Kerendan ESIA

DD-BK00-0Q-003
Salamander Energy
Page 1 of 369
Revision: Rev 0 Date: August, 2013
Document Title: KERENDAN BLOCK DEVELOPMENT ESIA STUDY

Document
Title:
KERENDAN BLOCK
DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL
IMPACT
ASSESSMENT (ESIA)

Document
Number:

DD-BK00-0Q-003

THIS IS A CONTROLLED DOCUMENT -
NUMBER

THIS IS AN UNCONTROLLED DOCUMENT X

Controlled documents will automatically be re-issued to recipients as and when
changes occur. It is recipients responsibility to replace the old version and
destroy it.

Uncontrolled documents will not automatically be re-issued and users should assure
themselves that they have the correct version in circulation.

Revision Description By Designation Signature Date
Rev 0
Approved August 2013
Endorsed August 2013
Reviewed August 2013
Prepared August 2013

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 2 of 369

DISTRIBUTION LIST
No Name Title Hard Copy Soft Copy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 3 of 369

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 21
RINGKASAN EKSEKUTIF 24
1 INTRODUCTION 26
1.1 General Overview 26
1.2 Project Location 26
1.3 Project Objectives 27
1.4 Other Development Opportunities 27
1.5 Project Proponent 27
1.6 Purpose and Scope of ESIA 28
1.7 ESIA Structure 29
2 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS 32
2.1 Introduction 32
2.2 Indonesian Regulatory Process Outline 32
2.2.1 Environmental Assessment 32
2.2.2 Other National and Regional Regulatory Provisions 32
2.3 International Processes and Standards 33
2.3.1 The International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance
Standards 33
2.3.2 IFC Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Guidelines
1
34
2.4 Comparison of Indonesian and IFC Standards 35
2.5 IFC Gap Assessment 36
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 37
3.1 Introduction 37
3.2 Project Overview 37
3.2.1 Project Area of Influence 37
3.2.2 Location 38
3.2.3 Area of Project Disturbance 38
3.2.4 Project History 39
3.2.5 Project Target and Objectives 40
3.2.6 Need for the Project 42
3.2.7 Project Alternatives 42
3.2.8 Current Project Status and Schedule 43
3.2.9 Gas field Component 44
3.2.10 Pipeline 46
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 4 of 369

3.2.11 Gas Processing Facility 47
3.2.12 Other Facilities 50
3.2.13 Associated Facilities 51
3.3 Pre-Construction 52
3.3.1 Project Land Use 52
3.3.2 Permits 53
3.4 Construction 54
3.4.1 Wellhead Cluster Pad 54
3.4.2 Access Roads 54
3.4.3 Helipad and Flyway Area 55
3.4.4 Pipeline 55
3.4.5 Kerendan Gas Processing Facility 56
3.4.6 Hours of Construction 57
3.4.7 Wellhead Cluster Pad 57
3.5 Operation 57
3.5.1 Pipeline 57
3.5.2 Kerendan Gas Processing Facility (KGPF) 58
3.6 Decommissioning 58
3.6.1 Removal of Plant and Equipment 59
3.6.2 Contaminated Site Management 59
3.6.3 Site Rehabilitation 60
3.7 Workforce Requirements 60
3.7.1 Construction 60
3.7.2 Operations 61
3.7.3 Local Employment Opportunities 61
3.7.4 Temporary Residential Facilities (Construction Camps) 61
3.8 Water Supply and Storage 62
3.8.1 Drilling Water 62
3.8.2 Hydrotesting 62
3.8.3 Potable and Non-potable Water 62
3.8.4 Fire water 63
3.9 Sewage and Drainage 63
3.9.1 Clean Water Drainage 63
3.9.2 Oily Water Collection and Drainage Systems 64
3.9.3 Sanitary Sewers 64
3.10 Energy Supplies 64
3.11 Traffic and Transport 64
3.12 Waste and Discharges 67
3.12.1 Waste Management 68
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 5 of 369

3.13 Air Emissions 72
3.13.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 73
3.14 Lighting and Visual Amenity 73
3.15 Noise and Vibration 74
3.15.1 Continuous Noise Limits 74
3.15.2 Start-up and Intermittent Service Noise Limits 74
3.15.3 Impulse and Impact Noise Limits 74
3.15.4 Emergency Services 74
3.15.5 Far-Field Noise Limits 74
3.16 Unplanned Events 74
4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 76
4.1 Introduction 76
4.2 Screening 77
4.3 Scoping 77
4.4 Project Description 78
4.5 Baseline Conditions 79
4.6 Stakeholder Engagement 79
4.7 Impact Assessment 79
4.7.1 Prediction of Impacts 80
4.7.2 Characterisation of Impacts 80
4.8 Identification of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures 84
4.9 Residual Impact Evaluation 85
4.10 Management, Monitoring and Audit 85
5 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE 87
5.1 Introduction 87
5.2 Project Setting Regional Context 87
5.3 Climate 87
5.4 Topography 88
5.5 Geology 89
5.6 Air Quality 90
5.6.1 Baseline Air Quality Data 91
5.7 Noise 95
5.8 Soils 95
5.8.1 Kerendan UKL/UPL Surveys (2005) 95
5.8.2 Soil Sampling Survey 2013 96
5.9 Hydrology 98
5.9.1 Baseline Water Quality Data 99
5.10 Biodiversity and Habitats 103
5.10.1 Desktop Review 104
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 6 of 369

5.10.2 Biodiversity Survey Results 117
5.10.3 Biodiversity Values 122
5.11 Ecosystem Services 128
5.11.1 IFC PS Expectations 129
5.11.2 Ecosystem Services Data Gathering 129
5.11.3 Ecosystem Services Prioritisations 131
6 SOCIAL BASELINE 136
6.1 Introduction 136
6.1.1 Methodology 136
6.1.2 Study Limitations 139
6.2 Overview of Communities in the Project Area 140
6.2.1 Ethnicity 142
6.2.2 Village Characteristics 143
6.2.3 Demographics 143
6.2.4 Sex Ratio 143
6.2.5 Population Density 144
6.2.6 Population Growth 144
6.2.7 Age and Gender Distribution 145
6.2.8 Religion and Ethnicity 146
6.3 Economic Profile 148
6.3.1 Employment and Livelihoods 148
6.4 Community Infrastructure 157
6.4.1 Clean Drinking Water 157
6.4.2 Sanitation 157
6.4.3 Electricity 158
6.4.4 Transportation Facilities 159
6.5 Community Health 161
6.5.1 Life Expectancy 161
6.5.2 Mortality 161
6.5.3 Morbidity 162
6.5.4 Communicable Diseases 162
6.5.5 Sexually Transmitted Diseases (HIV/AIDS) 165
6.5.6 Nutritional Status 165
6.5.7 Health Facilities 165
6.6 Education Facilities 167
6.7 Economic Infrastructure 170
6.8 Cultural Heritage 171
7 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 173
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 7 of 369

7.2 Historical Consultation Activities Undertaken 174
7.3 Community Perceptions 177
7.3.1 Community Awareness of the Project 177
7.3.2 Community Perceptions of Salamanders Consultation Level 177
7.3.3 Expectations of Salamander Benefits 178
7.3.4 Community Concerns Associated with Salamander Impacts 180
7.4 Disclosure and Planned Future Consultation Activities 181
7.5 Salamanders Grievance Mechanism 182
8 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) ACTIVITIES 184
8.1 Overview of Salamander's CSR Activities In Indonesia 184
8.2 CSR Approach, Policy, and Procedure 184
8.3 CSR Principles 185
8.4 CSR Strategy 186
8.5 Governance and Accountability 188
8.6 Previous CSR Activities Undertaken 189
8.6.1 Improvement of Public Roads in Kerendan and Muara Pari
Village 189
8.6.2 Independence Day Ceremony in Kerendan Village 189
8.6.3 Sports Facilities Renovation in Kerendan and Luwe Hulu
Village 190
8.6.4 Salamander Cup in Lahei Sub-District 190
8.6.5 Other CSR Contributions 191
9 ESIA SCREENING AND SCOPING 194
9.1 Scope of the Assessment 194
9.2 Methodology 194
9.3 Screening Results 195
9.3.1 IFC Gap Assessment 196
9.3.2 Project Land Use Audit 197
9.4 Scoping Results 197
9.4.1 Interaction Matrix 198
9.4.2 Prediction of Impacts 201
10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 209
10.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Results 209
10.3 Impacts to Terrestrial Flora 209
10.3.1 Direct Loss of Vegetation from Land Clearing 210
10.3.2 Impacts on Vegetation from other Project activities 211
10.3.3 Invasion and Spread of Invasive and/or Exotic Flora Species 213
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 8 of 369

10.3.4 Impacts to Threatened Flora Species 214
10.4 Impacts to Terrestrial Fauna 216
10.4.1 Loss of Habitat as a Result of Land Clearing 216
10.4.2 Mortality from Project Related Traffic and Hunting 218
10.4.3 Impacts to Fauna as a result of Pipeline Construction and
Habitat Fragmentation 219
10.4.4 Impacts to Fauna Behaviour from Operation of Facilities,
Equipment and Machinery 220
10.4.5 Impacts to Fauna Species of Conservation Significance 222
10.5 Ecosystem Services 224
10.5.1 IFC PS Expectations 224
10.5.2 Ecosystem Services Data Gathering 225
10.5.3 Discussion of Impacts 226
10.5.4 Impact Evaluation and Significance 231
10.6 Soil 235
10.6.3 Additional Mitigation Measures, Management, and Monitoring 236
10.6.4 Significance of Residual Impact 236
10.7 Surface Water 237
10.8 Ground Water 238
10.9 Air 239
10.10 Noise and Vibration 242
10.11 Aesthetics 246
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 9 of 369

10.12 Unplanned/Non-Routine Events 249
10.12.1 Impacts from a Fire, Explosion or Gas Leak 249
10.12.2 Impacts from Accidental Hydrocarbon, Chemical or Hazardous
Material Spills 251
10.12.3 Impacts from Process Upset or Emergency Flaring 253
10.13 Associated Facilities 253
10.13.1 Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base 254
11 SOCIAL AND HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT 260
11.2 Social Impact Assessment Definitions 260
11.2.1 Determining Magnitude 260
11.2.2 Determining Vulnerability 261
11.3 Evaluating Significance for Social and Health Impacts 263
11.3.1 Integration of Stakeholder Perceptions 265
11.3.2 Interpretation of Social Impact Significance 266
11.4 Social Impact Assessment Results 267
11.5 Communicable Diseases 268
11.6 Community Safety and Security 271
11.7 Environmental Quality 274
11.8 Economy and Livelihood 276
11.9 Community Infrastructure and Services 278
11.10 Cultural Heritage 280
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 10 of 369

11.11 Social/Cultural Structure 281
12 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 283
13 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
INTRODUCTION 285
13.1 Environmental and Social Management Requirements 285
13.1.1 Content of the ESMP 286
13.2 Salamander Energys Corporate EHS Principles 286
13.2.1 EHS Principles 286
13.2.2 EHS Policies 288
13.3 Salamander Energy Indonesia HSE Management System 292
13.3.1 HSE Roles and Responsibilities 292
13.3.2 General Manager 292
13.3.3 Managers HSE Responsibility 292
13.3.4 Operations/Drilling Manager 293
13.3.5 HR Manager 293
13.3.6 HSE Manager 293
13.3.7 Area Superintendent HSE Responsibility 294
13.3.8 Supervisor HSE Responsibility 294
13.3.9 Employee HSE Responsibility 294
13.3.10 Contractors 294
13.3.11 Role of Sub-Contractors 295
13.1 Kerendan Gas Development Project Organisation 296
13.4 Training, Awareness and Competence 298
13.4.1 Competency Levels 298
13.5 Monitoring, Review, Audit and Reporting 299
13.5.1 Audits and Verification 299
13.5.2 Non Compliance and Corrective Action 300
13.6 Project Environmental and Social Management Plan 300
13.6.1 ESMP Link to Other HSE Management System Plans 301
14 CONCLUSIONS 313
15 REFERENCES 322

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 11 of 369

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Project Total Area of Disturbance 39
Table 3.2 Kerendan Gas Field Ownership History 40
Table 3.3 Kerendan Gas Development Project Gas Specifications 41
Table 3.4 Project Schedule 43
Table 3.5 Kerendan Gas field Wellhead Development Summary 45
Table 3.6 Average Gas Composition of Kerendan Gas Field 45
Table 3.7 Infrastructure Required for Gas Processing Facility 50
Table 3.8 Project Operational Permits 53
Table 3.9 Average Daily Project Traffic during Construction 65
Table 3.10 Transportation Schedule for Delivery of Project Materials 65
Table 3.11 Predicted Waste Volumes to be Generated during Construction
and Operations 69
Table 3.12 Summary of GHG Emissions from KGPF and Gas Production
(Tonnes/Year) 73
Table 4.1 Resources/Receptors and Impacts Considered in Scoping 77
Table 4.2 Impact Characteristic Terminology 80
Table 4.3 Definitions for Likelihood Designations 82
Table 5.1 Climate within the Project Area 88
Table 5.2 Ambient Air Quality Standards 90
Table 5.3 Air Quality Sampling for Kerendan UKL/UPL (2005) 92
Table 5.4 Air Quality in Project Area 92
Table 5.5 Noise Quality Sampling for Kerendan Location (2010) 95
Table 5.6 Fauna in the Juboi-1, Sungai Lahei-1 and West Kerendan-1
UKL/UPL Study Area 106
Table 5.7 Likelihood of IUCN Species (Known to Occur in Kalimantan)
Occurring in the Project Area 108
Table 5.8 Threatened IUCN Listed Species Known to Occur or
Potentially Occur within the Project Area 123
Table 5.9 Appraisal of Project Against Relevant IFC Performance
Standards 125
Table 5.10 Criteria and Thresholds for Identifying Critical Habitat under
IFC Performance Standard 6 (2012) 127
Table 5.11 Ecosystem Services Summary 130
Table 5.12 Ecosystem Service Prioritisation Summary (Project Specific) 133
Table 6.1 Morning Open Day Schedule 138
Table 6.2 Afternoon Open Day Schedule 139
Table 6.3 Demographic Data of Villages in the Project Footprint 143
Table 6.4 Number of Population, Household, Sex Ratio by District 2011 144
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 12 of 369

Table 6.5 Population Growth in Project Affected Villages 2011 144
Table 6.6 Age and Gender Distribution of North Barito Regency 2011 145
Table 6.7 Population by Religion in Barito Utara Regency 2010 146
Table 6.8 Number of Population by Religion in Project Area Villages 2011 146
Table 6.9 Population 15 years old and over of Barito Utara Regency by
Main Activity 2011 149
Table 6.10 Land Use Area in Project Affected Villages 2011 (In Ha.) 149
Table 6.11 Agricultural Production by Region 2011 (Ton) 152
Table 6.12 Area Production and Number of Smallholder Rubber
Plantation by Regency 2011 152
Table 6.13 Number of Households by Lighting Sources in Village Affected
Project 2011 159
Table 6.14 Number of Households by Cooking Fuel Source in Project
AreaVillages 2011 159
Table 6.15 Health Facilities in the Project Affected Villages 166
Table 6.16 Number of Health Care Practitioners in the Project Affected
Villages 2013 166
Table 6.17 Number of Schools in the Project Affected Village 2013 167
Table 6.18 Number of Students per School in the Project Affected Village
2011 167
Table 6.19 Number of School, Students and Teacher of Junior High School
and Senior High School in Lahei Sub District 2011/1012 168
Table 6.20 Number of Teacher and Education Background in Elementary
School and Junior High School in the Project Affected Village
2011 168
Table 6.21 Numbers of Teacher and Education Background in Early
Childhood Education (PAUD) and Islamic School in the Project
Affected Village 2011 168
Table 6.22 Number of Economic Facilities in the Project Affected Village
2011 170
Table 6.23 Typical Dayak Dusun Malang Ceremonies 172
Table 7.1 Historical LAQ Consultation undertaken by Salamander 175
Table 8.1 Salamander CSR Program 2013 192
Table 9.2 Scoping Interaction Matrix (A3) 199
Table 9.3 Scoping Prediction of Impacts 202
Table 10.1 Loss of Vegetation from Land Clearing Activities 210
Table 10.2 Impacts on Vegetation from other Project Activities 212
Table 10.3 Impacts to Native Vegetation as Result of the Introduction of
Invasive or Alien Species 214
Table 10.4 Impacts to Threatened Flora Species from Clearing Activities 215
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 13 of 369

Table 10.5 Impacts to Fauna from Loss of Habitat as a result of Land
Clearing 217
Table 10.6 Impacts to Fauna as a Result of Hunting and Traffic Pressures 219
Table 10.7 Impacts to Fauna as a Result of Pipeline Construction and
Habitat Fragmentation 220
Table 10.8 Impacts to Fauna from Operation of Facilities, Equipment and
Machinery 221
Table 10.9 Threatened IUCN listed Species Assessed 222
Table 10.10 Impact to Conservation Significant Fauna Species as a Result of
Habitat Clearing 223
Table 10.11 Ecosystem Services Summary 226
Table 10.12 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation Matrix 228
Table 10.13 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation Summary (Project Specific) 229
Table 10.14 Impact Assessment Matrix for Impacts to Ecosystem Services 231
Table 10.15 Impacts to Ecosystem Services 232
Table 10.16 Assessment of Impacts to Priority Ecosystem Services 233
Table 10.17 Impacts to Soils 236
Table 10.18 Impacts to Surface Water Quality during Construction and
Operation 238
Table 10.19 Impact to Air Quality during Construction 241
Table 10.20 Impacts on Air during Operation 241
Table 10.21 IFC PS Noise Level Guidelines 243
Table 10.22 Indonesian Noise Regulatory Standards (dBA) 243
Table 10.23 Impact Magnitude Terminology 243
Table 10.24 Construction Noise Impact Magnitudes (LAeq dB) 244
Table 10.25 Operational Noise Impact Magnitudes 244
Table 10.26 Impacts from Project Noise and Vibration during Construction 245
Table 10.27 Impacts from Project Noise and Vibration during Operation 246
Table 10.28 Impacts from Project Lighting 248
Table 10.29 Impacts from Impacts from Largecale Event (Fire, Explosion or
Gas Leak) on Immediate and Surrounding Environment 250
Table 10.30 Impacts from Accidental Spillages of Hydrocarbons, Chemicals
and/or Hazardous materials 252
Table 10.31 Impacts from Process Upset or Emergency Flaring 253
Table 10.32 Potential Impacts on Soil from Operation of the Luwe Hulu
Supply and Support Base 255
Table 10.33 Potential Impacts on Surface Water from Operation of the
Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base 256
Table 10.34 Potential Impacts of Noise and Vibration at the Luwe Hulu
Supply and Support Base 258
Table 11.1 Designation of Social Magnitude 261
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 14 of 369

Table 11.2 Levels of Vulnerability 263
Table 11.3 Significance Rankings for Social and Community Health
Impacts 264
Table 11.4 Description of Social Impact Assessment Significance Rankings 267
Table 11.5 Communicable Disease Impacts 270
Table 11.6 Community Safety and Security Impacts 273
Table 11.7 Environmental Quality Impacts 275
Table 11.8 Economy and Livelihood Impacts 278
Table 11.9 Community Infrastructure, Services and Resources Impacts 279
Table 11.10 Cultural Heritage Impacts 281
Table 11.11 Social/Cultural Structure Impacts 282
Table 13.1 Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMS) Kerendan
Gas Development Project (A3) 302
Table 13.1 Kerendan Gas Development Project ESIA Outcomes 315
Table H-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Kerendan Gas
Development Project (A3) 353
Table I-2 Social Impact Assessment Kerendan Gas Development
Project (A3) 358
Table I-3 Non Routine Impact Assessment Kerendan Gas Development
Project (A3) 365

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Project Location 31
Figure 2.1 IFC Performance Standards 33
Figure 3.1 KGPF General Process Schematic Diagram 48
Figure 3.2 Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad (April 2013) 54
Figure 4.1 Impact Assessment Process 76
Figure 4.2 Impact Assessment Process 79
Figure 4.3 Assessing the Level of Magnitude 81
Figure 4.4 Impact Significance Rankings 83
Figure 4.5 Context of Impact Significance 84
Figure 4.6 Impact Mitigation Hierarchy 85
Figure 5.1 Cross Section of the Kerendan Gas Field 89
Figure 5.2 Locations of Air, Water Quality and Soil Sampling Undertaken
within or near the Project area from 2005 2013 93
Figure 5.3 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Sampling Stations 94
Figure 5.4 Soil Sampling Locations 97
Figure 5.5 Water Sampling Locations in the Project Area (2013) 101
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 15 of 369

Figure 5.6 Logging Transportation on the Barito River 116
Figure 5.7 Cleared Forest Areas for Plantations and Logging along Access
Roads 117
Figure 5.8 Vegetation at KGPF (left), evidence of clearing area in KGPF
(right) 118
Figure 5.9 Vegetation along Sales Gas Pipeline Route (left) Plantation near
PLN Section (right) 119
Figure 5.10 Vegetation at Survey Site GT05 along the Gathering Pipeline
Route 120
Figure 5.11 Vegetation at the Kerendan Wellsite (July 2013) 121
Figure 5.12 Ecosystem Service Prioritisation Matrix 132
Figure 6.1 Locations of Villages in Relation to the Kerendan Gas
Development Project Facilities 141
Figure 6.2 Typical Scenery in the Project Villages 142
Figure 6.3 Mosques in the Villages of Kerendan and Haragandang 147
Figure 6.4 Basarah Hall in Muara Pari 148
Figure 6.5 Economic Activities in Luwe Hulu 156
Figure 6.6 Toilet in Kerendan on the Lahei River 158
Figure 6.7 Haragandang and Muara Pari Access Roads during the Rainy
Season 161
Figure 6.8 Map of Malaria Endemic Areas in Central Kalimantan 163
Figure 6.9 Elementary Schools in Luwe Hulu and Muara Pari 170
Figure 7.1 Community Consultations Undertaken 176
Figure 7.2 Community Awareness of the Project 177
Figure 7.3 Community Perceptions of Project Consultation Activities 178
Figure 7.4i Expectations of Salamander Benefits in Haragandang 178
Figure 7.5 Community Concerns Associated with Salamander Impacts 180
Figure 7.6 Salamander Grievance Submission Flows 183
Figure 8.1 CSR Procedure 186
Figure 8.2 Sports Facilities constructed by Salamander 190
Figure 11.1 Vulnerable Groups Definition 262
Figure 11.2 Building in Perceptions, Stakeholders and Planning into
Significance Ratings 266
Figure 13.1 Salamander Energys Corporate Senior Management Team 287
Figure 13.2 Salamander Energys Corporate HSE Policy 289
Figure 13.3 Salamander Energys Corporate CSR Policy 291
Figure 13.4 Kerendan Gas Development Project Organisation Chart 297

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 16 of 369

Annexes

Annex A Applicable Standards
Annex B Environmental Baseline Sampling Assurance Report
Annex C Biodiversity Study
Annex D Eco-system Services Questionnaire and Observation Form
Annex E Public Consultation Attendance Record
Annex F Group Discussion
Annex G Community Perception Questionnaire
Annex H Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
Annex I Salamander Energy Indonesia HSE Management System

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 17 of 369

UNITS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable
AMDAL Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan
API American Petroleum Institute
Bcf Billion Cubic Feet
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BOPD Barrels of Oil Per Day
CAR Corrective Action Record
CBI Competency Based Interview
CDR Case Detection Rate
CE Critically Endangered
CH4 Methane
Cm Centimeters
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility
dB Decibel
DBH Diameter at Breast Height
DCQ Daily Contract Quantity
DHSV Down Hole Safety Valve
DIV Dutch Intervention Values
DO Dissolved Oxygen
EBE Elnusa Bangkanai Energy
EHS Environmental, Health, and Safety
EMP Environmental Management Plan
EN Endangered
EP Equator Principles
EPCI Engineering, Procurement, Construction and Installation
ERM Environmental Resources Management
ESAP Environmental and Social Action Plan
ESIA Environment and Social Impact Assessment
ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan
ESS Emergency Shutdown System
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 18 of 369

FEED Front End Engineering Design
FGS Fire and Gas System
FTHT Flowing Tubing Head Temperature
GHG Green House Gases
GIIP Good International Industry Practice
GN Guidance Note
GOI Government of Indonesia
GRU Grievance Redress Unit
GSA Gas Sales Agreement
H2S Hydrogen Sulphide
Ha Hectare
HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus
HP High Pressure
HPT High Pressure Temperature
HSE Health, Safety and Environmental
IA Impact Assessment
ICSS Integrated Control and Safety System
IFC International Finance Corporation
IMR Infant Mortality Rate
IPs Indigenous Peoples
IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature
Kg Kilogram
KGPF Kerendan Gas Processing Facility
Km kilometre
KO Knock Out
kph Kilometres Per Hours
KUD Koperasi Unit Desa
LBW Low Birth Weight
LP Low Pressure
LT Level Transmitter
LV Low Voltage
m Meter
MAOP Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure
MCC Monitor Control Centre
MDQ Maximum Daily Quantity
MMboe Million Barrels of Oil Equivalent
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 19 of 369

Mmbtu Million British Thermal Units
MMSCFD Million Standard Cubic Feet Per Day
MoC Management of Change
MP Medium Pressure
MS Management System
MV Manifold Valve
MW Mega Watt
N2 Nitrogen Gas
NO Nitrogen Dioxide
NGOs Non-Governmental Organisation
Nm
3
Nano Meter Cubed
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
NTPs Non Timber Products
O3 Oxidant
OCP Organo-Chlorine Pesticides
OGP Oil and Gas Producers
OPP Organo-Phosphate Pesticides
Pb Lead
PC Process Control
PCDP Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan
PM Particulate Matter
POD Plan of Development
PPE Personal Protection Equipment
PS Performance Standards
PSC Production Sharing Contract
PT PLN PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara
RO Reverse Osmosis
ROW Right of Way
RSL Regional Screening Level
Scf Standard Cubic Feet
SDV Shut Down Valve
SEIA Social and Environmental Impact Assessment
SIS Safety Instrumental System
SITP Shut-in Tubing pressure
SOx Sulphur Oxides
SVOC Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 20 of 369

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
TEG Tri Ethylene Glycol
TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
TSP Total Suspended Particulates
UKL Upaya Pengelolaan Lingkungan
UNICEF United Nations Childrens Fund
UPL Upaya Pemantauan Lingkungan
UPS Uninterrupted Power Supply
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
VRU Vapour Recovery Unit
VU Vulnerable
WHCP Wellhead control panel
WHO World Health Organisation
WK-1 West Kerendan
WMP Waste Management Plan
WV Water Valve
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 21 of 369

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Salamander Energy Indonesia through the wholly-owned subsidiary Salamander Energy
(Bangkanai) Limited Group (Salamander) is in the process of developing the Kerendan gas
field (termed the Kerendan Gas Development Project). The Kerendan gas field is located in
the Bangkanai Production Sharing Contract (PSC) in the North Barito Regency, Central
Kalimantan. The Bangkanai PSC covers an area of approximately 1,385 m, approximately
200 km west of Balikpapan and 330 km north of Banjarmasin. The block is located on the
northern edge of the Barito Shelf and the west side of the Kutei Basin.
The gas field was discovered in the early 1980s however it was not commercialised at the
time of discovery due to challenges associated with its remote location. Salamander has
partnered with the Indonesian State power company, PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PT
PLN (Persero)), to develop the Kerendan gas field as an integrated gas to power project. PT
PLN will construct a 320 MW power plant and transmission lines connecting to the
Kalimantan electrical grid. Salamander will be responsible for developing, processing and
delivering gas to the power plant.
An initial Gas Sales Agreement (GSA) was signed by PLN in mid-2011 for a 20 year period,
with first gas deliveries anticipated to commence in mid-2014. To date, 122.6 Bcf of the
Kerendan gas field has been committed for sale under the GSA, with an initial development
capital expenditure of $120 million. A further 160 Bcf of contingent resource is identified in
the field, providing potential for commercialisation of additional gas volumes.
The well sites being developed as part of the Project are located within the Kerendan
Wellhead Cluster Pad adjacent to the Lahei River. Production fluids from the well sites will
be transported via a pipeline to the Kerendan Gas Processing Facility (KGPF), approximately
3 km west of the Wellhead Cluster Pad. From KGPF, gas will be delivered via a Sales Gas
Pipeline to the PLN Power Plant, which will be constructed by PLN approximately 3km
south of the facility. The location, layout and schedule for the Project are illustrated in Figure
ES-1.
The Kerendan gas field obtained its environmental approval from the Indonesian
government in 2006 and is currently managed under the Environmental Management Plan
(UKL) and Environmental Monitoring Plan (UPL) prepared in fulfilment of the Indonesian
regulatory environmental approval process. An environmental impact assessment in the
form of an AMDAL was not required as the project will have a gas field production rate of
30 MMSCFD.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 22 of 369

Figure ES-1 Kerendan Gas Development Project Layout and Schedule

Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base
Project Schedule
LOCATION
Kerendan Cluster Development Drilling
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 23 of 369

Salamander appointed Environmental resources Management (ERM) to assist in conducting
a full Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) to international standards in
compliance with the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards and
Guidelines. This ESIA represents one element of Salamanders overarching Health, Safety
and Environmental (EHS) Management System governing the Companys commitments in
managing Environmental, Health and Safety, and minimizing risk to communities
surrounding all of Salamanders activities and operations in Indonesia.
Construction of the Project commenced in mid-2012 followed by the development drilling
program at the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad. Project activities that had already been
conducted at the time of this ESIA were excluded from the predictive impact assessment
process. These activities have been managed in accordance with the Projects UKL/UPL and
were subject to a compliance review against international standards, with recommended
corrective actions where required. For the ESIA, the focus of the impact assessment is on
construction and operational activities that have yet to occur. The scope of this ESIA is:
Construction and operation of the Gathering and Sales pipeline;
Construction and operation of the Kerendan Gas Processing Facility (KGPF);
Operation of the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad upon first gas production;
Construction and/or operation of other site infrastructure (e.g. temporary residential
facility and access roads) required to support the construction and operation of the
pipeline, KGPF and gas field components; and
Consideration of facilities associated with the Project that Salamander have an ability
to influence in terms of the environmental/social management and operational
performance. This includes the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base, and access
roads to the Kerendan facilities. The PLN Power station is not part of this assessment.
Surveys and sampling programs were conducted to obtain additional information on
environmental (air, soil and surface water conditions), biodiversity and ecosystem services,
stakeholder consultation and social baseline characteristics. This report presents the findings
of these studies in the context of an updated project description and an assessment of
potential impacts from proposed project activities. The ESIA concludes with Salamanders
commitments on mitigation and monitoring measures to manage the environmental and
social performance of the Project to acceptable levels under applicable national and
international standards, in accordance with Salamanders HSE Management System.
The following provides the Executive Summary text in Bahasa Indonesia.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 24 of 369

RINGKASAN EKSEKUTIF
Salamander Energy Indonesia melalui anak perusahaan yang sepenuhnya memiliki
Salamander Energy (Bangkanai) Limited Group (Salamander), sedang dalam proses
mengembangkan lapangan gas Kerendan (disebut sebagai Proyek Pengembangan Gas
Kerendan). Lapangan gas Kerendan terletak di Bangkanai Production Sharing Contract
(PSC) di Kabupaten Barito Utara, Provinsi Kalimantan Tengah. Bangkanai PSC meliputi
wilayah sekitar 1,385 km, berjarak sekitar 200 km sebelah barat dari Balikpapan dan 330 km
sebelah utara Banjarmasin. Blok ini terletak di tepi utara lempeng Barito dan sisi barat
Cekungan Kutai.
Lapangan gas ditemukan pada awal 1980-an namun itu tidak dikomersialkan pada saat
penemuannya karena tantangan yang berkaitan dengan lokasinya yang terpencil.
Salamander telah bermitra dengan perusahaan listrik Negara Indonesia, PT Perusahaan
Listrik Negara (PT PLN (Persero)), untuk mengembangkan ladang gas Kerendan sebagai gas
terintegrasi untuk proyek pembangkit listrik. PT PLN akan membangun pembangkit listrik
berkekuatan 320 MW berserta jaringan transmisinya yang akan menghubungkannya
jaringan listrik di pulau Kalimantan. Salamander bertanggung jawab untuk
mengembangkan, memproses dan memasok gas ke pembangkit tenaga listrik tersebut.
Perjanjian Penjualan Gas awal (Gas Sale Agreement) yang telah ditandatangani oleh PLN
pada pertengahan 2011 untuk jangka waktu 20 tahun, dengan pengiriman gas pertama yang
diharapkan akan dimulai pada pertengahan 2014. Sampai saat ini, 122,6 milyar kaki kubik
dari lapangan gas Kerendan telah disepakati untuk dijual sesuai perjanjian GSA, dengan
belanja modal pengembangan awal sebesar USD 120 juta. Sebanyak 160 milyar kaki kubik
sumber daya cadangan telah teridentifikasi di lapangan, yang dapat memberikan potensi
volume gas tambahan untuk komersialisasikan.
Lokasi sumur sumur pengeboran juga sedang dikembangkan sebagai bagian dari Proyek
yang berada di Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad berdekatan dengan Sungai Lahei. Produksi
fluida migas dari lokasi sumur akan disalurkan dengan pipa ke Fasilitas Pengolahan Gas
Kerendan (KGPF) untuk diolah, berjarak sekitar 3 km sebelah barat dari Wellhead Cluster
Pad. Dari KGPF, gas akan di alirkan dengan Pipa Gas ke Pembangkit Tenaga Listrik PLN,
yang akan dibangun oleh PLN sekitar 3km sebelah selatan fasilitas KGPF. Lokasi, tata letak
dan jadwal untuk Proyek diilustrasikan pada Gambar ES-1.
Lapangan gas Kerendan memperoleh Izin Lingkungan dari pemerintah Indonesia pada
tahun 2006 dan saat ini pengelolaan lingkungan a mengacu kepada Upaya Kelola
Lingkungan (UKL) dan Upaya Pemantauan Lingkungan (UPL) yang diperlukan sebagai
syarat dalam proses persetujuan Izin dari Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia. Analisa dampak
lingkungan dalam bentuk AMDAL tidak diperlukan karena proyek yang hanya memiliki
tingkat produksi lapangan gas 30 MMSCFD.
Salamander menunjuk konsultan Environmental Resources Management (ERM) untuk
membantu melakukan Kajian Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESIA) yang
mengacu kepada standar internasional yaitu Standar Kinerja (Performance Standard) dan
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 25 of 369

Pedoman dari International Finance Corporation (IFC). ESIA ini merupakan salah satu unsur
yang mewakili Sistem Manajemen Keselamatan dan Lingkungan (EHS) Salamander Energy
yang mengatur komitmen Perusahaan dalam mengelola Lingkungan, Kesehatan dan
Keselamatan, dan meminimalkan risiko bagi masyarakat sekitarnya di semua kegiatan dan
operasi Salamander di Indonesia
Pembangunan Proyek dimulai pada pertengahan 2012 diikuti oleh program pengembangan
pengeboran di Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad. Kegiatan proyek yang telah berjalan pada
saat ESIA ini disusunterbitkan tidak meliputi proses penilaian dampak yang diperkirakan.
Kegiatan ini telah dikelola sesuai dengan UKL / UPL Proyek dan mengacu kepada tinjauan
ulang atas kepatuhannya terhadap standar internasional, dengan rekomendasi tindakan
korektif jika perlu. Untuk ESIA, penilaian dampak akan fokus pada kegiatan konstruksi dan
operasional yang akan dilaksanakan.
Ruang lingkup ESIA adalah sbb:
Pembangunan dan pengoperasian Stasiun Pengumpul dan pipa Penjualan;
Pembangunan dan pengoperasian fasilitas Pengolahan Gas Kerendan (KGPF);
Pengoperasi Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad dan pengoperasian awal produksi gas
Pembangunan dan / atau pengoperasian infrastruktur lokasi lain (misalnya fasilitas
tempat akomodasi sementara dan jalan akses) yang diperlukan untuk mendukung
pembangunan dan pengoperasian jalur pipa, KGPF dan komponen lapangan gas, dan
Fasilitas lain yang dipertimbangan terkait dengan Proyek dimana Salamander akan
berperan dalam hal pengelolaan lingkungan / sosial dan kinerja operasional.
Termasuk Fasilitas layanan logistik di Luwe Hulu, serta jalan akses ke fasilitas
Kerendan. Pembangkit Tenaga Listrik PLN bukan merupakan bagian dari lingkup
kajian ini.
Survei dan program pengambilan sampel telah dilakukan untuk mendapatkan informasi
tambahan mengenai rona lingkungan awal (udara, tanah dan kondisi air permukaan),
keanekaragaman hayati dan ekosistem, konsultasi dengan para pemangku kepentingan dan
karakteristik rona awal sosial. Laporan ini menyajikan hasil temuan-temuan dari studi ini
berdasarkan deskripsi proyek yang mutakhir dan penilaian potensi dampak dari kegiatan
proyek yang diusulkan. ESIA ini dilengkapi dengan komitmen Salamander untuk
melakukan penanggulangan dan pemantauan dalam mengelola kinerja lingkungan dan
sosial dari proyek dengan tingkat yang dapat diterima yang mengacu kepada standar
nasional dan internasional yang berlaku, sesuai dengan Sistem Manajemen HSE Salamander.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 26 of 369

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW
Salamander Energy Indonesia through the wholly-owned subsidiary Salamander Energy
(Bangkanai) Limited Group (Salamander) is in the process of developing the Kerendan gas
field within the Salamander operated Bangkanai Production Sharing Contract (PSC), Central
Kalimantan, Indonesia. The gas field was discovered in the early 1980s however it was not
commercialised at the time of discovery due to challenges associated with its remote
location.
Salamander has partnered with the Indonesian State power company, PT PLN (Persero), to
develop the Kerendan gas field as an integrated gas to power project. Salamander will be
responsible for developing, processing and delivering gas to the PT PLN (PLN) plant while
PLN will construct a power plant and transmission lines connecting to the Kalimantan
electrical grid. An initial gas sales agreement (GSA) was signed by PLN in mid-2011 for a 20
year period, with first gas deliveries anticipated to commence in mid-2014.
government in 2006 and is currently managed under an Environmental Management Plan
(UKL) and Environmental Monitoring Plan (UPL). An environmental impact assessment in
the form of an AMDAL was not required as the project will have a gas field production rate
of 30 MMSCFD.
Government approval has allowed Salamander to commence development activities,
however an additional assessment of the Kerendan Gas Field Development Project (herein
referred to as the Project) is required to satisfy International Finance Corporation (IFC)
investment requirements. This Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) has
subsequently been developed to align the Project with IFC Performance Standards and
guidelines (Section 2.3.2).
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The Kerendan gas field is located in the Bangkanai Production Sharing Contract (PSC) in the
North Barito Regency, Central Kalimantan (Figure 1.1). The Bangkanai PSC covers an area
of approximately 1,385 m, approximately 200 kilometres west of Balikpapan and 330
kilometres north of Banjarmasin. The block is located on the northern edge of the Barito Shelf
and the west side of the Kutei Basin.
The well sites being developed as part of the Project are located within the Kerendan
Wellhead Cluster Pad adjacent to the Lahei River. Production fluids from the well sites will
be transported via a pipeline to the Kerendan Gas Processing Facility, approximately 3 km
west of the Wellhead Cluster Pad. From the KGPF gas will delivered via the Sales Gas
Pipeline to the PLN Power Plant, which will be constructed by PLN approximately 3km
south of the facility, near the existing logging road.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 27 of 369

Access to the Project area is by river and road only, via the village of Luwe Hulu, located
approximately 65 km or 35 nautical miles north of Muara Teweh on the Barito River. A
logging road that extends approximately 50 km is used to access the Project area from Luwe
Hulu.
1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
To date, 122.6 Bcf of the Kerendan gas field has been committed for sale under a Gas Sales
Agreement between Salamander and PLN, with an initial development capital expenditure
of $120 million. A further 160 Bcf of contingent resource is identified in the field, providing
potential for commercialisation of additional gas volumes. A 320 MW power plant will be
constructed approximately 3 km from the Kerendan field with the capacity to handle three
times the volume of the initial GSA.
Construction of the Project commenced in mid-2012 with the undertaking of the
development drilling program at the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad.
1.4 OTHER DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES
There are a number of prospects within the Bangkanai licence area that could become an
economical resource. The initial focus is on the development of West Kerendan (WK-1) and
Sungai Lahei, which have a combined mean prospective resource of 900 Bcf. These wells are
considered significant as they have the potential to open up access to the more lucrative East
Kalimantan gas market. In addition to WK-1 and Sungai Lahei, there are other prospects
contained in the Bangkanai PSC, including the large Jupoi surface anticline. Volumes in
excess of 500 Bcf are required to provide economic justification for the construction of a
pipeline to the east coast.
Development drilling of WK-1 commenced in mid-2013 following site preparation activities
which included clearing land for the wellsite and a 1 km road that connects to the existing
logging road. The WK-1 site is located near the Project area, approximately 23 km from the
Kerendan site (Figure 1.1).
In 2013, the Salamander Group was also awarded two new licences for Northeast Bangkanai
and West Bangkanai, which may provide for further expansion of gas development in the
region. These licence areas present potential acreage additions to Bangkanai PSC, in an area
where there is a clear market for incremental gas volumes to be commercialised.
1.5 PROJECT PROPONENT
Salamander is an independent upstream oil and gas company that focuses on the
exploration, development and production of assets in three core areas of South-east Asia:
Greater Bualuang in the Gulf of Thailand and North Kutei and Greater Kerendan in
Indonesia.
The company formed in 2005 and is listed on the London Stock Exchange (Ticker: SMDR)
and FTSE 250 index. It has approximately 300 employees based in offices in London,
Singapore, Jakarta and Bangkok.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 28 of 369

Salamander operates over 80% of its production, with the Salamander Group entering 2012
with 75.3 MMboe of proved and probable (2P) reserves. During the year production
totalled 3.9 MMboe and there were downward reserves revisions totalling 1.4 MMboe
against the Kambuna field. Set against this was an upgrade of 2.1 MMbo at the Bualuang
field. These additional reserves are associated with the T2 and T5 reservoir horizons. As a
result of these movements the Groups 2P reserves as at 31 December 2012 were 73.3
MMboe. In 2012 average daily production averaged 10,800 boepd and this figure is expected
to grow to between 12,500 and 15,500 boepd in 2013.
Production in 2012 was down year on year following the decision to sell the Offshore
Northwest Java and Southeast Sumatra PSCs in the second half of 2011 and to re-invest the
capital into growing production from fields that produce higher value barrels.
Production growth in 2013 will be driven by an anticipated increase of at least 50% in
production at the Bualuang oil field, the field which has the highest cash margin per barrel
metrics within the Groups portfolio.
The Groups activities in Indonesia are currently focused on the operated Greater Kerendan
and North Kutei areas. There is further production from the operated Kambuna field,
offshore North Sumatra, and development projects associated with the non-operated
Bengara and Simenggaris licence areas. The Group also has non-operated interests in the
Kutai and South Sokang PSCs.
Salamander:
Geoff Callow
Head of Corporate Affairs
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7432 2680
Brunswick Group LLP
Patrick Handley/Elizabeth Adams
16 Lincoln's Inn Fields
London WC2A 3ED
Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7404 5959

1.6 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF ESIA
Salamander commissioned Environmental Resources Management (ERM) to undertake an
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the Kerendan Gas Development
Project. The purpose of the ESIA is to provide an environmental and social assessment of the
Project which addresses IFC Performance Standards. Salamander has received funding from
the IFC to develop the Project and is therefore committed to meeting the IFC Performance
Standards 1- 8 (IFC PS) for the life of the Project. The Performance Standards provide a clear
set of environmental and standards that should be applied to a Project.
This document provides an overview of the Project as well as a summary of key impacts and
suggested management measures to align the Project with applicable IFC standards. Certain
aspects of the Project have already been developed or constructed and as such have been
excluded from the impact assessment process. The focus of the impact assessment is on
construction and operational activities that have yet to occur. This includes:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 29 of 369

Construction and operation of the Gathering and Sales pipeline;
Construction and operation of the Kerendan Gas Processing Facility (KGFP);
Operation of the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad upon first gas production; and
Construction and/or operation of other site infrastructure (e.g. temporary residential
facility and access roads) required to support the construction and operation of the
pipeline, KGPF and gas field components.
Activities undertaken to date have been managed in accordance with Indonesian regulatory
approval requirements and the Projects UKL/UPL.
1.7 ESIA STRUCTURE
This document has been structured and prepared with reference to the IFCs Performance
Standards and Guidelines. Specifically, the structure and contents of the ESIA reflect the
following:
IFC Performance Standard 1 Social and Environmental Assessment and
Management Systems;
IFC Guidance Note 1 Social and Environmental Assessment and Management
Systems;
IFC Guidance Note 1, Annex A Social and Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA)
Report.
This document is structured as follows:
Executive Summary;
Chapter 1: Introduction;
Chapter 2: Applicable Standards and Regulatory Provisions
Chapter 3: Project Description;
Chapter 4: Impact Assessment Methodology;
Chapter 5: Environmental Baseline;
Chapter 6: Social Baseline;
Chapter 7: Stakeholder Engagement;
Chapter 8: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities; and
Chapter 9: ESIA Screening and Scoping;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 30 of 369

Chapter 10: Environmental Impact Assessment;
Chapter 11: Social and Health Impact Assessment;
Chapter 12: Cumulative Impacts;
Chapter 13: Environmental and Social Management Plan
Chapter 14: Conclusions
Annexes: Supporting Information.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 31 of 369

Figure 1.1 Project Location
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 32 of 369

2 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS
2.1 INTRODUCTION
There are two levels of regulatory provisions applicable to the Project. The first is the
Indonesian assessment and approvals process (Section 2.2). ERM also understands the
Salamander has received funding from the IFC and the Kerendan Project will be included in
this loan agreement. As such, Salamander is committed to meeting the 2012 IFC Performance
Standards 1- 8 (IFC PS) and also IFC EHS guidelines during the construction, operation and
decommissioning of the project.
2.2 INDONESIAN REGULATORY PROCESS OUTLINE
2.2.1 Environmental Assessment
Indonesias Environmental Law requires a project proponent to undertake an Environment
Impact Assessment (Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan or AMDAL) where it is
considered that the project has the potential to result in potential significant environmental
or social impacts. The Indonesian government imposes a positive list for a project and/or
activity that requires AMDAL according to the type, scale and location of the proposed
activity.
Projects not listed are not believed to result in significant impacts. These projects arerequired
to prepare Environmental Management Effort (termed Upaya Pengelolaan Lingkungan or
UKL) and Environmental Monitoring Effort (Upaya Pemantauan Lingkungan or UPL)
documents. The UKL/UPL details the implementation of environmental management and
monitoring activities for the proposed project.
Based on Environmental Minister Decree No. 17 Year 2001 regarding the types of
commercial plan and/or activities, activities that need to undertake an AMDAL are oil and
gas developments that will produce 5,000 BOPD oil or 30 MMSCFD gas. The
development plan submitted by Elnusa for the development of Kerendan natural gas field
was based on a gas production of approximately 20 MMSCFD. Therefore an AMDAL study
was not required and the project was subject to a UKL/UPL dated January 2006. Chapter 1.3
of the UKL/UPL details valid Government Legislations and Regulations pertaining to the
project and these are not repeated here.
The Kerendan Project has received Indonesian Regulatory approval to proceed with the
project, in the form of an updated UKL/UPL dated 2006.
2.2.2 Other National and Regional Regulatory Provisions
In addition to the overarching requirements to manage environmental, social and health
impacts through the AMDAL or UKL/UPL processes, there a range of other regulatory
provisions that apply to the Project:
Indonesian Laws;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 33 of 369

Government Regulations;
Presidential Decrees;
Ministerial Regulations;
Regencial Regulations (Decrees of Head of Environmental Impact Management
Agency and National Land Agency); and
Local Regulations and Governor Decrees.
Chapter 1.3 of the UKL/UPL details valid Government Legislations and Regulations
pertaining to the project and these are not repeated here.
2.3 INTERNATIONAL PROCESSES AND STANDARDS
2.3.1 The International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards
In April 2006, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank
Group, released a set of Performance Standards (PSs) based upon the original World Bank
Group Safeguard Policies, which recognised further the specific issues associated with
private sector projects. EP Three: Applicable Social and Environmental Standards requires
that projects in non-OECD countries be undertaken in accordance with IFC Performance
Standards, General EHS Guidelines and Industry Specific Guidelines. The IFC PSs have been
broadened to include issues such as greenhouse gases, human rights, community health, and
safety and security. A revised set of Performance Standards came into force on January 1,
2012. The complete list of PSs is provided in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 IFC Performance Standards

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 34 of 369

The IFC PS can be found on the IFC website
1
.
PS1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management Systems is the key driver
behind the development of this ESIA and associated management plans. In particular, the
following key steps as outlined within PS1 have been adhered to as basic principles within
the ESIA preparation:
Project definition;
Initial screening and risk assessment of the project;
Scoping of the assessment process based upon the outcomes of the initial screening
and risk assessment;
Stakeholder identification;
Gathering of social and environmental baseline data;
Impact identification and analysis;
Generation of mitigation or management measures; and
Development of management action plans.
This ESIA has been prepared to be consistent with, and address the expectations of the
Performance Standards.
2.3.2 IFC Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Guidelines
1

Supplementing the IFC PSs are the IFC General Environmental Health and Safety (EHS)
Guidelines that were released in April 2007. The EHS Guidelines are technical reference
documents with general and industry-specific examples of Good International Industry
Practice (GIIP), as defined in IFC's Performance Standard 3: Resource Efficiency and
Pollution Prevention.
The EHS Guidelines contain performance levels and guidance measures that are generally
considered to be achievable by new facilities using existing technology at a reasonable cost.
Application of the EHS Guidelines to existing facilities may involve the establishment of site-
specific targets with an appropriate timetable for achieving them.
The following IFC EHS Guidelines are applicable to the Kerendan Gas Development Project:
Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines. GENERAL EHS GUIDELINES.

1
http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/
IFC+Sustainability/Sustainability+Framework/Sustainability+Framework+-
+2012/Performance+Standards+and+Guidance+Notes+2012/
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 35 of 369

The General EHS Guidelines contain standards relating to:
Environment: air, energy, waste, hazardous materials management, noise and
contaminated land.
Occupational Health & Safety.
Community Health & Safety.
Construction & Decommissioning
The General EHS Guidelines are designed to be used together with the relevant Industry
Sector EHS Guidelines which provide guidance to users on EHS issues in specific
industry sectors.
Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines. ONSHORE OIL AND GAS
DEVELOPMENT.
The Guidelines describe Industry-Specific Impacts and Management, with Performance
Indicators and Monitoring.
2.4 COMPARISON OF INDONESIAN AND IFC STANDARDS
Annex A provides a comparison of Indonesian regulatory standards against the IFC EHS
guidance for specific effluents, emissions and discharges, where available. It can be seen
from the tables that there are differences between parameters that are regulated under
national legislation and the guidance values of the IFC. There are also common parameters
that have different standards between the two systems. The more stringent standard is
highlighted for clarity.
When host country regulations differ from the levels and measures presented in the IFC EHS
Guidelines, projects are required to achieve whichever is the more stringent. If less stringent
levels or measures than those provided in the EHS Guidelines are appropriate in view of
specific project circumstances, a full and detailed justification must be provided for any
proposed alternatives through the environmental and social risks and impacts identification
and assessment process. This justification must demonstrate that the choice for any alternate
performance levels is consistent with the objectives of Performance Standard 3.
The applicable standards are further discussed in the relevant subsections of the Impact
Assessment (Chapters 10 and 11).

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 36 of 369

2.5 IFC GAP ASSESSMENT
Salamander committed to complete an ESIA based on the requirements of IFC Performance
Standards and EHS Guidelines at a time when the Kerendan project is in execute and a
number of activities have already taken place, notably at Kerendan, West Kerendan and the
Luwe Hulu Logistics Supply Base. It was necessary to conduct a site visit and gap
assessment of the project, together with screening and scoping. In addition, Project land use
compensation for the Kerendan cluster had been completed at the time of writing this ESIA.
A review of the process to use and compensate for the Project land requirements was
completed to make recommendations for the process going forward. These steps enabled
any challenges with meeting IFC Standards for existing activities to be subject to a corrective
action plan, whilst proposed activities could be subject to a predictive assessment through
the ESIA.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 37 of 369

3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a detailed description of the components associated with the
construction, operation and decommissioning of the Kerendan Gas Development Project.
The Project description reflects the current status of the Project. Some components are still
the front end engineering design (FEED) phase which may result in some refinements to the
Project description.
3.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
This section provides an overview of the Project, its location and components that form part
of the Project Area of Influence. Greater detail on individual Project components is provided
in the following sub-sections.
3.2.1 Project Area of Influence
The Project area consists of the following components:
Gas Field
Wellheads K-04, K-06, K-07, and K-08 at the Kerendan Cluster Pad manifold;
Workers camp and helipad (adjacent to Wellhead Cluster pad);
Pipeline
Flowlines from Wellheads K-04, K-06, K-07, and K-08 to the Wellhead Cluster Pad
Gathering pipeline route from Wellheads to KGFP
Pipeline route from KGFP to the PLN power plant
Produced water reinjection pipeline (likely to be constructed in the same trench as the
gathering pipeline)
Kerendan Gas Processing Facility (KGFP)
Gas processing facility
Workers camp
Staging areas and roads that connect the Kerendan Cluster Pad to the proposed KGPF and
PLN power plant locations also form part of the Project.
Associated facilities that are necessary for the development of the Project include the
following:
PLN power plant;
Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base; and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 38 of 369

Main roads used to access the Project area (e.g. Logging road from Luwe Hulu to
Project access roads).
3.2.2 Location
The Kerendan Gas Development Project is located in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia.
Kalimantan is the Indonesian section of Borneo and represents the bulk of Borneo, covering
approximately 550,000 square kilometres or 75% of the island. It is divided into five
provinces North, East, Central, South, and West Kalimantan with Central Kalimantan
being the second largest province, covering an area of approximately 150,000 square
kilometres. The provincial capital, Palangkaraya, is located in the southern section of the
province, between the Kayahan and Sabangau Rivers.
The Kerendan Gas field is located within the Bangkanai Production Sharing Contract (PSC),
in North Barito District, north-east Central Kalimantan (Figure 1.1). The North Barito District
is one of the thirteen regencies in Central Kalimantan, covering an area of approximately
8300 square kilometres. Muara Tewah is the districts capital and is located in the south-west
on the banks of the Barito River.
The Project is located in the sub-district of Lahei, approximately 50 km north-east of Muara
Teweh. Access to the Project area is by river and road only, via the village of Luwe Hulu,
located approximately 65 km or 35 nautical miles north of Muara Tewah on the Barito River.
A logging road that extends approximately 50 km is used to access the Project area from
Luwe Hulu. Road access is currently weather dependant, with parts of the road often
inaccessible during periods of heavy rainfall.
The nearest village to the Project area is Kerendan, which is located approximately 2 km
south of the Kerendan Cluster Pad. Other nearby villages include Haragandang
(approximately 15 km north-west of Kerendan Cluster), Muarapari (approximately 10 km
south of the proposed PLN power plant) and Luwe Hulu. The nearest district centre is
Muara Tewah which is located on the banks of the Lahei River, approximately 30 km south
of Luwe Hulu. Access from Muara Tewah to Luwe Hulu is via a 43 km river route.
The locations and characteristics of these communities in nearby villages in the context of the
Project area are discussed in Chapter 6.
3.2.3 Area of Project Disturbance
The total Project footprint area over the life of the Project has been calculated to be
approximately 57 hectares, which is based on estimates shown in the Error! Reference source
not found..

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 39 of 369

Table 3.1 Project Total Area of Disturbance
Location/Component Including Impact Zone (
m2
)
Wellhead cluster pad 53,000
Well site Camp 38,000
Helipad and flyway 38,000
Pipeline Right of Way (ROW) 39,000
Gas Processing Facility 250,000
Access Roads 150,000
Total 568,000

Salamander as required to rehabilitate an area equal to the size of the permit area (Ref. to
Minister of Forestry Decree). Rehabilitation is discussed in more detail in Section 3.6.3.
3.2.4 Project History
The Kerendan gas field was originally a part of a larger PSC, known as Teweh PSC. Unocal
was awarded Tewah PSC in 1972 and undertook two 2D seismic surveys in 1975 and
1985/1986 (Hichens, Harrison & Co. plc 2006). They also drilled 10 exploration wells and
two appraisal wells, three of which were drilled within the Kerendan gas field, which was
discovered in 1982 and is estimated to contain 280 Bcf of certified resource.
Unocal submitted a Plan of Development (POD) in 1993 which was approved in 1997 subject
to a Gas Sales Agreement (GSA). However, due to lack of market demand, an agreement
could not be reached and the Tewah PSC was subsequently relinquished by Unocal in 2000
(Dwi Cayho et. al 2007).
A new PSC was awarded to Elnusa Bangkanai Energy Limited in 2003 for a period of 30
years. Known as Bangkanai PSC, the PSC covers an area of approximately 1,385 m and
includes six wells drilled by Unocal within the previous Tewah PSC.
Elnusa Bangkanai Energy submitted a POD to BPMIGAS in 2005, which was approved in
2006. Under the POD, gas from seven (7) development wells within the Kerendan gas field
would be delivered to a power plant near the gas field. Two (2) existing wells were to be re-
entered and two (2) new wells drilled to meet a production requirement of 20 mmscfd.
The Project was approved by the Indonesian government in 2006 Development in the form
of an Environmental Management Plan (UKL) and Environmental Monitoring Plan (UPL).
An environmental impact assessment in the form of an AMDAL was not required as the
project will have a gas field production rate of 30 MMSCFD.
In 2010, Salamander signed a Sale & Purchase Agreement to acquire the entire share capital
of Elnusa Bangkanai Energy Ltd (EBE) from PT Elnusa Tbk. At the time, EBE held 69%
interest and operatorship of the Bangkanai PSC (Salamander 2010).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 40 of 369

Salamander increased its interest in the Bangkanai PSC to 80% n Q4 of 2011, however this
was subsequently lowered to 70% during Q1 2013, with interest passed on to Saka Energi
Indonesia (Saka) in exchange for the following:
$27 million cash;
A carry on development costs for the Kerendan field of up to $30 million;
2:1 promote on the drilling of the West Kerendan exploration well; and
1.25:1 promote on the drilling of the subsequent exploration or appraisal well.
Table 3.2 Kerendan Gas Field Ownership History
Year Details
1982 Kerendan Field discovered by Unocal
2000 PSC relinquished due to lack of gas market
2003 Bangkanai PSC granted to Elnusa
2006 Elnusas POD approved by BPMIGAS
2010 Salamander acquired 69% of Bangkanai PSC
2011 Salamander increased PSC interest in Bangkanai PSC to 80%
2013 Salamander interest in Bangkanai PSC reduced to 70% in exchange for other benefits with
Saka Energy Indonesia

3.2.5 Project Target and Objectives
Salamander is planning to initially develop approximately 40% the Kerendan gas field (120
Bcf) by constructing four wellheads that connect to a gas processing facility via a gas
gathering pipeline. Production will be predominantly gas, with a maximum of 25 MMscfd
and associated condensate and produced water of 300 bpd and 1870 bpd respectively. The
sales gas will be distributed to PT PLN (Persero) Power Plant via sales gas pipeline, while the
condensate will be stored in condensate storage tank and will be exported via road tankers.
Production and gas delivery will occur over a 20 year period, with the processing facilities
designed to operate and maintain the required integrity for a period of 25 years.
A summary of the gas specifications for the Project is provided in Table 3.3.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 41 of 369

Table 3.3 Kerendan Gas Development Project Gas Specifications
Description Design Criteria Units
Field life 20 years
Design life 25 years
Sales gas rate (DCQ) 20 mmscfd
Sales gas rate (MDQ) 22 mmscfd
Condensate production rate 300 bpd
Produced water rate 1867 bpd
Max. FWHT 46-58 C
Shut-in pressure 466 barg
CO for design 5% mol%
HS for design 25 ppmv
Gas Sales Specification (maximum values):
Gross heating value 950-1100 btu/scf
Water content < 10 lb/mmscf
HS content 25 ppmv
CO content 5 % mol%
Nitrogen content 5.8 mol%
Sulphur content 5 grain/100 scf gas
Delivery pressure 13.8 27.6 barg
Condensate Sales Specification:
Onshore oil in production water 25 mg/l
Storage capacity 30 day

Salamander intend to commercialise the remaining part of the Kerendan gas field and has
already started the process with the commencement of a development drilling program at
West Kerendan in June 2013 (Figure 1.1). Sungai Lahei is another prospect area being
considered as part of the Kerendan gas field development. The purpose of the development
drilling programme in other prospect areas is to improve Salamanders understanding of the
sub-surface in the area, and potential for further developing gas resources in the Greater
Kerendan region.
Development of the West Kerendan well site is not included in this assessment.
To date, 122.6 Bcf of the Kerendan gas field has been committed for sale under a Gas Sales
Agreement between Salamander and PLN, with an initial development capital expenditure
of $120 million. A further 160 Bcf of contingent resource is identified in the field, providing
potential for commercialisation of additional gas volumes. A 320 MW power plant will be
constructed approximately 3 km from the Kerendan field with the capacity to handle three
times the volume of the initial GSA.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 42 of 369

3.2.6 Need for the Project
Average domestic gas prices have risen significantly in Indonesia from a price of $2.8 per
mmbtu in 2006 to $8 per mmbtu in 2012 (Salamander 2012). The domestic price growth in
Indonesia is being driven by a combination of socio-economic factors, with the major drivers
being:
A forecast GDP growth of over 6% per annum in near term driving demand for new
power projects;
Removal of petroleum subsidies;
Rising F&D cost for gas;
Increasing export prices drag domestic price up; and
Rising costs of competing fuel drive substitution into gas.
Indonesia intendeds to rapidly expand its power network prior to the Asian financial crisis,
however the economic events created financial constraints on the state-owned power utility
Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN) which subsequently affected network growth (Reegle
2012). Generation capacity increased by more than 25% from 1999-2009, however increased
capacity has failed to keep up with demand. Intermittent blackouts are common and many
grid connected areas across the country are unable to take on new customers Electricity
demand in Indonesia is expected to increase by approximately 7% over the next 10 years
(Reegle 2012).
The current shortage of electricity in Kalimantan opens an opportunity to develop the
Kerendan gas field as fuel for power generation.
3.2.7 Project Alternatives
The Kerendan Gas Development Project will produce gas and associated condensate. The
base case option for the Project is to store the condensate in tanks onsite. Condensate will be
produced at a rate of approximately 200 bbls/day. The condensate will then be transported
from Kerendan by truck and taken to the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base for
temporary tank storage before onward vessel transport to market.
At the time of writing there were two alternative Project options under consideration for
condensate production:
1. Installation of a 4" condensate pipeline from Kerendan to Luwe Hulu for
transportation. This would remove the requirement for truck transport and provide
greater reliability given the seasonal challenges in road access during heavy rains; and
2. Sale of the condensate to PLN for use as a fuel at the power station. This would
provide a sales source for the condensate close to the site of production but would
depend on PLN selecting a dual fuel system at the power station (gas/condensate).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 43 of 369

Neither of these options had been fully evaluated at the time of the ESIA and so are not
considered further.
3.2.8 Current Project Status and Schedule
Construction of the Project commenced in early 2012 with mobilisation and site preparation
works undertaken for the development of four wellheads at the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster
Pad. Construction and operation activities undertaken to date include:
Site preparation activities at Kerendan Cluster Pad, which included clearing
approximately 13 hectares of vegetation for the construction of the wellsite, camp
facility and helipad;
Completion of the development drilling program at Kerendan Cluster Wellhead (mid-
2012 to mid-2013), during which four wellheads were constructed (K-04, K-06, K-07,
and K-08); and
Construction of the following supporting infrastructure:
Supply base at Luwe Hulu, on the banks of the Barito River;
Camp facility and helipad at the Kerendan Cluster Well site; and
Road networks along the proposed pipeline corridor (total length is approximately 6
km from the Kerendan Cluster Wellsite Pad to the proposed KGPF and PLN Power
Plant).
The PLN transmission system linking the power plant to the Kalimantan grid is under
construction and the PLN power plant contract was awarded in June 2013.
The Projects current schedule is outlined in the Table 3.4.
Table 3.4 Project Schedule
Task/Phase Start Finish
KERENDAN GAS PROCESSING FACILITY
Land clearing, earthmoving and temporary facility construction Aug 2013 Oct 2013
Construction of two groundwater wells (dependent on permit approval)
Foundation fabrication Aug 2013 Mar 2014
Storage tank erection Oct 2013 Mar 2014
Erection of buildings and permanent workers camp Nov 2013 May 2014
Equipment installation (mechanical) Jan 2014 Jul 2014
Storage tank hydrotesting Feb 2014 Apr 2014
Mechanical works Mar 2014 Mar 2014
Installation of Permanent Fencing May 2014 Jul 2014
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 44 of 369

Task/Phase Start Finish
WELLHEAD CLUSTER PAD
Site construction (access roads and Cluster Pad) Jun 2011 Mar 2012
Mobilisation of drilling crew and materials Apr 2012 Aug 2012
Development drilling/wellhead completion Aug 2012 Jun 2013
Construction of road in wellhead area Jan 2014 Mar 2014
Equipment installation Mar 2014 May 2014
Fencing installation Feb 2014 Mar 2014
Foundations Jan 2014 Apr 2014
Installation of equipment and piping Apr 2014 May 2014
PIPELINE
ROW site clearing and earthmoving Oct 2013 Dec 2014
Pipeline delivery Dec 2013 Dec 2013
Construction of road in Sales Gas area Jan 2014 Mar 2014
Pipeline handling and stringing Jan 2014 Feb 2014
Trenching and lowering, cathodic protection, installation of optic/power
cables, backfilling
Mar 2014 Apr 2014
Hydrotesting Apr 2014 May 2014
Sales Gas line foundation construction Dec 2013 Feb 2014
Electrical and instrument work (Sales Gas line) Feb 2014 Jun 2014
Fencing of pipeline metering station Feb 2014 Mar 2014
PRE-COMMISSIONING
Gathering line/Wellhead Cluster Pad Apr 2014 Jul 2014
Sales Gas line/Metering Station May 2014 Jul 2014
Building and workers camp Apr 2014 Jun 2014
KGPF Jun 2014 Aug 2014
COMMISSIONING & START-UP
Commissioning and start-up Aug 2014 Aug 2014
First sales gas Sep 2014 -
PLN POWER PLANT
Contract award and completion Jun 2013 Sep 2014

3.2.9 Gas field Component
The Kerendan gas field component comprises four onshore wellheads (with provision of 3
additional wellheads for future development) located at a wellhead cluster pad. A gathering
pipeline will be located on the wellhead cluster pad which will transport production fluids to
the KGPF.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 45 of 369

Table 3.5 Kerendan Gas field Wellhead Development Summary
Parameter Data
Number of Wells 4
Shut-in Tubing pressure (SITP) 466 barg (max)
Flowing Tubing Head Temperature (FTHT) 46-58 c
Maximum distance from wellhead to KGPF 2470 m

Production from these wells will be approximately 25 mmscfd with a requirement for gas
sales of 20 mmscfd and condensate.
Further detail on the gas composition of the Kerendan gas field and infrastructure required
for preparing the resource for processing is provided below.
Gas Specifications
The feed gas composition of the Kerendan gas field is outlined in the table below. The
composition of these components may vary over the production life of the gas field due to
changing pressure in the reservoirs as a result of gas extraction. The compositions presented
in the table are based on 20 years of production. As shown, reservoir fluids consist
predominantly of methane with a small proportion of CO2, N2 and hydrocarbon
components.
Table 3.6 Average Gas Composition of Kerendan Gas Field
Component Gas composition (%Mole)
CO2 2.88
N2 1.55
H2S 0.00
Hydrocarbons
- Methane 87.83
- Ethane 3.65
- Propane 1.34
- Butane 0.88
- Pentane and heavier 1.87
Total 95.57%

Gas field Infrastructure
The well head cluster pad area will consist of the following infrastructure:
Flowline tie-ins including space for future tie-ins
Shutdown system (DHSV, MV, WV, SDV)
Choke valve
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 46 of 369

Production manifold
Multiphase flowmeters
Gathering pipeline and tie-in
Nitrogen system
Methanol injection system
Provision for temporary pig launcher
Wellhead control panel (WHCP)
Vent and drains
Water injection well and injection pipeline
Remote SIS controller (remote terminal unit)
Fire and gas detection
PCS Remote I/O
Downhole gauge
The process system at the wellhead cluster pad consists of flowlines, a production manifold,
and gathering pipeline. Choke and shutdown valves and wet gas flow meter will be installed
on each flowline.
3.2.10 Pipeline
The pipeline component of the Project includes the following flowlines and pipeline services:
Four (4) flowlines transporting fluids from Wellheads K-04, K-06, K-07 and K-08 to the
manifold at Kerendan Cluster Pad;
One (1) Gathering pipeline (8 diameter, approximately 2.5 km long), to transport
production fluids from the manifold to KGPF;
One (1) Sales gas pipeline (8 diameter, approximately 4.5 km long) , used for the
transport of sales gas from KGPF to the PLN power plant; and
One (1) 4 Produced water reinjection pipeline, which will be used to reinject water
from produced water tanks at the KGPF to reinjection wells at the Kerendan Cluster
Pad.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 47 of 369

3.2.11 Gas Processing Facility
The KGPF will be located approximately 3 km west of the wellhead cluster pad, within a
maximum cleared footprint of approximately 25 hectares. The main components of the
facility include the following:
Receiving facilities system (HP separator) to separate gas, condensate and water;
Dehydration system;
Gas sweetening system/H2S removal (future);
Condensate stabilisation unit, storage and handling facilities;
Water storage and handling, and reinjection system for produced water;
Sales gas superheater;
Booster gas compressor system (future); and
Vapour recovery unit.
Schematic diagram and description of the main components of the facility and the gas
production process is shown in Figure 3.1.
Receiving Facilities Systems
The production fluids from the feed gas pipeline will arrive at KGPF as a mixture of
hydrocarbon gas, condensate and water. To separate the gas into individual components (i.e.
gas, condensate and water), the fluids will initially go through a 3 stage oil stabilisation
system using HP, MP and LP separators. The HP and MP separators are three phase
separators that are designed to accommodate gas, condensate and produced water, while the
LP separator is a 2 phase system designed to accommodate off-gas and condensate.
Wet gas produced from the HP system will be sent to the dehydration system, while the
remaining off-gas will be processed to the MP and LP systems and routed to the vapour
recovery unit (VRU).
Produced water from the HP and MP separators will be sent to a Degasser Vessel, while
condensate from the LP separator will be transferred to condensate coolers.
Each separator will have safety shutdown controls in the event a systems temperature
and/or pressure levels exceed or fall below safe operating standards.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 48 of 369

Figure 3.1 KGPF General Process Schematic Diagram

Dehydration System
The wet gas from the HP separator will be sent to a dehydration system and dehydrated to
an export specification of 10 lb/MMscf using a triethylene glycol (TEG) processing system.
Dewatering the gas is necessary to prevent problems occurring with downstream processes
and equipment.
Gas sweetening system/H2S removal
Gas sweetening (or amine gas treatment) is the process of removing acid gases such as
carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide from gas. Removal of acid gases and other
contaminants may be required for the Project to meet sales gas specifications, therefore
provision of a gas sweetening unit has been included as part of the KGPF design. Solvents
(amines) to be used in the process will be selected when the requirement for a gas
sweetening system has been confirmed.
No provisions have been made for removal of significant levels of hydrogen sulphide or
other sulphur components as the feed gas has only trace concentrations.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 49 of 369

Condensate Stabilisation Unit, Storage and Handling
The condensate in the LP separator will be stabilised using an electrical condensate heater.
Following this, the stabilised condensate will be sent to two storage tanks via transfer pumps
and stored at temperatures of 45-70C. The capacity of each condensate storage tank will be
approximately 1500m
3
which will allow for approximately 30 days of full production
storage.
Condensate will be measured before being transferred to transport vehicles and exported
from site. Offloading operations will be performed in batch mode, where the storage tank
being emptied is isolated and measured for RVP specification prior to export.
Blanket gas will be required to maintain pressure on the storage tanks and this will be
sourced from fuel gas system and later transferred to the LP flare system. In the event of
blanket gas loss or inability to release blanket gas via the LP flare, the pressure vacuum
safety valve will be installed to protect the tanks.
Produced Water Storage, Handling and Reinjection
Produced water will flow from the HP and MP separators to the Degasser, a three phase
system designed to separate off-gas, carry-over condensate and water. The off-gas will be
transported to the LP flare system, while the condensate will be sent back to the MP
separator using skim oil pumps.
Produced water from the Degasser will be transferred to the storage tanks via a water
treatment pump, with pressure in the Degasser by a pressure controller. Once treated, the
water will be reinjected at wells at the Kerendan Cluster via a 4 buried water pipeline.
Blanket gas will be required to maintain pressure in the produced water tanks. This will be
supplied by the fuel gas system and sent to the LP Flare System after use.
Sales Gas Superheater
The Sales Gas Superheater will be used to maintain the sale gas specification rates. The
dewatered gas from the dehydration system is transported to the Sales Gas Pipeline via the
superheater.
Booster Gas Compressor System
A booster compressor system will need to be installed in the downstream gas outlet of the
HP separator to maintain production in the end of life phase. During this phase, the reservoir
pressure is depleted and the pressure from the well can be as low as 16.2 barg which could
subsequently reduce pressure at the KGPF to 6.9 barg. In order to maintain the sales delivery
gas pressure and dehydration system performance, a booster gas compressor system will
need to be installed to increase predicted pressures from 6.9 to 37.2 barg. Future requirement
for this system has been considered in the KGPFs current site design.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 50 of 369

Vapour Recovery Unit
The purpose of the VRU is to recover off-gas from the LP separator and the Degasser. The
off-gas from the systems will be collected at common suction manifold, at which point the
VRU will compress the combined off-gas from 0.34-8.3 barg and transfer it to the fuel gas
system and utilised as a fuel source for other systems.
3.2.12 Other Facilities
In addition to the main processing facilities, the KGPF also requires utility systems detailed
in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7 Infrastructure Required for Gas Processing Facility
Type of Infrastructure Function
Fuel Gas System Drive power generation sets, fuel gas blanketing, and stripping gas in the
gas dehydration system
Diesel Fuel System Consists of a diesel storage tank (71m capacity), 2x100% diesel transfer
pumps and diesel filter package. Diesel will be used to run back-up diesel
engine generators and firewater pump. Tank is designed to hold diesel to
fuel for one generator for 7 days.
Drainage Systems Closed drain systems handle remaining hydrocarbon fluids in pressurised
equipment during maintenance and pumping collected hydrocarbon
liquids to the MP Separator for further condensate stabilisation processing.
Open drainage systems will be designed to handle rainwater, freshwater,
wash down water (including spillage from drip trays and bunded areas).
All streams will be routed to a common open drain header leading to the
API Separator/Pit.
Instrument Air and
Utility Air Systems
Consist of two air compressors and one air dryer system and filters. Will
be installed on a structural skid
Raw Water and Utility
Water System
Consists of a raw water pond and water pump, utility supply pump and
raw water filter. The system will support the requirement for utility water
during plant operation and firewater tank filling during pre-
commissioning.
HP Flare System Consists of HP Flare KO drum and associated pumps, flare ignition
package, flare tip, and pilot flare. All vessel and piping relief is connected
to the flare header. After separation in the HP flare drum, gas is flared at
HP flare tip (only during emergency blowdown). Liquid from the drum is
pumped to the closed drain system via HP flare KP drum pumps.
LP Flare System Vented gas from the atmospheric storage tanks is routed to this system
which comprises LP Flare header, flare stack ignition package and pilot
flare.
Power Generation
System
Comprises 2x50% 800kW gas engine driven generators and 1x50% 800kW
diesel engine driven as a backup gas engine generator. One emergency
diesel generator located at workers camp.
Firewater System Consists of two diesel driven firewater pumps and an electric jockey
pump. Fire hydrants and monitors will be installed at the Facility.
Firewater will be sourced from the firewater and utility water tank.
A deluge system will be installed in the processing area and at condensate
storage tanks to shield adjacent tanks. This will contain a fire monitor,
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 51 of 369

Type of Infrastructure Function
hydrants and spray and foam systems.
Integrated Control and
Safety System (ICSS)
Consists of a process control system (PCs), and a safety instrumental
system (SIS) which consists of an emergency shutdown system (ESS), and
a remote SIS controller and fire and gas system (FGS). SIS will be
functionally independent of the PCS.
The safety shutdown system at the wellhead cluster pad and metering
station at the PLN area will be performed by a remote SIS controller,
which will communicate with the ICSS via a fibre optic cable.

3.2.13 Associated Facilities
The execution of the Project will require the use of a number of associated facilities. These
currently include externally owned and operated roads, the Luwe Hulu Logistics Supply
Base facility, the PLN Kerendan Power Plant and local electrical grid infrastructure. Further
detail on these facilities is provided below.
Roads
To access the Project area, Salamander requires use of a road, approximately 50 km long
from Luwe Hulu to the proposed PLN Power plant. The first 27 km of the road is owned by
a logging company, however as a dependent user, Salamander contributes to the regular
maintenance of the road to maintain constant site access.
Prior to the Project commencing, an abandoned road extended past the end of the logging
road to the proposed PLN Power Plant location. Salamander has since repaired and
upgraded this road and cleared an additional 6km of access tracks from the road to the
KGPF and Kerendan Cluster. Salamander will continue to maintain these roads/access
tracks for the life of the Project.
Luwe Hulu Base
The Luwe Hulu Logistics Supply Base is a former coal development site located on the bank
of the Barito River. Salamander acquired the site to use as a staging area for the Project,
through provision of laydown areas for the storage and transport of materials and
equipment. There is capacity for other users such as PLN during construction of the power
plant, to use the base under the direction and management of Salamander.
The supply base substrate is gravel covered and there is an office and mess building and
designated refuelling and warehouse facilities. The village of Luwe Hulu is adjacent to the
Logistics Base and approximately 80% of the 150 employees employed at the base are from
the local community.
Power Plant
PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN) will be responsible for constructing the 320 MW power
plant and transmission lines connecting to the Kalimantan electrical grid. The power plant
will be constructed approximately 3 km from the KGPF and designed to receive three times
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 52 of 369

the initial volume of the initial gas sale agreement of 20 mmscf over 20 years.
Approximately 220 km of transmission lines will be required to link the PLN Power Plant
with the Kalimantan grid, which includes the following:
40 km to Muara Teweh;
120 km to Buntok; and
60 km to Tanjung.
The transmission system linking the power plant to the Kalimantan grid is currently under
construction. The PLN power plant contract was awarded in June 2013, with construction
expected to be completed within 15 months of the contract being awarded.
3.3 PRE-CONSTRUCTION
3.3.1 Project Land Use
The process to gain land for use by the Project process was led by Salamander, in
consultation with the local government and the National Land Agency (BPN), under the
guidance of the December 2010 Salamander Land Acquisition and Compensation Plan. The
process commenced in 2010 and was completed in 2013 (excluding WK-1 which is currently
ongoing as of August 2013). A total of 47.2 ha of land was required, affecting at least 46
landowners. Land was acquired for the following Project activities:
Sungai Lahei-1 Cluster Drilling Area 100% of 6 ha;
Kerendan Gas Processing Facilities (KGPF) 100 %of 25.1 ha; and
West Kerendan-1 (WK-1) Location is currently on going of 16 ha.
The majority of the land acquired was personally-owned or classed as forest plantation land,
though some is classed as unproductive land (which does not provide the affected
households a main source of income). No residences were located within the footprint
required for the Project.
3.3.1.1 Kerendan Wellhead Cluster
The land coordinates required for the well site are based on the geology of the area; straight
holes for exploration well drilling are required. The wellsite is located in the forest and no
community resides in the area. The nearest village is Kerendan which is approximately 8 km
from the well site location, across the Lahei River.
The land at the well site is swampy and floods when heavy rains occur however the local
communities grow rubber trees in and around the well site area.
The original land was acquired by Elnusa Bangkanai Energy Limited; 22,250 m
2
in total for
the well site and 61,960 m
2
for the 6 km access road from the abandoned Kerendan village
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 53 of 369

road.
Salamander required a bigger site area and therefore acquired an additional 19,968 m
2
from
one land-owner. A forestry permit for exploration activities was obtained in early 2011 to
cover the drilling operations in Kerendan, covering the drill location and the access road. No
permanent buildings were allowed to be constructed during the exploration stage as per the
exploration forestry permit requirement.
3.3.1.2 Kerendan Gas Processing Facilities (KGPF)
The above also applied for the KGPF location where local communities also grow rubber
trees. The total land acquired was 251,060 m
2
owned by none land-owners. All compensation
payments have been carried out.
3.3.1.3 Pipeline
The gathering and sales gas pipeline consists of a 10 m wide corridor along the 6 km pipeline
ROW. The pipeline will be laid alongside the existing access road requiring minimal
additional land.
3.3.2 Permits
The following operational permits are held by Salamander.
Table 3.8 Project Operational Permits
No Activities Permit Issuing Authority Current
Status
1
Any projects (Drilling wells, KGPF,
Access Road, etc)
UKL/UPL or
AMDAL
Environmental
Agency
Obtained
2
Projects within Forestry Area
(Drilling wells, KGPF, Access
Road, etc)
Forestry Permit Forestry Ministry Obtained
3
Any Projects (Drilling wells, KGPF,
Access Road, etc)
Location Permit Local Regency
(Bupati)
Obtained
4
Any permanent buildings Constructoin
Permit
Local Regency
(Bupati)
Obtained
5
Operational Activities (Plant, office
buildings etc)
Disturbance
Permit
Local Regency
(Bupati)
Obtained
6
Gas pipeline installation SKPII Director General
Migas
Handeled by
project
7
Deep water well drilling SIPPAT Local Regency
(Bupati)
Being
processed
8
Socialisation program for th
eproject to local communities and
Government officials
Communities
acceptance of the
project
Local communities
and Government
officials
Done
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 54 of 369

3.4 CONSTRUCTION
3.4.1 Wellhead Cluster Pad
Construction of the Wellhead Cluster Pad commenced in the first half of 2012. Site
preparation activities included the clearing of vegetation, followed by cut and fill earthworks
to provide areas suitable for installation of facilities and drainage networks. This included
the construction of three waste containment pits, with dimensions of approximately 20 m x
10 m x 2.5 m. Pits were constructed by mechanically digging and compacting soil until it was
is impermeable. Walls were then coated for added protection, to a thickness of
approximately 70 cm.
An area spanning approximately 4 hectares was cleared to the west of the pad to
accommodate a temporary residential facility and lay down area for the duration of the
development drilling program (Figure 3.2).
Figure 3.2 Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad (April 2013)

3.4.2 Access Roads
Access roads from the main road to the Kerendan Cluster Wellhead were constructed in mid
2012. They span approximately 10 m wide (including drainage) and extend approximately 4
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 55 of 369

km north-west of the main road to the proposed KGPF footprint, and 2 km north-east of the
KGPF to the Kerendan Cluster Wellsite.
The access roads have been constructed with drainage systems to prevent flooding and
obstruction of waterways. Where topography allowed, wide, shallow longitudinal drainage
was used to minimise erosion. The ditches will likely become vegetated with grass over time,
which will help bind the soil surface and assist with erosion and water flow management.
Material excavated from the proposed longitudinal drainage areas was used to construct a
roadway and raise the road above the surrounding ground level. The surface of the road was
sloped at a minimum of 4% to ensure water runs off the surface and into the side drains (or
up to 8% if super elevated). The cross section is constant and there are no separate shoulders.
Areas where there are specific problems (usually due to water of poor condition of the
subgrade) may be treated in isolation by localised replacement of subgrade, gravelling,
installation of culverts, raising the roadway or by installing other drainage measures.
Water is drained away from the carriageway side drains through lead off drains that divert
the flow into open space. Culverts have been installed perpendicular to the route where
there is a need to transfer water from one site to another, for example where the road crosses
a watercourse. In flat areas, smaller diameter, parallel culverts were preferable to single large
culverts, to maintain discharge at ground level.
3.4.3 Helipad and Flyway Area
A helipad and flyway area was constructed near the Kerendan Cluster Pad during wellsite
site preparation works in early 2012. The helipad was constructed to assist with emergency
response (e.g. medical emergency) and regular transport of personnel.
3.4.4 Pipeline
The gathering and sales gas pipelines will be constructed within a right of way (ROW) of
approximately 10m. This figure includes existing access tracks that were cleared to link the
Kerendan Cluster Pad to the KGPF and main road near the proposed PLN power plant.
The pipelines will be installed in trenches with a minimum cover of 1.0m. Bedding and
padding will be used in the ditch to protect the corrosion-resistant coating and provide
continuous uniform support and lateral restraint to the pipe. Ditch soil or materials obtained
nearby may be used as bedding and padding with screening being used where necessary to
remove rocks and achieve a graduation that does not damage the pipe coating. Bedding and
packing material will be placed above and below the pipe to assist in maintaining the
integrity of the pipe. Marking tapes will be installed to mark buried pipe locations.
The water reinjection pipeline and power and optic cables will be installed in the same
trench as the gas and production fluid pipelines.
Ditch breakers will be installed to control the water flow in the pipeline ditch on stoops
where backfill washout is anticipated. Distribution line submerged in waterways or swampy
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 56 of 369

areas will also be concrete coated with adequate weight to maintain stability.
Pipeline will be buried under streams and rivers through open cutting, horizontal directional
drilling and/or boring, at a minimum of 2m under the normalised bed of the river or
irrigation channel.
Installation of pipeline across roads will be done by horizontal directional drilling, boring or
open cutting, depending on local regulations, traffic, space and construction equipment
availability. Where drilling or boring is used, a mechanical protective coating will be applied
over the corrosion-resistant coating. The mechanical protective coating may consist of a thin
concrete coating, an extra-thick corrosion-resistant coating or another material.
After installing the pipelines, hydrotesting will be performed to verify pipeline integrity.
Testing will be undertaken after backfilling (but prior to the restoration of the RoW) in
accordance with MIGAS (Indonesian Oil and Gas Regulator) approval requirements.
The hydrotesting process will involve cleaning and filling the pipeline with inhibited water
by the use of pigs. A temporary pig launcher and pig receiver will be installed at both ends
of each pipeline section. Sections of the pipeline will then be filled with water to a specified
test pressure and held for a 24 hour period to ensure there are no air pockets.
3.4.5 Kerendan Gas Processing Facility
Construction of the KGPF is scheduled to commence in the third quarter of 2013. Site
preparation (pre-construction survey and site clearing, grubbing, grading) commenced in
late July 2013.
To prepare the facility for operation, the following activities will be undertaken:
Site preparation:
Pre-construction survey;
temporary facilities construction;
Site clearing, grubbing, and grading; and
Cut and fill, backfilling and compaction
Construction of two groundwater wells;
Foundation construction;
Installation of site facilities;
Painting, coating and hydrotesting of storage tanks;
Concrete Paving; and
Installation of fencing and gates.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 57 of 369

The types of facilities that will be installed for operation of the KGPF are described in Section
3.5.2.
3.4.6 Hours of Construction
Construction will be undertaken 7 days a week, with most activities restricted to a 10 hour
daylight shift. The only exceptions to this are uninterruptible activities or where a schedule
adjustment may be required (e.g. due to adverse weather). This includes:
Concrete pours;
Hook-up;
Pre commissioning; and
Commissioning.
The above activities will be undertaken over a 24 hour period, 7 days a week.
Construction of the pipeline and KGPF component commence in July 2013 with initial site
preparation works at KGPF. Construction of foundations and facilities at KGPF is scheduled
to commence in August 2013.
Site preparation and civil work activities are expected to take 10 months to complete, with
pre-commissioning and commissioning scheduled for completion in August 2014.
3.4.7 Wellhead Cluster Pad
Development of the four well heads at the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad (K-04, K-06, K-07,
and K-08) commenced in August 2012 and was completed in June 2013. Wells were tested at
a combined rate of 40 MMscfd, demonstrating the reservoir can comfortably deliver in excess
of the 20 mmscfd Daily Contracted Quantity (DCQ) in the current Gas Sales Agreement.
The development of the flowlines and wellheads at Kerendan Wellhead Cluster has been
completed and the wellsite is ready for operation.
Two reinjection wells (for reinjection of produced water) were also constructed at the Cluster
Pad.
3.5 OPERATION
3.5.1 Pipeline
Operation and maintenance of the pipeline will be managed from a control room at the
KGPF. There will be dedicated personnel responsible for monitoring the system on a 24 hour
basis.
The following activities will be undertaken during pipeline operations:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 58 of 369

Patrols;
Monitoring and repair of equipment;
Cleaning of the pipelines;
Corrosion monitoring and remediation where necessary; and
Maintenance of the ROW (including access roads).
Gas flows will be monitored using metering systems and significant imbalances investigated
immediately to ensure the integrity of the pipelines is maintained.
Regular inspections will be taken along the pipeline route to potential issues such as erosion,
interference and re-vegetation. Grass growth will be encouraged to assist with erosion,
however the establishment of deep-rooted along the pipeline easement will be discouraged
to avoid potential pipeline damage.
Prevention of third-party damage to the pipeline will be achieved by maintaining constant
communication with easement stakeholders/users and educating them about the potential
dangers of carrying out activities near the pipeline; regularly inspecting the RoW to identify
potential interference; posting signs along the pipeline advising people of its location and
management requirements; and ensuring the pipelines are buried at an appropriate depth. In
some areas additional protection may be installed to further reduce the risk of third-party
interference.
During operations, the pipeline will be accessed using existing access roads. Security and
locked gates will be constructed around major above-ground facilities to prevent accidental
or unauthorised interference.
The pipeline design incorporates an over-pressurisation system to ensure that operating
pressure remains within the designated maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) in
accordance with the relevant national and international codes. In addition, remotely
controlled emergency shutdown valves will be installed which can be activated in the event
of an emergency.
3.5.2 Kerendan Gas Processing Facility (KGPF)
First gas delivery is expected to occur in mid-2014. Gas processing operations and facilities
required for operational activities are described in Section 3.2.11.
3.6 DECOMMISSIONING
The Project is expected to have an operational life of approximately 20 years, and a design
life of 25 years. Significant environmental or social impacts from the decommissioning of
Project infrastructure are not expected to occur, however management measures will be
adopted during the construction and operational phases to maintain the integrity of the site
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 59 of 369

for decommissioning and rehabilitation.
A decommissioning and rehabilitation plan will be prepared prior to decommissioning,
which will provide details on the methodology to be adopted. There are a range of factors
that have the potential to impact the process including available technology; changes to
recycling or reuse options; legal and regulatory systems; and economic, social and political
conditions. Therefore, the methodology will be defined closer to the proposed
decommissioning date.
A brief summary of the decommissioning and rehabilitation procedures likely to be adopted
by the Project is provided below.
3.6.1 Removal of Plant and Equipment
Unless directed otherwise by regulators, Salamander currently intends to remove all
infrastructure associated with the KGPF and Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad. The process
will likely include the removal of the following infrastructure in accordance with applicable
provisions or legislation:
Processing facility and utility equipment (isolated gas streams will be minimised and
disposed of via flare systems prior to purging; facility equipment and piping will be
purged of hydrocarbons and either disposed of or sold for reuse or scrap; flares will be
removed and storage tanks emptied of product and likely removed as scrap, unless
deemed commercially viable);
Hardstand areas and access roads not required for future use;
Waste transfer facilities (disposed off-site to an appropriate disposal location);
Accommodation camps, administration buildings and warehouses; and
Well site equipment (wells will be decommissioned by plugging and sealing)
Deep footings and foundations (e.g. piles) that cannot be removed may need to remain in
situ. Any infrastructure that cannot be removed during the decommissioning process will be
documented to assist in future management of the site.
If left in situ, pipelines will be disconnected from all above ground structures, including the
cathodic protection systems and purged of gas, in accordance with relevant guidelines or
regulatory requirements.
3.6.2 Contaminated Site Management
The Project is not expected to result in significant contamination of soil or groundwater
however there is potential for contamination through hydrocarbon spills or leaks, process
chemicals or other wastes. The potential for contamination to occur will be reduced by
ensuring the following:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 60 of 369

Appropriate containment and management of chemicals, lubricants and fuels, to
minimise potential for accidental spills;
Supervision of contractors during delivery of chemicals, fuels and lubricants and
removal of waste;
Development and maintenance of appropriate on-site drainage systems to ensure that,
in the unlikely event of a spill, material is contained and the potential for discharge to
environment is avoided or minimised;
Providing spill kits at appropriate locations;
Regularly reviewing management and spill response measures;
Providing training for personnel involved in the management of site and facilities; and
Constructing and operating facilities in accordance with relevant legislation and
industry best practice guidelines.
3.6.3 Site Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation will be subject to the proposed use of the site subsequent to decommissioning
of the Facility. The nature and extent of rehabilitation will be agreed with the regulator
during detailed planning for decommissioning. As a holder of forestry permit (IPPKH) for
KGPF, Salamander is currently obligated to rehabilitate an area equal to size of area within
the permit.
The exact method of rehabilitation will be based on site-specific investigations at the time of
rehabilitation. However, it will likely consist of the following activities:
Earthworks - this will involve preparing the area for rehabilitation (including ripping
and implementing erosion control measures)
Re-vegetation this will likely be carried out using a number of methods, depending
on the configuration of the final landform in order to ensure that the both short term
objectives (i.e. reducing sediment run-off and erosion) and long term objectives (i.e.
creating a self-sustaining native ecosystem or managed productive ecosystem) are
met.
3.7 WORKFORCE REQUIREMENTS
3.7.1 Construction
Workforce numbers during the construction phase will peak to approximately 350 people,
with an estimated 144 general/unskilled workers and 210 skilled workers and Engineering,
Procurement, Construction and Installation (EPCI) Contractor employees.
The workforce will be under the day-to-day direction of the EPCI Contractor during
construction and commissioning phases. Activities will be supervised by a combination of
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 61 of 369

field engineers, supervisors, superintendents and site management.
Approximately 75 people were employed in a variety of positions for the development
drilling program at Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad. Many of these workers are now
involved in the development drilling program at WK-1.
3.7.2 Operations
Operations will require a total workforce of approximately 50 people. Only 26 permanent
workers are anticipated to be site at any given time, working on a rotating shift of 2 week on
2 weeks off. This workforce figure excludes contractors not involved in the day-to-day
management of the site (e.g. supply/waste disposal contractors).
3.7.3 Local Employment Opportunities
Construction labour will be sourced by the EPCI Contractor for specific scopes of work (e.g.
site preparation, groundwater well development). There may be opportunities for locals to
be employed by the Project, however the EPCI contractor is ultimately responsible for
sourcing the workforce. Selected personnel and the EPCI contractor are however
contractually bound to meet Salamanders requirements in regards to the management and
behavioural expectations of workforce involved in the Project.
Salamander will be responsible for the recruiting of operations personnel. Some recruiting
will take place during the construction phase, at which time selected personnel will undergo
training pending start-up of operations. The remainder of the workforce will be recruited in
time for the commencement of operations. Locals will be given the opportunity to apply for
positions providing they meet the companys employment requirements and are capable of
filling the required roles, following appropriate training. Selection of personnel will be
undertaken in consultation with local village heads.
3.7.4 Temporary Residential Facilities (Construction Camps)
Kerendan Cluster Well Development
A temporary workers camp was constructed at the Wellhead Cluster Pad in mid 2012. The
camp was located to the west of the pad and was constructed to house personnel involved in
the well development program.
The accommodation facility was transported to the WK-1 wellsite in August 2013 to house
workers involved in the WK-1 well development program. There are currently no intentions
to house employees involved in the construction and operation of the Project at this facility.
Separate accommodation facilities will be constructed at KGPF (see below).
Construction
A temporary accommodation facility for construction workers will be built at KGPF upon
completion of site preparation activities. Approximately 30 non-local contractors currently
involved in site preparation works are being housed in accommodation in Luwe Hulu.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 62 of 369

The temporary camp will consist of two buildings which will have the capacity to house
approximately 350 people during the construction and commissioning phases.
Operations
A permanent operations camp will be constructed at KGPF which will house a maximum
capacity of 30 people. The permanent camp will built separate to the facility however it will
still be contained the cleared KGPF footprint and fenced area.
3.8 WATER SUPPLY AND STORAGE
3.8.1 Drilling Water
Water for the Kerendan Cluster drilling program was sourced from the Lahei River. Drilling
water will be required for the two water supply wells to be constructed at the KGPF. This is
likely to also be sourced from the Lahei River; however the water source and volume will be
confirmed as part of the permitting process.
3.8.2 Hydrotesting
The estimated amount of water required for hydrotesting is approximately 70 m. The source
of water is currently assumed to be Lahei River, with water pumped from the Kerendan
Cluster site. Before testing, it will be treated with sufficient quantities of chemicals to avoid
any pipeline internal corrosion. Chemicals used in the process will be subject to strict
evaluation prior to the start of the hydrostatic testing to ensure environmental requirements
are met. Similarly, upon completion of the hydrostatic testing, water will be tested to ensure
the water satisfies environmental standards before channelling it back to the Lahei River or
selected water source.
3.8.3 Potable and Non-potable Water
Two deepwater wells will be constructed at the KGPF to source water for potable and non-
potable use. Each well will be designed with a 12 inch hole (with 4 inch casing) and drilled to
a depth of approximately 150 m.
An automatic control pump will be used to extract water from the wells which will be stored
in a 20m3 raw water tank. The raw water will go through a filtration unit before being
transferred to a 20m3 Clean Water Tank. Water from the clean water tank will be directed to
buildings for non-potable use, and a reverse osmosis (RO) unit, where will be treated and
transferred to refill units for potable use (i.e. drinking water). For hot water, an electric
heater will be used to heat water from the main potable water supply.
Water supply pipes will be buried to protect against corrosion, with flexible connections
used near building entrances.
Water at Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base is sourced from a shallow well or the Barito
River.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 63 of 369

Assuming a daily water use/consumption amount of 90 litres per person, total water
consumption during construction and operations is estimated to be approximately 30 m and
5 m per day respectively.
3.8.4 Fire water
The KGPF layout will maximise the use of passive protection in the form of equipment
spacing and drainage of possible liquid spillages away from critical equipment. Other active
measures to be included in the facilitys fire protection and safety system design include:
Separate firewater loops for each single risk area (to be tied into the existing firewater
distribution system);
Fire proofing (the degree of structural fireproofing shall be a three (3) hour rating);
Emergency relief/venting systems (for equipment subject to internal pressure buildup
from an external source of heat); and
Fire water pumps.
The basis of unit design will be a single risk area concept i.e. facilities will be divided into
separate areas of possible fire involvement, with each area considered as a single risk.
Fire water will be supplied via the proposed groundwater wells and will be stored in
fire water storage tanks.
3.9 SEWAGE AND DRAINAGE
Plant drainage and sewer systems will be designed in accordance with local codes and
regulations. They will be free flowing, to collect and transport all wastewaters to their
disposal location and to prevent fire hazards from spreading from one area to another.
Different types of wastewaters will be segregated in order to reduce the size, complexity and
costs of any treatment facility that is required for managing these wastewaters prior to
disposal. This may include separating drainage into the following separate systems, where
required:
3.9.1 Clean Water Drainage
Discharges to clean water drainage systems will include non-contact storm water, non-
contact cooling water (where permitted by the regulations), roadways and access area
drainage, parking lot and roof drainage and possibly firewater.
Stormwater generated from hardstand and other infrastructure areas around the site will be
controlled to prevent contamination of clean water drainage systems (see below).
The clean water drainage system will comprise of area drains, catch basins, ditches and
piping.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 64 of 369

3.9.2 Oily Water Collection and Drainage Systems
Discharges to oily water drainage systems include contact storm water, wash down water,
cooling tower blow down, desalted effluent, tank water draw offs, stripper condensates,
pump gland cooling water in hydrocarbon service, equipment drips and drains, draw offs
from sample connections, instruments, labouratories, and other routinely contaminated
wastewater streams (possibly firewater).
Water from potentially contaminated areas will not be discharged to the environment. Oil
traps will be used and domestic waste water kept separate from drainage effluents and
treated before disposal.
This oily water drainage system will comprise of drain hubs, catch basins, sumps, lift
stations, manholes and piping. Oily waters will be collected in sewer mains and routed to a
central treatment facility.
3.9.3 Sanitary Sewers
Sewage will be treated at the facilitys water treatment plant (STP) using a Bio Filtration-
Anaerobe-Aerobe system. Sewer pipes will be buried underground and effluent treated in
accordance with applicable domestic effluent quality standards.
An open drainage network will be constructed to direct rain water around buildings to the
river using a gravity-based flow system. Canteen and kitchen waste water collectors will
include grease separators. Decanting basins will also be installed to manage wastewater from
laundry facilities.
The sanitary sewer system will be composed of drains, manholes, lift stations and piping and
will not receive discharges from other sources.
3.10 ENERGY SUPPLIES
Construction will use power from onsite diesel generators. During the operation of the
KGPF, energy requirements will be met through the use of the following:
One (1) LV gas engine generator provided as a main power supply;
One (1) incoming power supply from power plant (future); and
One (1) LV diesel engine back-up generator.
A dual interruptible power supply will be provided via a distribution board for
communication and safety equipment systems.
3.11 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT
Traffic associated with the construction of the Project will be generated during transport or
use of the following infrastructure:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 65 of 369

Heavy machinery e.g. Bulldozers, drill rigs, graders, trucks, trenchers, excavators, and
loaders
Drilling machinery and well site/wellhead equipment;
KGPF components and supporting site infrastructure (e.g. Office buildings and
temporary workers accommodation); and
Delivery and construction of the pipeline component.
Traffic will also be generated through transport of workers to and from site (daily until an
accommodation facility is constructed at the KGPF), waste disposal, and fuel deliveries. The
type of transport method will depend upon the availability of plant, equipment and
materials. Traffic associated with the transport of workers to and from site will be reduced
once the accommodation facility at KGPF is constructed.
Estimated average daily traffic associated with the construction phase is presented in
Table 3.9. The greatest volumes of construction traffic are predicted to occur from November
2013 to April 2013 when the bulk of construction material will be transported to site. A
schedule of the likely delivery periods for construction material is shown in Table 3.10.
Table 3.9 Average Daily Project Traffic during Construction
Vehicle Type Average Daily Traffic
Light vehicles 50
Light trucks 10
Single unit trucks 10
Heavy trucks and tractors, trailer trucks 30

Table 3.10 Transportation Schedule for Delivery of Project Materials
Equipment/Material Type 2013 2014
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
TEG regeneration, nitrogen
and deluge valve packages

Diesel/gas engine generator,
air compressor, instrument
air dryer packages

Sales gas fiscal metering and
VRU packages

Flare ignition package
Methanol injection package
HP/LP/MP separators,
degasser, drums, air
receivers, condensate electric
heater, fuel gas/sales gas
heaters, pumps (raw water,

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 66 of 369

Equipment/Material Type 2013 2014
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
fire water, water injection,
condensate transfer, diesel
distribution, closed drain,
produce water, flare)
Condensate cooler
Fuel gas/diesel filters
Skim oil pump
Recycle oil pump
Jockey pump
Manual valves, bulk material
Speciality material
Switchgear & MCC
UPS, power and UPS
distribution panel,

Transformer
Distribution control system,
fire and gas system,
emergency shutdown
system, pressure regulating
valves,

Condensate fiscal metering
station, shut down and blow
down valves,

Wellhead control panel
Moisture analyser
Control valves
Displacer type LT, pressure
relief valve,
pressure/flow/level/temp
transmitter, pressure and
temp gauges, level gauges,
flow orifice and flanges + RO
plates, fire and gas detector

Multiphase wet gas
flowmeter

Telecommunication systems
Line pipe
Bulk material, cathodic
protection system

Insulation flange,
Potable raw water tank,
potable water treatment
system

Equipment shipment ex Jakarta
Delivery ex Batam
2
nd
Equipment shipment ex
Jakarta

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 67 of 369

Transport requirements for operations are expected to be signficantly less than that for
construction purposes, with the main transport requirements including the following:
Transport of infrastructure required for the gas field, pipeline or KGPF operations and
maintenance;
Transport of waste, and site supplies to and from site;
Transport of personnel to and from site (via helicopter for non-local personnel; locals
will make their own way to and from site); and
Transport of condensate for export.
A traffic management plan has been developed to help control traffic movements during
construction and operation of the Project and ensure road user safety.
3.12 WASTE AND DISCHARGES
Waste streams and volumes anticipated to be generated during construction, commissioning
and operation activities are presented in Table 3.11. The main activities or events expected to
generate waste include:
Site preparation;
Civil and construction activities;
Pipeline installation;
Reinstatement and site clean-up;
Mobilisation/demobilisation of equipment; and
Oil spills.
During all phases of the Project, the objective is to prevent and minimise the amount of
waste generate and ensure waste is managed in a way that is cost effective, minimises
impacts on the environment and complies with all applicable codes and regulations. The
preferred approach in managing waste is as follows:
Prevention and reduction;
Reuse;
Recycle and recovery;
Treatment; and
Disposal.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 68 of 369

3.12.1 Waste Management
All personnel involved in the Project (including subcontractors) are required to comply with
the Waste Management Plan (WMP). Audit and inspections will be carried out on a weekly
basis by and Environment Officer to ensure proper implementation of the WMP.
The objective of the waste management plan (WMP) is to ensure:
Waste is disposed in an environmentally sound manner;
Waste is managed in accordance with all applicable legislation and company policies
and requirements;
The risk of legal liability associated with handling waste is minimised;
All options are taken to minimise, eliminate, recycle or reuse waste materials; and
The Best Practical Environment Option is adopted (i.e. Choosing options that result
in the least environmental damage and are consistent with applicable regulations)
Recycling
Non-hazardous solid waste will be recycled instead of using an incinerator or land fill as
disposal methods. This will be undertaken in the form of a community development
program in accordance with Indonesian regulation.
Prior to commencing the recycling program, Salamander will assess stakeholders and/or
communities that will be involved.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 69 of 369

Table 3.11 Predicted Waste Volumes to be Generated during Construction and Operations
Waste Type Source
Annual Estimated Waste Volume
(m)
Treatment/Disposal Method
Construction &
Commissioning
Operations
NON-HAZARDOUS
Food waste Mess/camp 55 110 Compost, incineration
Plastic bottles Mess/camp 7 41 Recycling
Cans Mess/camp 9 9 Pressed, recycled
Drums KGPF, construction, workshop 146 292 Pressed, recycled, returned to
supplier
Metal (cable, bar, cutting steel) KGPF, construction 91 183 Asset
Cooking oil Mess/camp 7 14 Return to supplier
Paper (magazine, packaging,
cardboard)
KGPF, office, construction, camp,
supplies
7 14 Recycling, incineration
Plastic packaging KGPF, construction, camp, supplies 10 10 Recycling
Wooden packaging (box, pallet) KGPF, construction, supplies 15 15 Recycling, incineration
Backyard waste (wood, grass, leaf) KGPF, construction 37 73 Recycling, incineration
Fabrics KGPF, construction, workshop 2 2 Incineration
Glass KGPF, mess, construction, workshop 0.5 0.5 Landfill
Rubber (tyre, seal) KGPF, construction, workshop 5 5 Recycling
Fly ash incinerator KGPF, mess, construction 1 2 Landfill
HAZARDOUS
Solid chemical waste Warehouse, workshop 17 34 Licensed contractor, landfill
Miscellaneous contaminated waste KGPF, workshop, service 34 34 As above
Oil filters KGPF, transport, workshop 7 14 As above
Contaminated chemical packaging KGPF, transport, workshop 7 17 As above
Glass wool
Construction, camp, workshop,
warehouse
7 10 As above
Carbon active waste KGPF, water/wastewater treatment 3 34 As above
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 70 of 369

Waste Type Source
Annual Estimated Waste Volume
(m)
Treatment/Disposal Method
Construction &
Commissioning
Operations
plant
Asbestos
KGPF, construction, camp,
transportation
3 17 As above
Stationery waste Office 1 7 Recycled, returned to supplier
Contaminated sand KGPF, wellpad, drilling site 7 34 Licensed contractor, landfill
Batteries Office, workshop, transportation 1 2 Recycled, returned to supplier
Lamps Office, construction, KGPF - 1 As above
Chemical Drum (pressed) Warehouse, workshop 25 25 As above
Labouratory Waste Labouratory 0 2 Licensed contractor, landfill
Oil Waste
Warehouse, workshop, kitchen,
construction
1 10 As above
Liquid Chemical Waste Warehouse, workshop 1 1 Licensed contractor, landfill
Oil Sludge KGPF - 4 As above
SOBM/ Saraline Sludge Drilling - 20 As above
Drilling cutting
Drilling - 500 Licensed contractor, landfill,
contouring
Medical Waste Clinic - 2 Licensed contractor, landfill
WASTEWATER
Domestic waste water
KGPF 6300 38,325 River (uncontaminated), offsite
disposal
Pipeline hydrotesting Pipeline 147 - As above
Open drains KGPF 40 16 As above
Stormwater KGPF 44 053 88,105 As above
Produced water
KGPF - 58,035 Reinjection wells at Kerendan
Cluster Pad
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 71 of 369

The Project will send recyclable waste to the selected communities or stakeholders in raw
form, at which point the waste will be transformed into recycled products such as
handicrafts or recycled paper. Some of the benefits of the program may include the
following:
Additional revenue for the community or stakeholder (from the sale of recycled
products);
Opportunity for improvement to the communitys/stakeholders recycling processes
through capacity building (e.g. Training) and assisting with sourcing of potential
buyers for produced products; and
Increased awareness and potential changes to attitudes and behaviour in regards to
the management of and handling of waste in households and the general community.
Waste Handling and Disposal
During construction and operation phases, the handling, transport and disposal of non-
hazardous waste will be undertaken by a third party contractor. Food waste will be
composted or incinerated on site to minimise odour and spread of disease.
Domestic wastewater will be disposed to nearest water body receiving with permit by
authority. Produced water will be managed at the KGPF will be treated, stored in tanks and
reinjected at the two reinjection wells at the Kerendan Cluster Pad to via a water pipeline.
Hazardous waste will be transported, treated and disposed of by a licensed hazardous waste
treatment company, with treated waste buried at a secure landfill in Bogor, West Java.
The management of drilling waste mud and the drill cuttings during well development is
managed in accordance with the UKL-UPL management plan, which specifies that this waste
must be stored in waste containment pits (mud pits) and not discharged to the environment.
These pits could contain liquid waste (drilling mud) and solid waste (i.e. drill cuttings of
approximately 5m per day).
Drill cuttings are stored in cutting containers and disposed of offsite. No chemicals or special
muds are predicted to be required for development of groundwater wells at KGPF, therefore
soil waste from this activity may be used for contouring or levelling ground surfaces
surrounding the well locations.
Third Party Assurance
A thorough assessment of waste contractors is undertaken prior to selection to ensure they
are competent in the treatment and handling of waste, with consideration given to the
following:
Proximity of the disposal site operated or used by the contractor;
Size and financial security;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 72 of 369

Experience, technical capability, quality of personnel, equipment and facilities;
Environmental suitability of the contractors facilities and status of relevant permits to
handle or dispose of waste;
Inspection of the facilities; and
Verification of licenses, where applicable.
A waste register and transfer is used on site to record volumes of collected and transferred
for disposal by waste contractors. Contractors are required to provide a manifest that
outlines how waste is transported and treated and provides a certificate of destruction. These
manifests are also sent to the Indonesian Environment Ministry office.
Contractors responsible for the disposal of waste on site are subject to periodic audits and
spot checks.
3.13 AIR EMISSIONS
Most emissions generated during construction activities will come from vehicle engine
exhausts, generators, construction equipment and dust from earthworks and vehicles
movement. The composition of engine exhaust emissions is expected to be primarily NOX
and CO with small quantities of hydrocarbons.
Emissions from vehicles will be transient, intermittent and spatially variable, therefore it is
expected only a small incremental increase in combustion-based air pollutants will be
generated by the Project.
During the normal day-to-day operation of the facility, emissions are likely to be
predominantly generated by the following sources:
Gas turbines;
Gas sweetening unit (future);
Dehydration/TEG regeneration systems;
Refrigeration systems;
Fuel gas system;
Power generators;
Nitrogen rejection unit; and
Flaring.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 73 of 369

Potential emission sources from non-normal operations (i.e. conditions or activities not
associated with the general day-to-day operation of the facility) include the following:
Emergency flaring;
Emissions from normal operating equipment during start-up and shutdown; and
Vehicle emissions.
Emission rates for these activities may are likely to be variable and not impact air quality on
a continual basis.
3.13.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A summary of the estimated greenhouse gases (GHG) likely to be generated from the
production of gas and operation of KGPF is provided Table 3.12.
Table 3.12 Summary of GHG Emissions from KGPF and Gas Production
(Tonnes/Year)
Emission
Source
Totals
Gas Engine
Generator
TEG
regeneration
Flaring (0.3%
feed)
Fugitive
Emissions
CO 8100 960 6 9067
CH4 16 34 202 252
NO 5 5
CH4 as CO e 333 709 4233 5275
NO as CO e 45 1648
Total CO e 8478 1699 6 4233 14388
Calculation methodology: Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the Oil and Gas
Industry, Aug. 2009. API and USEPA 42; Indonesia Environment Ministry Regulation No.12/2012 concerning
GHG calculation method in Oil & Gas Industry
3.14 LIGHTING AND VISUAL AMENITY
The processing plant and associated facilities will introduce a wide array of light sources into
an environment which are presently dark at night. Night lighting during construction will be
restricted to interruptible activities discussed in Section 3.4. During operations, the KGFP
and Cluster Pad will require 24 hour lighting around facilities for safety and security
purposes.
There will be noticeable and permanent visual change associated with the removal of
vegetation and presence of infrastructure; however this is unlikely to affect the community
given the distances between the Project area and surrounding villages, and surrounding
environment (e.g. dense forest).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 74 of 369

3.15 NOISE AND VIBRATION
The main sources of noise and vibration during construction will be generators, earthmoving
works and equipment, facility assembly and construction of foundations (e.g. piling),
concrete batching, and plant operation. The principal source of noise emissions during
operations will be from the operation of the processing facility and the gas turbines used to
drive compressors and generators, associated pipe work and the cooling fans.
Noise levels for generators will be enclosed to meet required noise level limits of 85 dB (A) at
1 m from generator set enclosures.
The following maximum allowable equipment and piping system noise levels apply at
specific measurement locations. These limits will apply at all operating points within the
equipment's normal performance range:
3.15.1 Continuous Noise Limits
The maximum allowable A-weighted Overall Sound Pressure Level, Lp(A), for continuous
noise sources will be 85 dBA. For equipment trains composed of individual equipment
components from different suppliers, the noise limit for each equipment component is
reduced so that the equipment train as a whole will meet the 85 dBA limit.
3.15.2 Start-up and Intermittent Service Noise Limits
Noise limits for equipment used for these services will be the same as for continuously
operated equipment.
3.15.3 Impulse and Impact Noise Limits
The maximum allowable impulse or impact sound pressure level using a slow response
meter setting will be 115 dB. At no time will any impulse or impact peak sound pressure
level exceed 140 dB (while using a peak response or an impulse response meter setting).
3.15.4 Emergency Services
Emergency service equipment, including but not limited to alarms, emergency
generators and firewater pumps, will not exceed 115 dBA using a slow response
meter setting.
3.15.5 Far-Field Noise Limits
Far-field noise limits may be specified for special equipment items when noise impacts in the
surrounding community are a concern. Limits will be met at a specified distance, typically
122 meters from the centre of the equipment item.
3.16 UNPLANNED EVENTS
There is the potential for unplanned events to occur during the construction, operation or
decommissioning phase of the Project. Examples of unplanned events include:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 75 of 369

Environmental incidents such as hydrocarbon or chemical spills;
Vehicle, vessel accidents;
Natural disasters such as flooding and fire;
Fire or explosion;
Gas leak;
Emergency shutdowns; and
Medical emergencies such as injury, illness, or fatalities.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 76 of 369

4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This section of the ESIA study presents the methodology used to conduct the IA. The IA
methodology follows the overall IA approach illustrated in Figure 4.1. The IA has been
undertaken following a systematic process that predicts and evaluates the impacts the
Project could have on aspects of the physical, biological, social/ socio-economic and cultural
environment, and identifies measures that the Project will take to avoid, minimise/reduce,
mitigate, offset or compensate for adverse impacts; and to enhance positive impacts where
practicable. The stages of the IA process are described below.
Figure 4.1 Impact Assessment Process

The adoption of a generic impact assessment methodology may not accommodate the
identification or categorization of impacts particular to a project of this type and location.
The impact assessment methodology developed within this Chapter has been developed
with reference to internationally recognised best practice. It takes into account issues
specifically associated with development of onshore gas and associated infrastructure to
present an impact identification and evaluation mechanism which is specific to the
development type, thereby allowing for much more focused and refined assessment.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 77 of 369

4.2 SCREENING
The first stage in any impact assessment is screening. The primary objective of screening is to
identify what Impact Assessment (IA) requirements apply to the Project. Scoping is then
conducted to identify and develop the resulting terms of reference to provide the data
needed to conduct an informed impact assessment. The results of the screening exercise are
reported in Chapter 9 of this ESIA Report.
4.3 SCOPING
Scoping is undertaken to identify the potential Area of Influence for the Project (and thus the
appropriate Study Area), to identify potential interactions between the Project and
resources/receptors in the Area of Influence and the impacts that could result from these
interactions, enabling these potential impacts to be evaluated in terms of their likely
significance.
This stage is intended to ensure that the IA focuses on those issues that are most important
for design, decision-making and stakeholder interest. The findings of the scoping exercise are
reported in Chapter 9.
Table 4.1 defines the resources/receptors considered in the scoping stage, together with the
changes that might indicate a Project-related impact.
Table 4.1 Resources/Receptors and Impacts Considered in Scoping
Resources/Receptors Impact Definitions
Environmental
Geology Changes to geology, geomorphology, topography.
Soil Changes to physical and chemical properties and soil ecology.
Surface Water Changes to physical, chemical or biological quality of rivers, lakes, seas and
other surface water bodies;
Introduction of exotic species, changes in habitat quality, abundance,
diversity; Effluent discharge.
Groundwater Contamination of shallow or deep groundwater resources or change to
ground water resources.
Sediments River/waterbed morphology, physical and chemical properties, benthic
organisms.
Fisheries Changes in fisheries productivity.
Vegetation Changes to vegetation population, health, species abundance and diversity
and impact on endangered and economic species, food chain effects.
Wildlife Changes to wildlife assemblages, impact on endangered and economic
species, food chain effects.
Air Emissions of NOx, SOx, PM, CO, VOC, greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, and
N2O), ozone, TSP etc
Noise and Vibration Changes in noise or vibration levels.
Aesthetics Physical presence of facilities, increased night time light.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 78 of 369

Resources/Receptors Impact Definitions
Social / Socio-economic
Population and
physical displacement
Changes in population, total population, gender ratio, age distribution.
Physical displacement from residence as a result of Project land take, or

Social and Cultural
Structure
Disruption in local authority and governance structure; change in social
behaviours;
Alterations to social and cultural networks; intra and inter-ethnic conflict.
Economy and
Livelihood
Change in national/local economy, employment, standard of living,
occupation.
Resource ownership
and Use
Temporary or permanent displacement from land or water based
livelihood activities;
Changes in ownership of such resources.
Cultural Resources Physical disturbance of tangible cultural resources, such as shrines, burial
grounds, archaeological resources or to intangible cultural heritage (uses,
practices associations)..
Education and Skills Change in the availability or quality of education or skills provision.
Infrastructure and
Public Services
Improvement or pressure on existing urban/rural infrastructure or services
including: transportation; power, water, sanitation, waste handling
f iliti t
Community Health
Mortality and Key
Health Indicators
Change in the mortality profile of the community; changes in life
expectancy, birth rates, death rates, maternal mortality rates etc
Community Safety
and Security
Any factor placing the community at risk of danger or harm. Includes
human rights of the population.
Environmental
Change
Decreased air quality (e.g. NOx, SOx, VOC, CO, PM), contamination of
surface waters and potable ground water, increased vibration and noise,
increased night time light beyond acceptable limits, changes to the visual
i t
Communicable and
Non Communicable
Di
Change in incidence and /or prevalence of communicable and non-
communicable diseases or disease causing factors.
Vector Borne Diseases Changes in the incidence and or prevalence of vector borne diseases, the
density of these vectors and their breeding grounds.
Nutritional status Changes to nutritional status and food security.
Health
Facilities/Recreational
Facilities
Changes in availability of and access to health care and recreational
facilities including green space
Lifestyle factors Changing expectations of quality of life/behavioural changes. Drug
use/abuse, prostitution, communal violence, crime, suicide and
d i
4.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
In order to set out the scope of the Project features and activities, with particular reference to
the aspects which can impact on the environment, a Project Description is prepared. Details
of the Project facilities design characteristics, as well as planned and unplanned Project
activities, are provided in Chapter 3.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 79 of 369

4.5 BASELINE CONDITIONS
To provide a context within which the impacts of the Project can be assessed, a description of
physical, biological, social / socio-economic and cultural conditions that would be expected
to prevail in the absence of the Project is required. The Baseline includes information on all
resources/receptors in the Project Area of Influence, i.e. as having the potential to be affected
by the Project.
The baseline characterization is reported in Chapters 5 and 6 of this ESIA Report.
4.6 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
An effective IA Process requires engagement with relevant stakeholders throughout the key
stages. This assists in understanding stakeholder views on the Project and in identifying
issues that should be taken into account in the prediction and evaluation of impacts.
Details of the Stakeholder Engagement activities undertaken for the Kerendan Gas
Development Project to date are presented in Chapter 7.
4.7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Impact identification and assessment starts with scoping and continues through the
remainder of the IA Process. The principal IA steps are summarised in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.2 Impact Assessment Process

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 80 of 369

The principle steps illustrated in Figure 4.2 are:
Impact prediction: to determine what could potentially happen to resources/receptors
as a consequence of the Project and its associated activities.
Impact evaluation: to evaluate the significance of the predicted impacts by considering
their magnitude and likelihood of occurrence, and the sensitivity, value and/or
importance of the affected resource/receptor.
Mitigation and enhancement: to identify appropriate and justified measures to
mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive impacts.
Residual impact evaluation: to evaluate the significance of impacts assuming effective
implementation of mitigation and enhancement measures.
4.7.1 Prediction of Impacts
Prediction of impacts is essentially an objective exercise to determine what is likely to
happen to the environment as a consequence of the Project and its associated activities. From
the potentially significant interactions identified in Scoping, the impacts to the various
resources/receptors are elabourated and evaluated. The diverse range of potential impacts
considered in the IA process typically results in a wide range of prediction methods being
used, including quantitative, semi-quantitative and qualitative techniques.
4.7.2 Characterisation of Impacts
Once the prediction of impacts is complete, each impact is described in terms of its various
relevant characteristics (e.g., nature and type). The magnitude of the impact is assigned as a
function of extent, scale, duration and frequency. The terminology used to describe impact
characteristics is provided in Table 4.2 and magnitude illustrated in Figure 4.3.
Table 4.2 Impact Characteristic Terminology
Characteristic Definition Designations
Nature A descriptor indicating the relationship of the
impact
Positive
Negative
Type A definition of whether the impact occurs as a
result of the interaction between Project activities
and resource/receptor
e.g. air emissions affecting air quality = direct
e.g. reduced air quality affecting local health
conditions = indirect
Direct
Indirect
Extent The reach of the impact (e.g., confined to a
small area around the Project Footprint, projected
for several kilometres, etc).
Local (low)
Regional (medium)
International (high)
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 81 of 369

Characteristic Definition Designations
Duration The time period over which a resource / receptor
is affected.
Temporary
Short-term
Long-term/ irreversible
Scale The size of the impact (e.g., the size of the area
damaged or impacted, the fraction of a resource
that is lost or affected, etc)
Defined from a numerical
value or a qualitative
description of intensity
Frequency A measure of the constancy or periodicity of the
impact.
Defined from a numerical
value or a qualitative
d
Figure 4.3 Assessing the Level of Magnitude

Magnitude essentially describes the intensity of the change that is predicted to occur in the
resource/receptor as a result of the impact. The magnitude assessments as a function of
extent, duration, scale and frequency vary on a resource/receptor basis but the designations
are universal:
Negligible;
Small;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 82 of 369

Medium; and
Large.
For a number of other resource/receptor specific interactions/impacts definitions have been
developed where international standards or references exist, e.g. for noise or Social and
community Health. These resource/receptor-specific designations are discussed in
Chapters 10 and 11 in this report.
In the case of a positive impact, no magnitude designation is assigned. It is considered
sufficient for the purpose of the IA to indicate that the Project is expected to result in a
positive impact, without characterising the exact degree of positive change likely to occur.
Additionally, for unplanned events only, magnitude incorporates a likelihood factor. The
likelihood of an unplanned event occurring is designated using a qualitative scale, as
described in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 Definitions for Likelihood Designations
Likelihood Definition
Unlikely The event is unlikely but may occur at some time during normal operating
conditions.
Possible The event is likely to occur at some time during normal operating conditions.
Likely The event will occur during normal operating conditions (i.e., it is essentially
inevitable).

In addition to characterising the magnitude of impact, the other principal impact evaluation
step is definition of the sensitivity/vulnerability of the impacted resource/receptor. There
are a range of factors to be taken into account when defining the sensitivity/vulnerability of
the resource/receptor, which may be physical, biological, cultural or human. Other factors
may also be considered when characterising sensitivity/vulnerability/importance, such as
legal protection, government policy, stakeholder views and economic value.
Sensitivity/vulnerability/importance designations, as in the case of magnitude, are
universally consistent, but the definitions for these designations vary on a resource/receptor
basis (refer to Chapters 10 and 11 Impact Assessment). The sensitivity/ vulnerability/
importance designations used herein for all resources/receptors are:
Low
Medium
High
Once magnitude of impact and sensitivity/vulnerability/importance of resource/receptor
have been characterised, the significance can be assigned for each impact. Impact
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 83 of 369

significance is designated using the matrix shown in Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.4 Impact Significance Rankings
Sensitivity/ Vulnerability/ Importance of Resource/ Receptor
Low Medium High
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

o
f

I
m
p
a
c
t

Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Small Negligible Minor Moderate
Medium Minor Moderate Major
Large Moderate Major Major

The Impact Significance matrix universally applies to all resources/receptors, and all
impacts to these resources/receptors, as the resource/receptor-specific considerations are
factored into the assignment of magnitude and sensitivity/vulnerability/importance
designations that enter into the matrix. Error! Reference source not found. provides a context
for what the various impact significance ratings signify.
It is important to note that impact prediction and evaluation take into account any
embedded controls (i.e., physical or procedural controls that are already planned as part of
the Project design, regardless of the results of the IA Process). An example of an embedded
control is a standard acoustic enclosure that is designed to be installed around a piece of
major equipment. This avoids the situation where an impact is assigned a magnitude based
on a hypothetical version of the Project that considers none of the embedded controls.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 84 of 369

Figure 4.5 Context of Impact Significance
An impact of negligible significance is one where a resource/receptor (including people) will
essentially not be affected in any way by a particular activity or the predicted effect is
deemed to be imperceptible or is indistinguishable from natural background variations.
An impact of minor significance is one where a resource/receptor will experience a
noticeable effect, but the impact magnitude is sufficiently small and/or the
resource/receptor is of low sensitivity/vulnerability/ importance. In either case, the
magnitude should be well within applicable standards.
An impact of moderate significance has an impact magnitude that is within applicable
standards, but falls somewhere in the range from a threshold below which the impact is
minor, up to a level that might be just short of breaching a legal limit. Clearly, to design an
activity so that its effects only just avoid breaking a law and/or cause a major impact is not
best practice. The emphasis for moderate impacts is therefore on demonstrating that the
impact has been reduced to a level that is as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). This
does not necessarily mean that impacts of moderate significance have to be reduced to
minor, but that moderate impacts are being managed effectively and efficiently.
An impact of major significance is one where an accepted limit or standard may be exceeded,
or large magnitude impacts occur to highly valued/sensitive resource/receptors. An aim of
IA is to get to a position where the Project does not have any major residual impacts,
certainly not ones that would endure into the long-term or extend over a large area.
However, for some aspects there may be major residual impacts after all practicable
mitigation options have been exhausted (i.e. ALARP has been applied). An example might
be the visual impact of a facility. It is then the function of regulators and stakeholders to
weigh such negative factors against the positive ones, such as employment, in coming to a
decision on the Project.

4.8 IDENTIFICATION OF MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES
Once the significance of an impact has been characterised, the next step is to evaluate what
mitigation and enhancement measures are warranted. The following Mitigation Hierarchy is
illustrated in Figure 4.6.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 85 of 369

Figure 4.6 Impact Mitigation Hierarchy

The priority in mitigation is to first apply mitigation measures to the source of the impact
(i.e., to avoid or reduce the magnitude of the impact from the associated Project activity), and
then to address the resultant effect to the resource/receptor via abatement or compensatory
measures or offsets (i.e., to reduce the significance of the effect once all reasonably
practicable mitigations have been applied to reduce the impact magnitude).
4.9 RESIDUAL IMPACT EVALUATION
Once mitigation and enhancement measures are declared, the next step in the IA Process is
to assign residual impact significance. This is essentially a repeat of the impact assessment
steps discussed above, considering the implementation of the proposed mitigation and
enhancement measures.
4.10 MANAGEMENT, MONITORING AND AUDIT
The final stage in the IA Process is definition of the basic management and monitoring
measures that are needed to identify whether:
a) Impacts or their associated Project components remain in conformance with applicable
standards; and
b) Mitigation measures are effectively addressing impacts and compensatory measures and
offsets are reducing effects to the extent predicted.
Avoid at Source; Reduce at Source: avoiding or reducing at source through the design of the
Project (e.g., avoiding by siting or re-routing activity away from sensitive areas or reducing by
restricting the working area or changing the time of the activity).

Abate on Site: add something to the design to abate the impact (e.g., pollution control
equipment, traffic controls, perimeter screening and landscaping).

Abate at Receptor: if an impact cannot be abated on-site then control measures can be
implemented off-site (e.g., noise barriers to reduce noise impact at a nearby residence or fencing
to prevent animals straying onto the site).

Repair or Remedy: some impacts involve unavoidable damage to a resource (e.g. agricultural
land and forestry due to creating access, work camps or materials storage areas) and these
impacts can be addressed through repair, restoration or reinstatement measures.

Compensate in Kind; Compensate Through Other Means: where other mitigation approaches
are not possible or fully effective, then compensation for loss, damage and disturbance might be
appropriate (e.g., planting to replace damaged vegetation, financial compensation for damaged
crops or providing community facilities for loss of fisheries access, recreation and amenity
space).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 86 of 369

An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) is then compiled which summarises
all actions which Salamander has committed to executing with respect to
environmental/Social/ Health performance for the Project. The ESMP includes the
mitigation measures, compensatory measures and offsets and management and monitoring
activities together with details of who is responsible for implementation, how these measures
are evaluated for performance, timing and reporting responsibilities. The ESMP is provided
as an Addendum to this ESIA.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 87 of 369

5 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The baseline conditions within the Project Study Area have been characterised based on a
consideration of secondary data from published sources as well as primary data collected in
order to fill data gaps. It has been compiled using available data and published information,
including UKL/UPL reports developed by Elnusa Bangkanai Energy (EBE) from 2006 to
2010 and subsequent field investigations managed by Salamander from 2011 to 2013.
5.2 PROJECT SETTING REGIONAL CONTEXT
The Kerendan Gas Development Project is located in the Bangkanai Production Sharing
Contract (PSC) in the North Barito Regency, Central Kalimantan (Figure 1.1). The Bangkanai
PSC covers an area of approximately 1,385 m, approximately 200 km west of Balikpapan
and 330 kilometres north of Banjarmasin. The block is located on the northern edge of the
Barito Shelf and the west side of the Kutei Basin.
Central Kalimantan is the 3rd largest Indonesian province by area with a size of 153,800 km
2
.
It is bordered by West and East Kalimantan provinces to the north, by the Java Sea to the
south, by South and East Kalimantan provinces to the east, and by West Kalimantan
province to west. The majority of the centre of the province is covered with tropical forest.
Commercial forest activities in the area produce rattan, resin and timber such as Ulin and
Meranti. The southern part of the province comprises low-level alluvial flood plains and
swamps of the major tributaries of the Barito River.
5.3 CLIMATE
Central Kalimantans climate is one of a wet weather equatorial zone with an eight-month
rainy season, and 4 months of dry season. Rainfall or precipitation is 2,776 - 3,393 mm per
year with an average of 145 rainy days annually.
Based on climate data from 1995-2004 at Beringin Airport Meteorological Station - Muara
Teweh (Table 5.1), the climate in the Project area is consistent with Type A (Q = 7.4%; wet
climate type) of the Kppen Climate Classification system. Type A is a moist tropical climate
that experiences high temperatures and large amounts of rainfall all year round (EBE 2010).

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 88 of 369

Table 5.1 Climate within the Project Area
Parameter
Month
Yearly
Total/av.
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Rainfall
1995-2004
mm
267 263 366 291 248 153 173 134 147 252 346 322 2962
2007 363 420 331 266 371 184 206 147 128 234 220 485 3355
Rainy
Days
1995-2004
days
27 26 28 28 23 24 21 18 18 20 22 26 284
2007 24 21 20 21 19 19 15 20 12 13 20 22 226
Temp
Max.
C
31.7 31.8 32.1 32.3 32.6 32.3 32.1 32.2 32.2 32.4 32.4 32.2 32.2
Min. 23.1 23.3 23.4 23.7 23.8 23.4 23.4 22.7 23.1 23.5 23.3 23.3 23.3
Av. 26.4 26.6 26.7 27.1 27.3 26.9 26.4 26.5 26.6 27.1 26.8 26.7 26.8
Humidity
%
86 86 86 86 86 85 85 85 84 85 85 85 85
Exposure 49 47 48 59 64 64 53 54 45 46 55 54 53
Wind Speed knot 3 4 5 5 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4
Wind Direction V TL V BD V BD
Source: Jupoi B-1, Sungai Lahei -1 and West Kerendan-1 UKL/UPL (EBE 2010)

The monthly rainfall data shows average annual rainfall in the area is approximately 3000
mm a year, with the highest amount of rainfall generally occurring between November and
May, with the highest average monthly rainfall in December. The low rainfall period is
between May to October, with a lowest average monthly rainfall in September. The driest
months from 1995 to 2007 were between June and September.
Temperature is relatively consistent during the year. The average monthly temperatures are
approximately 27C, with maximum and minimum monthly temperatures of approximately
35C and 23C respectively.
Relative humidity is consistent year round (approximately 85 %) which is characteristic of
areas that experience high rainfall. The month to month variation in the relative humidity is
relatively small, which is approximately 5.5% between the average highest and lowest
humidity. Wind speed is also relatively consistent, ranging from 3 to 5 knots.
5.4 TOPOGRAPHY
The topography surrounding the Project area is characterised by undulating plains with
slopes ranging from 0-8% in height. Altitude at West Kerendan-1-1 and Lahei River ranges
between 170-370 m above sea level, while at Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad and the KGPF
altitude generally ranges from 80-95 m above sea level with the land sloping towards the
Lahei River (EBE 2010).
The Kerendan Cluster location is adjacent to the Lahei River and the site floods regularly
with high seasonal rainfall in the area.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 89 of 369

5.5 GEOLOGY
According to the Central Kalimantan province Thematic 1:500.000 scale Map (1970) and
Mining Geology 1:250,000 scale map (1977), the geology surrounding the Project area has
been influenced by a range of endogenous and exogenous forces (EBE 2010).
In general the geological formation of the Bangkanai PSC consists of volcanic breccia of late
Miocene, early Miocene, late Eocene/Oligocene, and sedimentary rock. This area belongs to
the stratigraphic column of Tanjung area (Barito Basin) and Kutai Basin. The lithology
generally consists of sandstone, clay, breccia, andestik, gravel, sand, clay, quartzite, brown
coal and metallic minerals (EBE 2010).
The Kerendan gas platform is distributed over an area of 176 km (approximately 11 by 16
km) and has an inferred thickness of approximately 1000m (Hichens, Harrison & Co. plc
2006). The current structure is believed to have been previously buried at a depth of
approximately 4300 m, at which depth limestone would have been destroyed. However the
acidic water expelled from nearby shales is believed to have preserved some of the porosity
in the reef structure area on the outer edge of the platform (Hichens, Harrison & Co. plc
2006). The porosities around the platform rim are between 5-13%, in contrast to the interior
which has less than 5% porosity.
A cross section of the Kerendan platform is shown in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1 Cross Section of the Kerendan Gas Field

Source: Salamander 2013
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 90 of 369

5.6 AIR QUALITY
This chapter provides an overview of the existing air environment using air quality data
from the Kerendan UKL/UPL Report (2006) produced by EBE and a recent sampling study
undertaken at various locations in the Project area. The aim of the studies was to compare air
quality in the Project area with air quality thresholds outlined in the Government Regulation
of the Republic of Indonesia No 41 of 1999 and the IFC General EHS Guidelines:
Environmental: Air Emissions and Ambient Air Quality, which also establishes a number of
threshold limits based upon World Health Authority (WHO) Ambient Air Quality
Guidelines.
IFC PS 3 states - When host country regulations differ from the levels and measures
presented in the EHS Guidelines, projects are expected to achieve whichever is more
stringent. If less stringent levels or measures are appropriate in view of specific project
circumstances, a full and detailed justification for any proposed alternatives is needed as part
of the site-specific environmental assessment. This justification should demonstrate that the
choice for any alternative performance level is protective of human health and the
environment.
Ambient air quality standards are outlined in the table below.
Table 5.2 Ambient Air Quality Standards
2

Parameter
Period of
Measurement
Unit PP41/1999
IFC EHS
Guidelines
Carbon monoxide (CO)
1 hour g/m
3
30,000 -
24 hour g/m
3
10,000 -
Hydrocarbons (HC) 3 hour g/m
3
160 -
Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
1 hour g/m
3
400 200
24 hour g/m
3
150 -
1 year g/m
3
100 40
Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
10 minute g/m
3
- 500
1 hour g/m
3
900 -
24 hour g/m
3
365 125*
g/m
3
50**
g/m
3
20
1 year g/m
3
60 -
Dust (TSP)
24 hour g/m
3
230 -
1 year g/m
3
90 -
Lead (Pb)
24 hour g/m
3
2 -
1 year g/m
3
1 -

2
World Health Organization (WHO). Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005. PM 24-hour value is the
99th percentile.
Interim targets are provided in recognition of the need for a staged approach to achieving the recommended
guidelines.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 91 of 369

Parameter
Period of
Measurement
Unit PP41/1999
IFC EHS
Guidelines
Oxidant (O3)
1 hour g/m
3
50 -
8 hour g/m
3
- 160*
g/m
3
- 100
1 year g/m
3
235 -
PM10
24 hour g/m
3
150 150*
g/m
3
100**
g/m
3
75***
g/m
3
50
1 year g/m
3
- 70*
g/m
3
50**
g/m
3
30***
g/m
3
20
PM2.5
24 hour g/m
3
15 75*
g/m
3
50**
g/m
3
37.5***
g/m
3
25
1 year g/m
3
65 35*
g/m
3
25**
g/m
3
15***
g/m
3
10*
Notes: *Interim target-1 ** Interim target-2 *** Interim target-3

A summary of the air quality assessments conducted in or around the Project area to date is
provided below.
5.6.1 Baseline Air Quality Data
5.6.1.1 Kerendan UKL/UPL Surveys (2005)
In 2005, air quality measurements were collected at the proposed Kerendan-3 wellsite and
near Kerendan Village as part of baseline studies for the EBE Kerendan UKL/UPL Report
(EBE 2006).
The air quality study involved measuring the following parameters: NO, SO, O3, CO,
hydrocarbons and dust/particulates. As shown in Table 5.3, labouratory analytical results
indicated that the air quality in the sampling area was good, with concentrations found to be
below ambient air quality standards.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 92 of 369

Table 5.3 Air Quality Sampling for Kerendan UKL/UPL (2005)
Parameter
Coordinates g/m
3

Latitude Longitude SO CO NO O3 Dust Pb CH4
Kerendan 0.6159 115.1570 <26.15 <1000 <10 1.49 20.31 <0.05 <6.53
Kerendan
- 3
0.5395 115.1208 <26.15 <1000 <10 1.57 19.21 <0.05 <6.53
Regulatory Limit* 900 30000 400 235 230 2 160
*Ambient Air Standard Quality Regulation, PPRI No. 41/1999.
Source: Kerendan UKL/UPL (2005)
5.6.1.2 Sungai Lahei -1 and West Kerendan UKL/UPL (2010)
The results of air quality sampling near Sungai Lahei -1 and West Kerendan UKL/UPL (EBE
2010) are presented in Table 5.4. Sampling locations are presented in Figure 5.2 (this figure
shows all sampling locations for the Kerendan and WK-1/Sungai Lahei UKL/UPL studies
and additional water sampling undertaken by Salamander).
The data show that ambient air quality in the areas surrounding the planned drilling
locations is considered relatively good, with parameters meeting the following
Environmental Quality Standards (BML):
PP. 41/1999 for SO2, NO2, CO, hydrocarbons, O3 and dust; and
LH No. KEPMENEG. KEP-50/1996 for H2S
Table 5.4 Air Quality in Project Area
Parameter unit
Environmental
Quality
Standard
(BML)
Locations near Kerendan & Lahei River
Km-27 Km-35 Kerendan Haragandang
PP No. 41/1999
Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
g/Nm
3

365 ND
Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
150 ND 0.46 0.72 0.52
Carbon monoxide
(CO)
10.000 ND
Hydrocarbons (HC) 160 3.41 0.82 1.24 0.97
Ozone (O3) 250
Dust 230 28.6 39.5 42.4 37.6
KEPMENEG LH No. KEP-50/1996
Hydrogen Sulphide
(H2S)
g/Nm
3
30,36 1.69 0.91 1.28 1.04
Description: ND = Not detected - = Not analysed
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 93 of 369

Figure 5.2 Locations of Air, Water Quality and Soil Sampling Undertaken within or near the Project area from 2005 2013

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 94 of 369

5.6.1.3 Air Quality Survey 2013
Ambient air quality monitoring and sampling activities were conducted at three locations in
the Project area in July 2013. The locations included the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad (A-
01-RG), along the pipeline route between the well site and KGPF (A-02-R II) and within the
KGPF footprint (A-03-R III). Sampling locations and shown in the figure below.
Figure 5.3 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Sampling Stations

In summary, Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2/1 hour average period), Sulphur Dioxide (SO2/10-
minute averaging period) and Ozone (O3/8-hour daily maximum) were not detected at the
sampled locations. Particulate Matter10 (PM10/24-hour averaging period) was detected at a
concentration of 28.1 g/Nm
3
on a sample collected from the Wellsite but it did not exceed
the World Health Organization (WHO) Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005
(International Finance Corporation [IFC] Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS)
Guidelines.
Similarly, Particulate Matter2.5 (PM2.5/24 hour averaging period) was detected at a
concentration of 18.4 g/Nm
3
on a sample collected from the Wellsite but it did not exceed
the World Health Organization (WHO) Air Quality Guidelines.
The full results of the air quality sampling program, including methodology used to conduct
the study, are detailed in Annex B.
AMBIENT AIR
MONITORING/SAMPLING
ROAD TO MANIFOLD (PLN)
MANIFOLD
(PerusahaanListrik
Negara- Government
Electricity Provider)
DRILL SITE
UNCLEARED AREA
(HEAVILY VEGETATED)
KGPF AREA
A-03-RIII
CAMP
HELIPAD
LAHAI RIVER (R I)
CLEARED
AREA
RIVER (R II)
A-01-RI
A-02-RII
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 95 of 369

5.7 NOISE
Under Indonesian standards, the Decree of Environmental Ministry No. 48/1996 on Noise
level Quality Standard and IFP regulates ambient noise and establishes a limit of 55 dBa for
residential areas. The IFC EHS Guidelines refer to the Guidelines for Community Noise,
World Health Organization (WHO), 1999. This stipulates limits of 55 dBa during the daytime
(07:00-22:00) and 45 dBa during night-time (22:00-7:00).
Baseline noise data was reported in the Kerendan UKL/UPL (2005) and Sungai Lahei -1 and
West Kerendan UKL/UPL (2010). Noise levels were recorded at the social receptors of
Kerendan and Haragandang Villages as well as along the access roads. Comparative
measurements were made at other villages.
The noise level data acquired from the measurements conducted in the study area are shown
in Table 5.5. In accordance with UKL/UPL requirements, noise monitoring is undertaken
every 6 months in accordance with the applicable noise monitoring standard.
Noise levels near the three locations ranged from 43.0 to 53.5 dBA (Table 5.5), which was
lower than the environmental quality standard of 55 dBA (LH No. KEPMENEG KEP-
48/1996) and IFC EHS Guideline recommended standards for daytime noise.
Table 5.5 Noise Quality Sampling for Kerendan Location (2010)
Measurement Location Noise Level (dBA)
Access Roads 27-km from Luwe Hulu 43.0 47.2
Access Roads 35-km from Luwe Hulu 43.9 46.7
Kerendan Village 44.2 47.3
Haragandang Village 44.1 47.9

5.8 SOILS
An assessment of soils in the Project area has been undertaken using existing data from the
Kerendan UKL/UPL Report and the results of a field survey conducted in the Project area in
July 2013. Additional sampling was undertaken so soil characteristics could be better defined
within the area of potential impact, thus allowing for the assessment of erosion potential and
potential for landscape change as a result of the Project.
Existing soil baseline data and results of recent soil sampling in the Project area are described
below.
5.8.1 Kerendan UKL/UPL Surveys (2005)
Soil samples were collected at Kerendan-1 and Kerendan-3 drill sites during surveys
conducted in 2005 for the Projects UKL/UPL report developed by EBE (2006). Sampling
locations are highlighted in Figure 5.4.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 96 of 369

The soil at the proposed well sites was generally found to be acidic with low levels of
nutrients and organic content (C and N). Base saturation was also found to be low, while
water content was found to be relatively high.
5.8.2 Soil Sampling Survey 2013
Due to the lack of information provided in the Project UKL/UPL (2005), a soil sampling
survey was undertaken in the Project area in July 2013. A total of 30 shallow soil samples and
two (2) duplicate samples were collected at randomly selected locations within the Kerendan
Wellhead Cluster (drillsite) and Camp Area, KGPF, and along the pipeline route. Soil
sampling locations are shown in Figure 5.4.
All 30 soil samples were analysed for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Semi-Volatile
Organic Compounds (SVOCs), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Metals; and Total
Alkalinity. Some samples for each location were also analysed for Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure (TCLP) Metals, Organo-Chlorine Pesticides (OCP) and Organo-
Phosphate Pesticides (OPP).
Soil samples were measured against the United States Environmental Protection Agency
Regional Screening Levels (US EPA RSLs) and Dutch Standards (Dutch Intervention Values
[DIV] 2009).
5.8.2.1 Results
A brief summary of the soil sampling results for parameters analysed during the study is
provided below. Further detail on the methodology and outcomes of the labouratory
analysis is provided in the full report, attached as Annex B.
Metals
Overall metal concentrations in soils sampled were found to be within the standard criteria
specified above (where applicable). The only exceptions to this were Arsenic, Barium and
Phosphorus. Two samples from the Wellsite and six samples from the pipeline route and
KGPF exceeded Arsenic criteria under the USEPA RSL.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 97 of 369

Figure 5.4 Soil Sampling Locations

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 98 of 369

Phosphorus was detected at all sampling locations, with all samples recording
concentrations in excess of the USEPA RSL limit of 20 mg/kg. The KGPF recorded the
highest concentration, recording a range of 76.0 to 172.0 mg/kg.
Barium was detected at all sampling locations. However, the Wellsite was the only site to
exceed the criteria (DIV), with levels ranging from 5.48 to 1,150.14 mg/kg.
TCLP Metals
Barium and Zinc were detected in soil samples collected from the Wellsite and camp, KGPF
and one of the samples collected from Pipeline Route. The detected TCLP concentrations are
not specified in the referenced criteria.
TPH, OCP and OPP, VOCs and SVOCs
OCP and OPP, VOCs and SVOCs and TPH were not detected in soil samples analysed.
Total Alkalinity
Total Alkalinity in soil samples collected from the Wellsite, Pipeline Route and KGPF ranged
from 30.0 to 2,960.0 mg/kg, 12.0 to 71.0 mg/kg and from 9.0 to 61.0 mg/kg, respectively.
Total Alkalinity was not detected from soil samples collected from Kerendan Cluster Pad
Camp.
5.9 HYDROLOGY
The main rivers near the Project area are the Upper Barito River and the Lahei River and
tributaries (Figure 1.1). The Barito River originates in the Muller Mountain Ranges in Central
Kalimantan and stretches approximately 900 km south to the Java Sea, through Barjarmasin,
the capital of South Kalimantan (EBE 2010).
The Lahei river mouth is located approximately half way between the river villages of Muara
Teweh and Luwe Hulu. According to the JB-1, SL-1 and WK-1 UKL/UPL Report (EBE 2010),
the width of the downstream section of Lahei River is between 35-40 m, which narrows to
30-35 m midstream and becomes more tapered upstream. The width of the river near the
Kerendan section ranges from 20-25 m, with a depth of approximately 4-10 m. River
sediments near Kerendan Village are generally in the form of sand-mud, while the upstream
tributaries near Haragandang Village have a somewhat rocky base.
The Inu river mouth is located near the downstream section of the Lahei River, near Muara
Inu. The downstream width of the Inu River is between 25-30 m, narrowing to 15-20 m in the
middle section and tapering further upstream. River sediments are similar to Kerendan and
consist of a sand-mud base.
Riverflow is highly variable, depending on rainfall. There are no reliable records from which
to assess trends in baseflow or flooding (possible through hydrological changes due to forest
exploitation). Water quality in forest streams is reported to be good even during high flow,
except where roads and other activities have caused erosion and sedimentation. Water levels
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 99 of 369

vary along the Lahei River during wet (flood) and dry seasons, with differences being up to 3
to 4 meters in the downstream section of the river and 2 to 3 meters in the upper reaches. The
Kerendan cluster site was subject to a high degree of flooding from variations in water level,
requiring the drilling site to be elevated by 4 m.
Land cover along the edges of the Lahei River consists of primary and secondary forest,
plantations, vacant land and residential areas. Surrounding community rubber plantations
are generally not cultivated intensively along the river and allowed to grow naturally.
Therefore vegetation is a mixture of rubber plantations and different kinds of forest and
rattan trees that grow along the river banks.
The Lahei River is the main transport route that connects the Capital District Lahei the
villages along the river and its tributaries. The centre of the village and village settlements
are generally located around the mouth of the Lahei River, such as the villages of Kerendan
and Haragandang.
In addition to transportation, the rivers are also used by the community as a water source for
drinking, bathing, washing, and fishing. Groundwater wells in the area are relatively rare, so
communities dependence on the Lahei River and its tributaries is high.
Information on water quality in the Lahei River is provided in the sub-sections below.
5.9.1 Baseline Water Quality Data
Surface water quality (rivers) is assed as the surrounding communities rely on the use of the
river as a source of clean water. The applicable standard for this use is Government
Regulation No. 82/2001 Group I (Annex A). Baseline information on the water quality within
and surrounding the Project area was collected from a range of secondary sources, including
UKL/UKL reports for Kerendan, Sungai Lahei -1 and West Kerendan, and other water
sampling activities undertaken in 2011 and 2012. The results of these reports/activities are
summarised below.
5.9.1.1 Kerendan UKL/UPL Surveys (2005)
Water sampling was undertaken at three locations near the Project area during the 2005 dry
season as part of the Kerendan UKL/UKL study. These included two sites near Kerendan-1
and Kerendan-3 wells and another near Kerendan Village (Figure 5.2).
In general, the quality of water samples collected during the Kerendan UKL/UPL study met
the quality standards of Government Regulation No. 82 Year 2001 Group I. An exception to
this was iron which was found to be higher than the standard of 0.3 mg/L, ranging from
0.617 to 1.214 mg/L. The highest concentration was found at the Kerendan Village sampling
location. Phenol concentrations in the water samples were also found to be slightly higher
than the standard of 0.001 mg/L, measuring 0.016 0.030 mg/L (EBE 2006).

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 100 of 369

Water temperatures at the sampling locations ranged from 26.3 to 26.7C which is considered
normal for tropical regions (EBE 2006). Total dissolved solids (TDS) ranged from 8 to 9
mg/L, which was considered low compared to the regulatory maximum standard of 1,000
mg/L TDS. Acidity (pH) levels were found to be normal, ranging from 6.44 to 6.84.
5.9.1.2 Sungai Lahei -1 and West Kerendan UKL/UPL (2010)
Water sampling was undertaken in 2008 as part surveys for the Sungai Lahei -1 and West
Kerendan UKL/UPL Report produced by EBE. Water samples were collected within the
Lahei and Inu Rivers, tributaries of the Upper Barito River (Figure 5.2).
Overall, the water quality in the upstream tributaries of the Lahei River at the time of
sampling was determined to be relatively good (EBE 2010). Of the 25 parameters tested, two
(2) did not meet the BML Class I Water Quality Standards (PP-82/2011), with these being
dissolved oxygen (DO) and chemical oxygen demand (COD). Dissolved oxygen levels
ranged from 5.26 to 6.03 mg/L, which was slightly lower than the BML water quality
standard of 6 mg/L. Dissolved oxygen plays an important role in aquatic ecosystems and
because if levels fall too low, it can have lethal or sub-lethal effects on aquatic ecosystems
(Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 1999).
Of 35 parameters analysed for the Inu River, 11 parameters did not meet the BML Class I.
These were total suspended solids (TSS), acidity (pH), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
dissolved oxygen (DO), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total phosphate, various heavy
metals and phenol. Differences in river quality were believed to due to the sampling period
(i.e. low rainfall) and impacts from land clearing for cultivation (EBE 2010).
5.9.1.3 Additional Water Sampling Surveys 2011 to 2012
Two water sampling surveys were conducted by Salamander in the Lahei River in December
2011 and October 2012. Three locations were sampled in the Lahei River in December 2011,
upstream from the Kerendan Cluster Wellhead Pad (Figure 5.2). Of the 35 parameters tested,
four (4) parameters did not meet the Drinking Water Standard Quality Regulation No.
907/Menkes/SK/VI/2002. These were turbidity which ranged from 55 to 94 mg/L
(regulatory limit 5 mg/L), coliform and lead (at one sampling location). Acidity (pH) was
slightly lower than Indonesian Regulatory limit, ranging between 5.72 and 6.34; however
these were within the World Health Organisation Drinking Water Standard Quality limit.
In October 2012, water sampling was undertaken at various locations near Kerendan,
Harangdang and WK-1 wellsite (Figure 5.2). A total of 28 parameters were tested
during the sampling. Five parameters did not meet Indonesian Regulatory limits
(Permenkes 492/Menkes/Per/IV/2010 and Permen LH No. 19 2010). These were
colour, turbidity and heavy metals, aluminium, iron, and manganese. The greatest
turbidity was recorded near Kerendan and Harangdang. Aluminium and iron levels
were also highest at the Kerendan sampling location. Kerendan was the only site to
record a Manganese level slightly higher (0.48 mg/L) than the water quality standard
of 0.4 mg/L.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 101 of 369

5.9.1.4 Surface Water Quality Survey 2013
Surface water was collected as part of a sampling program undertaken by ERM in the Project
area in July 2013. Water samples were collected from upstream, midstream and downstream
portions of the Lahei River, near the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad (Figure 5.5). The
Cluster Pads drainage outfall was also sampled (SW-04-RI). In total, four surface water
samples were collected from the Kerendan Wellhead area.
Surface water samples were also collected at a stream passing through the pipeline route and
a stream passing through the northwestern corner of KGPF (upstream, midstream and
downstream). Sampling locations are presented below.

Figure 5.5 Water Sampling Locations in the Project Area (2013)

A brief summary of the results for parameters analysed during the water sampling program
is provided below. Further detail on the methodology and labouratory results is provided in
the full report, Annex B.
River Flow
SURFAE WATER SAMPLING
MANIFOLD
(Perusahaan Listrik
Negara - Government
ElectricityProvider)
DRILL SITE
UNCLEARED AREA
KGPF AREA
SW-09-RIII
CAMP
HELIPAD
LAHAI RIVER (R I)
CLEARED
AREA
RIVER (R II)
SW-08-RIII
SW-07-RIII
SW-03-RI SW-02-RI SW-01-RI
SW-04-RI
SW-05-RII
SW-06-RII
Pipeline layout
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 102 of 369

pH
In general, most samples recorded pH concentrations within the range set by the GOI
Regulation No. 82 of 2001, Class 1 (GOI Regulation). The only exceptions to this were
samples collected in the upstream, midstream and downstream sections of the stream
passing through the north-western portion of the KGPF. The pH concentrations at these
locations were marginally lower than the minimum limit set by the GOI Regulation, at 5.8,
5.9 and 5.9, respectively.
Temperature
Recorded water temperatures generally ranged from a minimum of 27C to 37 C, with
streams along the pipeline route recording the highest temperatures. Temperature is not
specified in the GOI Regulation however lower measurements were generally consistent
with temperature measurements recorded during the Kerendan UKL/UPL study.
Turbidity
The sampling location near the Kerendan Wellsite recorded the highest TDS concentration at
725 mg/L, however all samples GOI Regulation water quality criteria. All TSS concentrations
met GOI Regulation criteria and the indicative guideline value applicable to sanitary
wastewater discharges to surface water.
Metals
Of the parameters tested during the sampling program, Iron and Manganese were the only
metals found to exceed water quality standards. Iron concentrations exceeded the GOI
Regulation at all sampling locations, although they did not exceed USEPA RSL criteria.
Manganese concentrations exceeded the GOI Regulation for samples collected in the
upstream, midstream and downstream section of the stream passing through the north-
western portion of the KGPF, recording concentrations of 0.17, 0.08 and 0.04 mg/L,
respectively.
Dissolved Metals
Concentrations of dissolved Iron at the upstream and downstream sections of KGPF north-
western stream exceeded the GOI Regulation, recording levels of 0.819 and 0.394 mg/L,
respectively. However, these concentrations do not exceed the USEPA RSL.
Organics
BOD and COD were only detected in surface water samples collected from the Kerendan
Wellhead drainage outfall. The detected concentration of BOD (74.0 mg/L) exceeded GOI
Regulation and IFC EHS Guideline. The COD concentration (122.0 mg/L) also exceeded the
GOI Regulation.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 103 of 369

Oil and Grease
Oil and grease was detected in surface water sample collected from the Kerendan Wellhead
drainage outfall and found to exceed the GOI Regulation, with a concentration reading of 8.0
mg/L. Oil and grease was not detected in other samples.
Dissolved Oxygen
All DO levels in sampled were found to be below the GOI Regulation minimum
requirement.
Surfactants (MBAS)
Surfactants were recorded in all water samples collected, however concentrations did not
exceed the maximum limit required under the GOI Regulation.
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected in water samples analysed.
5.10 BIODIVERSITY AND HABITATS
The chapter provides an overview of flora and fauna within the Project area and biodiversity
values in the context of IFC Performance Standard 6.
IFC PS6 defines the parameters of biodiversity and ecosystem services which must be
considered when assessing the Project against the IFC Performance Standards. This includes
the identification and consideration of habitat values, threatened species, ecosystem services,
protected areas and invasive species. The objectives of IFC PS6 are to:
Protect and conserve biodiversity;
Maintain the benefits from ecosystem services; and
Promote the sustainable management of living natural resources through the adoption
of practices that integrate conservation needs and development priorities.
This chapter has been compiled using secondary data from a range of secondary data
sources, including the IUCN redlist of threatened species and UKL/UPL reports for the
Kerendan and West Kerendan well sites and the results of a biodiversity survey undertaken
in the Project area in July 2013.
There is very little information on wildlife in the Project area. A biodiversity survey was
commissioned by Salamander in July 2013 to:
(1) Gain a better understanding of flora and fauna in the project area for the purposes of the
impact assessment; and
(2) Address gaps in existing UKL/UPL documents in regards to biodiversity and ecosystem
and IFC reporting requirements. This includes providing information on the possible
presence of species of concern and critical habitat, as defined in IFC PS 6.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 104 of 369

A summary of flora and fauna and biodiversity values that are relevant to the Project are
described below. The full Biodiversity Report which includes a more detailed description of
the approach, methodology and findings, is attached as Annex C.
5.10.1 Desktop Review
An initial desktop review was undertaken to identify flora and fauna that are known or
potentially occur in the Project area. A brief summary of this review and subsequent field
assessment is provided below.
5.10.1.1 Regional Context
The Project area is located within what is known as the Mount Muller complex. The Mt.
Muller complex is one of few remaining tropical forest areas in Kalimantan and contains
important habitat for flora and fauna biodiversity within the region. It extends across three
provinces: West Kalimantan, East Kalimantan, and Central Kalimantan.
The Indonesian Scientific Research Authority (LIPI) recorded significant biodiversity values
within the region during an expedition conducted in 2003-2004, recording a total of 66 fish
species, 17 reptile species, 10 amphibian species, 159 bird species, 8 small mammal species
and 10 primate species. There are no data on wildlife population sizes or preferred territories
within the Project area for these species.
Some of the most eminent species known to occur in the region include the Orangutan
(Pongo pygmaeus), Proboscis Monkey (Nasalis larvatus), Bornean Gibbon (Hylobates muelleri)
and Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus), all of which are listed as Endangered or Vulnerable on
the IUCN Red List.
The floral biodiversity of Kalimantan is made up of at least 3000 plant species, 58% of which
are considered endemic. During a floristic survey undertaken in this forest complex from
2003-2004, 75 species of orchid, 3 species of nepenthes, and a large number of species
belonging to dipterocarps family were identified. The diversity of flora is often considered
important for local communities that rely on forests for subsistence use, using it as a resource
for traditional medicine, building material, and traditional/ritual.
5.10.1.2 Kerendan UKL/UPL (2006)
A flora and fauna survey was undertaken in 2005 as part of the Kerendan UKL/UPL study.
The results of this assessment are described below.
Flora
Vegetation communities were assessed at 8 well sites (Kerendan-1 to Kerendan-8). The
assessment involved recording the type of and amount of vegetation observed, with leaf
samples collected for species that could not be easily identified in the field (later identified in
dendrology labouratory). In general, the vegetation in the study area was found to be
consistent with secondary forest (EBE 2006).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 105 of 369

The natural vegetation at Kerendan-2 and Kerendan-3 well sites was generally mixed with
crops or homogenous rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis) plantations grown by the local
community. These plantations are generally converted to crop fields (e.g. chilli/pepper Piper
sp., and rice Oryza sp.) when rubber plantations are less profitable (EBE 2006).
Terrestrial Fauna
Information on fauna was collected by undertaking a survey in the study area and gathering
information from the public. One targeted bird survey was conducted, which identified a
total of 17 species (EBE 2006). None of the species recorded are endemic or currently listed as
threatened species on the IUCN redlist.
A number of other general fauna observations were made during the field survey, however
it is unknown whether they were of conservation significance as many were not identified at
species level (i.e. genus only). Of the four species recorded, one, the Freshwater Crocodile or
False Gharial (Tomistoma schlegelii) is currently listed as Endangered on the IUCN redlist.
Domesticated or introduced animals that were recorded in the study area included chickens
(Gallus gallus), ducks (Anas spp.), feral pigeon (Columba livia), goats (Capra hircus), cats (Felis
familiaris), pigs (Sus sp.) and dogs (Canis canis).
Aquatic Biota
A total of 9 phytoplankton genera were found at water sampling locations in the Lahei River.
Abundance was found to be high but with a low species diversity value (H '<1) in the range
between 0.4330 to 0.5119. No dominance species were identified (D <0.5).
Water samples collected identified 2 genera of zooplankton: Nauplius and Oikopleura,
highlighting low diversity (H '<1) in the range of 0.0000 to 0.2764. 1.
5.10.1.3 Sungai Lahei-1 and West Kerendan-1 UKL/UPL (2010)
West Kerendan-1 well site is located approximately 10 km south west of the KGPF. Given the
proximity of the wellsite to the Project area, survey results for the Sungai Lahei-1 and West
Kerendan-1 UKL/UPL (2010) were reviewed as part of the desktop assessment.
A brief summary of the flora and fauna identified during the field survey, with specific
references to WK-1 (where possible), is provided below.
Flora
The vegetation types in the area surrounding WK-1 and Sungai Lahei-1 was identified as
lowland tropical natural forest. Both locations are within secondary forest logging areas,
where the area vegetation type is classified as Secondary Natural Forest (EBE 2010). Peat
vegetation, river banks, and springs (within a 200 m radius of the site) were not found in the
study area (EBE 2010).

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 106 of 369

Three protected species were identified in secondary forests surveyed, however overall
species richness and abundance of forest stands was found to be relatively low. Protected
species identified included Kempas (Koompasia malaccensis), Jelutung (Dyera costulata) and
Lay / Kalimantan Durian (Durio sp.).
Plantations in the study area were generally in the form of traditionally cultivated rubber
plantations (Hevea braziliensis) and food crops. They were not intensively cultivated,
therefore tended to be irregular and mixed with pioneer plant species/secondary forest.
Fauna
A total of 7 mammals, 5 reptiles, and 16 birds were identified during the Sungai Lahei-1 and
West Kerendan-1 UKL/UPL field survey (EBE 2010). Eight of the species were either
protected species under the Indonesian regulation, while three were listed as Endangered or
Vulnerable on the IUCN redlist. These were the Endangered Proboscis Monkey (Nasalis
larvatus), and the Vulnerable listed Sambar Deer (Cervus unicolor) and Bearded Pig (Sus
barbatus).
Mammals such as the Bearded Pig and Proboscis Monkey were mostly observed around
riparian areas, while the Sambar Deer is generally found in secondary forest (EBE 2010). A
list of the threatened species recorded during the survey, their conservation status and
preferred habitat is presented in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6 Fauna in the Juboi-1, Sungai Lahei-1 and West Kerendan-1 UKL/UPL
Study Area
Common Name Scientific Name
Status
(UU No.
5/1990)
IUCN
Vegetation Type*
HAS HTI SSK
Proboscis Monkey Nasalis larvatus D E - -
Sambar Deer Cervus unicolor TD V - -
Java Mouse-deer Tragulus javanicus D - - -
Barking Deer Muntiacus muntjak D LC - -
Bearded Pig Sus barbatus TD V
Changeable Hawk-eagle Spizaetus cirrcatus D -
Blue-eared Kingfisher Alcedo meninting D LC -
- Capsycus sonneratia D - -
Common Hill Myna Gracula religiosa D LC - -
Sunbird Nectarinia trigonostigma D - -
Description: TD = not protected, D = protected, LC = Least Concern, E Endangered, VU =
Vulnerable; HAS = secondary natural forest timber, HTI= timber plantations, SSK = riparian
vegetation
Source: EBE 2010

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 107 of 369

Fauna Habitat
Fauna habitat in the study area was identified as damaged and fragmented due to forest
concession activities and plantation farming.
5.10.1.4 Protected Areas
No legally protected areas are located within the Project area. The Project and surrounding
area is located within Production Forest. The nearest Protected forested area is located
approximately 30-40 km north-west of the KGPF.
5.10.1.5 Species of Conservation Significance
A desktop review of available data bases such as the IUCN Redlist was completed to identify
species of conservation significance that are known to potentially occur within the region
and project area. For the purpose of this ESIA, species of conservation interest are identified
as those listed as Critically Endangered (CE), Endangered (EN) or Vulnerable (VU), on the
IUCN red list. The species considered relevant to this project are listed at Table 5.7.
Table 5.7 also provides a brief review of whether the species is considered likely to occur
based on the species known habitat requirements, distribution and also habitats known to
exist within the project area. The consideration of likely presence was also based on the
preliminary site visit completed by the project team. This list was then used as part of the
biodiversity survey to confirm or otherwise the potential presence of conservation significant
species and understand if they are likely to be a relevant consideration during the impact
assessment.
From Table 5.7, it is considered that the project area may provide potential habitat for 18
fauna species of conservation significance. While individuals of these species have the
potential to occur within the project area the species are generally distributed across
Kalimantan and other locations within Indonesia and Asia, where suitable habitat occurs.
However many of these species are under increasing pressure from habitat removal and
development within the region.
The flora species search revealed an extensive list of species occurring within the region,
while little information was identified during the desktop search which would assist in the
identification of species of potential concern. The results of the flora survey presented at
Section 5.10.2 have been used as the basis for understanding if species of conservation
interest occur within the project area.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 108 of 369

Table 5.7 Likelihood of IUCN Species (Known to Occur in Kalimantan) Occurring in the Project Area
Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Distribution Habitat
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
Sus barbatus Bearded
Pig,
Western
Bearded Pig
VU Malay Peninsula,
Sumatra, Bangka, and
Borneo
Generally tropical evergreen
rainforest, but are known to use a
wide variety of habitat types,
ranging from beaches to upper
mountain cloud forests
Known Recorded during
WK-1 survey
(UPL/UKL)
Recorded during
biodiversity survey
Hylobates muelleri Bornean
Gibbon,
Bornean
Grey
Gibbon,
Borneo
Gibbon
EN Occurs throughout
Borneo except for the
southwest (where H.
albibarbis is found)
Primary, selectively logged and
secondary tropical evergreen
forest. Common in areas where
good forest remains. Average
home range size approx. 30 ha.
Arboreal and diurnal. Generally
frugivorous but also eat immature
leaves and insects.
biodiversity survey
Tomistoma schlegelii False
Gharial,
Malayan
Gharial,
Tomistoma
EN Widespread, although
at a low density,
throughout large areas
of Sumatra,
Kalimantan, Sarawak,
and Malaysia
Swamps, rivers and lakes.
Terrestrial nest sites and basking
areas
Kerendan
UPL/UKL survey
(2006)
Nasalis larvatus Long-nosed
Monkey,
Proboscis
Monkey
EN Endemic to Borneo,
occurring in Brunei,
Indonesia (Kalimantan)
and Malaysia.
Associated with riparian-riverine
forests, coastal lowland forest,
including mangroves, peat swamp,
and freshwater swamp forest.
Rarely ranges far from its local
habitat/waterway. Generally
Likely Recorded around
WK-1 (UKL/UPL)
Community
confirmation
during biodiversity
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 109 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
restricted to coastal areas and
rivers because of dietary
dependence on minerals and salts
(generally lacking from interior
soils).
survey
Helarctos malayanus Malaysian
Sun-bear
Vu Occurs throughout
south east Asia
Dense low land tropical forest.
Feed mainly on bees, termites,
earthworms, and fruits. Primarily
active during the night.
Likely Indirect evidence
(scratches) found in
Project area during
survey
Pardofelis badia Bay Cat,
Bornean
Bay Cat,
Borneo Bay
Cat
EN Found only on the
island Borneo
Distribution poorly
known
Appears to be forest dependent,
with records from hill and lowland
forest as well as swamp forest. Has
been recorded in regenerating
logged forest
Possible Presence of
preferred habitat,
distribution poorly
known
Hemigalus derbyanus Banded
Civet,
Banded
Palm Civet
VU Occurs in the Sundaic
region (includes
Borneo)
Primary lowland rainforest, but
also found in disturbed habitat,
peat swamp forest and acacia
plantations
Possible Wide distribution
range and presence
of habitat in Project
area
Neofelis diardi Enkuli
Clouded
Leopard,
Sunda
Clouded
Leopard
VU Restricted to the
islands of Sumatra and
Borneo
Generally found abundant in hilly,
mountain areas, but also known to
occur in lowland rainforest in
Borneo (possibly due to absence of
tigers). Forest-dependent. Avoids
entering plantations (oil palm, etc),
although it may be found, in
logged forests at low densities.
Possible May occur in
forests surrounding
Project area
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 110 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
Ophiophagus hannah Hamadryad
, King
Cobra
VU Widely distributed in
South and Southeast
Asia
Found in a variety of habitats -
primarily pristine forests, but can
also be found in degraded forest,
mangrove swamps and remnant
woodlands. Has been recorded
swimming in rivers and in non-
forested land , including palm oil
plantations
Possible Wide distribution,
found in a variety
of habitats present
in and around
Project area
Petinomys genibarbis Whiskered
Flying
Squirrel
VU Found on Sumatra,
Java, Peninsular
Malaysia and northern
Borneo
Lowland tall primary and
secondary forest. May also occur in
tree plantations. Arboreal and
nocturnal species.
Possible habitat occurs in
and around Project
area
Kerivoula flora Flores
Woolly Bat
VU Found in Borneo,
Lesser Sundas, Bali,
Sumbawa and Sumba
in Indonesia and
possibly in Vietnam
Found in primary forest Possible primary forest may
occur in area (need
to groundtruth)
Prionailurus planiceps Flat-headed
Cat
EN Found only on
Sumatra, Borneo and
the Malayan peninsula
Most records are from swampy
areas, lakes and streams, and
riverine forest. They also occur in
peat-swamp forest, and have been
observed in secondary forest
Possible lack of suitable
habitat in Project
area
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 111 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
Pardofelis marmorata Marbled Cat VU Tropical Indomalaya
westward along the
Himalayan foothills
westward into Nepal
and eastward into
southwest China
Primarily associated with moist
and mixed deciduous-evergreen
tropical forest. Some records from
secondary forest or cleared areas
near forest, but it is likely forest-
dependent
Possible
though
unlikely
Lack of suitable
habitat in Project
area
Pongo pygmaeus Bornean
Orangutan
EN Endemic to Borneo.
Present in three of the
Kalimantan provinces.
Four distinct
subpopulations with
particular regional
diversity and
geographic clustering.
Species occurs typically
at relatively low
abundance: 0.5 to 4.0
ind./km in most
populations.
Flood-prone forests and peat
swamps produce more regular and
larger fruit crops than dry
dipterocarp forests and harbour
the highest orangutan densities.
More abundant in low-lying
forests (below 500 meters asl) than
in uplands. Large rivers limit their
dispersal due to being impassable.
Possible Known to occur in
forested areas of
Central Kalimantan
Macaca nemestrina Pig-tailed
Macaque
VU Brunei, Indonesia
(Bangka, Kalimantan
Borneo, and Sumatra),
Malaysia and southern
Thailand
Found in lowland primary and
secondary forest, as well as coastal,
swamp and mountain forest.
Prefers dense rainforest but also
found on agricultural land.
Predominantly terrestrial,
although capable of foraging in
forest canopy. Diurnal and
Possible Habitat occurs in
and around Project
area
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 112 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
frugivorous.
Rheithrosciurus macrotis Tufted
Ground
Squirrel
VU Confined to Borneo Only recorded from primary forest
in hilly areas, however, it is not
well surveyed in other habitat
types. Likely dependent on good
quality habitat
Possible
though
unlikely
Lack of suitable
habitat in Project
area
Petinomys vordermanni Vorderman
n's Flying
Squirrel
VU Scattered localities on
southern Myanmar,
Peninsular Malaysia,
northern and central
Borneo, and islands off
eastern Sumatra
Likely prefers lowland rainforest.
Arboreal and nocturnal
Possible
though
unlikely
Lack of suitable
habitat in Project
area
Bos javanicus Banteng,
Tembadau
EN Java and possibly Bali,
and Borneo
Occupies secondary forest
formations from logging and fires.
Occasionally enters tracts of sub-
humid forest
Possible
though
unlikely
Habitat present but
low numbers (feral
species also occur in
Kalimantan)
Pteromyscus pulverulentu
s
Smoky
Flying
Squirrel
EN Rare species according
to Bornean records -
even in optimum
habitat (primary forest)
it is rarely seen
Lives in tree hollows in
undisturbed primary forest.
Unlikely Lack of suitable
habitat in Project
area
Crocodylus siamensis Siamese
Crocodile
CR Mesangat Lake in the
Mahakam River
system, East
Kalimantan Province
supports the only
Wide range of lowland freshwater
habitats, including slow-moving
rivers and streams, lakes, seasonal
oxbow lakes, marshes and
swamps. Freshwater records in
Unlikely outside distribution
range
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 113 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
known extant
population outside
mainland Southeast
Asia
Borneo include Bandjermassing
and Kinabatangan Rivers
Presbytis chrysomelas Bornean
Banded
Langur,
Sarawak
Surili
CR Endemic to the island
of Borneo. Combined
population estimates
from these sites are
very low
(approximately 200-500
individuals).
Swamp and lowland forests, and
mangroves. Group size is 3-7
individuals
range
Chelonia mydas Green
Turtle
EN Highly migratory Turtles migrate to areas rich in
seagrass and/or marine algae
where they forage and grow until
maturity
Unlikely Project are outside
distribution range
Elephas maximus Asian
Elephant,
Indian
Elephant
EN In Kalimantan,
elephants occur only in
the Upper Sembakung
River in Tindung
District.
Variety of habitats, including
grassland, tropical evergreen
forest, semi-evergreen forest, moist
deciduous forest, dry deciduous
forested, cultivated and secondary
forests.
distribution range
Hylobates agilis Agile
Gibbon,
Dark-
handed
Gibbon
EN In Indonesia and
Borneo, this species is
found in Sumatra
(southeast of Lake Toba
and the Singkil River)
Highest densities in dipterocarp-
dominated forests, but known to
inhabit swamp and lowland forests
to hill, submountain, and
mountain forests. Average home
distribution range
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 114 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
and Peninsular
Malaysia (from the
Mudah and Thepha
Rivers in the north to
the Perak and Kelanton
Rivers in the south)
range size of 29 ha.
Hylobates albibarbis Bornean
Agile
Gibbon,
Bornean
White-
bearded
Gibbon
EN Kalimantan, south of
the Kapuas River and
west of the Barito River
(endemic)
Found in primary, secondary and
selectively logged tropical
evergreen forests, as well as peat
swamp forest types. These arboreal
and diurnal primates are
dominantly frugivorous,
preferring fruits high in sugar, but
will also eat immature leaves and
insects. Average home range sizes
of 28 ha and 45 ha
distribution range
Arctictis binturong Bearcat,
Binturong
VU Widespread in south
and southeast Asia
Confined to tall forest, where it
feeds on fruits and small animals
like insects, birds, and rodents, and
fish. Primarily arboreal.
habitat in Project
area and low
population
numbers
Presbytis frontata White-faced
Langur,
White-
fronted
Langur,
VU Endemic to Borneo.
Found patchily in
central and eastern
Borneo, from central
Sarawak to the
southern coast, with a
Primary lowland rainforest,
riverine and hill forest, and
occasionally plantations and
secondary forest.
Unlikely Not commonly
found in habitat in
Project area, patchy
distribution
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 115 of 369

Genus Species
Common
names
IUCN
status
Likelihood
of
Occurrence
Reason
few populations in
west
Presbytis hosei Grey Leaf
Monkey,
Hoses
Langur,
Hose's Leaf
Monkey
VU found in northern
Borneo, specifically
northern Sarawak and
Sabah (Malaysia),
northern East
Kalimantan
(Indonesia), and Brunei
Darussalam
Lowland to hill dipterocarp
rainforest (on Mount Kinabalu).
Found in habitat ranging from 0-
1,000 masl. Occasionally enter
plantations. Primarily folivorous,
but will eat flowers, fruits and
seeds, as well as eggs and
nestlings.
habitat in and
around Project area,
found in NE
Kalimantan
Trachypithecus auratus Ebony Leaf
Monkey,
Javan
Langur,
Javan
Lutung
VU Endemic to Indonesia,
where it occurs on Java
and the smaller islands
of Bali, Lombok, Palau
Sempu and Nusa
Barung
Variety of habitat types -
mangroves, freshwater swamp
forests, ever-wet lowland and hill
forests, dry deciduous forests,
mountain forest up to 3,000-
3,500m, teak/rasamala/acacia
forest
range

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 116 of 369

5.10.1.6 Existing Environmental Pressures
The Project location is under existing pressure from commercial activities leading to
deforestation.
Commercial logging began in the early 1970s, but there is no documented or mapped
logging history. Legal extraction should follow the approved Indonesian selective cutting
system (TPTI), with size limits of 50 cm diameter at breast height (DBH) in production forest
(HP) and 60 cm DBH in limited production forest (HPT). Illegal loggers take smaller trees
from a wider variety of species. The logging industry uses the access roads and river
transport at Barito River to transport to markets outside the region (Figure 5.6).
Other industries in the area leading to changes in the natural habitat include coal, rubber
tapping and conversion of forest areas for plantations. These industries are contributing to
the modification of the natural habitat and the loss of native vegetation (Figure 5.7).
Figure 5.6 Logging Transportation on the Barito River

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 117 of 369

Figure 5.7 Cleared Forest Areas for Plantations and Logging along Access Roads

5.10.2 Biodiversity Survey Results
A biodiversity survey was completed for the project and is provided at Annex C. This
includes the detailed field methodology employed and the species list for each survey area.
The survey findings for each of the four survey areas are summarised below. A broad
summary of the vegetation and habitat types within the four survey areas is provided below.
This information was used to form the basis of the critical habitat assessment.
5.10.2.1 KGPF
Flora and Vegetation
Vegetation at KGPF consists predominantly of Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary Forest, with
some pioneer vegetation. Dominant species recorded during the survey generally belonged
to the genera Shorea, Macaranga, Lithocarpus, Callamus, and Ficus genuses. Cananga
odorata was also common.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 118 of 369

Figure 5.8 Vegetation at KGPF (left), evidence of clearing area in KGPF (right)

Approximately 40 species from 25 flora families were recorded from sampling plots within
the KGPF. The dominant tree species in the sample plots are Shorea pinanga, which grows to a
height of approximately 45 metres. This species is one of the 5 species of Dipterocarpaceae
recorded. The other four species is Shorea lamellata, Parashorea maalonan, Hopea ferruginea and
Dipterocarpus sp.
Common lower stratum and forest floor species included Phyrnium pubigerum which is a
species of herb clustered on the forest floor. Glochidion capitatum was commonly encountered
which is a small tree which often found in secondary forest habitats, often along streams.
Other commonly encountered small tree and sapling species included Melastoma
malabatricum and Canarium littorale. Melastoma malabatricum was found in plots with an open
canopy, whereas C. littorale was generally observed in plots with dense canopy. M.
malabatricum grow clustered on the edge of the forest, in contrast to C. littorale which grows
in forest stands.
Three threatened flora species were recorded, Hopea ferruginea, Shorea lamellate and
Parashorea malaanonan, which are currently listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN
redlist of threatened species. These species are all canopy tree species that occur within the
region
Fauna
A total of 4 mammals, 20 birds and 5 reptiles were observed in the KGPF survey area. An
additional 4 mammal species, 6 bird species and a reptile were recorded through indirect
evidence such as voice/calls, footprints and scats. Two of these species are listed as
threatened on the IUCN redlist. They include the Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus), currently listed
as Vulnerable, and the Endangered Mullers Gibbon (Hylobates muelleri). Eight of the bird
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 119 of 369

species recorded are protected under the Indonesian Protected by Government Regulation
No. 7 of 1999.
Habitat
Some streams were observed within the site boundary and near the access road. There was
evidence of past clearing in the survey area which appears to be ongoing as new plantations
were observed. Although somewhat disturbed, the existing vegetation was still considered
to be potential habitat for key species such as the Sun Bear, Muellers Gibbon, and the
Asianblack Hornbill. Some tall stands of Dipterocarpaceae with dense canopies still stand,
which combined with lianas (woody vines) likely provide useful connections for fauna
moving between habitats.
5.10.2.2 Sales Gas Pipeline Route
Vegetation along the Sales Gas pipeline route was primarily found to be modified habitat,
consisting of a mixture of plantations (primarily rubber) and Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary
Forest.
The canopy level along the Sales Gas pipeline route was the higher than other areas of the
Project area surveyed, however evidence of past clearing was observed along the
pipeline/access road route in the survey area which appears to be ongoing for the purpose of
plantation and horticultural farming.
Dominant species generally belonged to the genera Shorea, Macaranga, Lithocarpus, Callamus,
and Ficus. As a result of this clearing and disturbance nine commonly encountered species
were identified consisting of Ficus elastic, Horsfieldia grandis, Knema latifolia, Shorea pinanga,
Cananga odorata, Melastoma malabatricum, Macaranga sp., Hevea brasiliensis and Artocarpus
communis
Figure 5.9 Vegetation along Sales Gas Pipeline Route (left) Plantation near PLN
Section (right)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 120 of 369

Fauna
A total of 4 mammals and 18 bird species were observed while surveying the proposed
pipeline route. Nine of these bird species are protected under the Indonesian Protected by
Government Regulation No. 7 of 1999. Indirect evidence of two IUCN listed mammalian
species was recorded. These were the Vulnerable Malayan Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus),
which was identified from scratch markings, and the Mullers Gibbon.
Habitat
Habitat was a mixture of modified habitat and natural habitat that has been impacted from
clearing activities such as selective logging and plantations. Several trees from
Dipterocarpaceae family still standing and dominate the canopy. This may be suitable
nesting, shelter and feeding habitat for a number of species identified as protected under the
Indonesian regulations such as the Asian Black Hornbill (Anthracoceros malayanus), Little
Spiderhunter (Arachnothera longirostra), and Hill Myna (Anthracoceros malayanus).
5.10.2.3 Gathering Pipeline Route
Vegetation along the Gathering Gas pipeline route was Low Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary
Forest, with a relatively homogenous canopy. Dominant plant species generally belonged to
Dipterocarpaceae, Myrtaceae and Euphorbiaceae families. Some pioneer species were
present (e.g. Macaranga sp.), but otherwise it is considered to be modified habitat. Fern and
rattan dominated in the open area. Several streams were also observed in the forested area
along the route.
Figure 5.10 Vegetation at Survey Site GT05 along the Gathering Pipeline Route

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 121 of 369

A total of 22 flora species were recorded within this area consisting of Hopea ferruginea,
Shorea pinanga, Coelostegia neesiocarpa, Artocarpus dadah, Durio excelcus, Coelostegia
neesiocarpa, Palaquium obovatum, Melastoma malabatricum, Alstonia spp., Parashorea
malaanonan, Sterculia rubiginosa, Baccaurea bracteata, Shorea lamellate, Shorea leprosula,
Acacia alba, Durio zibethinus, Artocarpus macrophylla, Litsea garciae, Quercus sp.,
Macaranga conifer, Lithocarpus gracilis and Macaranga sp.
Three threatened flora species were recorded, Hopea ferruginea, Shorea lamellate and Parashorea
malaanonan, which are currently listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN redlist of
threatened species. These species are all canopy tree species that occur within the region.
Fauna
A total of 2 mammals, 14 bird species and one reptile species were observed at the gathering
pipeline survey locations, which included the Bearded Pig, listed as Vulnerable on the IUCN
redlist of threatened species. An additional mammal species, the Endangered Mullers
Gibbon, and three bird species were recorded indirectly through voice calls. Six of the bird
species recorded in the area are protected under the Indonesian Protected by Government
Regulation No. 7 of 1999.
Habitat
Some species of mammals utilise the modified habitat, especially opportunist species like
Long-tailed Macaques which inhabit the area in large number. They feed on a variety of food
sources, both in the trees and on the ground.
5.10.2.4 Kerendan Wellsite
Vegetation at the Kerendan Wellsite generally consists of ex-rubber plantation, and small
shrubs. It was generally considered to be secondary forest, although pioneer plants from the
Euphorbiaceae family were observed.
Figure 5.11 Vegetation at the Kerendan Wellsite (July 2013)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 122 of 369

Results of vegetation analysis conducted at the site Wellsite identified 12 species of flora
from 10 families. In general, the area around Wellsite is dominated by the rubber tree Hevea
brasiliensis interspersed with stands of secondary forest plants belonging to other pioneer
species such as Dillenia excelsa and Koilodepas sp.
Ptenandra coerulescens was another dominant species found in the Wellsite area. Ptenandra
coerulescens is one of 14 Ptenandra species found in Borneo and is well adapted to
regenerating secondary forest areas. Elateriospermum tapos was also commonly encountered
within the lower stratum.
Fauna
A total of 3 mammals, 12 bird species and 8 reptilian and ambibian species were observed
during surveys undertaken at the Kerendan Wellsite. Indirect evidence of the Common Palm
Civet and four bird species occuring in the area was also recorded. None of the species
identified are currently listed as IUCN threatened species, however 4 birds and the Leopard
Cat are classed as protected species under the Indonesian Protected by Government
Regulation No. 7 of 1999.
Habitat
Although modified habitat, the area may be used as foraging habitat for protected species
such as the Leopard Cat (Prionairulus bengalensis). This species is semi aquatic and evidence
of it occurring in the Project area was recorded during the field survey. A Hill Myna (Gracula
religiosa) nest was observed in a tree hole near the Wellsite. Protected under Indonesian
Regulation, this species lives in open areas, in groups of ten to twenty individuals, and feed
on a diet of fruits and insects. According the the community, the Lahei River is also
important habitat for the Probiscus Monkey (Nasalis larvatus) which is listed as Endangered
on the IUCN threatened species redlist.
5.10.3 Biodiversity Values
IFC PS6 defines the parameters of biodiversity values and ecosystem services which should
be considered when assessing the Project against the IFC Performance Standards. This
includes the identification and consideration of habitat values, threatened species, protected
areas and invasive species. A summary of these values is provided below. This was
developed using secondary data (primarily survey information from UKL/UKL reports) and
the information from the recent biodiversity field assessment.
5.10.3.1 Species of Conservation Interest
A desktop review of available data bases such as the IUCN Redlist was completed in June
2013 to inform the biodiversity survey of species of conservation significance that occur
within the Kalimantan region and potentially, in the Project area. IFC PS6 identifies
threatened species as those listed on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (the Red List)
and species categorised as critically endangered (CR), endangered (EN) and vulnerable (VU)
are considered to be at a heightened risk of extinction.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 123 of 369

IUCN conservation significant species known to occur in the Kalimantan region are outlined
in Table 5.8. Included in the table is a brief review of whether the species is known to occur
or could potentially occur in the Project area based on the species known habitat
requirements, distribution and habitats known to exist within the Project area. The
consideration of likely presence was also based on the preliminary site visit completed by the
Project team in April 2013. This list was then used as part of the biodiversity survey to
confirm or otherwise the potential presence of conservation significant species and
understand if they are likely to be a relevant consideration during the impact assessment.
Table 5.8 Threatened IUCN Listed Species Known to Occur or Potentially Occur
within the Project Area
IUCN Red
List Status^
Recorded in
Project Area#
Recorded in
Surrounding
Area#
Bornean Gibbon Hylobates muelleri EN Y
Malaysian Sun Bear Helarctos malayanus VU Y*
Bearded Pig Sus Barbatus VU Y Y
Proboscis Monkey Nasalis larvatus EN Y
Freshwater Crocodile Tomistoma schlegelii EN Y
Sambar Deer Cervus unicolor VU Y
Flat-headed Cat Prionailurus planiceps EN
Bornean Orangutan Bornean Orangutan EN
Bornean Bay Cat Pardofelis badia EN
Clouded Leopard Neofelis diardi VU
Whisked Flying
Squirrel
Petinomys genibarbis VU
King Cobra Ophiophagus hannah VU
Flores Woolly Bat Kerivoula flora VU
Pig-tailed Macaque Macaca nemestrina VU
Banded Civet Hemigalus derbyanus VU
^ IUCN Description: E = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable
# Data obtained from Biodiveristy Survey (2013), and UKL/UPL reports for Kerendan and WK-1
* Indirect evidence (scratches)

Threatened flora and fauna identified as occurring or potentially occurring in the Project area
based on secondary data research and biodiversity survey results are identified below.
Flora
Three threatened flora species were recorded in the Project area during the 2013 Biodiversity
survey. These were Hopea ferruginea, Shorea lamellate and Parashorea malaanonan, which
are currently listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN redlist of threatened species. These
species are all canopy tree species that occur within the region, including Brunei and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 124 of 369

Malaysia and in some instances Sumatra. These species were recorded at the KGPF site and
along the pipeline route from the well site to the KGPF and were a dominant canopy and
sapling species at most vegetation plots. Based on known distribution these species are likely
to be relatively common within the local area wherever similar stands of secondary forest
occur. This reflects the fact that these species are not necessarily restricted to the project area,
but are instead under threat regionally as a result of land clearing activities.
Fauna
Three fauna species listed as Vulnerable or Endangered under the IUCN red List have been
recorded in the Project area. An additional three species have been recorded in the
surrounding area based on evidence such as UKL/UPL reports and interviews with the
community.
A review of conservation significant species known to occur in the region and also existing
habitat at the survey site suggests that an additional nine (9) species may potentially utilise
the site, based on known habitat requirements and known records of the species or general
habitat range.
Habitat
The following habitat categories (as defined by the IFC) need to be considered when
determining the significance of biodiversity and natural resources:
Modified Habitat;
Natural Habitat; and
Critical Habitat
Definitions for these habitats and an assessment of the presence of the habitats in the Project
area is provided below while a review of the projects position against the modified and
natural habitat provisions of IFC PS 6 is provided at Table .
Habitat in the Project Area
Habitat in the Project is generally a mixture of modified and natural habitat that has
experienced modification as a result of ongoing clearing activities to support local
community needs (e.g. timber production and plantation farming). The greatest level of
habitat modification was observed at the Kerendan Wellsite and along the pipeline
routes/access roads, where habitat has been cleared or disturbed as a result of previous and
ongoing clearing activities.
Vegetation in the Project area consists predominantly of Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary
Forest, with some pioneer vegetation. Plantations (e.g. rubber) were present along sections of
the Sales Gas and Gathering Pipeline routes and at the Kerendan Wellsite.
Although somewhat disturbed, the vegetation in the Project area was still considered to be
potential habitat for key species listed in Table 5.8. Some tall stands of Dipterocarpaceae
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 125 of 369

with dense canopies still stand, which combined with lianas (woody vines) likely provide
useful connections for fauna moving between habitats. No specific habitats such as nesting
or roosting habitat were identified for these species, however they may use the Project area
for foraging.
Overall, the habitats identified within the Project area would not be considered unique or
considered to be of particular importance to locally occurring species, over and above the
general habitat values which the Project area provides.
Table 5.9 shows how the Project performs against the IFC performance standards (IFC PS 6)
relating to natural and modified habitats. The Guidance Notes accompanying IFC PS6 have
been used to guide the application of these performance standards to this Project.
This review has confirmed that Natural habitats as defined under PS 6 are likely to be
disturbed by the project. Suitable actions to mitigate or offset impacts to these areas are likely
to be required by the project. The requirements of such a program would need to be
discussed following completion of this ESIA and may include a commitment by Salamander
to be included within the Projects Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP).
It is considered unlikely that the project would affect critical habitats. This is assessed in
detail in Table 5.10.
Table 5.9 Appraisal of Project Against Relevant IFC Performance Standards
IFC Performance Standard^ Appraisal of Project Against Standard
Modified Habitat
(12) This Performance Standard applies to those
areas of modified habitat that include significant
biodiversity value, as determined by the risks
and impacts identification process required in
Performance Standard 1 (IFC PS 1). The client
should minimize impacts on such biodiversity
and implement mitigation measures as
appropriate.
(12) Modified habitats of the Project Area and
surrounds include plantations and areas subject to
logging and land clearing.. None of these habitats
occurring in the proposed footprint of the Project
contribute to biodiversity conservation in a
significant manner as they are not unique habitats
in the local area and will persist (and will remain
managed) by local people.
Mitigation of the impacts of the Project on these
areas is not considered necessary.
Natural Habitat
(14) Impacts to natural habitat can only occur
after client demonstrates:
no other alternatives exist within the
region to develop the Project on
modified habitat (this does not include
habitat that has been modified in
preparation for the development)
consultation has occurred (IFC PS 1)
mitigation of conversion and
degradation is demonstrated

(14) Clearing for the project is expected to result in
the clearing of approximately 57 ha of secondary
forest and other natural vegetation types.
Alternatives to clearing this land have not
been discussed in previous studies or
reports. Project design has been finalised,
it is recognised that the pipelines will
occur in close proximity to existing roads
to reduce project disturbance.
Consultation as part of the project has
been ongoing and has specifically been
conducted as part of the ESIA process.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 126 of 369

IFC Performance Standard^ Appraisal of Project Against Standard
Mitigation has not been confirmed as yet
and would be confirmed as part of the
impact assessment and follow-up
consultation with Salamander.
(15) Impacts on 'natural habitat' achieve no net
loss where feasible - no net loss meaning
negative impacts are balanced by avoidance,
minimisation, restoration and offsets.
appropriate actions include:
avoidance through identification and
protection of set-asides (areas onsite or
adjacent or under client's management
control that are identified as higher biological
value and are set aside for protection)
implement measures to minimise habitat
fragmentation (i.e. biological corridors)
habitat restoration during and/or after
operations
implementing biodiversity offsets
(15) Impacts of the Project in its current form,
while not considered significant will result in a
net loss of biodiversity.
No discussion has been provided in previous
studies or reports detailing the minimisation of
impacts to natural habitats or the onsite
creation of set-asides.
Habitat fragmentation has not been specifically
discussed however is unlikely to be a key
consideration for the project,
Habitat restoration or offsets are to be
confirmed for the project.
1. ^ Numbers in parentheses are those paragraph numbers from the IFC Performance
Standard 6.

Critical Habitat Determination
Critical Habitat is a concept within the IFC PS6 to facilitate the identification of areas of high
biodiversity value. The intention of delineating Critical Habitat is to define areas in which
development would be of a particularly sensitive nature and require special attention were it
to go ahead. Critical Habitat is not limited to pristine or highly biodiverse areas but rather
includes the broader landscape that supports the biodiversity values that trigger the Critical
Habitat designation, which typically include a mosaic of modified, natural, and critical
habitats. The provisions by which Critical Habitat is defined are laid out in Paragraph 9 of
PS6 and related Guidance Note (GN) 6. Critical Habitat is defined as any habitat that exhibits
one or more of seven criteria.
Table 5.10 evaluates the potential for critical habitat to occur based on the biodiversity
assessment findings to date. Based on the biodiveristy findings, the Project area is not
considered to be representative of critical habitat. The projects impacts on conservation
significant species are evaluated further at Chapter 10.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 127 of 369

Table 5.10 Criteria and Thresholds for Identifying Critical Habitat under IFC
Performance Standard 6 (2012)
Criteria
1
Criteria Met (Yes/No)
Criteria 1. Habitat required for survival of critically
endangered and/or endangered species
1

1
As classified on the IUCN Red List or lists
designated by the host government.

Unlikely

The Project area may provide general habitat
opportunities. IUCN listed species may
periodically utilise the Project area, however
these habitats would not support habitat
values critical to their survival. Further detail
on species and their habitat requirements is
provided in the biodiversity assessment in
Annex C. Project impacts to conservation
significant species are considered at Chapter
10.
Criteria 2. Areas having special significance for
endemic or restricted range species
2
.
2
In order to meet this criterion, large numbers of
endemic or range-restricted species found only in a
specific area must be present. Neither PS6 nor GN6
provides a specific threshold for this criterion.
Determination must be based on professional expertise and
judgment of qualified experts.
Unlikely

Species endemic to Kalimantan occur within
the project area however habitats would not
be of particular importance to these species.
Criteria 3. Sites critical for the survival of migratory
or congregatory species
3
.
3
In order to meet this criterion, the habitat must be
required for the survival of particular migratory or
congregatory species. Neither PS6 nor the supporting
GN provides a specific threshold for this criterion.

No

There is no evidence that congregatory or
migratory species would rely on the project
site as part of their survival.
Criteria 4. Areas with unique assemblages of
species
4

4
Defined in GN6 as species assemblages that cannot
be found anywhere else.
No

The species identified within the site are
expected to occur elsewhere within
Kalimantan, where similar habitat occurs.
Criteria 5. Areas associated with key evolutionary
processes
5

5
Defined in GN6 as areas that have key scientific
value due to the evolutionary or ecological attributes
present.
No

Criteria 6. Areas associated with key ecosystem
services
6

6
Neither PS6 nor the supporting GN defines key
ecosystem services. No specific threshold for meeting this
criterion exists. Determination must be based on
professional expertise and judgment of qualified experts.
No

Ecosystem services in the Project area are not
considered to be independent of surrounding
habitats which remain accessible to the
community.
Criteria 7. Areas having biodiversity of significant
social, economic, or cultural importance to local
No

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 128 of 369

Criteria
1
Criteria Met (Yes/No)
communities
7
7
No further guidance provided under this criterion.
There is no evidence that the Project area is of
significant economic, cultural or social
importance
The criteria and sub-criteria are based on the 2006 version of IFC PS6 (2006) and relevant GN (2007).

5.11 ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Ecosystem Services are defined as the benefits that people, including businesses, derive from
ecosystems (IFC 2012). These services are substantial and varied, underpinning basic human
health and survival needs as well as supporting economic activities, the fulfilment of
peoples potential, and enjoyment of life. In order to provide a uniform basis to assess the
status of all major global habitats across all of the worlds bioregions, the United Nations
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (UN 2005) combined these diverse Ecosystem Services
typologies into a consistent classification scheme.
There are four categories of Ecosystem Services defined in the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment as adopted in IFC PS6:
Provisioning services - those services that can be extracted from ecosystems to support
human needs. This term is more or less synonymous with the term ecosystem goods
that was used in some prior classification schemes, including such tangible assets as
fresh water, food, fibre, timber and medicinal plants;
Regulating services the benefits obtained from an ecosystems control of the natural
environment, including the regulation of surface water purification, carbon storage
and sequestration, climate regulation, protection from natural hazards, air quality,
erosion and pests;
Cultural services - nonmaterial benefits including diverse aspects of aesthetic, spiritual,
recreational, and other cultural values; and
Supporting services the natural processes essential to the maintenance of the integrity,
resilience, and functioning of ecosystems, thereby supporting the delivery of all other
benefits. They include soil formation, nutrient cycling and primary production.
The concept of Ecosystem Services highlights the fact that humans are reliant upon the
benefits provided by ecosystems, and that impacts to ecosystems can subsequently impact
human health and quality of life. Project Affected communities therefore perform an
important role in the identification and prioritisation of Ecosystem Services within this
review.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 129 of 369

5.11.1 IFC PS Expectations
IFC PS6 has the following requirements regarding Ecosystem Services:
Where a project is likely to adversely impact Ecosystem Services, as determined by the
risks and impacts identification process, the client will conduct a systematic review to
identify Priority Ecosystem Services. Priority Ecosystem Services are two-fold: (i)
those services on which project operations are most likely to have an impact and,
therefore, which result in adverse impacts to Affected Communities; and/or (ii) those
services on which the Project is directly dependent for its operations (e.g., water).
When Affected Communities are likely to be impacted, they should participate in the
determination of Priority Ecosystem Services in accordance with the stakeholder
engagement process as defined in Performance Standard 1.
With respect to impacts on Priority Ecosystem Services of relevance to Affected
Communities and where the client has direct management control or significant
influence over such Ecosystem Services, adverse impacts should be avoided. If these
impacts are unavoidable, the client will minimize them and implement mitigation
measures that aim to maintain the value and functionality of priority services.
With respect to impacts on Priority Ecosystem Services on which the Project depends,
clients should minimize impacts on Ecosystem Services and implement measures that
increase resource efficiency of their operations, as described in Performance
Standard 3.
Additional provisions for Ecosystem Services are included in Performance Standards
4, 5, 7, and 8.19.
5.11.2 Ecosystem Services Data Gathering
Ecosystem Services within the Study Area were identified through a process of stakeholder
engagement and consultation, as well as biodiversity survey and assessment. The data
collection aimed to directly consult and engage with Project Affected Communities to
ascertain their views and concerns relating to their use of the local environment and
potential concerns regarding the project. The process included:
Consultation with the community as well as review of existing available regency data
on land use and livelihood; and
A field survey to support the Biodiversity assessment
The social and biodiversity findings are described in detail within the respective baseline
chapters.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 130 of 369

5.11.2.1 Social Data
The social baseline chapter provides a detailed description of the types of ecosystem services
upon which the local communities rely or utilize as part of their day to day livelihoods.
These are summarised under the following major subject headings and are used as the basis
for discussing the relevant ecosystem services within the following sections.
Agriculture;
Rubber Cultivation;
Fishing, Hunting;
Gathering of Forest Products;
Water Use (domestic); and
Transportation.
5.11.2.2 Biodiversity Findings
The biodiversity baseline is detailed at the beginning of this chapter. It describes the local
area as consisting of agricultural land, plantation areas as well as secondary forest. No
unique or restricted habitat types were identified within the study area and it was
considered that the Project area was likely to provide general foraging habitat for a variety of
fauna species.
5.11.2.3 Ecosystem Services Descriptions
The provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services considered to be relevant to
the project site are listed at Table 5.11and are described in further detail below. This is based
on the findings of the social and biodiversity surveys but also ERMs experience on the types
of services that areas such as the Project site would be expected to provide. This primarily
relates to regulating and supporting services. Table 5.11 also identifies if the service is to be
carried through for consideration as a priority ecosystem service.
Table 5.11 Ecosystem Services Summary
Occurs within Study Area To be considered for Assessment
Provisioning Services
Wild-caught fish/Wild meat
Cultivated crops
Forest Products
Freshwater (surface water)
Freshwater (groundwater)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 131 of 369

Regulating Services
Regulation of air quality
Climate regulation: local
Regulation of water timing and
flows
Water purification and waste
treatment
River bank protection
Disease regulation
Pollination
No, general service unlikely to be significantly affected by the
Project.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Project.
Project.
Cultural Services
Non-use value of biodiversity
Spiritual or religious value

No, significant biodiversity values have not been attributed to the
project area.
No, significant spiritual or religious values have not been
attributed to the Project site.
Supporting Services
Primary production
Nutrient cycling
Water cycling
Soil formation
Habitat Provision
Transportation
No, general ecosystem service.
Yes
Yes

5.11.3 Ecosystem Services Prioritisations
Each of the Ecosystem Services considered in this study was evaluated to determine whether
it should be considered for elevation to a Priority Ecosystem Service based on the following
four criteria:
Dependence of the Project on the Ecosystem Service;
The importance of the service to the affected community; and
The irreplaceability of the Ecosystem Service if it was to be completely removed from
the region.
The criteria were combined using the matrix in Figure 5.12. Ecosystem Services with a
priority ranking of High Priority or Major Priority were assigned as Priority Ecosystem
Services. Table 5.12 displays the prioritisation of Ecosystem Services. In summary, the
Priority Ecosystem Services identified for the Project are:
Freshwater (Surface Water);
Freshwater (Groundwater);
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 132 of 369

Wild-Caught Fish;
Animal Hunting
Cultivated Crops;
Forest Products; and
Transportation.
Impacts to these services are assessed in the impact assessment chapter.
Figure 5.12 Ecosystem Service Prioritisation Matrix
Importance to Beneficiaries
Irreplaceability
High Moderate Low
Low The service is used and valued by parts of the
community, but it is not important in maintaining
quality of life or livelihoods of Project Affected
Communities.
Low
Priority
Low
Priority
Moderate
Priority
Medium The service is readily used by some members of the
Project Affected Communities for income or
subsistence, but they are not dependent upon the
service for their livelihoods, and not everyone
utilises the service.
Low
Priority
Moderate
Priority
High
Priority
High The service is highly important in maintaining the
livelihoods of the Project Affected Communities,
and is used by most of the community regularly.
Moderate
Priority
High
Priority
Major
Priority
Essential The service is essential to maintain the health of the
Project Affected Communities, and the service is
used by all members of the community.
High
Priority
Major
Priority
Major
Priority
Irreplaceability definition
High Many spatial alternatives exist that are readily available to the Project Affected
Communities, and there are no major impediments to their usage.
Moderate Spatial alternatives exist but are either less accessible than the affected service, or there
are other barriers to their use such as distance, cost and skills required to access the
service.
Low There are few to no spatial alternatives available to the Project Affected Communities.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 133 of 369

Table 5.12 Ecosystem Service Prioritisation Summary (Project Specific)
Ecosystem
Services
Trends and
Sustainability
Beneficiaries
Importance
to
Beneficiaries
Irreplaceability Summary of Rationale Priority
Freshwater
(Surface
Water)
Water quality generally
good, although high
levels of turbidity and
certain metals (e.g. iron)
has been recorded
during sampling of
Lahei River
Villagers

Essential Low Communities are reliant on riverwater for their
domestic water use including bathing and
drinking water.

Major
Freshwater
(Groundwater)
No trends identified Villagers High Low The community at Luwe Hulu utilizes
groundwater for drinking and other domestic
uses. This is also utilised by Salamander.
Major
Wild-Caught
Fish
Species such as the
Jelawat fish are the most
popular but are
becoming quite rare. No
trends identified for
other species.
Fishermen
Consumers of
fish
High Low Fish is an important element of the diet within
the four project affected communities. Most of
the fishing is conducted for household
consumption rather than fulltime employment.
The activity is primarily undertaken while
villages are not farming and rubber tapping.
Major
Animal
Hunting
Communities have
found that they need to
venture further into the
forest and animals are
becoming increasingly
difficult to find.
Dayak people
and local
villages.
Medium Low Intensive hunting is no longer conducted and it
generally occurs after harvesting. Communities
also catch birds to supplement their existing
livelihood.
High
Cultivated
Crops
No specific trends Villagers. High Moderate Agriculture is the primary livelihood for local
communities.
High
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 134 of 369

Ecosystem
Services
Trends and
Sustainability
Beneficiaries
Importance
to
Beneficiaries
Forest
Products
The area of native forest
is likely to have
decreased within the
local area as a result of
clearing for cultivation,
plantation and mining
activities
Villagers
collecting,
growing and
selling timber
and collecting
forest products to
support their
livelihood.
High Moderate Besides hunting animals in the forest some
villagers gather various types of plants. These
plants are gathered primarily for medicinal or
traditional purposes (i.e. to treat diseases,
increase stamina, as materials for constructing
houses and home furnishings and for
conducting traditional ceremonies). In addition,
some plant species collected from the forest are
sold in the market.
High
Regulating Services
Erosion
Regulation
No trends identified River water users
Fishermen
dependent on
good water
quality for
fishery
production
Low Moderate Shoreline vegetation is likely to play a role in
preventing or reducing sediment laden runoff
entering local river systems. These services will
continue to persist following project
construction and operation.
Low
Regulation of
Water Timing
and Flows
No trends identified Villagers living
close to rivers
Medium Moderate Vegetation and other groundcover is likely to be
important in regulating water timing and flows
potentially preventing or managing flooding in
some instances.
Moderate
Water
Purification
and Waste
Treatment
Fishermen
dependent on
good water
quality for
fishery
production
Medium Moderate Vegetation and other groundcover is likely to be
important in capturing wastes and managing
water quality entering local river systems. These
services will continue to persist following
project construction and operation.
Moderate
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 135 of 369

Ecosystem
Services
Trends and
Sustainability
Beneficiaries
Importance
to
Beneficiaries
River Bank
Protection
No trends identified Villages living
close to the river
system
Medium Moderate Engineering solutions can provide shoreline
protection, however these can have adverse
impacts on other shoreline processes. These
services will continue to persist following
Moderate
Supporting Services
Habitat
Provision
No trends identified Fishermen,
hunters and
people who
value the
conservation of
biodiversity
Medium Moderate Riverine and terrestrial habitats support the
biodiversity values which are utilised to support
the livelihoods of local communities.
Moderate
Transportation No Trends identified Local villages
and businesses,
including
Salamander
High Moderate All 4 villages are located along the river
therefore there is a strong reliance on the river
for transportation of goods and people.
High

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 136 of 369

6 SOCIAL BASELINE
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This section provides information on the socio-economic baseline conditions in the proposed
Project area, which will be used to inform the process of identifying and assessing the
potential social and community health impacts. Baseline data presented includes:
Demographics such as population growth, religion and ethnicity;
Economics including livelihoods and employment;
Community infrastructure including water, sanitation and electricity;
Community health including key health indicators;
Education such as literacy levels; and
Cultural heritage sites.
6.1.1 Methodology
A Social Baseline Study was conducted using secondary and primary data to triangulate the
information gathered at the regency and local level. The secondary data analysed was
provided either by Salamander or from the regency statistical office at the sub-district and
regency level.
Secondary data gathered was used to identify key data gaps; this helped to focus the primary
data collection that took place in the four potentially impacted villages of Kerendan, Luwe
Hulu, Harangandang and Muara Pari.
Tools used in the field to gather the primary data included an eco-system services
questionnaire and an observation form. Consultation notes were also taken in relation to
community perceptions towards Salamander, as well as summaries of the focus group
discussions held. The consultations had several objectives:
To gather valuable local level primary data;
To share Project information with the communities;
To build Salamanders relationship with its local level stakeholders; and
To manage the communities expectations around Project benefits and community
investment.
In each village the same four-hour consultation process was held:
Arrival and greeting by community members: Salamander and ERM consultants met
and greeted community members upon arrival and recorded attendance.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 137 of 369

Project Introduction: Salamander provided an introduction to the Project using visual
props such as posters and photographs. During the introduction Salamander
discussed:
The aims and objectives of the Project;
The Project timeline, status and planned future activities;
Salamanders Environmental and Social commitments;
CSR activities undertaken to date and the process of how investment is decided and
implemented; and
ERMs role and activities whilst in the Project area.
Approximately 50% to 60% of households attended the village meetings - representing a
suitable cross-section of each potentially impacted community. This enabled the team to
gather a robust understanding of overall community perceptions.
Group Discussions: The group discussion, led by ERM, involved asking a series of
questions in an open discussion format (see Annex F). Questions were structured in
order of importance, due to potential time constraints. During these group sessions
the participants were split into two groups (Group 1: women and children and Group
2: men), in order to obtain more detailed baseline data and perceptions.
Community Perception Questionnaire: Questionnaires were completed in each of the
group sessions. The aim of this questionnaire was to enable Salamander to gain a
better understanding of how each community perceives Salamander and its Project
activities (see Annex G).
Closing: Salamander concluded each meeting with a short speech, thanking the
community for their participation, providing a brief summary of what to expect next
and where additional information could be accessed.
ERM then returned to each village the following day to gather visual baseline data (Table 6.1
and Table 6.2 show the daily schedule).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 138 of 369

Table 6.1 Morning Open Day Schedule
Time
Item Facilitator Resources Required
Start Finish
0800 0815 Arrival/greeting of
community members
Salamander/ERM Record of Attendance Sheet
0815 0845 Project introduction &
meeting structure overview
Salamander Interactive display (posters,
pictures etc. of Project area
and activities)
0845 0945 Group discussion ERM Group discussion prompt
questions (for ERM use only
do not distribute)
0945 1015 Break snack and
refreshments
Salamander Snack and refreshments
1015 1100 Group discussion continued ERM As above
1100 1115 Perception Questionnaire
overview (instructions on
how to complete) and
questionnaire distribution
questionnaire
ERM Perception Questionnaire;
support from Salamander to
distribute
1115 1130 Community completes
questionnaire
ERM Pens/clipboards Support
from Salamander to collect
i i
1130 1200 End of meeting. Salamander
provide a brief (<5 min)
speech after completion of
questionnaires to conclude
meeting and thank
community for their time.
Lunch and refreshments
served upon conclusion
Salamander Lunch and refreshments

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 139 of 369

Table 6.2 Afternoon Open Day Schedule
Time
Item Facilitator Resources Required
Start Finish
1300 1330 Arrival/greeting of
community members. Lunch
and refreshments served
upon arrival
Salamander/ ERM Record of Attendance Sheet
1330 1400 Project introduction &
meeting structure overview
Salamander Interactive display (posters,
pictures etc. of Project area

1400 1500 Group discussion ERM Group discussion prompt
questions (for ERM use only
do not distribute)
1500 1515 Break snack and
refreshments
Salamander Snack and refreshments
1515 1615 Group discussion continued ERM As above
1615 1630 Perception Questionnaire
overview (instructions on
how to complete) and
questionnaire distribution
ERM Perception Questionnaire;
support from Salamander to
distribute
1630 1645 Community completes
questionnaire
ERM Pens/clipboards Support
from Salamander to collect

1645 1650 End of meeting. Salamander
provides a speech after
completion of questionnaire
to conclude meeting and
thank community for their
time.
Salamander

6.1.2 Study Limitations
There were a number of limitations whilst undertaking the community consultation
activities and when gathering the secondary data:
Low literacy levels: During the community consultations initially the perception
questionnaires were to be completed by all the group participants. However due to
the low literacy levels in the Project area many people had difficulties in reading and
answering the questions. To address this issue local literate people (i.e. teachers and
nurses) were asked to assist those who were illiterate.
Availability of participants: The majority of people in the village tap rubber in the
morning thus consultation activities held during this period had a lower participant
rate than in the afternoon and evening. Where possible consultation activities were
held once the villagers had returned back to their villages for the day.
Secondary data reliability: There were a number of inconsistencies in the secondary
data gathered; specifically between the statistics gathered by the Central Bureau of
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 140 of 369

Statistics compared to that provided in the local villages. The more reliable source was
utilised for this baseline.
6.2 OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITIES IN THE PROJECT AREA
The following subsections describe the characteristics of the people who live in the Project
area. Figure 6.1 illustrates the names and locations of villages in the Project area in relation to
Project facilities. Figure 6.2 presents the four Project villages.
There are four villages in the Project area; Haragandang, Kerendan, Muara Pari and Luwe
Hulu, all formerly within the Lahei sub district government administrative region. However
since October 2012, the village of Luwe Hulu has been incorporated into the West Lahei
administrative district as a result of the expansion of the Lahei sub district.
Haragandang, Muara Pari and Kerendan are located inland along the banks of the Lahei
River. Muara Lahei town is located at the mouth of the Lahei River and is the capital of the
Lahei sub district. The town of Muara Lahei is located on the interface between the mouth of
Lahei and Barito Rivers the Barito River being one of the largest and the longest rivers on
the island of Borneo. It is also one of the main transportation routes to the main cities in the
south such as Muara Teweh (the capital of North Barito regency) and Banjarmasin (the
capital of South Kalimantan province). Luwe Hulu, which is located directly on the banks of
the Barito River, therefore has the most access to other towns and cities in area.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 141 of 369

Figure 6.1 Locations of Villages in Relation to the Kerendan Gas Development Project
Facilities

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 142 of 369

Figure 6.2 Typical Scenery in the Project Villages

6.2.1 Ethnicity
The villagers of Haragandang, Kerendan, Muara Pari and Luwe Hulu all share the same
origin ancestry they all derive from the people of Dayak Bakumpai and Dayak Dusun
Malang.
The Dayak Bakumpai people are descendants of Dayak Ngaju who converted to Islam and
inhabited the area along the banks of the Barito River basin in South Kalimantan and Central
Kalimantan. Their ancestral villages were spread from Marabahan, Barito Kuala until Puruk
Cahu in Murung Raya. According to the 2000 population census approximately 7.5% of the
Central Kalimantan population is Bakumpai people. Historically many Dayak Bakumpai
people migrated and settled along the Lahei River.
The people of Dayak Dusun Malang are the indigenous Dayak tribe from the inland area in
Central Kalimantan; descendants of the Dayak Ot Danum clumps (clumps Barito Raya). The
original village of Dayak Dusun Malang was located close to Muara Inu in north-eastern part
of Muara Teweh. Similar to the Dayak Bakumpai people, the Dayak Dusun Malang people
also migrated to the Lahei River and to this day most Dusun Malang people still embrace the
beliefs of their ancestor Kaharingan.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 143 of 369

6.2.2 Village Characteristics
The settlement patterns of those residing in the four villages are typically clustered according
to their ethnic group and religion. For example the villagers of the Dayak Dusun Malang
group are concentrated on the upstream side of the Lahei River while the villagers of the
Dayak Bakumpai group are clustered in the lower reaches of the river.
Village houses are usually built close together along the banks of the river. Those houses
built on the river are traditionally named lanting houses and are quite vulnerable to flooding
during the rainy season. The majority of houses are semi-permanent constructed from wood
obtained from the nearby forest. There are a small proportion of more affluent households
who are building more permanent housing with brick walls and tiled flooring.
Although the two groups have different origins and religious affiliations, they co-exist
peacefully and often inter-marital relationships occur. Furthermore both groups share the
same language (Bakumpai); although the people of Dusun Malang have their own language.
Bahasa Indonesian is only used for academic teaching.
6.2.3 Demographics
Acording to the 2010 population census, the Barito Utara Regency population was 121,573
(48% female and 52% male). Based on the total regency the population density rate was
15 people/km, which is a low population density.
In the 2012 Lahei sub-district report, the total population of the four Project villages at the
end of 2011 was 3,229 people (or 916 households). That is an average of less than four people
per household). At the regency level the 2012 report indicated a similar number of people
per household. Therefore one can assume the potentially impacted villages have for the most
part small families with only one to two children per household. Table 6.3 provides a more
detailed breakdown of the demographics per village.
6.2.4 Sex Ratio
Based on 2012 Lahei sub district report in 2011 there were 1,754 men and 1,520 women.
Meanwhile, at the district and regency level the average population of sex ratio male and
female is 108 as summarised in Table 6.4 meaning the average sex ratio of males and females
in the four villages is higher than the sub district and regency levels.
Table 6.3 Demographic Data of Villages in the Project Footprint
Name of
Village
Area
(km
2
)
Population
Average number of
person per Household
Sex
Ratio
Density
/ km
2

M F Total
House
hold
Haragandang 109,65 321 273 594 139 4 118 5
Kerendan 265,05 299 253 552 151 4 118 2
Muara Pari 108,84 305 283 588 235 3 108 5
Luwe Hulu 106,28 829 711 1540 391 4 117 14
Total 589.82 1754 1520 3229 916 3.75 115 18
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 144 of 369

Table 6.4 Number of Population, Household, Sex Ratio by District 2011
Name of Sub
District
Area
(km
2
)
Population
Average number of
person per Household
Sex
Ratio
Density
/km
2

M F Total
House
hold
Montallat 553 5.468 5.136 10.604 2.641 4 106 19
Gunung
Timang
890 5.187 4.842 10.029 2.537 4 107 11
Gunung
Purei
1.468 1.261 1.165 2.426 711 3 108 2
Teweh Timur 768 3.789 3.432 7.221 110 4 110 9
Teweh
Tengah
1.708 36.309 33.632 69.941 17.573 4 108 41
Lahei 2.913 11.092 10.260 21.352 5.179 4 108 7
Total 8.300 63.106 58.467 121.573 30.452 4 108 15
Source: Lahei Sub District in Figures 2012

6.2.5 Population Density
According to Lahei sub-district report at the end of 2011 the total area of the four
Project villages was 589.82 km
2
; with a population of 3,229 people. This means the
average population density in the four villages is 5.47people/km
2
. The lowest population
density is in Kerendan (2 people/km
2
), while in Muara Pari and Haragandang the
population density is 5 people/km
2
. The highest population density is in Luwe Hulu (14
people/km
2
).
6.2.6 Population Growth
The Lahei sub-district report indicates a population growth of 6 people between 2010 and
2011 (from 1,534 people to 1,540); a growth of 1.84% per year this is higher than the sub-
district growth rate of 0.95% and the national of 1.49% per year. Table 6.5 below summarises
the Project villages population growth between 2010 and 2011.
Table 6.5 Population Growth in Project Affected Villages 2011
Name of Village
Population
2010 2011 Growth Rate (%)
Haragandang 570 594 4,21
Kerendan 546 552 1,10
Muara Pari 565 588 4,07
Luwe Hulu 1.534 1.540 0,39
Total 3.215 3.274 1,84
Source: Lahei Sub District in Figure 2012

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 145 of 369

Table 6.5 indicates the population growth rate is the highest in the villages
of Haragandang and Muara Pari - more than 4% per year. This high rate is believed to be due
to migrants from elsewhere marrying local residents as well as moving to the villages due to
employment at the mining and timber companies operating in the area. The migrants are
usually relatives from other villages or other regions such as Muara Inu, Luwe
Hulu, Muara Teweh, Marabahan or Banjarmasin. Some migrants who are now
residents include civil servants employed at the local clinics or
schools. The population growth in the villages of Luwe Hulu and Kerendan is
reportedly more stable however given the private sector activity in Luwe Hulu the
population data is likely to be inaccurate due to limited reporting and recording of migrant
activity in the village.
6.2.7 Age and Gender Distribution
The population in the Barito Utara regency is dominated by the productive age group -
between the ages of 15 and 64 years old (79,377 people or 65.35% of the population).
Table 6.6 presents the distribution of the regencys age groups. The data shows that for every
100 people of a productive age who are able to work 53 are of a non-productive age thus the
regency is burdened with a responsibility for a young (not earning age) generation more
than an elderly population. In addition it indicated there are less females of an income
earning age in the regency and an overall total population with slightly more males.
Table 6.6 Age and Gender Distribution of North Barito Regency 2011
Age Men Women Total Sex Ratio
0-4 6390 6094 12484 105
5-9 7203 6663 13866 108
10-14 6343 6061 12404 105
15-19 5417 5199 10616 104
20-24 5034 5105 1039 99
25-29 5963 5931 11894 101
30 -34 5837 5241 11078 111
35-39 5369 4970 10339 108
40-44 4663 3985 8648 117
45-49 3595 3115 6710 115
50-54 2732 2024 4756 135
55-59 1647 1296 2943 127
60-64 1202 1052 2254 114
65-69 757 743 1500 102
70-74 481 459 940 105
75 + 473 529 1002 89
Total 63106 58467 121573 108
Source: Barito Utara in Figure 2012

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 146 of 369

6.2.8 Religion and Ethnicity
The ethnic and religious diversity in Barito Utara regency is less so than in other areas of
Kalimantan such as Balikpapan, Samarinda and Pontianak. However logging and mining
companies who have been growing their operations in Central Kalimantan are attracting an
increasing number of migrants with different religious and ethnic backgrounds to the area.
Dayaks are the identified indigenous peoples (IPs) in the area; a sub-ethnic group of which is
the Bakumpai (often called people from Barito River). The majority of Bakumpai- who are
Muslim- migrated to Central Kalimantan one hundred years ago. Table 6.7 summarises the
regency by religion.
Table 6.7 Population by Religion in Barito Utara Regency 2010
Name of Village Islam Protestant Catholic
Hindu/
Kaharingan
Buddhism Total
Montallat 7,805 1,025 319 1,855 - 11,004
Gunung Timang 4,651 2,918 1,235 1,842 - 10,646
Gunung Purei 778 578 46 1,220 6 2,628
Teweh Timur 7,267 434 589 15,998 10 24,298
Teweh Tengah 54,097 6,166 2,586 3,418 225 66,492
Lahei 15,414 1,348 111 6,393 - 23,266
Total 90,012 12,469 4,886 30,726 241 138,334

People who live in the Project Area villages are of Islam; Protestant, Catholic,
Hindu and Kaharingan religious backgrounds. Based on the district report (2012), the
majority are Muslim (1,332 people or 51.1%). Islam is mainly practiced by the Dayak
Bakumpai people and migrants from Java and Bugis who settled in the village Luwe Hulu
and work at the mining and logging companies. Luwe Hulu village has the largest Muslim
population followed by Haragandang and Muara Pari (Table 6.8).
Table 6.8 Number of Population by Religion in Project Area Villages 2011
Name of Village Islam Protestant Catholic Hindu/Kaharingan Buddhism
Haragandang 503 - - 91 -
Kerendan 305 229 -
Muara Pari 467 40 - 81 -
Luwe Hulu 1332 72 54 72 10
Total 2607 112 54 473 10

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 147 of 369

There is a mosque in each of the four villages- see Figure 6.3. In addition Luwe Hulu
and Haragandang also have madrassa schools that teach the basics of Islam to children.
During consultations it was reported that there was a lack of Muslim mentors and educators
of Islam. Therefore, many have an expectation that the Project will provide benefits to the
community in terms of religious education facilities and mentors.
Other religion practices in the Project area include Hindu Kaharingan - primarily in
Kerendan where 473 people (18.14%) are Hindu Kaharingan. Hindu Kaharingan is
generally only practiced by the Dayak Dusun Malang. Kaharingan is a form
of traditional beliefs practiced by the Dayak people in Kalimantan for generations.
They believe and worship the Ranying the god who
created and mastered nature and human life. As the Indonesian government requires
every resident and citizen to adopt one of the religions recognised by the government
the Kaharingan has been included in the Hindu category since April 20 1980. This is because
of the similarities in the two religions.
Figure 6.3 Mosques in the Villages of Kerendan and Haragandang

The villages of Muara Pari and Kerendan both have a Basarah Hall established as a place
for gathering and performing rituals of Hindu Kaharingan (Figure 6.4). Kerendan is also
planning a Basarah hall but due to a lack of funds construction is incomplete. Consultation
with villagers in Kerendan indicates they expect support from the Project to complete
construction of the Basarah Hall.
In addition to the faiths of Islam and Hindu Kaharingan, Christian faiths are also practiced,
mainly by a small portion of the Kalimantan Dayak people and
ethnic migrants from Java, Manado and Batak, as well as those who are working for the
local mining and logging companies in Luwe Hulu. This is supported by the presence of
a church in Luwe Hulu. In Muara Pari in addition to
Christian migrants some Dayak people have converted to Christianity.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 148 of 369

Figure 6.4 Basarah Hall in Muara Pari

6.3 ECONOMIC PROFILE
6.3.1 Employment and Livelihoods
In the Barito Utara Regency (2012) as many as 42 897 people (70.62%) of the
population in North Barito regency over the age of 15 years work in the
agricultural and plantation sectors. The remaining are employed in the sectors such
as trade, restaurants and accommodation (13.21%), service
companies (7.8%), mining and quarrying (3.52%), construction
(2.16%), transport, warehousing and communications (1.21%), provision of
utilities (0.62%), industry (0.60%), financial institutions, real estate and leasing (0.23%). From
the above data it can be seen that the primary source of livelihood for the majority of the
population in the regency is agriculture and plantations (Table 6.9).

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 149 of 369

Table 6.9 Population 15 years old and over of Barito Utara Regency by Main Activity
2011
Main Industry Total Percentage
Agriculture, Plantation, Forestry, Hunting and Fishing 42,897 70.62
Mining and Quarrying 2,140 3.52
Industry 366 0.60
Electricity, Gas and Water Supply 374 0.62
Construction 1,311 2.16
Trade, Restaurants and Accommodation Services 8,026 13.21
Transport, Storage and Communication 738 1.21
Financial Institutions, Real Estate, Leasing and Business Services 142 0.23
Social Services, Community and Personal 4,752 7.82
Total 60,746 100.00

The main source of livelihood for the four villages is shifting agriculture -paddy, vegetables
and rubber plantations. Paddy and vegetables are farmed traditionally therefore generally
the yields are only sufficient to meet their household consumption needs.
The land use area in villages affected by the Project is summarised in Table 6.10.
Table 6.10 Land Use Area in Project Affected Villages 2011 (In Ha.)
Village Wed Land Dry Land Building Forest Others Total
Haragandang - 952 50 9.748 215 10.965
Kerendan - 2.119 34 23.794 603 26.505
Muara Pari - 962 45 9.659 218 10.884
Luwe Hulu - 960 68 9.407 193 10.628
Total - 4.993 197 52.608 1.229 58.982

According to the above data the majority of the land in the four villages is forest (52,608
hectares or 89% of the total 58,982 hectares). The amount used for dry land agricultural is
4,993 hectares (or 8.47%). Therefore one can conclude there is still plenty of land for further
dry land agriculture development.
6.3.1.1 Paddy Agriculture, Vegetables and Fruits
Paddy and vegetable farming is still undertaken by traditional forms - by clearing forest
areas and then planting local paddy varieties without using artificial fertilizers, pesticides or
insecticides. Paddy planting season is only done once a year with the growing season to
harvest around five months.
Each farming family has on average 20 hectares land of forest for farming located around the
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 150 of 369

village. This land has been either inherited or gained by cultivating forest lands. In general a
family uses one to three areas of land in the forest for farming per year whilst the remaining
land is left to be used the next year. If the plots of land have been harvested, the land will be
abandoned for several years, allowing the forest to regrow and the soil fertility to improve to
its natural form. This form of shifting agriculture is commonly practiced by the Dayak
people in Kalimantan.
The location of farming land has generally been located in the vicinity of the villages within a
radius of 1 to 5km. The location is usually close to the river for easy access to transportation
as well drinking water whilst the villagers are working and resting in their fields. As there
are a number of mining and logging companies in the area constructing access roads in the
forest, access has opened up significantly hence many villagers are cutting forest areas for
new paddy fields further away from their villages (up to 20 km- reached by motorcycle).
The cycle of paddy farming usually begins with the slashing stage in May and June (the
process of clearing the forest by cutting weeds and small trees). Once the land is cleared the
cutting stage commences in July and August (the process of cutting big trees). If all of the
tree trunks and branches felled are dry all the wood is burnt for one day to clean it and
produce charcoal as a fertilizer for the soil. The work of slashing, cutting down and burning
trees in the forest is usually carried out by adult men.
One family typically will open up one to three acres of forest land in one growing season,
depending on the availability and cost of the labour force. The process of forest clearing is
usually undertaken, either by each family or through group collaboration (involving more
than 20 families) in order for the work to be easier and faster. When the forest is opened, the
land clearing process for each family commences. Those working in the mines or for the local
logging companies will pay labourers up to Rp 75,000 per day to undertake the above
activities.
Once the land is cleared paddy seeds are planted by the females and children. This is
undertaken by sowing the soil using a piece of wood. For one hectare of land as much as
three cans of paddy seeds are required. The size of the cans varies between villages. In
Haragandang the size of one can is equivalent to 10 kg of paddy, while in the Kerendan one
can is equal to the size of 20 kg paddy. The type of paddy seeds planted consists of local
varieties such as Pangin, Bukar Tahun, Banih Bajang, Bajang Merah and Empa. Among the
five types of local paddy varieties generally the most preferred by the farmers is Pangin due
to its taste and the Bajang Merah as it produces large and fragrant rice.
Usually after planting of the paddy seeds is finished, vegetable and fruit seeds are planted
alongside the paddy seeds. Common vegetable crops grown include cassava, eggplant,
cucumbers, chilli, beans, spinach, taro, sweet potato and spinach3. Typical fruits grown
include papaya, banana and pineapple.

3
An example of price of 1 per kilogram of Cassava and Taro is valued Rp 5.000/ kg, while the price of chili is
Rp 25,000/ kg and the price of Spinach is Rp2,000/ bundle.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 151 of 369

Planting processes generally take up to two months; from September to October and
involves all family. As the distance between the farming land and the village can be far,
family members will stay in their farm houses in the forest during the seed planting season.
Therefore, during the months of September and October the villages are very quiet as almost
all of the population is residing in their farm house.
Crop maintenance is usually performed by men and women - weeding the fields of wild
plants such as grass and plant pests. This is generally carried out between November and
February. Common pests include wild boar, monkeys, leafhoppers and grasshoppers. The
wild boar is considered the most harmful hence they are often hunted or traps are laid
around the farming area.
Paddy harvesting usually occurs in March and is conducted by all family although
vegetables and fruit harvesting can be done earlier. Given the difficulties in maintaining the
harvest and minimising pests the production volume of paddy, vegetables and fruits is
relatively low. Currently the average paddy yield is 150 cans of unhulled rice - equivalent to
1.5 to 3 tons per hectare. The maximum yield is around 5 tons per hectare. The paddy yields
are usually for household consumption only and last for a period of up to one year. For a
family with two children, the average requirement for rice is 100 tins of unhulled rice. If a
family produces a good yield exceeding their annual needs the excess is either stored or sold
at Rp 10,000/ kg. Conversely, if a family produces a low yield they will have to purchase
additional rice. Typically few families yield enough rice to sell any surplus.
This is a similar scenario for harvested vegetables and fruits. Only a few villagers have
enough surplus during harvest to sell in the village market; this is generally in limited
quantities.
The reportedly low level of agricultural production in the villages consulted with is also
reflected in the reports of crop production from the Barito Utara regency in 2012 (Table 6.11).
The table shows that for the Lahei sub district 1,321 hectares of farming land were planted
with paddy however it only produced 2,936 tons of unhulled rice production; meaning the
average yield of paddy fields in the sub district of Lahei per hectare is equal to 2.22 tons of
unhulled rice. The same is true for other sub-districts in the regency of Barito Utara. This is
below the average national rate of production of paddy fields (3 to 4 tons per hectare). In the
sub district of Teweh Tengah paddy production in 2011 was 11,207 tons this is because
irrigated agriculture is practiced.
The production volume of maize, cassava, sweet potatoes and various types of beans and
vegetables is in general in the Project villages quite low. Only in the district of Teweh Tengah
and Teweh Timur is the vegetable production ample; this is because both are transmigration
villages with residents originating from Central Java and East Nusa Tenggara where
agricultural practices are more advanced.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 152 of 369

Table 6.11 Agricultural Production by Region 2011 (Ton)
Name of Sub
District
Dry Land Paddy
Maize, Cassava and
Sweet Potatoes
Peanuts, Soybeans and
Small Green pea
Vegetables
Area
Harvest
Production
Area
Harvest
Production*
Area
Harvest
Production Production
Montallat 1,024 2,981 40 337 - - 88,5
Gunung
Timang
1.880 4,786 42 366 90 102,2 222
Gunung Purei 324 639 33 235 2 1.8 77,5
Teweh Timur 1,003 2,115 87 618 35 40 516
Teweh Tengah 5,299 11.207 206 583 88 203,5 792
Lahei 1,321 2,936 91 579 13 12,5 233
Source: Barito Utara in Figures 2012, * Barito Utara in Figures 2012 and 2011

6.3.1.2 Rubber Cultivation
Rubber cultivation is the main source of income for the Project villages. Rubber cultivation is
usually carried out on former paddy farm lands after completing harvest activities.
Previously this land would have been left to regenerate as forest. On average farmers have
approximately 10 acres of rubber plantation, with some working on up to 30 acres (however
the quality of rubber sap will be lower as the trees are still young and damage is more likely
as it is harder to maintain a plantation of this size).
Although rubber plantations have been cultivated in South Kalimantan since the beginning
of the 20th century during Dutch colonialism times widespread cultivation of rubber in the
Project area is relatively new (over the past two decades). In 2011 the selling price of 1 kg
of rubber was Rp 15.000 - this encouraged many farmers to
plant rubber trees on their former paddy fields. The production acreage and number
of smallholder rubber farmers in North Barito Kabuapetn can be seen in Table 6.12.
Table 6.12 Area Production and Number of Smallholder Rubber Plantation by
Regency 2011
Name of Sub District Area Harvest (Ha) Production (Ton) Number of Smallholders
Montallat 6.165 4.941.25 1.915
Gunung Timang 11.754 9.278,36 2.569
Gunung Purei 2.724 2.148,68 788.0
Teweh Timur 3.114 2.159,42 924.0
Teweh Tengah 21.937 15.894,54 11.548
Lahei 8.925 3.855 4.498
Source: Barito Utara in Figures 2012

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 153 of 369

Today the price of 1 kg of rubber sap is valued at Rp 7,000. For Luwe Hulu rubber sap is sold
at Rp 6,000/kg to visiting middlemen. Should the farmers want to sell directly in the
market they have to travel to the city of Buntok in the Barito
Selatan regency or to Banjarmasin in South Kalimantan Province.
Rubber tapping activities are usually carried out from 7am until 11am or between taking care
of paddy and vegetables. Rubber tapping is undertaken by the plantation owners or
by sharecroppers (Handian). If undertaken by sharecroppers two-thirds of the sap will be
given to sharecroppers and the remaining to the plantation owners. In good weather
conditions a days tapping can produce on average 10 to 15 kg of rubber sap valued around
Rp 60.000 - to Rp 90.000. Although rubber prices continue to decline, and the income is
not sufficient to finance households, many farmers still persist in rubber tapping as they
have limited income alternatives. Other sources of income in the Project area include
selling fish and birds in the local market, working in the city of Muara Teweh or at one of the
local mining or logging companies.
6.3.1.3 Fishing
Fish is an important element in most villagers diet. In the Project area there
are many types of fish that provide a good source of protein. Fishing (largely for household
consumption) is carried out in the river by both men and women, either using a fishing
pole or nets.
Common fish species consumed by the villagers
include Tapah, Patin, Baung, Jelawat (Leptobarbus hoevenii), Tabiring, Lais, Tauman/ Dau
man and koloi. Among the river fish species the most popular is the Jelawat fish; the price of
which can reach Rp 50.000/kg. However it is quite rare to catch this fish in the local rivers
now. Other fish widely consumed by the villagers include baung, catfish and lais (which are
cheaper than the Jelawat fish).
In addition to fishing in the river in Karenadan fishing is carried out
in lakes located around the village (Lake Ode,
Punggung Laung, Umpit, Perangun, Halung, Belantik and Pongsong Lonok). There
are several types of fish commonly caught in the lakes such
as catfish, milkfish, Biawan, flatback, Tauman and Kaloi. In Kerendan and Haragandang up
to 10 kg/day can be made fishing, although this activity is only undertaken when the
villagers are not farming or tapping rubber.
Fish cultivation in the river is viewed by villagers as risky as in the rainy season overflow
and river currents have been known to destroy the fish cages. In addition, the practice of tube
adat uses toxins from local tree roots when the waters in the river recede in the dry season.
This practice has led to the death of many fish cultivated in the river.
6.3.1.4 Animal Hunting
In the past the Dayak people in Kalimantan hunted animals as a food source. This activity is
usually carried out in groups of adult men using spears, traps and blowpipes (Sipet) and
assisted by several hunting dogs. The native Dayak people are now concerned about
the sustainability of forest resources hence they only go hunting when food supplies are
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 154 of 369

limited. Hunting usually takes place after paddy harvesting, or if
a traditional ceremony or party is planned. In the past the Dayak people of
Kalimantan never sold the animals they hunted; the meat was divided according to the
needs of people who helped in the hunt.
From recent consultations in Luwe Hulu intensive hunting in the forest is no longer
conducted as many wild animals are now hard to find. Animals hunted include deer, boar,
moose deer, and partridges (Sakan). When hunting the villagers generally have to go deep
into the forest as it was reported that the logging and mining activities had scared the
animals away. In Haragandang, Kerendan and Muara Pari hunting is still possible around
the village.
In addition to hunting many villagers catch birds (Cecak Hijau, Murai, Tinjau Gunung,
Pampolo, Tiung, Punai, Baliang, Juwai, Siaw, Pating Danan, Benderang Mato, Bubut,
Tingang, Beo dan Moek) in the forest. Once caught, they are traded to local merchants who
will buy some bird species for up to Rp 400.000 for the Cecak Hijau). The Tinjau Gunung is
bought for Rp. 125.000 and the Bubut for between Rp. 100.000 and 200.000. The birds are
usually hunted deep in the forest at the upper reaches of the Lahei
River using traps, nets and sticky sap. They are then sold by traders in the bird market in the
city of Palangkaraya and Java Island. Given the potential income that can be made selling
these birds villagers
in Haragandang, Kerendan and Muara Pari often hunt birds to earn additional income. How
ever many of these birds are considered endangered such as the Tingang Bird and Beo.
However stopping the practice is difficult given the poverty levels
in Haragandang, Kerendan and Muara Pari.
The native Dayak people are generally not accustomed to keeping
livestock because they prefer to hunt animals in the forest. The same was found in the Project
villages. Some residents who live on the edge of the river have pigs but this is not a
widespread practice. In Haragandang some villagers rear
chickens, goats and cows, but only a limited number.
6.3.1.5 Gathering of Forest Products
Besides hunting animals in the forest some villagers gather various types of plants. These
plants are gathered primarily for medicinal or traditional purposes (i.e.
to treat diseases, increase stamina, as materials for constructing houses and home
furnishings and for conducting traditional ceremonies). In addition, some plant
species collected from the forest are sold in the market.
The types of plants collected from the forest for traditional medicine
include Pasak Bumi, Seluang Belum, Akar Kuning,
Akar Mambung, Tabat Berituk, Tabalin Bujang, Utin Tangen/Halalang, Kayu Rapat-Rapit,
Rambah Rimbangun, Hampalas Bajang, Penawar Sampai, Penawar Seribu, Penawar Kuning,
Kareho, Pungkala Tawar and others. Medicinal plant species are still easily found in the
forests surrounding the villages.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 155 of 369

Several species of forest plants considered an important
trading commodity include resin, rattan, eaglewood, ant nests as well as some kinds
of timber. Resin and eaglewood are difficult due find now due to the ongoing logging
activities, although rattan is generally found around the villages, especially along the banks
of the Lahei River. In one day a farmer can collect about 50 kg of rattan, however the selling
price is very low (Rp 100.000/quintal).

Important timber that is traded
includes Red Meranti, Lampung Lanan, Balau (Meranti Batu), Ulin, Kruing, Meranti Karape
h Undang, Kelapeh Putih, Tahan Bulan, Bengkirai
Batu, Marijang, Salumpang, Salumpatei, Kangkula Burung, Kayu Mata Burung, Karang
Buku and Tahan Pare. Most timber is used to construct houses, while the Tahan Balau is
used for constructing boats.
Ulin wood (Iron wood) is very hard and strong hence resistant to termites and other insects,
changes in temperature and humidity and sea water damage. It is widely used as a
foundation for housing, bridges and harbour construction or for submerged buildings. Given
its popularity as a strong and resistant construction material the Ulin Wood is becoming rare
in the local area. One tree can produce 30 to 50 sheets of board where the pieces of wood are
sold at Rp.18.000.
The forest also provides fruit for the villagers such as durian, rambutan, kangkuhis, rupai,
tarap (jackfruit), popuan, bonden (cempedak), tampang and salak forest. There are three
types of durian fruit in the Project area namely ratungan, layung papaken and tawala.
The favourite being the papaken, because of its taste and health benefits (low
in cholesterol). During the durian season (in February) the durian fruit is sold at Rp. 5000 in
the village or if sold in Muara Teweh it can reach up to Rp. 30.000 per piece.
6.3.1.6 Employment in the Formal Sector
Many villagers in the Project area are employed as civil servants (school teachers or health
workers) or in the coal mining and logging industries in the local area. In general villagers
classified as migrants are employed as teachers, health workers (manteri) or midwives.
There are several private companies operating near the village including
PT WIKI, PT. Austral Byna, PT.Sitasa Timber and PT. Antang all engaged in timber logging.
In addition, there are several operating coal mining companies in the area -
PT. Solid Black Gold and PT. Victor Two Three Mega. In addition to Salamander, which has
been present in the region since 2008, a number of sub-contractor companies working for the
Project have recruited local people.
As the general level of education amongst the Project villagers is low most are employed in
unskilled positions such as contract labourers, security officers, janitors, kitchen staff, speed
boat operators, heavy equipment operators, drivers and foremen. Given the high interest in
private sector employment in the villages (due to the relatively high wage)
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 156 of 369

Salamander provides a quota for each village which is managed by the village government
officials.
For those employed by Salamander the income ranges from Rp 2.500.000 to Rp 5.000.000
depending on the type of work and level of work experience they have. This is much higher
than the income earned through farming however some villagers have complained about the
wage differences between companies and have requested a uniform wage standard be
applied that is tailored to the price of basic commodities in each village. In Luwe Hulu a litre
of gas in June 2012 was Rp.12.000 while in Muara Teweh it is Rp. 6.500. In general the price
of goods for basic commodities is higher in the Project villages as most staple items are
brought into the area via river through Muara Teweh.
Villagers indicated that at least Rp 3.000.000 was required per month in order to finance the
needs of a family (meals, fuel for lighting homes, transportation and education). Almost all
of the children in the villages surrounding the Project who completed primary school have
continued their education at the Junior High School and Senior High School in the towns of
Muara Lahei or Muara Teweh. For children who attend school outside the village the cost
generally amounts to between Rp.1.000.000 and Rp. 2.000.000 per month which covers
accommodation, living costs and school fees. Although higher education is greatly valued
this cost is considered very burdensome.
Figure 6.5 Economic Activities in Luwe Hulu

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 157 of 369

6.4 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE
6.4.1 Clean Drinking Water
In the four villages affected by the Project most use water river as a source for they daily
needs. For the villagers who live along the Lahei River (e.g. Haragandang, Kerendan and
Muara Pari) the river is used for drinking, cooking, washing and bathing. In
Haragandang clean water is accessed via ground water located 500 m from the village.
However this cannot be used in the rainy season due to the river flooding.
In Luwe Hulu ground water is distributed to households via a hose line. This was
undertaken by Elnusa when they were present at the Luwe Hulu base. The water is generally
used for cooking and drinking, while the Barito River is used for washing and bathing. The
distribution of ground water is managed by the village head. In the dry season some the
villagers have complained that the water supply has decreased due to Salamander and other
company water demands in Luwe Hulu. Currently every home has water twice a week.
In the rainy season the river often overflows, as it contains lots of mud carried
by rain water from eroded soils, therefore the river is not generally used as a water source
during this period. The soil erosion is believed to be due to the local mining and
logging activities in the area, as well as the mud resulting from access roads construction
activities.
According to the 2012 regency report the service of clean water installation by the local
government has only reached two sub districts (Lahei I and Lahei II with 382 consumers)
and although tapped household water services have reached the Lahei sub district, the
Project villages have not yet been connected to this service.
6.4.2 Sanitation
At the end of 2012 the Barito Utara regency has developed a Community Based Total
Sanitation program (STBM) managed by 15 health centers across six sub-districts. The
main objectives of the STBM are to:
Change hygiene behaviour;
Avoid water wastage;
Encourage the washing of hands with soap;
Manage safe drinking water and food practices; and
Manage the safe disposal of human and household waste.
Despite the above program, sanitation conditions in most of the villages in the Barito Utara
Regency, and especially in Lahei sub-district, are poor; with human waste disposed of in the
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 158 of 369

Lahei, Pari and Barito Rivers.
Disposal drains in all the Project villages are not well developed and as the overall condition
of rural roads is poor during the rainy season standing water is common.
As there are no local landfills all households throw their waste in the river. Furthermore
most defecate in the river by building a small bathroom above the flow. For houses located
away from the river domestic waste is discharged under the house creating pools of standing
water around the house.

Figure 6.6 Toilet in Kerendan on the Lahei River

Electricity
The 2012 Lahei sub district report indicated that of the 24 villages in the sub district as many
as 15 villages are connected to the national grid (PLN). Luwe Hulu has, since 2011,
had electrical power generated from diesel generator engines capable of producing 759
430 KwH.
4
Consultations in Luwe Hulu indicate as many as 159 homes now have electricity
from PLN, with 43 households still using kerosene and 189 households using
private diesel engines. The service of PLNs electrical installation is only supplied to at
night for lighting homes enabling many households to view televisions.
Meanwhile the rest of the nine villages in the sub district of Lahei are not yet connected to
electricity, including Haragandang, Kerendan and Muara Pari, with most

4
Source: State Electricity Company (PLN), Muara Teweh year 2011.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 159 of 369

either using kerosene fuel for lighting homes or private diesel engines (Table 6.13).
Table 6.13 Number of Households by Lighting Sources in Village Affected
Project 2011
Name of Village
Electricity
Kerosene Others
PLN Non PLN
Haragandang - 102 37 -
Kerendan - 17 134 -
Muara Pari - 114 121 -
Luwe Hulu 159 43 189 -
Total 159 276 481 -
Source: Lahei Sub District in Figure 2012.
As many as 852 households (90% of the four villages) still use firewood for cooking with the
remaining 64 households (10%) using kerosene (especially in Luwe Hulu) as shown in
Table 6.14.
Table 6.14 Number of Households by Cooking Fuel Source in Project AreaVillages
2011
Name of Village Kerosene Kayu Bakar Electricity
Haragandang 10 129 -
Kerendan 4 147 -
Muara Pari 11 224 -
Luwe Hulu 39 352 -
Total 64 852 -
Source: Lahei Sub District in Figure 2012.

6.4.4 Transportation Facilities
As discussed previously, all 4 villages are located along the river therefore there is a strong
reliance on the river for transportation of goods and people. According to data from the 2012
regency report transportation facilities available in the Lahei sub district includes:
6 motor boats/ water buses/ boat trades;
30 klotok boats/ motor geteks;
4 outboard motor boats/ speed boats; and
3 tiung / barge.
5

However these facilities are not considered sufficient to serve the entire population of
the Lahei sub district (21,488 people in 24 scattered villages).

5
Transportation and Communication Office Service of Barito Utara Regency year 2011.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 160 of 369

For the villagers in Luwe Hulu transportation to the capital sub district or regency is easier
as the village is located right on the banks of the Barito River; therefore can be crossed by a
fast boat that regularly connects with the southern regions, such as Tumpung Laung and the
capital of Montallat sub district. A regular ticket price from Muara Teweh to Tumpung
Laung is Rp.75.000 per passenger. From Tumung Laung passengers can continue their trip to
Banjarmasin via the Barito River. Meanwhile, for passengers travelling to the northern
region, from Muara Teweh one can travel to Puruk Cahu, a city in the Murung Raya regency.
The ticket price is Rp.130.000 per passenger. The villagers in Haragandang, Karenadan and
Muara Pari, located on the banks of the River Lahei, must first reach Muara Lahei via a
Klotok boat (traditional boat) along the Lahei River for seven hours. This journey time is
slightly less for residents of Muara Pari, which is located further downstream (six
hours). Although all four villages are located by rivers not all villagers own a Klotok boat
therefore they must hire a boat paying approximately Rp. 500.000. For one trip to Muara
Lahei and then to the capital of Muara Teweh rental ranges from Rp 600,000
to Rp. 700,000 for a single trip. The cost includes diesel fuel, boat rental and boat
driver fees. During the dry season the cost increases as some parts of the Lahai
River are shallow causing a cascade or rapids that are very dangerous to pass by
boat. Therefore additional manpower is required to carry belongings along this part of the
river.
Since Salamander constructed the access road between Kerendan and Muara Lahei the
journey time has been significantly reduced to less than 2 hours by motorcycle. From Muara
Lahei the villagers are then able to continue their trip by motorcycle to the city of Muara
Teweh in about 30 minutes after crossing the Barito River by ferry boat at Ipu village. The
road access at Kerendan does not have a bridge over the Lahei River therefore villagers must
first travel by boat across the river.
In Haragandang there is an access road to the capital Muara Lahei via 15km of dirt road (in
total 65 km which can be completed in 2 hours by motorbike). This road was constructed by
the logging company PT. Antang. However the current road condition is poor due to heavy
use and damage during the rainy season- see Figure 6.7. Currently the road and bridge are
being repaired by logging companies operating in the area
(PT. Wiki, PT. Austral Byna and PT Sitasa).
Muara Pari also has overland access roads via Salamanders project road to the village
of Muara Pari. Unfortunately, during the rainy season the Muara Pari access road cannot
be used due to poor road resulting in Muara Pari being quite isolated during the rainy
season. If the road is in a good condition, the time taken from Muara Pari to Muara
Lahei (54 km) is around 1.5 hours by motorbike.
Project and village roads are vulnerable to damage caused by the numerous heavy goods
vehicles that frequently utilise the roads (especially during the rainy season) and intense
general use. Therefore Salamander and other operators in the area have committed to repair
the roads periodically.
Currently there is only one sealed road that connects the city of Muara Teweh with
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 161 of 369

the villages in the northern region; only reaching Nihan village 2 km from Luwe Hulu. Even
this road is heavily damaged. The access road from Nihan to Muara Teweh is often used
as an alternative road for the villagers to get to the town of Muara Teweh. Unfortunately to
reach Nihan one needs to cross the Barito River from Luwe Hulu. However there are no
available ferry facilities for crossing vehicles therefore after reaching Nihan one must use an
ojeg motorbike at a cost of Rp. 100,000.

Figure 6.7 Haragandang and Muara Pari Access Roads during the Rainy Season
6.5 COMMUNITY HEALTH
6.5.1 Life Expectancy
According to the 2011 Central Kalimantan Province report male life expectancy is
69.31 years and 73.21 years for females. In the North Barito regency the male life
expectancy is 70.17 years and 74.02 years for females; therefore slightly higher than the
province figures (and the national - 67.51 years for men and 71.74 years for females).
6.5.2 Mortality
Generally maternal and child mortality rates in Indonesia are very high. Despite a decline of
more than half a year since 1990 due to improvements in the health policy, an
estimated 150,000 children die in Indonesia every year before they reach their fifth
anniversary, and nearly 10,000 women die every year due
to pregnancy and childbirth.
6
According to UNICEF under-five mortality rates among poor
families is more than three times higher than in the richest households and only 15% of

6
UNICEF states on press release to Kompas.com, Thursday (06/14/2012)
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 162 of 369

uneducated mothers gave birth in a health facility compared to 71% amongst secondary
school educated mothers. The percentage of births attended by skilled health personnel also
increased as the income of a mother or educational status increases.
In 2012 in Central Kalimantan the Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) was estimated to be 49
(stillbirths or neonatal death) per 1000 live births and the child mortality rate for under five
years old estimated at 56 per 1,000 live births.
7
The main caused of infant mortality is
associated with poor nutritional status. To address this issue Indonesia is in the process of
implementing a Safe Motherhood Program, which includes the Child Survival and Growth
Development Program. However, more support is required for the South Barito local
government to implement this program, as these two regencies are under developed; lacking
health facilities and services.
Other causes of infant mortality include neo-natal conditions, haemorrhaging, acute
respiratory infections and severe infections.
According to head of the provincial health bureau of Central Kalimantan, multiple factors
result in high maternal and child mortality rates in central Kalimantan- the key reason being
due to limited qualified health professionals.
Limited access to a skilled health personnel and an inadequate referral system has resulted
in nearly 40%of women giving birth without the help of a skilled health workers and 70% do
not receive postnatal care within 6 weeks after childbirth. This is being addressed by health
office that is collaborating with traditional midwives to provide additional support in this
area.
8

6.5.3 Morbidity
Based on the results of the 2010 Susenas report, the morbidity rate
in Central Kalimantan Province was 18.74%; an increase from the previous year (17.20%).
Urban and rural rates were 16.30% and 19.97% respectively. Based on the 2011 Central
Kalimantan Province Health Profile the highest morbidity is found in North Barito
regency (27.82%).
6.5.4 Communicable Diseases
Communicable diseases are one of the major causes of mortality in Indonesia. Although
strategies have been developed to address the spread of communicable diseases,
implementation has been weak, particularly in under developed areas. This has largely been
attributed to the decentralised health system in Indonesia which has resulted in
communicable diseases continuing to be an issue.

7
Report of Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey 2012. Central Bureau of Statistics, the National Population and Family
Planning, Ministry of Health, MEASURE DHS, ICF International.
8
KaltengPos.Web.id. Mother and Baby Mortality Rate is Still High, Friday, 30 March, 2012.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 163 of 369

6.5.4.1 Malaria
Malaria is an infectious disease caused by plasmodium parasites that live and breed in
human red blood cells. It is transmitted via the female mosquito (Anopheles) and can affect
both men and women of all age groups. Over 45% of the population resides in an area that is
considered; these are generally remote areas with poor environmental conditions and limited
access to transportation, communications or healthcare facilities. In addition the community
generally has a low of education level, poor socio-economic status and limited sanitation
facilities. These characteristics are similar to those in the four Project villages.
The 2012 Central Kalimantan Province Health Profile identified the South Barito Regency as
a moderate endemic area, especially in the Lahei sub district area see Figure 6.8 below. In
each of the Project villages between two and five people are infected by malaria each month.

Figure 6.8 Map of Malaria Endemic Areas in Central Kalimantan

Source: Central Kalimantan Provincial Health Office in 2012

6.5.4.2 Dengue Fever
Dengue fever is a seasonal vector-borne disease that can lead to death. It usually occurs in
the rainy season when vector breeding grounds are abundant. In Central Kalimantan there
are a reportedly high number of cases of dengue fever; 12 in the sub-districts and 31 in the
villages (Central Kalimantan Province Health Profile, 2011). The number of dengue fever
cases in the last 3 years (prior to 2011) was as follows:
2008 - 952 cases (44.64 per 100,000 population);
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 164 of 369

2009 - 1,332 cases (61 per 100,000 population);
2010 - 1,397 cases (63.2 per 100,000 population); and
2011 - 68 cases (30.4 per 100,000 population).
It is important to note that although the number of cases significantly reduced in 2011
fatalities increased by 8 cases - indicating treatment of dengue cases still requires
improvement.
6.5.4.3 Tuberculosis (TB)
Tuberculosis (TB) is caused by a bacteria called Mycobacterium Tuberculosis. This disease
often occurs in under developed areas in Indonesia with poor sanitation conditions and a
low level of health awareness. In 2010 the Health Ministry set a target of at least 73% CDR
(Case Detection Rate) as an early prevention to mitigate the increased number of cases. The
CDR number was identified from the proportion of new positive patients seeking early
treatment compared to the estimated number of existing positive patients.
Based on the 2011 Central Kalimantan Province Health Profile the number of TB cases in
2011 was 2,668 (70.39% were new cases); the prevalence was 93 per 100,000 population and
the number of deaths was 25 per 100,000 population. Compared with 2010 there has been a
significant decline in the number of cases (4,174 cases mostly amongst males (2,482 cases);
there were 1,692 female cases. The number of deaths was 25 per 100,000 population. In 2011
the estimated number of new cases was 4,656 cases (35.17% are smear positive
tuberculosis (CDR)) - lower than the target of 70% however an increase of 28.28% from 2010.
A TB eradication program is being developed and implemented by the national government
through counselling and intensive treatment. However, implementation of the program at
the local level is still low.
6.5.4.4 Diarrhoea
In 2011 the Central Kalimantan Province Health Profile estimated there were 95,139 cases of
diarrhoea; with 63.5% of patients treated at local health facilities. This is an increase from the
previous year (93 571 cases and 53.1% of patients treated). In the North Barito regency 5,229
cases were reported with 2,742 patient treated (52.44%).
6.5.4.5 Respiratory Diseases
The 2011 Central Kalimantan Province Health Profile reported 22,406 cases (9.51%) of infants
with pneumonia; 235,649 children were under five. This is a decline from 2010 where 22,302
cases (10%) were reported (and 223,018 children under five). The number of infant patients
with pneumonia dealt by health facilities in 2011 was 735 cases (3.3%) -a slight decrease from
2010 where 775 cases were reported (3.5%).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 165 of 369

6.5.5 Sexually Transmitted Diseases (HIV/AIDS)
The number of new AIDS cases, according to the Central Kalimantan Province Health
Profile, was 84. The majority of cases were male (52 cases) - 32 cases were female. In 2011
only three AIDS cases resulted in death; however this may be due to under reporting.
In addition to the reported AIDS cases, there were 64 cases of HIV reported and 431 of other
sexual infections. In 2011, 85.7% of AIDS cases were reported compared to 83.87% in 2010. In
2005 only one district had reported cases of AIDS; whereas in 2011 14 districts / cities in the
Central Kalimantan region had reported cases. The low level of knowledge regarding
HIV/AIDS transmission is believed to be the main cause for the increased number of cases;
only a reported 57.5% of the Central Kalimantan province population, greater than 15 years
of age, has a comprehensive knowledge regarding HIV/AIDS.
6.5.6 Nutritional Status
LBW is defined as an infant with a birth weight of less than 2,500 grams weighed at birth up
to 24 hours after birth. LBW is largely as a result of mothers suffering from severe
malnutrition, anaemia, malaria or sexually transmitted diseases before
conception or during pregnancy.
Babies born with LBW suffer the risk of dying before the age of one year old (10 to 17 times
greater than babies born with normal weight). The 2011 Central Kalimantan Province Health
Profile reported LBW amongst 1.68% of 43 959 live births; this is a decrease from the
previous year (2.1%).
Malnutrition, especially in children under five can lead to an increased risk of death, and
can disrupt the growth of physical, mental development, and intelligence. In 2011 of
the 98,243 children under five 3.98% were reported as suffering from malnutrition and 0.10%
suffering from poor nutrition- a decrease from 2010 ( or the 33.418 infants weighed 12.67%
were malnourished and 4.10% suffering from poor nutrition.
6.5.7 Health Facilities
Table 6.15 shows the existing health facilities in the four Project affected villages. None of the
villages have a public health centre or clinic. However all villages have subsidiary public
health centres and integrated health centres. In general the facility conditions are poor with a
lack of modern equipment and supplies.
In Kerendan an on duty midwife often serves people at her home instead of at the health
centre. Whilst in Haragandang there is no maternity clinic due to a lack of midwives or
facilities. Therefore most pregnant females give birth at the sub district public health
centre located in Muara Lahei. Should more advanced medical treatment be required the
villager must travel to Muara Teweh. However in Haragandang many rely on traditional
birth attendants in the village at the time of giving birth. Doctors from the regency hospital
visit the villages once every three months.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 166 of 369

Table 6.15 Health Facilities in the Project Affected Villages
Name of
Village
Public Health
Centre
Subsidiary of Public
Health Centre
Maternity
Clinic
Integrated
Health Centre
Clinic
Haragandang - 1 - 1 0
Kerendan - 1 1 1 0
Muara Pari - 1 1 1 0
Luwe Hulu - 1 1 1 0
Total 0 4 3 4 0
Source: ERM Field Observations 2013

Table 6.16 presents the number of health care practitioners associated with the health
facilities in the four villages. In Muara Pari the midwife is from Muara Teweh therefore she
is only present in the village for two weeks per month, in Haragandang the paramedic is
from Muara Teweh therefore only stays in the village for a week per month whilst the
midwife is from Luwe Hulu so stays three weeks per month. In Luwe Hulu the midwife
lives in the village therefore has a permanent presence. Given the generally limited health
resources in the Project villages the communities are not satisfied with the health services
provided. It is considered that the number of healthcare professionals per facility is
inadequate, especially considering the total population size. In addition there are no doctors
currently practicing in any of the village facilities with only paramedic staff and midwives
are on duty to serve the sick villagers.
Table 6.16 Number of Health Care Practitioners in the Project Affected Villages 2013
Sub-District /Village Doctor Paramedic Staff Midwife Traditional Birth Attendant
Haragandang - 1 3
Kerendan - 1 3
Muara Pari - 1 2
Luwe Hulu - 1 1 4
Total 0 2 3 12

Figure 6.9 Subsidiary Public Health Centres in Haragandang and Kerendan
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 167 of 369

6.6 EDUCATION FACILITIES
The following tables show the existing education facilities and attendee numbers in the
Project area. All four villages have an elementary school (with a total of 554 students) but
none have a senior high school and only Luwe Hulu has a junior high school.
Table 6.17 Number of Schools in the Project Affected Village 2013
Name of
Village
Kinder
Garten/PAUD
Elementary
School
Junior High
School
Senior High
School
Madrasah
Haragandang 1 1 - - 1
Kerendan 1 - - 1
Muara Pari 1 - - -
Luwe Hulu 1 1 1 - 1
Total 2 4 1 0 3

Table 6.18 Number of Students per School in the Project Affected Village 2011
Name of Village
Kinder
Garten/PAUD
Elementary
School
Junior High
School
Senior High
School
Haragandang 34* 82 - -
Kerendan 83 - -
Muara Pari 132 - -
Luwe Hulu 40 257 88 -
Total 74 554 88 0
Source: Lahei Sub District in Figure 2012, * Field Observation (secondary data not available)

The Junior High School located in Luwe Hulu was founded in 2008 and funded by PT. Wiki.
However the school building and educational facilities are now in a poor condition due to
a lack of maintenance. Originally the school operations were financed by PT. Wiki however
presently the charity board is no longer active hence the management of the school has
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 168 of 369

been neglected. In 2013, 88 students attended the Junior High School. For students in
Haragandang, Kerendan and Muara Pari after finishing elementary school they continue at
the Junior High School in Muara Lahei where there are four state Junior High Schools and
three private Junior High Schools. Those that continue to Senior High School attend a school
in Muara Lahei where there is one state Senior High Schools and two private Senior High
Schools (Table 6.19).
Table 6.19 Number of School, Students and Teacher of Junior High School and Senior
High School in Lahei Sub District 2011/1012
Level of Education
School Student Teacher
State Private State Private State Private
Junior High School 4 3 347 218 24 18
Senior High School 1 2 173 154 46 19
Vocational School - - - - - -

Table 6.20 and Table 6.21 below summarise teachers per school and their qualifications. As
many as 23 elementary school teachers have an undergraduate education. This is largely as
a result of the governments affirmative action education program through the Open
University. The Junior High School located in Luwe Hulu is private although it
has limited facilities all the teaching staff are graduate scholars from a variety
of majors. The teachers are paid only Rp. 10.000/ day.
Table 6.20 Number of Teacher and Education Background in Elementary School and
Junior High School in the Project Affected Village 2011
Name of Village
Education category
Elementary School Junior High School
High
School
Diploma Bachelor S1
High
School
Diploma Bachelor S1
Haragandang - - 4 - - -
Kerendan 3 - 3 - - -
Muara Pari 1 7 - - -
Luwe Hulu 9 - 10
Total 3 1 23 10

Table 6.21 Numbers of Teacher and Education Background in Early Childhood
Education (PAUD) and Islamic School in the Project Affected Village 2011
Name of
Village
Education Category
Kinder Garten/PAUD Madrasah
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 169 of 369

High
School
Diploma
Bachelor
S1
Elementary
School
High
School
Bachelor S1
Haragandang 3 - - 2
Kerendan - - - 1
Muara Pari - - - - - -
Luwe Hulu 3
Total 3 - - 3 - 3
Source: ERM Field Observation 2013

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 170 of 369

Figure 6.9 Elementary Schools in Luwe Hulu and Muara Pari

6.7 ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE
Each village has a weekly market where goods such as chickens, fish,
vegetables, fruit, clothing and other imported goods by the merchants from Muara Teweh
are sold
(Table 6.22).
In Luwe Hulu a number of shops exist selling a variety of goods. These activities are
supported by the presence of several mining and logging companies operating in the area as
well as the Project.
Table 6.22 Number of Economic Facilities in the Project Affected Village 2011
Name of Village Pasar Umum Toko Kios/Warung Bank KUD/Non KUD
Haragandang 1 17 7
Kerendan 1* 10 6
Muara Pari 12 8
Luwe Hulu 1 25 22 1
Total 4 64 43 - 1

In most villages small scale shops conducted out of households exist. In Hulu Luwe there
over 25 shops and 22 stores in the shopping area located around the market. Other facilities
in Luwe Hulu Village include village unit cooperatives (KUD - Koperasi Unit Desa Bina
Bersama) with more than 80 people and assets over Rp. 120,000,000.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 171 of 369

6.8 CULTURAL HERITAGE
According to discussions with local villagers there are no important cultural heritage
sites around the Project area. There is a grave site for Kaharingan near the Luwe Hulu
base. However the sacred ancestors graves are generally located in the mountains far
from the Project villages.
In the Lahei sub district there is a betang (long house) of Tambau
9
which is of
significant cultural heritage in the Barito Utara regency. The Betang house is
a typical Dayak tribe dwelling inland of the Barito Utara regency. Currently
the betang house of Tambau is located at RT 01, in Nihan approximately 2 km north of
the Luwe Hulu Base. In the Barito Utara regency there are 17 known heritage sites which are
being developed as regional tourist destinations by the local government. One area that has
been developed for natural and cultural tourism is Gunung Lumut Protection Forest area in
the district of Mount Purei which is now being proposed as a biosphere
reserve. Gunung Lumut is used by the local Dayak communities as a place of worship to the
ancestral spirits. (Gunung Lumut was a sacred mountain for Dayak people who followed
the Kaharingan beliefs).
Other cultural heritage locations outside of the sub district of Lahei being developed as
cultural tourism destinations include the sunken Onrust ship at Lalutung Tou (in Teweh
Tengah), the former tomb of the Antasari prince at Bayan Pegog (Hulu Teweh), the
fossil skull of Panglima Singah Nginuh, Liang Longo, Liang Idai, the Cave of Liang
Angah and the Cave of Liang Pandan.
Traditional ceremonies are still practiced across the four communities especially among the
Dayaks Dusun Malang who follow Kaharingan. For these villagers some of
the Kaharingan, beliefs play an important role in their lifestyle. The indigenous leaders in the
villages have the judicial power, as Pangulu to determine of customary law in each village
which is usually assisted by the mantir, a kind of traditional village council. The indigenous
leader has the right to decide on all matters of village life. However in Luwe Hulu this
tradition is not commonly practices as there are less followers of Kaharingan in the
community. A number of traditional ceremonies practices by the Dayak Dusun Malang are
summarised in
Table 6.23 below.

9
The betang of Tambau was founded around the year 1918 as a replacement building after the previous
building was destroyed in a fire. The current betang hause has a length of 50 meters with a width of 8 meters
that is occupied by 17 Dayak Dusun Malang members. Some of the old building poles, made from ironwood,
still remain and are being treated. Betang of Tambau which is easily accessible by river and land is often
visited by foreign tourists from the United States, Netherlands, Philippines, China, Australia and Japan.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 172 of 369

Table 6.23 Typical Dayak Dusun Malang Ceremonies
1. Tiwah Ceremony
Tiwah ceremony is usually held for a person who has died after being buried.
The ceremony intends to align the spirit journey toward heaven so they can live in peace. In
addition, it is also intended as a procession for minimising bad luck influences.
2. Suhoor Pakanan Lewu Dayak.
The ceremony makes offerings to the ancestors or saints. "Suhoor" is defined as the ancestors or
gods that are believed to preserve human life, providing health, safety, peace, blessings and grace
to those who believe in Him. "The ritual called Pakan Suhoor Lewu for the Dayak Malang People is
usually done once a year. Generally Pakanan Lewu Suhoor is held after the harvest farming and
coincides with the New Year calendar of Dayak, which is approximately in May.
3. Nahunan Ritual
Nahunan Rituals purpose is to give a name to a child and a christening procession according to the
Kaharingan Religion. The Nahunan ceremony itself comes from the word "Nahun" which means
year. Thus, this ritual is generally held with babies of one year or more. The result of the ritual is to
choose a name then child for the child.
4. Manyanggar Ritual.
The term of Manyanggar is derived from the word of "Sangga". The ritual of Manyanggar
interpreted as ritual which is performed by humans for making boundaries of life with
supernatural beings that are not visible to the naked eye. The Manyanggar Ritual is held by Dayak
people because they believe that in life the world, besides humans, also lives delicate creatures. The
need to make signs to ensure the two do not mutually interfere with each other's lives and as an
expression of respect for the creatures lives. The ritual of Manyanggar is typically held when
humans want to open a new land for agriculture, establish buildings or before conducting
community activities on a large scale.
This ceremony was performed by residents of Kerendan when work was about to commence at the
Kerendan cluster.
5. Pananan Batu Ceremony
The Pananan Batu ceremony is a traditional ritual that was held after the harvest of the field or
fields. Pananan Batu ceremony is intended as an expression of gratitude and thanks to the
equipment used during farming. Objects such as rocks are considered as a source of energy, which
sharpens the tools used for farming. It is for sharpening machetes, balayung, ax, ani-ani or other
objects of iron.
6. Wara Ceremony
The Wara ceremony is a traditional ceremony intended to deliver the bodies and spirits of the dead
to the heavens. The ceremony begins with a gong to let the people regard someone passing away
and summoning the spirits of the ancestors in order to pick up the new spirit passing away. The
next event is the offerings of seven types of food for seven days. The next stage is to lead grave
offerings usually done after harvest and lasting for two days. In this ceremony, the spirit of the
previous waiting at Lumut Mountain (one of the places considered sacred by local people) on the
inland rivers Tewei (Teweh) - called back to receive offerings and purification before being brought
to heaven (sacred place).
10
The Wara custom event is concluded with the spirit leading back to the
Gunung Lumut. Usually an animal sacrifice takes place eg. buffalo or goat.

10
http://www.rad.net.id/online/mediaind/publik/9609/03/MI08-02.03.html, Jonio Suharto, Prosesi Ritual
Penghantar Jenazah Suku Dayak Melestarikan Upacara Wara, Selasa, 3 September 1996
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 173 of 369

7 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Stakeholder engagement is a key element of the IA process. The purpose of stakeholder
engagement is to allow for stakeholders to interact with the decision making process, express
their views and influence mitigation and technical solutions to concerns voiced during the
process.
Stakeholder engagement is an inclusive and culturally appropriate process which involves
sharing information and knowledge, seeking to understand the concerns of others and
building relationships based on collaboration. It allows stakeholders to understand the risks,
impacts and opportunities of the Project in order to achieve positive outcomes.
The main objectives of stakeholder engagement are:
To ensure that adequate and timely information is provided to those affected by the
Project;
To provide these groups with sufficient opportunity to voice their opinions and
concerns; and
To ensure that comments are received in a timely manner so that they can be taken
into account in Project decisions.
Stakeholder engagement and consultation is an integral part of Salamanders Project
planning and implementation. Salamander recognizes that achieving effective stakeholder
engagement involves building and maintaining constructive relationships over time.
Therefore the company has committed to an ongoing consultation and engagement process
that extends throughout the life of the Project.
Stakeholder engagement is also a key part of any ESIA process. For this Project, it was a
systematic process, starting with developing an understanding of the issues, creating and
maintaining a stakeholder relationship and partnerships through dedicated company
resources such as the External Affairs Site team based at Salamanders field office in Muarah
Tewe. Stakeholder engagement is a two way process, based on a willingness to listen to
feedback, and discuss it in an open and unprejudiced fashion. Processes are built around
time frames which allow stakeholders to understand, absorb, respond and interact.
A number of stakeholders have been identified for the Project including:
Salamander;
SKKMIGAS;
Regency, and sub-district government;
Village heads; and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 174 of 369

Project affected communities.
7.2 HISTORICAL CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN
Salamander has undertaken consultation activities since 2011. Initial activities focussed on
consultation with the forestry department to discuss the Projects forest permit. This was
followed by an extensive program of consultation on the land use process. During these
public consultation (socialization) sessions Salamander discussed the following:
Introduction of Salamander as PSC Operator, under SKKMIGAS;
Name of the Project and location;
Approved of Forestry Permit and Location Permit;
Support required from local community;
The land use processes and status;
The official land use and compensation team (local officials);
Time table of the processes;
Procedure for land price negotiation meeting;
Payment processes and signing of appropriate land ownership transfer documents;
The project commencement date; and
Grievance mechanism and procedure (submission procedure; internal Salamander
discussion and process; and resolution or response to stakeholders).
Information on was also provided to village officials to discuss with their village residents.
Historical consultation undertaken by Salamander within the affected villages is detailed in
Table 7.1 and illustrated in Figure 7.1.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 175 of 369

Table 7.1 Historical LAQ Consultation undertaken by Salamander
Date
Activity and Stakeholders
Involved
Issues Covered/Raised Location
Early 2011 Initial discussions regarding ,
involving:
North Barito Regency
personnel
BPN
Initial discussion on project
location.
-
27th April 2011 Lahei Camat and Staff, Head
and Secretary Karenden
Village, Head of Rahaden
village and local leader,
Muara Pari village Head,
Salamander Representative
and Land-Owners around
Km. 27 Street until Parau
River.
Improvement and use of
the road Km. 27
Lahei Sub
district office
13th May 2011 Land owner socialisation
regarding to well exploration
drilling activity SLH-1 at
Kerendan village 19,968 m
2

Land owners agree and
support with that activity
Kerendan
village
16th May 2011 Negotiation with land owner
(H. Surianto) facilitate by
Camat Lahei (Sub district
Head)
1. H. Surianto asks
involved in the
procurement of camp
materials and small cars.
Salamander Bangkanai
cannot meet because is the
contractors responsibility;
2. H. Surianto asks IDR
32,000 / m
2
for land price.
3. Salamander offer price
IDR 25,000 / m
2
Lahei Sub
district office
16th May 2011 Camat Lahei and staff,
Salamander Representative,
and Trees/Crops owners

Negotiation with trees and
crops owner
Rubber small IDR 25,000;
Rubber medium IDR
50,000;
Rubber large IDR 200,000
Others trees and crops refer
to North Barito Regent
Agree No: 188.45/480/2006
regarding plant
(agricultural, forestry, and
plantation).
Lahei Sub
district office
27th May 2011 Camat Lahei mediation
between Salamander and
Farmer Group: Singa Parung
(Matheus, Sastra Jaya, etc.) in
Kerendan village.

Meeting attendance by Camat
Lahei, Lahei Sub district Staff,
Recognition of Intersection
Enter km 27 to BM.05/06
street by Farmer Group:
Singa Parung.

Lahei Sub
district office
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 176 of 369

Date
Activity and Stakeholders
Involved
Issues Covered/Raised Location
Sector Police Personnel,
Salamander Representatives,
Kades Kerendan and staff,
Kades Muara Pari, and land-
owners
18th September 2012 Land Technical Advisory
Team regarding location
permit for gas pipeline
Land Technical Advisory
Team to give consideration
regarding location permit
for gas pipeline

11th January 2013 Muara Pari Head of village,
Village Representative Board
(BPD) Muara Pari Village and
Salamander representative

Socialisation and negotiation
meet regarding road
widening at WK-1 location.
Community agreed with
road widening plan form 4
m to 10 m with land price
IDR 18,000 / m
2

Site Office
Salamander
energy
Bangkanai
Ltd, Luwe
Hulu village
14th January 2013 Community at Muara Pari
village and Salamander
Representative
Celebrating for starting
WK-1 construction
WK01
location
Source: Secondary Data Review, 2013
Figure 7.1 Community Consultations Undertaken

Source: Salamander 2013

In addition to consultation activities in the communities discussing the process, formal and
informal activities have been undertaken by the field team. This has included weekly
meetings and discussions updating the community on Project activities, presenting the CSR
program and progress, opportunities for employment and discussing community concerns.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 177 of 369

Specific documentation on these activities was unavailable at the time of writing.
7.3 COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS
During ERMs field work in May 2013 to the four impacted villages the team examined
community perceptions associated with Salamanders activities in the area. A series of
questions were discussed with the community ranging from understanding the communities
awareness of the Project to perceptions of the Project impacts. The following section
summarises the key findings.
7.3.1 Community Awareness of the Project
Findings indicated that community members in Haragandang (women and men) had little
knowledge of the Project. Conversely most men in Luwe Hulu and Muara Pari were aware
of Salamanders activities in the area (see Figure 7.2). This is likely due to the fact that the
base is located in Luwe Hulu and many are employed by the Project.
Community members reported little consultation has occurred in Haragandang hence their
limited awareness of the Project. In addition the community reported they were not invited
to participate in the Salamander Cup event in early 2013.
Figure 7.2 Community Awareness of the Project

7.3.2 Community Perceptions of Salamanders Consultation Level
Men in Luwe Hulu and Haragandang perceive Salamanders consultation activities as poor;
indicating the Project had a preference for consulting with elite villagers only. In addition,
some young men discussed how accessing Project information on employment and business
opportunities was difficult. The findings also indicate there is a low level of understanding of
Salamanders consultation activities in most villages, especially amongst women
(see Figure 7.3).
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men
Haragandang Karendan Muara Pari Luwe Hulu
Unaware of project
Have heard of the project
Know some details
Fully informed
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 178 of 369

Figure 7.3 Community Perceptions of Project Consultation Activities

7.3.3 Expectations of Salamander Benefits
In all four villages improved heath facilities and access to drinking water were identified as
important. Project employment was also identified by the men in Kerendan and Luwe Hulu
villages as important. Development of community infrastructure was also identified
(Figure 7.4) as a high priority.
Figure 7.4i Expectations of Salamander Benefits in Haragandang

0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
Unaware of
Bad
Average
Good
Excellent
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Haragandang Women
Haragandang Men
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 179 of 369

Figure 7.4ii Expectations of Salamander Benefits in Haragandang

Figure 7.4iii Expectations of Salamander Benefits in Muara Pari

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Karendan Women
Karendan Men
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Muara Pari Women
Muara Pari Men
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 180 of 369

Figure 7.4iv Expectations of Salamander Benefits in Luwe Hulu

7.3.4 Community Concerns Associated with Salamander Impacts
Men in Haragandang and Luwe Hulu indicated the most interest in understanding negative
Project impacts. However both men and women in Kerendan indicated they were unsure
about the Project impacts (see Figure 7.5). This is an indicator that further consultation on
Project activities and impacts is required.
Figure 7.5 Community Concerns Associated with Salamander Impacts

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Luwe Hulu Women
Luwe Hulu Men
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
Not sure
Dont care
Minimal interest
Moderate interrst
High interest
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 181 of 369

7.4 DISCLOSURE AND PLANNED FUTURE CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES
Salamander is planning a series of public consultation meetings (inclusive of vulnerable
groups) to disclose the findings of the Projects ESIA. This process will be designed to enable
the affected communities to meaningfully contribute to the ESIA findings and hence towards
the overall Project development, particularly through the development of potential
mitigation measures.
The disclosure process is Salamanders opportunity to build constructive and long term
relationships with its key stakeholders. It provides the opportunity to communicate through
both oral and written explanations of Project activities, implementation schedules, and
associated risks, impacts and benefits measures. Public consultation and disclosure to the
affected community is an important platform for relaying information to project affected
communities. These activities will continue throughout the construction and operational
phase of the Project, and cover the impacts, hazards and risks associated with construction
activities.
Key messages for planned future public consultation will contain more information about
the local employment and business opportunities, community health and safety,
environmental and social impacts of construction and operation related activities and CSR
activities.
As such, Salamander is committed to maintaining its ongoing program of consultation and
disclosure and will:
Maintain regular communications with related stakeholders;
Provide local residents with regular information on project progress and related
implications;
Provide local residents with information on employment and business opportunities;
Maintain awareness of safety issues;
Maintain constructive relationships between local residents and the Project team by
continuing regular consultation meetings and informal interactions;
Identify and respond to stakeholder issues and concerns by reviewing the complaints
file and undertaken stakeholders consultation;
Monitoring implementation and effectiveness of mitigation measures their CSR
program; and
Ensure complaints are addressed according to the established process.
All activities undertaken during future consultation and disclosure will be appropriately
documented by Salamander.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 182 of 369

7.5 SALAMANDERS GRIEVANCE MECHANISM
Salamander formed a Grievance Committee to address grievances relating to land, security,
community, industrial relations and marine affairs, in response to a growing number of
interactions with land claimants. The Grievance Committee is composed of representatives
from internal Salamander departments, including Legal, External Relations and
Communications, General Services and Human Relations. Within this Committee, the Land
Grievance Team follows a structured procedure for recording, tracking and monitoring,
determining required actions, routing to appropriate destinations and documenting
grievances received.
The grievance mechanism developed by Salamander aims to manage any community
complaints appropriately. During the process land-owners and other stakeholders could
submit a grievance regarding the process to the following institutions or directly to
Salamander:
The Camat Lahei Office as the LAQ Team Chairman;
The head of Kerendan village;
The External Relations Officer in Luwe Hulu (Muhammad Idrus); and
The External Relations Officer in Muara Teweh Office (Tonny Partono and
Syahbuddin Yoesoef).
The grievance is submitted providing the following details:
Name of person submitting grievance;
Subject and grievance details; and
Local community members involved.
It is preferable that before being submitted the grievance is discussed with the village head.
As of 2012-2013, land grievance cases were lodged and prioritised as follows:
First Priority: Grievances directly affecting the Project development (i.e. grievances
concerning land plots directly within the Project site);
Second Priority: Grievances relating to significant impacts on the community;
Third Priority: Grievances with insufficient or unclear evidence or documents,
remaining to be clarified and further investigated; and
Fourth Priority: Grievances with no supporting evidence or documents.
The grievance mechanism followed by this team is illustrated in Figure 7.6.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 183 of 369

Figure 7.6 Salamander Grievance Submission Flows

The grievance settlement must be made within 5 days from receiving the grievance (this was
agreed with the local communities). If this timeframe is not met the complainant must be
informed as to the reasons why.
Grievances are to be discussed internally and then coordination is required with and the
local Camat or village head and approved by the External Relation Manager or Vice
President, Human Resources and General Affairs before it is conveyed to the stakeholder;
If no acceptable resolution is agreed the grievance is elevated to senior Salamander
management and SKKMIGAS to find an acceptable solution. If a resolution is not found then
the grievance is referred to the legal system.
Several issues have been encountered during the grievance process. After payments were
made, grievances were lodged with Salamander by community members who claimed that
the payments were given to the wrong person. The majority of these grievances were not
supported with the appropriate legal documentation to prove land rights so the grievances
were processed according to the hereditary rights.
These grievances were collectively settled according to community preferences through a
panel or regional parliament council (DPRD), instead of through legal channels on a case by
case basis.
Additionally in 2013 new grievances were lodged claiming that compensation paid was
insufficient.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 184 of 369

8 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) ACTIVITIES
8.1 OVERVIEW OF SALAMANDER'S CSR ACTIVITIES IN INDONESIA
Salamander recognises that maintaining a well-respected operating capability is
fundamental to its strategy and business model; this includes a sustainable and participative
CSR approach.
In Indonesia, Salamander has well established CSR programmes in both the Kambuna and
North Kutei areas which have been running for several years. Through Salamanders
presence in these areas employment opportunities for local people has increased and
infrastructure improvements have been made in the local area through Project investment.
Salamander also supports local cultural festivals with the aim of building a good working
relationship with the local community whilst generating support for its operational activities.
Salamander has also been supporting the local communities in the Greater Kerendan area.
Initial CSR programmes completed in 2011 include the opening of a rubber nursery in
Kerendan village and constructing a new road connecting Kerendan and Muara Pari villages
to the local town. This has brought significant socio-economic benefits to the local
communities as the journey previously involved travel by river that could take up to seven
hours. The journey time has now been reduced to less than an hour. Salamander also
supports local celebrations in the Project area such as Independence Day.
This Chapter provides an overview of Salamanders CSR approach, activities undertaken to
date as well as planned future activities.
8.2 CSR APPROACH, POLICY, AND PROCEDURE
Salamanders main CSR areas focus on the environment, health and safety, employees, local
communities and its approach to business conduct. Salamanders CSR objectives include:
Mitigating social risk associated with Project activities;
Establishing positive engagement with its Project communities;
Managing NGO and stakeholder concerns;
Delivering company messages and commitments to Project communities so that the
Project can operate safely and securely; and
Implementing social commitments as mandated by Indonesian regulation.
Salamanders CSR goal is to strengthen good and trusting relations, between the company
and communities residing in the area where it operates, by implementing a sustainable
program based on a community approach. As such, Salamander is committed to appreciate,
and take seriously its responsibilities to conduct its operations safely and in full co-operation
with the communities in which it operates. Salamander will ensure that the health and safety
of its employees is protected; that its impact on the environment is minimised; and that it is
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 185 of 369

sensitive to the needs of the communities in which it operates.
Salamander will also ensure that the interests of the surrounding communities are respected,
as well as seek to foster and support self-sustaining community businesses.
Salamander is committed to conduct all of its business in a fair manner and comply fully
with the relevant legal, regulatory and international accord requirements which apply to its
businesses. These include the UK Bribery Act, the International Labour Organisation
Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the UN Universal Declaration
on Human Rights, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the International
Finance Corporation (IFC) Environmental and Social Performance Standards and the
Equator Principles (EPs). The Group benchmarks its Health, Safety and Environment (HSE)
performance against industry statistics compiled by the International Oil and Gas Producers
(OGP).
8.3 CSR PRINCIPLES
Salamanders CSR policy highlights its commitment to operate in accordance with the
following principles:
Conduct business in compliance with law;
Act openly and honestly in business dealings;
Comply with best practice in corporate governance;
Behave responsibly and with sensitivity to the local community;
Provide sustainable benefits and avoid the creation of a dependency culture;
Ensure, wherever possible, that CSR partners are compliant with Salamander
standards;
Use continuous assessment to ensure Salamanders CSR activities meet identified
performance objectives;
Ensure that Salamander activities are conducted in accordance with the IFCs
Performance Standards; and
Publish an annual update on all CSR activities.
In order to implement these principles, Salamander established a community development
strategy document in 2008 which defines a five phased approach for community
development implementation as follows:
Consultation (participatory planning approaches);
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 186 of 369

Development of program framework and objectives (i.e. expected outcome,
parameters for measurement, program reasonable and specific actions to meet the
objectives, specific targets, and clear timetable);
Establishment of key program indicators (i.e. input, output, outcome, and impact);
Performance monitoring and evaluation; and
Grievance mechanism.
The mechanism for Salamanders CSR procedure is presented in the following figure.
Figure 8.1 CSR Procedure

Source: Salamander Data, 2013

8.4 CSR STRATEGY
Salamander is committed to developing future CSR programs in the following manner:
Identifying positive and negative social and environmental impacts of the operations;
Identifying natural and environmental resources in local communities;
Identifying community needs and aspirations; and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 187 of 369

Preparing a sustainable community development program to meet company
commitments and business needs.
In preparing and planning the program, the following steps will be observed by the CSR
Team:
Build the same perceptions between Salamander, the local government and other key
stakeholders around common interest issues;
Prepare a joint agreement between Salamander and Project stakeholders as the basis
for commitments for implementation;
Prepare integrated planning with the local government to achieve synergies in the
CSR program and appropriate distribution of benefits;
Conduct CSR dialog and consultation with stakeholders;
Determine CSR execution schedule, monitoring mechanism and evaluation
framework;
Chose human resources with capability and commitment towards CSR;
Training of CSR leaders;
Conduct CSR monitoring and evaluation; and
Undertake CSR documentation.
Criteria for delivering the CSR program are as follows:
Meet one of the program priorities that is consistent with meeting stakeholder needs,
i.e. infrastructure, education, environment, health, and establishing independent
livelihoods;
Focus on the local area, i.e. Barito Utara, Kutai Timur, and Kambuna Regency;
Develop criteria based on consultation with the local community - to understand their
concerns and priorities, as well as ensure the program meets their needs, as well as the
needs of other stakeholders;
Engage and encourage participation and empowerment of local people in executing
the program through:
Motivating the community to participate in a process which allows them to express
their needs, determine their future, and ensure ownership and sustainability of the
program; and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 188 of 369

Focus on supporting community members to organize themselves to solve their own
problems, in order to provide sustainable and long-term community development
programs.
Clear objective for measurable program achievement;
Non-discrimination (benefit to various groups of communities) with specific attention
to vulnerable groups (e.g. children and women);
Accountability, i.e.:
Program and budget to be approved by management and SKK Migas; and
Consultation with regional government and business partners where appropriate.
8.5 GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
During 2012 Salamander completed an internal restructuring of its Corporate CSR Steering
Committee, streamlining the membership to make it a more efficient and focused group that
can oversee its CSR activities and relationships with local stakeholders, as well as to improve
the delivery of community relations programmes. It is chaired by the Chief Executive Officer
(CEO), and meets bi-annually to discuss Salamanders investment in community based
projects. The committee monitors project performance against agreed objectives. CSR
Committees are also convened in the countries where Salamander operate and report to the
Group Steering Committee.
Salamander completes a stakeholder mapping exercise on entering a new licence. The results
of this are used by the local community development officers to determine with whom to
engage. The engagement programme will typically include local recruitment,
communication of Salamanders planned activity, meeting local officials and conducting
town hall style meetings. This process helps to identify community development projects
that meet the needs of stakeholders.
The Senior Management Team meets quarterly to discuss management level issues and HSE
is always a key agenda item. The Corporate HSSE Manager reports directly to the Group
COO and each of Salamander operated assets has a dedicated HSE and CSR team to monitor
activity and ensure Salamander guidelines are being followed.
During 2012 further policies and procedures in support of Salamanders anti-bribery and
corruption programme were developed and implemented. Salamander also instigated the
first series of compliance audits of processes already in place. These, together with the
annual anti-bribery and corruption risk assessment carried out towards the end of the year,
enabled Salamander to gain a comprehensive understanding of the corruption risks facing
the business and the robustness of its processes. The company has embedded whistle-
blowing procedures that permit employees and contractors to report any concerns they may
have in confidence to senior management or, if desired, to an external whistle-blowing
service.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 189 of 369

Building strong relationships with local communities is critical to Salamander in maintaining
its operating credibility. It adopts a pro-active approach to its community relations, seeking
to engage with local stakeholders early in the operational planning stage and recognising
any concerns/issues. The company employs a number of specialist government liaison and
community liaison officers, usually from the area of Project operations and has a detailed
understanding of the local, national and regional environmental and social sensitivities.
8.6 PREVIOUS CSR ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN
The following section summarises Salamanders CSR activities undertaken to date in the
Kerendan Project area.
8.6.1 Improvement of Public Roads in Kerendan and Muara Pari Village
In April 2012 Salamander built a land access road for public transportation in Kerendan and
Muara Pari village. Previously, approximately 600 households from Kerendan and Muara
Pari used boats to travel to their nearest sub-district town. The traditional boat journey,
which used the flow of the river, took villagers between five and seven hours or longer
depending on the river flow.
To provide the local communities with a more convenient transportation route Salamander
funded and constructed the public road which is 14.5km long in Kerendan and 6km long in
Muara Pari. Construction of the road has reduced the villagers travel time to within one
hour. This new road access has significantly improved access to health and education
facilities as well as markets supporting economic growth for both the Kerendan and Muara
Pari villages.
8.6.2 Independence Day Ceremony in Kerendan Village
Kerendan village is one of the local communities in and around Bangkanai. In August 2012
Salamander worked in partnership with youth groups to support the villagers in their
Independence Day celebrations.
Assisted by Salamander the organising committee, formed entirely of local villagers, planned
and implemented the celebration activities. At the communitys request, Salamander
organised a traditional sports competition for the local children and adults to take place
throughout the day. The competition included:
Panjat pohon pinang (Pinang tree climbing);
Balap karung (Sack race);
Volleyball; and
Badminton.
Salamander also provided the equipment and trophies for each of the events.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 190 of 369

8.6.3 Sports Facilities Renovation in Kerendan and Luwe Hulu Village
In December 2012 Salamander commenced the renovation and construction of sports
facilities in Haragandang, Kerendan, Luwe Hulu and Muara Pari villages identified due to
their proximity to the Bangkanai PSC.
After a series of consultations with local communities it was agreed Salamander would
construct volleyball, badminton and football facilities for each of the villages see Figure 8.2.
As well as being the most popular sports within the area, they also offer the opportunity for
the communities to gather, an important element of Indonesian culture.
Although supervised and facilitated by Salamander, the local community actively
participated in the planning and implementation of the proposed activities. The villagers
elected five representatives to take charge and oversee the completion of the new facilities.
This committee assigned local villager roles; priority was given to those members of the
community who were either unemployed or without permanent work.
The local economy has greatly benefitted from the project. For example, local green grocers
gained economic benefit by providing ingredients for meals for the villagers employed by
the project. In addition, Salamander ensured all materials such as cement, sand, gravel, and
other construction equipment were sourced from the surrounding villages. Where this was
not possible, in the case of heavy duty construction tools, those already used within
Salamanders construction and drilling programs were provided.
Sport facilities in Luwe Hulu were completed in March 2013, while construction in Kerendan
is 90% complete at the time of writing.
Figure 8.2 Sports Facilities constructed by Salamander

8.6.4 Salamander Cup in Lahei Sub-District
To ensure the sports facilities continue to bring communities together a committee,
supervised by Salamander, has been formed to oversee the Salamander Cup. Starting in
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 191 of 369

January 2013, the event allowed 14 surrounding villages to compete against each other in
soccer, volley ball, and badminton. It is hoped the Salamander Cup will become an annual
event, strengthening the relationship of Salamander and the communities in the
neighbouring villages.
8.6.5 Other CSR Contributions
Other CSR programs delivered in 2012 included:
Flood donation to the community of Luwe Hulu; and
Provision of permanent houses for the floating house owners close to the Project jetty
in Luwe Hulu.
A summary of Salamanders 2013 CSR activities is presented in Table 8.1. Activities include
reforestation, provision of clean water, improving a community clinic, construction
community centres and provision of loans for fishermen.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 192 of 369

Table 8.1 Salamander CSR Program 2013
Category Program Objective Partnership Status
Environmental Reforestation
Generate a community-based-strategic-plan
for reforestation program as a part of
forestry permit term of obligation
Consultation with Forestry
Department for identification of
location
In progress

Health
Salamander Cup
Competition of soccer, volley ball, and
badminton between villages surrounding the
Project area
Coordination with National Sport
Committee (KONI)
Annual event since 2013
Clean water, Kerendan
Village
Water well and distribution system for
drinking water and hygiene training
Coordination with local health
agency and public work agency
to form a water committee
Not yet implemented
Community Health
Clinic improvement,
Kerendan Village
Providing appropriate clinic equipment,
basic medicines, and training of local
medical personnel
Work with health agency to
form a health committee
Not yet implemented
Education
Community Library,
Luwe Hulu
Increase reading interest for primary-school-
age-children
Coordination with local
education agency to form a
community library committee
Not yet implemented
Independence day,
Kerendan and Muara
Pari
Celebrate Indonesia Independence Day with
community
Collaborate with Community
Independence Day Committee
Annual program since
2012
School boat
Provide boat for transporting elementary
students to their school to decrease travelling
time and absentee
Collabourate in a School Boat
Committee
In progress
Economy Soft loan for fisherman
Provide soft loan to fisherman at
Kenyamukan and Bontang Village to buy
engine and fishery tools for their boats
Collaborate in a Community
Soft Loan Committee
In progress

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 193 of 369

Category Program Objective Partnership Status
Infrastructure
Sport facilities
Construct badminton, volley ball, and soccer
sport facilities in Kerendan, Muara Pari, and
Haragandang Villages
Work with Community Sport
Committee
Sport facilities in
Kerendan is 90%
completed, while in
Muara Pari and
Haragandang are to
follow
Community Centre,
Kerendan
Build a permanent place for the community
to meet and discuss various communal
program
Work with community to
design, plan, construct, and
manage the facilities
Not yet implemented
Community Centre,
Luwe Hulu
Build a permanent place for the community
to meet and discuss various communal
program
Work with community to
design, plan, construct, and
manage the facilities
Not yet implemented
Total CSR Investment 419,000

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 194 of 369

9 ESIA SCREENING AND SCOPING
9.1 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT
This ESIA addresses all the potential impacts both within the identified Kerendan Cluster,
pipeline and KGPF areas, as well as associated facilities such as the existing access roads and
Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base.
The scope of this impact assessment is to assess the potential impacts of the proposed
activities associated with the Project on the relevant environmental, social, socio-economic
and health resources and receptors. The types of impact considered have been categorised
according to the Phase of the Project and activity/aspect that they are associated with,
describing the nature of the impact is according to the standard criteria provided in Chapter
2 (for example, are they detrimental or beneficial, direct or indirect etc.).
As discussed in Chapter 2, where activities have already occurred, such as the site
preparation, construction and installation of development drilling infrastructure and
development drilling at the Kerendan Cluster, these are subject to a separate Environmental
Action Plan to address any non-conformances with the IFC PS.
9.2 METHODOLOGY
The IA Methodology is discussed in detail in Chapter 4. As discussed, the identification of
impacts starts in screening/scoping and continues through to the impact assessment. The
core activity is the prediction, evaluation and mitigation of impacts.
Predication of impacts is essentially an objective exercise to determine what could potentially
happen due to the development of the Project and any associated activities. The diverse
range of potential impacts considered in the ESIA process results in a wide range of
prediction methods being used including quantitative, semi-quantitative and qualitative
techniques.
Impacts arise as a result of Project activities either through direct interaction or by causing
changes to existing conditions such that an indirect effect occurs. Accurate identification of
potential impacts is the critical first step within the impact assessment process. Following
screening, all proposed Project activities were scoped and a judgement made as to whether
their interaction with the environmental, social or health receptors had the potential to result
in a significant impact.
The following subsections provide the results of the ESIA Screening and Scoping activities.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 195 of 369

9.3 SCREENING RESULTS
As discussed, Salamander received Indonesian Regulatory approval to proceed with the
project, in the form of an updated UKL/UPL dated 2006. ERM understands that Salamander
has received funding from the IFC and as such, has committed to meeting the 2012 IFC
Performance Standards 1- 8 (IFC PS) and also applicable IFC EHS guidelines during the
construction and operation of the project. The Performance Standards provide a clear set of
environmental and standards that should be applied to a project.
The requirements for whether an ESIA is required under IFC PS depend upon the nature and
complexity of the project and prediction of impacts that are likely to occur. These are
embodied within Equator Principle Number One Review and Categorisation. Projects are
generally categorised as:
Category A: Projects with potential significant adverse social or environmental
impacts that are diverse, irreversible or unprecedented, with attributes such as direct
pollution discharges large enough to cause degradation of air, water or soil, large scale
physical disturbance of the site or surroundings, conversion of substantial amounts of
forest and other natural resources, measurable modification of hydrologic cycles, use
of hazardous materials in more than incidental quantities, and involuntary
displacement of people and other significant social disturbances. A Category A project
will require a full ESIA to be undertaken;
Category B: Projects with potential limited adverse social or environmental impacts
which are few in number, generally site specific, largely reversible and readily
addressed through mitigation measures. Typically Category B projects entail
rehabilitation, maintenance or upgrading rather than new construction. Whilst a full
ESIA is not required, some environmental and socio-economic analysis is required;
Category C: Projects with negligible or minimal social or environmental impacts.
These typically include projects with a focus on education, family planning, health
and human resources development. No ESIA or any other form of environmental
analysis is required.
The preliminary view was taken that due to the scale of the Project and potential
environmental impacts, it would likely be classified as a Category A project. This is primarily
determined on the basis that the clearing and habitat disturbance required for the Kerendan
cluster, pipeline and KGPF and access road development. Other considerations on the
associated facilities of Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base and LN power station were also
taken into consideration in making the determination.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 196 of 369

This preliminary categorisation was undertaken to make a decision to develop an ESIA with
the goal of addressing all impacts in a holistic and integrated manner in line with IFC
requirements. Salamander therefore commits to conduct an ESIA based on the requirements
of IFC Performance Standards and EHS Guidelines. At the time of conducting the ESIA, it
was acknowledged that the Kerendan project is in execute and a number of activities have
already taken place, notably at the Kerendan cluster and the Luwe Hulu Logistics Supply
Base, as described in Chapter 3 Project Description. As such, screening was conducted in two
stages, as follows:
Project review ERM completed a review of the project scope based on current
engineering information and also available baseline environmental and social
information. This included details of public consultation activities conducted to date.
ERM also completed a review of the UKL/UPL report.
Following the desktop review, a site visit was conducted to further understand the
projects current construction status and the existing environmental and social context.
This site visit was conducted over three days and a separate site visit report provided.
An audit was conducted for the land use compensation process already completed for
the Kerendan cluster site. The audit reviewed the process and implementation
conducted to date under Indonesian regulations against the IFC standards to produce
recommendations on the process followed.
9.3.1 IFC Gap Assessment
9.3.1.1 Introduction
Initially Salamanders consultants ERM had proposed an IFC gaps analysis as a desk based
exercise however, is was decided to complete a more detailed ESIA screening exercise once it
was confirmed that significant project construction activities had already commenced. It was
accepted that the construction activities would affect the approach to the ESIA and a site visit
was required to assess implementation of Project activities and determine how best to
incorporate IFC PS and EHS requirements into the project. This will be achieved either
through the ESIA process (for proposed activities) or as part of a corrective ESAP required to
update and improve the management of existing Project activities.
ERM reviewed the existing project information including project UKL/UPL, engineering
documentation, existing environmental and social data and current construction
management plans and procedures.
In completing the desktop review ERM undertook the following tasks:
IFC PS Table Preparation ERM has an established template for reviewing project
status against IFC PS requirements; and
Project review ERM completed a review of the project scope based on current
engineering information and also available baseline environmental and social

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 197 of 369

information. This included details of public consultation activities conducted to date.
ERM also completed a review of the UKL/UPL report. ERM expects that further data
and project information will be provided during preparation of the ESIA.
Following the desktop review, a site visit was conducted to further understand the projects
current construction status and the existing environmental and social context. The site visit
was conducted over 2 days and assessed the Kerendan Gas Development Project activities
conducted at that time, as well as the associated facility of Luwe Hulu Supply and Support
Base.
A separate site visit report was submitted to Salamander. Many of the requirements of IFC
PS 1 to 8 can be incorporated into the ESIA for common activities in future phases, however
activities that had concluded were subject to a number of recommendations. Salamander is
reviewing and addressing these through the HSE Management System (refer Chapter 13) as
part of a corrective action plan. These are not discussed further in this ESIA report as the
focus in on predictive potential impact management.
9.3.2 Project Land Use Audit
9.3.2.1 Introduction
Salamander has received financing from the IFC which is also contingent on the Project
meeting the requirements of the IFCs PSs. The IFC Gap Assessment identified that the
impacts associated with the Projects land use had to be assessed against the requirements of
IFC PS 5 and Involuntary Resettlement
11
. Therefore Salamander commissioned ERM to
conduct a Project land use audit to identify key gaps, outstanding issues, potential impacts
and corrective actions to implement moving forward.
The audit included a desktop review of relevant documentation to build on the screening
findings. This was undertaken via discussions with the social team at Salamanders office in
Jakarta and reviewing relevant land documentation provided by Salamander.
The findings of the Project Land Use Audit will be managed through the overarching
Salamander HSE Management System that governs the management of environmental and
social risks of all the Company; activities, as well as the lifetime of the Project (refer
Chapter 13) and as such were scoped out of the ESIA predictive IA Process.
9.4 SCOPING RESULTS
Scoping was undertaken for the potential Area of Influence for the Project (and thus the
appropriate Study Area), to identify potential interactions between the Project and
resources/receptors in the Area of Influence and the impacts that could result from these

11

http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/IFC+Sustainabi
lity/Sustainability+Framework/Sustainability+Framework+-
+2012/Performance+Standards+and+Guidance+Notes+2012/

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 198 of 369

interactions, and to prioritize these impacts in terms of their likely significance.
9.4.1 Interaction Matrix
Potential impacts were identified through a systematic process whereby the features and
activities (both planned and unplanned) associated with the pre-construction, construction,
operation and decommissioning of the Project have been considered with respect to their
potential to interact with resources/receptors. Potential impacts have each been classified in
one of two categories:
No interaction: where the Project is unlikely to interact with the resource/receptor
(e.g., wholly terrestrial projects may have no interaction with the marine
environment); and
Interaction: where there is likely to be an interaction, and the resultant impact has a
reasonable potential to cause a significant effect on the resource/receptor. Potential
positive as well as negative interactions were considered during this process.
As a tool for conducting scoping, the various Project features and activities that could
reasonably act as a source of impact were identified, and these have been listed down the
vertical axis of a Potential Interactions Matrix. The resources/receptors relevant to the
Baseline environment have been listed across the horizontal axis of the matrix.
Each resulting cell on the Potential Interactions Matrix thus represents a potential interaction
between a Project activity and an environmental, social or health resource/receptor. The
completed Potential Interactions Matrix is presented in Table 9.2. Those cells that remain
white are scoped out of further consideration in the IA Process.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 199 of 369

Table 9.1 Scoping Interaction Matrix (A3)
Resource/Receptors Environment Social Health

G
e
o
l
o
g
y

S
o
i
l

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

W
a
t
e
r

G
r
o
u
n
d
w
a
t
e
r

S
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s

F
i
s
h
e
r
i
e
s

V
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n

W
i
l
d
l
i
f
e

A
i
r

N
o
i
s
e
/
V
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

A
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
s

P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
/
P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l

d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

S
o
c
i
a
l
/
C
u
l
t
u
r
a
l

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

E
c
o
n
o
m
y

a
n
d

L
i
v
e
l
i
h
o
o
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

o
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
/
u
s
e

C
u
l
t
u
r
a
l

r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
s
k
i
l
l
s

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
/
P
u
b
l
i
c

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

M
o
r
t
a
l
i
t
y
/
K
e
y

h
e
a
l
t
h

i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

s
a
f
e
t
y

a
n
d

s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y

E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
b
l
e
/
n
o
n

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
b
l
e

d
i
s
e
a
s
e

V
e
c
t
o
r

B
o
r
n
e

D
i
s
e
a
s
e
s

N
u
t
r
i
t
i
o
n
a
l

S
t
a
t
u
s

H
e
a
l
t
h

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
/
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n

L
i
f
e
s
t
y
l
e

f
a
c
t
o
r
s

Activities
PRE-CONSTRUCTION

CONSTRUCTION

Access road construction (power plant)

Construction of groundwater well at KGPF

Construction of wellsite ancillary buildings and facilities

Installation of wellsite structural, mechanical, electrical
components

Pipeline ROW boundary demarcation

Site preparation (clearing and grubbing, topsoil strip)

Pipeline trench excavation

Pipeline installation (stringing and bending, welding,
testing and inspection, joint coating, placement in
trench)

Trench backfilling/reinstatement

Pipeline hydrostatic testing

Tie in and commissioning

KGPF construction (inc pipework, foundations and
ancillary facilities)

KGPC hydrotesting and commissioning

OPERATIONS

Kerendan facilities operation (physical presence)
-/+
Produced water removal and management

Flaring

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 200 of 369

Resource/Receptors Environment Social Health

G
e
o
l
o
g
y

S
o
i
l

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

W
a
t
e
r

G
r
o
u
n
d
w
a
t
e
r

S
e
d
i
m
e
n
t
s

F
i
s
h
e
r
i
e
s

V
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n

W
i
l
d
l
i
f
e

A
i
r

N
o
i
s
e
/
V
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

A
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
s

P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
/
P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l

d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

S
o
c
i
a
l
/
C
u
l
t
u
r
a
l

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

E
c
o
n
o
m
y

a
n
d

L
i
v
e
l
i
h
o
o
d

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

o
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
/
u
s
e

C
u
l
t
u
r
a
l

r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
/
s
k
i
l
l
s

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
/
P
u
b
l
i
c

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

M
o
r
t
a
l
i
t
y
/
K
e
y

h
e
a
l
t
h

i
n
d
i
c
a
t
o
r
s

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

s
a
f
e
t
y

a
n
d

s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y

E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
b
l
e
/
n
o
n

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
b
l
e

d
i
s
e
a
s
e

V
e
c
t
o
r

B
o
r
n
e

D
i
s
e
a
s
e
s

N
u
t
r
i
t
i
o
n
a
l

S
t
a
t
u
s

H
e
a
l
t
h

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
/
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n

L
i
f
e
s
t
y
l
e

f
a
c
t
o
r
s

Activities
ALL PHASES

Workforce presence

-/+ -/+

Resource use

Wastes, emissions and discharges generation, handling
and disposal

Power generation

Vehicle use/transportation (workforce, supply and
support)

-/+

Helicopter supply/support activities

NON-ROUTINE EVENTS

Process upset/Emergency flaring

Spillage of fuel, oil, chemicals and hazardous materials

Gas well blowout

Vessel, vehicle, helicopter accident

Fire/explosions (facilities)

Natural disasters and their implications on operations
(flood, earthquake, lightning)

ASSOCIATEDFACILITIES

Existing access roads

Physical presence (including drainage)
-/+ +
Vehicle use/transportation
+
Maintenance
+ +
Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base

Physical presence

Workforce presence
-/+
Vessel transportation

Wastes, emissions and discharges generation, handling
and disposal

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 201 of 369

9.4.2 Prediction of Impacts
Prediction of impacts is an objective exercise to determine what could potentially happen to
the environment and society (i.e. social, socio-economic and health) as a consequence of the
Project and its associated activities.
It should be noted that the IFC PS describe the standards that should be met throughout the
life of the project to identify and help avoid, mitigate, and manage risks and impacts as a
way of doing business in a sustainable way. They do not define the level of assessment
required to achieve the standards, e.g. how far should the identification of risks associated
with third party or associated facilities extend? This level of definition is typically achieved
during scoping, through early dialogue with the Lender and through periodic
communication through the IA process to ensure alignment and agreement on the
assessment to be conducted to adequately identify and manage the risks. Salamander
management regularly consults with the IFC to communicate the program of work and
approach being followed to manage environmental and social risks of the Project. This
communication was ongoing through the performance of the ESIA work.
Table 9.3 presents the results of scoping for the Project. The following information is
provided for each the impact topics:
Sources of impact: The potential causes or sources of impact for the topic;
Potential impacts of significance: Discussion of the types of impacts that could occur
from construction or operation of the Project based on available information and
existing environmental and social baseline data; and
Proposed assessment approach: An outline of the work required to complete the
assessment and methods used.
The Project/receptor interactions that are likely to lead to significant impacts form the focus
of the impact assessment.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 202 of 369

Table 9.2 Scoping Prediction of Impacts
Activity/ Aspect Resource/Receptor Initial Assessment Proposed Assessment Applicable Standard
Project Land Use Social:
- Social/Cultural Structure
- Economy and Livelihood
- Resource Ownership/Use
- Cultural Resources

Health:
- Nutritional status
Land use and compensation process for the Kerendan cluster and pipeline to KGPF has been
completed and followed Indonesian Regulations. The nearest village is more than 2km
distance therefore there is no physical displacement.

It is acknowledged that potential impacts may have resulted from the process. Therefore the
findings of the Project Land Use Audit will be managed through Salamanders HSE
Management System that governs the management of the environmental and social risks
over the lifetime of the Project (refer to Chapter 13). As such the assessment of these
potential impacts were scoped out of the ESIA predictive IA Process.

This has been scoped out of this ESIA. PS 1: Social and
Environmental Assessment
and Management Systems
PS 5: and Involuntary
Resettlement
PS 7: Indigenous Peoples
PS 8: Cultural Heritage
Employment
opportunities
(including workforce
presence)
Environment:
- Wildlife
- Vegetation
Presence of workers, particularly those employed from the nearby villages may result in the
hunting/trapping of animals or gathering of forest resources as is common practice in the
local communities. Some of these species may be of a vulnerable status.

Disturbance to vegetation outside of approved cleared areas is possible if workers venture
outside of work zones into natural habitat.
Review of biodiversity and species vulnerability
(flora/fauna)
PS 1: Social and
Environmental Assessment
and Management Systems
PS6: Biodiversity
Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Living
Natural Resources
Social:
- Social/Cultural Structure
(+/-)
- Education/skills
- Infrastructure/Public
Services (+/-)

Health:
- Communicable disease
- Lifestyle factors
- Community Safety and
Security
The Project has the potential to have a positive impact on the community through generation
of new employment and training opportunities. Improved disposable income also has the
potential to improve employee lifestyles create flow-on economic benefits in the community
such as through generating greater demand for local businesses/economic activity.

The presence of additional workers in the community has the potential to positively affect
infrastructure and services if the increase in demand results in improved infrastructure and
services for the community.

Conversely, the presence of additional workers in the community may also create negative
impacts such as through causing or accentuating the following:
disturbing existing lifestyles that may be valued by members of the community
transferring communicable diseases
social/cultural tension from the introduction of workers from outside the area with
different cultural values/characteristics
crime or sense of unsafety as a result of non-locals entering the community (even a
perceived risk has the potential to disturb the community)
community safety and security from Project security personnel (human rights
considerations from armed personnel)
negative impacts on the livelihoods and the economic situation of households that may not
receive direct economic benefit, but are exposed to impacts often associated with economic
development (e.g. increase in land prices, increases in cost of goods and services)
increasing demand for infrastructure and goods and services (e.g. medical, transport,
business). This has the potential to negatively affect the community if it results in decreased
access or quality of services and infrastructure available prior to the Project commencing
decrease in traditional lifestyles in the area (hunting/farming) and a change in community
structure if personnel work for the Project instead or pursing/continuing with traditional
roles.
Review of community social (cultural and
demographic structure) and lifestyle through
primary and secondary sources. This information
will be used to inform the Social Impact
Assessment.

Undertake social field visit that includes
consultation with affected communities and visual
assessment of villages and existing environment.
Consultation will help to identify potential impacts,
community concerns and areas of potential
investment for the Project.

investment for the Project
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Environmental and Social
Risks and Impacts
PS2: Labour and Working
Conditions
PS4: Community Health,
Safety, and Security
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 203 of 369

Transportation of
materials/ supplies
and workforce
Environment:
- Air
- Noise and vibration
- Wildlife
Air impacts will be associated with the generation of construction dust from handling,
transport and storage of materials and workers on unsealed roads; and exhaust emissions
from construction traffic, operational traffic, plant and any other exhaust emitting items
associated with the Project.

Noise and vibration impacts can arise from a number of sources during construction and
operation, including from:
movement of construction vehicles on and off site;
diversion of existing local traffic during construction
noise and vibration from operational traffic

Wildlife may be impacted through interactions with vehicles (resulting in injury or
mortality) and disturbance from noise and vibration and dust generation (noise and
vibration and increased dust may deter fauna from the area of impact, which may result in a
localised temporary displacement.
Review existing baseline assessments on Project area
and surrounding environment.

Undertake a terrestrial biodiversity assessment
addressing the requirements of IFC PS6. This is to be
comprised of:
Baseline assessment, including field surveys in
Project area;
Habitat mapping of critical habitats(if applicable);
Assessment of ecosystem services;
Impact assessment; and
Measures to be included in an Environment
Action Plan to negate any negative impacts
identified in the impact assessment.

For noise, identify sensitive receptors, and provide a
quantitative assessment of the predicted impacts
from construction and operation. Mitigation
measures will then be developed for
implementation.
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS3: Resource Efficiency and
Pollution Prevention
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
PS8: Cultural Heritage
Social:
(+/-)
Services

Health:
- Environmental Quality
- Lifestyle factors
Security
The transportation of workers, materials and supplies to and from site has the potential to
impact communities in the following way:
increased risk of traffic related incidents with increase in traffic activity (e.g. car accidents)
transportation requirements may have a positive economic effect if local businesses
and/or contractors are be employed to transport workers and materials to and from site
increased transport demand may also open up opportunities for improved transport
services which may improve access to community infrastructure and services for local
communities
improved access to infrastructure and services (which in turn has the potential to affect
their livelihood and economic situation). The project area needs to be accessible on a daily
basis therefore Salamander has invested and will continue to invest in developing and
upgrading transport networks.

By increasing traffic in the area, the project also has the potential to have a negative impact
on infrastructure and services the community currently use as a result of increased demand
and use by the Project. This may have flow-on effects if the increase in demand prevents the
community from accessing certain areas and/or the impacts associated with increased traffic
(e.g. dust generation) affects their health and/or economic livelihood.
Review of community social (cultural and
demographic structure) and lifestyle through
primary and secondary sources. This information
will be used to inform the Social Impact
Assessment.

investment for the Project Undertake social field
visit that includes consultation with affected
communities and visual assessment of villages and
existing environment. Consultation will help to
identify potential impacts, community concerns and
areas of potential investment for the Project
Site preparation (e.g.
clearing, grubbing,
grading, topsoil
storage, levelling,
compacting)
Environment:
- Soil
- Surface Water
- Vegetation
- Wildlife
- Air
- Noise/Vibration

Site preparation will require the disturbance of soils, potentially within steep areas which
may be subject to slope instability. Additionally, there will be an increase in the amount of
exposed soil, therefore there is the potential for increased sediment and other contaminants
to make their way into the river systems.

Construction and earthworks likely to generate dust terms. Exhaust emissions from plant
and equipment involved in site preparation may temporarily impact air quality in the
immediate area. Additionally, emissions of greenhouse gases and particulates have the
potential to contribute to anthropogenic climate change

Impacts on vegetation include a direct loss of habitat which has the potential to affect
biodiversity values and wildlife. Vegetation may also be impacted by dust and changes to air
quality (smothering may affect transpiration and photosynthesis process). Wildlife may be
affected directly or indirectly through interactions with machinery and personnel, and
Undertake soil and water sampling in the Project
area to identify baseline conditions that can be used
for baseline assessment and use in future
monitoring of activities.

In terms of surface and groundwater impacts, it is
proposed to develop some basic Project parameters
(instead of undertaking detailed catchment
modelling, or quantitative assessment of impacts),
undertake an impact assessment based on baseline
information and develop an appropriate suite of
management, mitigation and monitoring measures.

Review existing baseline assessments on Project area
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 204 of 369

impacts on habitat (e.g. loss of habitat or impacts to habitat/habitat use as a results of noise
and vibration and dust impacts)

Noise and vibration impacts during site preparation will predominantly occur from the
operation of machinery and equipment.

and surrounding environment. Undertake a
terrestrial biodiversity assessment addressing the
requirements of IFC PS6 (See Transportation above).

from construction and operation. Mitigation
measures will then be developed for
implementation.
Social:
- Resource ownership/use
Potential direct impacts to tangible and intangible heritage caused by disturbance of the
ground and/or loss of community access to areas.

Increased dust/reduction in air quality and generation of noise and vibration may cause
general disturbance to the community.

Economy and livelihood may be affected through removal of vegetation converting forest
areas that are used by local communities for farming, hunting and gathering of non-timber
products (NTPs), primarily for subsistence use. Similarly, livelihood may also be affected if
resources surrounding Project activities are impacted by dust or other factors associated with
the Project (e.g. contamination of local waterways used by locals for fishing)
Review existing data sources.

Consultation will help to identify potential impacts
associated with construction, community concerns
surrounding the Project
Health:
- Vector Borne Diseases
Dust and air impacts could potentially impact human health, both of workers and
surrounding communities.

Alteration of surface hydrology/drainage may lead to water pooling and stagnation which
may result in an increase in mosquito breeding and spread of associated diseases (malaria,
dengue).
Pipeline trench
excavation,
backfilling and
surface restoration
Environment:- Soil-
Wildlife- Vegetation- Air-
Noise/Vibration- Surface
water
Environmental impacts associated with trenching are similar to those associated with site
preparation including: soil exposure - potential for impact on sediment loads in local
waterways from water runoff; wind blown soil/dust impacting adjacent vegetation noise
and vibration impacts from machinery and equipment used to complete the activity (may
deter fauna from using the surrounding area) loss of topsoil - if topsoil is washed away,
this may affect future rehabilitation/re-vegetation dust generation and exhaust emissions
(air quality impacts) generated during excavation and operation of machinery and
equipment (potential to impact surrounding vegetation through smothering effects)Wildlife
may also be impacted by open trenches if they are left open - may impede movement
between forested areas and/or fauna may become trapped in the trenches, resulting in
injury or mortality.
Apply same level of assessment as Site
PreparationConfirm pipeline methodology and
length of time trench will be open, to assist in
assessment of impacts to wildlife from trench
excavation.
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
Social:
- Economy and livelihood (-)
Cultural artefacts may be uncovered during the excavation of material.

Increased dust/reduction in air quality and generation of noise and vibration may cause
general disturbance to the community.

Economy and livelihood may be affected if resources surrounding Project activities are
impacted by dust or other factors associated with the construction of trenches (e.g.
contamination of local waterways used by locals for fishing)
Assess likelihood of cultural resources occurring in
the area based on secondary and primary data,
including outcomes of community consultation and
research on cultural heritage values in the area.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 205 of 369

Health:
- Vector Borne Diseases
Security
Pipeline trenches that are unfenced and/or unmanned during the testing procedure may
present a safety risk to community members using the access roads or surrounding forest.

Dust and air impacts could potentially impact human health, both of workers and
surrounding communities. Similarly, community health may be impacted if alteration of
surface hydrology/drainage leads to water pooling/stagnation and increases in mosquito
breeding areas, and subsequent spread of associated diseases (malaria, dengue)
Review process of design and HSE management
controls.
Construction of
buildings and
facilities
Environment:
- Air
- Noise/Vibration
- Wildlife
- Aesthetics (Lighting)
The main impacts associated with the construction of buildings and facilities at KGPF and
Kerendan Cluster include the following:
air quality - dust generation and emissions associated with the operation of machinery and
equipment used to construct facilities
noise and vibration during the operation of machinery and equipment
lighting associated with night construction

Air quality may be impacted by construction of buildings and facilities as a result of dust
generation (predominantly from movement of machinery/equipment/vehicles) and exhaust
emissions from plant and equipment. Impacts will be temporary and likely restricted to the
immediate area. Construction of sealed surfaces at the KGPF will assist in reducing impacts
associated with dust generation during construction

Fauna may be deterred from the area of activity as a result of noise and vibration and
lighting impacts (lighting impacts restricted to construction activities undertaken on a 24
hour basis) which could lead to temporary displacement.
Apply same level of assessment as Site Preparation PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
Health:
Increased dust/reduction in air quality could potentially impact human health (both of
workers and surrounding communities) and cause general disturbance to the community.
Similarly, the community may be impacted by noise. The nearest village to the area of
activity if Kerendan which is approximately 2 km from Kerendan Cluster
controls.

Drilling
(groundwater well at
KGPF)
Environment:
- Groundwater
- Wildlife
- Vegetation
- Noise and Vibration
- Air
Drilling groundwater wells has the potential to result in impacts to:
wildlife and local community from the presence of equipment and noise/vibration;
air emissions, waste and discharges (refer air, waste sections);
interference/alteration of the groundwater system/aquifer;
surrounding vegetation (directly through smothering from dust generation and/or
indirectly through potential interference with groundwater systems)
Addressed in other sections
Social:
- Cultural resources

Health:
Potential for community impacts if environmental quality is negatively affected as a result of
increased noise and vibration, air quality impacts, and contamination.

Resource use may be impacted if Project groundwater use affects availability of water for
local communities (refer resource use) which could potentially lead to subsequent impacts
on nutrition.

Potential direct impacts to tangible and intangible heritage caused by ground disturbance.
Addressed in other sections PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
Resource use Environment:
- Groundwater

Social:

Health:
- Nutritional status
The use of local resources has the potential for positive and negative impacts:
positive impacts from the generation of income and demand for services in the local
economy;
native impact from over-demand affecting availability of goods and services for the local
population;
induced inflation from over demand resulting in escalation of prices and affect on local
community cost of living or affordability of goods.
use of community resources (e.g. groundwater) reducing natural supply/availability
levels.
Confirm resource needs of the project, including
water balance study
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 206 of 369

Installation and
testing of facilities
(including electrical
and mechanical
components)
Environment:- Soil-
Wildlife- Air-
Noise/Vibration- Surface
Water
Installation and testing of facilities has the potential to cause air and noise vibration impacts
through the use of machinery and equipment. If trenches are left open, wildlife could
potentially become trapped in the trenches, resulting in injury or mortality.Soil may also be
impacted in areas where the surface has been cleared and is exposed to the elements (e.g.
wind, rainfall) and vehicle use. This may result in erosion impacts (e.g. from wind-blown
soil and run off during periods of high rainfall) and/or air quality impacts from dust
generation.Local waterways have the potential to be impacted by hydrotesting as they will
be used as a source and discharge point for hydrotest water.
Confirm pipeline installation method to determine
whether vegetation impacts are likely to
occurReview existing baseline assessments on
Project area and surrounding
environment.Undertake a terrestrial biodiversity
assessment addressing the requirements of IFC PS6
(see Site Preparation)
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
Social:

Health:
Security
- Nutrition
Pipeline trenches that are unfenced and/or unmanned during the testing procedure may
present a safety risk to the community that use the area.

The community uses the river for drinking and fishing therefore negative impacts on local
waterways from contaminated hydrotest water could potentially affect resource use (e.g.
water source and fishing) and subsequently nutrition if the ability to source clean drinking
water or aquatic food resources is impacted.
controls.

Confirm community resource use using consultation
data and potential for impact
Physical presence
and operation of
infrastructure
Environment:
- Soil
- Wildlife
- Surface water
- Groundwater
- Air
- Aesthetics
- Noise/Vibration
Soil, surface water and groundwater may be impacted by the presence and operation of
infrastructure as a result of the following:
use of groundwater as a potable and non-potable water source (a groundwater well will be
drilled at KGPF and water treated and stored in tanks for site use);
drainage systems (freshwater/stormwater runoff directed to the environment); and
erosion of unsealed areas during periods of high rainfall (loss of soil, increased
sedimentation in local waterways)

Operations will occur 24 hours a day, therefore there is potential for lighting and noise and
vibration impacts.

The presence of infrastructure has the potential to affect wildlife either directly through
displacement and loss of foraging/nesting/roosting habitat, and indirectly from impacts
associated with the operation of facilities such as noise and vibration and lighting

Impacts on air quality may also occur from operation of the facility - see Waste section for air
impacts associated with operations
Assessment of drainage systems to be constructed
and proposed management and monitoring
measures to be implemented to ensure water
directed to the environment is not contaminated.
Similarly, identify potential for groundwater
contamination at proposed well location.

Assess suitability of soil stockpile storage
method/locations (if applicable)

Undertake a terrestrial biodiversity assessment
addressing the requirements of IFC PS6 (see Site
Preparation)

from operation. Mitigation measures will then be
developed for implementation.

Review of the light source characteristics and
establishment of light emissions influence zones
considering the environmental and social receptors.
The outputs of these will be utilised to assess
impacts to the adjoining human and ecological
receptors.
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 207 of 369

Social:
Services
(+/-)

Health:
The presence of infrastructure has the potential to disturb the community in ways such as
loss of access (can no longer use the area) and changes to the existing environment (refer ,
land clearing). Continued exclusion from the area removes the use of the land for possible
planting and harvesting.

Noise/vibration, light from operations may impact local communities using the area and
local community villages if propagation of emissions is visible/audible.

Use of groundwater for potable and non-potable water source (a groundwater well will be
drilled at KGPF and water treated and stored in tanks for site use) has the potential to affect
groundwater resources (quantity).

Project also has the potential to improve infrastructure and services either through direct
investment (e.g. CSR programs) or indirectly through the continual maintenance of access
roads, which may improve accessibility between communities/main population centres (and
subsequently improve access to surrounding community infrastructure and services,
education and economic opportunities).
Review existing data sources.

investment for the Project
Wastes, emissions
and discharges
generation, handling
and disposal
Environment:
- Surface water
- Ground water
- Air
- Soil
- Wildlife
There will be a number of sources of waste during the construction and operational phases
requiring disposal. This includes domestic waste associated with onsite workers, and general
construction/operational waste. Disposal of these in a manner that is environmental
unsound could lead to impacts off site.

Exhaust emissions from construction traffic, operational traffic, plant and any other exhaust
emitting items associated with the Project that have the potential to change the local air
quality. The composition of engine exhaust emissions is expected to be primarily NOX and
CO with small quantities of hydrocarbons.

Emissions of greenhouse gases and particulates during construction and operations have the
potential to contribute to anthropogenic climate change. The generation of air emissions
from construction activities however will be short-term and intermittent.

Produced water will be generated as a result of the Project however this will be reinjected
after going through treatment at the KGPF (reinjected via a water pipeline from KGPF to
Kerendan Cluster).

Incorrect management of waste may attract fauna to the area (pest/native), potentially
resulting in changes to natural behaviour or outbreaks of pest species.
Waste inventories and disposal methods will be
outlined in ESIA.

Assessment of predicted impacts of air pollutants
including Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) , carbon
monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM10) and
hydrocarbons by comparison with air quality
objectives. GHG emissions inventory and develop a
basic greenhouse gas reporting framework to be
implemented during the project.

Assurance of waste management systems (treatment
& discharge), and produced water reinjection
requirements

Review of the light source characteristics and
establishment of light emissions influence zones
considering the environmental and social receptors.
The outputs of these will be utilised to assess
impacts to the adjoining human and ecological
receptors.
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
Social: - Economy and
Livelihood - Resource
ownership/useHealth: -
Environmental quality -
Vector borne diseases -
Community Safety and
Security - Nutrition
Waste management, treatment and disposal could lead to impacts on the community by
changing the environment in which they live, affecting their lifestyles or economic livelihood
(e.g. impacts to water quality and effects on the fishing industry), health and safety (e.g.
through exposure to hazardous materials), and increasing risk of spreading disease (e.g.
from sanitation impacts).
Consultation will help to identify concerns
associated with the Project and characteristics of
each village which will assist in identifying
significance of impacts associated with waste on
affected communities.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 208 of 369

Non-
routine/unplanned
events
Environment:
- Soil
- Surface water
- Groundwater
- Wildlife
- Vegetation
- Noise and Vibration
- Air
- Aesthetics (lighting)
Although unlikely to occur, non-routine or unplanned events have the potential to result in a
number of environmental impacts such as the following:
Atmospheric emissions, noise and visual/lighting impacts during flaring
Impacts on soil, surface and groundwater from accidental releases or spills of fuels or
chemicals stored on site
Loss of habitat and impacts to wildlife as a result of an explosion or fire, or flaring
Noise and vibration impacts associated with flaring and explosions
Hazard and Risk Analysis for construction and
operations

Assess the status and process of emergency
management planning for the Project as appropriate
for the current stage of design
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS2: Labour and Working
Conditions
Social:

Health:
Security
- Nutrition
Impacts associated with non-routine or unplanned events have the potential to effect
communities in the following ways:
loss of land/crops as a result of an explosion or fire
temporary disturbance associated with flaring (noise, lighting/visual)
impacts on health and safety as a result of hazardous chemical release and loss of
resources
Review HAZID and other risk assessment
documents.

Confirm community resource use using consultation
data and potential areas of impact
Associated Facilities

Luwe Hulu -
Physical Presence
Environment:
- Soil
- Surface water
- Groundwater
- Air
- Aesthetics
- Noise/Vibration
Soil, surface water and groundwater may be impacted by the presence and operation of
infrastructure as a result of the following:
use of groundwater as a potable and non-potable water source may deplete supply
(community water well is used for water supply to the facility); and
drainage systems (freshwater/stormwater runoff directed to the environment).

Noise/vibration, light from operations may impact local faunal populations if propagation
of emissions is visible/audible.

Impacts on air quality may also occur from operation of the facility.
Review Scoping Report which involved assessment
of Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base and
describes existing facilities
PS1: Assessment and
Management of
Risks and Impacts
PS6: Biodiversity
Natural Resources
Social:
Services

Health:
Security
The presence of infrastructure has the potential to disturb the community (can no longer use
the area) although community members continue to access through the site which presents a
health and safety risk (not wearing appropriate PPE, may be unaware of risks associated
with the operation of the base etc.)

Noise/vibration, light from operations may impact local communities using the area and
local community villages if propagation of emissions is visible/audible.

Use of groundwater for potable and non-potable water source (community water well is
used for water supply to the facility). Use of the river for transportation has the possibility
to interfere with other river users (community, commercial).

Potential for local infrastructure and services to be improved either through direct
investment (e.g. CSR programs) or indirectly through the maintenance of infrastructure
which may improve accessibility between communities/main population centres (and
subsequently improve access to surrounding community infrastructure and services,
education and economic opportunities). Presence of the base may also have a positive impact
on local businesses through increased economic activity and demand for local goods and
services.

Uncontrolled access for the local community which is passing through the site without safety
PPE.
Review of social field data collected during visit to
Luwe Hulu community

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 209 of 369

10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
10.1 INTRODUCTION
The overall approach to the rating and evaluation of impacts follows the methodology
presented in Chapter 4. This Section provides greater detail in the evaluation of the
significance of environmental impacts identified during Scoping. Where resource/receptor
specific magnitude or sensitivity/vulnerability definitions apply, these are discussed in the
relevant subsections.
10.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT RESULTS
The results of the full environmental impact assessment are provided in Annex H. The
following sections identify and discuss the predicted positive and negative environmental
impacts associated with construction, operation and decommissioning of the Project. The
focus is on the impacts likely to be experienced by proposed Project activities at the
Kerendan cluster, KGPF and connecting pipelines to from the production site to KGPF and
onward to the PLN power station site. The associated facilities of the Luwe Hulu Supply and
Support Base and access roads are also considered. Whilst the PLN Power station is
considered an associated facility by the definition of the IFC, it is not assessed as Salamander
has no direct influence on the construction or operational performance of the facility.
Most of the impacts are similar across both the construction and operation phases of the
Project, that is, only the magnitude or location of the impact may differ. Therefore, the
following discussion combines construction and operational impacts unless significant
differences between the impacts during the two phases are anticipated. Post-operational
effects of the Project are largely unknown at this time since the Kerendan Gas Development
Project post-operational requirements have yet to be defined beyond initial plans to hand
over the Project to a state operator.
The following sub-sections present the assessment results for the environmental impacts
identified through Scoping.
10.3 IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL FLORA
Potential and actual impacts on vegetation resulting from the Project include:
Direct and indirect loss of vegetation from land clearance;
Degradation of vegetation communities from introduction and spread of invasive
and/or exotic species;
Physical disturbance from activities of the workforce; and
Project-related traffic and physical presence, including related dust and vegetation
smothering.
The significance of impact on flora may vary according to the Project activity or aspect,
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 210 of 369

therefore a separate discussion and evaluation of impacts for each activity or aspect is
provided below. Mitigation and management measures and residual impact assessment are
addressed where required.
10.3.1 Direct Loss of Vegetation from Land Clearing
Discussion of Impacts
Approximately 57 ha of vegetation will be directly impacted by the Project by vegetation
clearing. This includes vegetation that has already been cleared for the construction of the
Wellhead Cluster Pad and adjoining workers camp; helipad and flyway; and access roads
that link the Cluster Pad to main road (near PLN power plant location), via KGPF.
Vegetation in the Project area consists predominantly of Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary
Forest, with some pioneer vegetation. Plantations (e.g. rubber) were present along sections of
the Sales Gas and Gathering Pipeline routes and at the Kerendan Wellsite.
Vegetation in the Project is generally a mixture of modified and natural vegetation that has
changed as a result of ongoing clearing activities to support local community needs (e.g.
timber production and plantation farming). The greatest level of modification was observed
at the Kerendan Wellsite and along the pipeline routes/access roads, where habitat has been
cleared or disturbed as a result of previous and ongoing clearing activities. That said, the
project area including KGPF still contains stands of secondary forest which contain flora
species of conservation significance. Impacts to these species are assessed separately at
Chapter 10.3.4. The vegetation also provides habitat for locally occurring fauna species.
Impact Evaluation and Significance
Given the total area of vegetation to be cleared and the modified nature of the Project area,
the impact from land clearing is assessed as negative and Moderate.
Table 10.1 Loss of Vegetation from Land Clearing Activities
Impact Description Direct loss of vegetation and flora species as a result of land clearing
activities
Impact Nature Positive Negative
Impact Type Direct Indirect
Impact Extent Low Medium High
Impact Duration Short term Medium
term
Long term/ irreversible
Impact Scale Low Medium High
Frequency Low Moderate High
Magnitude Negligible Small Medium Large
Sensitivity/Vulnerability Low Medium High
Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 211 of 369

Additional Mitigation Measures, Management, and Monitoring
Timber that is produced from clearing is currently the property of the Forestry Department.
Salamander also intends to use some of the cleared timber for constructing facilities upon
approval from the Forestry Department.
Vegetation clearing cannot be avoided therefore a number of management and monitoring
measures in place to ensure impacts associated with vegetation clearing are minimised and
do not result in disturbance to surrounding vegetation:
Vegetation clearing only in designated areas for the project footprint; and
No disturbance to vegetation outside marked areas;
Topsoil will be stored separately during clearing and will be used to fill and level the
area once grubbing activities have been completed, thereby maintaining the seed
bank;
Pipeline will be installed along the road thereby reducing the land requirements and
associated vegetation clearance; and
Pipeline ROW will be re-vegetated following installation.
Significance of Residual Impact
While the management measures listed above will assist in managing vegetation clearing
activities and ensuring impacts on surrounding vegetation is minimised, the significance
rating for loss of vegetation will be Minor. Vegetation loss will be subject to an offset
program whereby Salamander will re-vegetate an area away from the Project, subject to
discussion with the Forestry Department (note: impacts on loss of habitat are addressed in
Section 10.4.1).
10.3.2 Impacts on Vegetation from other Project activities
Aspects of the Project that have the potential to impact vegetation surrounding the Project
area include the following:
Activities that generate dust or impact quality (if impact results in adverse impacts on
plant physiology);
Small spills or incorrect waste storage (e.g. vegetation may be indirectly impacted
through soil contamination); and
Project personnel (potential for vegetation disturbance if workers go outside cleared
boundaries into forested areas and/or partake in the gathering of plant resources, a
common practice in the local community).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 212 of 369

There is potential for accidental spillages to occur, however the design process includes
controls for managing and controlling waste through the installation of separate drainage
systems. Any spillages will likely be contained within these systems or contained within the
cleared area.
Dust generation is a potential impact, however this is likely to be negligible during
operations due to lower traffic volumes and presence of sealed surfaces. The greatest level of
impact from dust will occur during construction (particularly during clearing) which is a
temporary but medium significance impact given the sensitivity of the area due to high
levels of background dust generation.
Given the above, the evaluation of the extent and severity of indirect impacts on vegetation
from Project activities is subsequently considered Minor.
Table 10.2 Impacts on Vegetation from other Project Activities
Impact Description
Impacts to vegetation and flora species as a result of Project activities,
including vegetation smothering from dust generation
Impact Duration Short term Medium term Long term/ irreversible
Management and mitigation measures currently in place which will help minimise indirect
impacts to vegetation from Project activities are consistent with those described in above, in
Section . Additional mitigation measures include:
Dust suppression on access roads;
Speed limits (40 km hour or 15 km/hr near worksite and where a road passes
villages);
Personnel not allowed to capture or remove flora or plant products from site; and
Restricting work to designated/cleared boundaries.
With the implementation of the above measures, the significance rating for indirect impacts
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 213 of 369

to vegetation from Project activities is considered Negligible.
10.3.3 Invasion and Spread of Invasive and/or Exotic Flora Species
The influx of foreign workers, equipment, and materials may spread or introduce invasive
and/or exotic flora species to the Project area. Invasive species are native or non-native
species that cause ecological or economic problems (e.g., outcompeting indigenous species or
altering the existing ecological community through rapid development of monocultures).
Exotic species are those species that have been introduced, or moved, by human activities
to a location where they do not naturally occur.
Invasive and/or exotic plants are a concern because they can quickly form self-sustaining
monocultures that out-compete native plants and/or reduce the quality of wildlife habitat.
Highly invasive species can reduce the amount of available nutrients, light, and water
available to native species. Invasive species are typically fast growing and can spread easily,
so a small or insignificant disturbance can quickly cause widespread impacts if conditions
favour explosive growth of the invasive species in question. Ground disturbance related to
construction and operational activities and distribution of topsoil during vegetation
rehabilitation may contribute to dispersal of seeds of invasive and exotic species.
Vegetation and habitat in the Project area is predominantly modified. Construction of access
roads and ground disturbance activities may increase the risk of weeds spreading in the local
area however it is unlikely to results in significant impacts to the quality of existing habitat.
Therefore impacts associated with the introduction and spread of invasive and/or exotic
flora species on vegetation is assumed minor. Progressive vegetation rehabilitation and
implementation of a robust weed management program to control invasive and exotic
species may help manage this potential impact to a negligible significance.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 214 of 369

Table 10.3 summarises the impacts anticipated to native vegetation from the introduction
and spread of invasive and exotic species.
Table 10.3 Impacts to Native Vegetation as Result of the Introduction of Invasive or
Alien Species
Impact Description
Impacts to native vegetation communities as a result of the introduction
and spread of invasive and/or exotic flora species.

Although the habitat in the Project area is modified, there are areas that contain natural
habitat and pioneer species. Based on the impact assessment findings, no additional
mitigation or management measures were considered necessary.
The impact associated with the introduction of invasive or alien species to the Project area is
considered Negligible.
10.3.4 Impacts to Threatened Flora Species
Three threatened flora species were recorded in the Project area during the 2013 Biodiversity
survey. These were Hopea ferruginea, Shorea lamellatae (White Meranti) and Parashorea
malaanonan (White Seraya), which are currently listed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN
redlist of threatened species. These species are all canopy tree species that occur within the
region, including Brunei and Malaysia and in some instances Sumatra. White Seraya for
example is one of the most commercially important timber species in northern Borneo. These
species were recorded at the KGPF site and along the pipeline route and were a dominant
canopy and sapling species at most vegetation plots. Based on known distribution these
species are likely to be relatively common within the local area wherever similar stands of
secondary forest occur. This reflects the fact that these species are not necessarily restricted
to the project area, but are instead under threat regionally as a result of land clearing
activities (refer Chapter 12 Cumulative Impacts).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 215 of 369

Most of the clearing in the Project area has been completed therefore impacts on threatened
flora species are predicted based on ERMs understanding of the vegetation composition of
the project site and surrounding vegetation communities. At the time of the biodiversity
survey, sections of the KGPF footprint had been cleared. Clearing was completed before
threatened plant specimens collected during the KGPF survey were identified through the
Ministry of Forestry. Given the relative dominance of these tree species within the secondary
forest communities, quantification of the precise number of these species was not considered
necessary as it was unlikely to assist in informing the impact assessment process, particularly
as species dominance within surrounding vegetation communities could not be quantified at
this stage.
Given most clearing in the Project area has been completed. Further clearing will be minimal
as the pipeline will be installed along the side of the existing access road. In this instance,
mitigation actions cannot be applied as vegetation has been cleared, although it is assumed
that this clearing will have affected the conservation significant species recorded during the
biodiversity survey, therefore the impact significance has been assessed as Moderate. This
finding is primarily attributed to the relatively small area of secondary forest that would be
removed as a result of the project, and likely species presence in surrounding areas, where
similar vegetation communities occur.
Table 10.4 Impacts to Threatened Flora Species from Clearing Activities
Impact Description Impacts to threatened flora species from clearing activities

The following will mitigate and manage impacts to threatened flora species from habitat
clearing:
Re-vegetation along the pipeline ROW as discussed previously will aid in the recovery
of shallow rooted vegetation habitat;
Implementation of the re-vegetation program discussed earlier to offset net vegetation
losses.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 216 of 369

While re-vegetation is proposed, the residual significance of impact on these species from
clearing remains Moderate, requiring further assessment through Salamanders
environmental and social management programs. This will be carried through to be
addressed through review and assessment under the framework of Salamanders HES
Management System (refer Chapter 13).
10.4 IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL FAUNA
Impacts on fauna resulting from the Project include:
Loss of habitat from land clearance;
Mortality from Project-related traffic and hunting;
Impacts from pipeline construction;
Habitat fragmentation;
Impacts to behaviour from operation of facilities, equipment and machinery;
Impacts on fauna species listed as threatened on the IUCN redlist.
As with flora, the significance of impact on fauna may vary according to the Project activity
or aspect, therefore a separate discussion and evaluation of impacts for each activity or
aspect is provided below. Mitigation and management measures and residual impact
assessment are addressed where required.
10.4.1 Loss of Habitat as a Result of Land Clearing
Clearing land to construct the Project will directly remove habitat used by wildlife habitat
within the footprints of excavations, access, roads, pipeline ROW and other Project-
associated infrastructure, such as the KGPF site. The act of clearing land will not only
remove the habitat, but may result in fauna mortality if those species are not able to avoid
the area or adapt to loss of their habitat.
Although somewhat disturbed, the vegetation in the Project area provides habitat for a range
of different fauna species. Some tall stands of Dipterocarpaceae with dense canopies still
stand, which combined with lianas (woody vines) likely provide useful connections for
fauna moving between habitats. No specific habitats such as nesting or roosting habitat were
identified in the Project footprint, however species may use the area for foraging.
While it is considered likely that fauna in the area of impact will continue to persist within
the local area due to the availability of equal habitat in the vicinity, the area of vegetation to
be removed, coupled with the likely ongoing operational impacts is likely to result in
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 217 of 369

impacts to local faunal communities.
Construction activities will occur successively, specific to the areas being cleared which will
allow mobile wildlife to disperse to less disturbed areas. Although these measures will not
fully counteract the negative effects of the Project, they will minimise impacts to some extent.
Table 10.5 provides the evaluation of the extent and severity of impacts related to wildlife
mortality and wildlife habitat loss as negative and Minor.
Table 10.5 Impacts to Fauna from Loss of Habitat as a result of Land Clearing
Impact Description Fauna habitat loss as a result of land clearing activities

Clearing of habitat is required to develop the Project, however the following management
measures will assist in ensuring that impacts to vegetation area minimised and impacts on
surrounding habitat are minimised:
Vegetation clearing cannot be avoided. The following management and monitoring
measures will assist in ensuring impacts associated with vegetation clearing and disturbance
to surrounding habitats is minimised:
Vegetation clearing only in designated areas for the project footprint; and
No disturbance to vegetation outside marked areas;
Topsoil will be stored separately during clearing and will be used to fill and level the
area once grubbing activities have been completed, thereby maintaining the seed
bank;
Pipeline will be installed along the road thereby reducing the land requirements and
associated vegetation clearance; and
Pipeline ROW will be re-vegetated following installation.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 218 of 369

While the management measures listed above will assist in managing vegetation clearing
activities and ensuring impacts on surrounding vegetation is minimised, residual impacts on
wildlife mortality and wildlife habitat loss are Negligible.
10.4.2 Mortality from Project Related Traffic and Hunting
Traffic-related injury and mortality of wildlife may occur along Project access roads. In
addition, the communities in the area commonly hunt for species in the surrounding forest.
New access roads may provide access for hunters to reach new areas of forest habitat.
Where the Project employs workers from the local community, these workers may conduct
hunting in the Project area consistent with their traditions. Bringing in workers from
neighbouring communities may increase this pressure on local wildlife.
In newly opened and cleared areas surrounding the Project footprint and access roads, the
following factors may combine to increase the severity of traffic-related and hunting-related
impacts on wildlife:
Forest clearing for roads may expose new areas of wildlife to hunting and traffic
pressures;
Wildlife in these areas may be less accustomed to human presence and less
behaviourally adept at avoidance; and
These areas may contain a higher percentage of disturbance intolerant species, which
will likely move away from their established home ranges to avoid disturbance. These
individuals will be more susceptible than usual to hunting and roadkill as they move
through unfamiliar territory.
Considering that the Project is located in an area with production forest and modified
habitat, with human activity as well as hunting already common, impacts on wildlife are
predicted to be negative and minor (Table 10.6).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 219 of 369

Table 10.6 Impacts to Fauna as a Result of Hunting and Traffic Pressures
Impact Description Fauna habitat loss as a result of land clearing activities

Mitigation and management measures currently adopted by Project which will assist in
reducing impacts on fauna in terms of hunting and traffic pressures include the following:
Personnel not allowed to capture or remove fauna from site;
Restricting work to designated/cleared boundaries;
Limit 24 hour construction to uninterruptible/essential activities (such as concreting);
and
Speed limits (maximum speed limits of 15 kph at worksites and near accommodation;
maximum 60 kph on open highway; maximum 40 kph for heavy machinery
operations).
With the implementation of the above mitigation and management measures, the
significance of traffic and hunting pressures on fauna is considered Negligible.
10.4.3 Impacts to Fauna as a result of Pipeline Construction and Habitat Fragmentation
Forest habitat will be fragmented in several areas as a result of the project, primarily at the
Project facilities footprint and along the access road routes. Species richness in isolated
fragments decreases with time after excision from continuous forest, and small fragments
often have fewer species recorded for the same effort of observation than large fragments or
areas of continuous forest. Animals that are large, sparsely distributed, or very specialised
and intolerant of edge effects are particularly prone to impact from forest fragments (Turner,
1996).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 220 of 369

Evaluation and Significance of Impact
The presence of the Project may reduce fauna movement but most mobile and tolerant
species will still be able to traverse between habitat areas on either side of the facilities and
access roads (only above ground facilities such as the KGPF and Wellhead Cluster Pad will
be fenced). The pipeline will be trenched and backfilled in sections, thereby minimising
impacts to fauna movement between forested areas. Construction the pipeline in sections
will also reduce the risk of fauna falling into trenches. It is anticipated that trenches will be
open for no longer than 3 days.
In time it is predicted that species will adapt to the new environment and will continue to
access or traverse pipeline corridors. The pipeline ROW will be reinstated following pipeline
installation and testing. There is the potential for fauna species to enter the Project facilities
and be injured or killed, however fencing these areas will help minimise this risk.
Given the above, impacts to fauna as a result of pipeline construction and habitat
fragmentation and disturbance are assessed as Negligible. The pipeline construction
methodology reduces the level of impact as far as reasonable practicable through
constructing in sections and reducing the amount of time trenches are open.
Table 10.7 Impacts to Fauna as a Result of Pipeline Construction and Habitat
Fragmentation
Impact Description
Potential impacts to Fauna as a result of pipeline construction and habitat
fragmentation

10.4.4 Impacts to Fauna Behaviour from Operation of Facilities, Equipment and
Machinery
The primary impacts on fauna are likely to be associated with vegetation clearing and
subsequent habitat loss. However, the Project also has the potential to affect fauna behaviour
through generation of dust, noise and vibration and light from traffic and operation of
Project facilities, equipment and machinery. Storage of organic waste on site also has the
potential to attract fauna to the area, including pest species.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 221 of 369

Given construction activities will be temporary, impacts on fauna have been assessed as
Negligible. Operational activities will occur over a longer period of time and on a 24 hour
basis, therefore impacts to fauna behaviour have been assessed to be slightly higher than
construction, with an impact rating of Minor.
Table 10.8 Impacts to Fauna from Operation of Facilities, Equipment and Machinery
Impact Description Impacts to fauna from operation of facilities, equipment and machinery
term

The following mitigation and management measures currently in place will assist in
minimising future impacts to fauna from the operation of facilities, equipment and
machinery:
Contractual requirements outlining contractor and personnel expectations and
requirements to minimise environmental impact;
Preventing the proliferation of pest species by storing organic waste in green bins and
incinerating on a daily basis;
Environment compliance inspections (conducted by contractor); and
Enforcing speed limits (40 km hour or 15 km hour near worksite);
Only allowed night driving in the event of an emergency or with prior Project
approval;
Noise suppression guards on generators (continuous noise sources will be a maximum
of 85 dBA);
Dust suppression through watering as discussed previously; and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 222 of 369

Where possible, restricting construction activities to uninterruptible activities only (to
reduce noise, vibration impacts)
While the management measures listed above will assist in minimising impacts to fauna
from the operation of facilities, equipment and machinery, the significance will be managed
to be Negligible under normal operating conditions.
10.4.5 Impacts to Fauna Species of Conservation Significance
The biodiversity assessment identified the following conservation significant species as
occurring or potentially occurring within the project area. While listed as being of
conservation significance these species are expected to occur elsewhere within the region
where similar habitats occur. Clearing was identified as the primary impact that might affect
conservation significant species.
Table 10.9 Threatened IUCN listed Species Assessed
IUCN Red
List Status^
Recorded
in Project
Area#
Recorded in
Surrounding
Area#
Bornean Gibbon Hylobates muelleri EN Y
Malaysian Sun Bear Helarctos malayanus VU Y*
Bearded Pig Sus Barbatus VU Y Y
Proboscis Monkey Nasalis larvatus EN Y
Freshwater Crocodile Tomistoma schlegelii EN Y
Sambar Deer Cervus unicolor VU Y
Flat-headed Cat Prionailurus planiceps EN
Bornean Orangutan Bornean Orangutan EN
Bornean Bay Cat Pardofelis badia EN
Clouded Leopard Neofelis diardi VU
Whisked Flying Squirrel Petinomys genibarbis VU
King Cobra Ophiophagus hannah VU
Flores Woolly Bat Kerivoula flora VU
Pig-tailed Macaque Macaca nemestrina VU
Banded Civet Hemigalus derbyanus VU
^ IUCN Description: E = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable
# Data obtained from Biodiversity Survey (2013), and UKL/UPL reports for Kerendan and WK-1
* Indirect evidence (scratches)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 223 of 369

Consistent with the assessment of clearing impacts as a result of the project, impacts were
identified as being of Moderate significance). This is primarily due to the relatively small
area that would be disturbed as a result of the Project and that the Project area likely
provides general habitat opportunities, but is not representative of critical habitat.
Table 10.10 Impact to Conservation Significant Fauna Species as a Result of Habitat
Clearing
Impact Description Impacts to conservation significance fauna species as a result of
vegetation clearing and habitat removal

While impacts to threatened fauna species from habitat removal cannot be mitigated further,
the following management measures may assist in minimising impacts of the Project on
threatened species that may occur in the Project area:
Develop a record of (probable or actual) threatened species sightings in the Project
area and details of any interactions to use as a monitoring tool.
Speed limits (maximum speed limits of 15 kph at worksites and near accommodation.
Maximum 60 kph on open highway. Maximum 40 kph for heavy machinery
operations); and
No night driving under routine conditions
Implementation of the mitigation measures will manage the impacts to a Negligible residual
significance.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 224 of 369

10.5 ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
Ecosystem Services are defined as the benefits that people, including businesses, derive from
ecosystems (IFC 2012). These services are substantial and varied, underpinning basic human
health and survival needs as well as supporting economic activities, the fulfilment of
peoples potential, and enjoyment of life. In order to provide a uniform basis to assess the
status of all major global habitats across all of the worlds bioregions, the United Nations
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (UN 2005) combined these diverse Ecosystem Services
typologies into a consistent classification scheme.
There are four categories of Ecosystem Services defined in the Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment as adopted in IFC PS6:
Provisioning services - those services that can be extracted from ecosystems to support
human needs. This term is more or less synonymous with the term ecosystem
goods that was used in some prior classification schemes, including such tangible
assets as fresh water, food, fibre, timber and medicinal plants;
Regulating services the benefits obtained from an ecosystems control of the natural
environment, including the regulation of surface water purification, carbon storage
and sequestration, climate regulation, protection from natural hazards, air quality,
erosion and pests;
Cultural services - nonmaterial benefits including diverse aspects of aesthetic, spiritual,
recreational, and other cultural values; and
Supporting services the natural processes essential to the maintenance of the
integrity, resilience, and functioning of ecosystems, thereby supporting the delivery
of all other benefits. They include soil formation, nutrient cycling and primary
production.
The concept of Ecosystem Services highlights the fact that humans are reliant upon the
benefits provided by ecosystems, and that impacts to ecosystems can subsequently impact
human health and quality of life. Project Affected communities therefore perform an
important role in the identification and prioritisation of Ecosystem Services within this
review.
10.5.1 IFC PS Expectations
IFC PS6 has the following requirements regarding Ecosystem Services:
Where a project is likely to adversely impact Ecosystem Services, as determined by
the risks and impacts identification process, the client will conduct a systematic
review to identify Priority Ecosystem Services. Priority Ecosystem Services are two-
fold: (i) those services on which project operations are most likely to have an impact
and, therefore, which result in adverse impacts to Affected Communities; and/or (ii)
those services on which the Project is directly dependent for its operations (e.g.,
water).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 225 of 369

When Affected Communities are likely to be impacted, they should participate in the
determination of Priority Ecosystem Services in accordance with the stakeholder
engagement process as defined in Performance Standard 1.
With respect to impacts on Priority Ecosystem Services of relevance to Affected
Communities and where the client has direct management control or significant
influence over such Ecosystem Services, adverse impacts should be avoided. If these
impacts are unavoidable, the client will minimize them and implement mitigation
measures that aim to maintain the value and functionality of priority services.
With respect to impacts on Priority Ecosystem Services on which the Project depends,
clients should minimize impacts on Ecosystem Services and implement measures that
increase resource efficiency of their operations, as described in Performance Standard
3.
Additional provisions for Ecosystem Services are included in Performance Standards
4, 5, 7, and 8.19.
10.5.2 Ecosystem Services Data Gathering
Ecosystem Services within the Study Area were identified through a process of stakeholder
engagement and consultation, as well as biodiversity survey and assessment. The data
collection aimed to directly consult and engage with Project Affected Communities to
ascertain their views and concerns relating to their use of the local environment and
potential concerns regarding the project. The process included:
Consultation with the community as well as review of existing available regency data
on land use and livelihood; and
A field survey to support the Biodiversity assessment
The social and biodiversity findings are described in detail within the respective baseline
chapters.
Social Data
The social baseline chapter provides a detailed description of the types of ecosystem services
upon which the local communities rely or utilize as part of their day to day livelihoods.
These are summarised under the following major subject headings and are used as the basis
for discussing the relevant ecosystem services within the following sections.
Agriculture;
Rubber Cultivation;
Fishing, Hunting;
Gathering of Forest Products;
Water Use (domestic); and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 226 of 369

Transportation.
Biodiversity Findings
The biodiversity baseline is detailed at the beginning of this chapter. It describes the local
area as consisting of agricultural land, plantation areas as well as secondary forest. No
unique or restricted habitat types were identified within the study area and it was
considered that the Project area was likely to provide general foraging habitat for a variety of
fauna species.
10.5.3 Discussion of Impacts
The provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services considered to be relevant to
the Project site are listed at Error! Reference source not found. and are described in further
detail below. This is based on the findings of the social and biodiversity surveys but also
ERMs experience on the types of services that areas such as the Project site would be
expected to provide. This primarily relates to regulating and supporting services. The Table
also identifies if the service is to be carried through for consideration as a priority ecosystem
service.
Table 10.11 Ecosystem Services Summary
Wild-caught fish/Wild meat
Cultivated crops
Forest Products
Freshwater (surface water)
Freshwater (groundwater)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Regulating Services
Regulation of air quality
Climate regulation: local
Regulation of water timing and flows
Water purification and waste treatment
River bank protection
Disease regulation
Pollination
No, general service unlikely to be significantly affected by the Project.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Cultural Services
Non-use value of biodiversity
Spiritual or religious value

No, significant biodiversity values have not been attributed to the project
area.
No, significant spiritual or religious values have not been attributed to the
Project site.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 227 of 369

Supporting Services
Primary production
Nutrient cycling
Water cycling
Soil formation
Habitat Provision
Transportation
Yes
Yes

Based on the above assessment, the Priority Ecosystem Services identified for the Project are:
Freshwater (Surface Water);
Freshwater (Groundwater);
Wild-Caught Fish;
Animal Hunting
Cultivated Crops;
Forest Products; and
Transportation.
Each of the Ecosystem Services identified above has been evaluated to determine whether it
should be considered for elevation to a Priority Ecosystem Service based on the following
four criteria:
Dependence of the Project on the Ecosystem Service;
The importance of the service to the affected community; and
The irreplaceability of the Ecosystem Service if it was to be completely removed from
the region.
The criteria were combined using the matrix in Table 10.12. Ecosystem Services with a
priority ranking of High Priority or Major Priority were assigned as Priority Ecosystem
Services.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 228 of 369

Table 10.12 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation Matrix
Importance to Beneficiaries Irreplaceability
High Moderate Low
Low
The service is used and valued by parts of the community,
but it is not important in maintaining quality of life or
livelihoods of Project Affected Communities.
Low
Priority
Low
Priority
Moderate
Priority
Medium
The service is readily used by some members of the Project
Affected Communities for income or subsistence, but they
are not dependent upon the service for their livelihoods,
and not everyone utilises the service.
Low
Priority
Moderate
Priority
High
Priority
High
The service is highly important in maintaining the
livelihoods of the Project Affected Communities, and is
used by most of the community regularly.
Moderate
Priority
High
Priority
Major
Priority
Essential

The service is essential to maintain the health of the Project
Affected Communities, and the service is used by all
members of the community.
High
Priority
Major
Priority
Major
Priority
Irreplaceability definition
High Many spatial alternatives exist that are readily available to the Project Affected Communities, and
there are no major impediments to their usage.
Moderate Spatial alternatives exist but are either less accessible than the affected service, or there are other
barriers to their use such as distance, cost and skills required to access the service.
Low There are few to no spatial alternatives available to the Project Affected Communities.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 229 of 369

Table 10.13 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation Summary (Project Specific)
Ecosystem
Services

Trends and Sustainability Beneficiaries Importance to
Beneficiaries
Freshwater
(Surface Water)
Water quality generally good,
although high levels of
turbidity and certain metals
(e.g. iron) has been recorded
during sampling of Lahei
River
Villagers

Essential Low Communities are reliant on riverwater for their domestic
water use including bathing and drinking water.

Major
Freshwater
(Groundwater)
No trends identified Villagers High Low The community at Luwe Hulu utilizes groundwater for
drinking and other domestic uses. This is also utilised by
Salamander.
Major
Wild-Caught
Fish
Species such as the Jelawat
fish are the most popular but
are becoming quite rare. No
trends identified for other
species.
Fishermen
Consumers of fish
High Low Fish is an important element of the diet within the four
project affected communities. Most of the fishing is
conducted for household consumption rather than fulltime
employment. The activity is primarily undertaken while
villages are not farming and rubber tapping.
Major
Animal Hunting Communities have found
that they need to venture
further into the forest and
animals are becoming
increasingly difficult to find.
Dayak people and
local villages.

Medium Low Intensive hunting is no longer conducted and it generally
occurs after harvesting. Communities also catch birds to
supplement their existing livelihood.
High
Cultivated Crops No specific trends Villagers. High Moderate Agriculture is the primary livelihood for local communities. High
Forest Products The area of native forest is
likely to have decreased
within the local area as a
result of clearing for
Villagers collecting,
growing and selling
timber and collecting
forest products to
High Moderate Besides hunting animals in the forest some villagers gather
various types of plants. These plants are gathered primarily
for medicinal or traditional purposes (i.e. to treat diseases,
increase stamina, as materials for constructing houses and
High
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 230 of 369

Ecosystem
Services

Trends and Sustainability Beneficiaries Importance to
Beneficiaries
cultivation, plantation and
mining activities
support their
livelihood.
home furnishings and for conducting traditional
ceremonies). In addition, some plant species collected from
the forest are sold in the market.
Regulating Services
Erosion
Regulation
Fishermen dependent
on good water quality
for fishery production
Low Moderate Shoreline vegetation is likely to play a role in preventing or
reducing sediment laden runoff entering local river systems.
These services will continue to persist following project
construction and operation.
Low
Regulation of
Water Timing
and Flows
No trends identified Villagers living close
to rivers
Medium Moderate Vegetation and other groundcover is likely to be important
in regulating water timing and flows potentially preventing
or managing flooding in some instances.
Moderate
Water
Purification and
Waste Treatment
Fishermen dependent
on good water quality
for fishery production
Medium Moderate Vegetation and other groundcover is likely to be important
in capturing wastes and managing water quality entering
local river systems. These services will continue to persist
following project construction and operation.
Moderate
River Bank
Protection
No trends identified Villages living close to
the river system
Medium Moderate Engineering solutions can provide shoreline protection,
however these can have adverse impacts on other shoreline
processes. These services will continue to persist following
Moderate
Supporting Services
Habitat
Provision
No trends identified Fishermen, hunters
and people who value
the conservation of
biodiversity
Medium Moderate Riverine and terrestrial habitats support the biodiversity
values which are utilised to support the livelihoods of local
communities.
Moderate
Transportation No Trends identified Local villages and
businesses, including
Salamander
High Moderate All 4 villages are located along the river therefore there is a
strong reliance on the river for transportation of goods and
people.
High
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 231 of 369

10.5.4 Impact Evaluation and Significance
Potential impacts of the Project on Ecosystem Services were assessed using the matrix in
Table 10.14. The assessment has considered impacts to Ecosystem Services that have
occurred since the commencement of the Project, or which may occur in the future due to
construction or operational activities, focusing on the Priority Ecosystem Services identified
in the previous section.
Table 10.14 Impact Assessment Matrix for Impacts to Ecosystem Services
Negative impacts

Vulnerability of Receptors
Low: Minimal
areas of
vulnerabilities;
consequently
with a high
ability to adapt to
changes brought
by the Project.
Medium: Few
areas of
vulnerability; but
still retaining an
ability to at least
in part adapt to
change brought
by the Project
High: Profound
or multiple levels
of vulnerability
that undermine
the ability to
adapt to changes
brought by the
Project.
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

o
f

I
m
p
a
c
t

Negligible
Change remains within the range
commonly experienced within the
household or community
Negligible Negligible Negligible
Low
Perceptible difference from
baseline conditions. The impact
results in a reduction in the
availability or functionality of the
Ecosystem Service across a small
area and has implications for a
small number of receptors. The
change in the service is for a short
duration or occurs with low
frequency.
Negligible Minor Moderate
Medium
Clearly evident difference from
baseline conditions. The impact
results in a reduction in the
availability or functionality of the
Ecosystem Service across a
substantial area or number of
people and is of medium duration
or occasional frequency. Does not
threaten the long-term viability of
the service.
Minor Moderate Significant

The main impacts to Ecosystem Services will occur as a result of Project land use and
clearing of land previously used for cultivation and harvesting of natural materials, and
supported regulating services. Only limited impacts to Ecosystem Services are anticipated
through the operational phase. Consideration of these impacts is provided in Table 10.15.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 232 of 369

Impacts to ecosystem services have been assessed as negative and Minor. This was primarily
attributed to the services continuing to exist within the local area and minimal impact that
the Project may have on these values.
Table 10.15 Impacts to Ecosystem Services
Impact Description Impacts to Ecosystem Services as a Result of Clearing and Project related
activities
term
Sensitivity/
Vulnerability
Low Medium High

Table 10.16 provides a further breakdown of the impact significance rankings and
explanations for priority ecosystem services.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 233 of 369

Table 10.16 Assessment of Impacts to Priority Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem
Service
Magnitude Vulnerability Impact Discussion
Fresh Surface
Water
Low Medium Minor The primary use of river water is for domestic uses such as bathing and also drinking water. The project
will not affect the availability of river water for local communities. During construction there is the
potential for surface water impacts to occur as a result of sedimentation and spills and leaks, however it
is likely that this will be managed through construction management actions adopted as part of the
project. Discharges during operations will be discharged in accordance with local water quality
regulations. Further to this the volumes would not be such that changes in river water quality would be
expected to occur.
Groundwater Low Medium Minor The community at Luwe Hulu currently utilizes groundwater for domestic consumption, this
groundwater is also utilised by Salamander. As advised following the site audit completed by ERM,
there is some community concern regarding Salamanders use of this resource Groundwater wells are
expected to be drilled at the KGPF however communities are not utilizing groundwater within the
vicinity of this location. This potential impact will be carried forward under the Salamander HSE
Management System to gain further assurance on community water supply.
Wild-Caught
Fish
Negligible Medium Negligible Project affected communities rely on fishing to support their dietary requirements. As described above,
river water quality is not expected to be impacted by the project such that fish availability would be
affected. This resource and access to it would be maintained throughout project construction and
operation.
Cultivated
Crops
Low Medium Minor Project land use and associated construction will affect community farming areas including rubber
plantation areas, community forest cultivation areas and other farming activities. The land use and
compensation process has been assessed outwith the ESIA. While community access to this service has
been negatively affected by the project, this is unlikely to be significant given the relatively small area to
be disturbed and continuing availability of this resource within the local area.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 234 of 369

Ecosystem
Service
Magnitude Vulnerability Impact Discussion
Forest Products Medium Low Minor Approximately 57 ha of land will be affected by the project and these areas will no longer be available to
the community to support their day to day livelihoods. Given the area to be disturbed and availability of
similar forest areas within the local region, this ecosystem service is unlikely to be significantly affected.
Forest products will continue to be available to affected communities within the local area.
Supporting Services
Transportation Negligible Negligible Negligible Communities will continue to have access to the river systems during project construction and
operation. This resource would not be affected such that community transportation via local river
systems would be disrupted.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 235 of 369

10.6 SOIL
The Project area is expected to have increased erosion and sedimentation activity due the
land clearing for Project facilities and access roads, particularly given communities in the
area report increased soils erosion from land clearing with surface runoff affecting local
water quality.
During clearing of large areas, bare soil will become exposed to wind and water erosion
which may potentially affect local streams and waterways. Potential impacts to water quality
are addressed at Section 10.7.
Rainfall drainage in the area will need to be controlled to ensure that sediment loss into the
surface waters is minimised. The operational facility will have limited open areas of soil, but
ongoing control of captured surface water runoff will still be required.
There is potential for soil to be contaminated from loss of hazardous materials and liquid
wastes at Wellhead Cluster Pad, KGPF, and during refuelling and waste transfer process.
However, these are risks associated with most projects and can be managed with appropriate
management and mitigation measures.
The significance of impacts to soil during construction has been assessed as negative and
Moderate, based on evaluation of the following:
Drainage and water channelling systems included as part of the Projects design (will
assist in controlling and/or minimising erosion);
Wind and rainfall levels and likelihood of exposed soil being washed or blown away;
Surrounding vegetation and natural drainage systems; and
Past history with soil erosion in the Project area before and after land clearing.
Impacts to soil during operations have been assessed as Moderate due to the risk of soil
contamination. It is unlikely erosion impacts will be significant as the pipeline area will be
reinstated once installed. The KGPF and Wellhead Cluster Pad will also have sealed surfaces
and drainage systems which will assist in managing erosion. Access roads will remain
unsealed however, some vegetation will be allowed to re-establish in the pipeline ROW (i.e.
vegetation that will not interfere the integrity of the pipeline) which will assist in stabilising
ground surface and minimising soil erosion from wind and water.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 236 of 369

Table 10.17 Impacts to Soils
Impact Description Potential impact of erosion and loss of hazardous materials on soil from
contamination and erosion

10.6.3 Additional Mitigation Measures, Management, and Monitoring
The following mitigation and management measures are in place to minimise impacts to soil
from erosion and loss of hazardous or contaminated materials:
Vegetation clearing only in designated areas for the project footprint with no
disturbance to soils outside marked areas;
Install the pipeline along the road thereby reducing the land requirements and
associated vegetation clearance;
Placing soil a minimum of 1 m from edge of grading to reduce soil instability; and
Water spraying required for dust suppression during earthworks; and
Re-vegetation of pipeline ROW following installation.
10.6.4 Significance of Residual Impact
The implementation of the mitigation measures will reduce the impact significance rating to
Minor.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 237 of 369

10.7 SURFACE WATER
Impacts to water quality of surface water from routine activities may be caused by the
following:
Increased sedimentation of rivers due to soil erosion during initial land clearing
activities and longer term at the Project facilities locations and access roads;
Discharge of precommissioning wastes such as hydrotest water;
Discharge of treated effluents such as sewage; and
Accidental spills or loss of containment of hazardous materials, including wastes.
The construction phase through to Project decommissioning have the potential to impact
surface water in the Project watersheds. During construction of the access roads and early
works on the Project facilities footprint, removal of vegetation and opening up of the soil
surface to rain, and wind erosion has the potential to create sediment laden surface water
runoff , which once it enters waterways would lead to negative impacts on water quality.
Similarly, the soil stripping operations, stockpiling of soil and overburden and the
construction of infrastructure (drainage channels, pipelines, settling/treatment ponds etc.)
could lead to similar impacts.
Similar impacts are expected along the access roads with the potential for increased
sedimentation into rivers during construction and physical presence/maintenance.
Refuelling stations also have the potential to pollute surface waters through discharge of
waste water contaminated with hydrocarbons and other chemicals. Waste at these sites will
be carefully managed to avoid and reduce these potential impacts.
The potential for discharges of chemicals into the local waterways from refuelling stations,
operation of plant and equipment and chemical storage has the potential to occur. The
adoption of accepted storage and handling process as well as spill response procedures are
likely to be capable of managing associated risks to the surrounding environment.
Based on current Project information, impacts to surface water quality are assessed as
negative and Minor after consideration of the following factors:
Construction activities will be localised and temporary in nature; erosion resulting
from the Project is unlikely to be significant compared to natural erosion that occurs
during periods of heavy rainfall;
Temporary drainage channels will divert surface water from the site, reducing erosion
risks;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 238 of 369

Drainage systems will be constructed to control stormwater and wastewater, with
clean or treated water collected in a separate drainage system to reduce contamination
risk and control water flow;
A closed drainage system is built into the Project design to capture and manage any
potentially contaminated run-off and site drainage;
Disposal of hydrotest water must meet strict environmental controls and legal
requirements; and
Sewage will be treated at the facilitys water treatment plant (STP) using a Bio
Filtration-Anaerobe-Aerobe system. Sewer pipes will be buried underground and
effluent treated in accordance with applicable domestic effluent quality standards.
Table 10.18 Impacts to Surface Water Quality during Construction and Operation
Impact Description Potential impacts to surface water quality during construction and
operations from increased sedimentation, accidental spillages, and
discharges
Likelihood* Unlikely Possible Likely
*Likelihood additional category for accidental/unplanned events
While the implementation of water treatment and drainage management measures will assist
in reducing the risk of surface water contamination, the significance of the impact is still
considered Minor. Undertaking regular water sampling will assist in monitoring this impact.
10.8 GROUND WATER
Potential impacts arising from the utilisation of groundwater as a water resource during
construction and operation of the Project may result in:
Disruption to/depletion of water supply or groundwater levels.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 239 of 369

Two groundwater wells will be constructed at the KGPF and used to source potable and
non-potable water for the KGPF facility. Extracted water will be stored in a raw water tank
and treated to use for potable purposes such as drinking water. Total water consumption
during construction and operations is estimated to be approximately 30 m and 5 m per day
respectively.
Based on current project information, the significance of impacts to groundwater is likely to
be Negligible given the following:
Well construction permit requirements (including environmental standards for
managing pollution/contamination);
Lack of dependence on groundwater systems in the local community (see Section
10.13 for discussion of groundwater impacts associated with Luwe Hulu Supply and
Support Base);
The total estimated amount of groundwater required during construction and
operations; and
Waste and drainage systems included in the design of the facilities to ensure
wastewater and chemicals are contained and disposed of appropriately.
In the absence of groundwater systems in the area, groundwater monitoring may be an
appropriate tool for monitoring the recharge rates and capacities of groundwater systems.
10.9 AIR
Air emissions generated during construction activities will come from vehicle engine
exhausts, generators, construction equipment and dust from earthworks and vehicles
movement. The composition of engine exhaust emissions is expected to be primarily NOX
and CO with small quantities of hydrocarbons.
Emissions from vehicles will be transient, intermittent and spatially variable, therefore it is
expected only a small incremental increase in combustion-based air pollutants will be
generated by the Project.
During the normal day-to-day operation of the facility, emissions are likely to be
predominantly generated by the following sources:
Gas turbines;
Gas sweetening unit (future);
Dehydration/TEG regeneration systems;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 240 of 369

Refrigeration systems;
Fuel gas system;
Power generators;
Nitrogen rejection unit; and
Flaring.
Potential emission sources from non-normal operations (i.e. conditions or activities not
associated with the general day-to-day operation of the facility) include the following:
Emergency flaring;
Emissions from normal operating equipment during start-up and shutdown; and
Vehicle emissions.
The applicable standards for air emissions are provided in Annex A.
The mobilisation of construction equipment due to the Project activities is expected to
increase the concentration of dust in the air at a local level. In addition to dust generation
from vehicle activities, operational emissions over the Project lifetime may periodically
increase local air contaminant levels during certain conditions. Vehicle traffic during
operations will be lower than construction, with traffic generally consisting of periodic truck
movements associated with the transfer of waste and condensate from site, and delivery of
supplies. Personnel traffic will be minimal, with the transfer of personnel to and from site
(from Luwe Hulu) occurring on a fortnightly basis, at the end of each rotation.
Most greatest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will occur during the operational period due
to the length of time and activities involved (e.g. flaring and fugitive emissions), however
calculations for the Project are predicted to be less than 25,000 tonnes per annum (see Section
3.13.1 for a breakdown of emission calculations).
Non-normal operations will occur intermittently for a short duration, therefore emission
rates for these activities will be variable and unlikely to result in significant adverse impacts
on air quality.
Overall, impacts to air have been assessed as negative and Moderate due to the level of dust
generated during construction, and GHG emissions associated with the operations phase.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 241 of 369

Table 10.19 Impact to Air Quality during Construction
Impact Description Impacts to air quality during construction, including dust generation and
emissions

Table 10.20 Impacts on Air during Operation
Impact Description Impacts to air quality during operation, including dust generation and
emissions

Dust mitigation measures have been discussed in previous sections. The following measures
are currently in place to mitigate, manage and monitor impacts to air quality from pollutant
emissions:
All vehicles, equipment and machinery to contractual requirements and undergo a
pre-use inspection prior to use and periodic maintenance inspections.
Contractors and subcontractors will be required to demonstrate that their plant and
equipment are maintained to an acceptable safe standard by submitting the
appropriate inspection certificates or paper work routinely.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 242 of 369

Implementation of the above management and mitigation measures will assist in reducing
air quality impacts from emissions to a Minor significance due to the level of emissions
generated during the lifetime of the Project.
10.10 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Noise impacts may arise from the Project from:
Mobilization and transportation of equipment to and from the site;
Construction of the Project facilities, access roads and pipeline installation;
Operation of the KGPF and Kerendan gas production site;
Vehicle support and manpower during construction and operations; and
Emergency flaring during process shutdown.
Noise assessment typically includes a semi-quantitative process in which future noise levels
are compared against baseline and/or impact threshold levels. In the case when applying
both jurisdictional and lender standards, the more stringent of the two would be used in the
IA. In any case, however, the assessment still evaluates compliance with jurisdictional
requirements.
The IFC Performance Standards applicable for industrial noise are quoted in Table 10.21. It is
confirmed that this guidance applies to fixed noise sources only. IFC gives no guidance on
construction noise. Noise impacts should not exceed the levels presented in Table 10.21, or
result in a maximum increase in background levels greater than 3 dB at the nearest receptor
location off-site.
level Quality Standard and IFP regulates ambient noise. Noise health and safety limits are
established under the Ministry of manpower Decree No 51 of 1999 (Table 10.22).

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 243 of 369

Table 10.21 IFC PS Noise Level Guidelines
Receptor
1 Hour LAeq (dBA)
Daytime 07:00 22:00 Night-time 22:00-07:00
Residential, institutional, educational 55 45
Industrial, commercial 70 70
Table 10.22 Indonesian Noise Regulatory Standards (dBA)
Site National Standard 48/1996 National Standard 51/1999
Residential Area 55 -
Green Open Space 50 -
Industrial Area 70 -
Occupational Health & Safety (exposure
limits)
- 85 (8 hours)
- 88 (8 hours)
- 91 (8 hours)
- 94 (1 hours)
- 97 (30 minutes)
Source: Ministry of Environment Decree #48, 1996
Ministry of Manpower Decree 51, 1999

Where a specific noise standard gives threshold levels above which noise impacts are
expected it is necessary to scale the predicted noise exceedences into the impact magnitude
ranges required in impact assessment. The terminology to be used to describe impact
magnitudes in such cases is as follows.
Table 10.23 Impact Magnitude Terminology
Extent of Noise Change Impact Magnitude Description
0-3 dB Negligible Changes in environmental noise of less than
3dB are often not noticeable to a community.
3-5 dB Small
5-10 dB Medium
>10 dB Large A change of 10dB is often judged as
subjectively twice as loud so
may have additional significance

In the absence of IFC construction noise guidance, Indonesian standards solely apply.
Construction noise impact magnitude is usually judged by exceedance of absolute noise
thresholds, because it is usually well above baseline noise levels. It is common practice to
class impact magnitude as negligible if the predicted construction noise levels do not exceed
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 244 of 369

the existing ambient noise levels. Construction noise impact magnitudes based on a review
of international guidance are presented in Table 10.24.
Table 10.24 Construction Noise Impact Magnitudes (LAeq dB)
Operation

Daytime Night-time
Impact Rating Negligible Small Medium Large Negligible Small Medium Large
Short term
Exposure
< 1 month
<70 70-75 >75-80 >80 <55 55-60 >60-65 >65
Medium term
exposure
1 to 6 months
<65 65-70 >70-75 >75 <45 45-55 >55-60 >60
Long term
exposure
> 6 month
<55 55-60 >60-65 >65 <45 45-50 >50-55 >55

For operational noise, the IFC EHS guidelines are based on an interpretation of the relevant
section of the WHO 1999 guidance concerning the effect of noise on people and implied
potential health effects. As such, these IFC EHS guidelines are used to assess impacts on
people caused by disturbance and consequential annoyance from industrial noise. The IFC
EHS guidelines indicate that significant disturbance effects on people have a threshold of 55
dB LAeq,1hr, and 45 dB LAeq,1hr for daytime and night-time, respectively. The noise
disturbance impact magnitude ratings for absolute levels (when Project noise is above
baseline) are shown in Table 10.25.
Table 10.25 Operational Noise Impact Magnitudes
Operation Period Daytime Night-time
Impact Rating Negligible Small Medium Large Negligible Small Medium Large

Noise
Disturbance
Impact
Magnitude LAeq,
1hr dB

<50

50-55

>55-60

>60

<40

40-45

>45-50

>50
Amenity Impact
Magnitude
(LAeq, 1hr
LA90, 1 hr) for
background
noise above
LA90
30dB

<5

5-10

>10-15

>15

<5

5-10

>10-15

>15

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 245 of 369

During construction and operations, the maximum allowable A-weighted Overall Sound
Pressure Level, Lp(A) for continuous noise sources will be 85 dBA. Noise suppression
guards have been included as part of the design process for equipment with noise
specifications > 85 dBA, to ensure noise levels meet regulatory requirements.
From the baseline data, average ambient noise conditions were measured to range between
43.0 to 53.5 dBA. The nearest village to the Project is over 2 km distance and so noise impacts
severity will decrease with distance from the propagating source and will be negligible at
sensitive receptors.
There will however, be disturbance to fauna and communities active within proximity to the
Project area. Noise impact significance has been assessed as negative and Minor for
construction (Table 10.26) and negative and Moderate for operations (Table 10.27). The
rating is higher for the operational phase due to 24 hour operations and flaring requirements
(although irregular and short-lived, flaring generates a high level of noise) and subsequent
impacts on fauna that may surround the Facility.
Table 10.26 Impacts from Project Noise and Vibration during Construction
Impact Description Impacts of noise on sensitive receptors during construction

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 246 of 369

Table 10.27 Impacts from Project Noise and Vibration during Operation
Impact Description Impacts of noise on sensitive receptors during operation

The following measures discussed in previous sections will mitigate and manage impacts
associated with noise and vibration:
All vehicles, equipment and machinery to meet contractual requirements and undergo
a pre-use inspection prior to use and periodic maintenance inspections;
Limit 24 hour construction to uninterruptible activities;
Speed limits (maximum speed limits of 15 kph at worksites and near accommodation.
Maximum 60 kph on open highway. Maximum 40 kph for heavy machinery
operations) ;
Only allowed night driving in the event of an emergency or with prior Project
approval; and
Noise suppression guards on generators (continuous noise sources will be a maximum
of 85 dBA).
Implementation of the above management and mitigation measures will assist in reducing
noise and vibration impacts to Minor for construction and for routine activities during the
operational phase.
10.11 AESTHETICS
The Project may have an aesthetic impact on the surrounding environment. Given that the
Project location is one of dense vegetation, clearing and presence of the Project facilities will
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 247 of 369

be visible. However, the Project is not located in a densely populated area and will not be
visible far from the facilities from ground level. The aesthetic impact of the Project will
largely be restricted to light pollution.
The Kerendan gas production, KGPF plant and associated facilities will introduce a wide
array of light sources into an environment which is presently largely dark at night, including
operational lighting and the safety flare. There is no existing electricity grid in Kerendan,
therefore the amount of lighting that exists at night is presently minimal and 24 hour
operation of the plant may be visible from a large distance from the source. The intensity,
spectral quality, duration and periodicity of exposure from light has the potential to affect
the biochemistry, physiology and behaviour of organisms, as well as cause disturbance to
communities.
Fauna and flora species have different spectral sensitivities to the spectrum of light that is
visible to humans. Many insects, for example, are able to detect ultraviolet light, which is a
wavelength that is too short for the human eye to perceive. Some species have a high
sensitivity to a narrow band of radiation within their spectral range.
Natural light intensity varies during the daynight (diurnal) cycle, the lunar cycle and the
seasonal cycle. Organisms have evolved to respond to periodic changes in light levels in
ways that control or modulate movement, feeding, mating, emergence, seasonal breeding,
migration, hibernation and dormancy, and in plants, flowering and vegetative growth, and
the direction of growth. Given the effects of light on living organisms, the introduction of
24 hour artificial light into the natural environment from the Project may result in a
disturbance to local species in several potential ways:
Attraction to the light source, where species (such as insect species) will move towards
a light source. Light attraction is not only a potentially negative impact but can have a
positive effect, for example on foraging behaviour.
Avoidance of light. This is observed in nocturnal species and results in a decrease in
the available area for foraging.
Photoperiodism. Some species show seasonality in their behaviour, such as annual
migrations or periods of dormancy. Continuous unchanging light has the potential to
affect these behaviours.
Spectral quality. Impacts to species that respond to particular light regimes from
changes in the visual spectrum of artificial light stimuli
9
.
The closest community village to Kerendan is more than 2 km distance so it is not believed
that the light pollution from the Project site will be significant.
The potential effects on fauna (and possibly fauna) however has demonstrable effects on the
behaviour of the population of organisms in the natural environment, potentially affecting
foraging, reproduction, migration and communication of the living organisms in the forest or
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 248 of 369

changes in species routines. The potential impact of this is unknown given the availability of
current data for the Project location. Given that the Kerendan location has a minimal level of
artificial light due to a lack of availability of electricity, the impact evaluation for the visual
impact from the project from light pollution is ranked as negative and Moderate and will be
carried forward to be addressed though Salamanders HSE Management System (Table
10.28).
Lighting impacts during construction will be Negligible as most construction will be
undertaken during daylight. The only exceptions to this are uninterruptible activities or
where a schedule adjustment may be required (e.g. due to adverse weather).
Table 10.28 Impacts from Project Lighting
Impact Description Potential impacts of project lighting on fauna

Current lighting for the Facility has been designed to ensure the safety of the plant operators.
Further assessment is required to determine whether light spill can be minimised and
subsequently reduce light glow in the adjacent environment. Where possible, lighting should
not be installed where it is not required for safety purposes (e.g. limit perimeter fence
illumination and instead use infrared-sensing/motion detection cameras).
In the absence of mitigation and management measures, the potential impact of Project
lighting on fauna remains largely unknown until further study is conducted and so remains
Moderate.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 249 of 369

10.12 UNPLANNED/NON-ROUTINE EVENTS
There is the potential for unplanned events to occur during the construction, operation or
decommissioning phase of the Project. Unplanned events with potential for environmental
impact include:
Fire, gas leak or explosion;
Accidental spillages of hydrocarbons, chemicals or hazardous materials; and
Emergency shutdowns/flaring.
With the incorporation of appropriate design and control measures, the likelihood of
unplanned/non-routine Project events resulting in major environmental impact is
considered unlikely. Potential environmental impacts associated with unplanned/non-
routine events are discussed in more detail below.
10.12.1 Impacts from a Fire, Explosion or Gas Leak
Discussion of Impact
Potential environmental impacts associated with a fire, explosion or gas leak at Project
facilities include the following:
Generation of atmospheric emissions and particulates, including greenhouse gases;
Loss of habitat through vegetation loss or disturbance; and
Wildlife injury or mortality.
A number of controls have been implemented during the design process to mitigate and
manage risks associated with fire, explosions and gas leaks. These include:
Installation of fire detection and extinguishing systems, including smoke detectors,
extinguishers, sprinkler systems, and firewater facilities (hydrant and pumps);
Spark arrestors for all vehicles and exhaust engine systems;
Emergency stop work alarms;
Foam chambers for condensate and diesel tanks;
Installation of flame detectors on the FG and Flare KO drum;
Gas detection systems; and
Standard Operating Procedures, including gas test/gas monitoring prior to starting
work.
The above controls will (1) assist in reducing the likelihood of the event occurring (2) should
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 250 of 369

it occur, reduce significance of impacts (from implementation of automatic fire management
and alarm systems).
The impact significance of fire, explosion or gas leaks has been assessed as Moderate. The
facility has been designed to alert personnel of a fire or a gas leak and control impacts
through automated systems or design features, however there currently is no contingency
plan for fire or explosions that cannot be extinguished or controlled using installed systems
or infrastructure. Firewater facilities have been incorporated as part of the design, however
firefighting services are not available due to the Projects remote location. Automated
systems may assist in controlling most impacts, however further consideration needs to be
given to how fire or explosions will be managed in the event automated systems fail or are
unable to control a fire or explosion.
Table 10.29 Impacts from Impacts from Largecale Event (Fire, Explosion or Gas Leak) on
Immediate and Surrounding Environment
Impact Description Potential impacts on the environment (namely air quality, wildlife and
vegetation) from a fire, explosion or gas leak event

Salamander will provide:
Dedicated fire response equipment onsite;
Trained workforce with fire-fighting capability; and
Regular fire drills and response scenario exercises.
There is no local fire fighting service to assist the Salamander team, nor any regional
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 251 of 369

emergency response capability within the vicinity of the Project. Given the potential
magnitude of the impact the significance rating remains unchanged (Moderate).
10.12.2 Impacts from Accidental Hydrocarbon, Chemical or Hazardous Material Spills
Accidental spillages such as fuel, chemical and hazardous waste spills have the potential to
significantly impact a number of environmental aspects, including air quality (through the
release of chemicals), soil, surface water, and groundwater. Depending on the level of
impact, contamination of these systems has the potential to affect the quality of the
immediate and surrounding environment.
Potential impacts on air, soil, surface water, and ground water from accidental spillages of
hydrocarbons, chemicals and/or hazardous materials has been assessed to be of Minor
significance based on the following design and operation requirements:
Volumes of hydrocarbons, chemicals and hazardous materials to be stored on site;
Installation of drainage and containment systems such as impermeable bunding for
hydrocarbons and hazardous waste;
Sewage will be treated at the facilitys water treatment plant (STP) using a Bio
Filtration-Anaerobe-Aerobe system. Sewer pipes will be buried underground and
effluent treated in accordance with applicable domestic effluent quality standards;
and
Consideration to waste minimisation during the design process.
Soil is likely to be the most sensitive receptor to spills, as this will likely be the first point of
contact. The significance of the impact will depend on the type and volume of
material/waste lost.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 252 of 369

Table 10.30 Impacts from Accidental Spillages of Hydrocarbons, Chemicals and/or
Hazardous materials
Impact Description Potential impacts on air, soil, surface water, and ground water from
accidental spillages of hydrocarbons, chemicals and/or hazardous
materials

The following mitigation and management measures are in place to minimise impacts
associated with the loss of hydrocarbons, chemicals and/or hazardous materials:
Environmental Management Plan and Waste Management Plan outlining contractor
and personnel expectations and requirements to minimise environmental impact;
Site supervisor/HSE officer on site to coordinate and ensure compliance with
legislative, standard operating procedures, and management plan requirements;
Environment compliance inspections (conducted by contractor on biweekly and
monthly basis using checklists from EMP);
Environmental audit conducted every 6 months;
Providing spill kits and bunding in high risk areas (e.g. refuelling area); and
Site refuelling procedures; and
Environmental Monitoring Program (e.g. review of waste storage undertaken
monthly).
While the implementation of the WMP, drainage systems and various spill control measures
will assist in reducing the risk of spills, the significance of the impact is still considered
Minor. Incident reporting and regular sampling will assist in monitoring this impact.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 253 of 369

10.12.3 Impacts from Process Upset or Emergency Flaring
Process upset or emergency flaring has the potential to result in noise, vibration and lighting
impacts to wildlife, and increased atmospheric emissions and particulates (including
greenhouse gases). Given the remoteness of the facility (nearest village is more than 2 km
from the Project area), impacts on the community are not expected to be significant,
particularly given the duration and irregularity of the event.
The significance of impact on air quality and sensitive receptors from process upset and
emergency flaring has been assessed as negative and Minor, primarily due to the following:
Length of impact (duration of emergency flaring will be short due to the size of the
facility and length of gathering pipeline that may require venting (less than 3 km
long)); and
Distance from sensitive receptors.
This impact cannot be mitigated further, therefore the rating remains Minor.
Table 10.31 Impacts from Process Upset or Emergency Flaring
Impact Description Potential impacts on fauna and air quality from a process upset or
emergency flaring.

10.13 ASSOCIATED FACILITIES
The execution of the Project will require the use of a number of associated facilities. These
currently include externally owned and operated roads, the Luwe Hulu Logistics Supply
Base facility, the PLN Kerendan Power Plant and local electrical grid infrastructure.
Salamander owns and operates the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base, therefore an
assessment of potential impacts associated with the operation of the facility has been
undertaken.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 254 of 369

Other associated facilities such as the PLN Power Plant are externally owned and operated
therefore Salamander has no control on the construction, operation and decommissioning of
this infrastructure. Salamander and PLN Power Plant have entered a partnership through a
gas sales agreement, however ultimately Salamander will have limited influence on how this
project is executed and managed. The only exception to this will be in situations where PLN
require the use of Salamander facilities such as the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base
during construction and operation of the power plant. Use of these facilities will require PLN
to adhere to applicable Salamander standards. As such, the below discussion is applicable.
Existing access roads have been considered together with the construction and operation of
new access roads by Salamander as discussed in the preceding sections.
10.13.1 Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base
Salamander acquired the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base on Barito River to use as a
staging area for the Project. As described in Section 3.2.13, the base is an old coal
development site which is now used by the Project as a laydown area for the storage and
transport of materials and equipment. It also has a site office, and designated refuelling and
warehouse facilities. There is capacity for other users such as PLN to use the base.
Potential impacts associated with the operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base
are detailed below. A description of corrective measures required to align operations with
IFC standards is also provided. Impacts have only been considered in the context of ongoing
operations, as impacts from construction have already occurred and therefore cannot be
mitigated (corrective management measures may assist in remedying impacts that have
occurred as a result of construction).
Impacts on Soil
Soil at the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base has the potential to be affected erosion and
contamination from accidental loss of hazardous materials and liquid wastes. During a site
gap assessment conducted by ERM in 2013 (as detailed in Section 9.3.1), it was found that
management of waste and discharges did not sufficiently meet IFC PS3 and there was a risk
associated with this, most notably in relation to lack of drainage systems, spill prevention
and control measures, and hazardous material management. This represents a soil
contamination risk if not managed appropriately Erosion is also a risk, particularly during
heavy rainfall periods as the site is unsealed and does not have dedicated drainage systems.
In the absence of sufficient management and mitigation measures, significance of soil
impacts at the Supply Base have been assessed as negative and Moderate.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 255 of 369

Table 10.32 Potential Impacts on Soil from Operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and
Support Base
Impact Description Impacts to Soil during Operation of Luwe Hulu Supply and Support
Base

Corrective Measures
Corrective actions are required to bring pollution prevention and control practices at Luwe
Hulu in line with PS3. Suggested measures include:
Implementation of an EMP, WMP and refuelling procedure;
Review of current drainage systems and installation of improved drainage systems
where required;
Bunding in refuelling area and chemical/hazardous material storage areas; and
Provision of spill kits in high risk areas (e.g. refuelling area and storage area);
Material Safety Data Sheets available in the relevant locations; and
Education and training in spill management.
With the implementation of the above management measures the significance of impacts to
soil from the operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base would likely be reduced
to Minor.
Impacts on Surface Water
Potential impacts on surface water from the operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support
Base are consistent with those described in Section 10.6.3. These include:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 256 of 369

Increased sedimentation of rivers due to soil erosion (site is unsealed and there are no
dedicated drainage systems); and
Accidental spills or loss of containment of hazardous materials, including wastes and
fuel from the refuelling area.
The Supply Base is located on the banks of the Barito River. Given its location slope direction
to the river, the surrounding waterway is at risk of impact from current site activities.
In the absence of management and mitigation measures, impacts to surface water quality
during the operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base have been assessed as
negative and Minor. Vulnerability/sensitivity of the receptor has been assessed as medium
given impacts given the size and current level of usage by industry and other users, and
likelihood of impacts having a localised effect.
The implementation of a WMP and various spill control would likely assist in reducing the
current risk of surface water contamination at the Supply Base, however the significance of
the impact would remain Minor. It is recommended that regular water sampling be
undertaken in the area (as with other aspects of the Project) to assist in monitoring water
quality in the area and potential impacts from operation of the facility.
Table 10.33 Potential Impacts on Surface Water from Operation of the Luwe Hulu
Supply and Support Base
Impact Description Impacts to Surface Water Quality from Operation of Luwe Hulu Supply
and Support Base

Impacts on Groundwater
Salamander currently uses the community groundwater well as a water source for site
activities. Potential impacts associated with the use of this resource include:
Introduction of contaminants and pollutants to the groundwater system and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 257 of 369

Disruption to water supply or groundwater levels.
A lack of drainage systems, spill prevention and control measures, and hazardous material
management at the site represent a risk to groundwater systems.
Using the local groundwater well a water source also presents a risk as it a community well.
Further assurance is needed in this regard to determine whether the Supply Base has the
potential to, or is impacting local supply, particularly if activity at the base increases and
demand for water subsequently increases.
Based on the above, impacts on groundwater from the operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply
and Support Base are considered negative and of Moderate significance.
Table 10.28 Impacts on Groundwater from Operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and
Support Base
Impact Description Impacts to Groundwater during Operation of Luwe Hulu Supply and
Support Base

Corrective Measures
Suggested corrective measures to mitigate and minimise impacts on groundwater during the
operation of the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base include the following:
Implementation of spill mitigation and management measures outlined in the
preceding soil impacts section;
Undertake periodic consultation with local community to assess perception impacts
associated with the Project use of the community well;
Conduct a groundwater study to determine measure impact and likelihood of future
impact.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 258 of 369

In the absence of information on the groundwater well and current impacts, the significance
rating will remain as Moderate.
Impacts from Noise and Vibration
General vessel movement and handling of materials and equipment at the Supply Base will
generate noise and vibration which subsequently may cause general to the adjacent Luwe
Hulu community and fauna. Given the base is only operational during daylight hours,
impacts have been assessed as negative and of Minor significance.
Table 10.34 Potential Impacts of Noise and Vibration at the Luwe Hulu Supply and
Support Base
Impact Description Impacts of Noise and Vibration at the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support
Base from general vessel movements and handling of materials and
equipment

Impacts on Air Quality
Air emissions generated at the Supply Base will be generated from vehicle engine exhausts,
generators, equipment, machinery and dust from vehicles and machinery movement. The
composition of engine exhaust emissions is expected to be primarily NOX and CO with
small quantities of hydrocarbons.
The impact on air quality has been assessed negative and Negligible given the small size of
the area and existing level of soil compaction.
Impacts on Local Aesthetics
The impact of the Supply Base on aesthetics has been assessed as negative and Negligible
for the following reasons:
The base was previously a coal development site, therefore construction of the site has
not resulted in a significant change to existing aesthetics/visual landscape; and
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 259 of 369

Site activities are only undertaken during daylight hours, therefore there are no
lighting impacts associated with the operation of the base.
No further mitigation of potential impacts on visual amenity and lighting is required as the
significance of the impact has been assessed as Negligible.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 260 of 369

11 SOCIAL AND HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT
11.1 INTRODUCTION
The overall approach to the rating and evaluation of impacts follows the methodology
presented in Chapter 4. This Section provides greater detail in the evaluation of the two
components that, when analysed together, result in an evaluation of the significance of social
and community health impacts:
Determining the vulnerability of people and communities (referred to here as social
receptors), a characteristic that underpins their ability to adapt to socio-economic /
cultural or bio-physical changes whilst maintaining their overall livelihood, health
status and quality of life; and
Determining the magnitude of change in social and community health assets and
conditions as a result of the Project.
This Chapter addresses the evaluation of significance of potential social and community
health impacts, which is a combination of the above elements and includes consideration of
the acceptability of the change to stakeholders.
It should be noted that clear distinctions are made in assessing worker health impacts and
community health impacts. The former focusses on impacts associated with labour and
working conditions, while the latter considers how the Project will impact on the health of
people in the Projects Area of Influence. The aim is that, where there are no specific
requirements imposed by the regulatory regime or the clients that dictate otherwise, this is
the approach ERM adopts to ensure we present a consistent approach in the evaluation of
social and community health impacts.
11.2 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT DEFINITIONS
11.2.1 Determining Magnitude
Magnitude of social and community health impacts is understood as a reflection of the size
or degree of change caused by social and community health impacts. As discussed in
Chapter 4, magnitude is a function of one or more of the following characteristics:
Extent;
Duration;
Scale;
Frequency; and
Likelihood (for unplanned events only).
Table 11.1 provides the definitions for impact characteristics that culminate in a rating for
magnitude.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 261 of 369

Table 11.1 Designation of Social Magnitude
Designating Magnitude Description
Negligible Change remains within the range commonly experienced within the
household or community.
Small Perceptible difference from baseline conditions. Tendency is that impact is
local, rare and affects a small proportion of households and is of a short
duration.
Medium Clearly evident difference from baseline conditions. Tendency is that
impact affects a substantial area or number of people and/or is of medium
duration. Frequency may be occasional and impact may be regional in
scale.
Large Change dominates over baseline conditions. Affects the majority of the
area or population in the Area of Influence and/or persists over many
years. The impact may be experienced over a regional or national area.
Positive In the case of positive impacts, no magnitude is assigned, unless there is
ample data to support a more robust characterisation. It is usually
sufficient to indicate that the Project will result in a positive impact,
without characterising the exact degree of positive change likely to occur.
11.2.2 Determining Vulnerability
In the social and community health context, vulnerability is the accepted term for describing
the sensitivity of the receiving environment (i.e., societies, communities and households) that
will experience impacts.
A vulnerable individual or group is one that could experience adverse impacts more
severely than others, based on his/her vulnerable or disadvantaged status. Vulnerability is a
pre-existing status that is independent of the project under consideration. Figure 11.1Error!
Reference source not found. provides definitions of vulnerable groups from the World Bank
and the International Finance Corporation (IFC).
It is important to understand the vulnerability context as it will affect the ability of social
receptors to adapt to socio- economic/cultural or bio-physical changes. A higher level of
vulnerability can result in increased susceptibility to negative impacts or a limited ability to
take advantage of positive impacts. A project may also exacerbate existing vulnerabilities if
the status of individuals and communities and their coping mechanisms are not adequately
understood or considered.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 262 of 369

Figure 11.1 Vulnerable Groups Definition

Vulnerability is underpinned by a low existing level of livelihood assets (such as health or
education) or inadequate access to structures and processes to protect or improve
livelihoods. In order to identify vulnerable receptors, it is necessary to identify receptors that
experience these circumstances. Table 11.2 provides definitions to assist in this identification.
The assessment of vulnerability may include, but is not limited to, the following:
Ethnic minorities, including those of a different race, religion, caste or language than
the dominant population;
Women, particularly female headed households;
The old, infirm or disabled;
Those with underlying chronic health conditions especially if there is stigma
associated with the health condition (e.g., HIV/AIDS);
Those with differential rights, such as those without legal rights to land;
Those living below the poverty line / living wage;
Vulnerable Groups (ref: World Bank Glossary of Terms). This denotes a condition
characterised by higher risk and reduced ability to cope with shock or negative impacts.
It may be based on socio-economic condition, gender, age, disability, ethnicity, or other
criteria that influence peoples ability to access resources and development
opportunities. Vulnerability is always contextual, and must be assessed in the context of
a specific situation and time...
IFC PS Requirements (re IFC PS 1 Guidance Note GN48) There may be individuals or
groups within the projects area of influence who are particularly vulnerable or
disadvantaged and who could experience adverse impacts from the proposed project
more severely than others.
Large-scale projects with a large area of influence and multiple Affected Communities
are more likely to expose these individuals and groups to adverse impacts than smaller-
scale projects with site-specific issues. Where it is anticipated that the project to be
financed will impact one or more Affected Communities, the risks and impacts
identification process should use accepted sociological and health methods to identify
and locate vulnerable individuals or groups within the Affected Community population,
collecting data on a disaggregated basis. Using this disaggregated information, the client
should assess potential impacts, including differentiated impacts, on these individuals
and groups and propose specific (and if necessary separate) measures in consultation
with them to ensure that potential impacts and risks are appropriately avoided,
minimised, mitigated or compensated.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 263 of 369

Those without or with limited access to access to basic services such as water,
sanitation, health care and education; and
Those living in areas with pre-existing levels of environmental contaminants.
Table 11.2 Levels of Vulnerability
Ranking Definition
Low Minimal vulnerability; consequently with a high ability to adapt to changes brought by
the Project and opportunities associated with it.
Medium Some, but few areas of vulnerability; still retaining an ability to at least in part adapt to
change brought by the Project and opportunities associated with it.
High Profound or multiple levels of vulnerability that undermine the ability to adapt to
changes brought by the Project and opportunities associated with it.
11.3 EVALUATING SIGNIFICANCE FOR SOCIAL AND HEALTH IMPACTS
The significance of social and community health impacts is evaluated taking into account the
magnitude of the impact and the vulnerability of affected receptors. In rating significance for
social and community health impacts, the matrix in Table 11.3 is used to assign social and
community health impact significance for both negative and positive impacts, and includes
the definitions of magnitude and vulnerability designations.
Whilst we default to not rating the significance of positive impacts, it is important to describe
how the impact may differentially benefit vulnerable groups.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 264 of 369

Table 11.3 Significance Rankings for Social and Community Health Impacts

VULNERABILITY
Low
Minimal areas of
vulnerabilities; consequently
with a high ability to adapt to
changes brought by the Project
Medium
Some but few areas of
vulnerability; but still retaining
an ability to at least in part
adapt to change brought by the
Project
High
Profound or multiple levels of
vulnerability that undermine
the ability to adapt to changes
brought by the Project
M
A
G
N
I
T
U
D
E

Negligible
Change remains within the range commonly
experienced within the household or community.
Negligible

Negligible

Negligible

Small
Perceptible difference from baseline conditions.
Tendency is that impact is local, rare and affects a
small proportion of receptors and is of a short
duration.
Negligible Minor Moderate
Medium
Clearly evident difference from baseline
conditions. Tendency is that impact affects a
substantial area or number of people and/or is of
medium duration. Frequency may be occasional
and impact may potentially be regional in scale.
Minor Moderate Major
Large
Change dominates over baseline conditions.
Affects the majority of the area or population in
the area of influence and/or persists over many
years. The impact may be experienced over a
regional or national area.

Moderate

Major

Major

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 265 of 369

11.3.1 Integration of Stakeholder Perceptions
Unlike the environmental impact significance determination, the professional ranking of
social significance incorporates an additional step; the consideration of stakeholder
perceptions. It is common that the public may have the perception that an impact is higher
than will actually likely be the case. This is commonly referred to as a perceived impact.
Perceived impacts are captured, but are clearly differentiated to actual impacts as evaluated
in the standard methodology.
Whilst an impact may be considered as negligible significance based on the initial evaluation,
stakeholder perceptions need to be accounted for in the management of social issues.
Stakeholder views and priorities are considered in the impact assessment by increasing
significance ratings, where appropriate. This first looks at the significance rating without
stakeholder views/perceptions, then applying these and clearly explaining the reasoning for
any elevated significance in this context.
Where perceived impacts are deemed to be more critical than has been considered in the
impact assessment, they are evaluated separately. This may result in the development of
different mitigation and management measures specific to addressing stakeholder
perceptions than for those project activities that may require management to minimise the
impact magnitude by mitigating the activity at source or effect on the social receptor. Such
examples are strengthening aspects of awareness raising, Project communication and
engagement, participation in Project development and participative monitoring. It should
also be noted that perceived impacts are no less important than actual impacts with respect
to addressing community acceptance for a Project, and that failure to adequately assess such
impacts and develop supporting mitigation is just as likely to result in Project delays as in
the case of actual impacts. Error! Reference source not found. illustrates how the assessment
of impacts considers magnitude and vulnerability ratings but also potentially the perceptions
or sensitivities of stakeholders as well as any planning and development objectives laid out
for the administrative area in which the Project is located. This brings stakeholder views on
impacts explicitly into the evaluation, for example by reporting against policy or plans, or
reporting the results of stakeholder engagement.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 266 of 369

Figure 11.2 Building in Perceptions, Stakeholders and Planning into Significance
Ratings

11.3.2 Interpretation of Social Impact Significance
Table 11.4 shows how the different designations of significance may be interpreted. These
are described to reflect the Project context and setting, specifically reflected in planning and
policy objectives, and stakeholder views as appropriate. It is noted that stakeholder views
are not considered within these expressions of significance as stakeholder views are specific
to the Project and factored into the significance evaluation after the initial rating, as
described above.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 267 of 369

Table 11.4 Description of Social Impact Assessment Significance Rankings
Significance Negative Social Impacts Negative Health Impacts
Negligible Inconvenience caused, but with no
consequences to livelihoods, culture
or quality of life.
Receptors may experience annoyance, minor
irritation, or stress associated with change;
minimal impact to perceived quality of life.
Does not require treatment. No long-term
consequences for the health of individuals
and the community.
Minor Impacts are short term and
temporary and do not result in long
term reductions in livelihood or
quality of life.
Temporary reduction to health status of
certain individuals that can be easily treated
and does not result in long term
consequences for community health.
Impacts may lead to greater health
inequalities in Project area.
Moderate Adverse impacts that notably affect
livelihood or quality of life at
household and community level.
Impacts can mainly be reversed but
some households may suffer long-
term effects.
High risk of diseases or injuries as well as
exposure to Project operational risks to the
local community. May result in long term but
reversible community health impacts.
Major Diverse primary and secondary
impacts that will be impossible to
reverse or compensate for,
possibly leading to long-term
impoverishment, or societal
breakdown.
Loss of life, severe injuries or chronic illness
requiring hospitalisation. Exposure to and
incidence of diseases not commonly seen
previously in the area. Likely to have long-
term consequences for community health.
Note: Positive impacts are not ranked for significance, as discussed above.
11.4 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT RESULTS
The results of the full social impact assessment are provided in Annex H. The following
sections identify and discuss the predicted positive and significant negative social impacts
associated with construction, operation and decommissioning of the Project. The focus is on
the impacts likely to be experienced by the surrounding communities i.e. Haragandang,
Kerendan, Muara Pari, and Luwe Hulu.
Proposed mitigation measures are also presented. These are in addition to the existing
controls Salamander is planning or has already implemented.
Stakeholder consultation and the implementation of the grievance mechanism are critical
when identifying and managing social and community health impacts for a Project of this
nature.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 268 of 369

11.5 COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
The Project will employ a range of people during construction, operation and
decommissioning. There is potential for the workforce to introduce and/ or increase the rate
of communicable diseases to the Project area. (A communicable disease is a disease or
infection that can be passed from person to person, either through direct contact with an
infected person or their discharges, or via a vector, such as a mosquito). This includes the
introduction of a new disease and/ or a more virulent strain of an existing disease.
Given the existing community health baseline discussed in Chapter 7, there is potential for
the workforce/Project to transmit a communicable disease which may have significant
consequences for the community due to the limited health facilities. This is discussed in
more detail in the following Section.
In addition, the Project is likely to result in-migration i.e. people moving to the Project area
to capitalize on employment and business development opportunities. Similar to the
workforce, there is potential for in-migration to introduce and/ or increase the rate of
communicable diseases in the surrounding area.
11.5.1.1 Vector Borne Diseases
Another factor that will influence the prevalence and rates of communicable diseases is the
creation of vector habitat during construction and potentially operation phases of the Project.
Standing water (a common vector breeding habitat) can be created in a variety of ways, such
as alterations to drainage patterns and the establishment of trenches (which can fill with
water during the rainy season). This can increase the rate of communicable disease
transmission such as malaria and dengue fever -which are spread by mosquitoes. Given the
fact that malaria and dengue are prevalent in the Project area and that the community have
raised this issue as a concern during ERM field consultation sessions this impact is one that
requires careful attention.
11.5.1.2 Sexually Transmitted Infections
An increase in the commercial sex trade is often associated with large scale resource
developments due to the demand from the male non-local workforce. If appropriate
precautions are not taken, this too can increase the rate of communicable disease
transmission within the local area especially in the local town of Muara Lahei where
prostitution is already reported to occur. In particular, this behaviour can contribute to an
increase in rates of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections (e.g. Hepatitis A).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 269 of 369

11.5.1.3 Other Related Issues
Once a disease exists within the Project area, its presence can be exacerbated by a number of
Project activities as well as existing health challenges. For example, dust generated during
land clearing and other construction activities can intensify the effects of respiratory
illnesses, especially in those more vulnerable such as asthmatics.
The baseline in Chapter 7 identified the following health-related challenges:
There is an increasing rate of communicable diseases, including malaria, dengue fever
and diarrhoea;
Sanitation conditions in the four Project villages are poor (e.g. the frequent use of
unprotected drinking water resources such as the Lahei River);
There is limited capacity for healthcare services to respond to communicable diseases -
none of the Project affected communities have a public health centre and there are no
permanent doctors present in the Project affected communities; and
There is limited awareness and understanding within the local communities of
communicable diseases and their transmission.
Salamander proposes to establish a safety management plan, which will be implemented
throughout the Project lifecycle (i.e. construction through to decommissioning). The plan will
be developed to align with plans and policies already established by Salamander e.g. their
CSR policy, public consultation procedures, human resource procedures, and employee code
of conduct. For example, Salamanders human resource policy and procedures includes the
provision of healthcare and medical treatment for employees, such as pre-employment
medical examinations and follow-up annual examinations. These measures will apply to
workers brought in from outside the area as well as locally sourced workers.
In addition, Salamander will be establishing measures to reduce the interaction between the
Project workforce and local residents, such as encouraging workers to stay at the camp while
working.
The above requirements will be cascaded down to Salamanders EPC contractors (e.g.
through contractual requirements that will be monitored over time). This will help ensure a
consistent approach to workforce management across the Project.
11.5.2.1 Significance of Impact
An increase in the transmission of communicable diseases may occur as a result of the
introduction of workers into the area, creation of vector habitats, and/ or the presence of
commercial sex workers.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 270 of 369

The existing healthcare facilities have limited capacity to respond to any increase in
communicable diseases, which leaves the community vulnerable. This is of particular
importance if left untreated as communicable diseases can lead to long-term health
implications and/ or in some instances death.
However, Salamander has established a number of measures to reduce the likelihood that
the impact will occur. This includes the implementation of a workforce Code of Conduct to
manage behaviours, undertaking pest control activities such as fogging in mosquito breeding
areas and incinerating organic waste produced by the Project to reduce odour and spread of
disease and pest species. The focus is on managing the potential for workers to introduce
diseases and the management of vector habitat.
Despite the existing management measures, which will help reduce the likelihood of the
impact occurring, and the limited extent of the impact, the impact was assessed as negative
and moderate significance (Table 11.5). This is primarily due to the limited healthcare
services available and low level of understand of communicable disease transmission in the
Project area.
Table 11.5 Communicable Disease Impacts
Impact Description There potential exists for the increase in the transmission of communicable
diseases. This is associated with an increase in population due to Project
employment and in-migration and the establishment of vector habitat. These
impacts are likely to be further exacerbated by the limited capacity of existing
healthcare facilities to respond to the increase.
Nature Positive Negative
Type Direct Indirect
Extent Low Medium High
Duration Short term Medium term Long term/ irreversible
Scale Low Medium High
Sensitivity/
Vulnerability
Low Medium High

In addition to the steps Salamander has already taken, the management of this potential
impact will be carried forward to Salamander's HSE Management System that governs
environmental, social and community health risk management throughout the life of the
Project.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 271 of 369

11.6 COMMUNITY SAFETY AND SECURITY
11.6.1.1 Safety Management
There are a number of safety related issues that are may arise as a result of the Project. This
includes:
Traffic accidents (road and marine). An increase in traffic due to the Project can lead to
an increase in accidents, which can lead to community related injuries and/ or
fatalities;
Increase in crime associated with an increase in the population as a result of Project
employment and/ or in-migration and also due to increased incomes within the local
population (leading to an increased consumption of alcohol and domestic violence
etc.);
Presence of new infrastructure. There are often safety issues with the establishment of
new infrastructure e.g. community members falling in unsecured trenches or
interacting with unsecured equipment in and around the Project site. This can lead to
onsite accidents and injuries; and
Management of hazardous materials and waste onsite. It is particularly important that
these materials are managed appropriately so as not to contaminate the surrounding
water sources, as many are used by local communities for drinking and/ or other
household activities.
The Project will increase the number of vehicles on the local roads (e.g. through the transport
of workers and goods to and from the Project area) as well the number of existing roads (as
the few roads that do exist are of relatively poor quality) in the local area. With an increase in
vehicles, particularly heavy haulage vehicles, comes the increased potential for accidents to
occur. This is of particular concern in the Project area given the low level of road safety
awareness and poor quality of roads.
In relation to crime management, with an increase in population (due to workers moving
into the area and in-migration) there is likely to be an increase in crime rates or ethnic
conflict. (There is a direct correlation between population increase and crime rate increase.)
11.6.1.2 Security Management
The use of security forces is a common management measure - e.g. to reduce the potential of
non-workers entering the Project site. However, the employment of security forces can lead
to additional impacts, in particular the use of undue force during interactions with
community members who may be peacefully demonstrating (as has been known to occur on
this Project).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 272 of 369

Increasingly the use of undue force is viewed as not only a social impact, but also a breach of
international human rights standards. Given that this issue has arisen on other extractive
industry projects in Indonesia, it will need to be proactively managed.
Salamander is planning to establish a comprehensive safety management plan, which will be
implemented throughout the Project lifecycle. The focus will be on mitigating safety related
impacts (as described earlier).
The management plan will take into account Salamanders existing health and safety policies
and procedures. Examples of requirements set out in the existing policies and procedures
include, but are not limited to:
Restricting all non-workers accessing the site via fencing and signage/only authorised
personnel in work areas;
Having a site supervisor/health and safety officer on site to coordinate and ensure
compliance with Salamanders systems;
Installing barricades in areas of excavation and provide minimum of two escape ways;
During backfilling, having a flagman on standby to monitor traffic;
No night driving/river usage, unless in the event of an emergency or with prior
approval;
Installing traffic safety signs;
Establishing camp controls and interaction with the community;
Implementing workforce random drug and alcohol testing at any time on site;
Storing waste material in designated areas, in colour coded waste bins;
Establishing bunding around waste storage areas;
Ensuring personnel are trained to handle waste and installation of proper safety
signage and material safety datasheets;
Establishing warning signs/barriers to be applied to work areas;
Ensuring there is a trained emergency response team; and
Having an onsite medic and medical facility.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 273 of 369

In addition, and to reduce security risks, Salamander will be undertaking ongoing
engagement with local communities throughout the Project lifecycle. This will help to
maintain good working relations with community members and help reduce the potential
for conflict to occur (i.e. the need for security personnel to respond to community issues
which in other similar projects is when the use of undue force is most common).
Community safety and security impacts largely result from an increase in traffic, the
establishment of onsite infrastructure and the use of security forces.
Implementation of a safety management plan will help to mitigate the likelihood that the
impacts will occur i.e. reduce the likelihood from high to moderate. A key focus of the
management plan will be on traffic typically the most significant community health impact
on Projects of this nature. However, despite management efforts, the potential outcome of
the impact is an injury and in some instances a fatality (e.g. as a result of a traffic or onsite
accident). For the above reasons, the impacts on safety and security were assessed as
negative and moderate significance (Table 11.6).
Table 11.6 Community Safety and Security Impacts
Impact
Description
Safety and security impacts may arise as a result of: an increase in traffic, an
increase in population, the use of security forces on site, use of hazardous
materials and presence of new infrastructure. The community is most
vulnerable to the increase in traffic -this can lead to accidents, injuries and, in
some instances, fatalities.
Sensitivity/
Vulnerability
Low Medium High
The management of this potential impact will be carried forward to Salamander's HSE
Management System that governs environmental, social and community health risk
management throughout the life of the Project.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 274 of 369

11.7 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
The construction, operation and decommissioning of the Project will generate:
Noise, which can result from a variety of onsite activities (e.g. reversing beeps on large
vehicles, drilling activities and construction of the building and facilities). Noise can
lead to disruption of community activities and has also been linked to an increase in
depression and anxiety;
Vibrations, which can be caused by construction of infrastructure, if strong enough
can crack the foundation of nearby infrastructure; and
Dust, due to land clearing and other construction activities, can affect the nearby air
quality. This could impact community health, in particular those with existing
respiratory illnesses and other vulnerable groups such as the elderly.
Although the Project is likely to generate noise, vibrations and dust during the construction
of the KGPF these issues are unlikely to affect local communities given the distance between
the Project and the nearest community (>2km). However, the Project will be using a number
of local roads to transport equipment and goods thus it is likely that noise and dust will
occur in these localities. This has already been identified as a concern by the Project
communities who, during ERM consultations, complained about the level of dust generated
from existing Project traffic.
There is also potential, as briefly mentioned earlier, for contamination to occur as a result of a
spill or leak e.g. of hydrocarbons, processing chemicals or waste. This could occur during
routine activities onsite as well as during the transport of goods and services to the site via
existing roads and rivers. (The river systems are used by the Project as the roads are often
inaccessible during periods of heavy rainfall.)
At present, local communities heavily rely on ground and surface water for a variety of
activities including drinking, washing, bathing, and fishing. Given the reliance on existing
water sources, it is unlikely that the local communities would have the ability to adapt to
water contamination e.g. to find an alternative drinking water source.
Salamander is planning to establish an environmental management plan, which will include
measures to manage noise, vibrations and dust. For example, the management plan will
include dust suppression techniques along the road from Luwe Hulu to the site, and along
the site access roads. The water will be sourced from the Barito River near Luwe Hulu. The
management plan also includes ongoing monitoring and evaluation of implementation
activities to ensure measures in place are effective.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 275 of 369

The Project is likely to generate noise, vibrations and dust. However, given the management
measures currently in place and the distance between the Project and the nearest community,
the local community is unlikely to be significantly impacted.
There is a potential for contamination to occur as a result of a spill or leak should this occur
there is limited capacity for the local communities to adapt, given their heavy reliance on
ground and surface water.
Given the potential extent of the impact (which could extend beyond the nearby
communities if contamination were to enter a waterway) and the vulnerability of the local
communities (due to their heavy reliance on local waterways), this indirect impact was
assessed as negative and moderate significance (Table 11.7).
Table 11.7 Environmental Quality Impacts
Impact Description The Project, particularly during the construction phase, is likely to
generate noise, vibrations and dust. In addition, there is potential for
contamination of local water resources to occur. The issue that the
community is most vulnerable to is potential contamination. Salamander
is planning to develop a number of management measures to reduce the
likelihood for contamination to occur.
indirect impact will be through environmental mitigation (Chapter 10).
Assuming that the recommended environmental mitigation measures are implemented and
monitored over time, the residual impact was assessed as minor and negative. Ongoing
monitoring should occur to track implementation and evaluate the management measures.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 276 of 369

11.8 ECONOMY AND LIVELIHOOD
11.8.1.1 Business Development Opportunities
The Project will require goods and services throughout its lifecycle. There are opportunities
for local businesses to provide these goods and services (e.g. construction equipment, food
for the accommodation camp at Luwe Hulu, re-vegetation post-operation). There are also
expectations within the four Project villages (noted in the May 2013 ERM consultations) that
business development opportunities are created due to the Project. Existing local businesses
may expand or new businesses may be established locally to meet these demands.
Salamander has established policies and procedures to encourage the purchase of goods and
services locally i.e. local content. However, the level of opportunities will depend on the
initiative and capabilities of the local entrepreneurs as well as the needs of the EPC
contractor.
In addition, the workforce is likely to increase the demand for local goods and services.
During down time, workers (with their increased disposable income) are likely to spend
money in the local town e.g. to eat at local restaurants.
11.8.1.2 Employment Opportunities
The majority of local community members work within the farming sector. However,
increasingly there are opportunities to work in government and in private business (e.g.
logging and mining).
The Project will generate direct employment opportunities throughout its lifecycle. The
largest number of opportunities will be generated during construction; this number will
taper off during operation and decommissioning.
During construction it is anticipated that approximately 354 people will be employed. This
includes an estimated 144 general/unskilled workers and 210 skilled workers.
Approximately 50 employment opportunities will be generated during the operation phase.
Workers will operate on a rotating shift of two weeks on/ two weeks office, which means
that only approximately 25 workers will be on site at any given time.
Salamander has put in place policies and procedures to ensure that local employment
opportunities are generated. It is expected that approximately 40% of recruitment will be
from local communities during construction, with a focus on unskilled positions. However,
this is likely to change during the operation phase, as many of the positions require skilled
workers.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 277 of 369

In addition to the above direct employment opportunities, the Project is likely to generate
indirect employment opportunities. This is linked to the business development opportunities
discussed above as there will need to be workers to run the businesses that provide goods
and services to the Project. This is likely to generate opportunities for locals; however, it may
also drive in-migration.
It is also anticipated the Projects CSR program will provide sustainable on-going benefits to
the four local communities (and beyond) throughout the duration (and post) the Projects
lifecycle.
11.8.1.3 Training Opportunities
The Project will provide on-the-job training for employees. This will help to increase the skill
level within the local communities. These skills will not only be useful as part of the Project
but also increase the future employment opportunities for the community members trained.
This, in the longer-term, has the potential to improve the quality of lives of local community
members (which is associated with a steady income).
11.8.1.4 Labour and Working Conditions
Indonesian law and international best practice standards provide clear guidance on the
expectations as they apply to working conditions and the rights of workers. To ensure that
these standards are met (e.g. such as anti-discrimination, no child or slave labour),
Salamander is in the process of introducing internal labour standards, which will be
cascaded down to contractors. These standards will be regularly monitored to ensure
compliance across the Project.
Salamander has committed to identifying and capitalizing on local content opportunities
where possible. Expectations will need to be managed with regards to these Project benefits
(given their duration and small scale). In particular, there are few unskilled positions
available; these are the types of employment opportunities (based on the baseline) that are
likely to be filled by local community members.
The resulting impacts (e.g. increase in income for local community members, training to
increase future marketability) were assessed as positive i.e. beneficial to the community.
For this reason, the impact significance was not assessed (Table 11.8).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 278 of 369

Table 11.8 Economy and Livelihood Impacts
Impact Description The Project will generate employment, training, and business
development opportunities for local community members. Salamanders
commitment to local content will help to ensure that these opportunities,
where feasible (e.g. due to the limited number of unskilled positions
available), are realised.
Project.
11.9 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
An increase in population in the local area (due to employment opportunities and in-
migration) is likely to place additional pressure on existing infrastructure, resources and
services (e.g. healthcare, transportation, waterways, roads). The result is often a reduction in
capacity of existing infrastructure and services to meet the needs of the local communities (as
well as the additional population added by the Project). This can mean longer wait times and
diminished quality of already poor local services as well as reduced access to and increased
wear and tear on infrastructure.
An increase in road traffic can speed up the wear and tear experienced by roads, requiring
roads to be fixed earlier than typically required. This is already being experienced in the
Project area from the logging activities. Another example is an increase in waterway traffic,
which is likely to result from the transport of goods, services and workers into the area.
There is potential for this use to reduce the capacity of the rivers to be used by others, such as
for bathing and washing, fishing or for transporting commercial goods and services into the
area.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 279 of 369

Furthermore, the Project may lead to the removal of vegetation/habitats used by local
communities for subsistence farming, hunting and gathering of non-timber forest products
due to the presence of a non-local workforce. This may result in an impact on the
communities resources (i.e. availability) and potentially income levels for those who rely on
selling products/animals in the local markets.
Salamander is planning to establish a camp onsite to accommodate workers as well as
establish measures to reduce the likelihood that workers will utilize community
infrastructure, resources and services. These measures will appear in Salamanders ESMP.
The Project is unlikely to increase the pressure on community infrastructure due to the scale
of the Project and minimal demand for (or availability of) services from the local community.
The workforce is a relatively (by comparison to other extractive industry projects) small
workforce, particularly during operations. Given this and the distance (required to travel) to
the nearest community, it is anticipated that the workforce will not place a significant
demand on local infrastructure.
As most of the employment opportunities (particularly unskilled positions) will happen
during construction, the impact will occur over a short period of time. In addition, it is likely
to be experienced locally, which means that the extent will be low. For these reasons, the
impact was assessed as negligible (Table 11.9).
Table 11.9 Community Infrastructure, Services and Resources Impacts
Impact Description The project may place additional pressure on existing community
infrastructure and services
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 280 of 369

Project.
11.10 CULTURAL HERITAGE
Ground disturbance activities (e.g. clearing, trenching) form a part of the construction
process. There is potential for these activities to disturb, reduce access to, and, in some
instance, destroy existing tangible and intangible cultural heritage sites.
However, a recent survey of local community members indicates that there are no important
cultural heritage sites in and/ or around the Project site. Instead much of their cultural
heritage is maintained in the mountainous areas, some distance away from the Project area.
There are a number of intangible cultural heritage customs practices in the area however the
Project is already aware of these and has been effectively managing these with the local
community and traditional leaders.
The communities do have intangible cultural heritage practices, associated with the forest
housing spirits and association with required practices prior to disturbing these forest areas.
Given no tangible sites exist within the project footprint the potential impacts associated
with cultural heritage (e.g. destruction of significant sites) were assessed as negligible.
However, in line with best practice, Salamander will develop a chance finds procedure (IFC
PS8). This will ensure that if a cultural heritage site is discovered (e.g. unearthed) during the
construction process, it will be managed appropriately. The objective of a chance finds
procedure is to avoid or minimize any physical harm to a cultural heritage site or artefact.
In addition, Salamander will undertake steps to adhere to local culturally appropriate
practices. For example, there is a culturally important ceremony that the Kahringan practice
when developing new land. The intention is encourage the supernatural beings that occupy
an area to move to a new location. The local community members have asked Salamander to
undertake this ceremony- which the Project has adhered to.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 281 of 369

Table 11.10 Cultural Heritage Impacts
Impact Description Cultural Heritage Impacts
11.11 SOCIAL/CULTURAL STRUCTURE
Although employment opportunities bring positive economic benefits, they also can result in
social issues. These are largely associated with the following:
The movement of skilled workers. Often extractive industry projects offer better pay
and benefits (when compared to local jobs). The result is a movement in workers from
their existing positions to the employment opportunities offered by the Project. This
can reduce the local skills pool;
An increase in disposable income within the local communities. Although this can
have positive benefits such as improvement in nutrition and education (e.g. as
education outside the community becomes affordable). It often results in negative
impacts, such as an increase in the use of tobacco, drugs, and alcohol as well as an
increased consumption of fatty and sugary foods. (These types of foods can be
introduced to an area to cater for the non-local workforce.) The induced impacts are
an increase in non-communicable diseases (e.g. due to drug and alcohol consumption)
and reduced application of traditional practices; and
The introduction of non-local people in an area. This can lead to conflict within local
communities. This stems from a variety of issues including differences in ethnicity
and/ or religious values as well as jealousy that outsiders have successfully secured
positions within the Project. It can also result in a change in the social structure and
community networks.
The result is a reduction in the local skills pool, an increase in disposable income and
changes in social interactions. However, given the relatively small (when compared to other
extractive industry projects) workforce, this will likely reduce the severity should these
impacts occur.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 282 of 369

Salamander has a camp onsite to accommodate workers and will be establishing measures to
reduce the interaction between the community and workforce. This will help reduce the
potential for conflicts to arise e.g. due to differences in ethnicity and religion. As the
workforce is relatively small and contained within the Project area, along with the fact the
impacts will be localised (i.e. low extent) and largely occurring during construction (when
the largest number of people is employed); the impact was assessed as negative and minor
significance (Table 11.11).
Table 11.11 Social/Cultural Structure Impacts
Impact Description Although employment has a positive economic benefit, it also presents a
number of potential negative social impacts, such as the reduction in the
local pool of skilled workers and conflict within local communities.
However, the relatively small workforce will help reduce the magnitude
of the impacts occurring within the local communities.
Project.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 283 of 369

12 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
IFC PS 1 2012 requires that an environmental assessment should also address cumulative
impacts. The objective of the cumulative impact assessment is to identify those
environmental, social or health aspects that may not on their own constitute a significant
impact but when combined with impacts from past, present or reasonably foreseeable future
Project activities or other projects/activities may result in a larger and more significance
impact. IFC states that Cumulative impacts may result from the incremental impact, on areas or
resources used or directly impacted by the project, from other existing, planned or reasonably defined
developments at the time the risks and impacts identification process is conducted
12
.
Project related or regional cumulative impact examples include:
Increases in sediment loads to a watershed from removal of vegetation;
The recurring loss of habitat in areas that are disturbed and re-disturbed over an
extended period;
Increases in vehicle or vessel traffic;
Additional emissions as project facilities are extended and expanded over a period of
time or in combination with other industry emissions in the area;
Inward migration from progressive development opportunities in a region; or
Positive impacts from ongoing development of employment opportunities and
enhancement of local labour skills base as successive projects (related or unrelated) are
developed.
These are considered below.
Increases in Sediment Loads to a Watershed from Removal of Vegetation
The Project is located in an area with existing industries including coal, logging and palm oil
plantations. The landuse requirement for the Project and need to clear vegetation in the area
contributes to the cumulative loss of natural habitat in the region. Whilst the land
requirements for the Project are not extensive, this is a cumulative impact on the
deforestation occurring in Central Kalimantan and pressure on an already stressed
ecosystem. The Project has a commitment to conduct an offset program through re-
vegetation, with the location for re-vegetation under discussion with the Indonesian Forestry
Department.

12
IFC Performance Standard 1. Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts.
January 1, 2012
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 284 of 369

Recurring Loss of Habitat in Areas
The Project land requirements are approximately 56 ha to bring the gas fields to production
and distribute the gas to a neighbouring power station. There is no current plan for
expansion of facilities requiring additional land take. Land clearing for the Project will occur
at the construction phase and areas such as the pipeline ROW will be reinstated following
installation. At the end of the operational lifetime of the Project, facilities such as the
pipelines will be cleaned, sealed and left in situ to avoid re-disturbance of the vegetation and
soils.
Increases in Vehicle or Vessel Traffic
The Project will result in an increase in the movement of plant equipment and materials. This
increased transportation activity will result in a cumulative impact on the quantity of vessel
activity along the Barito river. Vehicle use however, is not expected to result in a cumulative
increase in vehicle traffic to a significant degree. The Project uses existing logging roads for
the first 27 km of the route from the Luwe Hulu Supply and Support Base. Vehicle demand
on this section is low and mainly attributable to the logging industry as the amount of public
vehicle ownership is low. From the 27 km point to the Project site at Kerendan, Salamander
has constructed an access road as there was no existing alternative. As a result, the project
will not result in a significant impact through an increase in the demand on local
infrastructure.
Incremental Atmospheric Emissions
Where a project has the potential to contribute towards adverse global environmental
impacts, an assessment needs to be undertaken. In this case, the construction and operation
of the Kerendan Gas Development Project will likely result in the production of greenhouse
gases (GHG). The threshold limits for undertaking a greenhouse gas emissions assessment as
detailed by IFC Performance Standards is 100,000 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year
for the aggregate emissions of direct sources and indirect sources associated with purchased
electricity for consumption. The estimated annual emission of CO2 equivalent gases for the
Project is 23,000 tonnes. Salamander will undertake annual quantification and monitoring of
GHG emissions in accordance with internationally recognised methodologies to verify actual
emission quantities during the operation of the Project.
Inward Migration
The potential for inward migration from the Project as a cumulative impact to the region
when considered with other industry is not considered significant. The greatest number of
workers required by the Project will peak at construction at approximately 350 people,
reducing to 50 staff required during construction.
Employment Opportunities and Enhancement of Local Labour Skills Base
With the exception of the PLN Power Plant associated with the Project (but not under
Salamander operating authority), no known plans for other potential future developments in
the area have been finalised.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 285 of 369

13 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
INTRODUCTION
13.1 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
The ESIA process has identified the key environmental, social and health issues, impacts and
risks associated with the project requiring the implementation of a wide range of mitigation
measures. The necessary actions required to manage these issues, impacts and risks are
presented in this ESMP; these includes identification of all project commitments (including
legislative and IFC compliance requirements), mitigation measures that have been identified
from the impact assessment, and other best practice measures designed to avoid, minimise
or reduce negative impacts and enhance positive impacts.
The objectives of an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) are to:
Identify the set of responses to potentially adverse impacts;
Define the responsibilities for implementation and monitoring;
Determine requirements for ensuring that mitigation and management measures are
implemented effectively and in a timely manner; and
Describe the means for meeting those requirements.
This Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) Chapter provides information and
instructions on how Environmental, Social, Health and Safety aspects of the Project will be
managed from pre-construction through the completion of the construction, operation and
decommissioning phases. The ESMP is a living document which will:
Incorporate the EHS and community mitigation social measures identified as a result
of the ESIA process into a comprehensive framework to facilitate and ensure
appropriate management throughout the Project cycle;
Provide a framework for procedures and plans specifically for activities that have
risks, as identified in the Impact Assessment;
Present responsibilities for meeting ESMP requirements including the provision of
training;
Provide a framework for the implementation of specific management plans by
contractors; and
Define the monitoring/verification and reporting program (including corrective
actions).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 286 of 369

13.1.1 Content of the ESMP
The following sub-sections of this chapter are structured as follow:
Salamander Energys Corporate EHS Principles;
Salamander Energy Indonesia HSE Management System;
Kerendan Gas Development Project Organisation;
Training, Awareness and Competence;
Monitoring, Review, Audit and Reporting; and
Project Environmental and Social Management Plan.
13.2 SALAMANDER ENERGYS CORPORATE EHS PRINCIPLES
13.2.1 EHS Principles
Salamander manages business and operational activities through Corporate EHS Principles
and Policies which are also enacted at a country level.
Salamander, in conducting its business and operational activities, is committed to ensure:
Safety and health of our employees and the people who could be impacted by our
activities;
Protection of the environment in which we work; and
That the interests of the communities in which we work are respected.
Salamander adopts a rigorous, top down approach to Corporate Responsibility. During 2011
we completed a restructuring of the organisational structure. In 2012 the focus moved on to
strengthening various functions within the management and operating units. This process
saw new people promoted to the Senior Management Team and a number of new recruits
bolstering our capabilities in the legal, company secretarial, corporate affairs, community
relations and health and safety departments, as follows:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 287 of 369

Figure 13.1 Salamander Energys Corporate Senior Management Team

The Senior Management Team meets quarterly to discuss management level issues and
Health, Safety and Environment are always key agenda items. The Corporate HSSE Manager
reports directly to the Group Chief Operating Officer (COO) and each of our operated assets
has a dedicated HSE and CSR team to monitor activity and ensure Group guidelines are
being followed.
The CSR Steering Committee was restructured during 2012 to improve the delivery of
community relations programmes. It is chaired by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), and
meets bi-annually to discuss the investment in community based projects. The committee
monitors project performance against agreed objectives. CSR Committees are also convened
in the countries where we operate and report to the Group Steering Committee.
The Group completes a stakeholder mapping exercise on entering a new licence. The results
of this are used by our local community development officers to determine with whom to
engage. The engagement programme will typically include local recruitment,
communication of the Groups planned activity, meeting local officials and conducting town
hall style meetings. This process helps to identify community development projects that
meet the needs of stakeholders.
During 2012 further policies and procedures in support of the Groups anti-bribery and
corruption programme were developed and implemented. The Group also instigated the
first series of compliance audits of processes already in place. These, together with the
annual anti-bribery and corruption risk assessment carried out towards the end of the year,
enabled the Group to gain a comprehensive understanding of the corruption risks facing the
business and the robustness of its processes.
The Company has embedded whistle-blowing procedures that permit employees and
contractors to report any concerns they may have in confidence to senior management or, if
desired, to an external whistle-blowing service.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 288 of 369

13.2.2 EHS Policies
Salamander operates in accordance with the following Policies.
Health & Safety (H&S)
Salamander commits to the following H&S principles:
We will promote a culture within the Company in which all employees share a
commitment to a healthy and safe workplace
We will comply with applicable laws and regulations and apply recognised
international standards where laws and regulations are not in place
We will ensure that employees and contractors are properly trained and aware of the
importance of health and safety matters
The Group has a rigorous set of HSE standards, procedures and guidelines that are made
available to all employees via the Groups Intranet. It is made clear to all employees and
contractors that they are expected to adhere to these standards when engaging in any
business related activity on behalf of the company. The Executive Directors reinforce this
message during management visits that are conducted at least annually and their findings
are reported back to the Board of Directors.
Salamanders Corporate Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) Policy is provided in Figure
13.2. Salamander operates in accordance with the following principles:
We are committed to protecting and conserving the environment in which we work;
We will adhere to the International Finance Corporations Performance Standards on
Social and Environmental Sustainability;
We strive to meet the challenges presented to the oil and gas industry by climate
change matters;
We strive for viable ways to minimise the environmental impact of our operations,
reduce waste generation, conserve resources and respect biodiversity; and
We will comply with applicable laws and regulations and apply recognised
international standards where laws and regulations are not in place.
Salamander has set Corporate environmental targets for all projects for 2013:
Keep CO2 and GHG emissions below OGP average; and
Continue to seek ways of pollution prevention, emission reduction and improving the
environmental performance of our operations.
The Corporate Policy is enacted in Salamander Energy Indonesias business and operational
activities through the Companys HSE Policy (Section 13.3).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 289 of 369

Figure 13.2 Salamander Energys Corporate HSE Policy

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 290 of 369

In addition, the Company operates in accordance with the commitments made in their
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Policy (Figure 13.3). Salamander is committed to
operation in accordance with the following principles:
We will uphold the principles outlined in the UN Universal Declaration on Human
Rights;
We will behave responsibly and with sensitivity towards the local communities in the
areas in which we operate; and
We will provide sustainable benefits and avoid the creation of a dependency culture.
Salamander recognises that building strong relationships with local communities is critical in
maintaining its operating credibility. The Company adopts a pro-active approach to
community relations, seeking to engage with local stakeholders early in the operational
planning stage and recognising any concerns/issues (Chapter 7). Salamander employs a
number of specialist government liaison and community liaison officers, usually people who
are from the area of our operations and have a detailed understanding of the local, national
and regional environmental and social sensitivities.
During 2012 the Company further strengthened the CSR team in Indonesia and restructured
the Steering Committee, streamlining the membership to improve its focus and effectiveness.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 291 of 369

Figure 13.3 Salamander Energys Corporate CSR Policy

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 292 of 369

13.3 SALAMANDER ENERGY INDONESIA HSE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
The HSE Management System (MS) prepared by HSE Department forms the general
guideline in achieving company commitment in managing Safety, Health and Environment
and minimizing risk to the community surrounding Salamander Energy Indonesia
(Salamander) operations area. The HSE MS is provided in Annex I.
13.3.1 HSE Roles and Responsibilities
The primary responsibility for HSE performance is assigned to and will remain a function of
line management at all levels. HSE staff are provided for assistance, advice and the
development of standards and procedures. The following are the key roles and HSE
responsibilities within Salamander.
13.3.2 General Manager
The General Manager exercises the authority of the company for carrying out HSE
requirements placed upon the company by law. He/she will:
Designate competent Health, Safety and Environment Manager and support staff, and
allocate adequate financial resources, as appropriate;
Demonstrate commitment and leadership by personal example, two way
communications, and through participation in appropriate initiatives, such as, HSE
Committees, meetings, incentive and awareness schemes, etc;
Give Health, Safety and Environmental issues appropriate priority alongside technical
and commercial factors; and
Systematically integrate HSE Policy, Expectations, Company objectives and targets into
planning and decision making processes, ensuring that a documented HSE Management
System is in place to deliver expected performance. Performance is assessed against Policy,
Expectations, objectives and targets.
13.3.3 Managers HSE Responsibility
The Managers are responsible for the management of HSE matters within their sphere of
control. He/she will:
Ensure organizational arrangements, defined roles and responsibilities are
documented and maintained for their area of responsibility;
Their individual Key Performance Indicators are identified;
Communicate the Salamander Commitment and Policy and HSE Expectations to their
personnel; and
Identify HSE Improvement Programs and Work Plans in his/her area of responsibility.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 293 of 369

13.3.4 Operations/Drilling Manager
The operations/Drilling Manager has the following HSE responsibilities:
Establish and develop HSE Management Systems by using Corporate HSE
Management guidelines and ensure systems are implemented;
Establish HSE improvement program and set an annual HSE targets as part
(cascading) of the General Manager Annual HSE targets;
Ensure that the line Management under his/her supervision include the HSE as part
of their performance indicator;
Implement and taking the responsibility in accordance with Law and implement
Contractor HSE Management System; and
Implement duties in accordance with guidelines in the Local Incident Management
Procedure.
13.3.5 HR Manager
The HR Manager has the following HSE responsibilities:
Ensure that employee competency meets the job competency including the HSE
requirements;
Ensure that medical examinations performed and the prospective employee personal
archives maintained in the relevant file;
Ensure that medical examinations of workers regularly carried out and archives are
stored in archives of workers concerned;
Schedule employee certification based on regulation requirements;
Develop policies relating to sanctions against violations of regulations relating to the
Company HSE performance appraisal and promotion;
In cooperation with the HSE to develop HSE training in accordance with the level of
employee HSE competency; and
Perform tasks according to the instructions contained in the Local Incident
Management Procedure.
13.3.6 HSE Manager
The HSE Manager is the 'Custodian' of the HSE Operating Manual and is responsible for
managing the HSE Department which will provide technical support and guidance to line
managers and others, for all HSE activities.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 294 of 369

The HSE Manager will also be responsible for the introduction and promotion of new
initiatives and techniques designed to improve safety in the workplace; the HSE
Improvement Programs and Work Plans and for reporting annually on the health, safety and
environmental performance of the Company.
13.3.7 Area Superintendent HSE Responsibility
Each Area Superintendent will ensure that HSE is a part of each Supervisor's instruction to
employees when assigning tasks to be performed within their area of responsibility. He/she
will ensure that his/her employee receives adequate instruction and training prior to
beginning a new or special task and that they are retrained as required.
13.3.8 Supervisor HSE Responsibility
Each Supervisor is responsible for familiarizing himself with all Salamander Indonesia HSE
Policy and Procedures that may applies to his/her area of activity and for their application to
all function under his/her control. He/she must instruct new or transferred employees in
both job and departmental procedures and institute appropriate disciplinary action for
violations of HSE Regulations. In addition he/she must assist with and promote department
HSE Programs, establish periodic Safety Meetings and ensure that adequate HSE Training is
given to all employees under his/her supervision.
13.3.9 Employee HSE Responsibility
All Employees working within Salamander Indonesia have a role to play in the
implementation of the HSE Management Systems. Each individual is encouraged to take a
proactive approach to HSE responsibilities and exercise a 'duty of care' for their colleagues at
work and others who they may come into contact with. Individuals are also expected to
comply with the General HSE Rules and direct HSE instructions and support initiatives to
improve performance.
Every employee is expected to observe and follow all directives and procedure related to
work assignment when initiated by appropriate authority. This requirement also holds true
at all level of supervision and management and forms part of the basis for measuring HSE
performance.
13.3.10 Contractors
Appointed Contractors will be responsible for ensuring compliance with all relevant national
legislation and international standards, as well as for assuring that they adhere with all
environmental, social and health controls and mitigation measures specified in the ESMP.
The Contractor will produce a statement setting out its Environmental, Health and Social
(ESH) Policy that demonstrates a visible management commitment to the values of
Salamander and the Project commitments. This will be signed by senior members of the
management team in order to signify their intent to uphold the policy. The statement shall
address:
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 295 of 369

Objectives;
Method of implementation;
Compliance with local and contract procedures;
Availability of qualified resources;
Continuous improvement; and
Auditing procedures.
The Contractor will demonstrate to the satisfaction of Salamander, how compliance with the
ESMP requirements will be ensured through the development of detailed ESH bridging
documents that capture all the requirements set out in the ESMP. The Contractors ESH
Plans, Procedures and Standards will be submitted for review by Salamander following the
Contractors appointment and will be the basis for open discussion to promote an
appropriate management regime for the Project.
The Contractor will be required to identify individuals responsible for overall environment,
health and social (including community liaison) management, demonstrating commitment to
the ESMP throughout the Contractors management structure.
The Contractor will be responsible for minimising the potential environmental, social, safety
and health impacts of contract activities, including the activities of all sub-contractors. The
Contractor will be required to undertake regular environmental, social, safety and health
inspections and to provide related reports to the Salamander team, thereby enabling the
Company to monitor and evaluate performance against the measures and objectives
established in the ESHIA.
13.3.11 Role of Sub-Contractors
Sub-contractors working for the main Contractor will develop and implement their own ESH
management plans and procedures that are fully aligned with that of the Contractor and
therefore the Project. Sub-contractors will not start work until the Contractor and
Salamander have approved their plans.
The Contractor maintains overall responsibility for Sub-contractor performance and will
develop a set of instructions for the Sub-contractors and their supervisors. The instructions
will be in a format and level of detail, which is targeted at the Sub-contractors and their
supervisors. The instructions will draw on the legal requirements, standards and guidance of
Salamander, and will incorporate the relevant provisions of the outline ESMP. The rationale
behind the instructions is to:
Provide the Sub-contractors with the Project specific ESH policies, management plans
and procedures as formulated by Salamander specific to the Kerendan gas
Development Project;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 296 of 369

Provide a framework for the Sub-contractors own Project specific ESH management
plan and work procedures that incorporate the requirements of the Project ESMP; and
Provide the Sub-contractor with relevant health, safety, environmental and social
performance instructions for their activities.
13.1 KERENDAN GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ORGANISATION
The Project organisational structure for the Kerendan Gas development Project is provided
in Figure 13.4.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 297 of 369

Figure 13.4 Kerendan Gas Development Project Organisation Chart

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 298 of 369

13.4 TRAINING, AWARENESS AND COMPETENCE
Salamander provides training for personnel so that the company as a whole complies with
legislative requirements and that the workers have the skills necessary to perform their jobs.
Training also provides the means to explain the need for safe operations supports two-way
communication and gives workers the confidence to work properly and safely. The HSE
commitments to training, awareness and competence are detailed in the HSE Management
System, SEI-HSE 009 (Annex I).
Salamander shall ensure that all personnel responsible for the implementation of this ESMP
are competent on the basis of education, training and experience. All personnel shall be
provided with environmental and social training appropriate to their scope of activity and
level of responsibility.
Environmental and social training activity shall be appropriately documented through the
development and implementation of a Workforce Environmental Training Programme
including:
Definitions of role specific training requirements;
A training needs assessment; and
Records of training undertaken including detailing the attendees, content, trainer and
dates of the induction/training.
Contractors environmental and social management documentation shall describe the
training and awareness requirements necessary for its effective conduct of their activities
within the requirements of this ESMP. Contractors training, awareness and competency
program, including delivery and verification thereof, is subject to Salamanders review and
approval.
13.4.1 Competency Levels
Salamanders HSE Department defines the HSE competency level for every level of
Management. A HSE development program is established according to the defined HSE
competency level.
Salamander conducts a Training Need Analysis (TNA) for employees on yearly basis. An
initial evaluation of environmental training and awareness needs associated with this ESMP
will be undertaken specific to the roles and responsibilities required. The outcomes of the
needs assessment will be used to develop and maintain the Work Program detailing the
training needs for each position based on job description and level of environmental and
social responsibility and involvement.
The Work Program shall include several levels of competency and training, including:
Competency Based Interview (CBI) to ensure that the candidate is suitable for the job
which will include HSE knowledge and practices;
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 299 of 369

Orientation Training for the employee who will be assigned a new task, including
accident preventive action to be taken in performing the tasks;
Management Training for management (Site Supervisors and higher), covering the
key aspects of HSE and this ESMP;
Job Specific Training job specific training and awareness for all personnel who have
direct roles and responsibilities within the ESMP or whose specific work activities
may have an environmental or social impact.
Salamander evaluates the effectiveness of training from time to time.
Employee training records are kept for all personal that have undergone HSE training
programs.
13.5 MONITORING, REVIEW, AUDIT AND REPORTING
Salamanders mechanisms for monitoring, review, HSE Audits and Reporting are detailed in
Annex I HSE Management System, SEI-HSE 016. A system of regular environmental audits
and checks are undertaken by Salamander and Contractors, as well as independent third
parties throughout the Project.
13.5.1 Audits and Verification
13.5.1.1 Internal Audit
HSE internal audits are required to be done regularly. Audits are conducted by Salamander
to monitor the achievement of HSE performance, compliance with regulatory standards and
adherence to HSE policies and this will be done for this ESMP.
13.5.1.2 Contractor Audit
Contractor Audits are required as part of the Contractors own Safety Management System.
Audits are required to be carried out in each phase of work that is categorised as High Risk
as follows:
Equipment Pre-mobilization phase;
Equipment mobilization phase;
Job execution phase; and
Equipment demobilization phase.
Contractor audits will also be required to ensure compliance with HSE standards and
Contractual expectations as well as the implementation and fulfilment of responsibilities
under the Project ESMP.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 300 of 369

13.5.1.3 External Audit
In fulfilment of the requirements of the IFC, Salamander will commission independent
audits from qualified and experience third parties to verify the findings of internal and
Contractor audits. A program of regular audits will be developed which will fulfil not only
regulatory requirements but more frequent verification requirements in accordance with
Good International Industry Practice.
13.5.2 Non Compliance and Corrective Action
Non compliances may include breaches of Salamander Policies, the Project ESMP,
unplanned events or community grievances. A Corrective Action Record (CAR) procedure
and system will be established for all non-compliances arising from inspections, audits,
incident investigations, emergencies or exercises, formal HSE studies and shall include
mechanisms for assignment of responsibilities, effective follow-up and close-out. Where
deemed necessary, findings from the close out of non-compliances may result in
amendments to this ESMP and related sub-plans.
13.6 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
Salamander is committed to the minimisation of environmental, social and health (ESH) risks
that are related to the Kerendan Gas Development Project. The development of an ESMP is
considered to be good management practice for any project or activity with the potential to
impact upon the physical, chemical, biological, social or health environment. It provides
guidance and a framework for ensuring that the commitments of Salamander are upheld and
that the ESH impacts of the Project are managed to an acceptable level.
The mitigation and management measures take place throughout the Project lifetime, from
pre-construction through construction, operation and decommissioning. In addition, there
are common mitigation and monitoring requirements that apply to all phases of the project,
e.g. vehicle use/operation. The mitigation and monitoring measures specific to the impact
assessment conducted for this Project ESIA are detailed in Table 13.1, together with
information on:
Phase and Activity;
Impact summary and receptor impacted;
Mitigation measure, responsibility and timing;
Monitoring requirement, responsibility and timing; and
Reporting.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 301 of 369

13.6.1 ESMP Link to Other HSE Management System Plans
Other types of plans are required to facilitate practical implementation of the ESMP
commitments, for example, Environmental Management Plan, Stakeholder Engagement
Plans, Biodiversity Action Plans etc. These may be organised by Project Phase specific to the
management of activities that occur during construction or operation, or may be applicable
to common activities in the whole Project. These plans are not substitutes for the overall
ESMP, but serve to describe how the commitments will be implemented in greater detail
(and likely at a later stage in Project development) than in the ESMP. In recognition of this,
this ESMP table details the Project Phase and activity for the impact and associated
mitigation commitment discussed.
This ESMP will be part of the Kerendan Project Development Documentation that will be
implemented through daily operation and production. This implementation will be under
Salamander Energys HSE Management System. It will follow the cycles of management as
governance and assurance processes will be used on plan, do, check, action. The HSE
Management Committee and CSR Committee ensures the implementation of the
commitments in the ESIA ESMP. This ESMP is a live document and will be updated
periodically, for example, depending on Project execution and performance.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 302 of 369

Table 13.1 Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMS) Kerendan Gas Development Project (A3)
Phase Activity/Aspect Category Receptor Potential Impacts Mitigation Responsibility Timing
Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
All Phases Employment
Opportunities (including
workforce presence)
Environment Vegetation Workers disturbing
vegetation from
physical activity
Personnel not allowed to
gather/remove flora or
plant products fromsite.
All workers briefed on this
policy.
Contractor HSE Officer
Salamander HSE Officer
Throughout the
Project
HES induction of
workers
HES Toolbox Talks
Bridging HSE
Document
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
As required
Daily
As per contract
HSE Monthly
Report
workforce presence)
vegetation outside
approved cleared areas
and/or taking forest
resources
All work to be undertaken
in cleared footprint only
Salamander Project
Manager
Throughout the
Project
Construction
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Completed As built
drawing
workforce presence)
vegetation outside
approved cleared areas
and/or taking forest
resources
Salamander Project
Manager
Prior to construction Construction
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Completed As built
drawing
workforce presence)
Environment Wildlife Workers
hunting/trapping fauna
No hunting policy enforced
for workforce
Throughout the
Project
HES induction of
workers
HES Toolbox Talks
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
As required
Daily
HSE Monthly
Report
All phases Employment
workforce presence)
Social/
Health
Communicable
Disease
Vector Borne
Disease
Introduction of
communicable
diseases and
reproductive health
issues frombringing
workers fromoutside
the area
Personnel will be
educated on
health/cultural risks
through onsite training.
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
HSE Induction and
daily report
Medical record
Salamander ER
Manager
Salamander HSE
Manager
Monthly HSE Daily
Report
workforce presence)
Social/
Health
Social/Cultural
Structure
Introduction of workers
with different cultural
and religious values,
and social/cultural
interaction issues and
tensions
All relevant personnel to
be trained on community
awareness/ interaction
and dos and donts.
Personnel will educated
on health/cultural risks
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
HSE Induction and
daily report
Salamander ER
Manager
Monthly HSE Daily
Report
workforce presence)
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on the
community through
generation of new
employment and
income generated from
Project demand for
local
businesses/economic
activity
Communicate Project
opportunities in advance
and in an accessible
format to communities
Salamander ER
Manager &Applicable
Contractors
Throughout Project
&Operation
HR records Salamander ER
Manager &
Applicable
Contractors
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 303 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
workforce presence)
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on the
community through
generation of new
employment and
income generated from
Project demand for
local
businesses/economic
activity
Effective contract
document requiring
appropriate local hiring.
Salamander
Procurement Manager &
End-User
Throughout Project
&Operation
Contract Document Salamander ER
Manager &contract
end-user
Contract
Performance
Review
Contract
Performance
Report
workforce presence)
Social/
Health
Community
Safety and
Security
Security personnel for
the Project have the
potential to impact
community safety and
security (human rights
considerations)
Contract scope for security
provider:

Socialization of security
arrangement for
Salamander site with
community.
Salamander Security Throughout Project
&Operation
Contract Document
Community
engagement record
Salamander VP GA Contract
initiation
External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
All phases Maintenance of access
roads
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Improvements to
infrastructure and
services may improve
accessibility between
communities/main
population centres and
subsequently improve
access to surrounding
community
infrastructure and
services, education and
economic opportunities
CSR activities focus on
sustainable projects
(enhancing economic
opportunities provided
through infrastructure,
access to education,
markets etc.)
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
CSR Implementation Salamander ER
Manager
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
All Phases Transportation/
Operation of vehicles
(construction,
materials/supplies and
workforce)
Environment Air Dust generation from
vehicle movement
Water spraying required
for dust suppression on
access roads. Speed limits
(maximumspeed limits of
15 kph at worksites and
near accommodation.
Maximum60 kph on open
highway. Maximum40 kph
for heavy machinery
operations)
Contractor Construction
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
As required Spray truck Km
Water volume use
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
(construction,
workforce)
Environment Air Exhaust emissions
fromoperational
vehicles, dust
generation fromvehicle
movement
near accommodation.
for heavy machinery
operations)
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Construction Supervisors
Prior to use
Monthly
maintenance
inspection
Inspection
certificates
Spot checks
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Operation of vehicles,
plant and equipment
Environment Air Exhaust emissions
fromoperational
vehicles, plant and
equipment
All vehicles, equipment
and machinery to undergo
a pre-use inspection prior
to use and periodic
maintenance inspections.
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Prior to use
Monthly
maintenance
inspection
Inspection
certificates
Spot checks
Contractor HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
(construction,
workforce)
Environment Vegetation Smothering fromdust
generation/air quality
impacts

Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Water volume use
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 304 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
near accommodation.
for heavy machinery
operations)
(construction,
workforce)
impacts

near accommodation.
for heavy machinery
operations)
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Water volume use
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
(construction,
workforce)
Environment Wildlife Wildlife may be
impacted through
interactions with
vehicles (resulting in
injury or mortality) or
disturbance fromdust
generation, noise and
vibration.

Speed limits (maximum
speed limits of 15 kph at
worksites and near
accommodation.
for heavy machinery
operations)
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily HSE induction
Log books
J ob Safety Analysis
records
Hazard Observation
Cards
Complaints register
Site inspections
Incident/accident
records
Recorded fauna
mortality/injury from
Project activities
Contractor HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Environment
al Monthly
Report
(fauna
impacts)
(construction,
workforce)
Environment Wildlife Wildlife may be
impacted through
interactions with
vehicles (resulting in
injury or mortality) or
disturbance fromdust
generation, noise and
vibration.

No night driving under
routine conditions
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Daily reports
Hazard Observation
Cards
J ob Safety Analysis
records
J ourney
Management Plan
records
Incident/accident
records
Contractor HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
All phases Transportation of
workforce
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Increased traffic and
pressure on existing
infrastructure interfering
with existing road/river
use
Undertake consultation
with local community
(including in local schools)
to raise awareness.
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
Manager
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
All Phases Wastes/effluents,
handling and disposal
Environment Surface Water
Soil
Surface water or soil
contamination,
subsequently reducing
environmental quality
All designated waste
storage areas on hard
standing with secondary
protection and closed
drainage (bunding)
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Site inspection
Hazard Observation
Cards
Non-conformances
Contractor HSE
Officer
Weekly HSE Weekly
Report
All Phases Refuelling All vehicle
and engines
Environment Surface Water
Soil
Surface water or soil
contamination,
subsequently reducing
All refuelling to be
conducted over hard
standing with secondary
containment and closed
drainage
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
As required Incident/accident
records (Spill record)
Contractor HSE
Officer
When occurred HSE
Daily/Weekly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 305 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
All Phases Wastes/effluents,
Environment Wildlife Organic waste may
attract fauna to the
area (pest/native),
resulting in changes to
natural behaviour
and/or outbreaks of
pest species.
All organic waste stored in
the proper bins and
incinerated daily
Daily Waste quantities
records
Incineration records
Contractor HSE
Officer
Weekly HSE Weekly
Report
All phases Wastes/effluents
and disposal
Social/
Health
Vector Borne
Diseases
Project / Facility
Domestic waste
management. attracting
wildlife (e.g. rats, dogs,
insects) and increasing
spread of associated
diseases.
All domestic waste will be
disposed of appropriately.
Salamander Project
Manager
Salamander Operation
Manager
Daily Waste
implementation and
EMP
Waste management
records
Salamander HSE
Officer
Daily HSE Daily
Report
and disposal
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Impacts on
that may affect
ecosystemservices
and livelihood (e.g.
reduction of water
quality effects on the
fishing)
All process waste will be
treated and disposed of
appropriately.
Equipment maintenance.
in cleared footprint only.
Salamander Project
Manager
Manager
Daily Waste
implementation and
EMP
Waste management
records
Maintenance Record
Salamander HSE
Officer
Daily
Monthly
HSE Daily
Report
Operation
Maintenance
Report
and disposal
Social/
Health
Environmental
Quality
Impacts on soil and
surface water quality
reducing environmental
quality and
subsequently impacting
human health
All process waste will be
treated and disposed of
appropriately.
Equipment maintenance.
in cleared footprint only.
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Waste
implementation and
EMP
Waste management
records
Maintenance Record
Salamander HSE
Officer
Daily
Monthly
HSE Daily
Report
Operation
Maintenance
Report
Construction Transportation/
(construction,
workforce)
Environment Noise and
Vibration
Vehicle noise and
vibration reducing
and affecting fauna
Construction activities
restricted to daylight hours
except for uninterruptible
activities
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Daily reports Contractor HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Construction Site preparation Environment Vegetation Clearing of flora
species
Vegetation clearing only in
designated areas for the
project footprint; and
No disturbance to
vegetation outside marked
areas
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Contractual
agreement with
detailed scope of
work
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
species
Topsoil will be stored
separately during clearing
and will be used to fill and
level the area once
grubbing activities have
been completed, thereby
maintaining the seed bank
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Contractual
agreement with
detailed scope of
work
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
species
Install the pipeline along
the road thereby reducing
the land requirements and
associated vegetation
clearance
Salamander Project
Manager
Daily As per design basis Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
species
Re-vegetation of offset
area to match pipeline
ROW area
Re-vegetation Project
Manager (Contractor)
As per permit Planted area against
contract
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 306 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Construction Site preparation Environment Vegetation Clearing of threatened
flora species
Rehabilitation programfor
habitat offsets to gain no
net loss in biodiversity
Re-vegetation Project
Manager (Contractor)
As per permit Planted area against
contract
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Construction Site preparation Environment Vegetation Dust generation and
smothering of fauna
for dust suppression
during earthworks
Manager
Water volume use
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Construction Site preparation Environment Surface Water Increased sediment
and contamination from
runoff
Topsoil will be stored
separately during clearing
and will be used to fill and
level the area once
grubbing activities have
been completed, thereby
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Contractual
agreement with
detailed scope of
work
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Construction Site preparation Environment Wildlife Loss of habitat from
vegetation clearing
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly As built
drawing
Construction Site preparation Environment Wildlife Loss of habitat,
Interaction with
personnel and
machinery, increased
noise and vibration
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly As built
drawing
Construction Site preparation Environment Wildlife Interaction with
personnel and
noise and vibration
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly As built
drawing
Construction Site preparation Environment Wildlife Interaction with
personnel and
noise and vibration
Limit 24 hour construction
to uninterruptible activities
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Construction Site preparation Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Impact to livelihoods
through loss of
resource use and ability
to produce or collect
surplus resources for
commercial purposes
Salamander Project
Manager
Construction As Built drawing Salamander Project
Manager
Drawing issue As Built
drawing
Construction Site preparation
Pipeline trench
excavation, backfilling
and surface restoration
Social/
Health
Cultural
Resources
Potential direct impacts
to tangible and
intangible heritage
caused by disturbance
of the ground and/or
loss of community
access to areas
Personnel will educated
on health/cultural risks
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
HSE Induction and
daily report
Medical record
Salamander ER
Manager
Salamander HSE
Manager
Monthly HSE Daily
Report
Construction Pipeline trench
Environment Air Dust generation from
soil stockpiles
access roads
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Water volume use
Construction
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Environment Soil Site drainage and
disturbance of soils
(resulting in erosion),
potentially within steep
areas which may be
subject to slope
instability and erosion.
Soil to be placed at a
minimum1 mfromedge of
grading to reduce
instability risk (trenching)
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily during pipeline
trenching
Daily reports Construction
Manager
Weekly HSE Weekly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 307 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Environment Surface Water Increased sediment
and contamination from
runoff
Covering top soil and
backfill material to prevent
erosion.
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Daily report
incident report
Construction
Manager
Weekly HSE Weekly
Report
Environment Wildlife Injury/mortality from
open trenches,
impeded movement
between forested areas
while trench is open
Trenches will be left open
for a maximumof 3 days
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Daily report
incident report
Construction
Manager
Weekly HSE Weekly
Report
Social/
Health
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to the
community fromopen
excavations
Consultation with local
community (including in
local schools) to raise
awareness.
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project CSR Implementation Salamander ER
Manager
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
Construction Construction of
groundwater well at
KGPF
Environment Groundwater Disruptions to
groundwater resource
availability
Water use management &
well design / location
Salamander Project
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Prior construction
after permit
approval
Well monitoring
water usage
Construction
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Construction Construction,
installation and testing
of Project facilities
Environment Air Atmospheric emissions,
dust generation
access roads
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Water volume use
Construction
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
dust generation
Speed limits (maximum
speed limits of 15 kph at
worksites and near
accommodation.
for heavy machinery
operations)
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Daily Vehicle speed record Contractor HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
dust generation
All vehicles, equipment
to use and periodic
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Prior to use
Monthly
maintenance
inspection
Contractual
specification of
vehicle
Maintenance record
Contractor HSE
Officer
Inspection
Report
Monthly
HSE Monthly
Report
Inspection
report
impacts

access roads
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Water volume use
Construction
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Environment Wildlife Temporary
displacement from
interaction with
personnel and
machinery, noise and
vibration, lighting
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly As built
drawing
displacement from
interaction with
personnel and
vibration, lighting
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
footprint
Salamander Project
Manager
Monthly As built
drawing
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 308 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
displacement from
interaction with
personnel and
vibration, lighting
Limit 24 hour construction
to uninterruptible activities
Manager
Contractor HSE
Manager
Prior to construction Daily report Salamander Project
Manager
Daily HSE Daily
Report
displacement from
interaction with
personnel and
vibration, lighting
No hunting policy enforced
for workforce
Throughout the
Project
HES induction of
workers
HES Toolbox Talks
Contractor HSE
Officer Salamander
HSE Officer
As required
Daily
HSE Monthly
Report
of project facilities
Social/
Health
Vector Borne
Diseases
Alteration of surface
hydrology/drainage
may lead to water
pooling and stagnation
which may result in an
increase in mosquito
breeding and spread of
associated diseases
(malaria, dengue)
Comply with basis of
design.
Salamander Project
Manager
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
As Built drawing Salamander Project
Manager
Salamander
Operation Manager
Drawing issue As Built
drawing
Operation Lighting of Project
facilities
Environment Wildlife Disturbance to fauna
and behavioural
impacts
Light impact minimization -
to be identified
Salamander project
manager
Project design
phase
Construction
implementation of
mitigation measures
Salamander Project
Manager
During
Commissioning
Commissioni
ng Report
Operation Physical presence and
operation of
infrastructure
Social/
Health
Environmental
Quality
Increased noise,
vibration and light
emissions and
discharges to river may
impact environmental
quality and
subsequently human
health
Maintenance program Salamander Operation
Manager
Daily Environment
Parameter (air
quality, noise,
vibration , light)
Monitoring
Maintenance record
Salamander
Operation Manager
As per
Environmental
program.
Monthly.
HSE Daily
Report
Operation
Maintenance
Report
Operation Physical presence and
operation of
infrastructure
Social/
Health
Infrastructure
and Services (-
/+)
Potential for local
infrastructure and
services to be improved
either through direct
investment/maintenanc
e of infrastructure
which may improve
communities/main
population centres (and
surrounding services,
education and
economic
opportunities)
CSR activities focus on
sustainable projects
(enhancing economic
opportunities provided
through infrastructure,
access to education,
markets etc.)
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
Manager
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
Associated
Facilities
Luwe Hulu Supply Base
Presence and Activities
Environment Groundwater Disruptions to
groundwater resource
availability
Water use management Salamander Project
Manager
Manager
Throughout the
Project &Operation
Luwe Hulu Base

water usage
Salamander
Construction
Manager &
Salamander
Operation Manager
Daily Daily
Operation
Report
Associated
Facilities
Environment Noise and
Vibration
Disturbance to fauna
fromnoise and
vibration fromoperation
of facility, vessels,
vehicles and equipment
Noise dampening for all
noise sources with
emission levels above
85dB
Luwe Hulu Base
Manager
Throughout the
Project &Operation
Luwe Hulu Base
Noise Mapping Salamander HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 309 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Associated
Facilities
Environment Surface Water Contamination through
uncontrolled
runoff/drainage
All hazardous materials to
be stored on hard standing
with bunding and 110%
inventory capacity
Luwe Hulu Base
Manager
Throughout the
Project &Operation
Luwe Hulu Base
Wastewater quality
report
Incident report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Associated
Facilities
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on local
businesses through
increased economic
activity and demand for
local goods and
services
Communicate Project
Salamander
Procurement Manager
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
Contract Document
CSR Program
implementation
Salamander
Procurement
Manager
Salamander ER
Manager
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
Associated
Facilities
Social/
Health
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Use of the river for
transportation has the
possibility to interfere
with other river users
(community,
commercial)
Contract Management of
river services contractors
Comply with River
Transportation System
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
Contract Document Salamander
Operation Manager
Contract
Performance
Review
Contract
Performance
Report
Associated
Facilities
Social/
Health
Infrastructure
and Services (-
/+)
Potential for local
infrastructure and
services to be improved
either through direct
investment/maintenanc
e of infrastructure
which may improve
communities/main
population centres (and
surrounding services,
education and
economic
opportunities)
Communicate Project
Salamander
Procurement Manager
Salamander ER
Manager
Throughout Project
&Operation
Contract Document
CSR Program
implementation
Salamander
Procurement
Manager
Salamander ER
Manager
Monthly External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
Associated
Facilities
Social/
Health
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
Community members
that access the site due
to insufficient controls
Contract scope for security
provider:

Socialization of security
arrangement for
Salamander site with
community.
Salamander Security Throughout Project
&Operation
Contract Document
Community
engagement record
Salamander VP GA Contract
initiation
External
Affairs
Monthly
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Fire/explosion Accidental
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
impact, injury, death)
Only authorised persons
allowed to enter site
(security to prevent
access)
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Throughout the
Project
Incident/accident
reports
HSE inductions
Contractor HSE
Officer &
Salamander HSE
Officer
Weekly HSE Weekly
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Community Awareness
Program/Consultation
Salamander External
Relation Manager
Throughout the
Project
Consultation
outcomes
Community
complaints/grievance
s register
Salamander External
Relation Manager
Monthly Asset
Monthly
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Trained emergency
response/fire team
Dedicated fire response
equipment
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Throughout the
Project
Training register
Accident/incident
reporting
Site inspections
Salamander HSE
Manager
Monthly HSE Monthly
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Fire drills and response
exercises
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
6 monthly Drill &Exercise
Report
Salamander HSE
Manager
6 monthly HSE Monthly
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 310 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Develop operational
emergency response plan
and disclose this plan with
communities as part of the
community awareness
program
Salamander External
Relation Manager &
Salamander HSE
Manager
Throughout the
Project &operation
Consultation
outcomes
Community program
Salamander External
Relation Manager &
Salamander HSE
Manager
Quarterly Asset
Monthly
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Spillage of fuel, oil,
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
People's livelihoods
may be affected if
resources are
negatively impacted
and result in loss of
economic value
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Daily Incident and accident
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
may be affected if
resources are
negatively impacted
economic value
Bunding/secondary
containment and spill kits
in refuelling area and
chemical/hazardous
material storage areas
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
may be affected if
resources are
negatively impacted
economic value
MSDS available in areas
of chemical storage and
use. Every activity (e.g.
loading and hauling of
hazardous material
chemicals) shall refer to
the MSDS. Chemical to
be stored according to
label type, with secondary
containment, spill kits, and
visible warning signs (no
smoking, eating, drinking
and sleeping)
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Environmental
Quality
Impacts on air, soil and
quality and
human health
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Environmental
Quality
quality and
human health
Bunding/secondary
chemical/hazardous
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Groundwater Contamination All hazardous materials to
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Groundwater Contamination Bunding/secondary
chemical/hazardous
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Groundwater Contamination Train personnel in spill
handling and response
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Throughout the
Project
Incident and accident
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 311 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Nutrition Impacts on
may affect nutrition if
the ability to source
clean drinking water
and other resources
(fish, vegetation) are
impacted
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
may affect nutrition if
the ability to source
clean drinking water
and other resources
(fish, vegetation) are
impacted
Bunding/secondary
chemical/hazardous
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Resource
ownership/use
Impacts on community
resources e.g. drinking
water and other
resources (fish,
vegetation)
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Resource
ownership/use
water and other
resources (fish,
vegetation)
Bunding/secondary
chemical/hazardous
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Soil Contamination of soil All hazardous materials to
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Soil Contamination of soil Bunding/secondary
chemical/hazardous
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Soil Contamination of soil MSDS available in areas
of chemical storage and
use. Every activity (e.g.
loading and hauling of
hazardous material
chemicals) shall refer to
the MSDS. Chemical to
be stored according to
label type, with secondary
containment, spill kits, and
visible warning signs (no
smoking, eating, drinking
and sleeping)
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Surface Water Contamination through
incorrect management
and disposal of waste
inventory capacity
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Accidental
Event
Bunding/secondary
chemical/hazardous
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 312 of 369

Monitoring
Parameter
Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring
Frequency
Reporting
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Vessel, vehicle,
helicopter accident
Accidental
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Potential loss of life All personnel trained in
first aid and refresher
training provided regularly
to maintain skill levels
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Throughout the
Project
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Vessel, vehicle,
helicopter accident
Accidental
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Potential loss of life All vehicles, equipment
to use and periodic
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Prior to use
Monthly
maintenance
inspection
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Vessel, vehicle,
helicopter accident
Accidental
Event
Community
Safety and
Security
Potential loss of life Keep all non-workers
away fromwork area
(authorised personnel
only) and erect warning
signs/barriers to work
areas
Salamander Project
Manager &Salamander
Operation Manager
Throughout the
Project
report
Salamander HSE
Officer
Contractor HSE
Officer
Daily Daily HSE
Report
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 313 of 369

14 CONCLUSIONS
This ESIA has been conducted to evaluate the impacts associated with the Kerendan Gas
Development Project in in the Bangkanai Production Sharing Contract (PSC) in the North
Barito Regency, Central Kalimantan. The ESIA has been in compliance with the international
standards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards and
Guidelines. This ESIA represents one element of Salamanders overarching Health, Safety
and Environmental (EHS) Management System governing the Companys commitments in
managing Environmental, Health and Safety, and minimizing risk to communities
surrounding all of Salamanders activities and operations in Indonesia.
government in 2006 and is currently managed under the Environmental Management Plan
(UKL) and Environmental Monitoring Plan (UPL) prepared in fulfilment of the Indonesian
regulatory environmental approval process. Construction of the Project commenced in mid-
2012 followed by the development drilling program at the Kerendan Wellhead Cluster Pad.
Project activities that had already been conducted at the time of this ESIA were excluded
from the predictive impact assessment process. These activities were subject to compliance
reviews and the findings carried through to Salamanders HSE Management System as part
of a corrective action plan.
Table 13.1 presents the outcomes of the comprehensive assessment of identified impacts as a
result of the various phases and proposed activities of the Project. The findings may be
summarised as follows:
Environmental Impacts
Through Salamanders commitment to the mitigation discussed in the ESIA, the identified
potential environmental impacts are mitigated to a residual level of minor negligible, with
the exception of:
Disturbance to fauna and potential behavioural impacts at Kerendan from artificial
light emissions. This has been ranked adopting a precautionary approach recognising
that IUCN listed species are believed to occur in the vicinity of the Project and
reflecting the limited information available on the location and sensitivity of these
species;
Potential disruptions to groundwater resource availability from Project water demand
and use of community groundwater wells at the associated facility of the Luwe Hulu
Supply and Support Base. This is ranked as Moderate, adopting a precautionary
approach in recognition that communities raised concerns over fluctuating water
supplies during the year and that the water is provided by a supplier to Salamander.
The Company recognises therefore, that this requires additional assurance around the
capacity, current community water demand and groundwater recharge rates in the
form of a water balance study.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 314 of 369

Groundwater will also be used for Project activities at the Kerendan site, however this
will be subject to permitting which will require investigation on the available resource,
capacity and Project demand to demonstrate the Project will not result in a depletion
in supply. This impact is ranked as minor on this basis.
In addition, consideration of potential cumulative impacts from the Project, together with
additional primary baseline data acquired during surveys and community consultation
highlighted a regional concern related to the loss of natural habitat, regional biodiversity and
ecosystem services. Whilst the land use requirements of Salamanders Project are evaluated
as a minor impact significance, the presence/potential for critically listed species of flora and
fauna to be found in the vicinity of the Project was recognised. Salamander commits to carry
this finding forward to be addressed under the Company HSE Management System for
additional action.
Social Impacts
In the assessment of social impacts it was found that many are indirect impacts resulting
from a direct impact from a Project activity/aspect on an environmental resource/receptor.
For those impacts, the management of the environmental component will result in an
avoidance of the social impact occurring. This is reflected in the ESMP tables.
A number of social impacts have been identified from the review of Salamanders activities
and social programs to date, many of which have been completed. These potential impacts
may require changes to plans, procedures and implementation, thereby falling under the
coverage of the Companys HSE Management System. Salamander commits to carry these
findings through to the HSE Management System to be addressed, beyond this ESIA process.
Non routine/ Unplanned Events
The evaluation of non routine/ unplanned events incorporated the additional consideration
of the likelihood of the event occurring. With additional mitigation it is determined that
these are manageable to a minor impact significance ranking. Through this process it was
recognised however, that there is no regional emergency response capability from either
Government or private industry. In the absence of this support, Salamander is reliant upon
the Companys emergency planning and implementation. This is recognised as of moderate
significance requiring discussion and action with Government and industry partners. This
potential impact will be carried forward through the HSE Management System.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 315 of 369

Table 13.1 Kerendan Gas Development Project ESIA Outcomes
Environment
Activity/Aspect Receptor Potential Impacts
Impact Evaluation
Pre Mitigation Post Mitigation
All Phases
Employment Opportunities (including
workforce presence)
Vegetation Workers disturbing vegetation outside approved cleared
areas and/or taking forest resources
Minor Negligible
Wildlife Workers hunting/trapping fauna Minor Negligible
Transportation/ operation of vehicles
(construction, materials/supplies and
workforce)
Air Dust generation from vehicle movement
Exhaust emissions from operational vehicles, dust
generation from vehicle movement
Moderate Minor
Vegetation Smothering from dust generation/air quality impacts Moderate Minor
Wildlife Wildlife may be impacted through interactions with
vehicles (resulting in injury or mortality) or disturbance
from dust generation, noise and vibration.
Minor Negligible
Wastes/effluents, handling and disposal
Wastes/effluents, handling and disposal
Surface Water
Soil
Surface water or soil contamination, subsequently reducing
Moderate Minor
Wildlife Organic waste may attract fauna to the area (pest/native),
resulting in changes to natural behaviour and/or outbreaks
of pest species.
Minor Negligible
Construction
Transportation/operation of vehicles
(construction, materials/supplies and
workforce)
Noise and
Vibration
Vehicle noise and vibration reducing environmental quality
and affecting fauna
Minor Negligible
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 316 of 369

Impact Evaluation
Site preparation
Vegetation
Clearing of flora species Moderate Minor
Clearing of threatened flora species Moderate Moderate
Dust generation and smothering of fauna Minor Negligible
Surface Water Increased sediment and contamination from runoff Minor Negligible
Wildlife Loss of habitat, Interaction with personnel and machinery,
increased noise and vibration
Minor Negligible
Pipeline trench excavation, backfilling and
surface restoration
Air Dust generation from soil stockpiles Minor Negligible
Soil Site drainage and disturbance of soils (resulting in erosion),
potentially within steep areas which may be subject to slope
instability and erosion.
Moderate Minor
Surface Water Increased sediment and contamination from runoff Minor Negligible
Construction of groundwater well at KGPF Ground water Disruptions to groundwater resource availability Minor Negligible
Construction, installation and testing of
Project facilities
Air Atmospheric emissions, dust generation Moderate Minor
Wildlife Temporary displacement from interaction with personnel
and machinery, noise and vibration, lighting
Minor Negligible
Installation and testing of facilities Surface Water Contaminated hydrotest water reducing environmental
quality and secondary impacts on aquatic fauna
Negligible Negligible
Operation
Lighting of Project facilities Wildlife Disturbance to fauna and behavioural impacts Moderate Moderate
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 317 of 369

Impact Evaluation
Luwe Hulu Supply Base Presence and
Activities
Ground water Disruptions to groundwater resource availability Moderate Moderate
Air Dust generation and exhaust emissions from vehicles, plant
and equipment
Noise and
Vibration
Disturbance to fauna from noise and vibration from
operation
Minor Minor
Surface Water Contamination through uncontrolled runoff/drainage Minor Minor

Social/Health
Impact Evaluation
All Phases
Employment Opportunities (including
workforce presence)
Communicable
Disease
Introduction of communicable diseases and reproductive
health issues from bringing workers from outside the area
Moderate
Wildlife Workers hunting/trapping fauna Minor Negligible
Social/Cultural
Structure
Introduction of workers with different cultural and religious
values, and social/cultural interaction issues and tensions
Minor Minor
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on the community through generation of
new employment and income generated from Project
demand for local businesses/economic activity
Positive Positive
Social/Cultural
Structure
Introduction of workers with different cultural and religious
values, and social/cultural interaction issues and tensions
Minor
Community Safety
and Security
Security personnel for the Project have the potential to
impact community safety and security (human rights
considerations)
Minor Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 318 of 369

Impact Evaluation
Community Safety
and Security
Safety risk from workers entering the community (even a
perceived risk has the potential to disturb the community)
Minor
Maintenance of access roads
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Improvements to infrastructure and services may improve
accessibility between communities/main population centres
and subsequently improve access to surrounding
community infrastructure and services, education and
economic opportunities
Positive
Transportation of materials/supplies and
workforce
Increased traffic and pressure on existing infrastructure
interfering with existing road/river use
Minor Negligible
Wastes/effluents generation, handling and
disposal
Vector Borne
Diseases
Domestic waste management attracting wildlife (e.g. rats,
dogs, insects) and increasing spread of associated diseases.
Minor Negligible
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Impacts on environmental quality that may affect ecosystem
services and livelihood (e.g. reduction of water quality
effects on the fishing)
Minor Negligible
Environmental
Quality
Impacts on soil and surface water quality reducing
environmental quality and subsequently impacting human
health
Minor Minor
Construction
Construction, installation and testing of
project facilities
Vector Borne
Diseases
Alteration of surface hydrology/drainage may lead to water
pooling and stagnation which may result in an increase in
mosquito breeding and spread of associated diseases
(malaria, dengue)
Moderate Minor
Site preparation
Environmental
Quality
Impact to livelihood from dust or other disturbance
associated with the Project (e.g. soil erosion and
contamination of surface waters used by locals for domestic
water use and fishing)
Moderate Minor
Environmental
Quality
Noise and vibration, surface water impacts and reduction in
air quality could potentially impact environmental quality
and subsequently impact human health
Moderate Negligible
Environmental
Quality
Impact to livelihood from dust or other disturbance
associated with the Project (e.g. soil erosion and
contamination of surface waters used by locals for domestic
water use and fishing)
Moderate Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 319 of 369

Impact Evaluation
Site preparation Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Impact to livelihoods through loss of resource use and
ability to produce or collect surplus resources for
commercial purposes
Moderate Minor
Site preparation
Pipeline trench excavation, backfilling and
surface restoration
Cultural Resources Potential direct impacts to tangible and intangible heritage
caused by disturbance of the ground and/or loss of
community access to areas
Operation
Physical presence and operation of
infrastructure
Environmental
Quality
Increased noise, vibration and light emissions and
discharges to river may impact environmental quality and
subsequently human health

Minor Minor
Potential impacts on resources and quality of groundwater
and/or surface water used by the community
Moderate Moderate
Infrastructure and
Services (-/+)
Potential for local infrastructure and services to be
improved either through direct investment/maintenance of
infrastructure which may improve accessibility between
communities/main population centres (and surrounding
services, education and economic opportunities)
Positive
Activities
Environmental
Quality
Minor Negligible
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on local businesses through increased
economic activity and demand for local goods and services
Positive
Use of the river for transportation has the possibility to
interfere with other river users (community, commercial)
Minor Negligible
Infrastructure and
Services (-/+)
Potential for local infrastructure and services to be
improved either through direct investment/maintenance of
infrastructure which may improve accessibility between
communities/main population centres (and surrounding
services, education and economic opportunities)
Positive
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 320 of 369

Impact Evaluation
Activities
Environmental
Quality
Minor Negligible
Community Safety
and Security
Safety risk to Community members that access the site due
to insufficient controls
Moderate Minor

Non Routine/Unplanned Events
Impact Evaluation
Fire/explosion Air Increase in atmospheric emissions and particulates, GHG Negligible Negligible
Fire/explosion Community Safety
and Security
Safety risk to surrounding communities (health impact, injury, death) Moderate Minor
Fire/explosion Resource
ownership/use
Resource use may be impacted if it results in loss of resources (e.g.
forest/farmland) or impacts quality or abundance resources used by the
community (e.g. forest products)
Minor Minor
Fire/explosion Community Safety
and Security
Safety risk to surrounding communities (health impact, injury, death) Minor Minor
Fire/explosion Vegetation Direct loss of vegetation/habitat Negligible Negligible
Fire/explosion Wildlife Injury/mortality Negligible Negligible
Gas leak from
facilities/pipeline
Air Increase in atmospheric emissions and particulates, GHG
Process Upset/emergency
flaring
Minor Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 321 of 369

Impact Evaluation
Process Upset/emergency
flaring
Wildlife Noise and vibration, light disturbance Minor Minor
Spillage of fuel, oil, chemicals
and hazardous materials
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
People's livelihoods may be affected if resources are negatively impacted
and result in loss of economic value
Moderate Minor
Environmental
Quality
Impacts on air, soil and surface water quality reducing environmental
quality and subsequently impacting human health
Minor Negligible
Groundwater Contamination of groundwater Minor Negligible
Nutrition Impacts on environmental quality may affect nutrition if the ability to
source clean drinking water and other resources (fish, vegetation) are
impacted
Minor Negligible
Resource
ownership/use
Impacts on community resources e.g. drinking water and other resources
(fish, vegetation)
Minor Negligible
Soil Contamination of soil Moderate Minor
Surface Water Contamination through incorrect management and disposal of waste Minor Minor
Vessel, vehicle, helicopter
accident
Community Safety
and Security
Potential loss of life Moderate Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 322 of 369

15 REFERENCES
Dwi Cayho M, Yaman F, Hasani N, & DS Hidayat. 2007. Incentives required to develop a
stranded gas field: a case study Kerenden Gas field. Proceedings, Indonesian Petroleum
Association, 31st Annual Convention and Exhibition May 2007.
Hichens, Harrison & Co. plc. 2006. Sound Oil Plc. Online Posting. Huff Hamilton. Accessed
22 July 2013.
http://www.hulfhamilton.com/downloads/Freelance%20-%20Sound%20Oil.pdf
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficient Partnership (REEEP). 2012. Indonesia 2012 Online
Posting. Reegle.
Accessed http://www.reegle.info/policy-and-regulatory-overviews/ID
Salamander Energy. 2010 Acquisition of Elnusa Bangkanai Energy Ltd. Online Posting.
Salamander Energy. Accessed 22 July 2013.
http://www.Salamander-energy.com/~/media/Files/S/Salamander-
Energy/PressReleasesPDFs/2010/2010-11-11.pdf
Salamander Energy. 2012. Annual Report 2012. Online Posting. Salamander Energy.
Accessed 22 July 2013.
http://Salamander-energy-ar-2012.production.investis.com/~/media/Files/S/Salamander-
Energy-AR-2012/Annual%20Reports/annual-report-2012.pdf
UKL/UPL reports developed by Elnusa Bangkanai Energy (EBE) from 2005 to 2010
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 323 of 369

ANNEX A
Applicable Standards

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 324 of 369

The following air and noise standards are applicable to the Project. The most stringent
standard is highlighted for ease of reference.
Table A.1 Ambient Air Quality
13

Parameter Period of Measurement Unit PP41/1999 IFC EHS Guidelines
Carbon monoxide (CO) 1 hour g/m
3
30,000 -
24 hour g/m
3
10,000 -
Hydrocarbons (HC) 3 hour g/m
3
160 -
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 1 hour g/m
3
400 200
24 hour g/m
3
150 -
1 year g/m
3
100 40
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) 10 minute g/m
3
- 500
1 hour g/m
3
900 -
24 hour g/m
3
365 125*
g/m
3
50**
g/m
3
20
1 year g/m
3
60 -
Dust (TSP) 24 hour g/m
3
230 -
1 year g/m
3
90 -
Lead (Pb) 24 hour g/m
3
2 -
1 year g/m
3
1 -
Oxidant (O3) 1 hour g/m
3
50 -
8 hour g/m
3
- 160*
g/m
3
- 100
1 year g/m
3
235 -
PM10 24 hour g/m
3
150 150*
g/m
3
100**
g/m
3
75***
g/m
3
50
1 year g/m
3
- 70*
g/m
3
50**
g/m
3
30***
g/m
3
20

13
World Health Organization (WHO). Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005. PM 24-hour value is the
99th percentile.
Interim targets are provided in recognition of the need for a staged approach to achieving the recommended
guidelines.
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 325 of 369

Parameter Period of Measurement Unit PP41/1999 IFC EHS Guidelines
PM2.5 24 hour g/m
3
65 75*
g/m
3
50**
g/m
3
37.5***
g/m
3
25
1 year g/m
3
15 35*
g/m
3
25**
g/m
3
15***
g/m
3
10*
Notes: *Interim target-1 ** Interim target-2 *** Interim target-3

level Quality Standard and IFP regulates ambient noise. Noise health and safety limits are
established under the Ministry of manpower Decree No 51 of 1999.
The IFC Performance Standards applicable for industrial noise applies to fixed noise sources
only. Noise impacts should not exceed the levels presented in Table A.2, or result in a
maximum increase in background levels greater than 3 dB at the nearest receptor location
off-site.
Table A.2 Noise Standards (dBA)
14

Site
MoE
Dec.
#48/1996
National
Standard
51/1999
IFC EHS Guidelines*
Daytime (07:00 -
22:00)
Night-time (22:00 -
07:00)
Residential;
Institutional;
educational
55 55 45
Trade and service 70
Office abd trade 65
Green space 50
Industrial; commercial 70 70 70
Officials and public
facility
60
Recreational 70
Airport -
Train station 60
Sea port 70

14
Source: Ministry of Environment Decree #48, 1996
Ministry of Manpower Decree 51, 1999
IFC General EHS Guidelines. Guidelines values are for noise levels measured out of doors. Source: Guidelines for
Community Noise, World Health Organization (WHO), 1999.
Acceptable indoor noise levels for residential, institutional, and educational settings (WHO 1999).
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 326 of 369

Site
MoE
Dec.
#48/1996
National
Standard
51/1999
IFC EHS Guidelines*
Daytime (07:00 -
22:00)
Night-time (22:00 -
07:00)
Cultural heritage -
Hospitals 55
Schools 55
Worship place 55
Industrial Area 70 -
Occupational Health &
Safety (exposure
limits)
Exposure
Limit/Day
LAeq, 8h Max LAmax, fast
- 40-45 (closed offices) -
- 45-50 (Open offices) -
85 (8 hours) 85 (heavy industry) 110 (heavy industry)
88 (8 hours)
91 (8 hours)
94 (1 hours)
97 (30 minutes)
*LAeq (dBA)

The IFC does not establish standards for surface water quality. Indonesian standards are
established by Government Regulation (PP) #82/2001 on Water Quality Management and
Water Pollution Control, which includes different classes according to use. Class I is
applicable to the Project as standards for drinking water (Class I) and Classes II-IV as water
suitable for use for recreational, fresh water fish cultivation, livestock and irrigation.
Table A.3 Water Quality
Parameters Units IFC
PP 82/2001
Class I
PP 82/2001
Class II
PP 82/2001
Class III
PP 82/2001
Class IV
Physical Tests
Temperature C - 3 deviation 3 deviation 3 deviation 3 deviation
pH - - 6 - 9 6 - 9 6 - 9 5 - 9
Hardness (calc)

- - - - -
Total Dissolved Solids,
TDS
mg/L - 1,000 1,000 1,000 2,000
Total Suspended Solids,
TSS
mg/L - 50 50
400 400
Anions & Nutrients
Fluoride, F mg/L - 0.5 1.5 1.5 -
Chloride, Cl mg/L - 600 - - -
Sulphate, SO4 mg/L - 400 - - -
Nitrate Nitrogen, NO3-N mg/L - 10 10 20 20
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 327 of 369

PP 82/2001
Class I
PP 82/2001
Class II
PP 82/2001
Class III
PP 82/2001
Class IV
Nitrite Nitrogen, as N mg/L - 0.06 0.06 0.06 -
Total Phosphate, T-PO4
sebagai P
mg/L - 0.2
0.2 1 5
Sulphide, H2S mg/L - 0.002 0.002 0.002 -
Free Ammonia Nitrogen,
NH3-N
mg/L - 0.5
- - -
Cyanide, CN mg/L - 0.02 0.02 0.02 -
Dissolve Metals
Arsenic, As mg/L - 0.05 1 1 1
Barium, Ba mg/L - 1 - - -
Boron, B mg/L - 1 1 1 1
Cadmium, Cd mg/L - 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Chromium Hexavalent,
(Cr
6+
)
mg/L - 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.01
Cobalt, Co mg/L - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Copper, Cu mg/L - 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.2
Iron, Fe mg/L - 0.3 - - -
Lead, Pb mg/L - 0.03 0.03 0.03 1
Manganese, Mn mg/L - 0.1 - - -
Mercury, Hg mg/L - 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.005
Selenium, Se mg/L - 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.05
Zinc, Zn mg/L - 0.05 0.05 0.05 2
Microbiology
Fecal Coliform MPN/100ml - 100 1000 2000 2000
Total Coli form MPN/100ml - 1,000 5000 10000 10000
Others
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand, BOD
mg/L - 2
3 6 12
Dissolve Oxygen, DO mg/L - 6 4 3 0
Chlorine, Cl2 mg/L - 0.03 0.03 0.03 -
Chemical Oxygen
Demand, COD
mg/L - 10
25 50 100
Surfactant, MBAS g/L - 200 200 200 -
Oil & Grease mg/L - 1 1 1 1
Senyawa Phenol, as Phenol g/L - 1 1 1 -
BHC g/L - 210 210 210 -
Aldrin/Dieldrin g/L - 17 - - -
Chlordane g/L - 3 - - -
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 328 of 369

PP 82/2001
Class I
PP 82/2001
Class II
PP 82/2001
Class III
PP 82/2001
Class IV
DDT g/L - 2 2 2 2
Heptachlor and
Heptachlor epoxide
g/L - 18
- - -
Lindane g/L - 56 - - -
Methoxychlor g/L - 35 - - -
Endrin g/L - 1 4 4 -
Toxaphane g/L - 5 - - -
Radioactivity
Gross-A Bq/L - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Gross- B Bq/L - 1 1 1 1
Class I water used as raw water for drinking water, or other uses that require water quality similar as
aforementioned
Class II water used for infrastructure / water recreation facilities, freshwater fish farming, livestock, water for
irrigating crops or other uses that require water quality similar as aforementioned
Class III water used for freshwater fish farming, livestock, water for irrigating crops or other uses that require
water quality similar as aforementioned
Class IV water used to irrigate crops and or other uses that require water quality similar as aforementioned

The following air emissions standards are applicable, according to point (combustion)
source.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 329 of 369

Table A.4 Air Emissions
Internal Combustion
Capacity Fuel Parameter Unit
Environmental Ministry
Regulation No. 13 Year
2009
IFC
a

570 KWth
Oil
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
1000 NA
CO mg/Nm
3
600 NA
Gas
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
400 NA
CO mg/Nm
3
500 NA
> 570 KWth
Oil
TSP mg/Nm
3
150 50 - 100
b

SO2
mg/Nm
3
800 NA
% NA 1.5 - 3
c

NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
1000 1460
d
and 1850
e

CO mg/Nm
3
600 NA
Dry Gas, Excess O2 Content % NA 15
Gas
TSP mg/Nm
3
50 NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
150 NA
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
400 NA
CO mg/Nm
3
500 NA
a
Engine (3 MWth - 50 MWth)
b
if justified by project specific considerations (e.g. Economic feasibility of using lower ash content fuel, or
adding secondary treatment to meet 50, and available environmental capacity of the site)
c
if justified by project specific considerations (e.g. Economic feasibility of using lower S content fuel, or adding
secondary treatment to meet levels of using 1.5 percent Sulphur, and available environmental capacity of the
site)
d
If bore size diameter [mm] < 400: 1460 (or up to 1,600 if justified to maintain high energy efficiency.)
e
If bore size diameter [mm] > or = 400
Gas volume measured at standard condition (25C and 1 atm) and all parameters corrected by O2 of 13%.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 330 of 369

Turbine Gas
Fuel Parameter Unit
Regulation No. 13 Year
2009
IFC
Oil
TSP mg/Nm
3
100 NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
650 NA
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
450 NA
Opacity % 20 NA
Gas
TSP mg/Nm
3
50 NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
150 NA
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
150 NA
Opacity % 320 NA
Natural Gas =
3MWth to <
15MWth
TSP mg/Nm
3
NA NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
NA NA
NOx as NO2 ppm NA 42
a
; 100
b

Natural Gas =
15MWth to <
50MWth
TSP mg/Nm
3
NA NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
NA NA
Fuels other than
Natural Gas =
3MWth to <
15MWth
TSP mg/Nm
3
NA NA
SO2 % NA 0.5% S
c

a
; 150
b

Fuels other than
Natural Gas =
15MWth to <
50MWth
TSP mg/Nm
3
NA NA
SO2 % NA 0.5% S
c

a
Electric generation
b
Mechanical drive
c
or lower percent Sulphur (e.g. 0.2 percent Sulphur) if commercially available without significant excess fuel
cost
Gas volume measured at standard condition (25C and 1 atm) and all parameters corrected by O2 of 15% dry
condition.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 331 of 369

Boiler, Steam Generator, Process Heater, Heater Treater
Fuel Parameter Unit
Regulation No. 13 Year 2009
IFC
a

Oil
TSP mg/Nm
3
150 50
b

SO2 mg/Nm
3
1200 2000
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
800 460
Opacity % 20 NA
Gas
TSP mg/Nm
3
50 NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
150 NA
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
400 320
Opacity % 20 NA
Solid
TSP mg/Nm
3
NA 50
b

SO2 mg/Nm
3
NA 2000
NOx as NO2 mg/Nm
3
NA 650
Opacity % NA NA
a
Only for Boiler
b
or up to 150 if justified by environmental assessment
Gas volume measured at standard condition (25C and 1 atm) condition.
All parameters corrected by O2 of 5% for oil fuel in dry condition except opacity
All parameters corrected by O2 of 3% for gas fuel in dry condition except opacity

Flare
Parameter Unit
IFC
Opacity % 40 NA

Thermal Sulphur Oxidation
Parameter Unit
IFC
SO2 mg/Nm
3
2600 NA

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 332 of 369

Sulphur Capture
Sulphur Feed Rate
(ton/day)
Unit
a

IFC
<2 % 70 NA
2-10 % 85 NA
10-50 % 95 NA
>50 % 97 NA
a
Minimum Sulphur Recovery

Glycol Dehydration
Parameter Environmental Ministry Regulation No. 13 Year 2009 IFC
VOC as TPH
Efficiency hydrocarbon 95% NA
0,8 kg VOC as TPH per mscf 24 hour average NA
condition.

Catalyst Regenerator
Parameter Unit
IFC
TSP mg/Nm
3
400 NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
1500 NA
NO2 mg/Nm
3
1000 NA
HC mg/Nm
3
200 NA
condition.

Class Sulphur Recovery unequipped by Gas Incinerator
Parameter Unit
IFC
TSP mg/Nm
3
400 NA
Reduced sulphur content mg/Nm
3
450 NA
NO2 mg/Nm
3
1000 NA
HC mg/Nm
3
200 NA
The measurement in dry condition and corrected by O2 of 0%
Reduced sulphur content is Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S), Carbonyl Sulphide (COS) and Carbon Disulphide (CS2)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 333 of 369

Class Sulphur Recovery equipped by Gas Incinerator
Parameter Unit
IFC
TSP mg/Nm
3
400 NA
SO2 mg/Nm
3
1500 NA
NO2 mg/Nm
3
1000 NA
HC mg/Nm
3
200 NA
condition.

Table A.5 Effluent and Discharges
Types Parameter Unit
MoE Decree KEP-
19/MENLH/2010 Att I.C
IFC
15

P
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

W
a
t
e
r

COD mg/L 200 125
BOD mg/L - 25
Oil and grease mg/L 25 -
Sulphide (as H2S) mg/L 0.5 1
Ammonia (as NH3-N) mg/L 5 -
Total Phenols mg/L 2 0.5
Temperature C 40
pH mg/L 6 - 9 6 - 9
TSS mg/L - 35
TDS
2
mg/L 4000 -
Heavy metal (total)
3
mg/L - 5
Chlorides mg/L - 600 (average); 1200
Total Hydrocarbon mg/L - 10
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e

W
a
s
t
e
w
a
t
e
r

Oil and grease mg/L 15 -
Total Organic Carbon (TOC) mg/L 110 -
C
o
o
l
i
n
g

w
a
t
e
r
6

Temperature C -
Temperature increase
of no more than 3 C
S
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r

d
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
5

Oil and grease - 10 mg/L.

15
IFC EHS Guidelines for Onshore Oil and Gas Development
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 334 of 369

Types Parameter Unit
MoE Decree KEP-
19/MENLH/2010 Att I.C
IFC
15

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

w
e
l
l

w
o
r
k
o
v
e
r

f
l
u
i
d
s
4

pH
- -
6 - 9
H
y
d
r
o
t
e
s
t

W
a
t
e
r
4

COD mg/L - 125
BOD mg/L - 25
Sulphide (as H2S) mg/L - 1
Total Phenols mg/L - 0.5
pH mg/L - 6 - 9
TSS mg/L - 35
Heavy metal (total)
3
mg/L - 5
Chlorides mg/L - 600 (average); 1200
Notes:
1. New on-shore oil and gas facility is facility utilised for exploration, drilling, production well, injection well,
well treatment, and oil and gas processing facility whose the plan stage is was conducted after 1996.
2. If the produced water discharged to the sea this is not applicable.
3. Heavy metals include: Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, vanadium, and
zinc).
4. For discharge to surface water or to land, see parameters for produced water
5. Stormwater runoff should be treated through an oil/water separation system
6. At edge of the zone where initial mixing and dilution take place. Where the zone is not defined, use 100 m
from point of discharge.

Table A.6 Sewage
Parameter Unit
IFC EHS Guidelines
Indicative Values for Treated Sanitary Sewage
Discharges
pH - 6 9
BOD mg/l 30
COD mg/l 125
Total nitrogen mg/l 10
Total phosphorus mg/l 2
Oil and grease mg/l 10
Total suspended
solids
mg/l 50
Total coliform bacteria MPNb / 100 ml 400
a

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 335 of 369

Annex B
Environmental Baseline Sampling Assurance Report
The worlds leading sustainability consultancy

Draft Report

ESIA Assurance Sampling for Soil, Surfacewater and
Ambient Air

Salamander Kerendan Site, Bangkanai Block PSC,
Kabupaten Barito Utara, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia
Salamander Energy Indonesia Pte. Ltd.
August 2013
www.erm.com
Privileged and Confidential
PT. ERM INDONESIA SALAMANDER ENERGY PTE. LTD.
PROJECT NO. 0184276 ESIA ASSURANCE SAMPLING

Draft Report

ESIA Assurance Sampling for Soil, Surfacewater
and Ambient Air

PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron Dirgantara
2
nd
floor, Suite 238-239
Jl. Gatot Subroto Kav. 72
Jakarta 12870
Indonesia

Telephone +62 21 7918 1904
Facsimile +62 21 7918 1905
Website: www.erm.com

Client.
Salamander Energy Indonesia Pte. Ltd.

Project No.
0184276
Date.
August 2013
Approved by

Denis Daley
Partner
ERM Indonesia

1 ESIA Assurance Sampling for Soil, Surfacewater and Ambient Air MAS/ARN/JRG DD DD 23Aug13
0 ESIA Assurance Sampling for Soil, Surfacewater and Ambient Air MAS/ARN/JRG DD DD 19Aug13
Revision Description By Checked Approved Date
This report has been prepared by PT. ERM Indonesia with all reasonable skill, care
and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporating our
General Terms and Conditions of Business and taking account of the resources
devoted to it by agreement with the client.

We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect or any matters
outside the scope of the above.

This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever
nature to any third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known.
Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk.
Distribution

Internal
Public
Privileged and Confidential

i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PT. ERM Indonesia (ERM) was commissioned by Salamander Energy
Indonesia Pte. Ltd. (Salamander/Client) to conduct a limited baseline
Assurance Soil and Surfacewater Sampling including Ambient Air Quality
Monitoring (the Project) at Kerendan Wellhead (comprised of the Drill Site
and the Main Camp), Pipeline Corridor and Kerendan Gas Processing
Facility (KGPF) (collectively referred to as the Site), which are located
within the Bangkanai Block Production Sharing Contract (PSC), in
Kabupaten Barito Utara, Central Kalimantan. ERM, along with its
subcontractors conducted the field work on 10-19 July 2013.
The objectives of the Project were to gather baseline soil, surfacewater and
ambient air quality data within the Site and its immediate surroundings, in
support of the on-going Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
currently being conducted at the Site.
Thirty soil samples were collected within the Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site
and Main Camp), Pipeline Route and KGPF in areas where no contamination
were visually observed. Three stations of ambient air quality monitoring and
sampling were positioned at strategic locations within the Kerendan
Wellhead, Pipeline Route and KGPF. Nine surfacewater samples were
collected from the Lahai River, a stream crossing the Pipeline Route and a
stream passing through the northwestern corner of KGPF.
Soil samples were sent to PT. ALS Indonesia (ALS) for the laboratory analysis
of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
(SVOCs), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), 30 Metal Scan and Total
Alkalinity. Two soil samples from Kerendan Wellhead [one sample from
Main Camp and one sample from Drill Site], and two samples each from the
KGPF and the Pipeline Route were analyzed for Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure (TCLP) 10-Metal Suite, Organo-Chlorine Pesticides
(OCP) and Organo-Phosphate Pesticides (OPP).
Ambient air quality samples were analyzed by ALS for Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
for 10 minutes (min) and 24-hours (hr) averaging periods, Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2) for 1-hr averaging period, Particulate Matters (PM10 and PM2.5) for 24-
hr averaging period and Ozone for maximum of 8-hr daily averaging period.
Surfacewater samples were analyzed by ALS for VOCs, SVOCs, TPH, 30
Metal Scan, Total Metals, Dissolved Metals and Total Surfactants (MBAS),
BOD5, COD, Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, Oil and Grease, Total
Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS).
IFCs Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines were applied (as
available and applicable) in the qualitative assessment of baseline soil,
ambient air and surfacewater analytical results. However, in the absence of
available IFC EHS Guidelines, applicable Indonesian regulations, relevant
industry sector EHS guidelines such as the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) and the Dutch
Standards (Dutch Intervention Values [DIV] 2009), were referenced.

ii
Based on the results of the Project, the following conclusions were drawn:
Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and Main Camp)
Soil Baseline Status:
The profile of surface soil is dominated by clay;
The baseline soil was detected with concentrations of Aluminum,
Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron,
Lead, Magnesium, Manganese, Molybdenum, Nickel, Phosphorus,
Potassium, Sodium, Sulfur, Strontium, Vanadium, Zinc, Lithium,
Titanium, and Mercury;
The detected Phosphorus concentrations (in all soil samples) exceeded
the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg. Three samples showed elevated
concentrations (from 162 mg/kg to 170 mg/kg] which might be
influenced by the current activities at the Drill Site given the location
where the soil samples were collected (i.e.; from the Drill Site and
between the Drill Site and the Lahai River). Phosphorus is not
specified in the DIV;
The detected concentration of Arsenic (in two soil samples from the
Drill Site; one close to the Lahai River [12 mg/kg] and one close to the
Main Camp [2 mg/kg]) exceeded the USEPA RSL of 1.6 mg/kg (the
USEPA RSL for Arsenic is more stringent than the DIV [76 mg/kg]).
The soil sample which showed elevated concentration (i.e.; 12 mg/kg)
might have been influenced by the activities at the Drill Site;
The detected concentration of Barium in one soil sample from the
Drill Site (close to the Lahai River [1,150.14 mg/kg]) exceeded the DIV
of 920 mg/kg (the elevated concentration might have been influenced
by the activities at the Drill Site). The DIV for Barium is more
stringent than the USEPA RSL [19,000 mg/kg]);
Concentrations of Barium and Zinc were detected in two soil samples
analyzed for TCLP Metals; and
TPH, VOCs, SVOCs, OCP and OPP were not detected in all soil
samples.
Ambient Air Baseline Status:
NO2 (1-hour averaging period), and O3 (8-hour daily maximum) were
not detected;
SO2 was detected for two-10-min averaging periods (ranged from 525
to 788 g/m3) and for 24-hr averaging period (167g/m3). The
detected SO2 concentrations for the two-10-min and 24-hr and
averaging periods exceeded the IFC EHS Guideline of 500 g/m
3
and
20 g/m
3
, respectively (SO2 is not specified in GOI National Ambient
Air Quality Standard No. 41/1999). The detection of SO2 in two-10-
min and 24-hr averaging periods might have been attributed by the
activities at the Drill Site. Also, it should be noted that one diesel
engine was operational at the Drill Site during the ambient air quality
monitoring and sampling activities.

iii
PM10 was detected at a concentration of 28.1 g/Nm
3
and PM2.5 at
concentration 18.4 g/Nm
3
for 24-hr averaging period but these
concentrations did not exceed the IFC EHS Guidelines (PM10: 50
g/Nm
3
and PM2.5: 25 g/Nm
3
) and the GOI National Ambient Air
Quality Standard No. 41/1999 (note that the IFC EHS Guideline is
more stringent that the GOI National Ambient Air Quality Standard
No. 41/1999 [PM10: 150 g/Nm
3
and PM2.5: 65 g/Nm
3
]). It should be
noted that the surrounding area where the ambient air quality
monitoring and sampling equipment was set-up is bare ground (i.e.;
no concrete/asphalt pavement or gravel bedding).

Surfacewater Baseline Status:
Lahai River
Recorded/detected baseline pH, TDS and TSS were within the
specified range or did not exceed the referenced criteria;
The baseline Total Alkalinity and Total Nitrogen ranged from 4-5
mg/L and from 0.6-2.5 mg/L, respectively;
The baseline surfacewater was detected with Total Metal
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Iron,
Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium, Strontium,
Sulphur and Zinc;
The baseline surfacewater was detected with Dissolved Metal
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Calcium, Iron, Manganese,
Sodium, Strontium, Sulphur, Zinc and Lithium;
Detected (total) Iron concentration in all Lahai River surfacewater
samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1 (0.3
mg/L);
Detected (dissolved) Iron concentrations in four Lahai River
surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No 82/2001 for
Class 1;
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected from all Lahai River
surfacewater samples, while DO and Surfactant were detected but did
not exceed or within the range of the referenced criteria; and
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected in all Lahai River
surfacewater samples.
Canal Outfall
The baseline Total Alkalinity and Total Nitrogen were detected at 387
mg/L and 157 mg/L, respectively;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Copper, Iron,
Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium, Strontium,
Sulphur and Zinc;

iv
concentrations of Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium,
Copper, Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium,
Sodium, Strontium, Zinc and Lithium;
Total Iron concentration exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for
Class 1;
The baseline (dissolved) Iron concentration exceeded the GOI
Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1;
BOD and Oil and Grease exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
for all water classes (Classes 1, 2, 3 and 4) ;
COD exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 4;
DO is lower than GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1 minimum
required concentration;
Surfactant did not exceed/ within the range of available standard; and
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected.
Pipeline Route
The profile of surface soil is predominantly clay and silt;
Arsenic, Antimony, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Cobalt, Copper,
Chromium, Iron, Lead, Lithium, Magnesium, Manganese, Mercury,
Nickel, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium, Sulfur, Strontium, Thallium,
Titanium, Vanadium and Zinc;
Barium and Zinc were detected in one soil samples analyzed for
TCLP Metals;
Detected concentration of Phosphorus in all soil samples exceeded the
USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg (note that Phosphorus is not specified in the
DIV);
The detected concentration of Arsenic in six soil samples (one
between the Drill Site and KGPF [3 mg/kg] and five between the
KGPF and the Manifold [2-4 mg/kg]) exceeded the USEPA RSL of 1.6
mg/kg (the USEPA RSL for Arsenic is more stringent than the DIV
[76 mg/kg]); and
TPH, VOCs, SVOCs, OCP and OPP were not detected in soil samples
from the Pipeline Route.


SO2 (for both 10-min and 24-hr averaging periods), NO2 (1-hour
averaging period), O3 (8-hour daily maximum), PM10 and PM2.5 (both
for 24-hr averaging period) were not detected.

v
Total Alkalinity of all surfacewater samples collected from the streams
along the Pipeline Route was recorded at 4 mg/L while the Total
Nitrogen ranged from 0.6-1.0 mg/L;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium,
Copper Iron, , Lithium Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium, Sodium,
Sulphur, Strontium, Titanium and Zinc;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Copper, Iron, Magnesium,
Manganese, Sodium, Strontium, Zinc and Lithium;
Detected total Iron and dissolved Iron concentrations in all Pipeline
Route surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No 82/2001
for Class 1;
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected, while DO was lower
than recommended range of GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1;
Surfactant were detected but did not exceed any referenced criteria;
and
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected in all Pipeline Route
KGPF
The profile of surface soil is dominated by organic clay;
Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead,
Magnesium, Manganese, Nickel, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium,
Sulphur, Strontium, Vanadium, Zinc, Lithium, Titanium, and
Mercury;
Concentrations of Barium and Zinc were detected in two soil samples
analyzed for TCLP Metals;
The detected Phosphorus concentrations (in all soil samples) exceeded
the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg ( Phosphorus is not specified in the
DIV);
The detected concentration of Arsenic in six soil samples from the
KGPF exceeded the USEPA RSL of 1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA RSL for
Arsenic is more stringent than the DIV [76 mg/kg]); and
TPH, VOCs, SVOCs, OCP and OPP were not detected in soil samples
from the KGPF.

vi

averaging period), O3 (8-hour daily maximum), PM10 and PM2.5 (both
for 24-hr averaging period) were not detected.


Recorded baseline pH (5.8-5.9) in all KGPF surfacewater samples
were lower than the specified range under the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001 for Class 1, 2 and 3;
Recorded/detected baseline TDS and TSS were within the specified
range of the referenced criteria;
The recorded baseline Total Alkalinity from 4-7 mg/L while Total
Nitrogen was not detected;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium,
Copper, Iron, Lithium, Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium, Sodium,
Strontium, Sulphur, Titanium and Zinc;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Calcium, Copper, Iron, Lithium,
Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium, Sodium, Strontium, Sulphur and
Zinc;
Detected total Iron and dissolved Iron concentrations in all KGPF
surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No 82/2001 for
Class 1;
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected, while DO was lower
than minimum range set by GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1;
Surfactant were detected but did not exceed any referenced criteria;
and

These conclusions are considered to represent the current condition of the
sampling locations.

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................... I
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................ VII
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE ...................................................................... 1
1.2 LIMITATION ..................................................................................................... 1
2 FIELDWORK .................................................................................................. 3
2.1 FIELDWORK SCHEDULE ................................................................................... 3
2.2 FIELD ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 3
3 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY ....................................................... 4
3.1 SOIL BORING AND SOIL SAMPLING ............................................................... 4
3.2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING/SAMPLING ....................................... 6
3.3 SURFACEWATER SAMPLING ............................................................................ 6
3.4 ANALYTES OF CONCERN .................................................................................. 7
3.4.1 Soil Samples .................................................................................... 7
3.4.2 Ambient Air Quality Samples ...................................................... 8
3.4.3 Surfacewater Samples .................................................................... 8
4 FIELD OBSERVATIONS .............................................................................. 9
4.1 SOIL BORING AND SOIL SAMPLING ............................................................... 9
4.1.1 Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and Main Camp) ...................... 9
4.1.2 Pipeline Route ................................................................................. 9
4.1.3 KGPF .............................................................................................. 10
4.2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING AND SAMPLING ............................. 10
4.2.1 Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and Main Camp) .................... 10
4.2.2 Pipeline Route ............................................................................... 11
4.2.3 KGPF .............................................................................................. 11
4.3 SURFACEWATER SAMPLING .......................................................................... 11
4.3.2 Pipeline Route ............................................................................... 11
4.3.3 KGPF .............................................................................................. 12
5 REFERENCE CRITERIA............................................................................. 13
5.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 13
5.2 SOIL ................................................................................................................ 13
5.2.1 USEPA RSLs ................................................................................. 13
5.2.2 Dutch Standards ........................................................................... 13
5.3 AIR .................................................................................................................. 14

viii
5.4 SURFACEWATER ............................................................................................. 14
5.4.1 GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 ....................................................... 14
6 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ..................................................................... 16
6.1 SOIL ................................................................................................................ 16
6.1.2 Pipeline Route ............................................................................... 17
6.1.3 KGPF .............................................................................................. 18
6.2 AMBIENT AIR ................................................................................................. 18
6.3 SURFACE WATER ........................................................................................... 19
6.3.1 Kerendan Wellhead ...................................................................... 20
6.3.1.1 Lahai River ...................................................................................... 20
6.3.1.2 Canal Outfall ................................................................................... 21
6.3.2 Pipeline Route ............................................................................... 21
6.3.3 KGPF .............................................................................................. 22
7 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 24

1
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
PT. ERM Indonesia (ERM) was commissioned by Salamander Energy
Indonesia Pte. Ltd. (Salamander/Client) to conduct a Limited Baseline
Assurance Soil and Surfacewater Sampling including Ambient Air
Quality Monitoring (the Project) at Kerendan Wellhead (comprised of
the Drill Site and the Main Camp), Pipeline Corridor and Kerendan Gas
Processing Facility (KGPF) (collectively referred to as Site) which
a r e located within the Bangkanai Block Production Sharing Contract
(PSC), in Kabupaten Barito Utara, Central Kalimantan, some 200
kilometers (km) west of Balikpapan. Figure 1 presents the Site Location.

Figure 1: Site Location

The objectives of this Project were to gather baseline soil, surfacewater
and ambient air quality data within the Site and its immediate
surroundings, in support of the on-going Environmental and Social
Impact Assessment (ESIA) currently being conducted at the Site.

ERM, along with its subcontractors conducted a field work at the Site on
10-19 July 2013.

This report presents the results of the Project.
1.2 LIMITATION

The findings of this report are based on the Scope of Work agreed with
the Client which reflects ERMs best judgment based on the information
available at the time of report preparation. ERM performed the services
in a manner consistent with the normal level of care and expertise
exercised by members of the environmental assessment profession. This
report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Client. Any third party
Site Location

2
use of this report, or any reliance on or decisions made on the basis of
this report, is the responsibility of such third party. ERM accepts no
responsibility for any damages, if any, suffered by a third party as a
result of decisions made or actions taken based on this report.
Subject to the Scope of Work, ERMs assessment is limited strictly to
assessing typical environmental conditions associated with the subject
property and does not evaluate structural conditions of any buildings on
the subject property, nor any other issues.
This assessment is based on the sampling and analyses described in the
report, information provided by the Client and review of available
historical information. All conclusions and recommendations made in
the report are the professional opinions of the ERM personnel involved
with the project and, while normal checking of the accuracy of data has
been conducted, ERM assumes no occurrences outside the scope of this
project.
The lack of full knowledge of prior use and site activities may affect our
ability to completely assess risks or hazards at the Site. Furthermore,
there can be no assurance that any sampling techniques employed will
necessarily disclose all contaminants at the Site due, among other things
and without limitation, to such factors as a practical and economic
limitation on the number and location of samples, sample depth, and the
like. Further, we assume no liability for existing conditions on the Site.
To the extent that the services require judgment, there can be no
assurance that fully definitive or desired results will be obtained, or if
any results are obtained, that they will be supportive of any given
course of action. The services may include the application of judgment
to scientific principles, to that extent that certain results of this work may
be based on subjective interpretation. ERM's findings are drawn from
professional judgment based on the targeted sampling and analysis
program and to allow informed decisions to be made by the Client on
any liability issues or remediation requirements necessary. We make no
warranties, express or implied, including without limitation, warranties
as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

3
2 FIELDWORK
2.1 FIELDWORK SCHEDULE

The field team mobilized from Jakarta to Balikpapan on 10 July 2013
then from Balikpapan to the Site on 11 July 2013.

Site kick-off meeting (KOM) and health and safety (H&S) briefing were
conducted in the morning of 12 July 2013. After the completion of KOM
H&S briefing, ambient air quality monitoring equipment were set-up
and soil sampling started. Surfacewater sampling started on 16 July
2013. All field activities were completed on 17 July 2013.

The field team demobilized from the Site to Balikpapan on 18 July 2013
then from Balikpapan to Jakarta on 19 July 2013.
2.2 FIELD ACTIVITIES
The following activities were completed at the Site and its immediate
surroundings during the fieldwork:
Soil sampling - soil samples were collected in areas where no
contamination was visually observed within the following
locations:
o Kerendan Wellhead (composed of the Drill Site and the
Main Camp);
o Pipeline Route; and
o KGPF;
Ambient air monitoring ambient air monitoring equipment was
positioned on the following locations:
o Kerendan Wellhead;
o Pipeline route; and
o KGPF.
Surfacewater sampling surfacewater samples were collected
from the following locations:
o Lahai River (upstream, midstream and downstream) close
to Kerendan Wellhead;
o canal outfall at the Kerendan Wellhead;
o a stream crossing by the pipeline route; and
o a stream at the southeast corner of the KGPF (upstream,
midstream and downstream).

4
3 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 SOIL BORING AND SOIL SAMPLING
To enable the collection of soil samples, soil borings were advanced from
the ground surface to a maximum of 0.5 meters below ground surface
(mbgs) using post-hole diggers. Soil samples were collected within this
depth. Soil bores were positioned in areas where no contamination was
observed. The soil bores were logged for geological description. The
coordinates of soil boring/sampling locations were recorded using
Global Positioning System (GPS).
Thirty soil samples were collected within the Kerendan Wellhead (Drill
Site and Main Camp), pipeline route and KGPF. A set of 10 soil samples
were collected each from Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and Main
Camp), pipeline route and KGPF. Two field duplicate samples were also
collected for field quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC).
Figure 2 below shows the soil sampling locations along with
representative photos during the soil sampling process. Attachment A
shows the Projects sampling and analysis plan.

PROJECT NO. 0184276 ESIAASSURANCE SAMPLING
5
SOIL SAMPLING LOCATIONS ANDPHOTOS
MANIFOLD
(Perusahaan Listrik
Negara - Government
!e"tri"it# Provi$er%
D&ILL
SIT
'NCLA&D A&A
S(-)*-+GPF
,)-../0
--/10/0 N
*, M
S(-.2-PL II
,)-.2,)
--//-** N
*, M
S(-.3-PL II
,)-.0.0
--//133 N
*, M
S(-.0-PL II
,)-),/2
--//,,/ N
*, M
S(-.--PL II
,)-))3*
--/)13* N
*, M
S(-),-PL II
,)-)2-)
--/.*2, N
*, M
S(-).-+GPF
,)-./*1
--/1/03 N
*, M
S(-))-+GPF
,)-.//3
--/1/3- N
*, M
S(-)/-+GPF
,)-./).
--/110) N
*, M
S(-)1-+GPF
,)-.)**
--/12,3 N
*, M
CAMP
HLIPAD
LAHAI &I4& (& I%
S(-,)-&G
,)-//.)
--/*01, N
*, M
S(-,/-&G
,)-/)/,
--/*0)* N
*, M
S(-,.-&G
,)-//00
--/*0** N
*, M
G&-&I
0293388 E
9935855 N
*, M
S(-,*
,)-/.02
--/*-/3 N
*, M
S(-,2
,)-/.)*
--/*-3) N
*, M
S(-,3-CP
,)-/.2)
--/*-,/ N
*, M
S(-,0-CP
,)-/.)*
--/*-3) N
*, M
S(-,--CP
,)-/,1,
--/*-/. N
*, M
S(-.,-CP
,)-/,01
--/*010 N
*, M
S(-..-PL I
,)-)2//
--/*2.- N
*, M
S(-)2-+GPF
,)-.,1.
--/1303 N
*, M
S(-)--
+GPF
,)-,0-0
S(-)0-
+GPF
,)-,0*3
--/13,, N
S(-)3-
+GPF
,)-,-2/
--/1312 N
S(-/,-+GPF
,)-,-3*
--/13/) N
*, M
S(-.)-PL I
,)-).12
--/*,12 N
*, M
S(-.*-PL I
,)-..3-
--/1023 N
*, M
CLA&D A&A S(-./-PL I
,)-)20.
--/*.23 N
*, M
S(-.1-PL I
,)-.)..
--/1-10 N
*, M
&I4& (& II%
PI PELINE LAYOUT

Figure 2: Soil Sampling Locations

6
3.2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING/SAMPLING
The ambient air quality monitoring and sampling activities were
conducted at the Kerendan Wellhead area, an area along the pipeline
route and within KGPF.
The air quality monitoring/sampling equipment was stationed at the
Drill Site (A-01-RG), close to Lahai River, between the Drill Site and
KGPF (A-02-R II) [along the pipeline route] and within the KGPF (A-03-
R III).
The equipment that was used for the ambient air quality
monitoring/sampling is Gray Wolf Sensing Solutions proprietary
AdvanceSense/DirectSense Toxic Gas Test Meters.
Figure 3 below shows the locations of the ambient air quality monitoring
stations. Attachment A shows the Projects sampling and analysis plan.
AM(INT AI&
MONITO&ING5SAMPLING
MANIFOLD
(Perusahaan Listrik
Negara- Government
!e"tri"it#Provi$er%
D&ILL SIT
'NCLA&D A&A
(HA4IL6 4GTATD%
+GPF A&A
A-,/-&III
CAMP
HLIPAD
LAHAI &I4& (& I%
CLA&D
A&A
&I4& (& II%
A-,.-&I
A-,)-&II

Figure 3: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Sampling Stations
3.3 SURFACEWATER SAMPLING
A total of nine surfacewater samples were collected, via grab sampling
method (a weighted decontaminated bailer was used from the bank of
the water features), from the upstream, midstream and downstream
portions (one sample each) of the Lahai River along the Kerendan
Wellhead area. One surfacewater sample was also collected from the
outfall of Kerendan Wellheads canal. A total of four surface water
samples were collected from the Kerendan Wellhead area.

7
Additionally, two surfacewater samples were collected (via grab
sampling method) at a stream that is passing through the pipeline route
and three surface water samples were also collected from a stream (at
the upstream, midstream and downstream) passing through the
northwestern corner of KGPF.
One field duplicate surfacewater sample was also collected for this
project (from Kerendan Wellhead canal outfall). Additionally, one
Equipment Blank was collected for QA/QC.
Surface water chemistry such as pH, temperature and DO were
measured in situ.
Figure 4 below shows the locations of surface water sampling.
Attachment A shows the Projects sampling and analysis plan.
&iver F!o7
S'&FA 8AT& SAMPLING
MANIFOLD
(Perusahaan Listrik
Negara - Government
!e"tri"it#Provi$er%
D&ILL SIT
'NCLA&DA&A
+GPF A&A
S8-,--&III
CAMP
HLIPAD
LAHAI &I4& (& I%
CLA&D
A&A
&I4& (& II%
S8-,0-&III
S8-,3-&III
S8-,/-&I S8-,)-&I S8-,.-&I
S8-,1-&I
S8-,*-&II
S8-,2-&II
Pipelinelayo!

Figure 4: Location of Surfacewater Sampling
3.4 ANALYTES OF CONCERN
3.4.1 Soil Samples
All 30 soil samples and two field duplicate samples (QA/QC) were sent
to PT. ALS Indonesia (ALS) for the analysis of Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOCs), Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs),
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), 30 Metal Scan and Total
Alkalinity. In addition, two samples from Kerendan Wellhead [one

8
sample from the Main Camp and one sample from the Drill Site], and
two samples each from the KGPF and the pipeline route (six samples in
total) were submitted for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) 10-Metal Suite, Organo-Chlorine Pesticides (OCP) and Organo-
Phosphate Pesticides (OPP) analysis.
It should be noted that Phosphorus and Sulphur are not categorized as
Metals; however, it is a common practice in industrial analysis to
include these analytes when conducting a Metal Scan. Thus, their
detected concentrations were presented along with other detected
Metals that were included in the 30 Metal Scan.
3.4.2 Ambient Air Quality Samples
Ambient air quality samples were sent to ALS for the analysis of IFC
recommended ambient air quality compounds such as Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2) for 24-hour (hr) and 10-minutes (min) averaging period, Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO2) for 1-hr averaging period, Particulate Matters (PM10 and
PM2.5) for 24-hr averaging period and Ozone for maximum of 8-hr daily
averaging period.
3.4.3 Surfacewater Samples
Surfacewater samples (including equipment blank [EB]) were sent to
ALS for VOCs, SVOCs, TPH, 30 Metal Scan, Total Metals, Dissolved
Metals, Total Surfactants (MBAS), BOD5, COD, Total Nitrogen, Total
Phosphorus, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total
Dissolved Solids (TDS), analysis. Additionally, conductivity was
analyzed in the laboratory.
A Trip Blank (TB) was sent to ALS along with the surfacewater samples
for VOC analysis only.
The analytes of concern and analytical plan for the Project are detailed in
Attachment A.

9
4 FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Described below are the observations made during the field work.
4.1 SOIL BORING AND SOIL SAMPLING
4.1.1 Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and Main Camp)
Three soil samples were collected from the Drill Site area (SB-01-
RG, SB-02-RG, and SB-03-RG):
o Soil sampling points within the Drill Site were located in
the eastern portion close to containers zone and wire
mesh fence; and
o Soil profile at the Drill Site is predominantly silty clay.
Four soil samples and one field duplicate sample were collected
from the Main Camp (SB-07-CP, SB-08-CP, SB-09-CP, and SB-10-
CP):
o Soil sampling points within the Main Camp located at
four corners of the area close to wire mesh fence; and
o Soil profile at the Main Camp is mostly silty clay and
sandy clay.
Two soil samples were collected on vacant land between Drill
Site and Main Camp (SB-05 and SB-06):
o The area between the Drill Site and the Main Camp is a
vacant land with some grasses and trees. Some part of the
land is being used as roadway; and
o Soil profile in the area between the Drill Site and the Main
Camp is clayey silt.
One soil sample was collected between Drill Site and Lahai River
(RG-RI):
o The area is grassy and dominated by clay formation.
4.1.2 Pipeline Route
Five soil samples were collected along the pipeline route from
Drill Site to KGPF (SB-11-PL I, SB-12-PL I, SB-13-PL I, SB-14-PL I,
and SB-15-PL I);
Soil sampling was conducted on the bank of the road (right side
going to the direction of KGPF from Kerendan Wellhead) where
the pipeline will be passing. Soil samples were collected with a
spacing of approximately 50 m from each sampling location;

10
Both sides of the pipeline route and the road (between Kerendan
Wellhead and KGPF) are heavily vegetated with trees and grasses;
Five soil samples were collected along the pipeline route from
Drill Site to the Manifold (Perusahaan Listrik Negara [PLN] -
Government Electricity Provider) [SB-16-PL II, SB-17-PL II, SB-18-
PL II, SB-19-PL II, and SB-20-PL II];
Soil sampling was conducted on the bank of the road (right side
going to the direction of the Manifold from KGPF) where the
pipeline will be passing. Soil samples were collected at
approximate 50 m spacing;
Both sides of the pipeline route and the road (between KGPF and
Manifold) are heavily vegetated with trees and grasses; and
Soil general soil profile within the pipeline route is
predominantly clay and silt.
4.1.3 KGPF
Ten soil samples and one field duplicate sample were collected
within KGPF (SB-21-KGPF, SB-22-KGPF, SB-23-KGPF, SB-24-
KGPF, SB-25-KGPF, SB-26-KGPF, SB-27-KGPF, SB-28-KGPF, SB-
29-KGPF and SB-30-KGPF);
Samples were collected from the northern and eastern edges of
KGPF, since most part of the KGPF is still heavily forested and
could not be accessed by ERM personnel; and
Soil general soil profile at the northern and eastern edges of
KGPF is predominantly organic clay.

Attachment B (Soil Boring Logs) details the soil formations encountered
during the soil boring.
4.2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING AND SAMPLING
The ambient air quality monitoring/sampling activity was
conducted at Drill Site area (A-01-RG), close to the Lahai River;
Within the Drill Site area, two diesel engines for electricity supply
and the water pump were observed. It was noted that one diesel
engine was operational during the ambient air quality
monitoring and sampling and the other one was on stand-by. The
distance between the position of the ambient air monitoring
equipment and the diesel engine was around 100 m (based on the
ERMs air quality subcontractor [ALS], this distance was
sufficient that emissions from the diesel engine would not
adversely impact the baseline results); and
An incinerator was also observed within the Main Camp area.
The distance between the position of the ambient air quality
monitoring equipment and the incinerator was around 200 m.

11
The incinerator was not active during the entire
monitoring/sampling duration.
The ambient air quality monitoring and sampling equipment was
positioned near a stream (crossing the pipeline route and the
road) near the edge of the forest, about 10 m away from the
road; and
It was observed that vehicles passed the location of the ambient
air quality monitoring and sampling equipment less than 10
times a day.
4.2.3 KGPF
The ambient air quality monitoring and sampling equipment
was positioned at the northwestern portion of KGPF (A-03-R III);
Most of the surrounding areas are heavily forested (some areas
has been cleared); and
It was observed that vehicles passed the location of the ambient
air quality monitoring and sampling equipment less than 10
times a day.
4.3 SURFACEWATER SAMPLING
Four surfacewater samples were collected from the Lahai River (a
portion of which passes through the vicinity of Kerendan
Wellhead):
One surfacewater sample was collected from the upstream
portion of the river (SW-01-R I);
One surfacewater sample was collected from the midstream
portion of the river (SW-02-R I);
One surfacewater sample was collected from the
downstream portion of the river (SW-03-R I); and
One surfacewater sample from the Kerendan Wellhead
canal outfall (SW-04-R I).
Two surfacewater samples were collected from a stream crossing
the pipeline route and the road between the Drill Site and KGPF:
portion (SW-06-R II); and

12
One surfacewater sample was collected from the downstream
portion (SW-05-R II).
Fishing activity by the residents of the nearby community was
observed during the sampling; and
Most of the surrounding areas are heavily vegetated with trees
and grasses.
4.3.3 KGPF
Three surface water samples were collected from the stream
crossing the southwestern corner of KGPF:
portion (SW-07-R III);
One surfacewater sample was collected from the midstream
portion (SW-08-R III); and
One surfacewater sample was collected from the downstream
portion (SW-09-R III).

13
5 REFERENCE CRITERIA
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Since the development of the Site is partly funded by the International
Finance Corporation (IFC), as such the IFCs Environmental, Health, and
Safety (EHS) Guidelines were applied (as available and applicable) in
the qualitative assessment of baseline soil, ambient air and
surfacewater analytical results. It should be noted that the IFC EHS
Guidelines are designed to be used together with relevant Industry
Sector EHS Guidelines and host country regulations. Thus, in the
absence of available IFC EHS Guidelines, applicable Indonesian
regulations, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) and the Dutch Standards
(Dutch Intervention Values [DIV] 2009), were referenced.
5.2 SOIL
The IFC has no established standards for soil. Similarly, Indonesia has
no existing specific standards or regulations relating solely to
contaminated soil. Thus, the USEPA RSLs and the DIV were used in the
qualitative assessment of the detected concentrations of soil analytes of
concern. Brief descriptions of these criteria are presented below:
5.2.1 USEPA RSLs
The USEPA RSLs are risk-based concentrations derived from
standardized equations combining exposure information assumptions
with EPA toxicity data. RSLs are considered by USEPA to be protective
for humans (including sensitive groups) over a lifetime, under
residential and industrial exposure scenarios.
Generally, at sites where contaminant concentrations fall below the
RSLs, no further action or study is warranted under the US Superfund
program; thus as long as the exposure assumptions at a site match those
taken into account by the RSL calculations. Chemical concentrations
above the RSLs would not automatically designate a site as "dirty" or
trigger a response action; however, exceeding an RSL suggests that
further evaluation of the potential risks by site contaminants is
appropriate.
5.2.2 Dutch Standards
The Dutch Standards are environmental pollutant reference values (i.e.
concentrations in environmental medium) used in environmental
remediation, investigation and clean-up.
The DIV (2009) indicates the environmental quality level, above which
the maximum allowable risk of adverse effects on human and the
environment is considered unacceptable. It is recognized that the Dutch

14
standards have been developed to assess the acceptability of
contaminated soils and groundwater at housing estates in the
Netherlands, without reference to commercial or industrial land in
Indonesia.
Table 1 presents the comparison between the USEPA RSLs, DIV
Standards and the detected concentrations of soil analytes of concern.

5.3 AIR
The IFC (based on the World Health Organization [WHO] Air Quality
Guidelines Global Update, 2005) and Indonesia (Government of
Indonesia [GOI] National Ambient Air Quality Standard No. 41 of 1999)
have existing regulations on ambient air quality.
The IFC and GOI National Ambient Air Quality Standard No. 41/1999
were both used in the qualitative assessment of the detected
concentrations of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Sulphur Dioxide (SO2),
Ozone (O3), Particulate Matter10 (PM10) and Particulate Matter2.5 (PM2.5).
Table 2 presents the comparison between the IFC Standards, GOI
National Ambient Air Quality Standard No. 41/1999 and the detected
concentrations of ambient air analytes of concern.
5.4 SURFACEWATER
The IFC has no established standards for surfacewater quality.
However, in Indonesia, the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 is used for the
management of water quality and control of water pollution.
Additionally, the USEPA RSLs and the DIV Standards are commonly
used by Industry Sectors in assessing groundwater (which includes
surfacewater). Thus, the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001, the USEPA RSLs
and the DIV Standards were used in the qualitative assessment of
detected analytes in surfacewater. A brief description of GOI Regulation
No. 82/2001 is described below (brief descriptions of USEPA RSLs and
DIV Standards were discussed in the previous sections).
5.4.1 GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
The GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 is used in Indonesia for water quality
management and water pollution control. This regulation categorizes
water quality into four classes as described below:
Class 1: designated for drinking water resources, and/or other
purposes that require equal water quality;
Class 2: Designated for buildings and water recreational
infrastructures, fresh water fish cultivations, cattle breeding,

15
agricultural irrigation, and/or other purposes that require equal
water quality;
Class 3 : Designated for fresh water fish cultivations, cattle
breeding, agricultural irrigation, and/or other purposes that
require equal water quality; and
Class 4: Designated for plants irrigation and/or other purposes
that require equal water quality.
It should be noted that in this Project the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
has been used solely for purposes of comparing analytical results and
not to classify the water bodies within the vicinity of the Site.
The GOI Regulation No. 82/2001, USEPA RSLs and DIV Standards were
used in the qualitative assessment of the detected concentrations of
surfacewater analytes of concern.
Table 3 presents the comparison between the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001, USEPA RSLs, DIV and the detected concentrations of
surfacewater analytes of concern.

16
6 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
6.1 SOIL
Thirty soil samples and two field duplicate soil samples (for QA/QC)
were sent to ALS for VOCs, SVOCs, TPH, 30 Metal Scan and Total
Alkalinity. In addition, two samples from Kerendan Wellhead (one
sample from the Main Camp and one sample from the Drill Site), and
two samples each from the KGPF and the pipeline route were asked to
be analyzed for TCLP 10-Metal Suites, OCP and OPP. Summarized
below are the results of laboratory analysis for soils (with the exemption
of QA/QC soil samples) collected from Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site
and Main Camp), Pipeline Route and KGPF (Table 1 presents the
detailed analytical results and their comparisons with referenced
criteria).
Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium, Iron, Lead,
Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium,
Strontium, Vanadium, Zinc, Lithium, Titanium, and
Mercury were detected above the laboratory Limit of
Reporting (LOR) in soil samples analyzed for 30 Metal Scan
from both the Drill Site and the Main Camp;
Arsenic (from two soil samples), Antimony (from one soil
sample) and Cobalt (from three soil samples) were detected
above the laboratory LOR only from the Drill Site;
Copper was detected above the laboratory LOR in five soil
samples from the Drill Site and three soil samples from the Main
Camp;
Molybdenum was detected above the laboratory LOR in two soil
samples from the Drill Site and in one soil sample from the Main
Camp;
Sulphur and Nickel were detected above the laboratory LOR in
five soil samples from the Drill Site and in four soil samples from
the Main Camp;
Total Alkalinity that was detected above the laboratory LOR
ranged from 30 to 2,960 mg/kg in some soil samples from the
Drill Site but it was not detected (or below the laboratory LOR)
in soil samples from the Main Camp. Total Alkalinity is not
specified in both USEPA RSL and DIV;
Barium and Zinc were detected above the laboratory LOR in two
soil samples analyzed for TCLP Metals from the Drill Site and
the Main Camp;
Phosphorus was detected above the laboratory LOR in all soil
samples collected from the Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and
Main Camp) [ranged from 57 mg/kg to 170 mg/kg] with three
soil samples showing elevated concentrations (from 162 mg/kg
to 170 mg/kg], which might be influenced by the current

17
activities at the Drill Site given the location where the soil
samples were collected (i.e.; from the Drill Site and between the
Drill Site and the Lahai River). All detected concentrations of
Phosphorus exceeded the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg (note that
Phosphorus is not specified in the DIV);
The detected concentrations of Arsenic in two soil samples, one
from the Drill Site (close to the Lahai River [12 mg/kg]) and one
close to the Main Camp (2 mg/kg) exceeded the USEPA RSL of
1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA RSL for Arsenic is more stringent than
the DIV [76 mg/kg]). The soil sample which showed elevated
concentration (i.e.; 12 mg/kg) might have been influenced by the
activities at the Drill Site;
Drill Site (close to the Lahai River [1,150.14 mg/kg]) exceeded
the DIV of 920 mg/kg (the elevated concentration might have
been influenced by the activities at the Drill Site). The DIV for
Barium is more stringent than the USEPA RSL [19,000 mg/kg]);
and
TPH, VOCs, SVOCs, OCP and OPP were not detected in soil
samples from the Drill Site and the Main Camp.

Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium, Iron, Lead,
Strontium, Thallium, Vanadium, Titanium and Mercury were
detected above the laboratory LOR in soil samples analyzed for
30 Metal Scan from the Pipeline Route;
Arsenic (from seven soil samples), Antimony (from two soil
samples), Cobalt (from five soil samples) and Copper, Nickel,
Sulphur, Zinc, and Lithium (from nine soil samples) were
detected above the laboratory LOR from the Pipeline Route;
ranged from 12 to 71 mg/kg in some soil samples from the
Pipeline Route. Total Alkalinity is not specified in both USEPA
RSL and DIV;
Barium was detected above the laboratory LOR in one of the
two soil samples analyzed for TCLP Metals from the Pipeline
Route;
Zinc were detected above the laboratory LOR in two soil
samples analyzed for TCLP Metals from the Pipeline Route;
Phosphorus was detected above the laboratory LOR in all
collected soil samples from the Pipeline Route. The detected
concentrations exceeded the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg (note that
The detected concentration of Arsenic in six soil samples from
the Pipeline Route (one between the Drill Site and KGPF [3
mg/kg] and five between the KGPF and the Manifold [2-4

18
mg/kg]) exceeded the USEPA RSL of 1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA
RSL for Arsenic is more stringent than the DIV [76 mg/kg]); and
samples from the Pipeline Route.

6.1.3 KGPF
Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Copper, Iron, Lead,
Magnesium, Manganese, Nickel, Phosphorus, Potassium,
Sodium, Strontium, Vanadium, Zinc, Lithium, Titanium,
and Mercury were detected above the laboratory LOR in
soil samples analyzed for 30 Metal Scan from the KGPF;
Arsenic (from eight soil samples), Cobalt (from seven soil
samples) and Sulphur (from eight soil samples) were
detected above the laboratory LOR from the KGPF;
ranged from 9 to 68 mg/kg in some soil samples from the KGPF.
Total Alkalinity is not specified in both USEPA RSL and DIV;
Barium and Zinc were detected above the laboratory LOR in two
soil samples analyzed for TCLP Metals from the KGPF;
Phosphorus was detected above the laboratory LOR in all
collected soil samples from the KGPF. The detected
concentrations exceeded the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg (note that
the KGPF exceeded the USEPA RSL of 1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA
samples from the KGPF.
Table 1 presents the summary of soil laboratory analytical results and
the comparisons of detected concentrations of analytes with the
referenced criteria.
Attachment C presents the Laboratory Analytical Certificates.
6.2 AMBIENT AIR
Ambient air quality monitoring and sampling activities were conducted
at the Drill Site (Monitoring/Sampling Station A-01-RG), close to the
Lahai River, between the Drill Site and KGPF (Monitoring/Sampling
Station A-02-R II) [along the pipeline route] and within the KGPF
(Monitoring/Sampling Station A-03-R III).

19
At the three monitoring/sampling stations (Drill Site, Pipeline Route,
and KGPF), NO2 (1-hour averaging period), and O3 (8-hour daily
maximum) were not detected.
SO2 was not detected at Pipeline Route and KGPF monitoring/sampling
stations for both 10-min and 24-hr averaging periods.
SO2 was detected at the Drill Site monitoring/sampling station for the
24-hr averaging period (167g/m
3
) and for two-10-min averaging
periods (ranged from 525 to 788g/m
3
). The detected SO2 concentrations
for two- 10-min averaging periods and 24-hr averaging period exceeded
the IFC EHS Guidelines of 500 g/m
3
and 20 g/m
3
, respectively (SO2 is
not regulated under the GOI National Ambient Air Quality Standard No.
41/1999). The detection of SO2 in two-10-min averaging periods and 24-
hr averaging period might have been attributed by the activities at the
Drill Site. Also, it should be noted that one diesel engine was
operational at the Drill Site during the ambient air quality monitoring
and sampling activities.
3
and PM2.5 at
3
on a sample collected from the Drill Site for
24-hr averaging period but they did not exceed the IFC EHS Guidelines
(PM10: 50 g/Nm
3
and PM2.5: 25 g/Nm
3
) and the GOI National
Ambient Air Quality Standard No. 41/1999 (note that the IFC EHS
Guideline is more stringent that the GOI National Ambient Air Quality
Standard No. 41/1999 [PM10: 150 g/Nm
3
and PM2.5: 65 g/Nm
3
]). It
should be noted that the surrounding area where the ambient air quality
monitoring and sampling equipment was set-up is bare ground (i.e.; no
concrete/asphalt pavement or gravel bedding).
Table 2 presents the summary of air laboratory analytical results and the
comparisons of detected concentrations of analytes with the referenced
criteria.
Attachment C presents the Laboratory Analytical Results.
6.3 SURFACE WATER
Surfacewater samples were collected, from the upstream, midstream and
downstream portions (one sample each) of the Lahai River along the
Kerendan Wellhead area. Kerendan Wellheads canal outfall was also
sampled. A total of four surface water samples were collected from the
Kerendan Wellhead area.
Two surfacewater samples were collected at a stream passing through
the Pipeline Route. Three surface water samples were also collected from
a stream (at the upstream, midstream and downstream) passing through
the northwestern corner of KGPF.

20
One field duplicate surfacewater sample was also collected for this
project (from Kerendan Wellhead canal outfall) and one Equipment
Blank was also collected for QA/QC.
Surface water chemistry such as pH, temperature and DO were also
measured.
Summarized below are the results of laboratory analysis for surfacewater
(with the exemption of QA/QC soil samples) collected from Kerendan
Wellhead (Drill Site and Main Camp), canal outfall, Pipeline Route and
KGPF.

6.3.1 Kerendan Wellhead
6.3.1.1 Lahai River
Recorded pH was within the specified range in the referenced
criteria;
TDS and TSS did not exceed the referenced criteria;
Total Alkalinity ranged from 4-5 mg/L;
Total Nitrogen ranged from 0.6-2.5 mg/L;
Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Iron, Magnesium,
Manganese, Sodium, Strontium and Sulphur were detected
above the laboratory LOR in surfacewater samples
analyzed for Total Metals from the Lahai River;
Aluminum, Barium, Calcium, Iron, Manganese, Sodium,
Strontium and Sulphur were detected above the laboratory
LOR in surfacewater samples analyzed for Dissolved
Metals from the Lahai River;
Boron was detected from midstream and downstream
surfacewater samples analyzed for Total Metals;
Sodium was detected from upstream, midstream and
downstream surfacewater samples analyzed for Dissolved
Metals;
Strontium and Sulphur were detected from midstream and
downstream surfacewater samples analyzed for Dissolved
Metals;
Zinc was detected only in downstream surfacewater samples
analyzed for Total and Dissolved Metals;
Lithium was detected only in downstream surfacewater samples
analyzed for Dissolved Metals;
Detected (total) Iron concentration in all surfacewater samples
collected from Lahai River exceeded the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001 for Class 1 (0.3 mg/L);

21
Detected (dissolved) Iron concentrations in four surfacewater
samples collected from the Lahai River exceeded the GOI
Regulation No 82/2001 for Class 1;
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected from all Lahai
River surfacewater samples, while DO and Surfactant were
detected but did not exceed or within the range of the referenced
criteria; and
6.3.1.2 Canal Outfall
criteria;
TDS and TSS did not exceed the referenced criteria;
Total alkalinity was detected at 387 mg/L;
Total Nitrogen was detected at 157 mg/L;
Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Copper, Iron, Magnesium,
Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium, Strontium,
Sulphur and Zinc were detected above the laboratory LOR in
Canal Outfall surfacewater sample analyzed for Total Metals;
Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Copper, Iron,
Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium, Zinc and
Lithium were detected above the laboratory LOR in Canal Outfall
surfacewater sample analyzed for Dissolved Metals;
Detected (total) Iron concentration from the Canal Outfall
surfacewater sample exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
for Class 1;
Detected (dissolved) Iron concentration from the Canal Outfall
surfacewater sample exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
for Class 1;
BOD and Oil and Grease exceeded the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001 for all water classes (Classes 1, 2, 3 and 4) ;
DO is lower than GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1
minimum required concentration;
Surfactant did not exceed/ within the range of available
standard; and
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected in the canal outfall
surfacewater sample.
criteria;
TDS and TSS did not exceed the referenced;

22
Total Alkalinity of all surfacewater samples collected from the
streams along the Pipeline Route was recorded at 4 mg/L;
Total Nitrogen ranged from 0.6-1.0 mg/L;
Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Iron, Magnesium,
Manganese, Potassium, Sodium, Strontium, Zinc, Lithium and
Titanium were detected above the laboratory LOR in Pipeline
Route surfacewater samples analyzed for Total Metals;
Aluminum, Barium, Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Sodium, Zinc,
and Lithium were detected above the laboratory LOR in Pipeline
Route surfacewater samples analyzed for Dissolved Metals;
Copper, Sulphur and Titanium analyzed for Total Metals were
detected in only one of the two Pipeline Route surfacewater
samples;
Copper and Strontium analyzed for Dissolved Metals were
detected in only one of the two Pipeline Route surfacewater
samples;
Detected total Iron and dissolved Iron concentrations in all
Pipeline Route surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected in all Pipeline
Route surfacewater samples, while DO was lower than
recommended range of GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1;
Surfactant were detected but did not exceed any referenced
criteria; and
6.3.3 KGPF
Recorded pH (5.8-5.9) in all KGPF surfacewater samples were
lower than the specified range under the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001 for Class 1, 2 and 3;
TDS and TSS did not exceed any the referenced criteria;
Total Alkalinity ranged from 4-7 mg/L;
Total Nitrogen was not detected;
Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium, Copper, Iron,
Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium, Sodium, Strontium and
Sulphur were detected above the laboratory LOR in KGPF
surfacewater samples analyzed for Total Metals;
Aluminum, Barium, Calcium, Copper, Iron, Magnesium,
Manganese and Potassium were detected above the laboratory
LOR in KGPF surfacewater samples analyzed for Dissolved
Metals;
Total Chromium was only detected in only one of the three
KGPF surfacewater samples;

23
Total Potassium was detected in two of the three KGPF
surfacewater samples;
Dissolved Copper, Sulphur, and Zinc were in two of the three
Dissolved Potassium was only detected in only one of the three
Total Iron (in all surfacewater samples collected from KGPF),
Dissolved Iron (in two KGPF surfacewater samples) and
Manganese (in one KGPF surfacewater sample) exceeded the GOI
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected, while DO in two
KGPF surfacewater samples was lower than minimum
concentration set by GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1;
criteria; and
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected in all KGPF
Table 3 presents the detailed analytical results and their comparisons
with referenced criteria.
Attachment C presents the Laboratory Analytical Results.

24
7 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the Limited Baseline Assurance Soil and
Surfacewater Sampling which includes Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
conducted by ERM on 10-19 July 2013, the following conclusions were
drawn:
Kerendan Wellhead (Drill Site and Main Camp)
The profile of surface soil is dominated by clay;
The baseline soil was detected with concentrations of
Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Chromium,
Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead, Magnesium, Manganese,
Molybdenum, Nickel, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium,
Sulfur, Strontium, Vanadium, Zinc, Lithium, Titanium, and
Mercury;
The detected Phosphorus concentrations (in all soil samples)
exceeded the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg. Three samples showed
elevated concentrations (from 162 mg/kg to 170 mg/kg] which
might be influenced by the current activities at the Drill Site
given the location where the soil samples were collected (i.e.;
from the Drill Site and between the Drill Site and the Lahai
River). Phosphorus is not specified in the DIV;
The detected concentration of Arsenic (in two soil samples from
the Drill Site; one close to the Lahai River [12 mg/kg] and one
close to the Main Camp [2 mg/kg]) exceeded the USEPA RSL of
1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA RSL for Arsenic is more stringent than
the DIV [76 mg/kg]). The soil sample which showed elevated
concentration (i.e.; 12 mg/kg) might have been influenced by the
activities at the Drill Site;
Drill Site (close to the Lahai River [1,150.14 mg/kg]) exceeded
the DIV of 920 mg/kg (the elevated concentration might have
been influenced by the activities at the Drill Site). The DIV for
Barium is more stringent than the USEPA RSL [19,000 mg/kg]);
Concentrations of Barium and Zinc were detected in two soil
samples analyzed for TCLP Metals; and
TPH, VOCs, SVOCs, OCP and OPP were not detected in all soil
samples.
NO2 (1-hour averaging period), and O3 (8-hour daily maximum)
were not detected;
SO2 was detected for two-10-min averaging periods (ranged from
525 to 788 g/m3) and for 24-hr averaging period (167g/m3).
The detected SO2 concentrations for the two-10-min and 24-hr
and averaging periods exceeded the IFC EHS Guideline of 500

25
g/m
3
and 20 g/m
3
, respectively (SO2 is not specified in GOI
National Ambient Air Quality Standard No. 41/1999). The
detection of SO2 in two-10-min and 24-hr averaging periods
might have been attributed by the activities at the Drill Site. Also,
it should be noted that one diesel engine was operational at the
Drill Site during the ambient air quality monitoring and sampling
activities.
3
and PM2.5 at
3
for 24-hr averaging period but these
concentrations did not exceed the IFC EHS Guidelines (PM10: 50
g/Nm
3
and PM2.5: 25 g/Nm
3
) and the GOI National Ambient
Air Quality Standard No. 41/1999 (note that the IFC EHS
Guideline is more stringent that the GOI National Ambient Air
Quality Standard No. 41/1999 [PM10: 150 g/Nm
3
and PM2.5: 65
g/Nm
3
]). It should be noted that the surrounding area where
the ambient air quality monitoring and sampling equipment was
set-up is bare ground (i.e.; no concrete/asphalt pavement or
gravel bedding).

Lahai River
The baseline Total Alkalinity and Total Nitrogen ranged from 4-5
mg/L and from 0.6-2.5 mg/L, respectively;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Iron,
Strontium, Sulphur and Zinc;
The baseline surfacewater was detected with Dissolved
Metal concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Calcium, Iron,
Manganese, Sodium, Strontium, Sulphur, Zinc and Lithium;
Detected (total) Iron concentration in all Lahai River surfacewater
samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1
(0.3 mg/L);
Detected (dissolved) Iron concentrations in four Lahai River
surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No 82/2001
for Class 1;
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected from all Lahai
River surfacewater samples, while DO and Surfactant were
detected but did not exceed or within the range of the referenced
criteria; and

26
Canal Outfall
The baseline Total Alkalinity and Total Nitrogen were detected at
387 mg/L and 157 mg/L, respectively;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Copper,
Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium,
concentrations of Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium,
Copper, Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Phosphorus, Potassium,
Sodium, Strontium, Zinc and Lithium;
Total Iron concentration exceeded the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001 for Class 1;
The baseline (dissolved) Iron concentration exceeded the GOI
BOD and Oil and Grease exceeded the GOI Regulation No.
82/2001 for all water classes (Classes 1, 2, 3 and 4) ;
DO is lower than GOI Regulation No. 82/2001 for Class 1
minimum required concentration;
Surfactant did not exceed/ within the range of available
standard; and
TPH, VOCs and SVOCs were not detected.
Pipeline Route
The profile of surface soil is predominantly clay and silt;
Aluminum, Arsenic, Antimony, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Cobalt,
Copper, Chromium, Iron, Lead, Lithium, Magnesium,
Manganese, Mercury, Nickel, Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium,
Sulfur, Strontium, Thallium, Titanium, Vanadium and Zinc;
Barium and Zinc were detected in one soil samples analyzed for
TCLP Metals;
Detected concentration of Phosphorus in all soil samples
exceeded the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg (note that Phosphorus is
not specified in the DIV);
The detected concentration of Arsenic in six soil samples (one
between the Drill Site and KGPF [3 mg/kg] and five between the
KGPF and the Manifold [2-4 mg/kg]) exceeded the USEPA RSL
of 1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA RSL for Arsenic is more stringent than
the DIV [76 mg/kg]); and

27
samples from the Pipeline Route.


averaging period), O3 (8-hour daily maximum), PM10 and PM2.5
(both for 24-hr averaging period) were not detected.

Total Alkalinity of all surfacewater samples collected from the
streams along the Pipeline Route was recorded at 4 mg/L while
the Total Nitrogen ranged from 0.6-1.0 mg/L;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium,
Chromium, Copper Iron, , Lithium Magnesium, Manganese,
Potassium, Sodium, Sulphur, Strontium, Titanium and Zinc;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Copper, Iron, Magnesium,
Manganese, Sodium, Strontium, Zinc and Lithium;
Detected total Iron and dissolved Iron concentrations in all
Pipeline Route surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected, while DO was
lower than recommended range of GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
for Class 1;
criteria; and
KGPF
The profile of surface soil is dominated by organic clay;
Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Boron, Calcium, Cobalt,
Copper, Iron, Lead, Magnesium, Manganese, Nickel,
Phosphorus, Potassium, Sodium, Sulphur, Strontium,
Vanadium, Zinc, Lithium, Titanium, and Mercury;
Concentrations of Barium and Zinc were detected in two soil
samples analyzed for TCLP Metals;

28
The detected Phosphorus concentrations (in all soil samples)
exceeded the USEPA RSL of 20 mg/kg ( Phosphorus is not
specified in the DIV);
the KGPF exceeded the USEPA RSL of 1.6 mg/kg (the USEPA
samples from the KGPF.


averaging period), O3 (8-hour daily maximum), PM10 and PM2.5
(both for 24-hr averaging period) were not detected.


Recorded baseline pH (5.8-5.9) in all KGPF surfacewater samples
were lower than the specified range under the GOI Regulation
No. 82/2001 for Class 1, 2 and 3;
Recorded/detected baseline TDS and TSS were within the
specified range of the referenced criteria;
The recorded baseline Total Alkalinity from 4-7 mg/L while Total
Nitrogen was not detected;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Boron, Calcium,
Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lithium, Magnesium, Manganese,
Potassium, Sodium, Strontium, Sulphur, Titanium and Zinc;
concentrations of Aluminum, Barium, Calcium, Copper, Iron,
Lithium, Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium, Sodium,
Detected total Iron and dissolved Iron concentrations in all KGPF
surfacewater samples exceeded the GOI Regulation No 82/2001
for Class 1;
BOD, COD, Oil and Grease were not detected, while DO was
lower than minimum range set by GOI Regulation No. 82/2001
for Class 1;
criteria; and

These conclusions are considered to represent the current condition of
the sampling locations.

T

Tables

TABLE1.SUMMARYOFLABORATORYANALYTICALRESULTSFORSOIL
RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS SB - 11 - PLI RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
Al mg/kg 5 990,000 NS 6,940.00 6,040.00 6,500.00 8,980.00 9,580.00 8,440.00 5,999.63 5,860.00 7,759.66 7,030.00 5,330.00 810.00 5,480.00 6,760.00 7,000.00 9,140.00 10,200.00 8,040.00 7,210.00 9,760.00 11,000.00 6,420.00 8,940.00 5,700.00 7,650.00 8,990.00 8,310.00 8,620.00 7,800.00 7,980.00 8,280.00 8,060.00
As mg/kg 1 1.6 76 <LOR <LOR <LOR 12.00 2.00 1.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 1.00 <LOR 3.00 <LOR <LOR 3.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 <LOR 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 <LOR 2.00 <LOR
Sb mg/kg 1 410 22 <LOR <LOR <LOR 12.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 2.00 2.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Ba mg/kg 1 19,000 920 5.48 14.00 6.89 1,150.14 21.81 20.33 6.44 6.64 6.52 11.64 14.00 2.00 8.00 80.00 14.00 14.00 10.00 28.00 32.00 14.00 9.00 7.00 6.00 18.00 17.00 12.00 8.00 48.00 19.00 8.00 18.00 6.59
Be mg/kg 1 2,000 NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
B mg/kg 1 20,000 NS 22.00 9.98 19.19 37.72 30.01 24.46 16.26 7.25 19.66 22.00 19.00 3.00 26.00 41.00 38.00 50.00 47.00 44.00 47.00 64.00 46.00 27.00 39.00 33.00 49.00 50.00 46.00 54.00 45.00 41.00 53.00 19.99
Cd mg/kg 1 800 13 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Ca mg/kg 1 NS NS 122.53 30.63 91.87 2,120.00 19.74 969.10 33.14 26.60 14.63 26.16 40.00 7.00 13.00 41.00 38.00 33.00 12.00 312.00 403.00 74.00 18.00 20.00 8.00 37.00 100.00 54.00 11.00 14.00 20.00 15.00 108.00 21.79
Cr mg/kg 1 150,000 NS 6.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 <LOR 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 6.00
Co mg/kg 1 400 190 <LOR <LOR <LOR 7.00 2.88 3.59 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 1.00 <LOR 2.00 <LOR 11.00 15.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 <LOR 4.00 2.00 2.00 <LOR 2.00 2.00 <LOR 3.00 <LOR
Cu mg/kg 1 41,000 190 <LOR 2.08 1.10 10.12 3.95 4.93 1.94 3.67 <LOR 2.15 3.00 <LOR 5.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 5.00 10.00 12.00 6.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 8.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 4.00 9.00 <LOR
Fe mg/kg 1 720,000 NS 10,900.00 5,140.00 9,560.49 19,000.00 15,300.00 12,600.00 8,290.00 3,760.00 10,300.00 11,400.00 9,840.00 1,460.00 13,100.00 20,700.00 20,300.00 26,300.00 24,800.00 23,300.00 24,100.00 33,100.00 23,800.00 14,100.00 19,900.00 17,200.00 25,600.00 26,100.00 25,000.00 28,900.00 24,000.00 21,700.00 28,000.00 10,500.00
Pb mg/kg 1 800 530 5.58 7.51 6.08 38.05 8.96 8.62 6.73 9.23 6.28 8.17 7.00 1.00 7.00 13.00 10.00 9.00 10.00 10.00 17.00 13.00 11.00 7.00 7.00 9.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 13.00 11.00 8.00 13.00 6.68
Mg mg/kg 1 NS NS 112.15 98.82 140.44 845.96 355.24 468.11 105.72 84.75 99.99 100.00 130.00 17.00 74.00 161.00 161.00 180.00 232.00 890.00 1,140.00 305.00 215.00 209.00 158.00 358.00 359.00 289.00 173.00 193.00 258.00 208.00 330.00 118.21
Mn mg/kg 1 23,000 NS 14.08 7.07 13.54 302.12 91.69 166.82 13.98 5.98 21.01 17.90 81.00 2.00 25.00 77.00 36.00 51.00 51.00 499.00 539.00 81.00 41.00 36.00 28.00 90.00 79.00 45.00 36.00 57.00 45.00 35.00 118.00 18.86
Mo mg/kg 1 51,000 NS 3.00 1.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 3.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Ni mg/kg 1 20,000 100 1.43 1.43 <LOR 8.82 4.35 4.58 2.03 2.07 1.15 2.00 2.00 <LOR 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 14.00 11.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 <LOR
P mg/kg 1 20 NS 67.00 57.00 74.00 170.00 162.00 166.00 56.00 46.00 67.00 80.00 60.00 34.00 61.00 179.00 144.00 109.00 104.00 129.00 145.00 130.00 97.00 101.00 103.00 76.00 149.00 106.00 130.00 172.00 124.00 112.00 149.00 68.00
K mg/kg 1 NS NS 118.82 174.41 100.01 619.72 186.22 281.51 197.17 162.68 63.31 163.82 143.00 30.00 96.00 205.00 236.00 201.00 199.00 376.00 577.00 356.00 171.00 195.00 137.00 319.00 460.00 330.00 228.00 324.00 320.00 252.00 399.00 78.18
Se mg/kg 1 51,000 NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Ag mg/kg 1 51,000 NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Na mg/kg 1 NS NS 67.44 67.94 69.62 369.13 68.32 77.73 68.71 73.92 55.63 68.71 68.00 37.00 45.00 54.00 62.00 54.00 56.00 61.00 91.00 59.00 61.00 66.00 47.00 63.00 63.00 55.00 56.00 52.00 55.00 74.00 57.00 82.68
Sr mg/kg 5 610,000 NS 1,550.00 716.42 1,370.00 2,740.00 2,170.00 1,800.00 1,150.00 519.34 1,420.00 1,640.00 1,400.00 202.00 1,900.00 3,040.00 2,810.00 3,730.00 3,580.00 3,320.00 3,500.00 4,700.00 3,370.00 2,050.00 2,840.00 2,440.00 3,660.00 3,740.00 3,540.00 4,100.00 3,430.00 3,080.00 4,000.00 1,450.00
S mg/kg 1 6,000,000 NS 75.00 75.00 <LOR 221.00 87.00 93.00 41.00 35.00 38.00 46.00 79.00 55.00 <LOR 167.00 92.00 115.00 54.00 60.00 79.00 69.00 121.00 64.00 <LOR 79.00 275.00 <LOR 518.00 224.00 128.00 152.00 187.00 59.00
Tl mg/kg 5 10 NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Sn mg/kg 1 610,000 NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
V mg/kg 5 5,300 NS 29.94 19.12 25.79 27.87 25.45 23.52 20.76 13.00 27.91 26.41 22.00 6.00 22.00 35.00 36.00 44.00 42.00 31.00 30.00 54.00 37.00 22.00 35.00 22.00 36.00 39.00 39.00 43.00 37.00 36.00 40.00 29.00
Zn mg/kg 1 310,000 720 4.50 4.05 5.74 40.21 19.58 14.20 3.92 3.53 5.76 5.04 7.00 <LOR 6.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 33.00 41.00 14.00 15.00 9.00 9.00 17.00 18.00 17.00 10.00 15.00 14.00 15.00 20.00 6.25
Li mg/kg 1 2,000 NS 25.00 2.00 3.00 78.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 27.00 37.00 2.00 <LOR 2.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 6.00 32.00
Ti mg/kg 1 NS NS 1,250.00 1,280.00 1,220.00 4,220.00 1,730.00 1,150.00 1,840.00 2,620.00 1,310.00 1,800.00 1,790.00 9,910.00 1,130.00 1,370.00 883.00 1,630.00 1,800.00 1,830.00 1,590.00 1,600.00 1,920.00 1,600.00 1,810.00 2,290.00 1,470.00 1,220.00 1,170.00 1,450.00 1,350.00 1,510.00 1,600.00 1,510.00
Hg mg/kg 0.01 43 4 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.12 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.04
As mg/L 0.01 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Ba mg/L 0.01 NS NS 0.45 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.49 NA NA <LOR NA NA 0.59 NA NA NA NA NA 0.59 NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.50 NA NA NA
Cd mg/L 0.05 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Cr mg/L 0.05 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Cu mg/L 0.01 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Ld mg/L 0.05 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Hg mg/L 0.0005 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Se mg/L 0.01 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Ag mg/L 0.05 NS NS <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
Zn mg/L 0.05 NS NS 0.22 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.20 NA NA 0.23 NA NA 0.28 NA NA NA NA NA 0.21 NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.22 NA NA NA
mg/kg various * <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
mg/kg 0.50 * <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA NA NA NA <LOR NA NA NA
mg/kg various NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
mg/kg 5 NS 54.00 <LOR <LOR 2,960.00 122.00 30.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 12.00 <LOR 30.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR 20.00 71.00 26.00 36.00 29.00 <LOR <LOR 15.00 61.00 25.00 17.00 9.00 14.00 10.00 68.00 <LOR
Volatile Organic
Compounds* mg/kg various *
<LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Semi-Volatile Organic
Compounds* mg/kg
various <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
Notes:
LOR : Limit of Reporting
mg/L : milligramper liter
: Exceeded the USEPA RSL 2012
: Exceeded the DIV 2009
NS : Not Specified
* : Criterion valuesare available but the analytical results are belowthe laboratorylimit of reporting
KGPF** : Field duplicate sample of SB-25-KGPF
Camp*** : Field duplicate sample of SB-09-CP
Drill Site
SB - 12 - PLI SB - 13 - PLI
#
SB - 14 - PLI SB - 15 - PLI SB - 16 - PLII
#
SB - 17 - PLII SB - 18 - PLII SB - 19 - PLII CAMP***
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 22 -
KGPF
#
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 - KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 29 -
KGPF
#
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF**
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Total Alkalinity
Arsenic
Organophosphate (OP)
Organic
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbons
Dissolved
Anions
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Pesticides
Organochlorine (OC)
TCLP Metals
Sodium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Pottasium
Selenium
Silver
Strontium
Sulphur
Thalium
Tin
Vanadium
Zinc
Lithium
Titanium
Mercury
Cobalt
Total Metals
Aluminum
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Main Camp Pipeline Route (Drill Site to KGPF) Pipeline Route (KGPF to Manifold [PLN]) KGPF
ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION
USEPA
RSL 2012
(for
Industrial
Soil)
DIV
2009
SB - 02 -
RG
SB - 08 - CP SB - 03 - RG RG - RI SB - 05 - RG SB - 06 - RG SB - 07 - CP SB - 20 - PLII SB - 09 - CP SB - 10 - CP
#
SB - 11 - PLI
UNIT LOR
Sample Identification
SB - 01 - RG
#
Locations
Field Quality Assurance
and Quality Control
Samples
Drill Site Pipeline Route KGPF
A-01- RG A-02- R II A-03- R III
RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
Nitrogen Dioxide (1-hour averaging period) NO
2 g/m
3
20 200 400 <LOR <LOR <LOR
Sulphur Dioxide (10-minute averaging period) g/m
3
300 500 NR
4
525-788
(08:36-11:17, 17:40-
06:57)
5
<LOR <LOR
Sulphur Dioxide (24-hour averaging period) g/m
3
12.5 20 365 167 <LOR <LOR
Ozone (8-hour daily maximum) O
3 g/m
3 20 100 NR
<LOR <LOR <LOR
Particulate Matter
10
(24-hour averaging period) PM
10 g/Nm
3
5 50 150 28.1 <LOR <LOR
Particulate Matter
2.5
(24-hour averaging period) PM
2.5 g/Nm
3
5 25 65 18.4 <LOR <LOR
Notes:
1
2
3 :GovernmentofofIndonesia(GOI)NationalAmbientAirQuality
4 :NotRegulated
5 :ExceededtheIFCEHSGuideline
: International Finance Corporation Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines (based on World Health Organization [WHO], Air Quality Guidelines Global Update, 2005 Table 1.1.1)
GOI National Ambient Air
Quality Standards No. 41 of
1999
3
: Limit of Reporting
TABLE2.SUMMARYOFLABORATORYANALYTICALRESULTSFORAMBIENTAIR
Locations
IFC (Based on
WHO Air Quality
Guideline)
2
SO
2
UNIT LOR
1
SW-01-R I SW-02-R I SW-03-R I SW-04-R I SW-05-R II SW-06-R II SW-07-R III SW-08-R III SW-09-R III
Water
(River)
EB TB
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
Physical Properties
pH - - NS
4
NS 6-9 6-9 6-9 5-9 6.20 6.60 6.20 7.60 6.20 6.20 5.80 5.90 5.90 7.40 NA
9
NA
Conductivity mhos/cm
5
1 NS NS NS NS NS NS 11.00 11.00 11.00 1,070.00 12.00 13.00 22.00 16.00 12.00 1,100.00 NA NA
Temperature C
6
- NS NS NS NS NS NS 29.30 29.40 30.40 31.40 37.40 27.00 28.90 28.90 27.90 31.40 NA NA
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L
7
1 NS NS 1,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 7.00 8.00 8.00 725.00 8.00 9.00 15.00 11.00 8.00 747.00 1.00 NA
Total Suspended Solids(TSS) mg/L 1 NS NS 50 50 400 400 12.00 11.00 11.00 14.00 19.00 19.00 31.00 8.00 12.00 13.00 2.00 NA
Dissolved Anion
Alkalinity-Total CaCO3 mg/L 1 NS NS NS NS NS NS 5.00 4.00 4.00 387.00 4.00 4.00 7.00 6.00 4.00 383.00 4.00 NA
Nutrients
Total Phosphorus P-PO4 mg/L 0.01 NS NS NS NS NS NS 0.08 0.07 0.08 8.43 1.10 1.20 0.05 0.10 0.11 8.42 0.03 NA
Total Nitrogen T-N mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 2.50 0.60 1.00 157.00 0.60 1.00 <LOR
8
<LOR <LOR 145.00 <LOR NA
Total Metals
Aluminum Al mg/L 0.01 NS 23,000 NS NS NS NS 0.64 0.81 0.81 0.21 1.26 1.46 1.47 0.45 1.08 0.17 <LOR NA
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001 0.06 1300 0.05 1 1 1 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.00 <LOR NA
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001 0.02 27 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001 0.625 120 1 NS NS NS 0.01 0.009 0.009 0.031 0.016 0.015 0.040 0.014 0.013 0.03 <LOR NA
Beryllium Be mg/L 0.005 NS 13 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Boron B mg/L 0.005 NS NS 1 1 1 1 <LOR 0.013 0.012 0.022 0.008 0.007 0.009 0.008 0.006 0.02 <LOR NA
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001 0.006 0.52 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Calcium Ca mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 1.70 1.90 2.10 7.10 1.60 1.30 2.00 1.60 1.40 6.00 <LOR NA
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001 0.03 NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.001 0.001 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005 0.1 0.21 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001 0.075 22 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.2 <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.007 0.001 <LOR 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.01 <LOR NA
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005 NS 270 0.3 NS NS NS 0.558 0.636 0.618 0.410 1.270 1.280 2.760 1.170 1.100 0.359 <LOR NA
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005 0.075 NS 0.03 0.03 0.03 1 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 0.50 0.500 0.600 2.400 0.700 0.600 1.200 0.900 0.700 2.40 <LOR NA
Manganese Mn mg/L 0.001 NS 21 0.1 NS NS NS 0.03 0.027 0.027 0.069 0.044 0.043 0.171 0.082 0.040 0.06 <LOR NA
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005 0.3 1.6 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005 0.075 NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR 9.20 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 8.40 <LOR NA
Potassium K mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR 15.30 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 <LOR 15.20 <LOR NA
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001 NS 0.4 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.05 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005 NS 0.6 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 5.80 6.20 5.00 35.50 5.20 4.80 5.10 4.90 4.90 35.40 <LOR NA
Strontium Sr mg/L 0.005 NS 330 NS NS NS NS 0.011 0.009 0.01 0.029 0.006 0.006 0.013 0.008 0.006 0.028 <LOR NA
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 1.80 1.50 1.20 11.40 0.90 <LOR 4.20 2.10 1.20 10.60 <LOR NA
Thallium Tl mg/L 0.01 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005 NS 2300 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005 NS 78 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005 0.8 290 0.05 0.05 0.05 2 <LOR <LOR 0.007 0.041 0.012 0.015 0.013 <LOR 0.008 0.038 <LOR NA
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001 NS 9.3 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 <LOR <LOR NA
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.05 <0.05 0.05 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 0.0003 0.033 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.005 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Dissolved Metals
Aluminum Al mg/L 0.01 NS 23000 NS NS NS NS 0.40 0.29 0.19 0.06 0.41 0.40 0.48 0.15 0.34 0.06 <LOR NA
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001 0.06 1300 0.05 1 1 1 <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.003 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.003 <LOR NA
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001 0.02 27 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001 0.625 120 1 NS NS NS 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.019 0.013 0.010 0.027 0.007 0.007 0.018 <LOR NA
Beryllium Be mg/L 0.005 NS 13 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Boron B mg/L 0.005 NS NS 1 1 1 1 <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.012 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.011 <LOR NA
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001 0.006 0.52 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Calcium Ca mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 0.8 0.8 0.9 5.9 <LOR <LOR 1.10 0.60 <0.5 5.9 <LOR NA
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001 0.03 NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005 0.1 0.21 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001 0.075 22 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.2 <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.004 0.001 <LOR 0.001 <LOR 0.001 0.004 <LOR NA
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005 NS 270 0.3 NS NS NS 0.362 0.300 0.207 0.263 0.449 0.444 0.819 0.287 0.394 0.209 <LOR NA
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005 0.075 NS 0.03 0.03 0.03 1 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR 2.20 0.60 0.60 1.10 0.70 0.50 2.20 <LOR NA
Manganese Mn mg/L 0.001 NS 21 0.1 NS NS NS 0.014 0.011 0.008 0.066 0.014 0.016 0.075 0.013 0.015 0.052 <LOR NA
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005 0.3 1.6 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005 0.075 NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR 7.6 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 7.6 <LOR NA
Potassium K mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR 14.8 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 0.6 14.8 <LOR NA
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001 NS 0.4 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.05 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005 NS 0.6 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS 0.6 0.5 0.5 29.0 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.0 0.7 29.0 <LOR NA
Stronsium Sr mg/L 0.005 NS 330 NS NS NS NS <LOR 0.005 0.006 0.028 0.006 <LOR 0.011 0.007 0.005 0.024 <LOR NA
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR 0.60 0.60 8.10 <LOR <LOR 0.80 <LOR 0.60 8.50 <LOR NA
Thallium Tl mg/L 0.01 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005 NS 2300 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005 NS 78 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005 0.8 290 0.05 0.05 0.05 2 <LOR <LOR 0.006 0.021 0.010 0.0013 0.013 <LOR 0.006 0.012 <LOR NA
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001 NS 9.3 NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR 0.006 0.021 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 <LOR <LOR NA
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 0.0003 0.033 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.005 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Organic
Chemical Oxygen Demand COD mg/L 10 NS NS 10 25 50 100 <LOR <LOR <LOR 122.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 118.00 <LOR NA
Oil and Grease O&G mg/L 5 NS NS 1 1 1 1 <LOR <LOR <LOR 8.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR 6.00 <LOR NA
Dissolved Oxygen DO mg/L 1 NS NS 6 (min) 4 3 0 6.00 6.00 6.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 3.00 6.00 4.00 NA NA
Surfactants MBAS mg/L 0.01 NS NS 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.08 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.08 <LOR NA
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon
(TPH)
C6 - C9 mg/L 0.05 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Total TPH ( C6 - C36 ) mg/L 0.1 NS NS NS NS NS NS <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
*
11 * * * * * <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR
*
* * * * * <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR NA
Note:
(1) DIV : Dutch intervention Value
(2) USEPA RSLs : United States Environmental Protection Agency Regional Screen Levels
(3) GOI : Government of Indonesia
(4) NS : Not specified
(5) mhos/cm : Micromohs per centimeter
(6)
o
C : Degrees Celcius
(7) mg/L : Milligramper Liter
(8) <LOR : Below laboratory Limit of Reporting
(9) NA : Not analyzed
(10)* : Criterion values are available but the analytical results are below the laboratory limit of reporting
: Range is lower or higher than both the GOI Regulation No 82 year 2001 (Class 1) and IFC Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines - Indicative Values For Treated Sanitary Sewage Discharges (Table 1.3.1)
: Exceeded the IFC Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines - Indicative Values For Treated Sanitary Sewage Discharges (Table 1.3.1)
: Exceeded GOI Regulation No. 82 year 2001 (Class 1) or detected value is lower than the "minimumvalue" set by the regulation (e.g. DO)
: Exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82 year 2001 (Class 2) or detected value is lower than the "minimumvalue" set by the regulation (e.g. DO)
: Exceeded the GOI Regulation No. 82 year 2001 (Classes 1-4) or detected value is lower than the "minimumvalue" set by the regulation (e.g. DO)
NS <LOR NA
USEPA RSLs
2012 For
Groundwater
2
DIV 2009
1
<LOR <LOR NS 2
Locations Field Quality Control/Quality Assurance
Samples
DrillSite and Main Camp Pipeline Route KGPF
<LOR
GOI Regulation No. 82 year 2001 (Class 1)
3
3 6 12
TABLE3.SUMMARYOFLABORATORYANALYTICALRESULTSFORSURFACEWATER
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS
Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD5 mg/L 5
ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION UNIT LOR
74.00 78.00 <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR <LOR

A

Attachment A: Sampling
and Analysis Plan

E N Zone
1 SB-01-RG Drill Site near the ex-STP 0293388 9935855 50 M 53 0.25 - 0.50
2 SB-02-RG Drill Site at the mini Camp 0293312 9935840 50 M 52 0.25 - 0.50
3 SB-03-RG Drill Site at the mini Camp 0293230 9935825 50 M 49 0.25 - 0.50
4 RG-R I Between the Drill Site and the River 0293268 9935971 50 M 44 0.25 - 0.50
5 SB-05-RG Between the Drill Site and the Main Camp 0293186 9935937 50 M 46 0.25 - 0.50
6 SB-06-RG Between the Drill Site and the Main Camp 0293153 9935943 50 M 46 0.25 - 0.50
7 SB-07-CP Main Camp near the Security room 0293162 9935903 50 M 52 0.25 - 0.50
8 SB-08-CP Main Camp near the communication antenna 0293125 9935972 50 M 52 0.25 - 0.50
9 SB-09-CP Main Camp near the pipe rod storage 0293040 9935931 50 M 51 0.25 - 0.50
10 SB-10-CP Main Camp near the incinerator 0293084 9935848 50 M 51 0.25 - 0.50
11 SB-11-PL I Pipeline Route to KGPF 0.5 Km from the Main Camp 0292633 9936619 50 M 51 0.25 - 0.50
16 SB-16-PL II Pipeline Route to PLN 0.5 Km from KGPF 0291602 9933955 50 M 67 0.25 - 0.50
21 SB-21-KGPF Near the River at the edge of the KGPF 0291354 9934387 50 M 50 0.25 - 0.50
22 SB-22-KGPF Near the River 20 meter from the SB-21-KGPF 0291337 9934379 50 M 50 0.25 - 0.50
23 SB-23-KGPF Parallel with the access road 150 m from SB-21-KGPF 0291321 9934482 50 M 62 0.25 - 0.50
24 SB-24-KGPF Parallel with the access road 300 m from SB-21-KGPF 0291255 9934607 50 M 57 0.25 - 0.50
25 SB-25-KGPF The edge of the KGPF 500 m from SB-21-KGPF 0291138 9934838 50 M 56 0.25 - 0.50
26 SB-26-KGPF On cleared area 200 m from SB-25-KGPF 0291041 9934787 50 M 53 0.25 - 0.50
27 SB-27-KGPF On cleared area 400 m from SB-25-KGPF 0290963 9934746 50 M 58 0.25 - 0.50
28 SB-28-KGPF The edge of the KGPF 500 m from SB-26-KGPF 0290857 9934700 50 M 60 0.25 - 0.50
29 SB-29-KGPF At the uncleared area 100 m from SB-28-KGPF 0290898 9934699 50 M 60 0.25 - 0.50
30 SB-30-KGPF At the uncleared area 150 m from SB-28-KGPF 0290975 9934732 50 M 65 0.25 - 0.50
31 CAMP Main Camp near the pipe rod storage 0293268 9935971 50 M 44 0.25 - 0.50
32 KGPF Edge of the KGPF 500 m from SB-21-KGPF 0291138 9934838 50 M 56 0.25 - 0.50
33 SW-01-R I Lahai River Upstream 0293096 9936187 50 M 44
34 SW-02-R I Lahai River Midstream 0293177 9935968 50 M 44
35 SW-03-R I Lahai River Downstream 0293248 9935987 50 M 41
36 SW-04-R I Canal Outfall 0293108 9935974 50 M 43
37 SW-05-R II River between Drill Site and KGPF Downstream 0291481 9935159 50 M 43
38 SW-06-R II River between Drill Site and KGPF Upstream 0291533 9935100 50 M 52
39 SW-07-R III River in KGPF Upstream 0291534 9935096 50 M 52
40 SW-08-R III River in KGPF Midstream 0291270 9934706 50 M 52
41 SW-09-R III River in KGPF Downstream 0291214 9934719 50 M 55
42 Water (River) Canal Outfall 0293108 9935874 50 M 43
43 TB Field Quality Assurance/Quality Control Sample
44 EB Field Quality Assurance/Quality Control Sample
45 A-01-RG Drill Site Station -1 0293305 9935905 50 M 58
46 A-02-R II Pipeline Route (between Drill Site and KGPF) Station -2 0291865 9935256 50 M 62
47 A-03-R III KGPF (Near the River) Station -3 0291234 9934719 50 M 54
Air Sample
Surfacewater Sample
Soil Sample
Particulate
Matters (PM10)
Particulate
Matters (PM2.5)
Oil and Grease
Total Suspended
Solid
DO, Conductivity,
Temperature, pH
SO2 NO2 O3
Organoposph
ate Pesticides
Total
Surfactants
(MBAS)
BOD5 COD Total Nitrogen (T-N)
Sampling and Analysis Plan
No Sample Code Location
Coordinate
Elevation
(masl)
Depth
(mbgs)
Analytes/ Parameters
VOC Total Posphorus (P-PO4) SVOC TPH
30 Metal
Scan
Total
Alkalinity
TCLP
Metals
Organochlorine
Pesticides

B

Attachment B: Soil Boring
Logs

SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No SB-01-RG
Project No: MAS & AF
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
3.0 3.0 Near Ex - STP
SB - 01 - RG
Hole Size: 4 in Screen Interval: NA Drilled By: PT. Geoteknika
Casing Size: NA Initial Water Level: - Drill Date:
Total Casing Depth: NA Static Water Level: - Drill Method: Post Hole Digger
Coordinate (m) E N : Z: 53 m Zone : 50 M
Silty CLAY (CL), redish brown, soft
0184276 Logged by:
Project: Assurance Sampling Reviewed by:
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
Salamander Energy Approved by
SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
low plasticity, moist
0293388 9935855
12-Jul-2013
no hydrocarbon impact
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Jakarta 12780 Indonesia
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
FIRST APPEARANCE LEVEL
STATIC GROUNDWATER LEVEL
GRAVEL
Silty CLAY Sandy CLAY
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
Concrete and Cobbles
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
0.3 0.3
SB - 02 - RG
12-Jul-2013
0293312 9935840
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
0.5 0.5
SB - 03 - RG
12-Jul-2013
0293230 9935825
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No SB-04
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
0.0 0.0
SB - 04
12-Jul-2013
0293178 9935921
plasticity, dry, no hydrocarbon impact
Clayey SILT (SM)
Yellowish brown, Medium, low
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
1.7 1.7
SB - 05
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Clayey SILT (SM),
Yellowish brown, medium, low
plasticity, dry, no hydrocarbon impact
12-Jul-2013
0293186 9935937
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
1.7 1.7
SB - 06
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Clayey SILT (SM),
Dark brown, medium, low plasticity,
dry, no hydrocarbon impact
12-Jul-2013
0293153 9935943
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No SB-07-CP
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
3.8 3.8
SB - 07 - CP
0184276 Logged by:
Silty CLAY (CL), brown, soft,
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
12-Jul-2013
0293162 9935903
Near Canteen low plasticity, moist
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
7.0 7.0
SB - 08 - CP
0184276 Logged by:
Sandy CLAY (CL), redish brown, soft
low plasticity, dry
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
12-Jul-2013
0293125 9935972
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
7.2 7.2
SB - 09 - CP
DUPLICATE
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
12-Jul-2013
0293040 9935931
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
6.3 6.3
SB - 10 - CP
0184276 Logged by:
Silty CLAY (CL), yellowish brown, soft
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
FILL
12-Jul-2013
0293084 9935848
Near Incinerator
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No RG - R I
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
16.0 16.0 Near River (R I)
and
RG - R I Wellpad
Coordinate (m) E N : Z: 44 m Zone : 50 M 0293268 9935971
13-Jul-2013
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
CLAY (CL)
Dark brown, soft, high plasticity, wet
contain fiber root and organic matter
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No SB-11-PL I
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
15.2 15.2
SB - 11 - PL I
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
CLAY (CL)
Brown, soft, medium plasticity, moist
13-Jul-2013
0292633 9935619
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
11.5 11.5
SB - 12 - PL I
13-Jul-2013
0292146 9935406
Grey, medium, low plasticity, moist,
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Sandy SILT (SM)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
14.8 14.8
SB - 13 - PL I
13-Jul-2013
0291681 9935167
Light brown, medium, low plasticity,
wet, no hydrocarbon impact
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Clayey SILT (SM)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
19 19
SB - 14 - PL I
13-Jul-2013
0291211 9934948
Dark brown, medium, medium
plasticity, wet, contain organic matter
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Clayey SILT (SM)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
10.2 10.2
SB - 15 - PL I
13-Jul-2013
0291179 9934867
contain organic matter, no hydrocarbon
impact
Brown, Soft, Low Plasticity, Wet
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic Clay
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No SB-16-PL II
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
17.3 17.3
SB - 16 - PL II
13-Jul-2013
0291602 9933955
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Clayey SILT (SM)
Dark brown, medium, medium
plasticity, wet, no hydrocarbon impact
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
16.0 16.0
SB - 17 - PL II
13-Jul-2013
0291818 9933477
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Clayey SILT (SM)
Light brown, soft, low plasticity, wet,
contain fiber root, and organic matter,
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
0184276 Logged by:
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
19.3 19.3
SB - 18 - PL II
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
CLAY (CL)
Light brown, soft, medium plasticity, wet,
contain fiber root and organic matter,
13-Jul-2013
0292036 9933003
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
17.4 17.4
SB - 19 - PL II
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
CLAY (CL)
Brown, medium, high plasticity, wet,
contain organic matter,
13-Jul-2013
0293230 9935825
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
17.5 17.5
SB - 20 - PL II
0184276 Logged by:
Redish brown, soft, medium plasticity,
wet, contain fiber root, and organic
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
CLAY (CL)
13-Jul-2013
0292692 9931560
matter, no hydrocarbon impact
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
SOIL BORING LOG Soil bore No SB-21-KGPF
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
12.9 12.9
SB - 21 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Light brown, soft, low plasticity, moist,
contain fiber root and organic matter,
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
13-Jul-2013
0291354 9934387
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
11.9 11.9
SB - 22 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Brown, soft, low plasticity, wet, contain
fiber root and organic matter,
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
13-Jul-2013
0291337 9934379
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
16.3 16.3
SB - 23 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
13-Jul-2013
0291321 9934482
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
13.4 13.4
SB - 24 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
13-Jul-2013
0291255 9934607
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
7.7 7.7
SB - 25 - KGPF
DUPLICATE
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
13-Jul-2013
0291138 9934838
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
8.9 8.9
SB - 26 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Project: Salamander ESHIA Reviewed by:
Light brown, soft, medium plasticity,
wet, contain organic matter and fiber
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
15-Jul-2013
0291041 9934787
root, no hydrocarbon impact
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
7.2 7.2
SB - 27 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
15-Jul-2013
0290963 9934746
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
8.2 8.2
SB - 28 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
15-Jul-2013
0290857 9934700
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
9.4 9.4
SB - 29 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
15-Jul-2013
0290898 9934699
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders
BHH
Client: DD
S
y
m
b
o
l
L
a
b

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
14.0 14.0
SB - 30 - KGPF
0184276 Logged by:
Remarks
D
e
p
t
h

(
m
)
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
S
a
m
p
l
e

I
D
P
I
D

(
p
p
m
)
15
o
45
o
GROUND SURFACE
Organic CLAY (CL)
15-Jul-2013
0290975 9934732
0.5
0.0
0.25
PT. ERM Indonesia
Wisma Aldiron
Dirgantara
2/F Suite # 238-239
Tel. +62 21 7918 1904
BENTONITE
GROUT
SAND PACK
SCREEN
SAND
CLAY
Clayey SAND
Clayey SILT
Sandy SILT
GRAVEL
Concrete Slab
Debris
Sandy GRAVEL
Gravelly SAND
Boulders

C

Attachment C: Laboratory
Analytical Certificates

Date Completed:
ALSI File No: ALSI03361a
Report on: Soil Analysis
SALAMANDER #0184276 RG & CP
Report to: PT. ERM INDONESIA
2nd Floor Suite 238-239
Jakarta 12780
Attention: Mr. Jess Gabriel
Date received:
Sampled by: Client
PT. ALS Indonesia
Reviewed by:
Sisca Nurhafifa
Laboratory Supervisor
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
26 July 2013
18 July 2013
Batch : ALSI03361a
Date of Issue :
Client : PT. ERM INDONESIA
REMARKS
26 July 2013
Please notify that CoA of ALSI03361a is a combine CoA of ALSI03359, ALSI03360 & ALSI03361.
An ALS Limited Company
Batch :
Sample Matrix : Soil
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
SB - 02 - RG SB - 03 - RG SB - 04 - RG SB - 05 - RG
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
UNIT LOR RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 6040 6500 cancel analysis 9580
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis 2
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 14 7 cancel analysis 22
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Boron B mg/kg 1 10 19 cancel analysis 30
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 31 92 cancel analysis 20
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 5 5 cancel analysis 4
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis 3
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 2 1 cancel analysis 4
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 5140 9560 cancel analysis 15300
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 8 6 cancel analysis 9
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 99 140 cancel analysis 355
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1 7 14 cancel analysis 92
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 1 <1 cancel analysis 4
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 57 74 cancel analysis 162
Pottasium K mg/kg 1 174 100 cancel analysis 186
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 68 70 cancel analysis 68
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 716 1370 cancel analysis 2170
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 75 <1 cancel analysis 87
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 19 26 cancel analysis 25
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 4 6 cancel analysis 20
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 2 3 cancel analysis 5
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 1280 1220 cancel analysis 1730
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 0.04 0.04 cancel analysis 0.04
LOR = Limit of Reporting ** = Subcontract
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION
Page 1 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Organic
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Dissolved Anions
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis 122
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS**
Monocyclic Aromatics
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
OXYGENATED COMPOUNDS
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Page 2 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
HALOGENATED ALIPHATICS
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
HALOGENATED
ALIPHATICS (Contd)**
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Page 3 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
HALOGENATED AROMATICS
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 <2 <2 cancel analysis <2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS**
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
LOR = Limit of Reporting Page 4 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
POLYAROMATIC HYDROCARBONS**
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 cancel analysis <5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
LOR = Limit of Reporting Page 5 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
NITROAROMATICS AND KETONES
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 <2.5 <2.5 cancel analysis <2.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
LOR = Limit of Reporting
Page 6 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 3 4 5
ALSI0335928
319
ALSI0335928
320
ALSI0335928321
ALSI0335928
322
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:16 14:26 14:28 14:36
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ANILINES AND BENZIDINES
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
3Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 cancel analysis <1
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 cancel analysis <0.5
Page 7 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5
Arsenic As mg/kg 1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1
Berilium Be mg/kg 1
Boron B mg/kg 1
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1
Copper Cu mg/kg 1
Iron Fe mg/kg 1
Lead Pb mg/kg 1
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1
Phosporus P mg/kg 1
Pottasium K mg/kg 1
Selenium Se mg/kg 1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5
Sulphur S mg/kg 1
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1
Lithium Li mg/kg 1
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
SB - 06 - RG SB - 06 - RG' SB - 07 - CP SB - 08 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
8440 8250 6000 5860
1 1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
20 20 6 7
<1 <1 <1 <1
24 24 16 7
<1 <1 <1 <1
969 969 33 27
4 4 5 5
4 4 <1 <1
5 5 2 4
12600 12400 8290 3760
9 8 7 9
468 468 106 85
167 161 14 6
<1 <1 <1 3
5 5 2 2
166 168 56 46
282 281 197 163
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
78 78 69 74
1800 1730 1150 519
93 91 41 35
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
24 23 21 13
14 14 4 4
4 4 2 2
1150 1130 1840 2620
0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04
Page 8 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100
Dissolved Anions
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
<5 <5 <5 <5
<50 <50 <50 <50
<100 <100 <100 <100
<100 <100 <100 <100
30 30 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 9 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5
HALOGENATED
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 10 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2 <2 <2 <2
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
Page 11 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 12 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
Page 13 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5
6 6 L Rep 7 8
ALSI0335928
323
ALSI0335928
323 L Rep
ALSI0335928
324
ALSI0335928
325
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:40 14:40 15:14 15:25
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 14 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
Total Metals
Arsenic As mg/kg 1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1
Berilium Be mg/kg 1
Boron B mg/kg 1
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1
Copper Cu mg/kg 1
Iron Fe mg/kg 1
Lead Pb mg/kg 1
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1
Phosporus P mg/kg 1
Pottasium K mg/kg 1
Selenium Se mg/kg 1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1
Sulphur S mg/kg 1
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1
Lithium Li mg/kg 1
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
SB - 09 - CP CAMP RG - RI
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
7760 8060 8980
<1 <1 12
<1 <1 12
7 7 1150
<1 <1 <1
20 20 38
<1 <1 <1
15 22 2120
6 6 6
<1 <1 7
<1 <1 10
10300 10500 19000
6 7 38
100 118 846
21 19 302
<1 <1 <1
1 <1 9
67 68 170
63 78 620
<1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1
56 83 369
1420 1450 2740
38 59 221
<1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1
28 29 28
6 6 40
27 32 78
1310 1510 4220
0.04 0.04 0.12
Page 15 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100
Dissolved Anions
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5
FUMIGANTS
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
<5 <5 <5
<50 <50 <50
<100 <100 <100
<100 <100 <100
<5 <5 2960
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 16 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
HALOGENATED
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 17 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2 <2 <2
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
Page 18 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
NITROSOAMINES
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 19 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5
HALOETHERS
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2.5 <2.5 <2.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
Page 20 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03361a
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
26 July 2013
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5
9 11 12
ALSI0335928326 ALSI0335928328 ALSI0335928329
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
15:32 15:35 9:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 21 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 2 4 5
ALSI0336028
330
ALSI0336028
331
ALSI0336028
333
ALSI0336028
334
SB - 11 - PLI SB - 12 - PLI SB - 14 - PLI SB - 15 - PLI
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:14 10:20 10:44 15:39
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 5330 810 6760 7000
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 1 <1 <1 <1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 14 2 80 14
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Boron B mg/kg 1 19 3 41 38
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 40 7 41 38
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 4 1 3 4
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 <1 <1 1 <1
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 3 <1 6 6
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 9840 1460 20700 20300
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 7 1 13 10
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 130 17 161 161
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1 81 2 77 36
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 2 <1 2 2
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 60 34 179 144
Pottasium K mg/kg 1 143 30 205 236
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 68 37 54 62
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 1400 202 3040 2810
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 79 55 167 92
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 22 6 35 36
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 7 <1 10 10
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 2 <1 2 3
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 1790 9910 1370 883
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 0.07 0.03 0.10 0.05
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Page 22 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 2 4 5
ALSI0336028
330
ALSI0336028
331
ALSI0336028
333
ALSI0336028
334
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:14 10:20 10:44 15:39
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50 <50 <50 <50 <50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100 <100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100 <100
Dissolved Anions
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5 12 <5 <5 <5
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
LOR = Limit of Reporting ** = Subcontract Page 23 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 2 4 5
ALSI0336028
330
ALSI0336028
331
ALSI0336028
333
ALSI0336028
334
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:14 10:20 10:44 15:39
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
HALOGENATED ALIPHATICS (Contd)**
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 24 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 2 4 5
ALSI0336028
330
ALSI0336028
331
ALSI0336028
333
ALSI0336028
334
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:14 10:20 10:44 15:39
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 <2 <2 <2 <2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Page 25 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 2 4 5
ALSI0336028
330
ALSI0336028
331
ALSI0336028
333
ALSI0336028
334
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:14 10:20 10:44 15:39
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 2 4 5
ALSI0336028
330
ALSI0336028
331
ALSI0336028
333
ALSI0336028
334
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:14 10:20 10:44 15:39
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
3Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 27 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
Total Metals
Arsenic As mg/kg 1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1
Berilium Be mg/kg 1
Boron B mg/kg 1
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1
Copper Cu mg/kg 1
Iron Fe mg/kg 1
Lead Pb mg/kg 1
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1
Phosporus P mg/kg 1
Pottasium K mg/kg 1
Selenium Se mg/kg 1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1
Sulphur S mg/kg 1
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1
Lithium Li mg/kg 1
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample 7 8 9 10
ALSI0336028
336
ALSI0336028
337
ALSI0336028
338
ALSI0336028
339
SB - 17 - PLII SB - 18 - PLII SB - 19 - PLII SB - 20 - PLII
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
11:02 11:08 11:21 11:29
10200 8040 7210 9760
4 2 4 4
<1 <1 2 2
10 28 32 14
<1 <1 <1 <1
47 44 47 64
<1 <1 <1 <1
12 312 403 74
4 3 1 3
<1 11 15 2
5 10 12 6
24800 23300 24100 33100
10 10 17 13
232 890 1140 305
51 499 539 81
<1 <1 <1 <1
2 14 11 3
104 129 145 130
199 376 577 356
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
56 61 91 59
3580 3320 3500 4700
54 60 79 69
<5 <5 <5 <5
<1 <1 <1 <1
42 31 30 54
12 33 41 14
6 7 7 5
1800 1830 1590 1600
0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03
Page 28 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100
Dissolved Anions
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5
FUMIGANTS
7 8 9 10
ALSI0336028
336
ALSI0336028
337
ALSI0336028
338
ALSI0336028
339
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
11:02 11:08 11:21 11:29
<5 <5 <5 <5
<50 <50 <50 <50
<100 <100 <100 <100
<100 <100 <100 <100
20 71 26 36
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 29 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
7 8 9 10
ALSI0336028
336
ALSI0336028
337
ALSI0336028
338
ALSI0336028
339
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
11:02 11:08 11:21 11:29
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 30 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5
7 8 9 10
ALSI0336028
336
ALSI0336028
337
ALSI0336028
338
ALSI0336028
339
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
11:02 11:08 11:21 11:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2 <2 <2 <2
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
Page 31 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
NITROSOAMINES
7 8 9 10
ALSI0336028
336
ALSI0336028
337
ALSI0336028
338
ALSI0336028
339
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
11:02 11:08 11:21 11:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 32 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
No. Sample
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5
HALOETHERS
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5
7 8 9 10
ALSI0336028
336
ALSI0336028
337
ALSI0336028
338
ALSI0336028
339
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
11:02 11:08 11:21 11:29
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 33 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 3 4 5 6
ALSI03361
28340
ALSI03361
28342
ALSI03361
28343
ALSI03361
28344
ALSI03361
28345
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 -
KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:35 14:49 15:02 15:29 9:34
UNIT LOR RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 11000 8940 5700 7650 8990
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 <1 2 2 2 1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 9 6 18 17 12
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Boron B mg/kg 1 46 39 33 49 50
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 18 8 37 100 54
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 2 4 <1 3 3
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 2 <1 4 2 2
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 5 3 6 9 8
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 23800 19900 17200 25600 26100
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 11 7 9 12 10
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 215 158 358 359 289
Manganese Mn mg/kg 1 41 28 90 79 45
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 2 1 4 3 2
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 97 103 76 149 106
Potasium K mg/kg 1 171 137 319 460 330
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 61 47 63 63 55
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 3370 2840 2440 3660 3740
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 121 <1 79 275 <1
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 37 35 22 36 39
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 15 9 17 18 17
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 5 5 4 5 5
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 1920 1810 2290 1470 1220
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 0.04 0.12 0.06 0.08 0.06
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
Page 34 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 3 4 5 6
ALSI03361
28340
ALSI03361
28342
ALSI03361
28343
ALSI03361
28344
ALSI03361
28345
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 -
KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
14:35 14:49 15:02 15:29 9:34
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
Dissolved Anions
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5 29 <5 15 61 25
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Page 35 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 3 4 5 6
ALSI03361
28340
ALSI03361
28342
ALSI03361
28343
ALSI03361
28344
ALSI03361
28345
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 -
KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
14:35 14:49 15:02 15:29 9:34
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 36 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 3 4 5 6
ALSI03361
28340
ALSI03361
28342
ALSI03361
28343
ALSI03361
28344
ALSI03361
28345
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 -
KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
14:35 14:49 15:02 15:29 9:34
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 37 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 3 4 5 6
ALSI03361
28340
ALSI03361
28342
ALSI03361
28343
ALSI03361
28344
ALSI03361
28345
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 -
KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
14:35 14:49 15:02 15:29 9:34
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 3 4 5 6
ALSI03361
28340
ALSI03361
28342
ALSI03361
28343
ALSI03361
28344
ALSI03361
28345
SB - 21 -
KGPF
SB - 23 -
KGPF
SB - 24 -
KGPF
SB - 25 -
KGPF
SB - 26 -
KGPF
14:35 14:49 15:02 15:29 9:34
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
3Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 39 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
Total Metals
Arsenic As mg/kg 1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1
Berilium Be mg/kg 1
Boron B mg/kg 1
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1
Copper Cu mg/kg 1
Iron Fe mg/kg 1
Lead Pb mg/kg 1
Manganese Mn mg/kg 1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1
Phosporus P mg/kg 1
Potasium K mg/kg 1
Selenium Se mg/kg 1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1
Sulphur S mg/kg 1
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1
Lithium Li mg/kg 1
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample 7 8 10 11
ALSI03361283
46
ALSI03361283
47
ALSI03361283
49
ALSI03361283
50
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF
15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
9:40 9:57 10:18 15:33
8310 8620 7980 8280
2 1 <1 2
<1 <1 <1 <1
8 48 8 18
<1 <1 <1 <1
46 54 41 53
<1 <1 <1 <1
11 14 15 108
3 3 4 3
<1 2 <1 3
5 4 4 9
25000 28900 21700 28000
8 13 8 13
173 193 208 330
36 57 35 118
<1 <1 <1 <1
1 2 1 3
130 172 112 149
228 324 252 399
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
56 52 74 57
3540 4100 3080 4000
518 224 152 187
<5 <5 <5 <5
<1 <1 <1 <1
39 43 36 40
10 15 15 20
4 3 4 6
1170 1450 1510 1600
0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05
<5 <5 <5 <5
<50 <50 <50 <50
<100 <100 <100 <100
<100 <100 <100 <100
Page 40 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
Dissolved Anions
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5
FUMIGANTS
7 8 10 11
ALSI03361283
46
ALSI03361283
47
ALSI03361283
49
ALSI03361283
50
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF
15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
9:40 9:57 10:18 15:33
17 9 10 68
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<5 <5 <5 <5
Page 41 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5
7 8 10 11
ALSI03361283
46
ALSI03361283
47
ALSI03361283
49
ALSI03361283
50
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF
15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
9:40 9:57 10:18 15:33
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2 <2 <2 <2
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 42 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5
7 8 10 11
ALSI03361283
46
ALSI03361283
47
ALSI03361283
49
ALSI03361283
50
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF
15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
9:40 9:57 10:18 15:33
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 43 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
PHTHALATE ESTERS
NITROSOAMINES
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5
7 8 10 11
ALSI03361283
46
ALSI03361283
47
ALSI03361283
49
ALSI03361283
50
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF
15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
9:40 9:57 10:18 15:33
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<5 <5 <5 <5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 44 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
HALOETHERS
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5
7 8 10 11
ALSI03361283
46
ALSI03361283
47
ALSI03361283
49
ALSI03361283
50
SB - 27 -
KGPF
SB - 28 -
KGPF
SB - 30 -
KGPF
KGPF
15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 15/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
9:40 9:57 10:18 15:33
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<1 <1 <1 <1
<1 <1 <1 <1
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 45 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
UNIT LOR RESULTS RESULTS
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 6940 7030
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 5 12
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Boron B mg/kg 1 22 22
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 123 26
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 6 5
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 <1 2
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 10900 11400
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 6 8
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 112 100
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1 14 18
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 3 <1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 1 2
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 67 80
Pottasium K mg/kg 1 119 164
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 67 69
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 1550 1640
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 75 46
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 <1 <1
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 <1 <1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 30 26
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 4 5
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 25 37
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 1250 1800
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 0.04 0.04
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
Page 46 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5 <5 <5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50 <50 <50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100 <100 <100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100 <100 <100
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 1 54 <5
TCLP Metals
Arsenic mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Barium mg/L 0.01 0.45 0.49
Cadmium mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Chromium mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Copper mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Lead mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Mercury mg/L 0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
Selenium mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Silver mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Zinc mg/L 0.05 0.22 0.20
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 47 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 48 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 <2 <2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 49 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
PHENOLS
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 <5 <5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
3Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES
AlphaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Beta & gammaBHC mg/Kg 1 <1 <1
DeltaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Heptachlor mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Aldrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Heptachlor epoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Endosulfan 1 mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4,4-DDE mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dieldrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Endrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4,4-DDD mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
4,4-DDT mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Endrin Ketone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Methoxychlor mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 52 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 10
ALSI0335928318 ALSI0335928327
SB - 01 - RG SB - 10 - CP
12/Jul/13 12/Jul/13
14:06 15:37
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
26 July 2013
ORGANOPHOSPHORUS PESTICIDES
Dichlorvos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Dimethoate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Diazinon mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chlorpyrifos methyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Malathion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Fenthion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Chloropyrifos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pirimiphos ethyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
ChlorfenvinphosE mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
ChlorfenvinphosZ mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Prothiofos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Ethion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Page 53 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
SB - 13 - PLI SB - 13 - PLI' SB - 16 - PLII
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
UNIT LOR RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 5480 5090 9140
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 3 3 3
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 8 8 14
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Boron B mg/kg 1 26 24 50
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 13 13 33
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 2 2 4
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 <1 <1 2
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 5 4 4
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 13100 12300 26300
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 7 7 9
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 74 69 180
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1 25 22 51
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 1 1 2
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 61 60 109
Pottasium K mg/kg 1 96 88 201
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 45 41 54
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 1900 1734 3730
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 <1 <1 115
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 <1 <1 <1
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 22 20 44
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 6 6 12
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 2 2 5
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 1130 1030 1630
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.03
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Page 54 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50 <50 <50 <50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5 30 30 <5
TCLP Metals
Arsenic mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Barium mg/L 0.01 0.50 0.50 0.59
Cadmium mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Chromium mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Copper mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Lead mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Mercury mg/L 0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
Selenium mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Silver mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Zinc mg/L 0.05 0.23 0.23 0.28
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Page 55 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Page 56 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 <2 - <2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Page 57 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Page 58 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Page 59 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
3 3 L Rep 6
ALSI0336028332
ALSI0336028332 L
Rep
ALSI0336028335
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
10:26 10:26 10:52
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
12 August 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Aniline (Cntd)
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
AlphaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Beta & gammaBHC mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
DeltaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Heptachlor mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Aldrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Heptachlor epoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Endosulfan 1 mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4,4-DDE mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dieldrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Endrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4,4-DDD mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4,4-DDT mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Endrin Ketone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Methoxychlor mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dichlorvos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dimethoate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Diazinon mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chlorpyrifos methyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Malathion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Fenthion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chloropyrifos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pirimiphos ethyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
ChlorfenvinphosE mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
ChlorfenvinphosZ mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Prothiofos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Ethion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Page 60 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
SB - 22 - KGPF SB - 22 - KGPF' SB - 29 - KGPF
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 6420 6440 7800
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 3 3 2
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 7 7 19
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Boron B mg/kg 1 27 27 45
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 20 23 20
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 1 1 3
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 1 1 2
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 3 4 6
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 14100 14100 24000
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 7 6 11
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 209 211 258
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1 36 34 45
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 2 1 2
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 101 101 124
Pottasium K mg/kg 1 195 195 320
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 66 80 55
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 2050 2000 3430
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 64 64 128
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 <1 <1 <1
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 22 22 37
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 9 9 14
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 3 3 4
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 1600 1580 1350
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Page 61 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Organic
C6 - C9 mg/kg 5 <5 <5 <5
C10 - C14 mg/kg 50 <50 <50 <50
C15 - C28 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100
C29 - C36 mg/kg 100 <100 <100 <100
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5 16 16 14
TCLP Metals
Arsenic As mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Barium Ba mg/L 0.01 0.59 0.45 0.50
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Copper Cu mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Lead Pb mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
Selenium Se mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Silver Ag mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.22
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Page 62 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
FUMIGANTS
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 <2 - <2
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 <5 - <5
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Page 66 of 72
Batch :
Date of Issue :
2 2 L Rep 9
ALSI0336128341
ALSI0336128341
L Rep
ALSI0336128348
13/Jul/13 13/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:39 14:39 10:10
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03361a
25 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Aniline (Cntd)
AlphaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Beta & gammaBHC mg/Kg 1 <1 - <1
DeltaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Heptachlor mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Aldrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Heptachlor epoxide mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4,4-DDE mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dieldrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Endrin mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4,4-DDD mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
4,4-DDT mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Endrin Ketone mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Methoxychlor mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dichlorvos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Dimethoate mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Diazinon mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chlorpyrifos methyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Malathion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Fenthion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Chloropyrifos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Pirimiphos ethyl mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
ChlorfenvinphosE mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
ChlorfenvinphosZ mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Prothiofos mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Ethion mg/Kg 0.5 <0.5 - <0.5
Page 67 of 72
Batch : ALSI03361a
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method
Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/kg 5 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <5 108
Arsenic As mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 110
Antimony Sb mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 95
Barium Ba mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 111
Berilium Be mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 86
Boron B mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 100
Cadmium Cd mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 111
Calsium Ca mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 96
Chromium Cr mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 111
Cobalt Co mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 115
Copper Cu mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 110
Iron Fe mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 96
Lead Pb mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 105
Magnesium Mg mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 102
Mangan Mn mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 97
Molybdenum Mo mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 90
Nickel Ni mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 115
Phosporus P mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 88
Pottasium K mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 98
Selenium Se mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 99
Silver Ag mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 95
Sodium Na mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 92
Stronsium Sr mg/kg 5 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <5 103
Sulphur S mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 94
Thalium Tl mg/kg 5 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <5 111
Tin Sn mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 92
Vanadium V mg/kg 5 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <5 115
Zinc Zn mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 115
Lithium Li mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 97
Titanium Ti mg/kg 1 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3120 B <1 95
Mercury Hg mg/kg 0.01 Soil APHA 3050 B, APHA 3112 B <0.01 97
TCLP Metals
Arsenic As mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.01 98
Barium Ba mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.01 100
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.05 103
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.05 98
Copper Cu mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.01 96
Lead Pb mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.05 97
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3112 B <0.0005 95
Selenium Se mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.01 85
Silver Ag mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.05 95
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 1311, APHA 3120 B <0.05 97
Total Alkalinity mg/kg 5 Water APHA 2320 <1 96
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon mg/L 50 Water USEPA 8015 B <50 93
Method Blank = A contaminant free sample that undergoes processing identical to that carried out for samples.
LOR = Limit of Reporting Reference Material = Material whose properties are certified by a technically valid procedure issued by a certified body.
Laboratory ID
26 July 2013
ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION Unit LOR
CRM
Matrix
Method Reference
Page 68 of 72
Batch : ALSI03361a
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method
Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
Laboratory ID
26 July 2013
CRM
Matrix
Method Reference
Benzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 98
Toluene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 97
Ethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 97
meta&paraXylene mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8260 B <1 97
Styrene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 100
orthoXylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 98
Isopropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
nPropylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 100
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
secButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 100
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
tertButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 100
nButylbenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 97
2Butanone (MEK) mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 96
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 100
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 101
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 94
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 96
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
1,2Dibromoethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 96
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 93
Chloromethane mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 96
Vinyl chloride mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 98
Bromomethane mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 97
Chloroethane mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 97
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <5 98
1,1Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 95
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 96
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 97
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 97
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 98
Carbon tetrachloride mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
1,2Dichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
Trichloroethene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 96
Dibromomethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 96
Tetrachlorethene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 97
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 100
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 104
Pentachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 102
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 93
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 113
Page 69 of 72
Batch : ALSI03361a
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method
Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
Laboratory ID
26 July 2013
CRM
Matrix
Method Reference
Chlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 98
Bromobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
2-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 100
4-chlorotoluene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 98
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 99
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/Kg 2 Soil USEPA 8260 B <2 100
Bromodichloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 102
Dibromochloromethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 103
Bromoform mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8260 B <0.5 101
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 99
2Chlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
2Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 97
3&4Methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
2Nitrophenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 94
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 97
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 99
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
Pentachlorophenol mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 107
Naphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
2Methylnaphtalene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 107
2Chloronaphthalene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Acenaphthylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 103
Acenaphthene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Fluorene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 107
Phenanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
Fluoranthene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 99
Benz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
Chrysene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 105
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 92
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
3Methylcholanthrene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 90
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 89
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 91
Page 70 of 72
Batch : ALSI03361a
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method
Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
Laboratory ID
26 July 2013
CRM
Matrix
Method Reference
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
Diethyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 107
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/Kg 5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <5 105
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 99
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 93
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 98
NNitrosomorpholine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 95
NNitrosopiperidine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 110
Methapyrilene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
2Picoline mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 96
Acetophenone mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Nitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 96
Isophorone mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 99
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 106
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 105
1Naphthylamine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
5Nitrootoluidine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
Azobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 94
Phenacetin mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 100
4Aminobiphenyl mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 100
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 100
Pronamide mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 109
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
Chlorobenzilate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 103
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 94
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 93
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Hexachloroethane mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
Hexachloropropylene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 108
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/Kg 2.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <2.5 97
Pentachlorobenzene mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
Hexachlorobenzene mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 102
Page 71 of 72
Batch : ALSI03361a
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method
Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
Laboratory ID
26 July 2013
CRM
Matrix
Method Reference
Aniline mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 93
4Chloroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 83
2Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 98
3Nitroaniline mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 100
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 97
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 100
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
PESTICIDES**
AlphaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
Beta & gammaBHC mg/Kg 1 Soil USEPA 8270 B <1 102
DeltaBHC mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 96
Heptachlor mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 90
Aldrin mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 84
Heptachlor epoxide mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
Endosulfan 1 mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
4,4-DDE mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 103
Dieldrin mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
Endrin mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
4,4-DDD mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 108
4,4-DDT mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
Endrin Ketone mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
Methoxychlor mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 103
Dibenzofuran mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 83
4Nitroaniline mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 85
Carbazole mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 98
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 90
Dichlorvos mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 105
Dimethoate mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 106
Diazinon mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 100
Chlorpyrifos methyl mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 95
Malathion mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 103
Fenthion mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 109
Chloropyrifos mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
Pirimiphos ethyl mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 108
ChlorfenvinphosE mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 104
ChlorfenvinphosZ mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 102
Prothiofos mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 101
Ethion mg/Kg 0.5 Soil USEPA 8270 B <0.5 97
Page 72 of 72
Date Completed:
ALSI File No: ALSI03387
Report on: SALAMANDER Project
Jakarta 12780
Date received:
Sampled by: Mr. Godfrey & Mr. Fahmi Idris
PT. ALS Indonesia
Reviewed by:
Sisca Nurhafifa
29 July 2013
22 July 2013
Batch :
Sample Matrix : Ambient
Date of Issue :
1 2 3
ALSI0338728516 ALSI0338728517 ALSI0338728518
A-01- RG A-02- R II A-03- R III
12/Jul/13 14/Jul/13 15/Jul/13
14:00 10:30 17:00
Nitrogen Dioxide NO
2 g/m
3
20 <20 <20 <20
(24 Hour Average Period)
Sulphur Dioxide SO
2 g/m
3
12.5 167 <12.5 <12.5
Ozone O
3 g/m
3
20 <20 <20 <20
PM 10 g/Nm
3
5 28.1 <5 <5
PM 2.5 g/Nm
3
5 18.4 <5 <5
LOR = limit Of Reporting
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
ALSI03387
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Page 1 of 11
SulfurDioxideppm NitrogenDioxideppm Ozoneppm
10MinuteAveragePeriod 1HourAveragePeriod 8HourAveragePeriod
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1#%&ul%1"0"'0('1)PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0"'1('1(PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0"'#('1+PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0"'"('18PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0"',('1-PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0"')('#0PM *"00 *#0
1#%&ul%1"0,'0('#1PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0,'1('##PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0,'#('#"PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0,'"('#,PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0,',('#)PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0,')('#(PM *"00 *#0
1#%&ul%1"0)'0('#+PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0)'1('#8PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0)'#('#-PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0)'"('"0PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0)',('"1PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0)')('"#PM *"00 *#0
1#%&ul%1"0('0('""PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0('1('",PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0('#('")PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0('"('"(PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0(',('"+PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0(')('"8PM *"00 *#0
1#%&ul%1"0+'0('"-PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0+'1(',0PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0+'#(',1PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0+'"(',#PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0+',(',"PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"0+')(',,PM *"00 *#0
1#%&ul%1"08'0(',)PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"08'1(',(PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"08'#(',+PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"08'"(',8PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"08',(',-PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"08')(')0PM )#) *#0
1#%&ul%1"0-'0(')1PM +88
1#%&ul%1"0-'1(')#PM +88
1#%&ul%1"0-'#(')"PM +88
1#%&ul%1"0-'"('),PM +88
1#%&ul%1"0-',('))PM +88
1#%&ul%1"0-')(')(PM )#) *#0
Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%01%!2 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%01%!2 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%01%!2 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%01%!2
Page 2 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1#%&ul%1"10'0(')+PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"10'1(')8PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"10'#(')-PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"10'"+'00PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"10',+'01PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"10')+'0#PM )#) *#0 *#0
1#%&ul%1"11'0+'0"PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"11'1+'0,PM )#)
1#%&ul%1"11'#+'0)PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"11'"+'0(PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"11',+'0+PM *"00
1#%&ul%1"11')+'08PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"1#'0+'0-AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#'1+'10AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#'#+'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#'"+'1#AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#',+'1"AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#')+'1,AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"01'0+'1)AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01'1+'1(AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01'#+'1+AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01'"+'18AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01',+'1-AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01')+'#0AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0#'0+'#1AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#'1+'##AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#'#+'#"AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#'"+'#,AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#',+'#)AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#')+'#(AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0"'0+'#+AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"'1+'#8AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"'#+'#-AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"'"+'"0AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"',+'"1AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"')+'"#AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0,'0+'""AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,'1+'",AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,'#+'")AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,'"+'"(AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,',+'"+AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,')+'"8AM *"00 *#0
Page 3 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1"%&ul%1"0)'0+'"-AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0)'1+',0AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0)'#+',1AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0)'"+',#AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0)',+',"AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0)')+',,AM )#) *#0
1"%&ul%1"0('0+',)AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0('1+',(AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0('#+',+AM +88
1"%&ul%1"0('"+',8AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0(',+',-AM )#)
1"%&ul%1"0(')+')0AM )#) *#0 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0+'0+')1AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+'1+')#AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+'#+')"AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+'"+'),AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+',+'))AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+')+')(AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"08'0+')+AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08'1+')8AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08'#+')-AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08'"8'00AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08',8'01AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08')8'0#AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0-'08'0"AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-'18'0,AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-'#8'0)AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-'"8'0(AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-',8'0+AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-')8'08AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"10'08'0-AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10'18'10AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10'#8'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10'"8'1#AM *"00 *#0
Page 4 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1"%&ul%1"11'0#'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11'1#'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11'##'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11'"#'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11',#'11AM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"1#'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"1#')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"01'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"01')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0#'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0#')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0"'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0"')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0,'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0,')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0)'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0)'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0)'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0)'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0)',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0)')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0('0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0('1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0('##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0('"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0(',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0(')#'11PM *"00 *#0 *#0
Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0#%!33 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0#%!33 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0#%!33 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0#%!33
Page 5 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1"%&ul%1"0+'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0+')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"08'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"08')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"0-'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"0-')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"10'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"10')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1"%&ul%1"11'0#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11'1#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11'##'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11'"#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11',#'11PM *"00
1"%&ul%1"11')#'11PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"1#'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"01'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0#'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#')#'11AM *"00 *#0 *#0
Page 6 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1,%&ul%1"0"'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0,'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0)'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0('0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0('1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0('##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0('"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0(',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0(')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0+'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"08'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0-'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-')#'11AM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"10'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10'1#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10'##'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10'"#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10',#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10')#'11AM *"00 *#0 *#0
1,%&ul%1"11'0#'11AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11'1#'11AM *"00
Page 7 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1,%&ul%1"11'1('1#AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11'#('1#AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11'"('1#AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11',('1#AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11')('1#AM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"1#'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"1#')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"01'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"01')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0#'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0#')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0"'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0"')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0,'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0,')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0)'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0)')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0('0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0('1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0('#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0('"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0(',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0(')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+'0('1#PM *"00 *#0 *#0
Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0"4!333 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0"4!333 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0"4!333 Am.ientAirMonitoring!e/ult/foro0ation1A%0"4!333
Page 8 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1,%&ul%1"0+'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0+')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"08'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"08')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"0-'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"0-')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"10'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"10')('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11'0('1#PM *"00 *#0
1,%&ul%1"11'1('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11'#('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11'"('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11',('1#PM *"00
1,%&ul%1"11')('1#PM *"00
1)%&ul%1"1#'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"1#'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"1#'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"1#'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"1#',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"1#')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"01'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"01'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"01'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"01'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"01',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"01')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0#'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"0#'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0#'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0#'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0#',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0#')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0"'0('1#AM *"00 *#0 *#0
Page 9 of 11
Unit (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
) (g/m
3
)
O! "00 #0 #0
Date$ime
1)%&ul%1"0"'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0"'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0"'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0"',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0"')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0,'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"0,'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0,'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0,'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0,',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0,')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0)'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"0)'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0)'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0)'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0)',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0)')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0('0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"0('1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0('#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0('"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0(',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0(')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0+'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"0+'1('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0+'#('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0+'"('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0+',('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"0+')('1#AM *"00
1)%&ul%1"08'0('1#AM *"00 *#0
1)%&ul%1"08'1('1#AM *"00 *#0
Page 10 of 11
Batch : ALSI03387
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
Nitrogen Dioxide NO
2 g/m
3
20 - Electrochemical Sensor - -
Sulphur Dioxide SO
2 g/m
3
Ozone O
3 g/m
3
PM 10 g/Nm
3
5 - Mini-vol / Gravimetric - -
PM 2.5 g/Nm
3
5 - Mini-vol / Gravimetric - -
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR Unit ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION
Page 11 of 11
Date Completed:
ALSI File No: ALSI03396
Report on: SALAMANDER KERENDAN
ASSURANCE SAMPLING
Jakarta 12780
Date received:
Sampled by: Mr. Godfrey & Mr. Fahmi Idris
PT. ALS Indonesia
Reviewed by:
Sisca Nurhafifa
29 July 2013
22 July 2013
Batch :
Sample Matrix : Water
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
SW-01-R I SW-01-R I' SW-02-R I SW-03-R I SW-04-R I
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
Physical Properties
pH - - 6.2 6.2 6.6 6.2 7.6
Conductivity mhos/cm 1 11 11 11 11 1070
Temperature C - 29.3 29.3 29.4 30.4 31.4
Total Dissolved Solids TDS mg/L 1 7 7 8 8 725
Total Suspended Solids TSS mg/L 1 12 12 11 11 14
Dissolved Anion
Alkalinity-Total CaCO
3
mg/L 1 5 5 4 4 387
Nutrients
Total Phosphorus P-PO
4
mg/L 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.08 8.43
Total Nitrogen T-N mg/L 0.5 2.5 2.5 0.6 1.0 157
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/L 0.01 0.64 0.62 0.81 0.81 0.21
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.003
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.031
Berilium Be mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Boron B mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.013 0.012 0.022
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5 1.7 1.7 1.9 2.1 7.1
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.007
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005 0.558 0.579 0.636 0.618 0.410
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 2.4
Mangan Mn mg/L 0.001 0.025 0.025 0.027 0.027 0.069
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 9.2
Pottasium K mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 15.3
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
** = Subcontract LOR = limit Of Reporting
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Page 1 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Total Metals
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5 5.8 5.6 6.2 5 35.5
Stronsium Sr mg/L 0.005 0.011 0.009 0.009 0.01 0.029
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.2 11.4
Thalium Tl mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005 0.008 0.007 <0.005 0.007 0.041
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
Dissolved Metals
Alumunium Al mg/L 0.01 0.40 0.37 0.29 0.19 0.06
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.003
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.019
Berilium Be mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Boron B mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.012
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 5.9
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.004
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005 0.362 0.334 0.300 0.207 0.263
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 2.2
Mangan Mn mg/L 0.001 0.014 0.013 0.011 0.008 0.066
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 7.6
Pottasium K mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 14.8
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Page 2 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Dissolved Metals
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 29.0
Stronsium Sr mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 0.006 0.028
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.6 0.6 8.1
Thalium Tl mg/L 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.006 0.021
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.006 0.021
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
Organic
Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD
5
mg/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 74
Chemical Oxygen Demand COD mg/L 10 <10 <10 <10 <10 122
Oil and Grease mg/L 5 <5 - <5 <5 8
Dissolved Oxygen DO mg/L 1 6 6 6 6 4
Surfactants MBAS mg/L 0.01 0.15 - 0.08 0.09 0.06
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH)
C6 - C9 mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
C10 - C14 mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
C15 - C28 mg/L 0.1 <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
C29 - C36 mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Total TPH ( C6 - C36 ) mg/L 0.1 <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS**
Benzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Toluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Ethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
meta&paraXylene mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Styrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
orthoXylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Isopropylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
nPropylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
secButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 3 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS**
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
tertButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
nButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Butanone (MEK) mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2Dibromoethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Chloromethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Vinyl chloride mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Bromomethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Chloroethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
1,1Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Carbon tetrachloride mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Trichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Dibromomethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Tetrachlorethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 4 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Pentachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Chlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Bromobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/L 0.02 <0.02 - <0.02 <0.02 <0.02
Bromodichloromethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Dibromochloromethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Bromoform mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Chlorophenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Methylphenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
3&4Methylphenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Nitrophenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Pentachlorophenol mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
COMPOUNDS**
Page 5 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
POLYAROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
Naphthalene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Methylnaphtalene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Chloronaphthalene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Acenaphthylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Acenaphthene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Fluorene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Phenanthrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Anthracene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Fluoranthene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Pyrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Benz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Chrysene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
3Methylcholanthrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Diethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
NNitrosomorpholine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
NNitrosopiperidine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Methapyrilene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 6 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
2Picoline mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Acetophenone mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Nitrobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Isophorone mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
1Naphthylamine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
5Nitrootoluidine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Azobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Phenacetin mg/L 0.005
4Aminobiphenyl mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Pronamide mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Chlorobenzilate mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Hexachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Hexachloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/L 0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Pentachlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Hexachlorobenzene mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Page 7 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
1 1 L Rep 2 3 4
ALSI033962
8593
ALSI033962
8593 L Rep
ALSI033962
8594
ALSI033962
8595
ALSI033962
8596
8:38 8:38 9:00 9:41 10:08
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Aniline mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4Chloroaniline mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
2Nitroaniline mg/L 0.01 <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Dibenzofuran mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Carbazole mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/L 0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 8 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
Physical Properties
pH - -
Conductivity mhos/cm 1
Temperature C -
Total Dissolved Solids TDS mg/L 1
Total Suspended Solids TSS mg/L 1
Dissolved Anion
3
mg/L 1
Nutrients
4
mg/L 0.01
Total Nitrogen T-N mg/L 0.5
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/L 0.01
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001
Berilium Be mg/L 0.005
Boron B mg/L 0.005
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5
Mangan Mn mg/L 0.001
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5
Pottasium K mg/L 0.5
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
SW-05-R II SW-06-R II SW-07-R III SW-08-R III
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
6.2 6.2 5.8 5.9
12 13 22 16
37.4 27.0 28.9 28.9
8 9 15 11
19 19 31 8
4 4 7 6
1.1 1.2 0.05 0.10
0.6 1.0 <0.5 <0.5
1.26 1.46 1.47 0.45
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
0.016 0.015 0.040 0.014
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.008 0.007 0.009 0.008
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
1.6 1.3 2.0 1.6
<0.001 0.001 0.001 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.001 <0.001 0.002 0.001
1.27 1.28 2.76 1.17
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.7 0.6 1.2 0.9
0.044 0.043 0.171 0.082
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
0.6 0.6 1.0 0.6
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Page 9 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Total Metals
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5
Stronsium Sr mg/L 0.005
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5
Thalium Tl mg/L 0.01
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005
Dissolved Metals
Boron B mg/L 0.005
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
5.2 4.8 5.1 4.9
0.006 0.006 0.013 0.008
0.9 <0.5 4.2 2.1
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.012 0.015 0.013 <0.005
0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002
0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05
<0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
0.41 0.40 0.48 0.15
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
0.013 0.010 0.027 0.007
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.5 <0.5 1.1 0.6
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001
0.449 0.444 0.819 0.287
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.6 0.6 1.1 0.7
0.014 0.016 0.075 0.013
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Page 10 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Dissolved Metals
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005
Organic
5
mg/L 5
Chemical Oxygen Demand COD mg/L 10
Oil and Grease mg/L 5
Dissolved Oxygen DO mg/L 1
Surfactants MBAS mg/L 0.01
C6 - C9 mg/L 0.05
C10 - C14 mg/L 0.05
C15 - C28 mg/L 0.1
C29 - C36 mg/L 0.05
Total TPH ( C6 - C36 ) mg/L 0.1
VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS**
Benzene mg/L 0.005
Toluene mg/L 0.005
Ethylbenzene mg/L 0.005
meta&paraXylene mg/L 0.01
Styrene mg/L 0.005
orthoXylene mg/L 0.005
Isopropylbenzene mg/L 0.005
nPropylbenzene mg/L 0.005
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005
secButylbenzene mg/L 0.005
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.6 0.6 0.6 1.0
0.006 <0.005 0.011 0.007
<0.5 <0.5 0.8 <0.5
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.010 0.0013 0.013 <0.005
0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
<5 <5 <5 <5
<10 <10 <10 <10
<5 <5 <5 <5
5 6 5 3
0.06 0.09 0.05 0.02
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 11 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS**
tertButylbenzene mg/L 0.005
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/L 0.005
nButylbenzene mg/L 0.005
2Butanone (MEK) mg/L 0.05
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/L 0.05
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/L 0.05
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/L 0.005
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005
1,2Dibromoethane mg/L 0.005
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/L 0.05
Chloromethane mg/L 0.05
Vinyl chloride mg/L 0.05
Bromomethane mg/L 0.05
Chloroethane mg/L 0.05
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/L 0.05
1,1Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005
Carbon tetrachloride mg/L 0.005
1,2Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005
Trichloroethene mg/L 0.005
Dibromomethane mg/L 0.005
Tetrachlorethene mg/L 0.005
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 12 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/L 0.005
Pentachloroethane mg/L 0.005
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/L 0.005
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/L 0.005
Chlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Bromobenzene mg/L 0.005
2-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/L 0.02
Bromodichloromethane mg/L 0.005
Dibromochloromethane mg/L 0.005
Bromoform mg/L 0.005
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/L 0.005
2Chlorophenol mg/L 0.005
2Methylphenol mg/L 0.005
3&4Methylphenol mg/L 0.005
2Nitrophenol mg/L 0.005
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/L 0.005
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/L 0.005
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/L 0.005
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/L 0.005
Pentachlorophenol mg/L 0.01
COMPOUNDS**
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Page 13 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Naphthalene mg/L 0.005
2Methylnaphtalene mg/L 0.005
2Chloronaphthalene mg/L 0.005
Acenaphthylene mg/L 0.005
Acenaphthene mg/L 0.005
Fluorene mg/L 0.005
Phenanthrene mg/L 0.005
Anthracene mg/L 0.005
Fluoranthene mg/L 0.005
Pyrene mg/L 0.005
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/L 0.005
Benz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005
Chrysene mg/L 0.005
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/L 0.01
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/L 0.005
3Methylcholanthrene mg/L 0.005
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/L 0.005
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/L 0.005
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/L 0.005
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Diethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/L 0.05
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/L 0.01
NNitrosomorpholine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosopiperidine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/L 0.005
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/L 0.01
Methapyrilene mg/L 0.005
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 14 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
2Picoline mg/L 0.005
Acetophenone mg/L 0.005
Nitrobenzene mg/L 0.005
Isophorone mg/L 0.005
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/L 0.01
1Naphthylamine mg/L 0.005
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/L 0.005
5Nitrootoluidine mg/L 0.005
Azobenzene mg/L 0.005
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/L 0.005
4Aminobiphenyl mg/L 0.005
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/L 0.005
Pronamide mg/L 0.005
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/L 0.005
Chlorobenzilate mg/L 0.005
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/L 0.005
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/L 0.005
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Hexachloroethane mg/L 0.005
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Hexachloropropylene mg/L 0.005
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/L 0.05
Pentachlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Hexachlorobenzene mg/L 0.01
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Page 15 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Aniline mg/L 0.005
4Chloroaniline mg/L 0.005
2Nitroaniline mg/L 0.01
Dibenzofuran mg/L 0.005
Carbazole mg/L 0.005
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/L 0.005
5 6 7 8
ALSI0339628
597
ALSI0339628
598
ALSI0339628
599
ALSI0339628
600
16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13 16/Jul/13
16:30 16:35 16:01 15:10
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Page 16 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
Physical Properties
pH - -
Conductivity mhos/cm 1
Temperature C -
Total Dissolved Solids TDS mg/L 1
Total Suspended Solids TSS mg/L 1
Dissolved Anion
3
mg/L 1
Nutrients
4
mg/L 0.01
Total Nitrogen T-N mg/L 0.5
Total Metals
Boron B mg/L 0.005
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
SW-09-R III Water (River)' Water (River) EB
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
5.9 7.3 7.4 -
12 1090 1100 -
27.9 31.4 31.4 -
8 744 747 1
12 13 13 2
4 383 383 4
0.11 8.45 8.42 0.03
<0.5 144 145 <0.5
1.08 0.16 0.17 <0.01
<0.001 0.003 0.003 <0.001
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
0.013 0.028 0.027 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.006 0.017 0.015 <0.005
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
1.4 6.0 6.0 <0.5
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.001 0.007 0.006 <0.001
1.1 0.374 0.359 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.7 2.5 2.4 <0.5
0.0 0.067 0.063 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.5 8.4 8.4 <0.5
<0.5 15.4 15.2 <0.5
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Page 17 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Total Metals
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005
Dissolved Metals
Boron B mg/L 0.005
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
4.9 35.2 35.4 <0.5
0.006 0.028 0.028 <0.005
1.2 10.6 10.6 <0.5
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.008 0.038 0.038 <0.005
0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
0.34 0.06 0.06 <0.01
<0.001 0.003 0.003 <0.001
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
0.007 0.018 0.018 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 0.010 0.011 <0.005
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.5 5.9 5.9 <0.5
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.001 0.003 0.004 <0.001
0.394 0.216 0.209 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.5 2.2 2.2 <0.5
0.015 0.053 0.052 <0.001
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.5 7.6 7.6 <0.5
0.6 14.9 14.8 <0.5
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Page 18 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Dissolved Metals
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005
Organic
5
mg/L 5
Chemical Oxygen Demand COD mg/L 10
Oil and Grease mg/L 5
Dissolved Oxygen DO mg/L 1
Surfactants MBAS mg/L 0.01
C6 - C9 mg/L 0.05
C10 - C14 mg/L 0.05
C15 - C28 mg/L 0.1
C29 - C36 mg/L 0.05
Total TPH ( C6 - C36 ) mg/L 0.1
VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS**
Benzene mg/L 0.005
Toluene mg/L 0.005
Ethylbenzene mg/L 0.005
meta&paraXylene mg/L 0.01
Styrene mg/L 0.005
orthoXylene mg/L 0.005
Isopropylbenzene mg/L 0.005
nPropylbenzene mg/L 0.005
secButylbenzene mg/L 0.005
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.7 28.7 29.0 <0.5
0.005 0.024 0.024 <0.005
0.6 8.5 8.5 <0.5
<0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
0.006 0.012 0.012 <0.005
0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
<0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
<5 74 78 <5
<10 125 118 <10
<5 - 6 <5
6 4 4 -
0.03 - 0.08 <0.01
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.1 - <0.1 <0.1
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.1 - <0.1 <0.1
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
Page 19 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
VOLATILE ORGANIC
COMPOUNDS**
tertButylbenzene mg/L 0.005
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/L 0.005
nButylbenzene mg/L 0.005
2Butanone (MEK) mg/L 0.05
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/L 0.05
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/L 0.05
FUMIGANTS
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005
1,2Dibromoethane mg/L 0.005
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/L 0.05
Chloromethane mg/L 0.05
Vinyl chloride mg/L 0.05
Bromomethane mg/L 0.05
Chloroethane mg/L 0.05
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/L 0.05
1,1Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005
Carbon tetrachloride mg/L 0.005
1,2Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005
Trichloroethene mg/L 0.005
Dibromomethane mg/L 0.005
Tetrachlorethene mg/L 0.005
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
Page 20 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/L 0.005
Pentachloroethane mg/L 0.005
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/L 0.005
Chlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Bromobenzene mg/L 0.005
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/L 0.02
Bromodichloromethane mg/L 0.005
Dibromochloromethane mg/L 0.005
Bromoform mg/L 0.005
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/L 0.005
2Chlorophenol mg/L 0.005
2Methylphenol mg/L 0.005
3&4Methylphenol mg/L 0.005
2Nitrophenol mg/L 0.005
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/L 0.005
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/L 0.005
Pentachlorophenol mg/L 0.01
COMPOUNDS**
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.02 - <0.02 <0.02
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
Page 21 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Naphthalene mg/L 0.005
2Methylnaphtalene mg/L 0.005
2Chloronaphthalene mg/L 0.005
Acenaphthylene mg/L 0.005
Acenaphthene mg/L 0.005
Fluorene mg/L 0.005
Phenanthrene mg/L 0.005
Anthracene mg/L 0.005
Fluoranthene mg/L 0.005
Pyrene mg/L 0.005
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/L 0.005
Benz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005
Chrysene mg/L 0.005
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/L 0.01
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/L 0.005
3Methylcholanthrene mg/L 0.005
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/L 0.005
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/L 0.005
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/L 0.005
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Diethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/L 0.05
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/L 0.005
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/L 0.01
NNitrosomorpholine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosopiperidine mg/L 0.005
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/L 0.005
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/L 0.01
Methapyrilene mg/L 0.005
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
Page 22 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
2Picoline mg/L 0.005
Acetophenone mg/L 0.005
Nitrobenzene mg/L 0.005
Isophorone mg/L 0.005
1Naphthylamine mg/L 0.005
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/L 0.005
5Nitrootoluidine mg/L 0.005
Azobenzene mg/L 0.005
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/L 0.005
4Aminobiphenyl mg/L 0.005
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/L 0.005
Pronamide mg/L 0.005
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/L 0.005
Chlorobenzilate mg/L 0.005
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/L 0.005
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/L 0.005
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005
Hexachloroethane mg/L 0.005
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Hexachloropropylene mg/L 0.005
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/L 0.05
Pentachlorobenzene mg/L 0.005
Hexachlorobenzene mg/L 0.01
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.05 - <0.05 <0.05
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
Page 23 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
UNIT LOR
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Time Sampled
Date Sampled
Aniline mg/L 0.005
4Chloroaniline mg/L 0.005
Dibenzofuran mg/L 0.005
Carbazole mg/L 0.005
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/L 0.005
9 10 L Rep 10 12
ALSI0339628
601
ALSI0339628
602 L Rep
ALSI0339628
602
ALSI0339628
604
16/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 17/Jul/13 13/Jul/13
14:31 10:12 10:12 10:44
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
<0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
Page 24 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
11
ALSI0339628603
TB
13/Jul/13
9:00
UNIT LOR RESULTS
Benzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Toluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Ethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
meta&paraXylene mg/L 0.01 <0.01
Styrene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
orthoXylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Isopropylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
nPropylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
secButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
tertButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
nButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
2Butanone (MEK) mg/L 0.05 <0.05
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/L 0.05 <0.05
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/L 0.05 <0.05
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2Dibromoethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05
Chloromethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05
Vinyl chloride mg/L 0.05 <0.05
Bromomethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05
Chloroethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/L 0.05 <0.05
1,1Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
Page 25 of 33
Batch :
Date of Issue :
11
ALSI0339628603
TB
13/Jul/13
9:00
UNIT LOR RESULTS
ALSI03396
29 July 2013
No. Sample
ALSI Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D.
Date Sampled
Time Sampled
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Carbon tetrachloride mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Trichloroethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Dibromomethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Tetrachlorethene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Pentachloroethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Chlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Bromobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
2-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
4-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 <0.005
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/L 0.02 <0.02
Bromodichloromethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Dibromochloromethane mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Bromoform mg/L 0.005 <0.005
Page 26 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
pH - - - APHA 4500 H - -
Conductivity mhos/cm 1 Water APHA 2510 B <1 104
Temperature C - - APHA 2550 B - -
Total Dissolved Solids TDS mg/L 1 Water APHA 2540 C <1 92
Total Suspended Solids TSS mg/L 1 - APHA 2540 D <1 93
3
mg/L 1 Water APHA 2320 B <1 96
4
mg/L 0.01 Water APHA 4500-P A,B,E <0.01 105
Total Nitrogen T-N mg/L 0.5 Water
APHA 4500-NH D &
APHA 4500-Norg C
<0.5 90
5
mg/L 5 Water APHA 5210 B <5 105
Chemical Oxygen Demand COD mg/L 10 Water APHA 5220 D <10 98
Oil and Grease mg/L 5 Water APHA 5520 B <5 110
Dissolved Oxygen DO mg/L 1 Water APHA 4500-O G <1 -
Surfactants MBAS mg/L 0.01 Water APHA 5540 A,B&C <0.01 92
Total Metals
Alumunium Al mg/L 0.01 Water APHA 3125 B <0.01 95
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 94
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 111
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 93
Berilium Be mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 94
Boron B mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 102
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 93
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 95
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 91
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 96
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 94
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 92
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 110
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 97
Mangan Mn mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 92
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 103
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 96
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 101 (QC)
Pottasium K mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 93
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 90
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 95
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 94
Stronsium Sr mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 91
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 96(QC)
Thalium Tl mg/L 0.01 Water APHA 3125 B <0.01 94
Unit ANALYSIS DESCRIPTION
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
Page 27 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
Total Metals
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 99(QC)
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 97
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 103
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 95
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05 Water APHA 3125 B <0.05 101
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 Water APHA 3112 B <0.0005 89
Dissolved Metals
Alumunium Al mg/L 0.01 Water APHA 3125 B <0.01 95
Arsenic As mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 94
Antimony Sb mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 111
Barium Ba mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 93
Berilium Be mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 94
Boron B mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 102
Cadmium Cd mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 93
Calsium Ca mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 95
Chromium Cr mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 91
Cobalt Co mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 96
Copper Cu mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 94
Iron Fe mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 92
Lead Pb mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 110
Magnesium Mg mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 97
Mangan Mn mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 92
Molybdenum Mo mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 103
Nickel Ni mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 96
Phosporus P mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 101
Pottasium K mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 93
Selenium Se mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 90
Silver Ag mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 95
Sodium Na mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5 94
Stronsium Sr mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 91
Sulphur S mg/L 0.5 Water APHA 3120 B <0.5
Thalium Tl mg/L 0.01 Water APHA 3125 B <0.01 94
Tin Sn mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 99(QC)
Vanadium V mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 97
Zinc Zn mg/L 0.005 Water APHA 3125 B <0.005 103
Lithium Li mg/L 0.001 Water APHA 3125 B <0.001 95
Titanium Ti mg/L 0.05 Water APHA 3125 B <0.05 101
Mercury Hg mg/L 0.0005 Water APHA 3112 B <0.0005 89
Page 28 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
C6 - C9 mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8015 B <0.05
Total TPH ( C6 - C36 ) mg/L 0.1 Water USEPA 8015 B <0.1
Benzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 110
Toluene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 111
Ethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 110
meta&paraXylene mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.01 113
Styrene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 110
orthoXylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 112
Isopropylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 114
nPropylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 106
1,3,5Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 101
secButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 109
1,2,4Trimethylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 113
tertButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 107
p-Isopropyltoluene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 117
nButylbenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 113
2Butanone (MEK) mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 100
4Methyl2pentanone (MIBK) mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 100
2Hexanone (MBK) mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 100
FUMIGANTS
2,2Dichloropropane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 102
cis-1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 110
trans1,3Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 110
1,2Dibromoethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 106
Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 112
Chloromethane mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 110
Vinyl chloride mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 113
Bromomethane mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 112
Chloroethane mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 103
97
Page 29 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
Trichlorofluoromethane mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.05 111
1,1Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 114
trans1,2Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 112
1,1-Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 113
cis1,2-Dichloroethene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 107
1,1,1Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 114
1,1Dichloropropylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 113
Carbon tetrachloride mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 112
1,2Dichloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 103
Trichloroethene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 116
Dibromomethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 102
1,1,2Trichloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 106
Tetrachlorethene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 112
1,1,1,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 115
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 102
1,2,3-Trichloropropane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 105
Pentachloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 118
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 93
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 107
Chlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 113
Bromobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 106
2-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 110
4-chlorotoluene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 111
1,3-dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 108
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 113
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 100
TRIHALOMETHANES
Chloroform mg/L 0.02 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.02 107
Bromodichloromethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 107
Dibromochloromethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 104
Bromoform mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8260 B <0.005 102
Page 30 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
PHENOLS
Phenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 97
2Chlorophenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 107
2Methylphenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 97
3&4Methylphenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 98
2Nitrophenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 104
2,4Dimethylphenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 90
2,4Dichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 91
2,6Dichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 91
4Chloro3methylphenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 97
2,4,6Trichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 100
2,4,5Trichlorophenol mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 93
Pentachlorophenol mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 91
Naphthalene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
2Methylnaphtalene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 102
2Chloronaphthalene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
Acenaphthylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 100
Acenaphthene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
Fluorene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 100
Phenanthrene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
Anthracene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 102
Fluoranthene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
Pyrene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
N2 Fluorenylacetamide mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
Benz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 95
Chrysene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 96
Benzo(b)&(k)fluoranthene mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 102
7, 12Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 93
Benzo(a)pyrene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 96
3Methylcholanthrene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 102
Indeno(1,2,3cd)pyrene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 103
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 106
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 102
PHTHALATE ESTERS
Dimethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
Diethyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 100
Dinbutyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 104
Butyl benzyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 105
Bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.05 106
Dinoctyl phthalate mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 105
COMPOUNDS**
Page 31 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
NITROSOAMINES
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 98
NNitrosodiethylamine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 95
NNitrosopyrrolidine mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 99
NNitrosomorpholine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 97
NNitrosodinpropylamine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 97
NNitrosopiperidine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 105
NNitrosodibutylamine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 95
Diphenylamine & NNitrosodiphenylamine mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 101
Methapyrilene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 102
2Picoline mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 94
Acetophenone mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 91
Nitrobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
Isophorone mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
2,6Dinitrotoluene mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 97
2,4Dinitrotoluene mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 102
1Naphthylamine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 98
4NitroquinolineNoxide mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
5Nitrootoluidine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 103
Azobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 99
1,3,5Trinitrobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 92
Phenacetin mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
4Aminobiphenyl mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
Pentachloronitrobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 94
Pronamide mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 103
Dimethylaminoazobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 98
Chlorobenzilate mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
HALOETHERS
Bis(2chloroethyl)ether mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 103
Bis(2chloroethoxy)methane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 87
4Chlorophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 94
4Bromophenyl phenyl ether mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 92
1,3Dichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 102
Hexachloroethane mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 90
1,2,4Trichlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 86
Page 32 of 33
Batch : ALSI03396
Date of Issue :
QUALITY CONTROL
Method Blank
Reference
Material %
Recovery
29 July 2013
Laboratory ID
Method Reference
CRM
Matrix
LOR
Hexachloropropylene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 86
Hexachlorobutadiene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 86
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene mg/L 0.05 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.05 100
Pentachlorobenzene mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 91
Hexachlorobenzene mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 89
Aniline mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 101
4Chloroaniline mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 92
2Nitroaniline mg/L 0.01 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.01 96
Dibenzofuran mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 98
Carbazole mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 104
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine mg/L 0.005 Water USEPA 8270 B <0.005 97
Page 33 of 33
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 336 of 369

Annex C
Biodiversity Study
Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world

Biodiversity Baseline Report
Prepared for:
PT. Salamander Energy

August 2013

PT. ERM Indonesia
2
nd
floor, Suite 238-239
Jakarta 12870
Indonesia

Telephone +62 21 7918 1904
Facsimile +62 21 7918 1905
Website: www.erm.com

Client. PT. Salamander Energy

Project No. 0184276

Summary.
This report presents the results of a biodiversity survey completed
for the Kerendan Gas Project
Date.

Included in this report.
Approved by

Miles Lockwood
Partner
ERM Indonesia

Revision Description By Checked Approved Date
This report has been prepared by Environmental Resources
Management with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the
terms of the Contract with the client, incorporating our General
Terms and Conditions of Business and taking account of the
resources devoted to it by agreement with the client.
We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect or
any matters outside the scope of the above.
This report is confidential to the client and we accept no
responsibility of whatsoever nature to any third parties to whom this
report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies
upon the report at their own risk.
Distribution

Internal
Public
Confidential

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT SALAMANDER ENERGY
KERENDAN PROJECT BIODIVERSITY REPORT
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... I
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 SURVEY AREA ................................................................................................... 1
1.3 SURVEY TEAM ................................................................................................... 3
2 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................... 4
2.1 FLORA ............................................................................................................... 4
2.2 MAMMALS ........................................................................................................ 5
2.3 BIRDS ................................................................................................................ 5
2.4 HERPETOFAUNA ............................................................................................... 6
2.5 INSECT ............................................................................................................... 7
3 RESULTS ......................................................................................................... 8
3.1 FLORA ............................................................................................................... 8
3.1.1 KGPF ................................................................................................. 8
3.1.2 Kerendan-1 Wellsite ..................................................................... 13
3.1.3 Pipelines ......................................................................................... 15
3.1.4 Important Species ......................................................................... 17
3.2 FAUNA ............................................................................................................. 17
3.2.1 Mammals ........................................................................................ 17
3.2.2 Birds ................................................................................................ 25
3.2.2.1 Species of Conservation Interest ...................................................... 31
3.2.3 Herpetofauna ................................................................................. 34
3.2.4 Insect ............................................................................................... 37

1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Salamander Energy through the wholly-owned subsidiary Salamander Energy
(Bangkanai) Limited (Salamander) is in the process of developing the Kerendan
gas field within the Salamander operated Bangkanai Production Sharing
Contract (PSC), Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. ERM has been engaged to
prepare an ESHIA in fulfillment of the International Finance Corporation (IFC)
Performance Standards (PS) 2012 to support the funding requirements of the
project.
IFC Performance Standard 6 specifically addresses Biodiversity Conservation
and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources. The expectations of
this Performance Standard are discussed in detail within the ESHIA document.
Prior to commissioning the field survey, ERM conducted a site visit and
background information review to confirm the scope and requirements of this
biodiversity survey. Following this visit ERM confirmed that while a desktop
review of available information revealed the presence of conservation significant
species
1
, the project area has suffered considerable disturbance as a result of
clearing and agricultural activity, while clearing for some components of the
project such as the Kerendan-1 well site had already occurred. That said some
areas of secondary forest were located within the project footprint and warrant
assessment as per the requirements of IFC PS 6. As such, a biodiversity survey
was commissioned to gather the required information to inform a biodiversity
impact assessment within the ESHIA document.
1.2 SURVEY AREA
The survey area encompassed the main project components comprising the
Kerendan Gas Production Facility, Pipelines incorporating the PLN sales Gas
Pipeline and Feed gas pipeline, as well as the area surrounding the existing
Kerendan 1 wellsite. A map of the project components and survey area is
provided at Figure 1.

1
hereafter defined as species listed as Endangered, Critically Endangered and Vulverable on the
IUCN Redlist.

2

Figure 1 Biodiversity Survey Locations PT. Salamander Energy

3
1.3 SURVEY TEAM
The survey was conducted between 15 and 23, July 2013 and was completed by
the following specialists.
Entol Muhammad Aaf Afnan as flora survey specialist;
Hery Sudarno as Ornithologist (bird specialist);
Akrom Mubarok as Herpetologist (herpetofauna specialist);
M. Faesal R.K. as Primatologist (primate specialist); and
Panji Fauzan as Ecologist and ERM field lead.

4
2 METHODOLOGY
The methodology adopted for the flora and fauna survey is provided under each
of the separate sub headings below. The survey locations are provided at
Figure 1.
2.1 FLORA
Vegetation survey and analysis was conducted to determine the vegetation
structure and species composition of the project area. The method used was the
square line method, which consists of sample plots created along the line of
observation. The plot size was 20 m x 20 m for tree vegetation while, sub-plots
were made for vegetation seedlings (2 m x 2 m), saplings (5 m x 5 m) and for
vegetation pole (10 m x 10 m). Data collected for tree and pole was name of
species, diameter at breast height, pole height and total height. Data taken for
saplings and seedlings is species names and number of individuals of each
species (Soerianegara and Indrawan, 1998).
Vegetation analysis was conducted to determine the composition and dominance
of a species of flora in a vegetation community. Dominance can be seen on the
Importance Value Index (INP) and is obtained from the sum of the value of the
relative density (KR) and relative frequency (FR) for seedlings and saplings as
well as the added value of the relative dominance (DR) for pole and tree level
(Soerianegara and Indrawan, 1998). The equations used are listed below :
Species density of-i (Ki) =
Number of individuals of a species
Total plot

Relative Density (KR) =
Density of a species x 100 %
Density of all species

Species dominance of-i
(Di)
=
Basal area of a species
Total plot

Relative Dominance (DR) =
Dominance of a species x 100 %
Dominance of all species

Species frequency of-i (Fi) =
Total plot occupy of a species
Total plot

Relative Frequency (FR) =
Frequency of a species x 100 %
Frequency of all species

5
Importance Value Index (INP) = KR + FR +DR

Importance Value Index
(INP)
= KR + FR (Ground Cover Flora)

Basal area of a species =
Note :
di = species diameter of-i
Identification of flora species from the survey, conducted at Puslitbang
Department Kehutanan Bogor.
2.2 MAMMALS
Mammals were surveyed opportunistically while the team was in the field. This
included asking community about the potential presence of some species. This
was considered to be a suitable approach given the extent of past and
surrounding disturbance and the difficulty in obtaining results from intensive
techniques such as trapping.
Both direct and indirect methods were utilized. Direct methods included active
searching during the field survey while indirect methods include observation of
footprints, scratch, scrape, scats, and voice) with line transect method.
Mammals identification in this study using field guide book with the tittle
Panduan Lapangan Mamalia di Kalimantan, Sabah, Serawak & Brunei
Darussalam J. Payne et al. (2000).
2.3 BIRDS
A road count method was used to survey birds. Through this method the
observer will record all birds encountered along the way, with the assumption all
of the individual bird has a same opportunities to be observed.
Observation occurred between 5:00 to 10:00 am and then continued between 3:00
to 06:30 pm, with the assumption nocturnal birds will be noticed at that time. In
addition, bird species recorded outside the schedule and location of the line
transect counts were also recorded and expressed as an additional species (cold
search).
Bird identification in this study was completed using the guide book with the
tittle Panduan Pengenalan Burung-Burung di Sumatra, Kalimantan, Jawa dan
Bali John Mckinnon et al. (2010), whereas for the naming nomenclature follow
the order of Peters Sequence and KUKILA List No.1 by Paul Andrew (1992).
2
. .
4
1
i
d

6
Bird protection status assessed by using IUCN (International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) 2011, CITES (Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) 2011, Law of
Indonesian Republic (Law No. 5 of 1990 ; Government Regulation No. 8 of 1990
and Government Regulation No. 7 of 1999) and ecological characteristic of the
bird (migratory and endemic).
2.4 HERPETOFAUNA
Searching for herpetofauna was conducted intensively on the forest floor in areas
such a puddles or grooves, streams and rivers and on the foliage and vegetation
around the observation area. The whereabouts of amphibians and reptiles was
determined based on direct encounter either of an individual adult or juvenile.
While indirect observations were recorded using signs such as nests, the remains
of the skin, and sound. The methods used is VES (Visually Encounter Survey)
which is referring to book Heyer et al. ( 1994 ).
The technique of observation is executed by observing and looking for specific
habitats or by tracking, especially in places that are potential microhabitat for the
target species. Tracking is directed to collect data by using line transect with 400
meters length and 10 meters width (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Scheme Collecting Data using Transect Technique

The second technique is conducted by tracking an area randomly. The venue
such as tree holes or on the ground, upper roots or barks, leaves or twigs of
shrubs and trees, piles of wood over , puddles, streams and on the sidelines or
stone walls of river (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Scheme Collecting Data using Time Search Technique

7
Observation of herpetofauna was conducted at noon and evening. The search
took approximately 2 hours on each occasion.
Herpetofauna that are found can be directly identified or collected in advance to
put into a bag for specimen identification at a later date. The handbook for
identification that is used is the work of Leiden (1915), Alexander (1998), Kirono
& Santoso (2007), Helen (2002).
2.5 INSECT
Collecting of insect was conducted along with other observation, morning and
evening. Insect collection was completed using an insect net. Insects collected
during the survey were preserved with alcohol 70%. The insect identification was
then conducted by UKF (Uni Konservasi Fauna) team.

8
3 RESULTS
3.1 FLORA
The surveys identified low mixed dipterocarp forest, secondary forest, and ex-
rubber plantation in the study area. Within the entire survey area there are
evidence of human activities such as logging and plantations. Habitat types in
the survey area is divided into 4 types, such as: (a) old secondary forest; having
relatively tight canopy closure, (b) young secondary forest; dominated tree
saplings at the site KGPF, (c) open area and forest rubber mixture, and (d) a
mixture of rubber forests and secondary swamp forests around Wellsite area.
Secondary forests are interspersed with cultivated vegetation composed of
pioneers such as Ptenandra coerulescens, Talauma condollei, and Dillenia excelsa,
whereas cultivated plants such as Hevea brasiliensis and Acacia alba were
identified.
Other land cover types in the survey area include, logged forests, fields, temporal
ponds, marshes and open areas. Topography at the entire site is relatively flat
and slightly undulating. The study area landscape is generally included in the
category of lowland forest. This is determined based on the vegetation structure
and composition, as well as regional topography with elevation fluctuating
between 100-200 m asl.
Broadly speaking, vegetation constituent ecosystems in the study area can be
classified into two groups, namely secondary dipterocarp forests and secondary
forests interspersed mixed crop cultivation. Secondary dipterocarp forest
vegetation composed by Dipterocarpaceae family with dominant species is
Shorea pinanga. Other species recorded include Shorea lamellata, Parashorea
malaanonan, Hopea ferruginea as well as several species of other families like
Palaquium seuriceum and Duabanga mollucana.
Shorea lamellata (White Meranti) , Parashorea malaanonan (White Seraya) and Hopea
ferruginea are listed as Critically Endangered by the IUCN Red List. These are all
species or large rainforest trees which occur within similar habitats within
Kalimantan and also other rainforest environments within Malaysia (Sabah and
Sarawak) and in some instances Sumatra Island and the Philippines. The White
Seraya for example is one of the most commercially important commercial timber
species in northern Borneo. These species were identified within the KGPF site
and pipleine from the Kerendan 1 well site to the KGPF.
3.1.1 KGPF
The forest type present in the KGPF area is secondary dipterocarp forest
vegetation dominated by species from the family Dipterocarpaceae. The survey
identified approximately 40 species of flora from 25 families. The species
identified and results of vegetation analysis in the KGPF area are shown at
Table 1 below.

9
Table 1 Results of Vegetation Analysis in Area KGPF
No. Spesies Density
Relative
Density
(%)
Frequency
Relative
Frequency
(%)
Dominant
Relative
Dominant (%)
Indeks Nilai Penting (%)
Seedling
Milletia sp. 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Koilodepas bantamensis 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Randia oppositifolia 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Sterculia rubiginosa 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Pternandra coerulescens 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Scorodocarpus borneensis 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Palaquium obovatum 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Phyrnium pubigerum 18125 27,88 0,50 9,09 36,98
Alpinia sp. 6250 9,61 0,25 4,55 14,16
Goniothalamus sp. 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Glachidion sp. 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Calamus sp. 6875 10,58 0,50 9,09 19,67
Polyalthia sp. 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Glochidion capitatum 1250 1,92 0,25 4,55 6,47
Elmerillia molis 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Ficus obscura 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Vernonia arborea 625 0,96 0,25 4,55 5,51
Dicranopteris linearis 5000 7,69 0,25 4,55 12,24
Lygodium scandens 11250 17,31 0,25 4,55 21,85
Cyperus rotundus 8125 12,50 0,25 4,55 17,05

10
No. Spesies Density
Relative
Density
(%)
Frequency
Relative
Frequency
(%)
Dominant
Relative
Dominant (%)
Sapling
Endiandra rubescens 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Pternandra coerulescens 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Ochanostachys amentacea 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Aporusa lunata 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Baccaurea sp. 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Teysmanniodendron
bogoriense
200 10 0,25 5,88 15,88
Dysooxylum densiflorum 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Parinari oblongifolia 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Orophea sp. 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Canarium littolare 200 10 0,25 5,88 15,88
Sterculia sp. 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Ardisia sp. 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Mallotus blumeanus 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Parashorea malaanonan 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Melastoma malabatricum 200 10 0,25 5,88 15,88
Nauclea orientalis 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Duabanga mollucana 100 5 0,25 5,88 10,88
Pole
Durio excelcus 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 4415,63 16,13 44,70
Shorea pinanga 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 3846,50 14,05 42,62
Baccaurea bracteata 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 3846,50 14,05 42,62
Dehaassia caesia 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 2374,63 8,67 37,25
Aglaia sp. 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 1962,50 7,17 35,74

11
No. Spesies Density
Relative
Density
(%)
Frequency
Relative
Frequency
(%)
Dominant
Relative
Dominant (%)
Parashorea malaanonan 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 7084,63 25,88 54,45
Mallotus blumeanus 25 14,29 0,25 14,29 3846,50 14,05 42,62
Tree
Shorea pinanga 56,25 50 0,25 12,50 107088,72 63,77 126,27
Hopea ferruginea 6,25 5,56 0,25 12,50 24732,41 14,73 32,79
Shorea lamellata 6,25 5,56 0,25 12,50 3066,41 1,83 19,88
Palaquium sericeum 12,50 11,11 0,25 12,50 14375,31 8,56 32,17
Dipterocarpus sp. 6,25 5,56 0,25 12,50 4415,63 2,63 20,68
Sterculia rubiginosa 6,25 5,56 0,25 12,50 6716,66 3,99 22,06
Canarium littorale 6,25 5,56 0,25 12,50 2826 1,69 19,74
Parashorea maalonan 12,50 11,11 0,25 12,50 4714,91 2,81 26,42

12
Figure 4 Vegetation Condition at KGPF A plot (left) and KGPF B plot (right)

Based on seedling growth rate, the species with the highest importance value
index is Phyrnium pubigerum with 36.98. Phyrnium pubigerum is a species of herb
from the Maranthaceae family which is usually clustered on the forest floor, this
species can grow well, even in the dense shade of tree canopy. Non-herb species
that had highest importance value index was Glochidion capitatum with a value of
6.47. Tropenbos Kalimantan (1994) mentions that the Glochidion genera is small
tree which rarely reaches medium size. The species is very common in secondary
forest, usually along streams.
Common species of saplings included Melastoma malabatricum and Canarium
littorale at 15.88. Melastoma malabatricum are found in the plot with an open
canopy, whereas C. littorale is found in plots with dense canopy. M. malabatricum
grows clustered on the edge of the forest, in contrast to C. littorale which grows
into and is associated with other forest stands.
Durio excelsus was the pole species with highest INP at KGPF location (44.7). D.
excelsus is one of 19 species of forest durian species (Durio genera) are reported in
Kalimantan. This species is characterized by bony lateral leaves approximately 6-
11 pairs, rounded fruits breech eggs, up to 11 cm long, diameter about 7 cm, red-
coated seeds and fruit cannot be eaten (Trobenbos Kalimantan, 1994).
Dominant tree species in the sample plots are Shorea pinanga with INP 126.27
(Figure 5). This species is one of the 5 species of Dipterocarpaceae recorded.
Tropenbos Kalimantan (1994) stated that S. pinanga is the tree height can reach 45
m, diameter up to 1 m. Commonly found in soil rich in clay, especially on a ridge
below the altitude of 700 m asl. This species is endemic to Borneo, commonly
used for plywood and an important source tengkawang good producer.
The other four species were Shorea lamellata, Parashorea maalonan, Hopea ferruginea
(Figure 5) and Dipterocarpus sp. As noted previously S. lamellata, P. maalonan and
H. ferruginea are listed as Critically Endangered by the IUCN.

13

Figure 5 Species from Dipterocarpaceae Family that found at KGPF Location:
Hopea ferruginea (left) and Shorea pinanga (right) which is the
Dominant Species

Other tree species besides Dipterocarpaceae family, which were recorded include
Palaquium sericeum of Sapotaceae family, Sterculia rubiginosa of Sterculiaceae
family and Canarium littorale of the Annonaceae family.
3.1.2 Kerendan-1 Wellsite
The Kerendan -1 wellsite was been cleared in the past for drilling activities. The
surrounding area appears to have been used for cultivation of rubber (Hevea
brasiliensis) as many rubber trees were found standing within this area. . H.
brasilienis is one of the main crops of Borneo (Figure 6).
In general, it appears the area around Wellsite is ex-slash and burn area that was
converted to rubber plantations (H. brasiliensis). The area is interspersed with
stands of secondary forest plants belonging to other pioneers such as Koilodepas
sp. and Dillenia excelsa. The rubber plants that were found had long been
abandoned and it did not appear that they are currently being harvested.

Figure 6 Vegetation Condition around Wellsite

Results of vegetation analysis conducted around the Wellsite, identified as many
as 12 flora species from 10 flora families (Table 2).

14
Table 2 Vegetation Analisys Result around Wellsite
No Species Density
Relative Density
(%)
Frequency
Relative
Frequency (%)
Dominant
Relative Dominant
(%)
Important Value
Index (%)
Seedling

Koilodepas sp.
5000 7,41 0,5 10

17,41

Elateriospermum tapos
2500 3,71 0,5 10

13,70

Litsea sp.
5000 7,41 0,5 10

17,41

Calamus sp.
20000 29,63 1 20

49,63

Panicum enciforme
30000 44,44 1 20

64,44

Derris trivolia
1250 1,85 0,5 10

11,85

Otophora alata
1250 1,85 0,5 10

11,85

Hevea brasiliensis
2500 3,70 0,5 10

13,70
Sapling

400 28,57 0,5 20

48,57

Pternandra coerulescens
400 28,57 0,5 20

48,57

Cyathocalyx sp.
200 14,29 0,5 20

34,29

Dillenia excelsa
200 14,29 0,5 20

34,29

Litsea sp.
200 14,29 0,5 20

34,29
Pole

Hevea brasiliensis
50 20 0,5 33,33 3925 9,83 63,17

50 20 0,5 33,33 3925 9,83 63,17

150 60 0,5 33,33 32067,25 80,33 173,67
Tree

75 31,58 1 25 3627,49 29,37 85,95

Talauma candollei
50 21,05 1 25 4390,51 35,55 81,60

Hevea brasiliensis
75 31,58 1 25 3007,34 24,35 80,93

12,5 5,26 0,50 12,50 530,66 4,30 22,06

Dillenia excelsa
25 10,53 0,50 12,50 795,21 6,44 29,46

15
From the vegetation analysis, the seedling growth rate with the highest
importance value index is Panicum enciforme with 64.44 (Figure 7). P. enciforme is a
species of herb from Graminae family. Other species with high importance value
index was Calamus sp a rattan species with value of 49.63. Rattan is a commodity
of non-timber forest products are often used by local communities at Kalimantan.
At the saplings rate growth, plant species with the highest INP is Ptenandra
coerulescens and Elateriospermum tapos with 48.57. Ptenandra coerulescens species is
one of 14 species of the Ptenandra genera occurring in Borneo Island. Ptenandra
coerulescens is also the dominant species on the pole and tree growth rate, with
the INP value at pole growth rates 173.67 and 85.95 at tree growth rates. In
general, this species dominates at every growth level. P. ceorulescens is a species
that grows well in secondary forest.

Figure 7 Ptenandra coerulescens is dominant species around the Wellsite

3.1.3 Pipelines
Surveys were conducted at this location to identify dominant flora species
however, because it does not have a definite area, vegetation analysis using
sample plots was not conducted. Instead observations by exploration method
was conducted at these two locations, namely the pipeline path between PLN
and KGPF and Kerendan-1 wellsite to the KGPF or called Pipeline 2. In general,
forest type in both the observation point is included in a secondary dipterocarp
forest types. Table 3 show types of plants that were found in the location
Pipeline.

16

Table 3. Flora list species at Pipeline 2 and PLN
Pipeline 2 PLN
Hopea ferruginea Ficus elastica
Shorea pinanga Horsfieldia grandis
Coelostegia neesiocarpa Knema latifolia
Artocarpus dadah Shorea pinanga
Durio excelcus Cananga odorata
Coelostegia neesiocarpa Melastoma malabatricum
Palaquium obovatum Macaranga sp.
Melastoma malabatricum Hevea brasiliensis
Alstonia spp. Artocarpus communis
Parashorea malaanonan
Sterculia rubiginosa
Baccaurea bracteata
Shorea lamellata
Shorea leprosula
Acacia alba
Durio zibethinus
Artocarpus macrophylla
Litsea garciae
Quercus sp.
Macaranga conifera
Lithocarpus gracilis
Macaranga sp.

As many as 22 flora species were recorded along Pipeline 2. Based on the
composition of the species recorded the most abundant species was from the
Dipterocarpaceae family (5 species). At the PLN pipeline only 9 species of flora
were identified. At the PLN line many areas that have been opened into fields
and gardens by locals. Flora species that are cultivated by the locals are food
crops such as rice fields and cassava (Manihot esculenta).

17

Figure 8. Vegetation condition at Pipeline 2 (left), and Durio excelsus (right) is a
species that found at Pipeline 2 from Bombacaceae family.

3.1.4 Important Species
The surveys identified Critically Endangered flora species, as designated by the
IUCN as occurring at the KGPF and gas gathering pipeline (Pipeline 2). These
were Parashorea malaanonan, Shorea lamellata and Hopea ferruginea, each from the
family Dipterocarpaceae. These species are large rainforest tree species which
are often encountered in rainforest environments within Kalimantan. The impact
of the project on these species has been considered within the ESHIA report.

Figure 9. Important species that found in the Survey Area : Shorea lamellata
(left) and Parashorea malaanonan (right).

3.2 FAUNA
3.2.1 Mammals
The survey locations have several characteristics and types. They are low mixed
dipterocarp forest with streams, secondary forest, and ex-rubber plantation in the

18
forest boundary. All the locations have a high potential of mammals, both
arboreal and terrestrial.. The survey was based on direct and indirect (footprints,
scratch, scrape, scats, and voice) with line transect method. The total species
encountered showed by the diagram below (Figure 10).

Figure 10. Total species encountered in the 4 locations.

Surveys were commenced at the KGPF on the first day. The habitat type is Low
Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary Forest. The forest patch has several streams inside
the forest. The area is 150 meters from the main road. By the first survey, we
founded 7 species from this site from direct and also indirect observation. From
direct observation we founded Painted Treeshrew (Tupaia picta), Lesser
Treeshrew (T. minor), Black-eared Pygmy Squirrel (Nannosciurus melanotis), and
Plain Pygmy Squirrel (Excilisciurus exils). And from indirect observation we
recorded Prevosts Squirrel (Callosciurus prevostii), Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus), and
Common Palm Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus). The Bearded Pig is listed as
Vulnerable by the IUCN.

Figure 11. Painted Treeshrew (Tupaia picta) on the branch around 1 meter from
the ground , photo : Hery Sudarno.

19

Figure 12. Black-eared Pygmy Squirrel (Nannosciurus melanotis) in the tree ,
photo : Hery Sudarno.

A transect walk was conducted from the Main Camp to KGPF through the main
road. From the main camp, habitat is secondary forest with several wetlands and
streams. Mixed Dipterocarp Secondary Forest is the forest type in KGPF and
some streams were identified inside the forest, and near from the main road.
There are pioneer vegetation in the boundary, such as Macaranga spp., some fern
species, and also shrubs. These are evidence that the forest was logged in the past
and there are new plantations near the observation site. We recorded 6 species
from daily observation. From direct observation we identified the Large
Treeshrew (Tupaia tana), Long-tailed Macaque (Macaca fascicularis) (Figure 13),
and Plantain Squirrel (Callosciuus notatus). From indirect observation, we
founded Muellers Gibbon (Hylobates muelleri) (morning call), Malayan Sun Bear
(Helarctos malayanus) (scrape, Figure 14), and Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus). Mullers
Gibbon is listed as Endangered by the IUCN while the Malayan Sun Bear is listed
as Vulnerable.

Figure 13. Long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis), the group is habituated by
people and live near Main Camp, photo : M. Faesal R. K.

20

Figure 14. Malayan Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus) scrape on the dipterocarp tree, photo : M. Faesal
R. K.

Habitat characteristics of the Wellsite location were ex-rubber plantation. There
are evidences of secondary forest, such as Macaranga sp., shrubs, and grass land.
We recorded 4 species, they are Plantain Squirrel (Callosciurus notatus), Long-
tailed Macaque (Macaca fascicularis), House Shreew (suncus murinus) and
Common Palm Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus) (scats, Figure 16). We recorded
the Leopard Cat (Prionairulus bengalensis) footprints on the boundary of wellsite
(Figure 15).

Figure 15. Leopard Cat (Prionairulus bengalensis) footprint near Wellsite,
photo : M. Faesal R. K.

21

Figure 16. Common Palm Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus) scats,
photo : M. Faesal R.K.

The vegetation and landscape at PLN-KGPF are rubber plantation, and low
mixed diptercarp forest. We recorded 3 species from visual encountered, they are
Long-tailed Macaque (Macaca fascicularis) (Figure 17), and Plantain Squirrel
(Callosciurus notatus). From indirect encountered we founded Common Palm
Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus) scats and Malayan Sun Bear (Helarctos
malayanus) scrape (Figure 18).

Figure 17. Single Long-tailed Macaque in the dipterocarp tree founded in the day 5
survey, photo : Hery Sudarno.

22
Figure 18. Sun bear scrape, founded in the side main road from PLN-KGPF, photo :
Hery Sudarno.

The overall observation result is summerised at Table 4 below. A total of 14
mammal species were recorded. The Malayan Sun Bear (VU), Bearded Pig (VU)
and Muellers Gibbon (EN) are listed by the IUCN and are considered to be of
conservation significance.
Table 4. Mammals list species at survey area PT. Salamander Energy
Location Local name
English
name
Scientific name IUCN status
KGPF
Tupai tercat
Painted
Tresshrew
Tupaia picta LC
Tupai kecil
Lesser
Treeshrew
Tupaia minor LC
Bajing kerdil
dataran
rendah
Plain Pygmy
Squirrel
Exilisciurus exilis LC
Bajing kerdil
telinga hitam
Black-eared
Pygmy
Squirrel
Nanosciurus melanotis LC
Bajing tiga
warna
Prevosts
Squirrel
Callosciurus prevostiii LC
Babi jenggot Bearded Pig Sus barbatus VU
Musang
luwak
Common
Palm Civet
Paradoxurus
hermaphrodites
LC
Main Camp-
KGPF
Tupai tanah
Large
Treeshrew
Tupaia tana LC
Bajing kelapa
Plantain
Squirrel
Callosciurus notatus LC
Monyet ekor
panjang
Long-tailed
Macaque
Macaca fascicularis LC
Klampiau
Muellers
Gibbon
Hylobates muelleri EN
Beruang
madu
Malayan
Sun Bear
Helarctos malayanus VU
Wellsite
Monyet ekor
panjang
Long-tailed
Macaque
Bajing kelapa
Plantain
Squirrel
Kucing
kuwuk
Leopard Cat Prionairulus bengalensis LC
Musang
luwak
Common
Palm Civet
Paradoxurus
hermaphroditus
LC
Munggis
rumah
House
Shrew
Suncus murinus LC
PLN-KGPF
Monyet ekor
panjang
Long-tailed
Macaque
Bajing kelapa
Plantain
Squirrel
Musang Common Paradoxurus LC

23
Location Local name
English
name
Scientific name IUCN status
luwak Palm Civet hermaphrodites
Klampiau
Muellers
Gibbon
Beruang
madu
Malayan
Sun Bear
Helarctos malayanus VU
Main Camp-
KGPF (Survey
2)
Codot pisang
coklat
Long-
tongued
Nectar Bat
Macroglossus minimus LC
Klampiau
Muellers
Gibbon

Family Tupaiidae
Painted Treeshrew (Tupaia picta)
Tupaia picta is diurnal species. Spread out is limited in Borneo. Live in the
lowland forest (below 1000 m asl). Eat fruits and small vertebrates.
Lesser Shrew (Tupaia minor)
Diurnal and almost arboreal species. Common on the level 3-8 meters above the
ground, feeding on the fruit trees and insects. Distributed at Thailand Peninsula
and Malay, Sumatra, and Borneo.
Family Sciuridae
Black eared-pygmy squirrel (Nannosciurus melanotis) and Plain Pygmy Squirrel
(Excilisciurus exilis)
Diurnal, active in the tree with small branches, usually observed on the tree bole.
Feeding on the bole surface, bark, and small vertebrates. Live on dipterocarp
forest or in the forest with high canopy. Nannosciurus melanotis distributed on
Java, Sumatra, and Borneo. Excilisciurus exilis is endemic Borneo.
Plantain Squirrel (Callosciurus notatus)
Diurnal, active in the mornig to dusk around small trees. Food are fruits and
insects. Distributed on Thailand and Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Java, and
Borneo.
Prevosts Squirrel (Callosciurus prevostii)
Diurnal, active from dawn to dusk, arboreal, sometimes walk on the ground to
cross the canopy. Distributed on Thailand and Malay Peninsula, Sumatra,
Celebes, and Borneo.
Order Insectivora

24
Family Erinaceidae
House Shrew (Suncus murinus)
Live near house or settlements. Distributed on Africa, Madagascar, Asia,
Philipine, Indonesia.
Order Dermoptera
Family Pteropodidae
Long-tongued Nectar Bat (Macroglossus minimus)
Live in coastal mangrove, dipterpcarp forest, and lower mountain forest. Feeding
on nectar, bananas flower and other pollens. Distributed on Thailand Peninsula,
Malay, Southern Philipine, Java, papua New Guinea, Salomon Islands and
Northern Australia.
Order Carnivore
Family Felidae
Leopard Cat (Prionairulus bengalensis)
Nocturnal and terrestrial. Live in secondary and primary forest. Distributed on
Northern India to Eastern Asia and Siberia, Taiwan,South East Asia, Sumatera,
Java, Bali, Palawan, and Borneo.
Family Ursidae
Malayan Sun bear (Helarctos malayanus)
Regularly active in the afternoon and the night. Live on the ground or the high
trees. Feeding on fruits, bee nest, stingless bee nest, termites, coconut pith, and
other small vertebrates. Distributed on Myanmar, Thailand, Malay Peninsula,
Sumatra and Borneo. The species is listed as Vulnerable by the IUCN.
Family Viveridae
Common Palm Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus)
Nocturnal, sleep in the morning and afternoon in the tree. Usually active on the
ground. Feed on fruits, leaves, arthropods, worms, and mollusc. Distributed on
Sri Lanka, India, South East Asia, Philipine, Sumatra, Java, Sulawesi, and Borneo.
Order Primate
Family Hylobatidae
Muellers Gibbon (Hylobates muelleri)
Diurnal, extremely arboreal and monogamous primate. Live with small group,
group is consisted by family. Homerange around 20-30 Ha. Great call in the

25
morning, between 08.00-10 am. A female gibbon reacts to playback or taped
female song by approaching and singing, and the male joins in the duet. A
female dominates and interactive duet with a loud bubbling call. Endemic
Borneo. Muellers Gibbon is listed as Endangered by the IUCN.
Family Cercopithecidae
Long-tailed Macaque (Macaca fascicularis)
Diurnal and arboreal, although active on the ground. Ability to swiming in the
river. The male dominance hierarchy is less marked than in the other macaques.
High rankking individuals leads the group. Multimale-multifemale groups.
Habitat are primary, secondary, coastal, mangrove, swamp, riverine forest, even
near settlements. Feed on fruits, seeds, insects, and other vertebrates. Distributed
on Myanmar Peninsula, Thailand, Malaysia, Southern Indochina, Philipine,
Sumatra, Java, and East Nusa Tenggara.
Family Suidae
Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus)
Nocturnal but periodically active in the afternoon. Feeding on fruits and seeds on
the ground, worms, roots, pith, and other vertebrates. Distributed on Malay
Peninsula, Sumatra, Palawan, and Borneo. The Bearded Pig is listed as
Vulnerable by the IUCN.
3.2.2 Birds
Field surveys at the Well Site area, KGPF area, KGPF-wellsite 1 pipeline , and
KGPF-PLN pipeline identified 63 species of birds from 29 families. Findings List
of bird species and their protection status are presented in Table 5. No species
listed as Endangered, Critically Endangered or Vulnerable by the IUCN were
recorded.
Table 5. Bird species list and conservation status in survey area PT. Salamander
Energy
No. Scientific Name Indonesian Name English Name
Conservation Status
IUCN CITES
GoI
No. 7
of 1999
Accipitridae
1
Pernis ptilorhyncus
Sikep madu asia
Oriental Honey-
buzzard
App. II P
2
Aviceda Jerdoni
Baza jerdon Jerdon's Baza
App. II P
Falconidae
3
Microhierax fringillarius
Alap-alap capung Black-thinged Falconet
App. II P
Rallidae
4
Amaurornis phoenicurus
Kareo padi
White-breasted
Waterhen
Columbidae

26
5
Treron olax
Punai kecil Little Green Pigeon
6
Treron vernans
Punai gading
Pink-necked Green
Pigeon
7
Ducula aenea
Pergam hijau Green Imperial Pigeon
8
Chalcophaps indica
Delimukan zamrud Common Emerald Dove
Cuculidae
9
Rhopodytes diardi Kadalan beruang Black-bellied Malkoha
10
Rhamphococcyx curvirostris
Kadalan birah
Chestnut-breasted
Malkoha
11
Cacomantis sonneratii
Wiwik lurik Banded Bay Cuckoo
12
Centropus sinensis
Bubut besar Greater Coucal
Strigidae
13
Bubo Sumatranus
Beluk jempuk Barred Eagle-Owl
App. II

Hemiprocnidae
14
Hemiprocne longipennis
Tepekong jambul Grey-rumped Treeswift
15
Hemiprocne comata
Tepekong rangkang Whiskered Treeswift
Alcedinidae
16
Alcedo meninting
Raja udang meninting Blue-eared Kingfisher
P
17
Pelargopsis capensis
Pekaka emas Stork-billed kingfisher
P
Bucerotidae
18
Anthracoceros malayanus
Kengkareng hitam Black Hornbill
NT App. II P
19
Buceros rhinoceros
Enggang cula Rhinoceros Hornbill
NT App. II P
Capitonidae
20
Megalaima australis
Takur tenggeret Blue-eared Barbet
21
Megalaima lineata
Takur bultok Lineated Barbet
22
Megalaima rafflesii
Takur tutut Red-crowned Barbet
23
Megalaima haemacephala
Takur ungkut-ungkut Coppersmith Barbet
24
Calorhamphus fuliginosus
Takur ampis Brown Barbet
Picidae
25
Chrysocolaptes lucidus
Pelatuk tunggir-emas Greater Goldenback
Eurylamidae
26
Cymbirhyncus
macrorhynchos Sempur-hujan sungai Black and Red Broadbill
27
Eurylaimus javanicus
Sempur-hujan rimba Banded Broadbill
Pittidae
28
Pitta sordida
Paok hijau Hooded Pitta
P
Hirundinidae
29
Hirundo tahitica
Layanglayang batu Pasific Swallow
Aegithinidae
30
Aegithina viridissima
Cipoh jantung Green Iora
NT

Chloropseidae
31
Chloropsis sonnerati
Cica-daun Besar Greater Green Leafbird
Pycnonotidae
32
Pycnonotus atriceps
Cucak kuricang Black-headed Bulbul
33
Pycnonotus goiavier
Merbah cerukcuk Yellow-vented Bulbul
34
Pycnonotus simplex
Merbah corok-corok Cream-vented Bulbul
35
Pycnonotus brunneus
Merbah mata-merah Asian Red-eyed Bulbul

27
36
Criniger bres
Empuloh janggut Grey-cheeked Bulbul
37
Tricholestes criniger
Brinji rambut-tunggir Hairy-backed Bulbul
Timaliidae
38
Pellorneum capistratum
Pelanduk topi-hitam Black-capped Babbler
39
Trichastoma bicolor
Pelanduk merah Ferruginous Babbler

40
Stachyris maculata
Tepus tunggir-merah
Chesnut-rumped
Babbler
NT

41
Stachyris erythroptera
Tepus merbah-sampah
Chesnut-winged
Babbler

Sylviidae
42
Prinia flaviventris
Perenjak rawa Yellow-bellied Prinia
43
Orthotomus sericeus
Cinenen merah Rufous-tailed Tailorbird
44
Orthotomus ruficeps
Cinenen kelabu Ashy Tailorbird
Muscicapidae
45
Eumyias indigo
Sikatan ninon Indigo Flycatcher
46
Ficedula westermanni
Sikatan belang Little Pied Flycatcher
Monarchidae
47
Terpsiphone paradisi
Seriwang asia
Asian Paradise
Flycather
Rhipiduridae
48
Rhipidura javanica
Kipasan belang Pied Fantail
Dicaeidae
49
Prionochilus percussus
Pentis pelangi
Crimson-breasted
Flowerpecker
50
Prionochilus xanthopygius
Pentis kalimantan
Yellow-rumped
Flowerpecker
51
Dicaeum chrysorrheum
Cabai rimba
Yellow-vented
Flowerpecker
52
Dicaeum trigonostigma
Cabai bunga-api
Orange-bellied
Flowerpecker
Nectariniidae
53
Anthreptes simplex
Burung-madu polos Plain Sunbird
P
54
Anthreptes malacensis
Burung-madu kelapa
Brown-throated
Sunbird
P
55
Hypogramma
hypogrammicum Burung-madu rimba Purple-naped Sunbird
P
56
Aethopyga siparaja
Burung-madu sepah-
raja Crimson Sunbird
P
57
Arachnothera longirostra
Pijantung kecil Little Spiderhunter
P
Estrildidae
58
Lonchura fuscans
Bondol kalimantan Dusky Munia
59
Lonchura punctulata
Bondol peking Scaly-breasted Munia
Ploceidae
60
Passer montanus
Burung gereja erasia Eurasian Tree Sparrow
Sturnidae
61
Gracula religiosa
Tiong mas Common Hill Myna
App. II P
Dicruridae
62
Dicrurus paradiseus
Srigunting batu
Greater Racquet-tailed
Drongo
Corvidae
63
Corvus enca
Gagak hutan Slender-billed Crow

28

Figure 20. Total species of bird per family that found in survey location PT.
Salamander Energy.

Based on Figure 20, family Pycnonotidae has the highest total species, with 6
species, followed by family Capitonidae and Nectariniidae with 5 species. Next
are family Columbidae, Cuculidae, Timaliidae, and Dicaeidae with 4 species
encounter. For the others family of birds only found one or two species.
Each bird species has a habitat type, in accordance with the environment needed
to support life (Alikodra, 1990). According Darmawan (2006), based on the
discovery of habitat, bird species classified on several criteria, among others:
1. Forest birds. This group utilizes the forest habitat of forest vegetation
(canopy strata) and the forest floor to perform his activities and is
only found in the forest habitat types. Examples of this type of record
include: types of birds of Bucerotidae family (Rhinoceros Hornbill and
Black Hornbill), Pittidae family (Hooded Pitta), Monarchidae family
(Asian Paradise Flycatcher).
2. Birds of open habitat area, shrubs and cultivated land. Species
recorded during the survey include Timalidae family (Black-capped
Babbler, Ferruginous Babbler, Chesnut-rumped Babbler, Chesnut-
winged Babbler), Silviidae family (Yellow-bellied Prinia, Rufous-
tailed Tailorbird, Ashy Tailorbird), Ploceidae family (Eurasian Tree
Sparrow), Estrildidae family (Dusky Munia, Scaly-breasted Munia).
3. Riparian bird habitat. Species recorded during the survey include
Alcedinidae family (Blue-eared Kingfisher and Stork-billed
kingfisher) and Rallidae family (White-breasted Waterhen).
4. Birds in the canopy. These species predominately use the space above
the canopy (aerial) to perform activities, such as foraging and hunting.
Species recorded during the survey include Accipitridae family
Family
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A
c
c
i
p
i
t
r
i
d
a
e
F
a
l
c
o
n
i
d
a
e
R
a
l
l
i
d
a
e
C
o
l
u
m
b
i
d
a
e
C
u
c
u
l
i
d
a
e
S
t
r
i
g
i
d
a
e
H
e
m
i
p
r
o
c
n
i
d
a
e
A
l
c
e
d
i
n
i
d
a
e
B
u
c
e
r
o
t
i
d
a
e
C
a
p
i
t
o
n
i
d
a
e
P
i
c
i
d
a
e
E
u
r
y
l
a
m
i
d
a
e
P
i
t
t
i
d
a
e
H
i
r
u
n
d
i
n
i
d
a
e
A
e
g
i
t
h
i
n
i
d
a
e
C
h
l
o
r
o
p
s
e
i
d
a
e
P
y
c
n
o
n
o
t
i
d
a
e
T
i
m
a
l
i
i
d
a
e
S
y
l
v
i
i
d
a
e
M
u
s
c
i
c
a
p
i
d
a
e
M
o
n
a
r
c
h
i
d
a
e
R
h
i
p
i
d
u
r
i
d
a
e
D
i
c
a
e
i
d
a
e
N
e
c
t
a
r
i
n
i
i
d
a
e
E
s
t
r
i
l
d
i
d
a
e
P
l
o
c
e
i
d
a
e
S
t
u
r
n
i
d
a
e
D
i
c
r
u
r
i
d
a
e
C
o
r
v
i
d
a
e
T
o
t
a
l

S
p
e
c
i
e
s

Total Species per Family

29
(Oriental Honey-buzzard and Jerdon's Baza), Falconidae family
(Black-thinged Falconet), Hemiprocnidae family (Grey-rumped
Treeswift and Whiskered Treeswift), Hirundinidae family (Pacific
Swallow).
Bird species utilize different food types to survive. Type of feed that is used by
birds can be classified into seven groups of insects (insectivoree), fruit
(frugivore), meat (carnivore / predator), seeds (granivore), fish (piscivore),
nectar/ pollen (nektarivore) and herbivore (leaf/ flower buds/ stem). Species
can consume in a single (one type of feed) or a combination of several types of
feed.
The feeding habits of the bird species identified during the survey are grouped at
Table 6 below.
Table 6. The use of feed types by bird species
Feed Total Bird Species
C 4 Pernis ptilorhyncus Microhierax fringillarius Bubo sumatranus

Aviceda jerdoni
G 3 Lonchura fuscans Lonchura punctulata Passer montanus
I 21 Dicrurus paradiseus Hirundo tahitica
Cymbirhyncus
macrorhynchos

Pellorneum capistratum Hemiprocne longipennis Eurylaimus javanicus

Trichastoma bicolor Hemiprocne comata Eumyias indigo

Stachyris maculata Prinia flaviventris Ficedula westermanni

Stachyris erythroptera Orthotomus sericeus Terpsiphone paradisi

Centropus sinensis Orthotomus ruficeps Pitta sordida

Cacomantis sonneratii Rhipidura javanica Rhopodytes diardi
FG 5 Megalaima australis Megalaima rafflesii
Calorhamphus
fuliginosus

Megalaima lineata Megalaima haemacephala
FI 14 Pycnonotus atriceps Anthracoceros malayanus Prionochilus percussus

Pycnonotus goiavier Buceros rhinoceros
Prionochilus
xanthopygius

Pycnonotus simplex Chloropsis sonnerati Dicaeum chrysorrheum

Pycnonotus brunneus Eumyias indigo Dicaeum trigonostigma

Criniger bres Tricholestes criniger
GF 4 Treron olax Treron vernans Ducula aenea

Chalcophaps indica
IC 2 Rhopodytes diardi Rhamphococcyx curvirostris
IF 1 Cacomantis sonneratii
IG 1 Aegithina viridissima
IN 5 Anthreptes simplex
Hypogramma
hypogrammicum
Arachnothera longirostra

Anthreptes malacensis Aethopyga siparaja
CFI 1 Corvus enca
FIG 1 Gracula religiosa
PIC 2 Alcedo meninting Pelargopsis capensis
Note :
C= Carnivore G= Granivore F= Frugivore P= Piscivore

30
I= Insectivore N= Nectarivore H= Herbivore

Note :
C= Carnivore G= Granivore F= Frugivore P= Piscivore
I= Insectivore N= Nectarivore H= Herbivore
Figure 21. Percentage of Type Feed Based on Combination of feed.

The most dominant bird species group in the study area of PT. Salamander
Energy is a group of insectivore bird species. Insects used by 48 species of birds
(77%) and 21 species of birds recorded during the surveys (33%) are true
insectivore, which means that the birds do not eat that kind of food other than
insects as the main feed. Insectivores group has a very important function for the
balance of the environment as controlling insect populations in nature.
A photolog of some bird species identified during the survey are provided
below.

C
6%
G
5%
I
33%
FG
8%
FI
22%
GF
6%
IC
3%
IF
2%
IG
2%
IN
8%
CFI
2%
FIG
2%
PIC
3%
Percentage Type of Feed

31
Figure 22. Some of insectivore bird species;
(a) Pacific Swallow (Hirundo tahitica) Photo : Hery Sudarno and
(b) Yellow-bellied Prinia (Prinia flaviventris) Photo : Hery Sudarno.

Figure 23. Some of frugivore bird species;
(a) Little Green Pigeon (Ducula aenea) Photo: Hery Sudarno and
(b) Hairy-backed Bulbul (Tricholestes criniger) Photo: Hery Sudarno

3.2.2.1 Species of Conservation Interest
In the survey location, the types of birds that recorded are protected at family
level and at the level of species. Based on the Government Regulation No. 7 of
1999, for protected bird species at the family level, there are 6 families, which
means that all members of the family's bird species are protected by Indonesian
law. The types of birds that are protected at the family level are 2 species of the
family Accipitridae (Eagles), one species of the family Falconidae (Falcon), 2
species of the family Alcedinidae (Kingfisher), 2 species of the family Bucerotidae
(Hornbill), 1 species of the family Pittidae (Pitta) and 5 species of the family
Nectariniidae (Honey eater). While at the level of the species that is just Hill
Myna (Gracula religiosa).
There are several reasons a bird species protected at the level of species. The
reason is partly because these birds have a high potential for trade, endangered
populations or populations in the wild is small of number, and have a limited
distribution also have benefits to balance ecosystem and environmental
sustainability (Sozer et al., 1999).
Accipitridae and Falconidae protected at the level of families by the Indonesian
government, because this bird has a very important function for balancing the
ecosystem. Bird species recorded in the family Accipitridae : Oriental Honey
Buzzard and Jerdons Baza, while in the family Falconidae is Black-thinged
Falconet.

32

Figure 24. Some species of birds of prey (raptors);
(a) Oriental Honey Buzzard (Pernis ptilorhyncus) Photo : Hery Sudarno and
(b) Black-thinged Falconet (Microhierax fringillarius) Photo : Hery Sudarno.

Bucerotidae is protected at the family level by the Indonesian government
because this type has great benefits as an indicator of forest health. According to
Kemp (1993) in Noerdjito (2005) Bucerotidae species members play an important
role in seed dispersal. Family Bucerotidae prefer forest habitat has a wide canopy
closure, trees with large diameter and there are many fruit trees, so it can be used
to see the level of health or sustainability. Besides this kind in natural
populations is very limited, and thus susceptible to interference needs to be
protected. Bird species recorded in the family Bucerotidae are Rhinoceros
Hornbill and Black Hornbill. The uniqueness of the family Bucerotidae is they
always live in pairs / monogamous, so often seen flying along in addition to it,
these birds nest in tree holes are big and tall. Females incubate and guard duty
until the child is quite big and can fly, the female will nest trees cover the hole
with his own faeces and will come out if her child was big and can fly. While the
male in charge of collecting food to be given to female and nestling.

Figure 25. Member of family Bucerotidae :
Black Hornbill (Anthracoceros malayanus) (a) Male (b) Female; Photo : Hery Sudarno.

33
Alcedinidae also protected in the family level. This family is protected because
the fish-eating birds (Kingfisher), especially Alcedinidae family can be used as an
indicator of habitat. This species has a particular sensitivity to the environmental
health of the habitat (Sozer et al., 1999), so it is beneficial for the balance of the
natural environment indicators.
Nectariniidae including protected bird species in the family level. This family has
a high benefit to help pollinate flowers, so it is important for the regeneration of
flowering vegetation.

Figure 26. Some bird species from Nectariniidae family ;
(a) Little Spiderhunter (Arachnothera longirostra) Photo : Hery Sudarno and
(b) Purple-naped Sunbird (Hypogramma hypogrammicum) Photo : Hery Sudarno.

Determination of the status by using the international rules that are based on the
CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora), showed that among the birds recorded in the observation that there
are 7 species of birds included in CITES Appendix II category. Animals are
categorized as CITES Appendix II of this may be traded internationally, but with
strict controls and a certain quota. The birds include Oriental Honey Buzzard,
Jerdons Baza, Black-thinged Falconet, Barred Eagle-owl, Black Hornbill,
Rhinoceros Hornbill, and Common Hill Myna.

Figure 27. Borneo endemic bird species;

34
(a) Dusky Munia (Lonchura fuscans) Photo : Hery Sudarno dan
(b) Yellow-rumped Flowerpecker (Prionochilus xanthopygius) Photo : Hery Sudarno.

Figure 28. Several Birds in PT. Salamander Energy;
(a) Chesnut-winged Babbler (Stachyris erythroptera);
(b) Chestnut-breasted Malkoha (Rhamphococcyx curvirostris);
(c) Greater Goldenback (Chrysocolaptes lucidus);
(d) Brown Barbet (Calorhamphus fuliginosus)
Photo : Hery Sudarno, July 19, 2013

3.2.3 Herpetofauna
Surveys were conducted in all habitat types. Habitat types in the survey area is
divided into 4 types, such as: (a) old secondary forest; having relatively tight
canopy closure, (b) young secondary forest; dominated tree saplings at the site
KGPF, (c) open area and forest rubber mixture around Helipad area, and (d) a
mixture of rubber forests and secondary swamp forests around Wellsite area.
Land cover types in the survey area include logged-over forests, fields, temporal
ponds, marshes and open areas. Topography at entire site is relatively flat and
slightly undulating. There is a river in KGPF location that has a slow stream with
muddy sand substrate. In addition there is puddle in the vicinity of the helipad is
formed due to disconnected from the flow of river.

35
Based on a survey conducted during 5 days of observation, found 67 individual
herpetofauna recorded with details of 51 individuals amphibians and 16
individuals reptiles. The overall findings identified 23 species of herpetofauna, 15
species of amphibians of the 4 families (Bufonidae, Ranidae, Dicrogglossidae and
Rhacophoridae) and 8 species of reptiles from 4 families (Gekkonidae, Agamidae,
Scincidae and Colubridae). Herpetofauna species list as a whole are presented in
Table 7. No species of conservation significance were identified during the
survey.
Table 7. Herpetofauna species list at survey area PT. Salamander Energy
No. Family Species
Protection Status
IUCN CITES PP N0.7 Th 1999
Aamphibians
1 Bufonidae Phrynoidis aspera LC - -
2 Ranidae Hylarana raniceps LC - -
3 Ranidae Hylarana signata LC - -
4 Ranidae Hylarana nicobariensis LC - -
5 Ranidae Hylarana baramica LC - -
6 Ranidae Hylarana erythraea LC - -
7 Ranidae Hylarana glandulosa LC - -
8 Dicrogglossidae Fejervarya cancrivora LC - -
9 Dicrogglossidae Fejervarya limnocharis LC - -
10 Dicrogglossidae Limnonectes paramacrodon NT - -
11 Dicrogglossidae Occidozyga leavis LC - -
12 Rhacophoridae Polypedates leucomystax LC - -
13 Rhacophoridae Polypedates colleti LC - -
14 Rhacophoridae Polypedates macrotis LC - -
15 Rhacophoridae Rhacophorus appendiculatus LC - -
Reptiles
16 Gekkonidae Hemydactylus frenatus LC - -
17 Gekkonidae Cyrtodactylus ingeri - - -
18 Agamidae Draco quinquefasciatus - - -
19 Scincidae Eutropis multifasciata - - -
20 Scincidae Eutropis rudis - - -
21 Scincidae Apterygodon vittatus - - -
22 Colubridae Xenocrhopis trianguligera - - -
23 Colubridae Dendrelapis pictus - - -
Note : LC = Least Concern

0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5
Number of
Species
Day -
Herpetofauna Species Curve
Amfibi
Reptil
Herpetofauna

36
Figure 29. Curves of the number of types of herpetofauna based on the
observation.

Most of the herpetofauna species found have specific distribution. A total of 18
species were only found in one survey location. This is because reptiles have
lower density so it difficult to find. Most widely spread of reptile is Eutropis
multifasciata and Eutropis rudis which were encountered at all locations. Besides
having a high enough density, Eutropis sp. has a range of habitats and a high
enough adaptability so that it can be found in a variety of different habitats.
In the open area around the Helipad, species identified include Hylarana
erythraea, Fejervarya cancrivora, Fejervarya limnocharis and Polypedates leucomystax.
Each of these species has a high adaptability to areas that have been disturbed.
Meanwhile, Asper Phrynoidis, Hylarana signata, Hylarana raniceps and Hylarana
baramica occupy habitat that have minimal disturbance that is KGPF site,
precisely on the banks of the river.

(A) (B)

(C) (D)
Figure 30. A) Fejervarya limnocharis; B) Phrynoidis aspera; C) Hylarana
erythraea; D) Polypedates leucomystax.

Different species are found in marshy habitat types around the Wellsite. For
example, species such as Leavis Occidozyga, Rhacophorus appendiculatus and
Polypedates colleti. were identified.

37

B

A C
Figure 31. A) Polypedates colleti; B) Occidozyga leavis; C) Rhacophorus
appendiculatus

3.2.4 Insect
Insect species identified during the survey are listed at Table 8 below. No species
of conservation significance were recorded.
Table 8. Insect species list at survey area PT. Salamander Energy
Order Family Species
Lepidoptera Nymphalidae Moduza procris
Orthoptera Mantidae Hierodula sp.
Lepidoptera Nymphalidae Athyma larymna (male)
Orthoptera Grylidae
Lepidoptera Nymphalidae Althyma asura latecicta
Orthoptera Phasmatidae
Wellsite

38
Coleoptera Scarabidae Chacosoma caucasus
Homoptera Cicadidae
Coleoptera Scarabidae Papilia sp.
Orthoptera Grylidae
Odonata Libellilulidae
KGPF
Lepidoptera Nymphalidae Althyma larymna
Hemiptera Reduvididae
Hymenoptera Formicidae
Lepidoptera Lycanidae Jamides bochus
Diptera Syrphidae Syrphu sp.
Diptera Calliphoridae Chrysomya sp.
Odonata Libellilulidae
Lepidoptera Hesperidae
Coleoptera Chrysomelidae
Hymenoptera Ichneumonidae


REFERENCES
Alikodra, H.S. 1990. Pengelolaan Satwaliar. Jilid I. Yayasan Penerbit Fakultas
Kehutanan IPB, Bogor.
Bibby, C; M.Jones; S. Marsden. 2000. Teknik-Teknik Ekspedisi Lapangan :
Survey Burung. BirdLife International Indonesia Programme. Bogor.
Darmawan, M. P. 2006. Keanekaragaman Jenis Burung pada Beberapa Tipe
habitat di Hutan Lindung Gunung Lumut Kalimantan Timur. Skripsi.
Jurusan Konservasi Sumberdaya Hutan Fakultas Kehutanan Institut
Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.Tidak Dipublikasikan.
IUCN. 2013. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. www.iucnredlist.org.
MacKinnon, J.; K. Phillips; B. V. Balen. 1993. Seri Panduan Lapang Burung-
Burung Di Sumatera, Jawa, Bali Dan Kalimantan. Pusat Panelitian Dan
Pengembangan Biologi LIPI. Bogor.
Payne J, Francis C. M, and Kartikasari S. N. 2000. Panduan Lapangan Mamalia di
Kalimantan, Sabah, Serawak & Brunei Darussalam. The Sabah Society-
World Conservation Society-Indonesian Programe and World Wild Fund-
Malaysia.
Rowe N. 1996. The Pictorial Guide to The Living Primates. Poginian Press.
Hongkong.
Soerianegara, I. dan A. Indrawan. 1998. Ekologi Hutan Indonesia. Laboratorium
`Ekologi Hutan. Fakultas Kehutanan. Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor
Sozer, R., Y. Saaroni, P.F. Nurwatha. 1999. Jenis-Jenis Burung Dilindungi Yang
Sering Diperdagangkan. Yayasan Pribumi Alam Lestari. Bandung.
Sukmantoro W., M. Irham, W. Novarino, F. Hasudungan, N. Kemp & M.
Muchtar. 2007. Daftar Burung Indonesia (DBI) no. 2. Indonesian
Ornithologists Union, Bogor.
Tropenbos Kalimantan [Director General Of The Agency Forestry Research and
Development]. 1994. The International Indonesia Ministry of Forestry
Tropenbos Kalimantan Project. Tropenbos Indonesia. Bogor
Tropenbos Kalimantan [Director General Of The Agency Forestry Research and
Development]. Dipterocarpaceae di Pulau Kalimantan. Tropenbos
Indonesia.Bogor

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 337 of 369

Annex D
Eco-system Services Questionnaire and Observation Form
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 338 of 369

Ref
#
Ecosystem
Service
Questions
Key Project Area (Does it occur? Y/N)
If yes, provide
further detail
on the
following:
Details
Well
site
Pipeline Roads KGF
Supply
Base

1a
Food: wild-
caught fish and
shellfish
Are fish caught
for subsistence?

Main species
caught or
targeted (local,
common and
scientific name)
Catch
amounts
Important
fishing locations

1b
Are fish caught
for commercial
sale?

2
Food:
aquaculture
Are fish,
shellfish, and/or
plants bred and
reared in ponds
or enclosures
for harvesting?

Location of
enclosures
Species bred
(local, common
and scientific
name)

3a
Food: wild
plants, nuts,
mushrooms,
fruit, honey
Are wild fruits,
nuts, plants,
etc. collected
for personal
use?

Species
names of wild
plants collected
(local, common,
scientific name)
Locations
Commercial
value
Where and to
whom are
plants sold to?

3b
Are wild fruit,
nuts, wild
plants, etc.
collected for
commercial
use?

4a
Food: wild meat
Are wild
animals hunted
for food for
personal use?

Species
names of wild
animals hunted
(local, common,
scientific name)
Important
hunting
locations
Commercial
value of hunting
Where and to
whom are wild
animals sold to?

4b
Are wild
animals hunted
for food for
commercial
use?

5a
Food:
cultivated crops
Are crops
grown for
personal use?

Species
names of crops
grown (local,
common,
scientific name)
Crop
locations
Commercial
value
Where and to
whom are crops
sold to?

5b
Are crops
grown for
commercial
use?

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 339 of 369

Ref
#
Ecosystem
Service
Questions
If yes, provide
further detail
on the
following:
Details
Well
site
Pipeline Roads KGF
Supply
Base
6
Livestock
farming
Is there
livestock
farming?

What species
of livestock are
farmed (local,
common,
scientific name)
Is the farming
sedentary or
nomadic?

7 Biomass fuel
Is wood, dung
and plant
matter used for
fuel

What type is
used? E.g. wood
Where is the
biomass fuel
sourced?

8a
Timber and
wood products
Is wood
collected for
local use?

Harvest
locations
Type of
commercial use
8b
Is wood
collected for
commercial use
? e.g. timber,
wood pulp,
paper

9
Non- wood
fibres and resins
Are other
materials
harvested? e.g.
cane, palm,
straw, cotton,
twine and rope,
natural rubber

Harvest
locations
Types
harvested

10 Freshwater
Is freshwater
used for
bathing,
drinking,
irrigation,
laundry,
household and
industrial use?

What is
freshwater used
for?
Location of
important
freshwater
sources e.g.
wells, streams

11a
Biochemical,
natural
medicines,
pharmaceuticals
Is the natural
environment
used for
sourcing natural
medicines and
other biological
material
for personal
use?

Harvest
locations
Materials
sourced
Commercial
value

11a
Is the natural
environment
used for
sourcing natural
medicines and
other biological
material
for commercial
use?

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 340 of 369

Ref
#
Ecosystem
Service
Questions
If yes, provide
further detail
on the
following:
Details
Well
site
Pipeline Roads KGF
Supply
Base
12
Ornamental
resources
Are ornamental
resources
collected or
traded? E.g.
carved or
decorative
animal
products, live
animal trade

Types of
ornamental
resources
collected/traded
Locations

13
Genetic
resources
Are genes and
genetic
information
used for animal
breeding, plant
improvement,
and
biotechnology?

N/A

Regulating Services
14
Regulation of
air quality
The influence
ecosystems
have on air
quality by
extracting
chemicals from
the atmosphere
(i.e., serving as
a sink) or
emitting
chemicals to
the atmosphere
(i.e., serving as
a source)

Sinks (land
based
emissions)
Sources
(removes
emissions from
atmosphere e.g.
forest, lakes)

15
Climate
regulation:
global
Influence
ecosystems
have on the
global climate
by emitting
greenhouse
gases or
aerosols to the
atmosphere or
by absorbing
greenhouse
gases or
aerosols from
the
atmosphere.

Sources of
greenhouse
gases (e.g.
livestock, rice
paddies emit
methane)
Remove
greenhouse
gases (e.g.
forest)

16
Climate
regulation: local
Influence
ecosystems
have on local or
regional
temperature,
precipitation,
and other
climatic factors.

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 341 of 369

Ref
#
Ecosystem
Service
Questions
If yes, provide
further detail
on the
following:
Details
Well
site
Pipeline Roads KGF
Supply
Base
17
Regulation of
water timing
and flows
Influence
ecosystems
have on the
timing and
magnitude of
water runoff,
flooding, and
aquifer
recharge

Location and
type of
ecosystem (e.g.
river
floodplains,
wetlands)

18
Water
purification and
waste
treatment
Role played by
vegetation in
the filtration
and
decomposition
of organic
wastes and
pollutants and
the assimilation
and
detoxification of
compounds.

Location and
type of
vegetation

19
Shoreline
protection
Role of natural
habitats (e.g.
wetlands,
beaches, reefs)
in protecting
crops, buildings,
recreation areas
from waves,
wind and
flooding from
coastal storms.

Location and
type of
ecosystem (e.g.
river
floodplains,
wetlands)

20 Fire regulation
Regulation of
fire frequency
and intensity
(e.g. dense
forest can
provide
firebreaks)

Are they
natural fires or
controlled
burns?
How often
and where do
they occur?

21 Pest regulation
Are there pests
and diseases
that affect
crops and/or
livestock?

Types of pests
or diseases
(local and
scientific name)
Distribution
(common?
rare?)
Where have
they come
from?

22
Disease
regulation
Influence
ecosystems
have on the
incidence and
abundance of
human

Ecosystems
that affect level
of human
pathogens (e.g.
mosquito
breeding sites)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 342 of 369

Ref
#
Ecosystem
Service
Questions
If yes, provide
further detail
on the
following:
Details
Well
site
Pipeline Roads KGF
Supply
Base
pathogens
23
Erosion
regulation
Role of
vegetation in
regulating
erosion on
slopes and
riparian areas

Location and
type of
vegetation
Are there
problems with
erosion?
Where?

24 Pollination
Birds, insects
and some small
mammals
pollinate certain
flora species,
including some
agricultural
crops

Types of crops
grown
Pollinating
species known
to occur in area

Cultural Services
25
Spiritual or
religious value
Are there
natural spaces
or species of
spiritual or
religious
importance?

Type of
place/species
Level of
significance
Locations

26
Traditional
practices
Are traditional
practices such
as hunting,
fishing, crafts
and use of
natural
resources
culturally
important?

Types of
culturally
importance
practice (.e.g.
fishing)
Location of
practices

27
Recreation and
tourism
Are natural
spaces and
resources used
for tourism and
recreation (e.g.
swimming,
boating,
hunting)?

Types of
activities (e.g.
swimming)
Location of
activities

28 Aesthetic value
Cultural value
placed on the
aesthetic value
provided by
landscapes,
natural
landmarks

Location of
culturally
important
landscapes

29
Educational and
inspirational
values
Information
derived from
ecosystems
used for
intellectual
development,

Types of
information

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 343 of 369

Ref
#
Ecosystem
Service
Questions
If yes, provide
further detail
on the
following:
Details
Well
site
Pipeline Roads KGF
Supply
Base
culture, art,
design, and
innovation.
Supporting Services
(1)

Primary
production
Formation of
biological
material by
plants through
photosynthesis
and nutrient
assimilation.

Type of
biological
material (e.g.
algae)

Nutrient cycling
Flow of
nutrients (e.g.,
nitrogen,
sulphur,
phosphorus,
carbon) through
ecosystems.

Types of
nutrient flows
(e.g. sediment
in rivers)

Water cycling
Flow of water
through
ecosystems in
its solid, liquid,
or gaseous
forms.

Water flows

Habitat
Provision
Natural spaces
that maintain
species
populations and
protect the
capacity of
ecological
communities to
recover from
disturbances.

Types and
locations of
natural spaces
(e.g. rivers)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 344 of 369

Annex E
Public Consultation Attendance Record
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 345 of 369

SALAMANDER PROJECT - COMMUNITY CONSULTATION ATTENDANCE SHEET
DATE: .. VENUE LOCATION: SESSION (AM/PM): FACILITATORS:....
Name Number of
accompanying
children
Contact Details Please tick if you would be interested in
participating in future consultation
activities with Salamander

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 346 of 369

Annex F
Group Discussion

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 347 of 369

Group Discussion Questionnaire
ECONOMY
How do people in this settlement secure their livelihood?
Fishing, Animal husbandry, Hunting, gathering, Agriculture, Industry, Trade, Salaries paid
from state budget, Material aid provided by family members living outside the village, Social
benefits (excluding Humanitarian aid), Humanitarian aid, Retirement benefit (pension), No
permanent source of livelihood
Please list the industry/commerce/crafts in the village (workshops, restaurants, hairdressers
etc)
EDUCATION
For each school in your village provide the following information:
Name of school, enrolment, student/teacher ratio, number of classes
Where are schools located?
Do children from the settlement go to schools outside the village? If so where?
Are there any educational issues in the community? E.g. Conditions of schools need for
children to travel long distances to school, lack of educational materials
HEALTH
Are there any problems with health services/care in your settlement?
In your opinion, how has the health of the local population changed during the past five years?
If yes, has it worsened or improved and why?
What are the health services in this settlement?
Where is the nearest hospital? Hospital and clinic equipment available. How do people get to
the hospital?
Is there a campaign in immunization of the population?
What are the serious health problems associated with the location, profession or any
environmental impact in the village?
INFRASTRUCTURE
Is electric energy provided to your settlement?
Water supply?
Is there a communal sewerage in the village?
Does garbage collection take place in the village?
What will happen with the landfill?
Are/were there any indices of burning of waste?
Do you have graveyards in this village? If yes, how many? And where located? If no, where
are people buried?
Where are the services and infrastructure in your area?
o Police
o Fire department
o Market
o Shops
o Emergency healthcare services (ambulances)
o Child care services
o Community centre
o Bank
o Local government office
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 348 of 369

o Cultural artefacts
o Association
What are the best things about your settlement?

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 349 of 369

Annex G
Community Perception Questionnaire

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 350 of 369

KERENDAN GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Community Questionnaire - Project Understanding
Q1. How long have you lived in this area? (..yearmonths). What is your occupation?
Q2. If you are a migrant- are you working in this area? For how long?
Q3. What is your age? ____________ (leave blank if they prefer not to say)
Q4. Gender (please tick): Male Female
Q5. How would you rate your level of general knowledge of the Kerendan Project (please tick ONE
box only)?
No Knowledge Limited knowledge Some knowledge Extensive knowledge

Q6. What is your main source of information about the Kerendan Project? Please tick ONE box
only
Salamander Employer Family and Friends Community leaders
Q7. If any other Source (please specify): _________________
Q8. How would you rate the level of consultation by Salamander in your community (please tick
ONE box only)?
Dont know Very Poor Poor Good Excellent

Q9. Please rank the following categories in order of importance from 1 to 10 (1 = most important, 10
= least important)
Category Ranking
Protecting the environment
Education facilities
Increasing employment opportunities
Improved housing
Medical facilities/health care
Access to drinking water
Community infrastructure (e.g. roads)
Community Safety
Attracting new industries
Recreational facilities
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 351 of 369

Q10. What can be done to improve liveability in your community?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Q11. How concerned are you that the Kerendan Project will affect your way of life?
Unsure Not concerned Slightly
concerned
Moderately
concerned
Highly
concerned
Extremely
concerned

Q12. Do you think the Kerendan Project will have a positive impact on you and your community?

Yes No Unsure

Q13. Please read through the list of statements and tick the following statements about Salamander?
Please tick ONE box only
Salamander.. Unsure Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Agree Strongly
Agree
Cares for the environment
Has helped our community
Is concerned about our community
Is good employer
Has a good reputation locally
Is trusted by the local community
Meets community expectations
Is committed to the community for the
long term

Communicates clearly with our
community

Q14. Overall, how do you feel about the Project? Please tick in ONE box only
Negative Neutral Positive

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 352 of 369

Annex H
EHS Impact Assessment

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 353 of 369

Table H-1 Environmental Impact Assessment Kerendan Gas Development Project (A3)
Phase Activity/Aspect Receptor Potential Impacts Impact Evaluation (Pre-Mitigation) Mitigation Residual Impact
Magnitude Sensitivity Significance Magnitude Sensitivity Significance
All Phases Employment Opportunities
(including workforce presence)
Vegetation Workers disturbing vegetation from
physical activity
Small Medium Minor Personnel not allowed to
gather/remove flora or plant products
from site. All workers briefed on this
policy.
Small Low Negligible
Vegetation Workers disturbing vegetation outside
approved cleared areas and/or taking
forest resources
Small Medium Minor All work to be undertaken in cleared
footprint only
Vegetation Workers disturbing vegetation outside
approved cleared areas and/or taking
forest resources
Small Medium Minor Register of protected or endangered
species and/or species used by the
local community for commercial or
subsistence use (biodiversity survey
and social consultation)
Wildlife Workers hunting/trapping fauna Small Medium Minor No hunting policy enforced for
workforce
All Phases Transportation/ Operation of
vehicles (construction,
workforce)
Air Dust generation from vehicle
movement
Medium Medium Moderate Water spraying required for dust
suppression on access roads
Small Medium Minor
workforce)
Air Exhaust emissions from operational
vehicles, dust generation from vehicle
movement
Medium Medium Moderate Speed limits (maximum speed limits of
15 kph at worksites and near
accommodation. Maximum 60 kph on
open highway. Maximum 40 kph for
heavy machinery operations)
Small Medium Minor
vehicles, plant and equipment
Air Exhaust emissions from operational
vehicles, plant and equipment
Medium Medium Moderate All vehicles, equipment and machinery
to undergo a pre-use inspection prior to
use and periodic maintenance
inspections.
Small Medium Minor
workforce)
Vegetation Smothering from dust generation/air
quality impacts

Small Medium Minor
workforce)
quality impacts

Small Medium Minor
workforce)
Wildlife Wildlife may be impacted through
interactions with vehicles (resulting in
injury or mortality) or disturbance from
dust generation, noise and vibration.

Small Medium Minor Speed limits (maximum speed limits of
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 354 of 369


workforce)
Wildlife Wildlife may be impacted through
interactions with vehicles (resulting in
injury or mortality) or disturbance from
dust generation, noise and vibration.

Small Medium Minor No night driving under routine
conditions
All Phases Wastes/effluents, handling and
disposal
Surface Water
Soil
Surface water or soil contamination,
subsequently reducing environmental
quality
Medium Medium Moderate All designated waste storage areas on
hard standing with secondary
protection and closed drainage
(bunding)
Small Medium Minor
disposal
Surface Water
Soil
Surface water or soil contamination,
subsequently reducing environmental
quality
Medium Medium Moderate All refuelling to be conducted over hard
standing with secondary containment
and closed drainage
Small Medium Minor
disposal
Wildlife Organic waste may attract fauna to
the area (pest/native), resulting in
changes to natural behaviour and/or
outbreaks of pest species.
Small Medium Minor All organic waste stored in green bins
and incinerated daily
Construction Transportation/ Operation of
workforce)
Noise and
Vibration
Vehicle noise and vibration reducing
environmental quality and affecting
fauna
Small Medium Minor Construction activities restricted to
daylight hours except for
uninterruptible activities
Construction Site preparation Vegetation Clearing of flora species Medium Medium Moderate Vegetation clearing only in designated
areas for the project footprint; and
No disturbance to vegetation outside
marked areas
Medium Medium Moderate
Construction Site preparation Vegetation Clearing of flora species Medium Medium Moderate Topsoil will be stored separately during
clearing and will be used to fill and
level the area once grubbing activities
have been completed, thereby
Small Medium Minor
Construction Site preparation Vegetation Clearing of flora species Medium Medium Moderate Install the pipeline along the road
thereby reducing the land requirements
and associated vegetation clearance
Small Medium Minor
Construction Site preparation Vegetation Clearing of flora species Medium Medium Moderate Re-vegetation of pipeline ROW
following installation
Small Medium Minor
Construction Site preparation Vegetation Clearing of threatened flora species Medium Medium Moderate Rehabilitation program for habitat
offsets to gain no net loss in
biodiversity
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 355 of 369

Construction Site preparation Vegetation Dust generation and smothering of
fauna
Small Medium Minor Water spraying required for dust
suppression during earthworks
Construction Site preparation Vegetation Clearing of natural flora and
introduction of alien species
Small Low Negligible N/A Small Low Negligible
Construction Site preparation Surface Water Increased sediment and
contamination from runoff
Small Medium Minor Bunding/secondary containment and
spill kits in refuelling area and
chemical/hazardous material storage
areas
Construction Site preparation Wildlife Loss of habitat from vegetation
clearing
Construction Site preparation Wildlife Loss of habitat, Interaction with
personnel and machinery, increased
noise and vibration
Small Medium Minor All work to be undertaken in cleared
footprint only
Construction Site preparation Wildlife Interaction with personnel and
machinery, increased noise and
vibration
Small Medium Minor Personnel not allowed to remove fauna
from the work location (dead or alive)
or animal products (e.g. eggs, skins)
Construction Site preparation Wildlife Interaction with personnel and
machinery, increased noise and
vibration
Small Medium Minor Limit 24 hour construction to
Construction Pipeline trench excavation,
backfilling and surface
restoration
Air Dust generation from soil stockpiles Small Medium Minor Water spraying required for dust
Small Medium Negligible
restoration
Soil Site drainage and disturbance of soils
(resulting in erosion), potentially within
steep areas which may be subject to
slope instability and erosion.
Medium Medium Moderate Soil to be placed at a minimum1 m
from edge of grading to reduce
instability risk (trenching)
Small Medium Minor
restoration
Surface Water Increased sediment and
contamination from runoff
Small Medium Minor Dedicated drainage channels must be
constructed to catch and divert run-off
away from surface water
restoration
Wildlife Injury/mortality from open trenches,
impeded movement between forested
areas while trench is open
Small Low Negligible Trenches will be left open for a
maximum of 3 days
Construction Installation and testing of
facilities
Surface Water Contaminated hydrotest water
reducing environmental quality and
secondary impacts on aquatic fauna
Construction Construction of groundwater well
at KGPF
Groundwater Disruptions to groundwater resource
availability
Small Medium Minor Water use study to be conducted to
ensure no depletion in supply
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 356 of 369

Construction Construction, installation and
testing of Project facilities
Air Atmospheric emissions, dust
generation
Small Medium Minor
generation
Small Medium Minor
generation
Medium Medium Moderate All vehicles, equipment and machinery
to undergo a pre-use inspection prior to
use and periodic maintenance
inspections.
Small Medium Minor
quality impacts

Small Medium Minor
Wildlife Temporary displacement from
interaction with personnel and
machinery, noise and vibration,
lighting

All work to be undertaken in cleared
footprint only

Limit 24 hour construction to
Wildlife Workers disturbing fauna from
physical activity
Small Medium Minor No hunting policy enforced for
workforce
All work to be undertaken in cleared
footprint only
Construction Installation and testing of
facilities
Surface Water Contaminated hydrotest water
reducing environmental quality and
secondary impacts on aquatic fauna
Operation Lighting of Project facilities Wildlife

Disturbance to fauna and behavioural
impacts
Medium Medium Moderate Light impact minimization - to be
identified
Associated
Facilities
Groundwater Disruptions to groundwater resource
availability
Medium Medium Moderate Water use study to be conducted to
ensure no depletion in supply
Associated
Facilities
Air Dust generation and exhaust
emissions from vehicles, plant and
equipment
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 357 of 369

Associated
Facilities
Noise and
Vibration
Disturbance to fauna from noise and
vibration from operation of facility,
vessels, vehicles and equipment
Small Medium Minor Noise dampening for all noise sources
with emission levels above 85dB
Small Medium Minor
Associated
Facilities
Surface Water Contamination through uncontrolled
runoff/drainage
Small Medium Minor All hazardous materials to be stored on
hard standing with bunding and 110%
inventory capacity
Small Medium Minor

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 358 of 369

Table I-2 Social Impact Assessment Kerendan Gas Development Project (A3)
All phases Employment Opportunities
Communicable
Disease
Introduction of communicable
diseases and reproductive health
issues from bringing workers from
outside the area
Medium Medium Moderate Personnel will educated on
health/cultural risks through onsite
training.
Small Medium Minor
Social/Cultural
Structure
Introduction of workers with different
cultural and religious values, and
social/cultural interaction issues and
tensions
Small Medium Minor All relevant personnel to be trained on
community awareness/ interaction and
dos and donts. Personnel will
educated on health/cultural risks
Small Medium Minor
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on the community
through generation of new
employment and income generated
from Project demand for local
businesses/economic activity
Positive Communicate Project opportunities in
advance and in an accessible format
to communities
Positive
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive Effective contract document requiring
appropriate local hiring.
Positive
Social/Cultural
Structure
Introduction of workers with different
cultural and religious values, and
social/cultural interaction issues and
tensions
Small Medium Minor The management of this potential
impact will be carried forward to
Salamander's HSE Management
System that governs environmental,
social and community health risk
management throughout the life of the
Project.

Community
Safety and
Security
Security personnel for the Project
have the potential to impact
community safety and security (human
rights considerations)
Small Medium Minor Contract scope for security provider:
Socialization of security arrangement
for Salamander site with community.
Small Medium Minor
Communicable
Disease
Vector Borne
Disease
outside the area
Medium Medium Moderate The management of this potential
Project.

Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive The management of this potential
Project.

Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk from workers entering the
community (even a perceived risk has
the potential to disturb the community)

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 359 of 369

Project.
Communicable
Disease
outside the area
Medium Medium Moderate The management of this potential
Project.

Community
Safety and
Security
Project.

Community
Safety and
Security
Project.

Community
Safety and
Security
Security personnel for the Project
have the potential to impact
community safety and security (human
rights considerations)
Project.

All phases Maintenance of access roads Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Improvements to infrastructure and
services may improve accessibility
between communities/main population
centres and subsequently improve
access to surrounding community
infrastructure and services, education
and economic opportunities
Positive CSR activities focus on sustainable
projects (enhancing economic
opportunities provided through
infrastructure, access to education,
markets etc.)
Positive
All phases Transportation of
materials/supplies and workforce
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Increased traffic and pressure on
existing infrastructure interfering with
existing road/river use
Medium Low Minor Undertake consultation with local
community (including in local schools)
to raise awareness of transportation
routes
All phases Wastes/effluents generation,
Vector Borne
Diseases
Domestic waste management
attracting wildlife (e.g. rats, dogs,
insects) and increasing spread of
associated diseases.
Small Medium Minor All domestic waste will be disposed of
appropriately i.e. through incineration
onsite or taken offsite for disposal to
an appropriate facility
Negligible Medium Negligible
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Impacts on environmental quality that
may affect ecosystem services and
livelihood (e.g. reduction of water
quality effects on the fishing)
Small Medium Minor All refuelling to be conducted over
containment and closed drainage
Environmental
Quality
Impacts on soil and surface water
quality reducing environmental quality
and subsequently impacting human
health
Small Medium Minor All refuelling to be conducted over
containment and closed drainage
Small Medium Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 360 of 369

Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Project.

Environmental
Quality
health
Small Medium Minor The management of this indirect
impact will be through environmental
mitigation (refer environmental
receptors)
Small Medium Minor
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
receptors)
Environmental
Quality
health
receptors)
Small Medium Minor
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
receptors)
Environmental
Quality
health
receptors)
Small Medium Minor
testing of project facilities
Vector Borne
Diseases
Alteration of surface
hydrology/drainage may lead to water
pooling and stagnation which may
result in an increase in mosquito
breeding and spread of associated
diseases (malaria, dengue)
Small High Moderate Cover all trenches and other possible
potential vector breeding grounds
within the site area during the rainy
season
Small Medium Minor
restoration
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to the community from
open excavations
Small Low Negligible Consultation with local community
(including in local schools) to raise
awareness of transportation routes
Construction Site preparation Environmental
Quality
Impact to livelihood from dust or other
disturbance associated with the
Project (e.g. soil erosion and
contamination of surface waters used
by locals for domestic water use and
fishing)
Medium Medium Moderate The management of this indirect
receptors)
Small Medium Minor
Quality
Noise and vibration, surface water
impacts and reduction in air quality
could potentially impact environmental
quality and subsequently impact
human health
receptors)
Negligible Medium Negligible
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 361 of 369

Quality
Impact to livelihood from dust or other
disturbance associated with the
Project (e.g. soil erosion and
contamination of surface waters used
by locals for domestic water use and
fishing)
receptors)
Small Medium Minor
Construction Site preparation Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Impact to livelihoods through loss of
resource use and ability to produce or
collect surplus resources for
commercial purposes
Medium Medium Moderate All work to be undertaken in cleared
footprint only
Small Medium Minor
Construction Site preparation
Pipeline trench excavation,
restoration
Cultural
Resources
Potential direct impacts to tangible and
intangible heritage caused by
disturbance of the ground and/or loss
of community access to areas
Small Low Negligible Personnel will educated on
health/cultural risks through onsite
training.
Construction Site preparationPipeline trench
excavation, backfilling and
surface restoration
Cultural
Resources
Potential direct impacts to tangible and
intangible heritage caused by
disturbance of the ground and/or loss
of community access to areas
Small Low Negligible The management of this potential
Project.

Operation Physical presence and operation
of infrastructure
Environmental
Quality
Increased noise, vibration and light
emissions and discharges to river may
impact environmental quality and

Potential impacts on resources and
quality of groundwater and/or surface
water used by the community (e g
waterways for fishing and drinking
water) could have subsequent effects
on the community health if access to
or quality of these resources is
negatively impacted (e g loss of
drinking water source)
Medium Low Minor Maintenance program Medium Low Minor
of infrastructure
Environmental
Quality

Medium Low Minor The management of this indirect
receptors)
Medium Low Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 362 of 369

of infrastructure
Infrastructure
and Services
(-/+)
Potential for local infrastructure and
services to be improved either through
direct investment/maintenance of
infrastructure which may improve
communities/main population centres
(and surrounding services, education
and economic opportunities)
Positive CSR activities focus on sustainable
projects (enhancing economic
opportunities provided through
infrastructure, access to education,
markets etc.)
Positive
of infrastructure
Environmental
Quality

receptors)
Medium Low Minor
of infrastructure
Infrastructure
and Services
(-/+)
Project.

of infrastructure
Environmental
Quality

receptors)
Medium Low Minor
of infrastructure
Environmental
Quality

receptors)
Medium Low Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 363 of 369

Associated
Facilities
Luwe Hulu Supply and Support
Base Presence and Activities
Environmental
Quality
receptors)
Associated
Facilities
Environmental
Quality
receptors)
Associated
Facilities
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Positive impact on local businesses
through increased economic activity
and demand for local goods and
services
to communities
Positive
Associated
Facilities
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
services
Project.

Associated
Facilities
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
Use of the river for transportation has
the possibility to interfere with other
river users (community, commercial)
Medium Low Minor Contract Management of river
services contractors
Comply with River Transportation
System
Associated
Facilities
Infrastructure
and Services
(-/+)
to communities
Positive
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 364 of 369

Associated
Facilities
Infrastructure
and Services
(-/+)
Project.

Associated
Facilities
Economy and
Livelihood (-/+)
services
Project.

Associated
Facilities
Environmental
Quality
receptors)
Associated
Facilities
Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to Community members
that access the site due to insufficient
controls
Medium Medium Moderate Contract scope for security provider:
Socialization of security arrangement
for Salamander site with community.
Small Medium Minor

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 365 of 369

Table I-3 Non Routine Impact Assessment Kerendan Gas Development Project (A3)
Phase

Activity/Aspect

Receptor

Potential Impacts

Impact Evaluation (Pre-Mitigation) Mitigation Residual Impact
Magnitude Sensitivity Likelihood Significance Magnitude Sensitivity Likelihood Significance
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Fire/explosion Air Increase in atmospheric
emissions and
particulates, GHG
Small Low Unlikely Negligible N/A Small Low Unlikely Negligible
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Fire/explosion Community
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Small Medium Unlikely Moderate Only authorised persons allowed to
enter site (security to prevent access)
Small Medium Unlikely Minor
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Small Medium Unlikely Moderate Community Awareness
Program/Consultation
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Small Medium Unlikely Moderate Trained emergency response/fire team
Dedicated fire response equipment
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Fire/explosion Resource
ownership/use
Resource use may be
impacted if it results in
loss of resources (e.g.
forest/farmland) or
impacts quality or
abundance resources
used by the community
(e.g. forest products)
Small Medium Unlikely Minor Trained emergency response/fire team
Dedicated fire response equipment
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Safety and
Security
Safety risk to
surrounding
communities (health
Small Medium Unlikely Minor Fire drills and response exercises Small Medium Unlikely Minor
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Fire/explosion Vegetation Direct loss of
vegetation/habitat
Small Low Unlikely Negligible No mitigation measures required Small Low Unlikely Negligible
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Fire/explosion Wildlife Injury/mortality Small Low Unlikely Negligible No mitigation measures required Small Low Unlikely Negligible
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Gas leak from
facilities/pipeline
Air Increase in atmospheric
emissions and
particulates, GHG
Small Low Possible Negligible No mitigation measures required Small Low Possible Negligible
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Process
Upset/emergency
flaring
Air Increase in atmospheric
emissions and
particulates, GHG
Medium Low Possible Minor Impact cannot be mitigated further Medium Low Possible Minor
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 366 of 369

Phase

Activity/Aspect

Receptor

Potential Impacts

Non routine/
unplanned
events
Process
Upset/emergency
flaring
Wildlife Noise and vibration, light
disturbance
Medium Low Possible Minor Impact cannot be mitigated further Medium Low Possible Minor
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Economy and
Livelihood (-
/+)
People's livelihoods may
be affected if resources
are negatively impacted
economic value
Medium Medium Possible Moderate All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Economy and
Livelihood (-
/+)
economic value
Medium Medium Possible Moderate Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Economy and
Livelihood (-
/+)
economic value
Medium Medium Possible Moderate MSDS available in areas of chemical
storage and use. Every activity (e.g.
loading and hauling of hazardous
material chemicals) shall refer to the
MSDS. Chemical to be stored
according to label type, with secondary
containment, spill kits, and visible
warning signs (no smoking, eating,
drinking and sleeping)
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Environmental
Quality
quality and
human health
Medium Medium Possible Minor All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
Small Low Unlikely Negligible
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Environmental
Quality
quality and
human health
Medium Medium Possible Minor Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Groundwater Contamination Small Medium Unlikely Minor All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Groundwater Contamination Small Medium Unlikely Minor Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Groundwater Contamination Small Medium Unlikely Minor Train personnel in spill handling and
response
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 367 of 369

Phase

Activity/Aspect

Receptor

Potential Impacts

Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
may affect nutrition if the
ability to source clean
drinking water and other
resources (fish,
vegetation) are
impacted
Medium Low Unlikely Minor All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
may affect nutrition if the
ability to source clean
drinking water and other
resources (fish,
vegetation) are
impacted
Medium Low Unlikely Minor Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Resource
ownership/use
water and other
resources (fish,
vegetation)
Small Medium Possible Minor All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Resource
ownership/use
water and other
resources (fish,
vegetation)
Small Medium Possible Minor Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Soil Contamination of soil Medium Medium Possible Moderate All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
Small Medium Possible Minor
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Soil Contamination of soil Medium Medium Possible Moderate Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Soil Contamination of soil Medium Medium Possible Moderate MSDS available in areas of chemical
storage and use. Every activity (e.g.
loading and hauling of hazardous
material chemicals) shall refer to the
MSDS. Chemical to be stored
according to label type, with secondary
containment, spill kits, and visible
warning signs (no smoking, eating,
drinking and sleeping)
Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Small Medium Possible Minor All hazardous materials to be stored on
inventory capacity
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 368 of 369

Phase

Activity/Aspect

Receptor

Potential Impacts

Non routine/
unplanned
events
chemicals and
hazardous materials
Small Medium Possible Minor Bunding/secondary containment and
areas
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Vessel, vehicle,
helicopter accident
Community
Safety and
Security
Potential loss of life Medium Medium Unlikely Moderate All personnel trained in first aid and
refresher training provided regularly to
maintain skill levels
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Vessel, vehicle,
helicopter accident
Community
Safety and
Security
Potential loss of life Medium Medium Unlikely Moderate All vehicles, equipment and machinery
to undergo a pre-use inspection prior
to use and periodic maintenance
inspections.
Non routine/
unplanned
events
Vessel, vehicle,
helicopter accident
Community
Safety and
Security
Potential loss of life Medium Medium Unlikely Moderate Keep all non-workers away from work
area (authorised personnel only) and
erect warning signs/barriers to work
areas
DD-BK00-0Q-003

Salamander Energy
Page 369 of 369

Annex I
Salamander Energy Indonesia HSE Management System

Kerendan ESIA

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Kerendan ESIA

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

DD-BK00-0Q-003

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi