Draft Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Addendum – Supplement Studies including Biodiversity and Critical Habitat Assessment

Project Number: 49222-001 May 2016

INO: Tangguh LNG Expansion Project

Prepared by BP Berau Ltd.

The environmental and social impact assessment is a document of the project sponsor. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. Your attention is directed to the “Term of Use” section of this website.

In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of or any territory or area.

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Tangguh Expansion Project

June 2016

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Contents

Page 1 Introduction ...... 7 1.1 Project Background ...... 7 1.2 Rationale for this Report ...... 8 1.3 General Approach ...... 9 1.4 Project Description ...... 11 1.4.1 History of the Tangguh Train 1 and 2 and TEP ...... 11 1.4.2 Tangguh Expansion Project ...... 12 1.4.3 Alternatives ...... 15 1.5 Structure of this Document ...... 16 2 Scope and Objectives ...... 18 2.1 Project Scope ...... 18 2.2 Scope of this Report ...... 18 2.3 Aim and Objectives ...... 19 2.3.1 Application of the Mitigation Hierarchy ...... 19 2.3.2 Development of the Biodiversity Action Plan ...... 20 3 Policy and Regulatory Framework ...... 21 3.1 International Conventions ...... 21 3.2 National Legislative and Policy Framework ...... 21 3.2.1 Environmental Law ...... 22 3.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Legislation ...... 22 3.2.3 Conservation and Forestry Laws ...... 24 3.2.4 Marine and Fisheries Laws ...... 25 3.2.5 Species Protection and Trade ...... 25 3.2.6 Biodiversity and Species Action Plans...... 26 3.3 ADB Safeguard Policy Statement ...... 27 3.4 IFC Performance Standards ...... 28 4 Biodiversity Baseline ...... 29 4.1 Methodology ...... 29 4.1.1 Study Area ...... 29 4.1.2 Desktop Information ...... 31 4.1.3 Field Surveys ...... 31 4.1.4 Sensitivity Mapping ...... 32 4.1.5 Stakeholder Engagement on Biodiversity Values ...... 32 4.2 Environmental Setting ...... 33 4.2.1 Physiography ...... 33

Page 2 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

4.2.2 Main Habitats ...... 35 4.2.3 Species of Conservation Concern ...... 38 4.2.4 Ecosystem Services ...... 45 4.2.5 National and International Protected Areas ...... 46 4.2.6 Other Nature Conservation Areas ...... 49 5 Critical Habitat Assessment ...... 51 5.1 Methodology ...... 51 5.1.1 Criteria for assessment ...... 51 5.1.2 Critical Habitat Assessment approach...... 51 5.2 Assessment of Critical Habitats ...... 55 5.2.1 Criterion 1: Critically endangered or endangered species...... 55 5.2.2 Criterion 2: Endemic or restricted range species ...... 60 5.2.3 Criterion 3: Migratory or congregatory species ...... 65 5.2.4 Criterion 4: Unique species assemblages associated with key evolutionary processes or providing key ecosystem services ...... 66 5.2.5 Criterion 5: Biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities ...... 67 5.2.6 Criterion 6: Protected areas or proposed for protection...... 69 5.2.7 Criterion 7: Highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems ...... 69 5.3 Priority Biodiversity Features ...... 70 5.3.1 Priority Species and Associated Habitats ...... 70 5.3.2 Priority Ecosystem Services ...... 72 5.3.3 Priority Protected Areas ...... 72 6 Impact Assessment and Mitigation ...... 73 6.1 Impact Evaluation ...... 73 6.2 Evaluation of Impacts on Priority Species and Associated Habitats ...... 76 6.2.1 Discharge of drilling mud / cuttings ...... 76 6.2.2 Foreshore development, dredging and dredge disposal ...... 77 6.2.3 Operational discharge of effluents ...... 78 6.2.4 Presence of offshore platforms ...... 79 6.2.5 Sea transportation (including LNG tanker traffic) ...... 79 6.2.6 Underwater sound ...... 80 6.2.7 Land clearance ...... 81 6.2.8 Noise and visual disturbance ...... 83 6.2.9 Invasive species ...... 85 6.2.10 Spills of hazardous material, including hydrocarbon and chemicals ...... 87 6.3 Evaluation of Impacts on Ecosystem Services ...... 88 6.3.1 Evaluation of impact ...... 89 6.4 Evaluation of Impacts on Protected Areas ...... 90 6.4.1 Evaluation of impact ...... 90 6.5 Strategy for Additional Mitigations ...... 91 6.5.1 Generic measures ...... 91

Page 3 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.5.2 Avoidance ...... 92 6.5.3 Minimization ...... 92 6.5.4 Restoration ...... 93 6.5.5 Offsets ...... 94 6.5.6 Additional Conservation Actions ...... 94 6.5.7 Monitoring ...... 94 6.6 Impacts on Priority Habitats ...... 95 6.7 Impacts on Priority Species ...... 96 6.7.1 Plants ...... 97 6.7.2 Mammals ...... 98 6.7.3 Birds ...... 98 6.7.4 Amphibians and reptiles ...... 99 6.7.5 Summary of Impacts ...... 100 7 Tangguh Biodiversity Action Plan ...... 102 7.1 Overview ...... 102 7.1.1 BAP Objectives ...... 102 7.1.2 Priority species and associated habitats ...... 102 7.1.3 Further surveys and assessments ...... 103 7.2 External Engagement and consultation ...... 104 7.3 Activity Plans ...... 105 7.3.1 Land Clearance Activities ...... 106 7.3.2 Re-vegetation Activities ...... 107 7.3.3 Noise and Visual Disturbance Activities ...... 108 7.3.4 Management of Invasive Species ...... 109 7.3.5 Offset agreement ...... 110 7.3.6 Environmental awareness activities ...... 112 7.4 Role and responsibilities ...... 113 7.4.1 Construction phase ...... 113 7.4.2 Operation phase ...... 115 7.5 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting ...... 115 7.5.1 Monitoring During Construction ...... 115 7.5.2 Monitoring during Operation ...... 117 7.5.3 Reporting ...... 117 8 References ...... 118 A.1 Description of Biodiversity Surveys Commissioned by Tangguh ...... 126 A.2 List of Species of Conservation Concern ...... 131 A.3 Consultation with Biodiversity Experts on Critical Habitat Assessment ...... 152

Tables

Table 1 – Key Definitions and Abbreviations ...... 9

Page 4 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 2 – List of biodiversity surveys commissioned by Tangguh ...... 32 Table 3 - Species of flora of conservation concern ...... 39 Table 4 – Bird species of conservation concern ...... 40 Table 5 – Mammal species of conservation concern ...... 43 Table 6 – Herpetofauna species of conservation concern...... 44 Table 7 – Fish species of conservation concern ...... 44 Table 8 - Quantitative Thresholds Tiers 1 and 2 of Critical Habitat Criteria 1 to 3 ...... 52 Table 9 – DMU areal coverage estimates ...... 53 Table 10 - Forest ecosystem cover in West Papua in 2011 (GCF, 2013) ...... 70 Table 11 – Stages for the Identification of Tier 1 & Tier 2 Critical Habitat Assessment Species ...... 71 Table 12 – Overview of significant impacts (AMDAL, 2014) ...... 74 Table 13 – Habitat loss in Project Area...... 96 Table 14 - Summary of existing and new documents ...... 105 Table 15 - Management of land clearance ...... 106 Table 16 - Management of re-vegetation ...... 107 Table 17 - Management of noise and visual disturbance ...... 108 Table 18 - Management of Invasive Species ...... 109 Table 19 – Environmental awareness building ...... 112 Table 20 – Species of flora of conservation concern ...... 131 Table 21 – Bird species of conservation concern ...... 134 Table 22 – Mammal species of conservation concern ...... 145 Table 23 – Herpetofauna species of conservation concern ...... 147 Table 24 – Fish species of conservation concern ...... 151

Figures

Figure 1 – Project location ...... 7 Figure 2 – Project timeline ...... 11 Figure 3 – Existing and planned project layout ...... 13 Figure 4 – Offshore Development Plan Showing Existing and Planned Platforms for TEP Initial Phase ...... 13 Figure 5 – Tentative plot plan of onshore and nearshore facilities ...... 14 Figure 6 – Structure of this document ...... 17 Figure 7 – Applying the Mitigation Hierarchy to achieve No Net Loss ...... 19 Figure 8 – The Four Key Actions in the Mitigation Hierarchy ...... 20

Page 5 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 9 – Study area ...... 30 Figure 10 – Geographical Features within the Study Area ...... 34 Figure 11 – Photos of main habitat types ...... 36 Figure 12 – Location of proposed protected areas ...... 48 Figure 13 – Discrete Management Units for terrestrial and estuarine habitats ...... 54 Figure 14 – Map of Project Infrastructure ...... 75 Figure 15 – One of the Proposed Offset Areas (1,320Ha) ...... 111

Page 6 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

1 Introduction

1.1 Project Background BP Berau Ltd. (“BP”) is the operator of Tangguh LNG, which comprises of two gas treatment and liquefaction Trains located in Bintuni Bay Regency, West Papua Province, Indonesia (Figure 1). The onshore plant produces Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and stabilised hydrocarbon condensate as export products and has been fully operational since July 2010. Natural gas from two offshore platforms is delivered to onshore receiving facilities via subsea pipeline. Three production sharing contracts are effective until 2035 which govern the Tangguh development. Current production is from the Vorwata offshore field only which contains 75% of the development’s gas reserves. Development of the Vorwata field is required to supply sufficient gas to the onshore facilities to maintain current nameplate production through each of the two initial LNG Trains for the duration of the production sharing contracts. BP and its partners, plan to expand the Tangguh LNG facilities to increase Tangguh LNG production capacity by developing LNG Train 3 and additional supporting facilities, referred hereafter as the Tangguh Expansion Project (TEP). Initial expansion is planned to include LNG Train 3, two platforms (ROA and WDA), 13 new development wells, two subsea pipelines, a combined LNG and Condensate Jetty and other supporting facilities.

Figure 1 – Project location

TEP aims to optimize LNG production of existing reserve that cannot be produced within existing two trains development prior to PSC expiry. TEP will provide benefits to the Government of Indonesia and local communities which include a contribution to fulfilling domestic gas needs, support to local livelihoods, strengthening partnerships and continuing investment in economic and social development of the region. BP and its partners are seeking external finance to support the onshore components of the project (section 1.4.2).

Page 7 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The TEP Project aims to comply with the environmental requirements of the Government of Indonesia and respective local government regulations, and conform to ADB's Safeguard Policy Statement 2009 (ADB, 2009) and align with IFC Performance Standards (IFC, 2012a), as well as Equator Principle III (2013) standards.

1.2 Rationale for this Report The island of Papua has a rich biodiversity. A recent report by WWF (2011) suggests as many as 1,800 species of terrestrial vertebrates (birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians) inhabit the area. Plant diversity is also high, with the estimated number of vascular plant species ranging from 25,000 to 30,000, with many new species still being discovered. For its existing operations, Tangguh is committed to biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources as described in the original Biodiversity Action Plan (Tangguh, 2003) and AMDAL (2002). This commitment underpins the preparation and planning for the TEP. Since 2000 Tangguh has regularly conducted flora and fauna and marine mammal surveys in its buffer zone area and the surrounding Teluk Bintuni area respectively. The results of the 10 years plus surveys show that there is minimal impact to the biodiversity within Tangguh buffer zone and Teluk Bintuni area from the presence and activity of Tangguh Train 1 and 2. The ongoing environmental impact management plan for the buffer zone area has proven effective to maintaining biodiversity in the Tangguh area. Fencing and limitation of access to the buffer zone area played a major role in maintaining biodiversity in protecting the forest area from logging and tree cutting for other purposes. A commitment to carry out regular flora and fauna surveys (including marine mammals) in the 2003 Biodiversity Action Plan has been included in the new environmental impact assessment (AMDAL) as one of the key elements of biodiversity management. With that background in place, the TEP planning and preparation has maximized the use of brownfield area and minimize the clearance of the forest within buffer zone area. The effort and rationale in TEP facility location design are described in Section 1.4.3. Supported by a series of environmental studies, Tangguh carried out an environmental and social impact assessment for the TEP in accordance with Indonesia’s AMDAL regulation. The AMDAL was approved in 2014, with the resulting Environmental Permit stipulating the environmental requirements and conditions attached to the Project in line with Indonesian government regulations. As part of its lenders due diligence process, ADB has requested Tangguh to submit a Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan for TEP. Critical habitat refers to areas of high biodiversity value in which development would be particularly sensitive and require special attention. The purpose of a critical habitat assessment is to identify areas of high biodiversity value that meet certain criteria. Critical habitat is a concept recognized in the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (2009). The concept of critical habitat and underlying criteria has been further developed by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) in its Performance Standard 6 (PS6) on Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Resources (IFC, 2012a). The Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) is a plan which includes a set of actions that lead to the conservation of such areas of high biodiversity for a specific project.

Page 8 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Details of the final project design and the results of additional studies undertaken since the AMDAL documents were prepared and included in this document.

1.3 General Approach This report identifies biodiversity features which may qualify the Tangguh project area and surrounding environment as a critical habitat, as per the criteria of the IFC Performance Standard 6 and required by the ADB to inform project design and implementation. A key principle of these requirements is that the project design and implementation will avoid impacts on critical habitat qualifying biodiversity features or, in cases where this may not be possible, follow the mitigation hierarchy of minimization, restoration and offsetting. The approach taken in the preparation of this report is based on the methodology of a critical habitat assessment in the IFC Guidance Note 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources (IFC, 2012b). The details of this approach are explained in Section 5.1. Critical habitats are identified by the presence of qualifying biodiversity features. These may include significant components of Critically Endangered and Endangered species, species with small ranges, migratory or congregatory species, rare and threatened ecosystems, and key evolutionary processes. Specific to the ADB Safeguard Policy (2009), the Critical Habitat Assessment also considers ecosystem services associated with unique biodiversity features and presence of protected areas. The assessment determines the extent of, and qualifies criteria for critical habitat relevant to the TEP Project. This leads to a priority list of biodiversity features of conservation concern. Subsequent assessment of the direct and indirect impacts of the project on priority biodiversity feratures will determine what actions need to be taken. The environmental impacts as described in the AMDAL documentation (AMDAL, 2014) have been reviewed and re-assessed with specific attention to the application of the mitigation hierarchy. The intent of this approach is to demonstrate no net loss of biodiversity in line with ADB Safeguard Policy (2009). Actions required are then captured in a plan of action for conserving biodiversity which forms the basis of the biodiversity action plan. A detailed definition of critical habitat and that of related terms used in this document are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 – Key Definitions and Abbreviations

Term Definition ADB Asian Development Bank Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan (Indonesian Environmental and Social Impact AMDAL Assessment) Analisis Dampak Lingkungan (Environmental Impact Assessment); is a part of overall ANDAL AMDAL document BAP Biodiversity Action Plan BOG Boil Off Gas CHA Critical Habitat Assessment Species that gather in globally significant numbers at a particular site and at a particular Congregatory species1 time in their life cycle for feeding, breeding or resting (during migration).

Page 9 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

A subset of both natural and modified habitat that deserves particular attention. Critical habitat includes: areas with high biodiversity value, including habitat required for the survival of critically endangered or endangered species; areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range species; sites that are critical for the Critical habitat2 survival of migratory species; areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of congregatory species; areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated with key evolutionary processes or provide key ecosystem services; and areas having biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities. Discrete Management Unit. An area with a definable boundary within which the DMU biological communities and/or management issues have more in common with each other than they do with those in adjacent areas. Ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems. These include (i) provisioning services such as food, water, timber, and fibre; (ii) regulating services that Ecosystem Services3 affect climate, floods, disease, wastes, and water quality; (iii) cultural services that provide recreational, aesthetic, and spiritual benefits; and (iv) supporting services such as soil formation, photosynthesis, and nutrient cycling. An endemic species is defined as one that has ≥ 95 percent of its global range inside Endemic species4 the country or region of analysis. The region may also be a landscape/seascape or other sensible geographical unit within the country itself or in coastal and marine habitats. EOO Extent of Occurrence The area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary which can be Extent of occurrence drawn to encompass all the known, inferred or projected sites of present occurrence of (EOO)1 a taxon, excluding cases of vagrancy. FID Financial Investment Decision GCF Governors' Climate and Forests Task Force IFC International Finance Corporation IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature LNG Liquefied Natural Gas Natural habitat that has been altered as a result of human activities such as agricultural, Modified habitat2 forestry or urban development, or through the introduction of alien species. Land and water areas where the biological communities are formed largely by native Natural habitat2 plant and animal species, and where human activity has not essentially modified the area’s primary ecological functions. OGP Oil and Gas Producers POD Plan of Development PSC Production Sharing Contract For terrestrial vertebrates, a restricted-range species is defined as those species which Restricted range have an extent of occurrence of 50,000 km2 or less. species5 For marine systems, restricted-range species are provisionally being considered those with an extent of occurrence of 100,000 km2 or less. Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan (Environmental Management Plan); is a part of overall RKL AMDAL document ROA Platform Name Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan (Environmental Monitoring Plan); is a part of overall RPL AMDAL document SPA Sale and Purchase Agreement Surat Pernyataan Pengelolaan Lingkungan (Statement Letter of Environmental SPPL Management) TEP Tangguh Expansion Project UKL Upaya Pengelolaan Lingkungan (Environmental Management Effort) UPL Upaya Pemantauan Lingkungan (Environmental Monitoring Effort) VRA Platform Name VRB Platform Name WDA Platform Name WWF World Wildlife Fund

Page 10 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Note: 1. Definition taken from Langhammer et al (2007). 2. Definition taken from ADB Safeguards Policy (2009). 3. Definition taken from Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). 4. Definition taken from IFC (2012a). 5. Definition taken from IFC (2012b).

1.4 Project Description The existing facilities of the Tangguh LNG comprise of 2 x 3.8 mtpa gas treatment and liquefaction trains. These facilities are fed with natural gas from thirteen production wells via two offshore platforms, VRA and VRB. Each platform delivers gas to onshore receiving facilities via a dedicated subsea pipeline. The onshore plant produces Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and stabilised hydrocarbon condensate as export products. Liquefied ethane and propane are generated in the process and used in refrigeration at the plant. The onshore existing facilities also consist of associated utilities and infrastructure such as an LNG loading jetty, a combo dock and permanent buildings and camps for operations.

1.4.1 History of the Tangguh Train 1 and 2 and TEP

Figure 2 – Project timeline

The existing Tangguh facilities are operated in accordance with the previous Tangguh AMDAL that was approved in 2002. In 2004, long term Sale and Purchase Agreements (SPAs) with foundation buyers were signed, which was a critical milestone for securing the final investment (FID) approval in 2005. Construction of Train 1 and 2 took place between 2005 and 2009. The start-up of existing facilities was in 2009 and Tangguh has been fully operational since July 2010. The Plan of Development II (POD II) for TEP was approved in 2012 by the Government of Indonesia. This prompted the development of a new environmental and social impact assessment (AMDAL) in 2012. The approval of the new AMDAL was obtained in July 2014. At the time of writing the present document, the project is preparing for FID approval. Construction is scheduled to start in the 3Q of 2016, with the intent of achieving first production in 2020.

Page 11 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

1.4.2 Tangguh Expansion Project The TEP scope consists of offshore and onshore developments. The new offshore facilities comprise two normally un-manned wellhead platforms (WDA and ROA) with interconnecting subsea pipelines to the onshore facility. The new onshore scope consists of:  1 x 3.8 mpta natural gas liquefaction train (Train 3).  A new Onshore Receiving Facility for the new pipeline. This will be tied into the existing ORF to provide flexibility of operation and allow co-mingling of gas supply from offshore fields to Trains 1, 2 and 3.  New combined LNG and condensate loading jetty.  Additional boil off gas (BOG) recovery facilities.  Utilities to supply Train 3.  A new dedicated wet/ dry flare system.  Treatment facilities for produced water, domestic waste water and a new integrated waste management facility for use during construction phase and subsequently by Operations.  Permanent buildings and infrastructure to support three (3) train Operations.  Temporary facilities for construction, including camps/accommodation facilities, access road, waste management facilities, laydown area, etc. The initial offshore scope consists of:  Two additional normally unattended installations, ROA and WDA  13 new development wells  Two subsea pipelines (29 km)  Onshore pipeline and pig receiver  Subsea power and fibre optic cabling (60 km) As described in the AMDAL (2014), Tangguh is also considering further expansion plans with the potential addition of platforms and a fourth gas liquefaction train (Train 4). These plans are not within scope of the present document. The system design life for the Train 3 facilities, platforms and pipeline is 25 years. Decommissioning is not currently considered as the facilities may be transferred to other operators at the end of the PSC obligations, while the offshore platforms and support facilities may be decommissioned and dismantled in accordance with Indonesian regulations and PSC obligations. Figure 3 shows an oblique view of the existing project overlain by the tentative location of planned developments. The initial offshore facilities are shown in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows a plot plan delineating the tentative location of the onshore and nearshore facilities.

Page 12 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 3 – Existing and planned project layout

Figure 4 – Offshore Development Plan Showing Existing and Planned Platforms for TEP Initial Phase

Page 13 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 5 – Tentative plot plan of onshore and nearshore facilities

Page 14 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

1.4.3 Alternatives Alternative design concepts and locations are considered in project planning. The first Tangguh development evaluated 17 different sites within 250 km of the gas fields, and finally narrowed down the list of candidate sites to two locations, old Tanah Merah and Saengga. The old Tanah Merah location was preferred to the Saengga location for its engineering, environmental, and cost factors, and was selected once it became clear that the villagers of old Tanah Merah were receptive to relocation and resettlement. The design of the existing facilities for Train 1 and 2 followed a minimum facilities option, in which the produced gas, condensate, and formation water would be transported from the platforms to an onshore LNG plant via dual pipelines, 22 km and 15 km, respectively, from platforms offshore. This option avoids the need to discharge produced water at the offshore platforms, and does not require power generation and accommodation facilities on the platforms. Tangguh has commited to commercial production levels that cannot be sustained without addition of more wells. Not proceeding with TEP would not be an option and this rules out a no-project alternative. For TEP, no alternative locations were considered because of the need to have the third train linked to the location of existing facilities. Expanding on the existing facilities, rather than developing a new site around Bintuni Bay, significantly reduces any potential environmental and social impacts. In addition, the existing design of the expansion has been modified to take into consideration local environmental and social conditions but within the constraints of health and safety requirements. It is not envisaged that land outside the current project site needs to be acquired. All onshore activities are located within the site perimeter, which comprises both brownfield and greenfield areas. The existing facilities will remain in operation during the construction of the plant. Process safety considerations and reliability of supply dictate the location and micro- siting of Train 3 and associated facilities within the overall site perimeter. This means that the project had to consider careful alignment of construction activities, material offloading, vessel access and navigational safety, and the location of temporary worker accommodation and other new facilities with existing operations. Different alternatives were investigated for project components with a major potential footprint, including the Bulk Offloading Facility, the combined LNG Condensate jetty, pipeline landfall and location of the worker accommodation, laydown areas, LNG train, pig receiver and waste management facility. The additional facilities are carefully positioned in proximity of the existing facilities, avoiding the most difficult and often environmentally sensitive terrain, whilst taking into consideration:  Process safety buffers. Any living accommodation will need to be located outside the modelled 30 mbar blast overpressure contour line to avoid risk to a large construction workforce.  Cut and fill volumes. Cut and fill is needed to level grounds prior to construction. Cut and fill volumes need to be balanced, with the added benefit of being able to avoid unnecessary sourcing of fill material from outside the project area.  Geotechnical data on the ground conditions, site and natural drainage.  Connection with and continued use of existing facilities.

Page 15 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Design standards. The facilities will need to meet certain engineering or design standards, which results in a minimally required footprint.  Pipeline landfall and navigational safety, avoiding risk of dropped objects or anchor damage of subsea pipeline, and allowing continued safe navigation at the existing and planned jetties and BOF. Where practically possible, the new facilities will be located on previously disturbed land so as to avoid any unnecessary loss of natural habitat. Options to reposition the planned facilities on the basis of environmental grounds are very limited without compromising fundamental safety or design requirements. Given the constraints highlighted above, it has been deemed necessary to clear an area of vegetation within the overall site perimeter. Offshore infrastructure (wells, jack-up rigs and subsea pipelines) and associated activities (e.g. dredging) avoid sensitive habitat. The dredge disposal areas were designated by the Indonesian government, using deeper areas of Teluk Berau and Bintuni away from sensitive habitats. Selection of construction method depends on a variety of considerations, the most important being soil conditions and properties and access to site. For the landfall of the Train 3 pipeline, horizontal directional drilling (HDD) is selected over trenching and shore pull, minimizing the footprint and loss of mangrove habitat. The pipeline and cable shore crossing method for TEP is using HDD, drilling underneath the mangrove fringe habitat over a total length of 2.1 km. Dredging is necessary to construct the Bulk Offloading Facility and the LNG and condensate jetty. Four locations were considered for the Bulk Offloading Facility, and the selected option avoids sensitive mangrove habitat and interference with plant operating areas. The existing construction jetty will be enhanced, thus preventing the need for an additional jetty intersecting with sensitive shoreline habitat. Although some initial capital dredging and subsequent maintenance is required to achieve navigational depths, the use of trestle structure for the jetty and enhancement of the existing construction jetty minimizes dredging and capital maintenance.

1.5 Structure of this Document Figure 6 illustrates the structure of the present document. The first two chapters introduce the project and the scope of the critical habitat assessment and biodiversity action plan. This is followed by a chapter summarising the legislative framework as it applies to biodiversity-related issues in Indonesia and the project. Chapter four establishes the baseline information, highlighting what biodiversity is potentially present in the wider study area in which the project is located, with emphasis on the biodiversity features of conservation concern. The critical habitat assessment in chapter five evaluates these features of conservation concern, and narrows these down to a list of priority species and associated habitats. Chapter six evaluates the impact on these priority species culminating in a list of mitigation measures for further consideration in the biodiversity action plan, which is discussed in the final chapter seven.

Page 16 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 6 – Structure of this document

Page 17 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

2 Scope and Objectives

2.1 Project Scope The project under consideration includes all impacts from the planned expansion of the Tangguh development, including the construction, commissioning and operations phase as described in Chapter 1. The existing Tangguh operation, of which the original AMDAL was approved in 2002, is not subject to the critical habitat assessment, except in those situations where consideration of the cumulative impact of both the existing and planned operations on a common receptor is warranted. This study does not cover the decommissioning phase as the facilities may be handed over to others at the end of the PSC period. The potential for biodiversity impacts will be addressed during planning of any decommissioning activity against the environmental assessment and planning requirements in place at the time. This document only considers those project activities and impacts over which Tangguh and its project partners have control or influence.

2.2 Scope of this Report The purpose of this report is to demonstrate that the planned activities of the project meet the requirements of both the ADB Safeguard Policy (2009) and the IFC Performance Standard 6 (IFC, 2012). This report specifically includes:  A biodiversity baseline, which provides complementary information to the baseline included in the AMDAL;  The identification of priority species and habitats for conservation and a critical habitat assessment;  An assessment of the potential impact of the planned project activities on critical habitats, and;  A draft biodiversity action plan to ensure that the project aims to achieve a no net loss in biodiversity. In accordance with the ADB Safeguard Policy (2009), the project should be able to demonstrate that no project activity will be implemented in areas of critical habitat unless the following requirements are met: (i) There are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat which could impair its high biodiversity value or the ability to function. (ii) The project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species or a loss in area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem be compromised. (iii) Any lesser impacts are mitigated. The ADB Environmental Safeguards Good Practice Sourcebook (ADB, 2012) states that for projects with potential biodiversity impacts and risks (e.g. involving critical habitats), the development of a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) or its equivalent may be appropriate.

Page 18 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

2.3 Aim and Objectives The overall aim of the project is to achieve a no net loss in biodiversity. This will be facilitated by applying the mitigation hierarchy (Figure 7) and ensure that the project undertakes appropriate measures to protect and conserve biodiversity in the long- term.

Figure 7 – Applying the Mitigation Hierarchy to achieve No Net Loss

2.3.1 Application of the Mitigation Hierarchy The mitigation hierarchy is a tool designed to help manage potential impacts to biodiversity (CSBI, 2015) which involves the application of four key actions:  Avoidance – measures taken to anticipate and prevent adverse impacts on biodiversity before actions or decisions are taken that could lead to biodiversity impacts.  Minimization –measures taken to reduce the duration, intensity, significance and/or extent of impacts that cannot be completely avoided.  Restoration – measures taken to repair degradation or damage to specific biodiversity features and ecosystem services of concern following project impacts that cannot be completely avoided or minimized.  Offsets – measureable conservation outcomes resulting from actions applied to areas not impacted by the project that compensate for significant adverse impacts of a project that cannot be avoided, minimized and/or restored. The overall purpose of the mitigation hierarchy is to ensure that a project first aims to avoid any potential impacts to biodiversity and only undertakes restoration or offset measures if impacts cannot be managed from preventative measures alone (Figure 8).

Page 19 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

(Source: CSBI, 2015)

Figure 8 – The Four Key Actions in the Mitigation Hierarchy

Throughout the project, and as demonstrated in this report, Tangguh has applied the mitigation hierarchy with the aim of achieving no net loss in biodiversity. Details on the specific mitigation measures are described in Chapter 6 and then covered in the Biodiversity Action Plan.

2.3.2 Development of the Biodiversity Action Plan Due to the potential for the project to have an impact on biodiversity, a detailed biodiversity action plan (BAP) will be formulated. The BAP will provide details on the management actions and mitigation measures which will be applied by the project to ensure that the project aims to achieve in the longer-term a no net loss in biodiversity. The objectives of the BAP are to:  Identify the priority species and habitats for conservation.  Detail the mitigation measures and management actions which will be undertaken before, during and after the construction of the project.  Undertake a series of additional conservation actions to raise environmental awareness.  Establish a monitoring and evaluation programme to determine the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. The BAP for the Tangguh Expansion Project is provided in Chapter 7. This BAP includes the actions which will be undertaken to ensure that the objectives, as listed above, will be completed. The Tangguh BAP (2016), as outlined in Chapter 7, will replace the previous Tangguh BAP (dated 2003). Actions and mitigation measures in the original 2003 BAP will be incorporated into the new BAP. The BAP will be valid for five years, after which the objectives and actions of the BAP will be reviewed. The BAP is structured in line with Annex A of the IFC Guidance Note 6 (IFC, 2012b) and the IPIECA Guide to developing biodiversity action plans (IPIECA/OGP, 2005).

Page 20 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

3 Policy and Regulatory Framework

The purpose of this section is to highlight the legal and regulatory framework that governs conservation of biodiversity and protected species in Indonesia. It further explains how certain legislation relates to the Tangguh development.

3.1 International Conventions The Republic of Indonesia has ratified the following international laws and conventions that aim to protect biodiversity:  Convention on Biological Diversity.  Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from Their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity.  Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity.  Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

3.2 National Legislative and Policy Framework The structure of the Indonesian legal system can be viewed as a pyramid. Under Law No.12 of 2011, the Indonesian regulatory hierarchy starts with the 1945 Constitution, of 1945 as the highest law, and followed in sequential order by:  Law/Acts of Parliament (‘Undang-Undang’; UU).  Resolution of People’s Consultative Assembly (‘Ketetapan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat’/TAP MPR).  Law (‘Undang-Undang’; UU)/Government Regulation In Lieu of Law (‘Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang Undang’/Perpu).  Government Regulations (‘Peraturan Pemerintah’; PP).  Presidential Regulation (‘Peraturan Presiden’; PerPres).  Local Regulations (‘Peraturan Daerah’; PerDa). Ministers may issue Ministerial Regulations (‘Peraturan Menteri’) in order to assist the President in the implementation of a higher rank of laws; and regional regulations may be issued at the Province/Regency/City level (Peraturan Daerah). Land in Indonesia is classified into two main uses, Forest Areas and Non-Forest Areas (Area Penggunaan Lain/Land allocated for other purposes, or APL). Forest Areas come under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), with conservation and forestry laws providing the basis for issuing permits for management of forests areas and changes in forest functions. Land allocated for other purposes falls under the jurisdiction of the National Land Agency, with the Agrarian/Land Law providing the basis for issuing land titles and changes on land titles. With appropriate approvals, a forest area can be converted to ‘land allocated for other purposes’, and vice versa. The former occurred when Tangguh obtained the Forestry Release Decree for the Tangguh development site through a Ministry of Forestry Approval SK No. 287/MENHUT-II/2004, received on August 5th, 2004. The Ministry agreed to release an

Page 21 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

area of 3,380.10ha from Forestry Area for the Tangguh LNG Project Site as a result of the fulfilment of obligations stipulated in Principal Approval SK No. 52/MENHUT- VIII/2001 from the Ministry of Forestry. The National Land Agency issued a ‘Hak Pakai’ Land Title over the forestry-released area. The 1999 Law on Regional Autonomy and Decentralisation (1999) gives provinces and districts major roles, tasks and responsibilities in development planning, implementation and management of natural resources management. The management and conservation of biodiversity now rests largely with these and lower levels of government, including biodiversity management and conservation. However, with Law No. 23/ of 2014 on Local Government, the provincial level governments are given additional responsibilities from the regency governments, including responsibility for forest governance. For Teluk Bintuni Bay Regency, the administrative area where Tangguh LNG is located, forest management is still handled by the Regency as an extended arm of the provincial government. This is because the full implementation of Law No. 23/2014 for Teluk Bintuni Regency is still being prepared. Spatial planning for coastal areas, small islands, fisheries and seas are under the authority of the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) based on President Regulation No.63/2015 issued on May 25th, 2015. However, Tangguh does not hold any permit from MMAF as this regulation is yet to be fully implemented at the time of writing this report. Marine related activities such as vessels and special port activities are controlled by the Directorate General of Sea Transportation in the Ministry of Transportation. While the limitation and prohibition of entering certain marine zones in the Tangguh area within the Indonesia sea areais set by the Directorate General of Oil and Gas through Letter No:23102/18.03/DMT/2008.

3.2.1 Environmental Law Law No. 32/2009, on Environmental Management and Protection, can be considered the umbrella law for the majority of other natural resource/environment-related laws in Indonesia. Law 32/2009 includes articles designed to:  Anticipate and account for global environmental issues.  Support sustainable development and the sustainable use of natural resources.  Protect the environment as a human right.  Ensure the protection of living resources and their ecosystems, including the prevention of pollution, waste and the preservation of environmental functions. The law regulates planning, utilization, control, maintenance, supervision, and law enforcement through litigation, and non-litigation based mechanisms (e.g., environmental conflict resolution).

3.2.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Legislation Environmental impact assessment is regulated through Government Regulation No. 27/2012 on Environmental Licenses. This is a subsidiary regulation under Law No. 32/2009 on Environmental Protection and Management and Protection. Under this regulation, projects are either classified as:

Page 22 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Requiring an environmental impact analysis (Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan, or AMDAL).  Subject to environmental management and environment monitoring efforts (Upaya Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup dan Upaya Pemantauan Lingkungan Hidup, or UKL-UPL).  Requiring a letter of commitment for environmental management and monitoring (Surat Pernyataan Kesanggupan Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan Hidup, or SPPL). The AMDAL is a study of the potential significant impacts on the environment of a proposed business activity, while the UKL-UPL covers monitoring and management efforts undertaken for business activities which are not likely to have significant impact on the environment. The SPPL is for smaller business activities which do not require UKL-UPL due to their scale. In addition, any business activities that require an AMDAL or UKL-UPL need to acquire an Environmental License, which can only be obtained following the completion of the AMDAL or UKL-UPL assessments. The approval process of an environmental licence involves three stages.  Drafting an AMDAL or UKL-UPL.  Evaluation of the AMDAL or UKL-UPL, and obtaining an AMDAL approval or UKL-UPL recommendation.  Application for an Environmental Licence. The application of the Environmental Licence is submitted to the relevant level of government; either at the national level with the Minister for the Environment, the provincial level with the relevant governor, or at regency/city level where the Project is located. An AMDAL document must be prepared by a certified AMDAL consultant, and shall consist of:  A Terms of Reference.  Environmental Impact Statement (ANDAL).  Environmental Management and Environmental Monitoring Plan (RKL-RPL). The AMDAL process requires identification of the environmental and nature conservation values, and proposes management activities to avoid adverse impacts on these values. As part of the AMDAL documents, an activities plan must be prepared and publicly announced. The public is given time to provide feedback on the activities plan. The AMDAL is evaluated by the AMDAL Evaluation Commission (Komisi Penilai AMDAL) established at the relevant level of government, which will issue a recommendation to that government. The holder of an Environmental Licence must:  Comply with the terms and conditions of the licence.  Report on compliance with the terms and conditions every 6 months.  Provide collateral funds for any potential environmental restoration.

Page 23 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Up to 2014, Tangguh LNG operated under an Integrated AMDAL (AMDAL, 2002). In 2014, a new AMDAL (AMDAL, 2014) was approved through a Letter of Decision on Environmental Appropriateness No. 011.20.07 issued by the Ministry of Environment. The AMDAL 2014 includes an assessment of the potential impact and appropriate mitigation measures for Tangguh's existing and planned activities.

3.2.3 Conservation and Forestry Laws The Government of Indonesia have put in place regulations directly or indirectly related to protected area management and species conservation. The most important of those regulations is Law No. 5/1990 on the Conservation of Living Natural Resources and its Ecosystem. This law aims to ensure the sustainable use of natural resources to support human welfare and quality of life. It regulates the preservation and conservation of flora and fauna, ecosystems, conservation areas, the sustainable use of natural resources, and describes the investigation process, penalties, and sanctions for crimes established in the law. In the law, Nature Conservation Areas (‘Kawasan Pelestarian Alam’; KPA) consist of National Parks (‘Taman Nasional’; TN), Forest Parks (‘Taman Hutan Rakyat’; THR), and Natural Tourism Parks (‘Taman Wisata Alam’; TWA). There are a number of subsidiary government regulations relevant to the proposed project, which includes:  GR No.7/1999 on Plant and Animal Preservation, which defines protected species of flora and fauna and their habitats.  GR No.8/1999 on Wildlife Utilization, which provides rules on wildlife utilization for commercial purposes (breeding, trade, commercial exhibition, and cultivation of medicinal plants) and utilization for non-commercial purposes (research and non-commercial exhibition).  GR No.13/1994 on Wildlife Hunting, which regulates the hunting of targeted unprotected wildlife.  GR No.28/2011 on Management of Sanctuary Reserve and Nature Conservation Area, which regulates the preservation and optimal utilization of wildlife and its ecosystems in nature conservation areas and sanctuary reserves. Law No. 41/1999 on Forestry establishes good forestry governance by considering and combining forest utilization and forest conservation. The law also accounts for the needs of local peoples in these processes, and to clarify the investigation procedures, penalties and sanctions, and promote transparency. One of the judicial reviews of this law focused on the process of establishing and gazetting forest boundaries and the recognition of adat forest (customary forest owned by indigenous people) as non-state forest. There are a number of regulations that derive from Law No.41/1999, including:  GR No. 45/2004 on Forest Protection, which includes implementation of forest protection, protecting the forest from fire, and penalties and sanctions for contravening the government regulation.  GR No. 6/2007 on Forest Management Plan, Forest Use, and Forest Area Management, which governs the use of state forests and establishes the

Page 24 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

procedures for obtaining permits from the provincial and central governments for forest use activities. State forests are generally grouped into three types: Nature Conservation Area, Natural Sanctuary Area, and Production Forest (Hutan Produksi).  Law No. 18/2013 on Prevention and Eradication Forest Destruction, which is designed to prevent and eradicate organized crimes related to forestry issues, including but not limited to illegal logging, mining, plantations and other forms of illegal forest exploitation. The Tangguh LNG Site was initially a production forest area that was converted through an approval from the Ministry of Forestry SK No. 287/MENHUT-II/2004. The entire Tangguh site covers 3,266ha, of which 404ha has been converted to accommodate the existing Tangguh facilties. The remaining areas within the site which have not been developed are known as the “buffer zone”. Law No. 32/2009 on Protection and Management of the Environment referred to in Section 3.2.2 also includes provisions for the planning of protection and management of the environment. This includes the preparation of environmental inventories, determination of eco-regional areas and preparation of Environmental Protection and Management Plans (‘Rencana Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup’; RPPLH). Protection from alien invasive species, i.e. species whose introduction and/or spread outside their natural past or present distribution threatens biological diversity, is provided under Law No.16/1992 on Plant, Fish and Animal Quarantine. This law addresses Indonesian quarantine requirements, defines vectors and pests, characterizes the actions and investigation processes to be taken, and lists penalties and fines.

3.2.4 Marine and Fisheries Laws Law No. 27/2007, in conjunction with Law 1/2014 on Management of Coastal Areas and Small Islands. The purpose of this law is to protect, conserve, rehabilitate, use, and enrich resources in coastal areas and small islands in a sustainable way, as well as empower communities living in coastal areas and small islands. Law No. 31/2004 in conjunction with Law No.45/2009 on Fisheries. This law focuses on marine and freshwater areas, including rivers, lakes, and swamps; and gives the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) the authority to declare protected fish species, control the fish trade, and manage waters/wetland conservation areas. The law also regulates commercial aspects of Indonesian fisheries, including the declaration of protected fisheries; and allowable catch quotas, fish sizes, and the number of permitted vessels. Law No. 32/2014: on Marine. This law covers the ocean in accordance with Indonesian sovereignty to the continental shelf, and regulates the management and utilization of marine resources.

3.2.5 Species Protection and Trade Indonesia is party to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). In this convention, wild plants and animals which can be traded between countries are categorized into the following appendices:  Appendix I is a group of wild plants and animals which cannot be traded. Only artificially propagated species may be traded.

Page 25 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Appendix II is a group of wild plants and animals not threatened by trading activities, which trade is controlled through quotas.  Appendix III is a group of wild plants and animals prohibited to be traded due to the request of a member state. This prohibition applies only in the requester’s country. Law No. 5/1990, on Conservation of Living Resources and their Ecosystems is the principal legislation for CITES implementation in Indonesia, including the subsidiary regulations listed under Section 3.2.3. At the heart of the regulatory framework is Government Regulation No.7/1999, which provides the list of protected species in Indonesia. The list covers 294 species or species groups, including:  70 species or species groups of mammals, including cetaceans.  93 species or species groups of birds  31 reptiles including monitor lizards, gavials and crocodiles, some pythons, some freshwater and land turtles, all sea turtles, sailfin lizards  20 insect groups including all butterflies  7 fish species or species groups including sawfishes (Pritis spp.)  1 coral species, which is the black coral  14 species of mollusc, including clams, nautilus, giant triton, coconut crab.  58 plant species including orchids, rafflesia, pitcher plants and dipterocarps. Species of plants and animals that are legally protected are further separated into those considered in danger of extinction and those whose populations are rare. For protected species, it is prohibited to:  Take, cut, possess, damage, destroy, maintain, transport, sell or purchase any plant, or part of a plant, whether alive or dead;  Move protected plants, animals or parts thereof within Indonesia or outside of Indonesia, whether alive or dead;  Capture, injure, kill, keep, possess, maintain, transport, sell or purchase a protected species, alive or dead, whole or parts thereof, eggs and/or nests. For the purpose of this Tangguh Biodiversity Action Plan, any protected species under Government Regulation No.7/1999 is considered a species of conservation concern.

3.2.6 Biodiversity and Species Action Plans Indonesia has a 2003-2020 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (Strategi dan Rencana Aksi Keanekaragaman Hayati Nasional, or IBSAP) in place (IBSAP, 2002). This replaced the earlier Biodiversity Action Plan for Indonesia (BAPI) issued in 1993. The IBSAP provides a framework for meeting Indonesia’s obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity to develop national strategies, plans, or programmes for the conservation and sustainable utilization of biological diversity. A revised IBSAP document was issued in early 2016 by KPPN/BAPPENAS that includes a strategic plan and an action plan for biodiversity conservation management, including performance indicators, and potential partners to implement the programme (IBSAP, 2016). The IBSAP provides an outline for how this biodiversity can be used sustainably to improve the economic and development opportunities for Indonesia and

Page 26 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

assist with the nation’s economic independence. The document highlights four strategies:  Recognition of biodiversity as the basic capital of national development,  Improvement of conservation and restoration of biodiversity,  Management of biodiversity through development of science and technology, policy, and capacity building of human resources, institutional strengthening and budgeting, and  Management of biodiversity in national development activities and various aspects of societal welfare. This Tangguh Biodiversity Action Plan seeks to be consistent with, and supportive of the IBSAP. In addition to the general action plans, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry has also issued conservation strategies and action plans for several priority species. Conservation Action Plans have been prepared for Sumatran Rhino, Sumatran Tiger, Elephant, Orang-utan, Banteng, Anoa, Babirusa, Tapir and the Javan Hawk-Eagle. These documents act as a reference and guidelines for parties interested in the conservation of these species. None of these species are present in Papua Barat. The need to conserve biodiversity is also recognised in the overall Sectoral Medium- Term National Development Plan (five-year-action plan) for 2015-2019 (KPPN, 2014) with priorities on forest management reform, conserving biodiversity, strengthening the rights of forest-dependent local communities and law enforcement measures. The Teluk Bintuni Regency has set up spatial plannng for the area through Regional Regulation of Teluk Bintuni Regency No. 4 /2012 which includes strategies to maintain and improve the ecosystem balance and biodiversity.

3.3 ADB Safeguard Policy Statement The ADB Safeguards Policy Statement (ADB, 2009) covers environmental and social safeguards of ADB's operations. It includes a set of specific safeguard requirements that borrowers/clients are required to meet in addressing environmental and social impacts and risks. The objectives of ADB’s safeguards are to:  avoid adverse impacts of projects on the environment and affected people, where possible.  minimize, mitigate, and/or compensate for adverse project impacts on the environment and affected people when avoidance is impossible.  help borrowers/clients to strengthen their safeguard systems and develop the capacity to manage environmental and social risks. Under the Safeguards Policy, all projects, including an upgrade or expansion of existing facilities that are likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts that are irreversible, diverse, or unprecedented correspond to Category A Projects. These require a thorough environmental impact assessment (EIA), including development of an environmental management plan (EMP). The AMDAL (2014) and associated RKL-RPL in principle meet these requirements, with the exception of an assessment of critical habitat. Projects seeking financing through the ADB should undertake a critical habitat assessment.

Page 27 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

In accordance with the ADB SPS, no project activity is permitted in areas of critical habitat unless:  There are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat that could impair its high biodiversity value or ability to function;  The project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species, or a loss in the area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem will be compromised; and  Any lesser impacts are mitigated to achieve at least no net loss of biodiversity. For projects with potential biodiversity impacts and risks (e.g. involving critical habitats), ADB requests the development of a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) or equivalent.

3.4 IFC Performance Standards Commercial banks that subscribe to the Equator Principles (Equator Principles, 2013) have adopted a financial industry benchmark for determining, assessing and managing environmental and social risk in projects. For a large project in Indonesia, this implies that the commercial banks will assess the compliance of the project with the Performance Standards of the IFC and World Bank Group Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines. IFC has adopted a set of Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (IFC, 2012a). IFC expects that each client will employ methods best suited to its business to meet the requirements of the Performance Standards. Consistent with the client’s policy and the objectives and principles described therein, the client will establish management programmes that, in sum, will describe mitigation and performance improvement measures and actions that address the identified environmental and social risks and impacts of the project. IFC Performance Standard 6 differentiates between modified and natural habitats, each with different requirements around mitigation. A subset of both habitat types is so-called critical habitat which because of applicable qualifying criteria, is accorded the highest biodiversity value. In areas of critical habitat, the client will not implement any project activities unless all of the following are demonstrated:  No other viable alternatives within the region exist for development of the project on modified or natural habitats that are not critical;  The project does not lead to measurable adverse impacts on those biodiversity values for which the critical habitat was designated, and on the ecological processes supporting those biodiversity values;  The project does not lead to a net reduction in the global and/or national/regional population of any Critically Endangered or Endangered species over a reasonable period of time; and  A robust, appropriately designed, and long-term biodiversity monitoring and evaluation program is integrated into the client’s management program. Where a client is able to meet these requirements, the project’s mitigation strategy will be described in a Biodiversity Action Plan.

Page 28 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

4 Biodiversity Baseline

For its existing operations, Tangguh is committed to biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources as described in the original Biodiversity Action Plan (Tangguh, 2003) and AMDAL (2002).

As part of the BAP and AMDAL commitment, since 2000 Tangguh has regularly conducted flora and fauna surveys in its buffer zone area and marine mammal survey in the surrounding Teluk Bintuni.

As a continuation of the 2003 BAP, the commitment to regularly conduct flora, fauna and marine mammal surveys in the area has been included in the new AMDAL as one of the key elements of biodiversity management.

This chapter outlines the important biodiversity features in the study area. For a detailed description of the physical and biological environment, the reader is referred to survey reports and AMDAL documents (AMDAL, 2002; AMDAL, 2014).

4.1 Methodology

4.1.1 Study Area For the purpose of this assessment, an overall study area has been defined that is presented in Figure 9. The study area represents an area of land and seascape around the project that has been chosen to be sufficiently large so as to cover the population of the majority of species or ecological boundaries. The boundary of the study area is not fixed, but rather encompasses an area within which important ecological processes most strongly interact. This is based on the following ecological premises:  In terms of seascape, the area includes any home ranges of marine and estuarine animals likely present in Bintuni Bay, excluding vagrant species.  The area includes the lower reaches of tributary rivers and creeks into Bintuni Bay, noting that these may be used by estuarine specialists, i.e. fish and reptile species that reside in and migrate between the creeks and Bintuni Bay. In terms of landscape, it includes ‘contiguous’ zones of lowland, freshwater swamp and mangrove forest that can reasonably be expected to offer habitat and ecological connectivity for populations of terrestrial, coastal and freshwater flora and fauna potentially present near the project. Habitat connectivity is defined as the connectedness between patches of suitable habitat for a given individual species. Ecological connectivity is the connectedness of ecological processes across multiple scales, including trophic relationships, disturbance processes and hydro-ecological flows (Fisher and Lindenmayer, 2007, Pulsford et al., 2015).

Page 29 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 9 – Study area

Page 30 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

4.1.2 Desktop Information In addition to data collated specifically for the AMDAL documents in 2002 and 2014 and associated surveys, a number of secondary sources of information were consulted. These include:  Fishbase: http://www.fishbase.org/search.php  Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool: https://www.ibatforbusiness.org/  IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: http://www.iucnredlist.org/  BirdLife International Data: http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/home  World Wildlife Fund Global Ecoregions: http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/ecoregions/ecoregion_list/  Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) - Biodiversity Hotspots: http://www.cepf.net/Pages/default.aspx  World Database on Protected Areas: http://www.protectedplanet.net/  Republic of Indonesia - List of protected species PP 7/1999: http://www.hukumonline.com/pusatdata/download/fl359/node/250  Scientific literature These sources of information were used to identify any nature conservation areas (existing or proposed) and areas of high biodiversity within or near the study area.

4.1.3 Field Surveys Tangguh commissioned a number of surveys in the study area. A list of the various surveys conducted is presented in Table 2, and a description of each of the surveys is provided in Annex A.1.

Page 31 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 2 – List of biodiversity surveys commissioned by Tangguh

Abbreviated name1 Full title Period of survey

Marine survey 2004 Study on Sustainable Fisheries in Teluk Jan – Oct 2004 Bintuni Marine survey 2005 Bintuni Bay Rapid Ecological Assessment Sep – Nov 2005 (REA): Marine Mammals and Marine Reptiles Marine Survey 2007 Study on Sustainable Fishery at Bintuni Bay, Jun – Dec 2007 West Papua Marine Survey 2009 Fisheries Study to Update Basic Information Jun – Jul 2009 of Tangguh LNG Project Marine Survey 2013 Fisheries, Marine Mammals & Reptiles and Mar 2013 – Jan 2014 Mangrove Ecosystem Studies in Bintuni Bay Regency Terrestrial Survey 2000 Baseline studies for AMDAL Sep – Oct 2000 Terrestrial Survey 2002 Flora and Fauna Survey of The Tangguh LNG Feb – Apr 2002 Site Papua Province, Indonesia Terrestrial Survey 2007 Flora Fauna Survey of The Tangguh LNG Jul – Aug 2007 Project Site Bintuni Bay West Papua Indonesia Terrestrial Survey 2011 Flora & Fauna Observation in The Buffer Sep 2011 – Jan 2012 Zone of Tangguh LNG Teluk Bintuni Regency, West Papua Terrestrial Survey 2016 Flora Fauna Survey for Tangguh Operation Dec 2015 – Feb 2016 Notes: 1. The abbreviated name is used to reference the survey throughout the document.

For the purpose of this assessment the species records of all individual surveys have been combined with the view that species present during one year, although not detected during other surveys, may still be potentially present in the area.

4.1.4 Sensitivity Mapping In 2013, Tangguh commissioned a sensitivity mapping study for the purposes of oil spill response and planning (Tangguh, 2013). This study identified and analysed the biological and socio-economic and cultural sensitivity of resources in the wider Bintuni Bay area. The sensitivity of biological features was ranked based on secondary information on habitats, species and protected areas, using a systematic classification system that assigns the highest sensitivity to those habitats of species that are protected at the national level, vulnerable to oil/condensate when exposed, and listed on the IUCN Red List of Threatened species. For the purpose of this Critical Habitat Assessment, the sensitivity map is used to assist in the review of the potential impacts of unintended releases of oil / condensate on high biodiversity value resources.

4.1.5 Stakeholder Engagement on Biodiversity Values Prior to the establishment of the first Tangguh development, biodiversity studies and extensive consultation were carried out to establish a suitable area for the project facilities, with the intent to avoid and minimize biodiversity, socio-economic and

Page 32 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

cultural impacts in the area. The selected area and subsequent conservation actions aligned with the priorities for biodiversity conservation as established by the existing in-country network of conservation organizations, global conservation groups, academic institutions and/or the local/national government (AMDAL, 2002). The resulting choice of project area reflects this consultation. Local communities were an integral part of the earlier consultation, with one village, Tanah Merah, giving up their customary land rights for an alternative plot of land near the mouth of the Saengga River (West of the project site). In providing support to this and other villages potentially affected by the project, Tangguh maintained a level of engagement that provided these communities with a mechanism to voice their concerns over biodiversity and ecosystem services as it affects their livelihoods and cultural existence. The communities were also consulted on the plans for the Tangguh Expansion Project (AMDAL, 2014) and took active part in the various biodiversity surveys that have been carried out in the past. Further details are provided in Section 7.2.

4.2 Environmental Setting

4.2.1 Physiography The study area is divided into three broadly defined physiographic regions: North Plain (Bird’s Head Peninsula), Bomberai Plain (Peninsula) and Berau/Bintuni bay environment. Figure 10 below provides an overview of the geographic features in the study area. North Plain is composed of lowland mangrove, palm/palmetto, and sago swamps. The surface area has very low relief, with elevations generally ranging from sea level to 2 m above sea level. Soils are Quaternary-age (Recent) alluvium, which is still undergoing depositional processes. Bomberai Plain consists of low-lying coastal alluvial plain and savannah with interspersed low-lying bedrock hills. The Bedidi and Bomberai are the two major rivers that drain the Bomberai Plain; with combined catchment areas of about 1.9 x 103 km2 and average annual flow rates in the order of 100 m3/s. The smaller Saengga River is the river nearest to the Tangguh LNG site. It drains into Teluk Berau just to the west of the development area. Berau/Bintuni bay appears to have formed by the tectonic subsidence of an ancient river valley. The Bay is generally described as shallow, though water depths in the centre of the Bay are 65 to 70 m.

Page 33 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 10 – Geographical Features within the Study Area

Page 34 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

4.2.2 Main Habitats Detailed information about the original terrestrial and coastal habitats present in the area is presented in AMDAL (2002), AMDAL (2014) and the survey reports. The reader is referred to these studies for a full description of the environment. The information presented here refers to the actual project site and immediate surrounding area. The principal terrestrial and coastal habitats in the study area are: lowland tropical forest, beach forest, savannah, mangrove, and Nypa-Metroxylon (nipah-sago) swamp forest (AMDAL, 2002). All of these habitats, except the anthropogenic savannah patches, can be considered natural, dominated by the original vegetation types present in the area. Since construction of the first Tangguh LNG Project started, an area of 404ha was transformed into modified habitat, largely hard standing with industrial facilities, housing, or regularly maintained grassy corridors or land, and a few roads. The resettlement of the old village of Tanah Merah to the banks of the Saengga river mouth also transformed natural land to modified habitat, mostly for accommodation and small-scale agriculture. Based on soil characteristics, moisture and dominant vegetation, this disturbed land can be classified as savannah habitat. The habitat types of palm/palmetto and sago swamps that are only present on the North Plain, and the highland rainforest habitats of higher elevations are not included in this analysis. A brief description of the main habitats, taken from the Terrestrial Survey report (2002) and AMDAL (2002), is provided below. Lowland forest Lowland forest, also referred to as dryland forest by the Ministry of Forestry, covers most of the project area on non-flooded ground between the drainages of the Saengga and Manggosa Rivers. The lowland forest is represented by canopy and sub-canopy layers with relatively high biodiversity in woody plants (trees) and vines. The canopy, which typically is 25 to 30 m in height with trunk diameters of 75 to 100 cm, presents a diverse array of arboreal families, including the canopy dominant Leguminosae, Dipterocarpaceae, Araucariaceae, Lecythidaceae, Sapotaceae, Moraceae, and others. At the canopy level, notable dominant timber species include Agathis sp., Calophyllum inophyllum, and Eugenia malaccensis. Plot data indicate that these species attain high relative densities. Occasional emergent trees occur above the canopy to heights of 50 m. Sub-canopy strata include several layers, with a notably mixed composition of understory trees, where juveniles of canopy trees such as Agathis sp. and Calophyllum sp. are present in high relative densities. Other species typical of the sub-canopy layer include the palm Calamus sp. and saplings of the canopy trees Intsia bijuga and Calophyllum inophyllum. The forest understory is variable in structure and composition, ranging from open through dense stands with high stem densities. Gaps, openings in the forest canopy, are common and typically colonized by Macaranga species (Euphorbiaceae) and the important timber tree Pometia pinnata (Sapindaceae), both early successional species. Dendrocalamus bamboo swale also occurs in gap areas of the forest, often dominating clearings and the forest understory in patches. Dominant and speciose plant families in the lowland forest include Anacardiaceae, Annonaceae, Apocynaceae, Burseraceae, Dipterocarpaceae, Ebenaceae,

Page 35 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Euphorbiaceae, Guttiferae (Clusiaceae), Leguminosae, Meliaceae, Myristicaceae, Myrtaceae, Orchidaceae, Palmae, Pandanaceae, Rhizophoraceae, Rubiaceae, Sapindaceae, Sapotaceae, and Sterculiaceae. All of these taxa are predominantly tropical in nature. A typical lowland tropical forest community is shown in Figure 11-A.

Note: A: Lowland Forest; B: Savannah; C: Beach Forest; D: Swamp Forest; E: Mangrove

Figure 11 – Photos of main habitat types

Savannah The savannah patches are characteristic of the project area are dominated by a sparse cover of trees and shrubs. The vegetation includes specialist taxa typical of grassland- savannah habitat (e.g. species in the Genus Baeckia, Keraudrenia, Melaleuca and Xyris) which are not found in the adjacent forest nor associated with the lowland rainforest. The trees that grow in savannah patches are a Eucalyptus sp. and a Chenopodium sp. In terms of dominance of the sparse arboreal vegetation cover, Meulaleuca leucodedendron and a Chenopodium species characterize this layer. Saplings of these tree species are common. A distinctive and sparse shrub layer also exists and is dominated by Melastoma malabatricum. The herbaceous cover in the savannah community is represented by several dominant species including a Lycopodium species (a club moss fern), the grass genera Digitaria and Eragrostis, the sedges in the genera Fimbristylis, Kyllinga, and Cyperus, various common herbs in the genera Melastoma and Lindernia, and the abundant true fern, Nephrolepis sp.. Imperata cylindrica is common in larger grass patches. This grass species is widespread throughout paleotropical grasslands and is a reliable indicator of frequently burned areas, evidence of the anthropogenic origins. Also characteristic and abundant in the savannah is the insectivorous plant Nepenthes spp. (pitcher plants), sometimes forming large though localized patches. Plot studies in both dry and wet seasons show also that at the lowest structural level in savannah, seedlings of the tree species Melaleuca, Casuarina, and Eucalyptus present high levels of regeneration. A typical savannah forest community is shown in Figure 11-B.

Page 36 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Beach Forest Beach forest is a localized vegetation type that occurs on sandy, typically non- inundated soil behind mangrove forest on the sea front. The seaward community structure of this forest is characterized by low scrub vegetation of Ipomoea pescaprae and other species. Trees species characteristic of this formation include Hibiscus tiliaceus, Pometia pinnata, Inocarpus sp., Mangifera sp., Alstonia scholaris, Cerberra odollam, and Ficus sp. Several of the tree species occur in moderately abundant numbers, such as Pometia pinnata, Calophyllum inophyllum, and Alstonia scholaris, all of which are important regional timber species (Figure 11-C). The understory of beach forest is characterized by a high sapling density of the following tree species: Eugenia malaccensis, Pandanus tectorius, Calamus sp., and Calophyllum soulatri. Fresh Water Nypa-Metroxylon Palm Swamp Forest Extensive formations of Nypa-dominated freshwater swamp forest occur in the project area. This community is bounded by the fresh/salt water intertidal zone adjacent to mangrove forest and the inland flooded riparian zone along rivers where the formation covers the floodplain areas (Figure 11-D). Nypa forest occurs along a scale between semi-haline to permanent freshwater conditions, an environmental gradient that influences the species composition. The most abundant species in the understory along the gradient is the monodominant palm Nypa fruticans. Swamp forest near the intertidal zone, apart from being characterized by Nypa palms is interspersed with several mangrove tree species. In inland non-haline flooded areas along rivers, the group of Avicennia-Rhizophora- Bruguiera-Sonneratia mangrove species disappears and other taxa dominate the swamp forest along with Nypa palms. In these conditions the sago palm (Metroxylon sago) becomes a significant and dominant tree in the canopy. The freshwater Nypa palm forest with a dominant component of Metroxylon sagu palms is characterized by high species diversity at the canopy, in contrast with the intertidal Nypa formations. Additional species that typically occur are Buchanania sp., Gluta sp. (Anacardiaceae), Terminalia catappa (Combretaceae), Sapium sp. (Euphorbiaceae), and Myristica argentea (Myristicaceae). Mangrove The shoreline mangrove vegetation type is characterized by the genus of Avicennia, Bruguiera, Rhizophora, Sonneratia, Xylocarpus. Figure 11-E shows a mangrove forest community. Riparian mangroves along the lower stretches of rivers and creeks, can reach a height of more than 20m, usually tidally influenced. During the rainy season, salinity decreases because of overland run-off and riverine inputs. Further inland, the mangrove forests include the following species: Rhizophora mucronata, R. apiculata, Bruguiera gymnoriza, Bruguiera parviflora, Xylocarpus spp., Ceriops tagal, Avicennia officinalis. The undergrowth on compact clay soils is characterized by Acanthus ebracteatus, Acanthus ilicifolius, Aegiceras corniculatum and Avicennia intermedia. Mixed stands of Nypa fructicans and individual mangrove trees characterize the gradual succession to freshwater habitat.

Page 37 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Berau / Bintuni Bay The bay is a partially mixed estuarine system and salinity generally ranges from 26 to 32 psu, with fluctuations being associated with an increase of rain and riverine inputs. Numerous rivers and streams empty into the bay, including the Wasian, Muturi, Bokor, Tirasai, Source, Kodai, Rarjoi, Kamisayo, Tatawori, Sorobaba, Yakati, Yensei, Sobrawara, Naramasa, Manggosa, and Saengga river. The depth of the bay waters varies between one to 20 m at the edges to around 70m in the middle of the bay.

4.2.3 Species of Conservation Concern For the purpose of this study, species of conservation concern are defined as species that are:  Listed as critically endangered or endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.  Recognised or assumed as endemic or restricted-range species, migratory or congregatory species, in accordance with the definition of the IFC Guidance Note (IFC, 2012b).  Protected under Indonesian legislation as per PP 7/1999. Indonesia and the island of New Guinea occupy a large landmass. The term ‘endemic’ has little meaning in this respect, as it would apply to the majority of species present. For the purpose of this study, we chose a more relevant geographic unit for endemic species. Endemic species are defined as restricted to the West Papua Ecoregion, roughly corresponding to West Papua province (Bird’s Neck Peninsula and Bomberai Peninsula). A restricted-range species applies to vertebrates, defined as a species having an extent of occurrence of 50,000 km2 or less (for terrestrial vertebrates) or as having an extent of occurrence of 100,000 km2 or less (for marine vertebrates). Migratory species are defined as any species of which a significant proportion of its members cyclically and predictably move from one geographical area to another (including within the same ecosystem). This applies mostly to birds, but may also be relevant to certain species of mammals. Congregatory species are species that gather in globally significant numbers at a particular site and at a particular time in their life cycle for feeding, breeding or resting (during migration). This term is also used in relation to bird species.

Flora The successive surveys commissioned by Tangguh in the study area have identified some 980 plant species, of these a total of 19 plants are species of conservation concern. A full list of species of conservation concern and reason for their inclusion is presented in Table 3. Details are presented in Table 20.

Page 38 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 3 - Species of flora of conservation concern

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Endemic IUCN1 Legal protection2 1 Calophyllum insularum Tree species, Endemic EN – Bintangur daun halus 2 Nepenthes ampullaria Flask-shaped pitcher- – LC Protected plant; Kantong semar; Wanitoto 3 Nepenthes mirabilis Common Swamp – LC Protected Pitcher-Plant; Wantoto Nifuri 4 Grammatophyllum Orchid species; – NE Protected speciosum Anggrek kuning 5 Grammatophyllum Orchid species; – NE Protected pantherinum Anggrek raksasa Irian 6 Bryobium sp. Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 7 Bulbophyllum sp. Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek putih 8 Bulbophyllum sp. Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 9 Bulbophyllum sp-1 Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 10 Bulbophyllum sp-2 Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 11 Bulbophyllum sp-3 Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 12 Robiquieta sp. Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 13 Dendrobium sp. Orchid species; Endemic3 NE – Anggrek 14 Flindersia pimenteliana Silkwood species; – EN – Kowanitaya 15 Myristica inaequalis Tree of myrtle family Endemic VU – 16 Livistona sp. Species of fan palm; Endemic3 NE Protected Palem kipas Sumatera 17 Glochidion daviesii Species of tree Endemic NE – 18 Scaevola burnettii Species of shrub Endemic NE – 19 Freycinetia Tree (Pandanus) Endemic NE – bomberaiensis Notes: 1. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated 2. According to list of Protected Species as per Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999 3. These species are assumed endemic, but were not been identified to species level.

Page 39 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Birds A total of 210 bird species have been identified during the various surveys commissioned by Tangguh. Of these 62 have been identified as being of species of conservation concern (presented in Table 4, detailed listing in Table 21). The avifauna in and around Tangguh is typical for the region and given the range of estuarine, coastal and terrestrial environments. A large number of these are nationally protected, included a number of vagrant bird species. These will be discussed further in Chapter 5.

Table 4 – Bird species of conservation concern

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Congregatory / Endemic IUCN1 Legal migratory protection2 species 1 Accipiter Grey headed Goshawk – - LC Protected poliocephalus 2 Alcedo azurea Little Kingfisher (Raja- – - LC Protected udang Kecil 3 Alcedo pusilla Little Kingfisher (Raja- – - LC Protected udang Kecil) 4 Aquila gurneyi Gurney’s Eagle – - NT Protected 5 Ardea alba Kuntul Besar Migrant species - LC Protected from the north to Indonesia 6 Aviceda Pacific Baza – - LC Protected subcristata Baza Pasifik 7 Cacatua galerita Sulphur-Crested – - LC Protected Cockatoo (Kakatua Koki) 8 Calidris Great Knot (Kedidi Besar) Full Migrant - EN – tenuirostris Congregatory (and dispersive) 9 Casuarius Southern Cassowary – - VU Protected casuarius (Kasuari Gelambir-ganda) 10 Casuarius Northern cassowary – - VU Protected unappendiculatus 11 Chalcopsitta atra Black lorry – Endemic LC – (Nuri Hitam) 12 Charmosyna Red-flanked Lorikeet – Endemic LC Protected placentis (Perkici Dagu-merah) 13 Chlamydera Namdur Cokelat – - LC Protected cerviniventris 14 Chlidonias Dara-Laut Kumis Full Migrant - LC Protected hybridus Congregatory (and dispersive) 15 Chlidonias White-winged Tern (Dara Full Migrant - LC Protected leucopterus laut Sayap-putih) Congregatory (and dispersive) 16 Clytoceyx rex Shovel-billed Kingfisher – - LC Protected 17 Dacelo gaudichaud Rufous-bellied – Endemic LC Protected Kookaburra (Kukabura - Perut-merah) 18 Dacelo leachii Blue-winged Kookaburra – - LC Protected (Kukabura Sayap-biru) 19 Dicaeum pectorale Olive-crowned – Endemic. LC – Flowerpecker 20 Eclectus roratus Eclectus Parrot (Nuri – - LC Protected Bayan) 21 Egretta alba Great White Egret - LC Protected

Page 40 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Congregatory / Endemic IUCN1 Legal migratory protection2 species 22 Egretta garzetta Little Egret, Snowy Egret Congregatory - LC Protected (Kuntul Kecil) (and dispersive) 23 Egretta White-faced Heron – - LC Protected novaehollandiae 24 Egretta picata Pied Heron – - LC Protected 25 Goura cristata Western Crowned- – Endemic VU Protected pigeon 26 Halcyon chloris Collared – - LC Protected kingfisher 27 Haliaeetus Elang Laut Perut-putih – - LC Protected leucogaster 28 Haliastur indus Elang Bondol – - LC Protected 29 Haliastur Whistling Kite – - - sphenurus 30 Henicopernis Long-tailed Honey- – - LC Protected longicauda buzzard 31 Megapodius Dusky Scrubfowl – Endemic LC Protected freycinet (Gosong Kelam) 32 Megapodius Orange-footed Scrubfowl – - LC Protected rainwardt 33 Meliphaga Forest Honeyeater – - LC Protected montana 34 Mesophoyx Kuntul Perak – - LC Protected (Ardea) intermedia 35 Myzomela eques Myzomela Leher-merah – - LC Protected 36 Myzomela nigrita Black Myzomela – - LC Protected 37 Myzomela obscura Dusky Myzomela – - LC Protected (Myzomela Remang) 38 Nectarinia aspasia Black Sunbird – - LC Protected 39 Nectarinia jugularis Olive-backed Sunbird – - LC Protected 40 Nycticorax Rufous Night-Heron – - LC Protected caledonicus (Kowak-malam Merah) 41 Pandion haliaetus Osprey – - LC Protected 42 Paradisaea minor Lesser Bird-of-paradise – - LC Protected (Cenderawasih Kecil) 43 Paradisaea Raggiana Bird-of-paradise – - LC Protected raggiana 44 Philemon Cikukua Tanduk – - LC Protected buceroides 45 Philemon Noisy Friarbird – - LC Protected corniculatus 46 Pitta erythrogaster Red-bellied Pitta (Paok – - LC Protected Mopo) 47 Pitta sordida Hooded Pitta (Paok Hijau) – - LC Protected 48 Probosciger Palm Cockatoo (Kakatua – - LC Protected aterrimus Raja) 49 Ptilinopus ornatus Western Ornate Fruit- – Endemic LC - dove 50 Pycnopygius Marbled – - LC Protected cinereus honeyeater 51 Rhyticeros plicatus Blyth’s Hornbill (Julang – - LC Protected Papua) 52 Sterna bergii Great Crested Tern, Swift Partial Migrant - LC Protected Tern (Dara-laut Jambul) Congregatory (and dispersive)

Page 41 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Congregatory / Endemic IUCN1 Legal migratory protection2 species 53 Sterna fuscata Sooty Tern (Dara-laut Full Migrant - LC Protected Sayap-hitam) Congregatory (and dispersive) 54 Sterna hirundo Common Tern (Dara-laut Full Migrant - LC Protected Biasa) Congregatory (and dispersive) 55 Syma torotoro Yellow-billed Kingfisher – - LC Protected (Cekakak Torotoro) 56 Talegalla cuvieri Red-billed Brush-Turkey – Endemic LC Protected 57 Talegalla Black-billed Brush-turkey – - LC Protected fuscirostris (Maleo Paruh-Hitam) 58 Tanysiptera Common – - LC Protected galatea Paradise kingfisher 59 Tanysiptera Cekakak Pita Bidadari – - LC Protected nympha 60 Todiramphus Collared Kingfisher – - LC Protected chloris (Cekakak Sungai) 61 Todiramphus Forest Kingfish (Cekakak – - LC Protected macleayii Rimbaer) 62 Todiramphus Sacred Kingfisher – - LC Protected sanctus (Cekakak Australia) Notes: 1. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated 2. According to list of Protected Species as per Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

Mammals Various surveys and ad hoc observations over the past 12 years have identified more than 80 mammal species being present within or surrounding the Tangguh site. Of these, 13 have been identified as being of conservation concern (listed in Table 5; details in Table 22). This includes a number of marine mammals sporadically entering Teluk Berau and possibly Teluk Bintuni.

Page 42 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 5 – Mammal species of conservation concern

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Endemic IUCN1 Legal protection2 1 Balaenoptera edeni4 Bryde’s whale - DD Protected 2 Cervus timorensis3 Timor (Javan) deer (Rusa) - VU Protected 3 Dendrolagus inustus Grizzled Tree Kangaroo - VU Protected 4 Dendrolagus ursinus Vogelkop Tree-kangaroo Endemic VU Protected 5 Dorcopsis muelleri Brown Dorcopsis (Walabi Endemic LC Protected Esem) 6 Megaptera Humpback whale - LC Protected novaeangliae4 7 Nyctimene draconilla Lesser Tube-nosed Bat (Paniki Endemic- DD – Kecil) 8 Sousa chinensis Humpback dolphin - NT Protected chinensis 9 Spilocuscus (Phalanger) Common Spotted Cuscus - LC Protected maculatus (Kuskus Bertotol) 10 Stenella attenuata4 Spotted dolphin - LC Protected 11 Stenella longirostris4 Spinner dolphin - DD Protected 12 Strigocuscus (Phalanger) Ground Cuscus (Kuskus - LC Protected gymnotis Tanah) 13 Tursiops aduncus4 Indopacific Bottlenose dolphin - DD Protected

Notes: 1. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated 2. According to list of Protected Species as per Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999 3. Javan Deer (Cervus timorensis), currently classified as Rusa timorensis, is a species of deer recently introduced to Papua. Although legally protected, it is not of conservation concern in the study area and therefore will not be further discussed within the context of the Critical Habitat Assessment. 4. Several whale and dolphin species occasionally enter Berau/Bintuni Bay. They are legally protected. .These species are are not considered to have resident populations inside the study area and will not be further discussed within the context of the Critical Habitat Assessment.

Reptiles and Amphibians Over the past 12 years more than 110 species of reptiles and amphibians have been recorded within the area. Of these 17 have been identified as being of conservation concern (Table 6, details in Table 23), and this includes three previously unknown species (and as yet to be described). While the amphibian diversity does appear to be unusual, with a higher proportion of restricted range species, this is more likely to be due to the lack of surveys across the region rather than any particular uniqueness of the Tangguh area (Terrestrial Survey, 2002).

Page 43 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 6 – Herpetofauna species of conservation concern

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Endemic IUCN1 Legal protection2 1 Caretta caretta Loggerhead turtle - VU Protected 2 Carlia bomberai – Endemic LC – 3 Chelonia mydas Green turtle - EN Protected 4 Cophixalius sp. nov. – Endemic NE – 5 Crocodylus novaeguineae New Guinea Crocodile - LC Protected 6 Crocodylus porosus Estuarine crocodile - LC Protected 7 Dermochelys coriacea Leatherback turtle (Penyu - VU Protected Belimbing) 8 Elseya novaeguineae New Guinea Snapping Turtle Endemic LC Protected (Kura-kira Irian Leher Pendek) 9 Emoia sp. nov. – Endemic NE – 10 Eretmochelys imbricata Hawksbill turtle (Penyu Sisik) - CE Protected 11 Hylophorbus sp. nov. – Endemic NE – 12 Hypsilurus dilophus Crowned Forest Dragon - LC Protected (Bunglon) 13 Lepidochelys olivacea Olive Ridley turtle Penyu Abu- - VU Protected abu/Lekang 14 Morelia viridis Green tree python - LC Protected 15 Platymantis punctatus Papua wrinkled frog Endemic LC - 16 Tiliqua gigas Indonesian blue-tongued skink - NE Protected (Kadal panama) 17 Varanus indicus Mangrove monitor (Biawak) - LC Protected

Notes: 1. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated 2. According to list of Protected Species as per Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

Fish Nearly 100 different fish species were identified during different surveys over the years. Out of these, three freshwater fish species are considered endemic to West Papua. These are listed in Table 7 and the detailed list is in Table 24.

Table 7 – Fish species of conservation concern

Name Conservation status Latin Common name Endemic IUCN1 Legal protection2 1 Melanotaenia irianjaya Irian Jaya rainbowfish Endemic NE - 2 Melanotaenia arfakensis Arfak rainbowfish Endemic NE - 3 Pseudomugil reticulatus Vogelkop Blue-Eye Endemic NE - Notes: 1. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated 2. According to list of Protected Species as per Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

Page 44 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Invertebrates and Algae The environmental surveys commissioned by Tangguh also analysed phytoplankton and zooplankton. The species were identified to class level. Zooplankton and phytoplankton are not considered of conservation concern. Two species of coral, Cantharellus noumeae and Isopora togianensis, both considered endangered on the IUCN Red Data list (IUCN, 2016) have modelled distribution maps that overlap with Teluk Berau and Teluk Bintuni. Cantharellus is a fungid coral that occupies sheltered bays, but is considered endemic to New Caledonia. Few confirmed records exist outside of this area. Specimens from Western Australia and the Red Sea are genetically distinct from those of the Pacific (Veron, 2000). Isopora togianensis is an acroporid species of shallow reef environments, endemic to Togian Island in Sulawesi. There are no known records of these species in Teluk Bintuni and Teluk Berau. The closest island / shores with conditions that would support sparse coral growth is Pulau arguni in the western part of Teluk Berau, over 60 kilometres to the west of the Tangguh site (Marine survey, 2006). It is therefore unlikely that these species qualify as species of conservation concern in the study area. A species of freshwater prawn (udang tanah) was observed in lowland forest during the 2011 terrestrial survey. It is not known whether this represents a new species. Butterfly and moth surveys were also carried out in 2007 and 2002. In 2007, as many as 131 types of butterflies from 9 families and 114 moth species of 16 families were identified. A number of species were observed that could not be identified to species level. The same type of survey conducted in 2002 only encountered 85 species of butterflies from 5 families, while moths were not observed. None of the species identified were protected through Government Regulation 7/1999 or considered threatened (Critically Endangered or Endangered in the IUN Red List), but it cannot be ruled out that some species are endemic to West Papua province. Measures proposed to avoid, minimize and offset adverse impacts on terrestrial and aquatic habitats as well as rehabilitation efforts will benefit invertebrate species of conservation concern.

4.2.4 Ecosystem Services Ecosystem services are the direct and indirect contributions of ecosystems to human well-being (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). This comprises:  Provisioning services (goods or products obtained from ecosystems, e.g. food, timber, fiber, and freshwater).  Regulatory services (contributions to human well-being arising from an ecosystem’s control of natural processes, e.g. climate regulation, disease control, erosion prevention).  Cultural services (nonmaterial contributions of ecosystems to human well- being, e.g. recreation, spiritual values, and aesthetic enjoyment).  Supporting services (natural processes, such as nutrient cycling and primary production, that maintain the other services) The communities around Teluk Berau and Teluk Bintuni have a strong connection with the surrounding environment, and have long been dependent on the natural resources, from fisheries, hunting for bush meat to medicinal plants (Terrestrial survey, 2002).

Page 45 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The economic uses of mangroves have been analysed by Ruitenbeek (1992), who estimated that for Teluk Bintuni, a variety of benefits with a total value of $US 1,500 per square kilometre per year could be derived from biodiversity-related goods and services, if the mangrove were maintained intact. No economic data are available for the economic uses of the lowland forest in the study area. Based on interviews with the communities in the surroundings of Tangguh LNG forest areas, field observations, literature as well as AMDAL studies (AMDAL, 2002 and 2014), some 154 species of plants were identified that are known to be used by the communities. No less than 21 uses were identified, ranging from thatch, vegetables, edible tubers (yam), timber, poles, staple food, fragrant woods or resins (gaharu), betel nut or medicinal use. The Sago palm (Metroxylon sp.) in particular has many uses, and is still occasionally extracted from the forest surrounding the Tangguh LNG plant, in particular near the hamlet of Manggosa (east of the LNG site). Some of the flora and fauna have cultural significance, as the identity and traditions of the local communities are intimately linked to the forest. This is reflected in the oral culture and traditions in which sago plays an important role. Tribal dress and ceremonies also reflect an intimate connection with the forest (AMDAL, 2002). The estuary is an important fishing ground. Mangrove-lined creeks, shallow areas and mudflats are important nursery and foraging grounds for shrimp, molluscs and fish species that provide an important source of protein and livelihood to the communities living around Teluk Bintuni and Teluk Berau. Commercial fishing vessels regularly fish in Teluk Berau for shrimp, giant trevally, pomfret, mackerel, tuna, sharks, and in Teluk Bintuni for shrimp, sardines, anchovies, ponyfish, croakers and catfish. Local communities tend to fish nearer to shore using smaller boats, with customary fishing grounds typically up to 3 km away from the villages (AMDAL, 2014). There are a number of regulating services and supporting ecosystem services associated with the biodiversity within the project area. These include pollination of flowers or seed dispersal of edible or medicinal plants by insects, bats and birds, aquifer recharge, freshwater storage and purification in the natural ecosystems, while run-off of silt and organic matter replenishes the foreshore environment and estuary and sustains fisheries. Mangroves are of particular importance, providing coastal defence and spawning ground for local fisheries.

4.2.5 National and International Protected Areas Indonesia has two protected areas that are located near the study area. These are delineated in Figure 12 and listed below: Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve The Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve is located approximately 80 km to the east of the Tangguh LNG Expansion Project site. In 1982, an area of approximately 300,000ha was designated to be used as the Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve (Cagar alam Teluk Bintuni) through Ministry of Agriculture Decree No. Mentan 820/Kpts/UM/11/1982. However in 1999 the area was further reduced to 124,850ha through Ministry of Agriculture Decree Mentan No. 891/Kpts-II/1999 which remains valid until present day. Bintuni Bay is the largest protected bay bordered by tidal mudflats, sand and mangrove forest. Inland, the mangrove forest is fringed by Nipah Palm (Nypa fruticans) followed by freshwater swamp forest and lowland tropical rain forest.

Page 46 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

As part of the commitments made in the previous Tangguh Biodiversity Action Plan (BP, 2003), Tangguh sought to improve the protection of the reserve through the development of the Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve Management Plan. The development of the plan was involved local stakeholders, with key activities supported by a Conservation Training and Resource Centre (CTRC). The plan was developed through strategic consultation with all stakeholders; and ongoing partnerships with local and international conservation and social NGOs, which were deemed critical in the process, particularly to facilitate implementation. In August 2005, the Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve Management Plan was completed by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), with financial support from Tangguh. The Management Plan was formally adopted during a stakeholder workshop on 30 August 2005, hosted by the Bintuni Bay district’s Planning Agency (BAPPEDA), and subsequently approved by the Ministry of Forestry. TNC’s work has raised expectations and built trust among local stakeholders. However, it is recognized that the long term implementation will not only rely on Tangguh’s effort, but mostly on sufficient resources and support from all stakeholders, in particular the Government of Indonesia. Gunung Wagura Kote Nature Reserve Another nature reserve Cagar alam Gunung Wagura Kote was proposed by the Ministry of Forestry in 1996. It has been decreed in Government Regulation (Peraturan Pemerintah) Republik Indonesia No. 26/2008, and subsequently through the National Spatial Plan and Local Government Regulation (Peraturan Daerah) Teluk Bintuni No. 4/2012. The area covers a small mountain range with an elevation of 50 m to 1,134 m and it is located approximately 70km from Tangguh area. Both areas are acknowledged as nature reserves in the district spatial plan for Teluk Bintuni (2012-2032) (Peraturan Daerah No. 4/2012 – Rencana tata ruang wilayah kabupaten Teluk Bintuni). International Protected Areas There are no Ramsar Wetland Sites of International Importance, UNESCO World Heritage sites or UNESCO-MAB Biosphere Reserves in the study area.

Page 47 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 12 – Location of proposed protected areas

Page 48 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

4.2.6 Other Nature Conservation Areas Relevant organizations and/or websites listed in Section 1.1.1 were consulted to check for the presence of priority sites for biodiversity, which includes the following categories:  Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA)  Important Bird Areas (IBA)  Important Plant Areas (IPA)  Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites Key Biodiversity Areas Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are sites identified as global priorities for conservation using simple, standard criteria, based on their importance in maintaining species populations (Langhammer et al., 2007). There are no KBAs within or near the study area. Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) have been classified by BirdLife International as key sites for conservation – small enough to be conserved in their entirety and often already part of a protected area network. They are identified as important on the basis of one (or more) of the followings: (i) holding significant numbers of one or more globally threatened bird species; (ii) being one of a set of sites that together hold a suite of restricted-range species or biome-restricted bird species; and (iii) having exceptionally large numbers of migratory or congregatory bird species. There are no IBAs within or near the study area. Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites are a subset of KBAs. They are some of the highest-priority sites globally, as each one is the last remaining refuge of one or more globally Endangered or Critically Endangered species (Ricketts et al., 2005). There are no IBAs within or near the study area. Biodiversity hotspots, WWF Global Ecoregions and Endemic Bird Areas (EBA) Relevant websites listed in Section 4.1.2 were further consulted to check for the presence of biodiversity hotspots, global ecoregions and Endemic Bird Areas, which generally encompass a larger area. The presence of such areas is an indication of the global importance in terms of biodiversity and the potential for critical habitat being triggered. The concept of biodiversity hotspots was originally coined by Myers et al. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots are a method to identify those regions of the world where attention is needed to address biodiversity loss and to guide investments in conservation. As of January 2016, the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund recognizes 36 global biodiversity hotspots, most of which occur in tropical forests (Mittermeier et al., 2011). No global biodiversity hotspot currently overlaps with the study area. WWF defines an ecoregion as a "large unit of land or water containing a geographically distinct assemblage of species, natural communities, and environmental conditions". Two WWF Global Ecoregions overlap with the study area, those being:

Page 49 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Vogelkop-Aru Lowland Rain Forests [AA0128]  New Guinea Mangroves [AA1401] Within the category of Tropical and Subtropical Moist Broadleaf Forests, the Vogelkop- Aru Rain Forests ecoregion includes the hills and lowlands of the Vogelkop and Bomberai peninsulas of New Guinea and the surrounding islands. The relatively intact lowland tropical rain forests are among the largest and richest forests in the Australasian realm. The New Guinea Mangroves are found along extensive lengths of the coastline of New Guinea. There are several disjunct sections along the north coast, including the eastern side of Cenderwasih Bay, adjacent to the mouths of the Sepik and Ramu rivers, and Dyke Ackland Bay and Ward Hunt Strait. The longest and deepest stretches of mangroves are found on the south side of the island, especially at the mouths of the Purari, Kikori, Fly, Northwest, and Otakwa rivers, Bintuni Bay, and the southern portions of the Bird’s Head Peninsula. An Endemic Bird Area (EBA) is defined as an area which encompasses the overlapping breeding ranges of restricted-range species, such that the complete ranges of two or more restricted-range species are entirely included within the boundary of the EBA. The West Papuan Lowlands EBA (no. 172) covers a large part of the province of Papua Barat including the west Papuan islands of Waigeo, Batanta, Salawati, Kofiau and Misool, and the lowland rain forests, swamp forests and mangroves of the Bird’s Head and Bomberai peninsulas, extending around Teluk Cenderawasih (Geelvink Bay) and Teluk Etna as far east as the Sirowa river in the north and the Mimika river in the south, where it abuts two other lowland Papuan EBAs (176 and 179). Most restricted-range bird records from the mainland are from coastal regions, but it is assumed that some birds are likely to occur further inland. The upper limit of this EBA has been defined by the 1,000 m contour line. Most of the restricted-range species occur in lowland rain forest with several also being recorded in swamp forest and mangroves.

Page 50 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

5 Critical Habitat Assessment

This chapter evaluates the presence of critical habitats in the area, as defined by the ADB (2009) and IFC (2012b), by identifying biodiversity features that would qualify as meeting the criteria under the critical habitat assessment.

5.1 Methodology

5.1.1 Criteria for assessment The criteria for critical habitat defined by ADB (2009) are as follows:  Criterion 1: The area includes habitat required for the survival of critically endangered (CR) or endangered (EN) species;  Criterion 2: The area has special significance for endemic or restricted-range species;  Criterion 3: The area represents a site that is critical for the survival of migratory species; or supports globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of congregatory species;  Criterion 4: The area includes unique assemblages of species that are associated with key evolutionary processes or provide key ecosystem services;  Criterion 5: The area holds biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities;  Criterion 6: The area is either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet the criteria of the World Conservation Union classification, the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s World natural Heritage sites. IFC Performance Standard 6 (IFC, 2012b) adds an additional criterion:  Criterion 7 (Criterion 4 in IFC Performance Standard 6): Highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems. Highly threatened or unique ecosystems are those (i) that are at risk of significantly decreasing in area or quality; (ii) with a small spatial extent; and/or (iii) containing unique assemblages of species including assemblages or concentrations of biome-restricted species. IFC does not limit the definition of critical habitat to these criteria (paragraph 56 in IFC Guidance Note, 2012b). Other recognized high biodiversity values might support a critical habitat designation, but these are either considered duplicative of the aforementioned criteria (i.e. new species discovered during surveys were precautionary classified as endemic) or not relevant (e.g. refuge sites for drought, fire or floods or climate change, erosion control, presence of keystone species).

5.1.2 Critical Habitat Assessment approach In the absence of a specific approach recommended by ADB, this critical habitat assessment follows the methodology explained in the IFC Guidance Note (2012b). This guidance uses numerical thresholds for the first three critical habitat criteria (i.e., CR/EN species; endemic/restricted-range species; migratory/congregatory species). The thresholds were obtained from globally standardized numerical thresholds published by the IUCN as Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines (Langhammer et al,

Page 51 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

2007). The thresholds form the basis of a tiered approach, in that numerical thresholds are used to assign Criteria 1 through 3 to a Tier 1 or a Tier 2 critical habitat designation. A summary of the tiers with respect to the thresholds for each criterion is provided in Table 8.

Table 8 - Quantitative Thresholds Tiers 1 and 2 of Critical Habitat Criteria 1 to 3

Criteria Tier 1 Tier 2 1. Critically (a) Habitat required to sustain ≥ 10 (c) Habitat that supports the regular occurrence of a single Endangered (CR) / percent of the global population of individual of a CR species and/or habitat containing Endangered (EN) a CR or EN species/subspecies regionally- important concentrations of a Red-listed EN Species1 where there are known, regular species where that habitat could be considered a occurrences of the species and discrete management unit for that species/ subspecies. where that habitat could be (d) Habitat of significant importance to CR or EN species considered a discrete that are wide-ranging and/or whose population management unit for that species. distribution is not well understood and where the loss (b) Habitat with known, regular of such a habitat could potentially impact the long-term occurrences of CR or EN species survivability of the species. where that habitat is one of 10 or (e) As appropriate, habitat containing nationally/regionally fewer discrete management sites important concentrations of an EN, CR or equivalent globally for that species. national/regional listing. 2. Endemic2 / (a) Habitat known to sustain ≥ 95 (b) Habitat known to sustain ≥ 1 percent but < 95 percent Restricted Range percent of the global population of of the global population of an endemic or restricted- Species an endemic or restricted-range range species where that habitat could be considered a species where that habitat could discrete management unit for that species, where data be considered a discrete are available and/or based on expert judgment. management unit for that species (e.g., a single-site endemic). 3. Migratory / (a) Habitat known to sustain, on a (b) Habitat known to sustain, on a cyclical or otherwise Congregatory cyclical or otherwise regular basis, regular basis, ≥ 1 percent but < 95 percent of the global Species ≥ 95 percent of the global population of a migratory or congregatory species at population of a migratory or any point of the species’ lifecycle and where that congregatory species at any point habitat could be considered a discrete management of the species’ lifecycle where unit for that species, where adequate data are available that habitat could be considered a and/or based on expert judgment. discrete management unit for that (c) For birds, habitat that meets BirdLife International’s species. Criterion A4 for congregations3 and/or Ramsar Criteria 5 or 6 for Identifying Wetlands of International Importance4. (d) For species with large but clumped distributions, a provisional threshold is set at ≥5 percent of the global population for both terrestrial and marine species. (e) Source sites that contribute 1 percent of the global population of recruits. Notes: 1. Interpreted for the purpose of this critical habitat assessment as species listed as IUCN CR or EN as well as species protected in Indonesia under GR 7/1999. 2. The concept of endemism depends on the knowledge of the geographical range of a species. Newly discovered species are typically found in a limited site, and with the knowledge of that moment, are considered a single-site and national endemic. Many endemic organisms which are difficult to be recognised, such as species from very large and complex groups (plants, arthropods) or small organisms are likely to be initially classified as site or national endemic until the same species has been identified from other sites or countries. 3. See IBA global criteria in http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/info/ibacriteria 4. See http://www.ramsar.org/cda/en/ramsar-about-faqs-what-are-criteria/main/ramsar/

Page 52 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Tier 1 corresponds to critical habitat of highest importance in which development is difficult to implement and offsets are generally not possible except in exceptional circumstances. Tier 2 corresponds to critical habitat of high importance in which development may be possible and offsets may be possible under some circumstances. The IFC Guidance Note further states that for Criteria 1 through 3, for each species of concern a boundary (ecological or political) is to be determined that delineates the area of habitat to be considered for the Critical Habitat Assessment. This is called the “discrete management unit (DMU)”, defined as an area with a definable boundary within which the biological communities and/or management issues have more in common with each other than they do with those in adjacent areas. The DMU includes the project zone of influence (direct footprint and extent of potential secondary/indirect impacts), but spatially can extend into neighbouring areas of high biodiversity value that have an inherent connectivity of the ecological system. For the present study, terrestrial or shore-based DMUs were defined by the area of contiguous or adjacent habitat of a similar type present within a radius of 20 km of the project. This distance was chosen on the grounds that for most species of flora and fauna present natural dispersion patterns, home ranges and flow of energy in the food web are restricted to within this boundary. In other words, the DMU reflects the biodiversity attributes particular to the habitat in question and the ecological processes required to maintaining a viable population. Figure 13 shows the overall area plotted against land use data analysed by the Ministry of Forestry (Peta Penutupan Lahan Indonesia Tahun 2011 Provinsi Papua Barat, Kementrian Kehutanan). The calculated DMU areal coverage for the main habitat types is presented in Table 9. The 2011 Ministry of Forestry dataset was used as it provides a good representation of the existing habitat types (both primary and secondary forest) present in the study area. For the purpose of the impact assessment, distinguishing between the primary and secondary forest categories has been avoided. Although primary forest can be assumed to have a higher inherent biodiversity value, many species of conservation concern will not be restricted to that forest type and both primary and secondary forests could be classified as critical habitats (in accordance with ADB and IFC requirements). The overall estuarine water body of Teluk Berau (up to approximately 55 km west from the project site) and Teluk Bintuni were taken as DMU for estuarine species (fish, invertebrates, reptiles, mangroves). This captures habitat and ecological connectivity between different sites in this estuarine environment through which populations of resident species are maintained. Further west, marine conditions start dominating Teluk Berau, as characterized by the dominance of marine fish guilds (AMDAL, 2014).

Table 9 – DMU areal coverage estimates

Habitat type Area of coverage Lowland forest or dryland forest 30,170ha Swamp forest 9,305ha Mangroves 6,853ha Savannah 6,547ha Estuary 528,200ha

Page 53 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 13 – Discrete Management Units for terrestrial and estuarine habitats

Page 54 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The proportion of global population size or global species range residing in the DMU, is used to evaluate whether for the species of concern under consideration, critical habitat would be triggered against the thresholds in Table 8. From Table 8 it follows that to establish whether a given species of concern meets the thresholds for triggering critical habitat, estimates are needed of the global extent of occurrence (EOO), population size, and the number of sites where the species is known to occur. If for a particular species, detailed population data is not available, the analysis would be based on the proportion of species range (‘Extent of Occurrence’) as surrogate. This information is collected from scientific literature, baseline surveys and the IUCN Red Data website. Expert judgment has been applied where this information is not available. For some Critically Endangered or Endangered species with large distribution ranges, or whose population is not well understood, a meaningful DMU cannot be determined. This includes for instance endangered marine turtles. For Criteria 4 and 5 and 7, internationally agreed numerical thresholds have not been sufficiently developed. Best available scientific information, expert opinion and information from local stakeholders is used to assess the relative “criticality” of a habitat or material dependence on an ecosystem service triggered by these criteria. Criterion 6 concerns the potential overlap of the study area with the boundaries of any area that is legally protected or officially proposed for protection, or taking a precautionary approach, where a project through habitat or ecological connectivity has the potential to affect the conservation objectives of that designated or proposed protected area.

5.2 Assessment of Critical Habitats

5.2.1 Criterion 1: Critically endangered or endangered species Although this criterion refers to IUCN critically endangered and endangered species, the definition has been interpreted to include all species that are of national significance (i.e. species which are nationally protected and of IUCN Red List category higher than Least Concern). For each of the species of conservation concern, identified in Section 4.2.3, the following assessment will determine whether these species also qualify as triggering critical habitat. Calophyllum insularum – IUCN Endangered and endemic Calophyllum insularum is a flowering tree. The IUCN Red Data List (Eddowes, 1998) refers to this species as uniquely found on several islands in Teluk Cendrawasih (Geelvink Bay). Because of its restricted distribution and the possibility of exploitation, this species is considered seriously endangered. The holotype record is from Pulau Yapen (Naturalis, 2016) where it was collected at 200 m elevation in lowland forest. It has been recorded present in the study area in 2007 and 2011, but earlier surveys did not record this species. It is related to more common Calophyllum species previously recorded in the study area (AMDAL, 2002) which include Calophyllum inophyllum and Calophyllum soulattri. These are abundant and widely distributed species. Surveys carried out in forest concessions further to the east have identified Calophyllum insularum (PT Wijaya, 2016) which suggests that the species is found in lowland forests outside the islands in Teluk Cendrawasih.

Page 55 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

These known records suggest that the species is present in lowland forest area that ranges from the project area to the islands of Teluk Cendrawasih to the east (Pulau Yapen) over a distance of some 400 – 450 km. The exact extent of occurrence and number of records are not known. It is considered that the DMU of this species supports a viable concentration of Calophyllum insularum. The DMU qualifies as Tier 2 Critical Habitat under Criterion 1 as habitat containing regionally important concentrations of an EN or equivalent regional listing. Pitcher plants Nepenthes ampullaria and Nepenthes mirabilis – IUCN Least Concern and Nationally Protected Nepenthes refers to the genus of tropical pitcher plants, carnivorous mostly liana- forming plants of the Old World tropics. Nepenthes ampullaria is a liana that climbs up a host tree up to 15 m height.The distribution of this species includes Kalimantan, Brunei, Sumatera, Irian, Thailand, Singapore to New Guinea. In the Tangguh LNG area this species is found in lowland forest and swamp forest. Nepenthes mirabilis has the most widespread distribution of pitcher plants. Its range covers continental Southeast Asia and all major islands of the Malay Archipelago (minus the Lesser Sunda Islands and northern Philippines), stretching from China in the north to Australia in the south. In the Tangguh LNG area this species is found n lowland forest and savannah. Both species are listed as Least Concern on the IUCN Red Data List. Nepenthes mirabilis appears to thrive in disturbed habitats. Although small colonies appear to be regularly destroyed in Southeast Asia during land clearing and construction projects, anthropogenic habitat disturbances create new habitats for this species at a rate that appears to be substantially greater than the rate of loss of existing colonies. N. ampullaria also occupies secondary forest. Given their widespread distribution and presence in different habitats and ability to survive in degraded forest ecosystems, the populations of both species would not appear to be at risk in Indonesia. The DMU area of Nepenthes ampullaria, having been found in both lowland forest and swamp forest habitat is 39,475ha, while that of Nepenthes mirabilis, present in savannah and lowland forest, is 36,717ha. Measured against their extensive EOO (e.g. 700,000 km2 for N. mirabilis) and taking into consideration the IUCN least concern status, both populations do not qualify under the critical habitat assessment. The legal protection accorded to this genus reflects their exploitation in the wildlife trade (both species are currently listed on CITES Appendix II, i.e. species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival). Orchids Grammatophyllum speciosum and Grammatophyllum pantherinum – IUCN Not Evaluated and Nationally Protected Grammatophyllum speciosum is an epiphyte but sometimes also found on rock ledges. This plant grows on big trees and tree stumps in open area of tropical lowland rain forest. In Tangguh LNG area this species is found in lowland forest. The distribution of this species includes Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Kalimantan, Java, Maluku, Philippines, Sulawesi, Sumatera, Bismarck Islands, New Guinea, Indonesia and Malaysia.

Page 56 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Grammatophyllum pantherinum (synonym of G. papuanum) is a related species, with a smaller distribution, extending from Borneo to the Phillipine islands and Papuasia (New Guinea, New Britain and surrounding islands). It was also found in lowland forest around Tangguh LNG. Both species have not been evaluated on the IUCN Red Data List, and their legal protection appears to be related to the trade in orchid species, with both species listed on Cites Appendix II. The DMU for both species, measures 30,170ha (lowland forest). A global extent of occurrence has not been determined, but with both species present and regularly found across large parts of Southeast Asia, it would appear that these species do not qualify under the critical habitat assessment. Flindersia pimenteliana –maple silkwood – IUCN Endangered Flindersia pimenteliana is a large tree found mainly in lower montane rainforest or in foothill rainforest in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Queensland (Australia), where it is widespread. It was observed in 2016 in the project area. Earlier terrestrial surveys (2002) found a related species Flindersia laevicarpa, which is recorded as vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. Both species yield good quality wood, hence their exploitation in the timber trade. A tree survey commissioned by Tangguh (Tangguh LNG, 2014) identified many individual Flindersia sp. (identified as silver ash, local name iskumun) in the surveyed area, with heights up to 25 m. This appears to be a common genus of species that is widely distributed throughout the Tangguh project area. The DMU for Flindersia pimenteliana measures 30,170ha (lowland forest). A global extent of occurrence has not been determined, but with the species present on the island of New Guinea and Northeast Queensland, it would appear that the DMU of this species would be less than 1% of the EOO, and hence this species does not qualify under the critical habitat assessment. Livistona sp – Fan Palm – IUCN Not Evaluated, Endemic and Nationally Protected Dowe and Mogea (2004) reviewed the genus Livistona in New Guinea and identified nine different Livistona species of which six are endemic. It is therefore possible that the species encountered in the study area is also endemic. The terrestrial survey (2002) suggests that this may be a new species. The species was present in swamp forest close to the shore, but also in lowland areas far from the coast in low, very humid areas of the forest. All species of the genus Livistona are protected in Indonesia. Expert consultation (Annex 3) confirms that Livistona sp., although protected is widely found outside the Tangguh LNG area around Bintuni Bay, such as in Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve. The palm is often used by local communities in their households.The palm heart is edible and the leaf is used for roof thatch. Without knowing the exact species, or extent of occurrence of individual species, it is not possible to determine whether the proportion of trees in the DMU of this fan palm species (39,475ha corresponding to lowland forest and swamp forest habitat combined) meets the 1% criterion of the total population. From a precautionary point of view, it is assumed that this species does qualify under Tier 2 for critical habitat. With the species widely distributed around Bintuni Bay, it is not likely that the DMU contains more than 95% of the population.

Page 57 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis – IUCN Near Threatened & Nationally Protected The taxonomy of this sub-species is unclear, but this Indo-Pacific type is generally regarded as a separate population to that of Atlantic, Australian and South African types. This assessment only refers to the S.c.chinensis type (See IUCN, 2008 for further details). This sub-species is found in shallow, coastal waters, including Mangrove swamps, across wide geographical areas from eastern Australia to eastern India. The total population size is small, probably less than 10,000 mature individuals (IUCN, 2008). This species was recorded in Bintuni Bay waters during the 2013 marine surveys, and confirmed that a small resident natal population of eight individuals is likely to be present within the Bay (Marine Survey, 2013). While this may only represent approximately 0.1% of the global population it is of national importance. Therefore this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Grizzled Tree Kangaroo Dendrolagus inustus – IUCN Vulnerable & Nationally Protected The Grizzled Tree-Kangeroo occurs across the northern range of West Papua and has a wider geographical range than the rarer Vogelkop Tree-Kangeroo. This species is found in both primary and secondary forests, including lowland forest habitats (IUCN, 2008). Throughout its range this species is in decline with hunting and habitat loss the main threats. This species was recorded as being in the area during the 2000 surveys, but not recorded since. Local community members are aware that a species of Tree-Kangeroo (ewai) does occur in the area, but not frequently seen. The global population size of this species is unknown and the DMU is unlikely to represent more than 1% of the total geographical range of this species, and therefore does not qualify under the critical habitat assessment. Additional Note: Western Long-beaked Echnida Zaglossus bruijnii is a critically endangered species restricted to the lowland forests within the Vogelkop Peninsula. The population is thought to have declined more than 80% in the last 40-50 years (IUCN 2008). This species has not been recorded within the DMU, and local villagers have no knowledge of this species occurring in the area (Tangguh, 2002), and therefore not included in this assessment. Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris - IUCN Endangered The Great Knot breeds in north-east Siberia and has its main wintering grounds in Australia, and scattered across South-East Asia (del Hoyo et al., 1996). During migration a majority of the population passage is through South Korea. The global populations have undergone significant decline in recent years (IUCN 2012), with the latest population estimate being around 290,000 (Wetlands International 2015). The EOO for the species is 1,490,000km2. The bird typically feeds in estuaries and on intertidal mudflats (Moore, 2006). In the DMU, the Great Knot is an incidental visitor and individual birds are likely to feeding in Bintuni Bay during its passage between breeding and wintering grounds. The number of birds within the DMU at any one time is likely to be significantly less than 1% of the global population (and 0.03% of the EOO); the population is not of national or regional significance. However, this species is endangered and the technical experts have identified this species as being of high priority for conservation

Page 58 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

(see section A-3). Therefore, it is deemed that this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Southern Cassowary Casuarius casuarius - IUCN Vulnerable) & Northern cassowary Casuarius unappendiculatus - IUCN Vulnerable & Nationally Protected Both species of cassowary can be found in lowland forests. The Northern Cassowary is the rarer of the two species, with a narrower range (EOO: 186,000km2) and only found across the northern parts of New Guinea. The Southern Cassowary is found in southern parts of New Guinea and north east Australia (EOO, 394,000km2). Both species are in decline (Birdlife, 2016), both are of high priority for conservation and both species are nationally protected. Both species are resident within the DMU and have been frequently recorded over the past 10 years around the site. Due to the more restricted range of the Northern Cassowary, and although the DMU only represents 0.3% of the EOO) this species is of national importance; it is suggested that this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. But that the more common and wider ranging Southern Cassowary (with the larger EOO) does not qualify. Sea Turtles (Green turtle Chelonia mydas – IUCN Endangered; Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta – IUCN Vulnerable; Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate – IUCN Critically Endangered; Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea – IUCN Vulnerable; Leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea – IUCN Vulnerable) All species of turtle found in the area have a global distribution, but there has been in significant global decline in numbers, for instance the Green Turtle has seen a 40 to 70% decline in the number of mature females over the past three generations. All are highly migratory species and use a wide range of marine and coastal habitats (IUCN, 2004). In Indonesia, the green turtle also has a very wide distribution with population size estimates varying between studies, depending on the methodology used (Tomascik, 1997), with up to 40,000 individuals estimated in Bali. All four species are protected under national legislation. The 2005 marine survey reports nests and regular sightings of green and hawksbill turtles on the beaches of Ogar Island over 65 km west of Tangguh. There are no reports of the leatherback turtle nesting in the area, and on the basis of consultation with fishermen, this species seems mostly restricted to the western part of Teluk Berau, outside the estuarine DMU. The Green turtle was recorded as being present within Teluk Bintuni during the 2013 marine surveys, but only likely to be infrequently feeding in the area. The loggerhead turtle is nesting on islands to the west of the DMU in the Teluk Berau, and feeding within the bay. While the nesting areas for the loggerhead turtle are outside the DMU, these protected species are foraging along the northern shore of Teluk Bintuni (as reported in Tangguh, 2013 marine survey report). The 2005 marine survey report suggests that villagers had caught two juvenile Hawksbill turtles at Pulau Amutu 40 nm east of Tangguh in Teluk Bintuni. Hawksbills constitute an occasional by-catch of the bay’s fishery, suggesting their presence is regular, not accidental. Hawksbill turtle were not recorded during the 2013 marine surveys. During the 2013 surveys several Olive Ridley Turtle observations were made, implying that this species is regularly feeding within Teluk Bintuni, although no evidence of nesting. In summary, Loggerhead Turtle, Hawksbill Turtle and Olive Ridley Turtle qualify under Tier 2 threshold for habitats which contain a nationally important concentration of nationally listing – as species have been observed foraging within the estuarine

Page 59 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

DMU. Green turtle and Leatherback Turtle do not qualify, based on the range of the species and low numbers/absence within the estuarine DMU.

5.2.2 Criterion 2: Endemic or restricted range species Some additional species which do not necessarily meet the IFC restricted range definition are included in this assessment if the species is nationally protected and has a limited range (typically endemic to a specific area or range less than 200,000km2), as opposed to the IFC definition of an extent of occurrence of 50,000km2 or less for terrestrial vertebrates and 100,000km2 (IFC, 2012b) For the purpose of this study, endemic refers to restricted to the province of West Papua as opposed to nationally endemic given the areal extent of the area. Species that are also present in Papua New Guinea or Wallacea region are not considered endemic species. Orchids of genera Bryobium, Bulbophyllum, Robiquieta, Dendrobium - Endemic Different species of orchids were identified over 16 years of terrestrial surveys that could not be identified to species level. This includeded one species of Bryobium, seven different species of Bulbophyllum, one species of Robiquieta and one species of Dendrobium, with four different species of Bulbophyllum recorded in a single year (2016) and different species present in different habitats, swamp forest, savannah and lowland forest. The orchid flora of New Guinea is one of the richest in the world, with some 2500 species in about 130 genera (Schuitema and De Vogel (2001). The majority of orchids grow as epiphytes, and particularly where the flower is high up in a tree, it will be difficult to identify the species. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that many different species exist within the genus of Bulbophyllum and Dendrobium, many of which as yet undescribed (Agustini et al., 2013). Many orchid species are endemic to specific regions within the island of New Guinea (Vollering et al, 2016). Six types of the genus Dendrobium are protected under Indonesian regulation 7/1999, however the 2002 and 2016 survey did not specify the actual Dendrobium species found. Expert consultation (Annex 3), suggests that Dendrobium sp. are widely distributed in West Papua. Considering both the high degree of endemicity found in Papuan orchids and the homogeneity of the lowland forest and freshwater swamp around Bintuni Bay, it is possible that the DMUs of individual species may contain between 1% and 95% of a global species population. Individual endemic orchid species do qualify under Tier 2. Myristica inaequalis – IUCN Vulnerable and Endemic Myristica inaequalis is a tree that grows up to 20 metres. It is a member of the nutmeg family (Family Myristicaceae). New Guinea contains by far the most species of the genus Myristica. The species is endemic to West Papua. The type specimen is from the Arfak mountains in the Bird’s Head Peninsula at an altitude of 800-850 m (De Wilde, 1998). The finding of this species at the Tangguh project site in 2016, in both lowland forest and freshwater swamp habitat, suggest that this species is not restricted to the mountainous region. Other records of the genus Myristica in the project area include Myristica fatua and Myristica lancifolia as well as a number of unidentified species of the genus in 2007. These two species are not endemic to West Papua. The genus was also widely recorded in the tree survey (Tangguh LNG, 2014) but this survey did not identify to species level.

Page 60 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The current record of 2016 suggest that the species is present in swamp and lowland forest area to mountainous forest in the Arfak mountains over a distance of some 200 km. The exact extent of occurrence and number of records is not known. It is considered that given the presence of the species in a wide range of habitats, and the limited other records, the DMU of this species may possibly support a viable concentration of Myristica inaequalis and does qualify as Tier 2 Critical Habitat. Glochidion daviesii, Scaevola burnettii and Freycinetia bomberaiensis – IUCN Not Evaluated and Endemic During the 2002 terrestrial survey three new species were found and subsequently described by Takeuchi and Huynh respectively. Usually, if a newly discovered species has only been found in a limited site, and with the knowledge of that moment, it should be considered a site and national endemic. Glochidion daviesii is a sub-canopy tree of up to 10-15m height. The genus of Glochidion is a prominent component of Malesian forests, often occurring in regrowth and edge situations. Glochidion daviesii grows in lowland forest and swamp forest with an occasional presence. A particular characteristic is the growth of clusters of fruits on the stem near the ground. Takeuchi suggests that Cassowaries act as the principal dispersal agent for G. daviessi (Takeuchi, 2003). Scaevola burnettii is a shrub, occurring in patches between fern thickets and on bare ground found in savannah clearings. It is known thus far only from the Melaleuca- Baeckea savannah at the Tangguh LNG site. In the 2002 terrestrial survey report, the botanical expect Takeuchi suggests that the populations of these species are likely to be minor relative to their total population, but that given their probably limited distributions, special consideration should be given to these species. Freycinetia bomberaiensis is related to the pandan tree and was common in lowland forest. The population size and extent of occurrence of these species have not been quantified. There are no unique geographic features that would give rise to unique species assemblages within the project site or the wider study area (see discussion under Criterion 4 below). In view of the homogeneity of the savannah, lowland forest and freshwater forest across the wider study area, it is considered unlikely that the entire population of these species is restricted to their respective DMUs. It is therefore judged that, despite representing the only DMU where the species was found, the respective DMUs of all three species qualify for Tier 2 Critical Habitat under Criterion 2, as they are endemic, although viable populations of the species are likely present across the wider study area. Black lory Chalcopsitta atra - Restricted Range The Black lory has a relatively restricted range (EOO: 77,300km2) being endemic to West Papua, and with a global population size of around 10,000 mature individuals (IUCN, 2015). The Black lory is a qualifying species of the West Papuan Lowland Endemic Bird Area (EBA). This species is typically found across a diversity of natural and modified forest, grassland and savannah habitat types (Birdlife, 2016). This species is resident with the DMU, having been recorded at the Tangguh site in 2002 and 2016. Less than 1% of the global population is likely to be within the DMU (the DMU represents 0.7% of the EOO of this species), and technical experts state that the status of this species is not concerning (see section A-3), it is proposed that this species does not qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment.

Page 61 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Olive-crowned Flowerpecker Dicaeum pectoral – Restricted Range This species of flowerpecker is restricted in range to West Papua (EOO: 97,800km2), being typically found in lowland forests, and while the global population size is not known it is likely to be less than 10,000 mature individuals (IUCN, 2012). This species is resident in the DMU, but less than 1% of the global population is likely to be within the DMU (the DMU represents 0.6% of the EOO of this species), and technical experts state that the status of this species is not concerning (see section A-3). It is proposed that this species does not qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata – Restricted Range, IUCN Vulnerable & Nationally Protected The Western Crowned Pigeon is endemic to West Papua with a patchy and restricted range (EOO: 83,500km2), and found in natural lowland, swamp and mangrove forests. The global population of this species has declined rapidly due to logging and hunting (Birdlife 2016), and the global population size is estimated between 3,000 and 10,000 mature individuals. This species is regarded as being resident in the DMU, although likely to be in low numbers having only been recorded during 2002 and 2007 surveys. The DMU only represents 0.65% of the EOO for this species, and less than 1% of the species population is likely to be in the DMU. However, this species is a qualifying species of the West Papuan Lowland EBA and technical experts (section A-3) have stated that this species needs to be managed with high priority, it is suggested that this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet – Restricted Range & Nationally Protected The dusky scrubfowl is endemic to the islands of West Papua, and not previously recorded on mainland West Papua (see IUCN, 2013). This species has a very restricted range (EOO: 31,900km2) and is found in natural lowland forests and swamps. The global population of this species is declining, and is estimated as being between 5,000 and 10,000 mature individuals. This species is likely to be resident in the DMU, having being recorded in 2002, 2007 and 2016. The DMU represents 1.7% of the EOO for this species, although less than 1% of the species global population is likely to be within the DMU. However, this species is a qualifying species of the West Papuan Lowland EBA and technical experts (section A-3) have stated that this species needs high priority in its conservation due to increased threat level, it is suggested that this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Western Ornate Fruit-dove Ptilinopus ornatus – Restricted Range The Western Ornate Fruit dove has a restricted range (EOO: 29,500km2) and typically only found at higher elevation in northern West Papua (IUCN, 2014). This species is found in natural lowland and montane forests, and while the global population size is unknown it is likely to be less than 10,000 mature individuals. It is likely that this species is not a permanent resident in the DMU, as this species has only been recorded once (in 2002) and is outside of its normal expected range. Although the DMU represents 1.8% of the EOO for this species, and with certainty no more than 1% of the global population would occur in the DMU. Therefore this species does not qualify in the critical habitat assessment.

Page 62 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Red-billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri – Restricted Range & Nationally Protected The Red-billed Brush Turkey has a restricted range (EOO: 122,000km2), is nationally protected, is endemic to West Papua and is typically found in natural lowland forests (IUCN, 2012). The population is in decline and although the global population size is unknown it is likely to be less than 7,000 mature individuals. This species was only recorded within the area in 2003. While the DMU represents 0.4% of the EOO for the species, and it is likely that less than 1% of the global population is inside the DMU, technical experts regard this species as being of high priority for conservation (see section A-3). This species is a qualify feature of the West Papuan Lowland EBA. Therefore, it is suggested that this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Forest Honeyeater Meliphaga montana – Restricted Range & Nationally Protected The Forest Honeyeater is a relatively restricted range (EOO 118,000km2) species and is nationally protected. The species has a patchy distribution across New Guinea and is typically found in natural and modified lowland forests (Birdlife 2016). The status and global population of this species is not known. This species has only been recorded once within the DMU (in 2000), which indicates that this is not a permanent resident within the DMU. The DMU represents 0.5% of the EOO of this species, and less than 1% of the species population is likely to occur within the DMU. Therefore it is regarded that this species does not qualify in the critical habitat assessment. Marbled honeyeater Pycnopygius cinereus – Restricted Range & Nationally Protected The Marbled Honeyeater is a relatively restricted range (EOO 106,000km2) species and is nationally protected. The species has a patchy distribution across New Guinea and is typically found in natural and modified lowland forests (Birdlife 2016), of similar ecology to the Forest Honeyeater. This species has only been recorded once within the DMU (in 2000), which indicates that this is not a permanent resident. The DMU represents less than 0.5% of the EOO of this species, and less than 1% of the species population is likely to occur within the DMU. Therefore it is regarded that this species does not qualify in the critical habitat assessment. Cekakak Pita Tanysiptera nympha – Restricted Range & Nationally Protected The Cekakak Pita has a patchy and very restricted range, being only found on western West Papua and eastern New Guinea (total EOO 104.000km2), occupying natural lowland, swamp and mangrove habitats (Birdlife, 2016). While the global population is in decline, its global population size is unknown, but certainly less than 10,000 mature individuals. This species is nationally protected. This species has only recently been recorded in the area (in the 2016 surveys), which may indicate its scarcity within the DMU. The DMU represents 0.5% of the EOO for this species, and less than 1% of the global population is likely to be resident in the DMU. Therefore, it is suggested that this species does not qualify in the critical habitat assessment. Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla – Restricted Range & IUCN Data Deficient The Lesser Tube-nosed Bat has a patchy distribution and only been recorded from ten or more locations across Papua, and only one location in West Papua (IUCN 2008). From the information available, this species appear to favour swamp forest of elevations up to 100m ASL (Bonaccorso, 1998).

Page 63 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The Lesser Tube-nosed Bat was recorded from the Tangguh site in 2016, and if confirmed, would be a significant expansion to the existing range of this species. N. draconilla is difficult to distinguish from the more common Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene albiventer, and N.albiventer has also been recorded from the Tangguh site. Based on the currently available information, the DMU does not sustain >95% of the global population, but may represent >1% of the global population. This species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Vogelkop Tree-Kangeroo Dendrolagus ursinus – Restricted Range & IUCN Vulnerable The Vogelkop Tree-Kangeroo has a very restricted range, which has significantly reduced over the last 60-70 years (Flannery, 1995). The main threats to this species are hunting and increasing habitat loss from logging and agricultural expansion. Once a species found across West Papua at all elevations, it is now only found in more montane forest habitats at elevations above 1,000m ASL (IUCN, 2008). This species was recorded in 2000 during the original AMDAL survey (Tangguh, 2003), but has not been recorded since. This species is also limited to areas with little or no human presence (Wikramanayake, et al. (2002), and is therefore very unlikely to occur within the DMU. Therefore this species does not qualify. Brown Dorcopsis Dorcopsis muelleri – Restricted Range & Nationally Protected While the Brown Dorcopsis is endemic to West Papua and occurs across the lowlands of western Papua and neighbouring islands, its population size is thought to be large and stable (IUCN, 2008). This species is found in both natural and modified habitats, including swamp forests. This species has been recorded within the DMU, and the population is regarded as being reasonably healthy (Tangguh, 2003). The global population size is unknown. Yet the DMU is unlikely to sustain more than 1% of the global population of this species and therefore does not qualify as being critical. Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai – Restricted Range This species of skink has a very restricted range, is endemic to West Papua where it is only known in the lowland forests of the Tangguh area (IUCN, 2015). This species has been classified as being of Least Concern, and is likely to occur along much of the Bombarai peninsula (Zug & Allison, 2006). While this species may be abundant its range is very restricted with more than 1% of the population likely to occur within the DMU. Therefore this species does qualify under Tier 2 of the critical habitat assessment. Nursery frog Cophixalus sp. nov., Mawatta frog Hylophorbus sp. nov & Skink Emoia sp. nov – Restricted Range & New Species Nursery frogs are a group of amphibians endemic to Papua and northeast Australia with more than 60 species described, typically found in lowland and swamp forests (Frost, 2013) and 18 species from New Guinea. During the 2002 survey a new species of Cophixalus was collected, but has not yet been described. Mawatta frogs are a group of amphibians endemic to Papua with more than 26 species described typically found in lowland and swamp forests (Frost, 2013). Several species have a very limited range. During the 2002 survey a new species of Hylophorbus was collected, but has not yet been described. The group of skinks in the Emoia genus have a wide distribution across the Pacific- Australian region with more than 75 species described, of which 29 have been previously recorded from Indonesia (Marshall & Beehler, 2012). During the 2002 a new species of Emoia was collected, but has not yet been described.

Page 64 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Little is known about these three new species. They may occur across the region or restricted to the DMU. However, the forest habitats across the DMU and across the wider landscape are relatively uniform (with no physical barriers to speciation), and it is possible that these species are widely distributed. However, due to the lack of information on the distribution and ecology of these three new species, and adopting a precautionary approach, it is assumed that all three species qualify under Tier 1 of the critical habitat assessment. Papua wrinkled frog Platymantis (Cornufer) punctatus – Restricted Range This species of frog has a patchy but wide distribution across the Vogelkop Peninsula, and is presumed to have a large population being regarded as being of Least Concern (IUCN, 2004). It is typically found in natural habitats near rivers and in swamp forests (Gunther 1999). This species is resident in DMU, having been recorded in 2007 and 2011. Given the large population and wide distribution this species does not qualify under the critical habitat assessment. Melanotaenia irianjaya Irian Jaya Rainbow Fish – Endemic; Melanotaenia arfakensis Arfak Rainbow Fish – IUCN Vulnerable – Endemic & Pseudomugil reticulatus Vogelkop Blue-Eye - Endemic M. irianjaya and P. reticulatus were found present in Siripa Creek during the 2000 and 2002 terrestrial surveys. M. arfakensis was recorded present during the 2007 survey, but subsequently it is deemed likely that this was a mis-identification (see expert comments in Annex A-3) and this was in fact M. irianjaya. Numbers of individual fish caught were representative of a healthy population. Melanotaenia irianjaya occurs in rainforest creeks and small rivers in West Papua It is also collected from the Djarua, Krabra-Kladuk, Kamundan and Timoforo watersheds (Tappin, 2007). It is considered widespread in the Bird’s Head Peninsula (Unmack et al, 2013). Pseudomugil reticulatus, commonly named Vogelkop Blue Eye, was known only from a single specimen collected from a rainforest stream, about 2 km east of Ajamaru Village in the middle of the Bird’s Head Peninsula, where it inhabits well-vegetated rainforest streams. But Ivantsoff et al, (1997) have collected further specimens in the environs of Timika and Tembagapura south of the study area. Both species are considered exotic species in the aquarium trade and are exploited. In the wild, the species populations are at risk of exploitation, use of pesticides and increasing loss of habitat. The endemic freshwater species are resident in the DMU, having been recorded in several years. Given the wide distribution of Melanotaenia irianjaya and Pseudomugil reticulatus across West Papua (see Technical expert comments in section A-4), these species are judged not to qualify under the critical habitat assessment.

5.2.3 Criterion 3: Migratory or congregatory species Eight species of bird (Table 4, Chapter 4) were identified as part of the identification of priority species for conservation. All of these species are also protected under national legislation. Great Knot is covered under critically endangered or endangered species above. Great White Egret Ardea alba & Little Egret Egretta garzetta Both these species of egrets are cosmopolitan in distribution with very large ranges, exceeding 50,000,000km2 and population sizes in excess of 2,000,000 mature

Page 65 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

individuals (Birdlife, 2016). Both species are significant post-breeding dispersive migrants (del Hoyo et al. 1992), however, while the Palearctic and Nearctic populations are migratory (Flint et al. 1984), populations which breed in the tropics are sedentary or partially migratory. Both species are relatively abundant throughout their range, feeding in estuaries, swamp and mangrove swamps and nesting in coastal forests and scrub. Both species are nationally protected. Little Egret is resident within the DMU, while the Great White Egret is less frequently observed, yet the maximum number of individual birds within the coastal habitats of the DMU are likely to be between 10-20 mature individuals. Given the large range and abundance of these species and that the DMU represents less than 0.02% of the species EOO, these species do not qualify under this critical habitat assessment. Species of Sternidae This assessment includes five species of tern which have similar ecology and distribution, namely Chlidonias hybridus, Chlidonias leucopterus, Sterna bergii, Sterna fuscata, and Sterna hirundo. All five species are found in the open water and along the coastal habitat margins in Bintuni Bay, feeding on small fish and crustacean. All five species are nationally protected. While these species are classified under migratory species, the extent of their migration varies between species (Birdlife, 2016). Sterna bergii is a partial migrant, while Sterna fuscata, and similarly Sterna hirundo, is a more typical long distant migrant (del Hoyo et al., 1996) and after breeding can become strongly pelagic (Higgins and Davies, 1996). All five species have very large global ranges (EOO in excess of 16,000,000km2). All five species have been recorded in the marine DMU and along the coastal areas of Tanggih and Bintuni Bay, but not in any sizable numbers (between 50-100 individuals maximum), and no breeding colonies are known within the DMU. Given the large range and abundance of these species, and the DMU represents less than 0.04% of the EOO, these species do not qualify under this critical habitat assessment.

5.2.4 Criterion 4: Unique species assemblages associated with key evolutionary processes or providing key ecosystem services This particular criterion includes two elements:  Key evolutionary processes.  Key ecosystem services. Both key evolutionary processes and specific ecosystem services represent spatially- limited biodiversity values/ecosystem services, in that they are relatively irreplaceable in the landscape, and potentially vulnerable in being able to remain there. This criterion is particularly identified by physical landscape features promoting evolution, or by unique groups of species with distinct evolutionary history. IFC Guidance Note (IFC 2012b) lists two key factors that define the presence of key evolutionary processes: 'the physical features of a landscape' and 'subpopulations of species that are phylogenetically or morphogenetically distinct'. This is interpreted as operating at a relatively fine scale, e.g. a locally distinct feature in the land/seascape (e.g. islands, caves, mountains, ecotones) that has given rise to a specific flora or fauna, rather than a broad biogeographic region. Inspection of maps and interpretation of the survey reports does not reveal any landscape features or unique species assemblages in the study area that would meet this aspect of the criterion.

Page 66 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Examples of specific ecosystem services that would meet the criterion of a unique species assemblage providing ecosystem services could be interpreted as a sacred lake that holds particularly unique significance to local communities, or a single patch of forest that may provide a type of fibre or medicinal plant found nowhere else, or a low ridge in the land that may provide singular flood control. Knowledge about the interaction of local communities with the environment in the study area was obtained through consultation within the context of the AMDAL in 2002 and 2014. There are currently no communities living within the site perimeter. Dependence on any unique physical characteristics of the area (e.g. specific habitats/forest types) is low, with alternative sites within reach of existing communities. The communities have been consulted on specific sites of cultural importance (e.g. sacred spirit house, sacred rock), and these have been set aside from development. None of these culturally important features are based on specific assemblages of species. The potential for unique species assemblages to provide provisioning services has also been considered. The Nipah and Sago palm associated with the fresh water Nypa- Metroxylon Palm Swamp Forest are used or harvested by local communities, but these are also abundant in nearby areas that are more accessible to the communities. There are no unique and irreplaceable species assemblages in the study area that are known to provide key ecosystem services (cultural, provisioning, regulating or supporting) and on which the communities living near the project site depend. The lack of any specific or unique species or assemblages arising from key evolutionary processes, as defined in the IFC guidance, or associated with key ecosystem services (as per the definition of critical habitat in the ADB Safeguards Policy) suggests that this criterion does not trigger qualification of parts of the study area as critical habitat. Sago and other natural resources extracted from the forest may however qualify as biodiversity of significant social, economic or cultural importance to local communities as discussed under the next criterion.

5.2.5 Criterion 5: Biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities While criterion 4 concentrates on unique species assemblages, criterion 5 considers the ecosystem services from biodiversity in general. The assessment of significance of ecosystem services to local communities is assessed retrospectively in line with the Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment (ESR for IA) method of the World Resources Institute (Landsberg et al, 2013) using information from the AMDAL (2014) and based on previous consultation with local communities. The first four steps in this approach concern the identification, prioritization, scoping of impact and establishing the baseline of ecosystem services present in the study area. Ecosystem services affected by the project are prioritized when all three of the following criteria are met: (i) the project might affect the ability of others to benefit from the service; (ii) the affected service is important to beneficiaries’ well-being; and (iii) beneficiaries do not have viable alternatives for that service. Section 4.2.4 summarizes the ecosystem services used by local communities in the wider study area. Potential priority ecosystem services are as follows:  Forest produce used as vegetables, fruit or staple food (e.g. yams, sago).  Forest produce used for building or manufacture of tools (thatch, timber, poles)  Forest produce used as medicine.

Page 67 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Forest produce that is traded (e.g. gaharu, fragrant woods, wildlife specimens).  Game (e.g. dear meat, eggs).  Fisheries resources in nearshore and offshore environment (e.g. nursery grounds, crab and shellfish, shrimp and fish stocks).  Cultural identity associated with traditional hunting and gathering.  Additional regulating and supporting services in support of these ecosystem services. To understand the potential impact, it is important to assess the dependency on the ecosystem services. The dependency on forest and mangrove produce will have changed since before the first Tangguh Development, brought about by an increase in prosperity, change in livelihoods and availability of alternative building materials, medicine or food. During construction of the first Tangguh Development, a fence was erected around the buffer zone, marking the overall site perimeter with a view to improve security and facilitate guarding. Another fence along the inside perimeter prevents access to the actual plant facilities. The local community can still access the buffer zone of Tangguh LNG forest area but it is restricted from entering the inside perimeter fence. There is no specific agreement with neighbouring communities about access to the buffer zone, but the marking and boundaries of the buffer zone have been shared with the community. However, as part of an agreement with the local communities in 1999, the Manggosa pathway along the outer perimeter fence was completed. This provides the local communities of Saengga, Tanah Merah with a small track that can be used to access the hamlet of Manggosa and nearby Sago palms (east of the LNG site). Currently the surrounding community has minimum direct dependency on the buffer zone of Tangguh LNG forest areas, as Tangguh LNG presence provides socio- economic benefits to the villagers in Tofoi, Tanah Merah, Saengga and Onar villages, in part for the resettlement programme in 2004-2005. Training has been carried out to improve the skills of the community with the objective of improving agriculture, fishing, carpentry, machine workshop, business management and household management. With the development of the agriculture, to date, Tanah Merah has become a stocking point for vegetables, fruit and fish to feed Tangguh LNG’s workforce. The current understanding of the interaction of the community with the project area is that the communities mainly depend on fishing in the nearshore and offshore waters (despite having designated areas that are off limits to local fishermen for safety reasons). Medicine, staple food (sago, yams), tradable items such as wildlife specimens or gaharu, game and building materials, may occasionally be taken from the buffer forest, but in view of the scale and location of the development, close to existing facilities, these services are less important to the well-being of the surrounding communities; and there will be a supply of alternatives within reach in non-affected forest or a substitute source of income from newly developed livelihoods. The relatively limited scale of the development, combined with the fact that there are no communities actually living within the site perimeter, implies that the regulating and supporting services provided by the site are of negligible importance.

Page 68 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

In view of their importance to local communities, it would appear that only the fishing grounds (present in nearshore and offshore waters close to the developments) should be classified as a priority ecosystem service. The impact and mitigation measures will be discussed in in Chapter 6.

5.2.6 Criterion 6: Protected areas or proposed for protection. According to the ADB SPS (2009), critical habitats include those areas either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet the criteria of the IUCN, the Ramsar Sites of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world natural heritage sites. Two protected areas have been identified in the study area (Figure 12):  Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve.  Gunung Wagura Kote Nature Reserve. The Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve is connected to the project area via habitat or functional connectivity, with bird, bat and fish species, and mangrove propagules or seeds, able to freely move in-between the two areas along water ways, shoreline habitat and estuary. On the grounds of this habitat and ecological connectivity, Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve does qualify as critical habitat under ADB. Gunung Wagura Kote hosts more mountainous forest habitat. There will be few species that this habitat has in common with that of the lowland habitats (savannah, swamp forest, lowland forest and mangroves) near the project area. A number of species of the lowland forest at the project site may also be present in Gunung Wagura Kote. There is no habitat connectivity as the area is separated by other distinct habitat types and larger rivers. Some degree of ecological connectivity may occur via certain species (fruit bats, fruit pigeons, hornbills) (Corlett, 2009) or male larger mammals searching widely for a mate (Fisher and Owens, 2000; Sandell, 1989), but the distance extends beyond typical territorial or home ranges or seed dispersal distances of most species (±100km). The populations of individual non-migratory flora and fauna species are probably relatively isolated, with connectivity limited to a few fruit-eating birds or bats sporadically straying across. On the grounds of the very limited expected connectivity, Gunung Wagura Kote reserve does not qualify as critical habitat.

5.2.7 Criterion 7: Highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems This criterion covers rare and threatened habitats that are not necessarily identified under criteria 1 to 3. No quantitative criteria exist for highly threatened and/or unique ecosystems, but the IFC considers these as areas determined to be irreplaceable or of high priority/significance based on systematic conservation planning techniques carried out at the landscape and/or regional scale by governmental bodies, recognized academic institutions and/or other relevant qualified organizations (including internationally-recognized NGOs) or that are recognized as such in existing regional or national plans, such as the National Biodiversity Action Plan. IFC (IFC, 2012b) defines ecosystems considered to be 'highly threatened' or 'unique' as those that (i) are at risk of significantly decreasing in area or quality; or (ii) with a small spatial extent; and/or (iii) containing unique assemblages of species including assemblages or concentrations of biome-restricted species”.

Page 69 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

An example of a unique ecosystem would be one that occurs in very limited numbers in the region, such as the only lowland dipterocarp forest. An example of a highly threatened ecosystem would be one that is losing a high percentage of its area each year. None of the ecosystems (or habitat types) listed in Section 4.2.2 are particularly unique to West Papua or the island of New Guinea. On account of unique ecosystems, these ecosystems would not qualify under this critical habitat assessment. Deforestation rates are high in the province of West Papua, although official figures are lacking. Over the period of 2006-2011, GCF (2013) calculated a forest degradation rate of 1.31%, equivalent to an area of 120,000ha per year. In neighbouring Papua province, GCF reports deforestation and forest degradation rates in the order of 0.09% (25,700ha/yr) and 0.67% (181.700ha/yr) respectively over the same period of 2006- 2011. The high rates of deforestation and forest degradation in West Papua are attributed to logging, infrastructure projects, fires, widespread encroachment, and conversion of natural forest into agriculture / plantation and a reclassification of primary forest type to secondary forest type (GCF, 2013). Table 10 details the forest cover of West Papua by forest type.

Table 10 - Forest ecosystem cover in West Papua in 2011 (GCF, 2013)

Forest type Condition and area Total Primary Secondary Dryland forest 1.243 million ha 4.587 million ha 5.83 million ha ecosystem Mangrove 0.38 million ha 0.11 million ha 0.49 million ha ecosystem Swamp forest 0.67 million ha 0.07 million ha 0.74 million ha ecosystem

If present rates of deforestation and forest degradation were to continue, these ecosystems may over time well be considered threatened (i.e. vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered), measured against red list for ecosystems criteria developed by the IUCN (Rodriguez et al., 2011; Keith et al., 2013). For the purpose of this critical habitat assessment, it is considered that where these ecosystems are known to host species triggering Criteria 1-3, the mitigation measures (as detailed in Sections 6.2 and 6.5) put in place will also prevent the irreversible loss of the overarching viability of the ecosystems.

5.3 Priority Biodiversity Features This section summarises the priority biodiversity features that meet the definition of critical habitat under either ADB (2009) or the IFC Performance Standards (2012a).

5.3.1 Priority Species and Associated Habitats This assessment has gone through a series of steps to identify priority species for conservation, leading to the short-listing of species which meet the Tier 1 and Tier 2 critical habitat assessment criteria. Table 11 below summaries the number of species which have been assessed as part of this review.

Page 70 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 11 – Stages for the Identification of Tier 1 & Tier 2 Critical Habitat Assessment Species

Stage in the Number and species assessed assessment

1. Baseline assessment More than 980 plants, 80 mammals, 210 birds, 110 reptiles and amphibians, and 99 fish have been recorded within the Tangguh area since 2000.

2. Species of 19 plant species conservation concern 62 species of bird (Chapter 4) 13 species of mammals 17 species of reptile & amphibians 2 species of fish

3. Critical Habitat 6 plant species and one group of endemic orchids Assessment qualifying 19 species of bird species 5 species of mammals Priority species 10 species of reptile & amphibians (Chapter 5)

Tier 1 criterion: Nursery frog Cophixalus sp. nov. (Restricted Range) Mawatta frog Hylophorbus sp. nov. (Restricted Range) Skink Emoia sp. nov. (Restricted Range)

Tier 2 criterion: Calophyllum insularum (Endangered and Endemic) Livistona sp Fan palm (Endemic and Nationally Protected) Orchid species of genus Bryobium, Bulbophyllum, Robiquieta Dendrobium (Endemic) Myristica inaequalis (Endemic) Glochidion daviesii (Endemic) Scaevola burnettii (Endemic) Freycinetia bomberaiensis (Endemic) Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris (Endangered & Migratory) Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla (Restricted Range) Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis (Nationally Protected & Near Threatened) Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate (Nationally Protected & Critically Endangered) Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Nationally Protected & Vulnerable) Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta (Nationally Protected & Vulnerable) Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai (Restricted Range) Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet (Restricted Range & Nationally Protected) Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata (Restricted Range, Vulnerable & Nationally Protected) Red-billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri (Restricted Range & Nationally Protected) Northern Cassowary Casuarius unappendiculatus (Nationally Protected & Vulnerable)

Page 71 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

And the associated habitats for these species:  Swamp forests – notably due to the presence of Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet, Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata and Fan palm Livistonia sp.  Lowland forests – notably due to the presence of Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla, Northern Cassowary Casuarius unappendicultus, Red- billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri, two new species of frog, and two species of reptiles, and two priority plant species Calophyllum insularum and Myristica inaequalis.  Estuarine waters – notably due to presence of Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley Lepidochelys olivacea, Loggerhead Turtles Caretta caretta and Humpback Dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis.

5.3.2 Priority Ecosystem Services Based on the preliminary classification of significance to local communities as discussed in Section 5.2.5, only the fishing grounds are considered priority ecosystem services. This ecosystem service warrants further impact assessment and mitigation, as provided in Chapter 6.

5.3.3 Priority Protected Areas There is no direct overlap of the project site with the Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve (Cagar Alam Teluk Bintuni), but in view of potential habitat and functional connectivity, impacts will be discussed in Chapter 6.

Page 72 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6 Impact Assessment and Mitigation

The purpose of this chapter is to assess the project-related direct, indirect and residual impacts on critical habitat features, identified in the previous chapter. Where an adverse impact is likely, mitigation measures are proposed that are designed to maintain a high biodiversity value in the affected area, and support the conditions necessary to maintain viable populations of endangered and critically endangered species and other priority features.

6.1 Impact Evaluation The AMDAL (2014) analyses a wide range of impacts on different receptors. Those impacts that have the potential to adversely affect biota directly or indirectly have been reviewed and are re-assessed in this chapter in terms of their specific impact on priority species and associated critical habitat. In addition to the impacts discussed in the AMDAL (2014), three additional aspects of the overall project have been assessed, these being invasive species, increased shipping traffic and unintended releases in terms of their potential to adversely affect priority species and associated critical habitat. Table 12 describes the activities that have the potential to significantly impact marine and terrestrial biota, as identified in the AMDAL (2014). From Table 12, it can be inferred that impacts on biodiversity, priority species and associated critical habitat, can be summarised as follow:  Direct and indirect effects of land clearance activities.  Direct and indirect effects of discharge of drilling mud / cuttings.  Direct and indirect effects of foreshore development, dredging and dredge disposal.  Direct and indirect effects of operational discharge of effluents.  Direct and indirect effects of presence of offshore platforms and vessels.  Direct and indirect effects of sound emissions.  Direct and indirect effects of sea transportation.  Direct and indirect effects of underwater sound. Additional impacts may arise from the following activities that were not explicitly assessed in the AMDAL (2014):  Direct and indirect effects of invasive species.  Direct and indirect effects of spills of hazardous material, including hydrocarbon and chemicals.

Page 73 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 12 – Overview of significant impacts (AMDAL, 2014)

Receptor Development Phase1 Description of Impact Source of Impact Construction phase Marine biota Gas exploitation activities Changes in nekton diversity Transportation and installation of offshore platform Overboard discharge of drilling mud / cuttings Underwater sound from production well drilling activity Existence of Offshore Platform

Terrestrial flora LNG Plant activities Changes in cover, structure, Land clearing composition and diversity of flora species Terrestrial fauna LNG Plant activities Changes in fauna species Changes in fauna species diversity distribution Secondary impact from changes in structure and composition of flora species Changes in fauna species Changes in wildlife habitat distribution Increase in noise level Changes in wildlife habitat Land clearing

Marine biota LNG Plant activities Changes in nekton diversity Sea transportation for workforce, (Including marine mammals) equipment and materials Derivative impact of increase in ammonia concentration

Marine biota Marine facilities activities Changes in nekton diversity Sea transportation for workforce, (Including marine mammals) equipment and materials loading and transfer of LNG and condensate Decrease in plankton Dredging and disposal of dredge

abundance material Decrease in benthos Dredge material disposal abundance

Operations Phase Marine biota Marine facilities activities Decrease in benthos Dredge material disposal from abundance - dredging maintenance dredging Marine biota Gas exploitation activities Changes in nekton diversity Existence of offshore platform and (Including marine mammals) transfer of LNG and condensate

Note: 1. Decommissioning is not currently considered as the facilities may be transferred to other operators at the end of the PSC obligations, while the offshore platforms and support facilities may be decommissioned and dismantled in accordance with Indonesian regulations and PSC obligations.

Figure 14 shows a map of the project infrastructure associated with these sources of impact.

Page 74 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 14 – Map of project infrastructure

Page 75 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.2 Evaluation of Impacts on Priority Species and Associated Habitats The analysis of impacts, described in the AMDAL (2014) is used here to scope and evaluate the impacts on priority species and associated habitat, based on an overlap of the zone of influence with their respective habitats. For each of the potential impacts described above, it is further explained how the identified priority species or associated habitat may be directly or indirectly affected, followed by an evaluation of the required mitigation of that impact if considered appropriate.

6.2.1 Discharge of drilling mud / cuttings Potential receptors: Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis, Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and and loggerhead, Caretta caretta. Disposal of drilling mud and drill cuttings will temporarily increase the concentration to total suspended solids and oil and grease in the seawater around the wells. This in turn could affect nekton, plankton and benthos in the area. Modelling suggests that concentrations of suspended solids increase up to 21 mg/L. The concentrations dissipate to 5 mg/L within 500 m of the discharge location. There is a marginal release of oil on cuttings associated with synthetic or oil-based muds, but if required to be used, the concentrations will meet AMDAL and permit conditions. Drilling is a temporary activity. Effective discharge of drill cuttings / mud is limited to a period of 30 days over a total drilling period of 3-6 months per well. It is clear from the AMDAL (2014) that the effect of drilling mud and cuttings on water quality is shortlived and limited in extent owing to the rapid dilution and dispersal of the drill cuttings. The physical and chemical persistence of drill cuttings and mud on the seafloor depends on prevailing flow patterns and biodegradability. The strong bottom currents in the estuary will aid in redistribution of the drill cuttings. Benthos may be adversely affected from direct toxicity, burial, oxygen depletion and changes in sediment composition. This will initially lead to a decrease in benthic diversity, followed by an increase in opportunistic species such as polychaetes. Over time, the affected area should revert to normal production and biomass levels (IOGP, 2016) as sediments are re-distributed and recovery and recruitment of bentos ensues. Marine turtles and dolphin species are at low risk of harm from drill cuttings discharges as they usually avoid or move away from plumes of suspended drill cuttings. The initial reduction in benthic productivity within a small footprint around the well would not affect the marine turtles or dolphins. Required mitigation will be in the form of:  Avoidance: No discharge of Organic-Phase Drilling Fluid (OPDF) as whole fluid.  Minimization: Use of water-based muds where technically feasible. If synthetic- based muds are to be used for technical reasons, the discharge will meet AMDAL and permit conditions.  Restoration: not required.  Offset: not required.

Page 76 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.2.2 Foreshore development, dredging and dredge disposal Potential receptors: Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis, Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and and loggerhead, Caretta caretta. The construction of the bulk offloading facility and jetty, pipelay, and cabling for umbilicals involves dredging and trenching. Dredging will also be required to attain navigational depths. Modelling suggests that concentration of suspended solids increase up to 12 mg/L, with the sediment plume travelling up to 500 m before it attenuates. Maintenance dredging may be carried out at 5 yearly intervals to maintain the navigational depths. Dredged material will be disposed of in two designated areas at depths of 50 m in Teluk Bintuni / Berau (Figure 14). Capital dredging will last up to 12 months during the construction period. Maintenance dredging is completed in 3-6 months at a five year intervals during operation, and more frequent only if deemed necessary. Seabed disturbance from dredging and dredge disposal activities may affect water and sediment quality. This in turn could affect the priority species, Humpback dolphin, Hawksbill, Olive Ridley and loggerhead turtle. Similar to the discharge of drill cuttings, it is not expected that suspended sediments from dredging and dredge disposal operations will adversely affect the water quality in the Bintuni Bay because of the dispersive characteristics. Moreover, the nearshore areas are characterized by naturally high concentrations of suspended matter, implying that the estuarine fauna have adaptability to the sedimentary and turbid environment. Benthos will be affected at the location of dredging in the harbour area, fill operations associated with the bulk offloading facility, trenching or jetting of the seabed alongside the pipeline route and dredge disposal in the designated (and previously used) areas. This results in localised effects. Benthos is expected to recover quickly. The localized loss in benthic productivity is of no significance to dolphins and sea turtles feeding in the area. Dredging may affect marine turtles directly through injury or mortality through accidental intake and entrainment. The use of cutter-suction dredger, clamshell or bucket dredger is considered a low risk, as no turtle mortalities have been reported with this dredge type. There is evidence of very low levels of mortality of marine turtles during dredging with trailing suction hopper dredgers (Dickerson et al. 2004). Sighting reports on Olive Ridley, Hawksbill and loggerhead turtle in central Bintuni- Berau Bay suggest that these species are more likely to be present in the western section and outer islands in Teluk Berau (approx. 65 km west of from the Tangguh (Marine Survey, 2006 and 2013). Based on their rare occurrence in the area designated for dredging it is not expected that turtles are at risk of entrainment. While impacts on the priority species are not expected, the likelihood of an impact can be further reduced by restricting any dredging and dredge disposal activities to the designated areas. Seawater sampling and monitoring at upstream, downstream and a control station will be carried out during and after the dredging programme. Conservation of these species will benefit from environmental awareness building programmes for the communities around Bintuni Bay, for instance by encouraging the release of any turtles accidentally caught in fishing nets or discouraging trade and consumption of turtle meat or eggs.

Page 77 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.2.3 Operational discharge of effluents Potential receptors: Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis, Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and loggerhead, Caretta caretta. The LNG facilities (Existing Train 1 and 2 and added Train 3) will result in different wastewater effluents, including brine water reject, produced water, wastewater contaminated with chemicals or oily water, and domestic waste water. The effluent will increase the salinity, biological and chemical oxygen demand near the outfall. However, tidal and wind driven currents further dilute the concentrations to insignificant levels. The water quality in Bintuni Bay is characteristic of an estuary with high input of sediment and organic matter loading from runoff and rivers draining swamps and mangroves. Dry and wet season measurement of seawater quality across a number of stations show that in 2012-2013, the parameters Total Phosphorus, N-Nitrate, suspended solids and turbidity regularly exceeded the seawater quality standards (Ministry of Environment Decree 5/2004 Appendix III) consistent with natural inputs. In contrast, produced water constituents such as of PAH, phenols, oil, grease, and heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper and zinc were below the seawater quality standards, despite the Tangguh facility having been in operation for several years. Rapid dispersion, evaporation, adsorption to sediment, photolysis and aerobic biodegradation of hydrocarbons and other contaminants will reduce the concentrations in the water column. Operational discharges are expected to continue over the lifetime of the facility (25 years). Contaminants may enter the food chain, which in turn could affect apex predators such as the dolphin Sousa chinensis and turtles because such large, long-lived species have been shown to bioaccumulate contaminants (Gui et al, 2014; Keller et al, 2012). Dolphins and turtles have large home ranges. The exposure time to key contaminants in the effluent is too short to induce a significant toxic effect. Furthermore, studies in the Gulf of Mexico of bioaccumulation from produced water-derived contaminants concluded that there is no indication of significant bioaccumulation in marine organisms. Comprehensive studies of contaminants in tissues of wild fish populations in the North Sea have not revealed elevated levels of contaminants arising from produced water (OGP, 2005; Bakke et al., 2013). It is therefore unlikely that dolphins and sea turtles in Teluk Bintuni will experience a detrimental effect from the release of wastewater effluent including produced water constituents. The volume of contaminants entering the estuarine environment is mitigated by:  Avoidance: no discharge of off-spec (i.e. failure to meet the prescribed specifications) wastewater during normal operation.  Minimization: wastewater treatment prior to discharge; meet the conditions under the applicable Wastewater Discharge Permit to Sea; and investigation of the potential for a reduction in volume through reuse of treated produced water for utility water, and reuse of treated sewage for road watering and other non- consumption purpose.  Restoration: not required.  Offset: not required.

Page 78 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.2.4 Presence of offshore platforms Potential receptors: Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis, Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and loggerhead, Caretta caretta.. The platforms and other infrastructure located on the seabed provides habitat to benthos and fish species. The AMDAL (2014) concludes that this has a positive impact on the productivity of the estuary. Not only will a range of invertebrates and fish settle or seek refuge on or near the structures, but the fact that an exclusion zone is imposed will also prevent exploitation of the fish around those structures. The additional production may in turn be beneficial to the dolphins and turtle, although this is likely to be only a marginal benefit. The additional productivity that is created is small in comparison to the overall ecosystem productivity. The impact will be sustained throughout the lifetime of the facilities (25 years). No mitigation would be required because no negative impact on priority species is expected.

6.2.5 Sea transportation (including LNG tanker traffic) Potential receptors: Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis, Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and loggerhead, Caretta caretta.. Both during construction and operations, there will be a need for vessels to support construction activities, transport of supplies, material and people, or assist in maintenance activities. Vessels include support vessels, tug boats, material barges and landing craft. LNG and condensate tankers will export the gas and condensate products. The number of tankers visiting Tangguh will increase. Vessels will be present in larger numbers during construction of Train 3, while vessels involved in the operation and transport of supplies or product continue to be present throughout the operational facilities’ lifetime. Dolphins and turtles may suffer from vessel strikes or entrainment in ship propellors. The AMDAL (2014) concludes that such an impact is unlikely. No such incidents have been recorded during existing Tangguh activities. Sea turtles will move away from approaching ships, while dolphins, including groups of Sousa chinensis have been noted to approach moving vessels (bow riding) (Erftemeijer et al., 1989). Required mitigation includes:  Avoidance: Boat-free “dolphin habitat zone” by re-routing speedboats between Babo and LNG Plant Site to deeper water (>12m), during all months with calm sea conditions (due to safety concerns on rough sea days, this action is limited to the dry season and other calm periods).  Avoidance: Ensure compliance on Tangguh Policy to route LNG tankers along established international sea lanes through Halmahera (Maluku) waters. Avoid travel through Raja Ampat, which features high biodiversity value and whale migration corridors.  Minimization: Tangguh LNG has implemented a procedure for marine mammal protection for current operational activities, which includes regulations on

Page 79 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

vessel routes and speed restrictions. This procedure will continue to be applied for Tangguh LNG Expansion activities.  Restoration: not required.  Offset: not required.

6.2.6 Underwater sound Potential receptors: Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis, Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and loggerhead, Caretta caretta. The primary sources of underwater sound related to the project include vessel traffic, drilling, geophysical surveys to identify subsurface geologic structures or seabed characteristics and pile driving during construction of the bulk offloading facility, expansion of the Combo dock and the construction of the jetty. Vessel traffic is likely to occur throughout the project duration, whereas drilling will occur over several months for each well. Pile-driving and geophysical surveys are typically shorter duration activities. Therefore the majority of sounds related to the project are expected to be associated with vessel traffic (propulsion and mechanical vibrations) and drilling activities (mechanical vibration for jack-up platforms), which are typically continuous in nature, predominantly low frequency and low source level (AMDAL 2014) compared to sounds commonly associated with pile-driving and geophysical surveys, which are impulsive/intermittent in nature with higher source levels (Genesis 2011). Potential effects from sound on marine mammals, fish and turtles are generally categorized as being either physical auditory injury or behavioural disturbance, such as changes in movement and vocalization. Another behavioural aspect is related to ’masking effects’, otherwise described as interference with natural sounds used for communication and navigation. Potential physical injury is typically considered in terms of hearing impairment, which is commonly considered in terms of a permanent change in hearing sensitivity or permanent threshold shift (PTS) (Southall et al, 2007). Such potential physical impacts are generally considered possible if marine mammals are exposed to high levels of anthropogenic (human generated) sound at close range. Behavioural responses of marine mammals to underwater sound are generally more variable, context dependent and less predictable than potential physical impacts (Southall et al., 2007). In terms of impacts on the Humpback dolphin, it is noted that marine mammals produce and use sounds in various ways and in various contexts, such as communication and feeding. The Humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis), is an odontocete species of marine mammal and is therefore expected to utilise sound within a medium frequency range (from 1 kHz to over 20 kHz). Whilst the frequency range of sounds associated with project activities may overlap with the hearing capability of the Humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis), received sound levels are expected to be below those associated with potential physical injury for mid- frequency odontocete marine mammals. Therefore the likelihood of physical injury is considered to be low. It is likely that sound associated with the project activity will be heard or perceived by Humpback dolphins depending on their location relative to the activities. Therefore

Page 80 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

some level of behavioural response may occur, such as temporarily moving away from or avoiding sources of underwater sound, which further reduces any risk of potential injury impacts. Loggerhead, Olive Ridley and Hawksbill Turtles are known to hear sound within a frequency range of 50-100Hz to 1-1.5kHz (Piniak, 2012, Bartol, 2014). Whilst this overlaps with the frequency range of sounds associated with project activities, there is no information currently available to suggest sound from these activities may result in either potential physical or behavioural impacts to turtles. An indirect effect on dolphins could arise from the effect of underwater sound on fish species on which they feed. Results from laboratory and caged based studies are varied. Some suggest impacts to fish occur due to exposure to impulsive and continuous sound signals, while others show no significant impacts to fish. Results vary from physical injury at close range to physiology and hearing mechanisms (such as epithelial hair cells and swim bladders) and/or changes in swim behaviour. Results from such studies are commonly questioned as not being representative to real world scenarios where both the sound source and fish are moving, and free roaming fish would most likely move away from an aversive sound. Larvae and eggs are considered most sensitive due to their inability to move away, but the high natural mortality and dispersion of larvae and eggs would mask any localised impact of underwater sound. Required mitigation will be in the form of:  Avoidance: Planned activities are over 60 km from known turtle nesting areas.  Minimization: Implementation of nominal practices to minimise potential risk of physical injury and impact to marine mammals. These include: o Marine mammal training of vessel crew o If required (depending on monitoring result at sensitive receptor, i.e. community school and place of worship), the use of muffler or noise reduction method will be considered o If possible, soft start of piling activities  Minimization: Implementation of JNCC Guideline when conducting Vertical Seismic Profile (VSP) during drilling, with procedures as follows: o Conduct observation of marine mammal spotting within 500 m distance for 30 minutes prior to Vertical Seismic Profiling activity o If marine mammal spotted within 500 m distance, then the activity is suspended to allow for marine mammal to swim away o Implement "Soft Start" procedure  Restoration: not required.  Offset: not required.

6.2.7 Land clearance Receptor:  Terrestrial vegetation: Calophyllum insularum, Livistona sp., Myristica inaequalis, Endemic orchids, Glochidion daviessi, Scaevola burnetti, Freycinetia bomberaensis.

Page 81 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Reptiles and amphibians: Cophixalus sp. nov., Hylophorbus sp. nov., Emoia sp. nov., Four-fingered skink (Carlia bombarai).  Birds: Dusky Scrubfowl, Western Crowned-pigeon, Red-billed Brush-Turkey, Northern Cassowary.  Mammals: Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Land clearance is required to prepare the land for the new worker accommodation, access corridors to the BOF and jetties and offshore facilities, pig receiver, new waste facility and additional facilities. For train 3, up to 250ha of land will be cleared, both within greenfield and brownfield site. Forest area will be cleared by tree cutting, and subsequent site preparation will involve earthworks, such as cut and fill, grading and compaction using heavy machinery. Initial site preparation will take up to a year. Some land take will be permanent, but parts of the site that are not used for permanent facilities will be revegetated after completion of the construction activities. Land clearance has the potential to affect the priority species and their associated habitats in direct and indirect ways, including:  Loss of individual specimens at the clearance site.  Compaction and erosion of soils, loss of soil fertility  Fragmentation of habitat, loss of connectivity between discrete wildlife populations.  Edge effects / disturbance of adjacent habitats.  Changes in surface water hydrology.  Loss of a seed source or recruitment pool for adjacent areas. The immediate impact of land clearing is the loss of any priority plant species such as Calophyllum insularum, Livistona sp., Myristica inaequalis and Freycinetia bomberaensis, where these are present. Faunal priority species such as the reptile and amphibian species Cophixalus sp. nov., Hylophorbus sp. nov., and Emoia sp. nov., are potentially killed at the time of vegetation removal (physical impact) or die soon after from predation or starvation. Over time, small non-viable isolated populations in remaining habitat fragments may disappear long after clearing has ceased (Lindenmayer and Burgman (2005). Species with a high degree of ecological specialization and restricted dispersal are particularly vulnerable to disturbance (Simberloff 1986). The Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai, was abundantly present in both natural and modified habitat (Terrestrial Survey, 2002), and may in fact thrive on opening up areas. Besides natural savannah woodland and lowland forest, it occurred in open areas, such as garden clearings and village margins (Zug and Allison, 2006). Where topsoil is very thin, contains most of the organic matter, and overlies nearly sterile subsoil, the destruction of the topsoil will hamper regrowth and revegetation or give rise to different vegetation. This topsoil contains most of the nutrients. If mechanical clearing methods are used, the topsoil may be lost with the rootball leaving an unfavourable, infertile and often acid material. Mechanical clearing may further compact the subsoils or clays (FAO, 1985). The removal of perennial vegetation contributes to soil erosion by wind and water, leading to declines in water quality. The removal of deep-rooted perennial vegetation

Page 82 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

and its replacement by shallow-rooted species reduces evapotranspiration, thereby allowing ground water to rise and ground and surface water flows to increase. Salts in the soil are dissolved and brought to the surface by the rising ground water, where they are concentrated by evaporation (Lindenmayer and Burgman, 2005). The surface water hydrology may change from sediment run-off deposited in watercourses and changes the nature of the streambed as the site is levelled or graded. Cutting of the trees will open up large areas, and result in edge effects of adjacent plots through a change in light, precipitation, and gradual spread of opportunistic pioneer vegetation or increase in predation on bird nests (Stephen, 2003). Some species with suspected larger home ranges such as Megapode birds like the Dusky Scrubfowl or Red-billed Brush-Turkey, or the Northern Cassowary, Western Crowned-pigeon and Lesser Tube-nosed Bat may find suitable habitat further away as they seek refuge in adjacent forest. Land clearance in proximity of pristine forest may not necessarily lead to species loss and occurrence of forest-dependent species (Sodhi et al., 2008). Required mitigation will be in the form of:  Avoidance: Site specific avoidance during planning (e.g. avoiding loss of mangroves for BOF; maximize brownfield over greenfield, maximize use of existing access corridors/roads; avoid clearance of Melaleuca-Baeckea woodland (Savannah) habitat (associated with Scaevola burnetti).  Minimization: development of land clearing plan, land clearing activity to be conducted only in planned area, land drainage and erosion management, and use reduced impact logging technique to reduce impact from tree cutting.  Restoration: Re-vegetation/replanting programme, with seeds, shoots or saplings of priority plant species to be collected during targeted pre- construction survey and propagated in dedicated nursery, for subsequent replanting in existing forest and re-vegetated areas. Replanting of a representative sample of possibly endemic orchids from a range of felled trees during initial clearance. Re-vegetation programme at the end of the construction for areas that are not used for permanent facilities.  Offset: Offset programme as agreed with Indonesian Government.

6.2.8 Noise and visual disturbance Receptor:  Reptiles and amphibians: Cophixalus sp. nov., Hylophorbus sp. nov., Emoia sp. nov., Four-fingered skink (Carlia bombarai), Hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea and loggerhead, Caretta caretta.  Birds: Dusky Scrubfowl, Western Crowned-pigeon, Red-billed Brush-Turkey, Northern Cassowary, Great Knot.  Mammals: Lesser Tube-nosed Bat During the construction phase, land clearing with chain saws, movement and operation of heavy construction equipment and piling activities will act as a source of noise and visual disturbance. During operations, noise will be emitted from

Page 83 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

installations and traffic on site and occasional vessels, while the flare and facility lighting will change the visual landscape. Flaring is associated with non-routine activities such as commissioning, train start-up, purge gas and pilot flaring while some flaring may be required during operations for reasons of operational safety. Occasionally, people working at the site may venture in adjacent forested areas and cause disturbance. Construction noise lasts up to 3 years with variable intensity as different activities take place in different parts of the plot. Operation of the LNG facilities will produce background noise that together with permanent lighting will be present for the duration of the project. Potential impacts of noise on wildlife consist of hearing damage, physiological changes, and changes in behaviour, which in turn may adversely affect the population of a species through a change in predator-prey relationships, mating and reproductive failure, population distributions and migration from the area. Studies on birds show that there is also a large variation in the response between species (Ortega, 2004). For the purpose of the AMDAL (2014), noise modelling was carried out which for human receptors at the nearest settlement (Tanah Merah Baru) suggests maximum noise levels of up to 61 dBA if all equipment is assumed to be in operation during peak construction. The forest nearest to the project site acts as a noise barrier, and the noise levels will attenuate progressively with distance into the forest away from the sound source. It is expected that noise will interfere with the priority species, but that the impact is limited to the immediate area around the construction site. There will be a range of responses. Priority species may adapt their vocalizations to the ambient sounds, display behavioural changes, particularly at the onset of intrusive sounds as the species is perturbed, or species may habituate to the anthropogenic sound. The initial sound disturbance coincides with mobilizing equipment and people to site. At this stage, priority species may move away from any approaching human individuals or encroaching human activities. Like sound, human disturbance can have adverse influences on feeding success, range use, reproduction, survival and abundance. Light pollution on forest species has a minor effect in comparison to noise and human presence. A review by Longcore and Rich (2004) suggests that animals experience increased orientation or disorientation from additional illumination and are attracted to or repulsed by glare, which affects foraging, reproduction, communication, and other critical behaviours. The effect of light on sea turtle hatchling behaviour has been linked to increased mortality in sea turtle populations (Tuxbury and Salmon, 2004). Ecologists also found that lights on tall structures, such as flares can disorient migrating birds Ogden, 1996; Sage, 1979). The presence of relatively intact habitat in the buffer forest behind the area of construction may account for minimal species loss and is conducive to the ocassional entry of forest dependent species in re-vegetated area during later stages of construction. On the foreshore environment, it can be noted that impacts on sea turtles from visual pollution are less likely. Their nesting sites are located 60 km to the west of the Tangguh LNG site. The endangered Great Knot (Calidris tenuirostris), if the species were to return to Bintuni Bay in great numbers, will likely prefer the mudflats along the northern and eastern side of Bintuni Bay.

Page 84 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

While sound, human presence and encroachment and light may affect the priority species, it is difficult to determine the impact. The surrounding forest will function as some sort of noise barrier, while at the same time acting as refuge. Effects on smaller animals such as ampibians will be restricted to close to their habitats, e.g. along creeks, in wet depressions and humid patches of the forest. Larger species, such as the megapode birds or Cassowarie will be more susceptible to the noise, human and visual disturbance, but may use the wider forest as refuge. Required mitigation will be in the form of: In terms of avoidance:  The tree harvesting plan (land clearance activities) will designate and limit the area of construction and permanent facilities.  No hunting of wildlife, no fishing or plant removal policy for workers. In terms of mitigation:  Use of mufflers or noise barriers if required;  Routine maintenance for equipment to minimize the noise sound.  Activities with the potential to cause high noise levels will be restricted to 14 hours per day.  Security team will carry out routine monitoring of the buffer zone fencing (no unauthorized access to buffer zone area).  Flaring will be reduced through: use of boil-off-gas recovery process, balance the amount of fuel gas used for the old and new plant, and optimizing TAR and number of plant shutdowns. No restoration or offsets are required. An environmental protection and awareness programme may discourage local people from entering the forest and disturbing sensitive wildlife.

6.2.9 Invasive species Receptor:  Terrestrial vegetation: Calophyllum insularum, Livistona sp., Myristica inaequalis, Endemic orchids, Glochidion daviessi, Scaevola burnetti, Freycinetia bomberaensis.  Reptiles and amphibians: Cophixalus sp. nov., Hylophorbus sp. nov., Emoia sp. nov. Four-fingered skink (Carlia bombarai).  Birds: Dusky Scrubfowl, Western Crowned-pigeon, Red-billed Brush-Turkey, Northern Cassowary. While not an activity per se, there is the potential that the construction or operations introduce alien invasive species. Possible vectors include hull fouling, ballast water, transport of supplies and equipment from other islands and people visiting the Tangguh LNG site, including visitors who bring or keep pets. The risk of inadvertent introduction of invasive species persists for the duration of the project. Both marine species and terrestrial species can be brought in. Introducing plant and animal species that are not native to an area can cause major disruption to local ecosystems, replacing and sometimes devastating native plants and animals. This disruption can result from the deliberate introduction of non-native

Page 85 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

species, such as for agriculture or landscaping, or the inadvertent introduction and release of alien species into an environment, for example through transport along roads or in ship ballast water. In some cases, an alien species can become invasive, spreading rapidly throughout a habitat and replacing or destroying native species through competition for resources, predation or habitat destruction. Ballast water management will be in place to reduce the risk of invasive species via ballast water. It is unlikely that sea turtles and the dolphin species, as apex predators would be affected. Onshore, there is a risk of introducing new species to site. This is an issue of concern given the unique flora and fauna of the island of New Guinea, with many species present that are not native to other islands of Indonesia or overseas, and vice versa. A separate risk is the wildlife trade, by which local communites collect or hunt the wildlife for trade with Tangguh employees, and uncontrolled use of pesticides and herbicides. These can result in a reduction of the population of local wildlife species, which may include priority species. There is a history of existing invasive species that were inadvertently introduced by people from outside the project. Notable invasive species are the Asian house rat, a frequent passenger on vessels or the Asian toad (Phrynoidis (Bufo) aspera), likely introduced from the island of Java. Cats and dogs are also a threat, particularly when these domestic animals become feral. Megapode birds, which include two priority species, are easy prey for feral dogs. Mitigation measures required are in the form of:  Avoidance: Prohibition for employees and/or visitors to bring in flora and/or fauna that are not native from the area, to prevent exotic species entering Tangguh area and also forbid release of flora and fauna from Tangguh area. In terms of minimization, the following measures will be required:  During the induction training, information will be shared regarding the prohibition, collection and transport of protected wildlife and wildlife parts.  Ballast water management. Whenever possible, ballast water exchange will be conducted at least 200 nautical miles from the nearest land and in water of at least 200 meters in depth, taking into account IMO Guidelines, or as far from the nearest land as possible and in all cases at least 50 nautical miles from nearest land and in water depth at least 200 meters.  Pest control programme will be in place. For instance, baited traps may be set for the control of the Asian house rat.  Flora and fauna management programmes, aimed at raising awareness within local communities and managing the risk that dogs and cats can pose to will be required, e.g. awareness for local community to manage their dogs and cats belonging that may pose threat to flora fauna within buffer zone area.  Security team to conduct routine monitoring of the buffer zone fencing.  A prohibition to feed animals in the Tangguh area.  Roundup/herbicides chemical usage to follow the SSO for Weed Control.

Page 86 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.2.10 Spills of hazardous material, including hydrocarbon and chemicals Receptor: all priority species. Like many other construction projects or industrial facilities, Tangguh LNG uses, stores, and handles a number of hazardous materials, including fuel, flammable gases and bulk chemicals. Spills of hydrocarbons and chemicals in the environment are a threat. Spills from onshore and offshore facilities can be due to leaks, equipment failure, accidents, and human error or as a result of third party interference. Industry data indicate that smaller spills are occurring much more frequent than large spill events. Despite mitigation plans put in place, the risk of unplanned release of hydrocarbons and chemicals persists for the duration of the project, with a higher likelihood of smaller spills occurring during the construction phase. Spills may occur onland and offshore, and therefore all priority species are considered to be potential receptor. The effects of an oil or chemical spill will depend on a variety of factors including, the quantity and type of chemical or hydrocarbon spilled, how it interacts with the marine, freshwater, groundwater or terrestrial environment. Weather conditions will also influence the oil or chemical physical characteristics and its behaviour. Other key factors include the biological and ecological attributes of the area, including the potential of microbial biodegradation; the ecological significance of key species and their sensitivity to oil and chemical pollution as well as the time of year. Clean-up techniques used in the response will also have a bearing on the environmental effects of a spill. Smaller spills on land will affect a localised area of land, but may also compromise groundwater quality or local creeks. Species that are directly exposed may succumb to the toxicity or physical characteristics of the chemical constituents, or suffer from chronic and sublethal effects that may affect their physiology and fitness. While at sea, smaller oil and chemical spills tend to be rapidly dispersed. Larger spills include oil spills that are released in a vessel collision, or the uncontrolled release of condensate in a well blow-out scenario. Larger spills potentially cover a very large area, including all resident or temporarily-resident species. In terms of avoidance (prevention from spills):  Proper materials for fuel and chemical storage that are compatible with fuel and chemical properties.  All storage shall have spill containment system to capture any spills associated with a potential tank overflow, rupture or leak.  Any area designated as motor pool refuelling area shall have spill containment system.  Floor and spill containment system shall be made from impervious membrane, concrete or other impermeable material.  Refuelling or transfer of chemical should be conducted carefully to avoid potential spill.  Refuelling shall be done in a controlled area, which has a containment to avoid spillage onto the ground and runoff.

Page 87 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 For refuelling of landing craft transport, filling rate should be carefully monitored to avoid overfilling. Spill collected in the pontoon should be regularly cleaned up to avoid spillage onto the water.  Procedures for transfer operation to be developed if there is a high risk of spill during transfer and the transfer operation will only commence once the procedures are in place.  All vehicles to be refuelled in areas that are level and away from water courses and drainage ditch, sensitive habitat or endangered species.  Temporary secondary containment shall be provided for liquid fuel, liquid chemical, liquid hazardous waste and the following activities: temporary storage of hydrocarbon, chemical and hazardous waste, refuelling activity at refuelling station or any other places, chemical top up activity. In terms of mitigation:  Boom deployment, in the unlikely event that a spill would occur, to limit the area of impact.  Use of dispersant (if required) to minimize the area of impact.  All vehicle refuelling operators will be trained to respond to spill of fuel.  Emergency response teams in place to provide quick response if any event occur. In terms of restoration:  Post-spill restoration will be implemented where appropriate, using proven approaches, which may include contaminated soil treatment.

6.3 Evaluation of Impacts on Ecosystem Services The priority ecosystem services affected are access to and production from fishing grounds. In line with the ESR for IA methodology (Landsberg et al, 2013), the impact assessment should predict the impact of the project on the ecosystem service supply, followed by an assessment of the significance of project impacts on affected stakeholders. The following activities may result in a loss of access to and production from fishing grounds:  Construction of the bulk offloading facility and jetties overlapping with existing crab / shellfish / fisheries grounds or fish / shrimp nursery areas.  Blocking of access / corridors to crab / shellfish / fishing grounds.  Exclusion zones around the offshore platform or in the nearshore area of the Tangguh LNG facilities. These prevent access to crab / shellfish / fisheries grounds, either temporarily during construction or permanent in operations.  Dredging and drilling whose impacts indirectly affect fish / shrimp stocks. The principal concern is that areas that are currently being used by local communities as fishery grounds will either no longer be able or have limited capacity to provide benefits to the community, either because the actual area is taken over by the project or because access to the area is compromised or conditions that sustain the stocks have deteriorated.

Page 88 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The possible implications of the project impacts are that the affected communities will have to find alternative fishing grounds.

6.3.1 Evaluation of impact Local fishermen may have a viable alternative to the loss of a fishing ground if they are able to fish or collect crabs / shellfish in an area: (i) that is the same distance from their landing sites; (ii) that supplies the target species of interest to local fishermen; (iii) that does not show signs of overfishing; and (iv) to which they have fishing rights. In terms of the impact on fisheries, the following conclusions can be drawn from the AMDAL (2014):  Indirect impacts from seabed disturbance or wastewater on fisheries are of a temporary nature or of little consequence to ecosystem productivity, with a negligible-minor impact on benthos and plankton on which fish and shrimp depend. The area affected is of limited extent (up to 500 m around well locations, up to 1,000 m for dredging and dredge disposal).  The platforms and marine facilities and surrounding exclusion zones act as fisheries no-take zones that are beneficial to the replenishment of fish stocks.  Exclusion zones around offshore well locations, shipping lanes and berthing areas do overlap with a limited number of fishing areas to which different communities hold customary fishing rights, or impose longer journeys to and from some existing fishing grounds.  Dependency on fish stocks is high, particularly along the northern shore of Bintuni Bay, while fishermen from Saengga and Tanah Merah will depend on crab / shellfish / fishing grounds near the marine facilities.  Villagers tend not to fish in areas to which they do not hold customary fishing rights, and lack the means to fish in alternative areas further away. This suggests that ecosystem productivity will not be significantly affected. There will however be an impact from the exclusion zones and increased shipping, as fishing communities will not all have access to alternative fishing grounds that are customarily fished by other communities or face longer journeys. Required mitigation will be in the form of:  Avoidance: avoidance of the impact will be difficult to achieve, because the exclusion zones are driven by safety considerations, including the safety of the fishing communities themselves and regulatory requirements.  Minimization: affected communities were consulted about any exclusion zones imposed. Skills training and use of local product by the project will continue, and will reduce the dependency of local communities on fishing grounds affected by the project.  Restoration: grievance procedure for local community, artisanal fishing activities and cross-traffic will be allowed to resume along subsea infrastructure once construction activities have finished, provided that fishing or navigation takes place outside permanently imposed exclusion zones.  Compensation: if there is an impact on fishing grounds, a livelihood restoration programme will be provided aimed at diversification and income restitution to directly affected local fisherfolk. The Tangguh Community Relation Program (CRP) Team will verify who may be affected and what the potential loss of

Page 89 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

income is. The principal purpose of the Livelihood Restoration and Income Restitution Programme is to restore income of affected people to at least the same or better than the previous income, The form of compensation varies, from providing assets or an economic programme to re-establish livelihoods, to a nutrition substitution programme for loss of food supply.The programme will be executed prior to execution of the project activities.

6.4 Evaluation of Impacts on Protected Areas Protected areas can be considered critical habitat if there is overlap between the project activities and the protected area. Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve is linked to the project area via habitat and functional connectivity. This implies that even though the project area is not located in a protected area, the connectivity causes the protected area to be a potential receptor for direct or indirect impacts arising from the project. Planned project activities and unplanned events that have a possible effect on the nature reserve are:  Potential pollution and loss of ecosystem productivity of the bay from suspended sediments arising from drilling and dredging activity during construction and exploration activities – if not managed properly.  Potential pollution and loss of ecosystem productivity of the bay from planned emissions – if not managed properly.  Visual disturbance from the flare.  Unintentional spills, e.g. condensate from well-blow outs or fuel/oil/condensate from vessel collisions.

6.4.1 Evaluation of impact The AMDAL (2014) concluded that impacts on ecosystem productivity from project- induced pollution and seabed disturbance are of limited significance and extent. Tidal currents replenish the bay and ensure adequate circulation. Existing facilities have been been operating for more than five years, and contaminant levels are maintained below water quality standards, except for the concentration of suspended solids, which are naturally high. The area earmarked for TEP clearance includes a limited area of mangroves, approximately 4ha in extent. In terms of the supply of seeds or propagules or faunal recruitment, any mangrove habitat loss at the project site will have an insignificant impact on population dynamics in the nature reserve. Only few seeds would naturally establish successfully, and most of the seeds will be supplied from within the nature reserve itself. Faunal recruitment from such a small area lost is also judged to be insignificant. Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve is located at some 80 km from the project site. Visual disturbance from the flare is unlikely to affect the resident fauna in the nature reserve. In the unlikely event of a large spill, such as that from a blow out or vessel collision, Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve could be affected. The sensitivity map that Tangguh has prepared underscores the particular sensitivity of the Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve. The TEP is unlikely to have any significant impacts on Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve, except from large spill events. Required mitigation will be in the form of:

Page 90 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Avoidance: spill prevention measures such as navigational aids, vessel traffic management, and standardized global requirements for well design and construction aimed at preventing an oil spill from vessels or a condensate spill from loss of well control.  Minimization: implementation of an oil spill response plan, with response strategies based on a tiered approach widely accepted within the industry. Capping and containment plans in place in case primary and secondary well controls fail. Response plans are informed by monitoring and modelling of the released oil or condensate. The focus is on containment, reducing the amount of oil entering the marine environment and limiting the spread of any released oil. An oil spill contingency plan, emergency response plan, shoreline clean up strategy (SCAT) and oil wildlife response procedures are in place. Regular training is carried out to prepare responders for potential spill scenarios identified in the planning of the project/operations.  Restoration: post-spill restoration will be implemented where appropriate, using proven approaches.  Compensation: Grievance mechanism has been in place to be used by affected local communities, who depend on the natural resources of Bintuni Bay and the Nature Reserve.

6.5 Strategy for Additional Mitigations The potential impacts of the project are provided in the preceding sections, the following section provides details regarding:  Specific mitigation measures which are in addition to those included in the AMDAL.  Mitigation measures which are included in the AMDAL but are important in ensuring no adverse impacts on priority species and critical habitats. These measures are necessary to ensure that the project has no adverse impacts on the priority species and associated critical habitats and aim to achieve no net loss to biodiversity. Due to the project having an impact on natural / critical habitats, it will be necessary for the project to implement both preventative and remediative steps in the mitigation hierarchy, as outlined below. Full details of these mitigation measures will be included in the existing Environmental Management & Monitoring Plan and the pending Construction Environmental Management Plan and Biodiversity Action Plan.

6.5.1 Generic measures  A qualified forestry specialist will be employed and on site to ensure proper implementation of land clearance and, subsequent re-vegetation activities.  Qualified ecologist will be employed and on site throughout the pre- construction survey and initial tree clearance to support the forestry specialist with re-vegetation/replanting of priority plant species, management of the nursery, post-construction survey planning and invasive species management.  Qualified environmental team will be employed and on site throughout the construction activity to ensure proper environmental management in place,

Page 91 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

including management of flora, fauna and marine mammal; and provide day-to- day advice related to environmental issue.  Conduct socialization regarding priority species of flora and fauna to contractors, i.e. during kick off meeting with the tree cutting contractor, develop information material for priority species for use in several areas for tree cuttings.  All contractors working on the site will be provided with an ecological toolbox talk, as part of the HSSE induction - to ensure all workers are aware of the ecological issues on the sites and actions necessary if any protected species or wildlife found during the construction works.

6.5.2 Avoidance  Avoid loss of mangrove habitats, by using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) method for nearshore pipeline.  No project activities to be undertaken within the Scaevola – savannah scrub.  No major permanent rivers (i.e. Saengga River and Mangosa River) will be removed or dammed and no habitats within 10 m of major permanent rivers will be removed.

6.5.3 Minimization  Vegetation clearance will be kept to a minimum as per requirement for construction. The project has been designed to minimize the removal of natural habitats, prioritising project activities within existing brownfield/modified habitats – approx. 30% of the project footprint will be on brownfield land and only about 10% of the habitats to be cleared will be natural habitats (see Table 13). This is an estimate numbers and final details will be provided in the Tree Harvesting Plan produced by EPC Contractor.  Only marked trees will be removed as part of the clearance activities: as specified in the Tree Harvesting Specification.  Minimize changes in natural flow patterns of ephemeral rivers by using culverts, bridges, artificial drainage or other proper drainage methods if earthwork at creek area is inevitable.  Develop drainage management plan, including erosion control; design of drainage pattern at affected area to transfer surface run-off to natural flow; and construction of a sedimentation pond in the downstream of affected area.  A range of mitigation measures will be introduced to minimise adverse impacts on marine mammals and sea turtles (as already included in the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan and the Marine Mammal & Sea Reptile Protection Procedure: 900-PRC-EN-2329). These include the establishment of boat-free zone by re-routing speedboats during calm weather months, LNG tankers only using established lanes (and avoiding sensitive areas), soft start of piling activities (if possible), all vessel crew to be marine mammal trained, and managing waste and waste water including ballast water in accordance with international standard.  Tangguh invasive species management: Measures will be introduced to manage and reduce the spread of invasive species across the site. Measures will include:

Page 92 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

o A programme for the trapping and removal of invasive rat and feral cats within the Tangguh site. o Using only native plant and tree species in the forest restoration. No non-native plant species will be used in any of the planned planting schemes around the site.  No hunting of wildlife, no fishing and no removal/collection of plant species will be permitted by the project workforce, as described in the Tangguh Flora and Fauna Protection Procedures (Rev 04 June 2015) and in the existing Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan.  No workers will be permitted to enter any of the forest areas without prior permission. All construction activities will remain within permitted areas only and “No Entry” areas will be clearly marked out.  Pollution control measures to minimize spill potential will be described in the Contractor Environmental Management Plan together with incident response arrangements. All spills with potential to result in land or water (surface or ground) contamination will be recorded and reported immediately to the appropriate site management team by sub-contractors, and appropriate oil spill response implemented in accordance with existing site procedures.  Existing hazardous and toxic materials management procedures will be adhered to throughout the construction phase. No herbicides will be used in the revegetation areas – with the intent of minimization of potential impacts to habitats and species.  Measures to minimise the risk of fires will be described in the Contractor Environmental Management Plan, this will includes the housing of firefighting equipment on site through the construction period, and restriction on certain activities (for example no open fires, smoking restricted to certain areas etc.),as detailed in the existing Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan.

6.5.4 Restoration  An area of approximately 91 ha cleared and used for temporary facilities will be re-vegetated after the completion of the construction and removal of the associated construction camps. This is an estimated number and final details will be provided in the Tree Harvesting Plan produced by EPC Contractor Full detail is included Revegetation Specification document.  During the pre-construction survey, if any of the following plant species are found within the area to be cleared, the collection of individual plant specimens, seeds, seedlings, saplings or shoots of Calophyllum insularum; Livistona sp., Myristica inaequalis, Glochidion daviesii and Freycinetia bomberaiensis will be undertaken. These will be propagated in dedicated nursery, for subsequent replanting in existing un-affected forest area and areas earmarked for re-vegetation. Saplings may be directly replanted to adjacent un- affected forest.  During the initial tree clearance, a representative sample of orchid specimens will be collected from felled trees. These will be moved to a suitable plant nursery on site or, where possible, directly replanted into adjacent un-affected forest area.

Page 93 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.5.5 Offsets (Replacement of Forest Area)  An offset of 6,984.40ha has already been agreed, covering the existing and any future expansion within the site perimeter in accordance with and as part of the Forestry Decree no 287/2004 that releases the Tangguh LNG site from forestry area. The main objective of the offset is to fulfil the obligation set in Forestry Released Decree, which required the area to replace the released 3,266ha Production Forest for Tangguh LNG Plant Development (for the development of up to 8 trains) and 200ha for Kampung Simuri-Saengga and Tanah Merah Relocation. No further or additional offsets are needed as part of this project for the loss of critical habitat, further details are provided in Chapter 7 of this document.

6.5.6 Additional Conservation Actions  An Environmental Protection and Awareness (EPA) programme is already being undertaken as part of the Tangguh operations, which includes biodiversity conservation awareness – this will be extended to include specific awareness regarding the priority species and importance of biodiversity conservation.  As part of the EPA, a biodiversity conservation awareness programme will be executed to increase local awareness and capacities related to local environmental issues.  Specific activities of biodiversity conservation awareness, will include joint data collection, analysis and sharing on biodiversity conservation, also initiate and coordinate Tangguh workers volunteer activities for environmental protection.

6.5.7 Monitoring  Prior to vegetation clearance activity, a pre-construction survey will be conducted for trees, bats, and amphibians/reptiles. The survey is intended to collect information on priority species within the area to be cleared and in adjacent buffer forest. A qualified ecologist will be employed to supervise the day-to-day survey activity, with specialists for each of the species groups participating in the survey. Furthermore, the qualified ecologist will be consulted following the pre-construction survey result to determine whether or not any additional adaptive management measure is required.  A post-construction flora and fauna survey will be carried out to determine the actual impact and success of mitigation, determining actual land loss, species and habitat recovery, at the cleared areas and in adjacent forest.  Pre- and post-construction flora and fauna surveys will also cover transects outside the area earmarked for clearance. In view of the fact that site-endemic species have likely been under-sampled across the wider region, there is a need to understand the densities, distribution and habitat preference of identified priority species such as the amphibians, reptiles and site-endemic plant species that are new to science.  The monitoring of the revegetation on the site shall be undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness and success of the revegatation and tree planting for every 6 months until hand over. Specific indices of revegetation success are defined in the Revegetation Specification document. Mitigation step may be necessary in the event that the restoration does not meet specified criteria as also indicated in Revegetation Specification.

Page 94 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 A marine mammal survey will be conducted during the construction phase to monitor marine mammals including priority species.

6.6 Impacts on Priority Habitats The project will include a number of planned activities which will result in the loss of natural and modified habitats. Approximately 160ha of onshore habitat will be cleared as part of the project; this will include 4ha of mangrove forest and 14ha of primary lowland forest. All other habitat areas are regarded as being modified. A breakdown of the areas to be cleared and restored is provided in Table 13. More than 90ha of cleared habitat will be restored, of which more than 77ha will be forest.

Page 95 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 13 – Habitat loss1 in Project Area

Habitat areas Area to be Area to be Total area Total area Total area being cleared (Ha) revegetated (Ha) of habitat cleared as lost as impacted being lost percentage percentage of the of the habitat in habitat in the DMU the DMU

Mangrove 4 - 4 0.06% 0.06% Forest (Natural)

Shrub 27 5 22 2.52% 2.06% (Modified)

Secondary 93 Lowland Forest 77 30 0.35% 0.10% (Modified)

Primary 14 Lowland Forest (Natural)

Secondary 26 9 17 0.28% 0.18% Swamp Forest (Modified)

Total habitat 164 91 73 0.30% 0.31% areas (56% of total (44%) area restored)

Built areas being impacted

Tangguh LNG 54 - - Facilities

Existing Access 3 - - Track

Total project 219 91 71 - - footprint

6.7 Impacts on Priority Species This section provides further details regarding the potential impacts of the project activities on the priority species (identified in Chapter 5), taking into consideration the impacts of the various project activities (section 6.3) and the mitigation measures (as outlined in section 6.4).

1 The areas provided in this table are an approximation only and used for the purpose of this assessment. The actual area lost will be re-calculated, post vegetation clearance and the updated habitat areas lost included in the annual reporting.

Page 96 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

6.7.1 Plants Calophyllum insularum (Endangered and Endemic) The potential impacts to this endangered and restricted-range species may include felling, changes in the hydrological conditions, and loss or disturbance to pollinators and seed dispersers (bats) due to habitat loss. Little is known about this lowland forest species, and while its distribution is limited it is probably wider ranging than documented. Specific mitigations, as outlined in Section 6.2 and 6.5, will be introduced. The planned project activities will have a localised and temporary impact on this species, but given that the project will only remove 107ha of lowland forest (77ha will be restored), and taking into consideration the mitigation measures, including proposed replanting/revegetation from collected plant source material when available, no reduction in the population of this endangered species is predicted. Fan Palm Livistona sp (Endemic and Nationally Protected) The potential impacts to this restricted-range species may include felling, changes in the hydrological conditions, and harvesting for food and fibre. Very little is known about this swamp forest species, and while its distribution is limited it is probably wider ranging than documented. Specific mitigations, as outlined in Section 6.2 and 6.5, will be introduced. The planned project activities will have a localised and temporary impact on this species, but given that the project will only remove 26ha of swamp forest (9ha will be restored), and taking into consideration the mitigation measures, no adverse impact on this species is predicted in the longer-term. Orchid species of genus Bryobium, Bulbophyllum, Robiquieta and Dendrobium (Endemic) Several species of at least four different orchid genera have been recorded within the area of the Tangguh site, and many remain undescribed (Agustini et al., 2013), and therefore the distribution, abundance of these species is poorly documented. The main impact to these species will be tree felling and the loss of habitat, and microclimate changes resulting from habitat fragmentation and edge effects. As mitigation, minimization of land clearing area, collection and replanting of a representative sample of orchid specimens, and regular flora fauna surveys to further identify orchid species in Tangguh area will be implemented. As a result of these mitigations, and minimising the area of habitat loss, the impact on the orchid species is likely to be localised, temporary, and no adverse impact to these species are predicted in the longer-term. Myristica inaequalis (Endemic) This Genus represents more than 70 beetle pollinated tropical species. The main potential impacts to this restricted-range species may include felling, changes in the hydrological conditions, and loss or disturbance to pollinators and seed dispersers. Surveys certainly suggest that this species is wider ranging and may be more abundant in lowland forests than previously documented. While there will be temporary and localized impacts on this species, the removal of 107ha of lowland forest (77ha will be restored) is likely to lead to no adverse impact in the longer-term. Glochidion daviesii (Endemic), Scaevola burnettii (Endemic) and Freycinetia bomberaiensis (Endemic) The potential impacts to these new and restricted-range species may include felling, clearing, changes in the hydrological conditions, and loss or disturbance to pollinators and seed dispersers (birds, bats) due to habitat loss. Scaevola burnetti is not likely affected as the associated savannah habitat is not earmarked for land clearance. As with the other critical habitat qualifying species there will possibly be a temporary and

Page 97 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

localised impact on the other two species, but given the relatively small area being lost (less than 107ha), it is predicted that the project will have no adverse impact in the long-term.

6.7.2 Mammals Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla (Restricted Range) The potential impacts to this bat species may include light and noise disturbance from the construction activities and impacts of habitat fragmentation and loss during land clearance, which can be significant (Mickleborough et al 2002). Very little is known about the ecology of this species (Pattisselanno, 2003) and further surveys will be undertaken. The implementation of the mitigation measures as specified in Sections 6.2 and 6.5, will reduce any potential impact on this restricted range bat species. Any potential impacts will be temporary, localised and reversible, and no adverse impact is predicted significant in the medium to long-term. Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis (Nationally Protected and Near Threatened) The potential impacts to the Humpback dolphin are likely to be limited to effects of underwater sound and disturbance of vessel movement within the DMU. Research by Ng (2003) concluded that slow moving vessels do not cause immediate stress to S.chinensis populations, although individuals may flee or avoid areas of activity. Even so, the project will introduce speed restrictions and no-go dolphin sensitive areas, as detailed in the existing Marine Mammal & Sea Reptile Protection Procedure (Document No: 900-PRC-EN-2329). As a positive impact, the creation of fishing exclusion zone around the offshore platform is likely to act as a refuge for fish species, which could act as a food source for this and other species of dolphins in the Bay, therefore no adverse impact is expected.

6.7.3 Birds Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris (Endangered and Migratory) During migration the Great Knot will be feeding on the mudflats and mangrove swamps within the DMU. The Great knot is sensitive to habitat loss, and like other waterbird species, noise or visual disturbance (Borgmann, 2011). This project will not be undertaking any significant activity within the mudflat and only minor habitat clearance of the mangrove forests. In addition this species is a vagrant and is only likely to occur across the extensive mudflat area within the DMU in small numbers. Therefore no adverse impact on this priority species is predicted. Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet (Restricted Range and Nationally Protected) The potential impacts to the Dusky Scrubfowl from the project activities include habitat loss and fragmentation, noise and visual disturbance during construction, hunting, and predation by the introduction/spread of invasive species (e.g. rats and cats). This scrubfowl is particularly sensitive due to its ground nesting behaviour (Lincoln, 1974). The implementation of the mitigation measures will significantly reduce any potential adverse impacts on this species. There may be temporary and localised impacts, but given that the area being lost is relatively small and the restoration of the lowland and swamp forests, no adverse impact is predicted in the longer-term.

Page 98 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata (Restricted Range, Vulnerable and Nationally Protected) The Western Crowned-pigeon could be impacted by habitat loss and fragmentation, noise and visual disturbance during construction and hunting for food, its plumes and wildlife trade (Toone, 1993). The implementation of the mitigation measures will reduce any potential adverse impacts on this species which is typically found in swamp forests. There may be temporary, reversible and localised impacts, but given that this species is relatively common in the DMU (see comments from technical experts in Annex A.3) and the area being lost is relatively small and the planned forest restoration, no adverse impact is predicted in the longer-term. Red-billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri (Restricted Range and Nationally Protected) The potential impacts to the Dusky Scrubfowl from the project activities include habitat loss and fragmentation, noise and visual disturbance during construction, introduction of invasive species (rats predating on eggs and cats or dogs killing individuals) and hunting (for food and egg collecting), and is particularly sensitive due to its ground nesting behaviour (Beehler & Pratt, 2016). The implementation of the mitigation measures will significantly reduce any potential adverse impacts on this species. There may be temporary and localised impacts, but given that the area being lost is relatively small and the restoration of the lowland and swamp forests, no adverse impact is predicted in the longer-term. Northern Cassowary Casuarius unappendiculatus (Nationally Protected and Vulnerable) The Northern Cassowary could be potentially impacted from habitat loss and fragmentation, noise disturbance, introduction of invasive species (rats predating on eggs and cats or dogs killing young individuals) and hunting. While this species is moderately tolerant to intermediate disturbance (Pangau-Adam et al, 2015) mitigation measures will still be introduced. This species is not common in the DMU, and given the low number of individuals in the wider area and the relatively small area being cleared, no adverse impact on this species is predicted in the longer-term.

6.7.4 Amphibians and reptiles Nursery frog Cophixalus sp. nov. and Mawatta frogs Hylophorbus sp. nov. (Restricted Range) Species of Cophixalus are particularly sensitive to habitat loss, habitat edge effects and noise disturbance (interfering with calling behaviour, Goosem, et al., 2007). However, little information is known about both these species and further surveys will be undertaken, including a pre-construction survey to determine their presence and habitat preference (within and outside) of the clearing area. The impact of the project will be localised and temporary; the project will only result in the loss of 0.10% of the lowland forest in the DMU. Yet it is difficult to predict the potential impact of the planned project activities on these species. These species may not have a restricted range (see expert consultation in Annex A.3), as amphibians within the region have been poorly studied and it is inconceivable that the species would only be present within the DMU. While no long-term adverse impact is predicted; surveys and monitoring will be undertaken as part of regular flora and fauna survey. Skink Emoia sp. nov. (Restricted Range)

Page 99 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

The potential impacts to this lizard may include disturbance from habitat loss and fragmentation, introduction of invasive species (rats and cats preying upon eggs and adults) and accidental killing of individuals during construction. However, species of Emoia are likely to be resilient to modest habitat loss, and may temporarily benefit from an increase in foraging and basking areas (Ineich, 2010). However, little information is known about this species and further survey and monitoring will be undertaken as part of regular flora fauna survey, including a pre-construction survey to determine their presence and habitat preference (within and outside) of the clearing area. It is inconceivable that the species would only be present within the DMU. The impact of the project will be localised and temporary, and no long-term adverse impact is predicted surveys and monitoring will be undertaken as part of regular flora and fauna survey. Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai (Restricted Range) The potential impacts to this skink from the project activities may include disturbance from habitat loss and fragmentation, introduction of invasive species (rats and cats preying upon eggs and adults) and accidental killing of individuals during construction. However, there is some evidence that habitat disturbance may benefit certain reptile species, by increasing suitable habitat for basking and feeding (Inech, 2010). This species is found in both primary and secondary forests and modified scrub, and is the most abundant lizard in the area (Zug & Allison, 2006). Given the abundance of this species and mitigation measures being applied, no adverse impact on this species is predicted. Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate (Nationally Protected and Critically Endangered) Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Nationally Protected and Vulnerable) and Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta (Nationally Protected and Vulnerable) The potential impacts on these turtle species are likely to be limited minor effects of underwater sound and disturbance from vessel movement. No nesting areas will be impacted by the planned activities. In addition, while the marine DMU is a critical habitat for these turtle species (due to their national importance), the DMU will represent significantly less than 1% of the total EOO of these species. Certain additional conservation actions to assist with the protection of turtle nesting areas outside of the DMU will be undertaken as part of the biodiversity conservation awareness programme. Subsequently, no adverse impacts are predicted.

6.7.5 Summary of Impacts Following a review of baseline ecological surveys which have been undertaken at the Tangguh project site over the last 12 years, a detailed assessment has been completed to identify priority species and habitats for conservation and critical habitats. Critical habitats have been identified within the DMU of the planned project. These include areas in:  Swamp forests – due to the presence of Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet, Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata and Fan palm Livistonia sp. as well as the possible presence of endemic orchid species new to science.  Lowland forests – due to the presence of Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla, Northern Cassowary Casuarius unappendicultus, Red-billed Brush- Turkey Talegalla cuvieri; two new species of frog Cophixalus sp. nov., Mawatta frogs Hylophorbus sp. nov.; two species of reptiles Skink Emoia sp. nov., Four- fingered skink Carlia bombarai, and four priority plant species Calophyllum insularum, Myristica inaequalis, Glochidion daviessi and Freycinetia

Page 100 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

bomberaiensis, as well as the possible presence of endemic orchid species new to science.  Estuarine waters – due to presence of Hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley Lepidochelys olivacea and Loggerhead Turtles Caretta caretta and Humpback Dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis.

Following the mitigation hierarchy (CSBI, 2015) a range of avoidance, minimization and restoration measures are proposed. In addition, offsets have already been applied to the areas which will be impacted by the planned project (see section 7.3.5).

A Biodiversity Action Plan is developed which details the relevant actions, performance indicators, resources and the responsibilities needed to deliver and implement the mitigation measures. The percentage of habitat loss within the DMU will be minimal (less than 0.3%) and 64% of the forest habitats lost will be restored over time. While there will be short-term, temporary and localised impacts on biodiversity, it is predicted that these impacts will be reversible and result in no net loss in biodiversity in the longer-term.

Page 101 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7 Tangguh Biodiversity Action Plan

7.1 Overview This section presents the Tangguh Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), which outlines the objectives, actions and monitoring activities of the project to ensure that the planned project has no long-term net loss in biodiversity.

7.1.1 BAP Objectives The overall purpose of the BAP is to provide details on the actions needed to ensure a no net loss in biodiversity, whereby this BAP will:  Identify the priority species and habitats for conservation;  Detail the objectives, mitigation measures and management actions to ensure that there are no long-term measurable impacts on critical habitats and priority species;  Detail a series of additional conservation actions to raise awareness and develop a community based conservation project, and;  Establish a monitoring and evaluation programme to ensure that mitigation measures are being appropriately managed and effectively implemented. This BAP will be implemented following the FID of the project and will be valid for five years. The BAP objectives will be reviewed before the end of this 5-year period; to validate its purpose and actions.

7.1.2 Priority species and associated habitats The overall objectives are to ensure that there is no measurable adverse impact of the Tangguh operations on the critical habitats and priority species, and in the long-term no net loss in biodiversity is achieved. While the mitigation measures and activities as outlined in this BAP will benefit all biodiversity features within the Tangguh area, this BAP focuses on the priority species and associated critical habitats (as summarized in Section 6.7.5). To achieve no net loss, the population of each priority species and the viability of the ecosystems upon which these species depend will need to be maintained at a favourable conservation status. This BAP will prioritize the following species and associated habitats for conservation: Plants 1. Calophyllum insularum 2. Fan palm Livistona sp. 3. Orchid species of genus Bryobium, Bulbophyllum, Robiquieta, Dendrobium 4. Myristica inaequalis 5. Glochidion daviesii 6. Scaevola burnettii 7. Freycinetia bomberaiensis

Page 102 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Mammals 1. Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla 2. Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis Birds 1. Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet 2. Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata 3. Red-billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri 4. Northern Cassowary Casuarius unappendiculatus Amphibians and Reptiles 1. Nursery frog Cophixalus sp. nov. 2. Mawatta frogs Hylophorbus sp. nov. 3. Skink Emoia sp. nov. 4. Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai 5. Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate 6. Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea 7. Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta And the associated habitats for these species:  Swamp forests – notably due to the presence of Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet, Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata and Fan palm Livistonia sp. as well as the possible presence of endemic orchid species new to science.  Lowland forests – notably due to the presence of Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla, Northern Cassowary Casuarius unappendicultus, Red- billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri, two new species of frog, and two new species of frog Cophixalus sp. nov. and Mawatta frogs Hylophorbus sp. nov., and two species of reptiles Skink Emoia sp. nov. and Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai, and plant species Calophyllum insularum and Myristica inaequalis Glochidion daviessi and Freycinetia bomberaiensis, as well as the possible presence of endemic orchid species new to science.  Estuarine waters – notably due to presence of Hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricate, Olive Ridley Lepidochelys olivacea and Loggerhead Turtles Caretta caretta and Humpback Dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis. Section 7.3 of this BAP provides details regarding the planned activities and their associated mitigation measures. This also includes reference to key plans and specifications which ensure that the mitigation measure will be delivered and related performances indicators.

7.1.3 Further surveys and assessments The critical habitat assessment identified several restricted range and new species which will require further surveys to determine their abundance and distribution within the area. Additional surveys will be undertaken for the following and will be part of the flora and fauna surveys:

Page 103 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Amphibians/reptiles – because amphibians and reptiles are known to be particularly diverse within the region and Indonesia is suspected to host the highest numbers of amphibians worldwide (Iskander & Erdelen, 2006), and due to the presence of two new species of frog in the Genus Cophixalus and Hylophorbus and possibly a new species of skink of the genus Emoia.  Bats – because this faunal group is largely understudied within West Papua (Bonaccoro, 1998) and due to the presence of restricted range Lesser Tube- nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla.

7.2 External Engagement and consultation In accordance with good practices (IPIECA, 2005), the engagement, participation and consultation with external stakeholders is an important component in the development and subsequent implementation of a Biodiversity Action Plan. Extensive consultation regarding the project has already been undertaken as part of AMDAL and Tangguh also has good working relationships with the local community and stakeholders. As part of AMDAL study, the project firstly announced the project plan to the community through mass media and this followed by a public consultation. The public announcement was made in May 2012, in a national and two local newspapers. This process was then followed by a public consultation process, which was held in 17 locations covering a total of 62 villages inTeluk Bintuni and Fakfak Regency, as well as in the capital city of Teluk Bintuni and Fakfak Regency, West Papua Province. The public consultation was conducted between May-July 2012, attended by 1,767 people, including local communities, government officials and relevant stakeholders in Teluk Bintuni and Fakfak. Subsequent public hearings were held as part of the AMDAL in Teluk Bintuni and Fakfak Regencies for three times between December 2013 and February 2014. The Public Hearing was attended by approximately 250 people, including Papua Barat, Teluk Bintuni and Fakfak local government, representatives from central government, Ministry of Environment and SKK Migas, and finally local community representatives from Teluk Bintuni and Fakfak Regencies. During the events, there were approximately 450 aspirations recorded from the attendees and most of the comments are related to social issues, with no or only very minor concerns related to biodiversity; mainly on the perceived impact to fishing grounds, which also corresponds to a social issue (i.e. impact to livelihood). Following the completion of the BAP, a socialization activity on the purpose and actions relating to biodiversity will be undertaken. The following activities are proposed:  Posting of BAP in public domain (i.e. ADB website);  Socialization with local stakeholder community representatives and stakeholders in Tangguh. The objective of the BAP socialization will be to raise awareness amongst priority stakeholders of the BAP activities and how the biodiversity impacts and mitigation will be managed.

Page 104 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3 Activity Plans The following section describes the activities that will be undertaken to meet the purpose and objectives of the BAP. Details regarding these activities are then detailed in various plans and specifications. Table 14 includes a list of the reference documents relevant to the BAP. The BAP is an overarching plan or framework for biodiversity-related action. The specific plans and specifications detailed in Table 14 provide detailed instructions for BP staff or contractors about the specific actions that need to be undertaken. An important element of these plans is verification, if necessary at pre-defined intervals. Corrective actions and adaptive management measures may be put in place if the intent of the plans and specifications are not followed or cannot be met. Any corrective measure will be followed up in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) method established by the Project. The BAP will be valid for five years, after which the objectives and actions of the BAP will be reviewed.

Table 14 - Summary of existing and new documents

No. Reference Document Status 1 Tangguh Sustainability Development Program (TSDP) Existing 2 Environmental Management & Monitoring Plan Existing 3 Flora & Fauna Protection Procedure Existing 4 Marine Mammal and Sea Reptile Protection Procedure Existing 5 Tree Harvesting Specification Existing 6 Re-vegetation Specification Existing 7 Hazardous and Toxic Materials Management Procedure Existing 8 Weed Control at LNG Site Existing 9 Pest Control Activities Existing 10 Wild Animal Control Plan Existing 11 Invasive Species Management Plan To be produced 12 Contractor Environmental Management Plan To be produced

Page 105 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3.1 Land Clearance Activities The objectives are to:  Minimize the clearance of natural habitats; and  Minimize any potential disturbance to priority species of conservation.

Table 15 - Management of land clearance

Components Main Activities Selected Milestones (Targets)

Pre-clearance - Development of land clearance map to avoid - Completion of Land Activity primary forest and individual priority tree Clearing Map species, where possible. - Completion of pre- - Pre-construction survey to identify and construction survey collect donor material of priority plant - Completion of tree species for subsequent re-vegetation / harvesting activity. replanting. - Start of plant nursery During Tree - Planning for Tree Harvesting and Land establishment Cutting Activity Clearing, e.g. marking area for log storage

and log landings, tree marking and selection, - Pre-construction survey etc. report - Tree Harvesting and Land Clearing Operations. - Collection of representative sample of orchids from felled trees during initial clearance for subsequent replanting. - Soil erosion, drainage control, surface water management and sediment control - High noise activity limitations.

Related plans and specifications: - Tree Harvesting Specification - Contractor Environmental Management Plan

Performance Indicators: Actual land clearing aligns with Land Clearing Map, with no erosion and proper drainage control in place. Priority plant species present in clearance area identified and where possible, plant donor material collected and transferred to nursery for re-vegetation and/or replanting.

Page 106 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3.2 Re-vegetation Activities The objectives are to:  Minimize the long-term impact of land clearance of lowland and mangrove forest.  Restore, in the long-term, the function and ecological importance of lowland forest.

Table 16 - Management of re-vegetation

Components Main Activities Selected Milestones (Targets)

Pre-revegetation - Species selection - Agreed list of species for revegetation - Nursery establishment - Start of plant nursery - Land preparation establishment Re-vegetation - Development of planting schedule - Start of land preparation Post re-vegetation - Post planting maintenance - Start of planting activity - Post re-vegetation monitoring - Post re-vegetation monitoring

Related plans and requirements: - Flora & Fauna Protection Procedure - Revegetation specification - Contractor Environmental Management Plan - Environmental Management & Monitoring Plan

Performance Indicators: Re-vegetation works to meet the minimum success criteria that are set out in the Re- vegetation Specification document, which include the survival rate of the plants, plant density, plant health, etc.

Page 107 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3.3 Noise and Visual Disturbance Activities The objectives are to:  Minimize any potential disturbance to priority species, including marine mammals and sea turtles. The priority species for these activities are:  Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis  Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricate  Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea  Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta

Table 17 - Management of noise and visual disturbance

Components Main Activities Selected Milestones (Targets)

Pre- - Conduct noise contour modelling (as part - Completion of noise Construction of AMDAL). modelling and integration Phase into project design. - Incorporate directional lighting into design

Construction - Monitoring marine mammal and sea Phase turtle activities. - Implementation of marine mammal avoidance and mitigation measures as per procedure. - Implementation of actions detailed in the Marine Mammal and Sea Reptile Protected Procedures.

Operation Monitoring marine mammal and sea turtle - Marine mammal and sea Phase activities. turtle monitoring report.

Related plans and specifications: - Marine Mammal and Sea Reptile Protection Procedure - Contractor Environmental Management Plan

Performance Indicators: No significant impact to marine mammals and sea reptile due to project activity, which will be monitored through the observation of marine mammals and sea reptile presence around the project activity and marine mammal and sea turtle monitoring during the operations phase.

Page 108 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3.4 Management of Invasive Species The objectives are to:  Minimize any potential impact to priority species for conservation.  Control and reduce the spread of invasive species into natural habitats. An Invasive Species Management Plan will be produced in accordance with the good practice guidance on alien invasive species and the oil and gas industry (IPIECA, 2010).

Table 18 - Management of Invasive Species

Component Main Activities Selected Milestones (Targets)

Plan Establishment - Establishment of policies in the - Production of Invasive Tangguh LNG related Invasive Species Species Management Management Plan. Plan. - Alignment of the Invasive Species - Instigation of Management Plan with existing site management activities. measure to control - Mapping of existing distribution of and reduce the invasives. spread of invasive - Site awareness. species.

Implementation - Establish socialization programs to - Annual report on the increase employee awareness in control and status of mitigating the negative impacts of invasive species. invasive species on natural ecosystems in the forest area of the Tangguh LNG. - Introduction of control measures to reduce spread of invasive species. Monitoring - Invasive species control plans integrated into operational procedures. - Monitoring the distribution and spread of invasive species. Related plans and requirements: - Flora & Fauna Protection Procedure. - Contractor Environmental Management Plan. Performance Indicators: Monitoring of specific invasive species presence within site area.

Page 109 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3.5 Offset agreement (Replacement of Forest Area) As stated in Forestry Released Decree No. 287 of 2004, as part of the approval to release forestry area for the Tangguh LNG Project, Tangguh is required to conduct rehabilitation of forest area in a total area of 6,984.40ha. The main objective of the offset is to fulfil the obligation set in the Forestry Released Decree, which required the area to replace the released area of 3,266ha Production Forest for Tangguh LNG Plant Development (for up the development of upto 8 trains) and 200ha for Kampung Simuri- Saengga and Tanah Merah Relocation. The initial area allocated as replacement forest as part of forestry release was determined in the Ministry of Forestry Decree No. 286 of 2004. However, due to an overlap with existing land use, the initial location was no longer possible and a new location has been proposed with a total area of 1,320ha as shown in Figure 15 below. This new area has been surveyed and a decree will be issued by Ministry of Forestry to formally assign the new area as part of the replacement forest to replace the initial area assigned through MOF Decree No. 286 of 2004. The survey results of the new area confirm that the area is suitable for offset as per the following considerations. Discussion is still on going with the Ministry of Forestry and SKK migas regarding the offset mechanism.

- The land cover of the new area consists of 80% swamp forest and 20% mangrove. - Topography of the area is 100% flat. - Only accessible using speedboat - Total population aged 15 years and older are more than 300 people; provides sufficient number of workforce for the rehabilitation activity The remaining area of 5,664.40ha will be located in Teluk Bintuni Regency or Papua Barat Province. The area will be determined later as part of Replacement Forest by the Ministry of Forestry and will be assigned formally through a Decree as well. It is noted that this government-mandated offset programme is not intended to provide a like-for-like replacement of the specific biodiversity lost by the Tangguh project. The currently proposed and future rehabilitation effort will however contribute to the enhancement of biodiversity values in the wider project area.

Page 110 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Figure 15 – One of the Proposed Offset Areas (1,320Ha)

Page 111 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.3.6 Environmental awareness activities The objectives are to:  Raise awareness and understanding of the importance of local biodiversity.  Improve community capacity in wildlife conservation management. The EPA programme is currently included in the Tangguh Sustainability Development Programme (TSDP). The focus areas selected for the initial EPA programme within the TSDP includes biodiversity conservation. The objective of the EPA programme is to increase local awareness and capacities related to local environmental issues, targeting the local community members, organizations, government and universities..

Table 19 – Environmental awareness building

Components Main Activities Selected Milestones (Targets)

Biodiversity - Joint data collection, analysis and sharing - Environmental Conservation on biodiversity conservation partners/stakeholders Awareness meeting (2016, 2019) - Initiate and coordinate Tangguh workers volunteer activities for environmental - Environment campaigns protection targeting school students in Bintuni town, Babo, Supporting - Provide technical advice and support on Kokas and selected villages Tangguh environmental aspects of other TSDP (2016, 2018) Community programs. - Biodiversity conservation analysis document completed (2017)

Related plans and requirements: - Tangguh Sustainability Development Program

Performance Indicators - A partnership forum on biodiversity conservation

Page 112 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

7.4 Role and responsibilities

7.4.1 Construction phase VP Project The VP Project has overall accountability for project environmental performance and is responsible for:  Providing leadership by clearly defining environmental goals and expectations;  Providing approval to Biodiversity Action Plan commitment related to project activity and endorsement to implement the additional mitigations;  Ensuring that the project environmental requirements, including BAP commitment are met at all times; and  Ensuring that adequate resources within both Tangguh and contractors are in place to implement project environmental management programmes, including BAP commitment. Project Managers Project Managers are responsible for:  Providing leadership by clearly defining environmental goals and expectations;  Ensuring that the Contractor working on their scope of work meet the Contractual environmental requirements at all times, which includes the BAP commitment;  Ensuring that adequate resources within both Tangguh and contractors are in place to implement planned Project environmental programs, including BAP commitment; and  The HSSE performance for their scope of work, including environmental management. Project HSSE Manager Project HSSE Manager is responsible for:  Developing a project HSSE management plan that clearly articulates how HSSE risks will be systematically identified, assessed and mitigated.  Providing HSSE resources for implementation of the project HSSE management plan.  Providing the project leadership team and functional leaders with HSSE advice, guidance and assistance.  Promoting standardization and simplification of HSSE plans, processes and procedures.  Verifying that adequate HSSE training is provided.  Developing a budget for the HSSE team and ensure that HSSE team activities are conducted within the constraints of the budget.

Page 113 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Environmental Team Leader Environmental Team leader is responsible for:  Providing self-verification that Tangguh Expansion Project is executed in compliance with applicable legislative and environmental requirements.  Providing self-verification that BAP commitment related to the project is delivered properly.  Providing advice to Tangguh leaders in abnormal and emergency situations related to environmental requirements and regulations.  Providing supervision to Contractor’s management, especially the Environmental Lead in managing environmental aspects during construction activities.  Ensuring the environmental requirement in the contract is implemented by Contractors.  Developing all environmental reports to internal BP, Government and relevant stakeholders. Environmental Advisor Environmental Advisor is responsible for:  Ensuring the daily construction activity comply with environmental requirement as stipulated in contract.  Providing day to day supervision and advice to Contractors related to environmental issues.  Reviewing environmental monitoring performance and provide advice to improve the performance.  Acting as Single Point Responsible during external environmental audit and/or visit conducted by BP and external Parties (Lenders and Government official).  Providing administrative support for development of environmental report.  Supporting Environmental Team Leader to ensure the environmental requirements are implemented. Forestry Specialist The Forestry Specialist is responsible for:  Ensuring the daily construction activity complies with forestry requirement as stipulated in contract.  Providing day to day supervision and advice to Contractors related to forestry issues.  Co-ordination and verification of the actions detailed in the Tree Harvesting Specifications.  Providing advice and supervision on Re-vegetation Specification and related activities.  Co-ordination of the Invasive Species Management Plan

Page 114 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Project Ecologist The Project Ecologist will be suitably qualified to provide support and advice to TEP on biodiversity issues, and is responsible for:  Co-ordination of the species surveys before construction activities;  Provide advice on management and implementation of the biodiversity mitigation measures as outlined in the BAP;  Provide advice for the Invasive Species Management Plan;  Assist in post-construction survey planning  Provide expertise and knowledge related to TEP activity impact to flora, fauna and marine mammal species; and

7.4.2 Operation phase Roles and responsibilities for the operation phase are defined in Environmental Management Procedures.

7.5 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting Extensive baseline surveys and assessments have been undertaken at the site for more than ten years, and a range of additional and more detailed monitoring activities will be undertaken during and after construction. The objectives of the monitoring activities will be to:  Measure the state of change during and after construction;  Ensure that the mitigation measures have been effectively implemented. If at any stage of the project (during or post-construction) the mitigation measures are shown not to be meeting the desired objectives, additional mitigations will be evaluated. The following sections provide a summary of the planned monitoring activities.

7.5.1 Monitoring During Construction The following activites are based on measures already detailed within the AMDAL and will be described in the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan for the project. The monitoring activities are intended to monitor the implementation of the AMDAL and BAP commitments. The monitoring result will then be used to review the success and effectiveness of the management plan, including determination of any corrective action necessary to mitigate any abnormalities identified during monitoring, which may lead to non- compliance/non-conformance to the management plan. The specific corrective action to be implemented will be documented and tracked using the existing Corrective Action Plan (CAP) method but will not trigger revision of the BAP, which functions as an overarching plan.

Page 115 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Land Clearing Activities Monitoring activity for impact management of land clearing activities are:  Record checking of tree cutting and log management activity  Checking of actual land clearing with proposed map  Record of visual fauna monitoring  Record of revegetation program  Perform revegetation monitoring every 6 months during revegetation maintenance until hand over to operation. High resolution infrared remote sensing imagery, using monthly automatic change detection analysis, will also be used to monitor habitat loss and changes during the construction - to monitor monthly changes in the areas of forest being cleared. The technology will also allow the project to monitor the recovery and condition of the forest after replanting. Noise and Vibration Monitoring activity for noise and vibration impact during construction will include:  Monthly internal monitoring noise level at 2 locations in Tangguh perimeter fence and 2 locations in Tanah Merah Baru Village  6 monthly external monitoring of noise at 2 locations in Tangguh perimeter fence and 2 locations in Tanah Merah Baru Village  6 monthly checking of maintenance record Dredging Activity Monitoring for dredging activity impact during construction will include:  Checking of dredging and dredging disposal activity record  Weekly internal TSS monitoring in sea water at designated location  External monitoring of sea water (pH and TSS) and plankton at designated location, once during dredging activity and once after completion of dredging  External monitoring of sediment at designated location, once during dredging activity and once after completion of dredging Marine Mammal Monitoring  Marine mammal and reptile observation during project activity.  Marine mammal survey to be conducted once during construction phase. Flora and Fauna Monitoring Flora and fauna survey to be conducted once pre-construction and once after construction prior to hand over. These surveys will:  Record any priority flora and fauna found in a representative number of transects.

Page 116 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

 Identify presence / density / distribution of priority tree species, priority amphibians/reptiles and priority bat species (as listed in CHA and BAP) in the survey area and in adjacent forest. Social Monitoring  Tangguh will conduct an annual survey to measure community incomes including in the fishery sector.  Ongoing community consultation will be conducted regularly in villages by the Tangguh Community Relation Team following the requirement in the Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (Section 5.1. Routine Community Relations), and Tangguh Sustainable Development Programme (Section 4.1.4. Community and External Relations).  If compensation is required, the compensation process will be applied as per the Grievance Mechanism Procedure.

7.5.2 Monitoring during Operation The existing Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan for the Tangguh operations is already in place. The monitoring activities include:  Flora and Fauna Survey –once every 5 years during operation phase.  Marine Mammal Survey – once every 3 years during operation phase.

7.5.3 Reporting Regular environmental reporting will be conducted to Indonesian government and to Lenders. Environmental Report shall be submitted to both on a 6 monthly basis, covering implementation of AMDAL commitment. In addition to the regular reporting to government and lenders, internal environmental reporting will be developed to track environmental performance of both company and contractor (during construction), which are:  Weekly environmental performance  Monthly environmental performance  Non-compliance and non-conformity report Reporting of BAP implementation will be submitted as part of 6 monthly monitoring report to Lenders and Indonesian Government (for AMDAL commitment).

Page 117 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

8 References

ADB (2009). Safeguards Policy Statement. Manila. ADB (2012). Environmental Safeguards. A Good Practice Sourcebook – Draft Working Document. Manila. Agustini, V. Suharyanto, Suharno, Dimara, L. and Sembay, C.D. (2013). The Diversity of Tropical Orchids of South Papua. Jurnal Biologi Papua. Vol. 5(1): 1-9. Allen, G. 1996. Melanotaenia arfakensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.1996.RLTS.T13057A3407931.en. [Accessed 10-04-2016] Allen, G.R., 1991. Field guide to the freshwater fishes of New Guinea. Publication, no. 9. 268 p. Christensen Research Institute, Madang, Papua New Guinea. AMDAL (2014). Tangguh Expansion Project Environmental Impact Assessment (ANDAL). AMDAL (2002). Integrated ANDAL for Tangguh Train 1 and Train 2. Ashton, P.S. (1982). Dipterocarpaceae. Flora Malesiana, Series I 92: 237-552. Bakke, T., Jarle Klungsøyr J., Sanni, S. (2013). Environmental impacts of produced water and drilling waste discharges from the Norwegian offshore petroleum industry. Marine Environmental Research 92: 154-169. Bartol, S.M. and I.K. Bartol, I.K. (2014), Hearing Capabilities of Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta) throughout Ontogeny: An Integrative Approach involving Behavioral and Electrophysiological Techniques, Final Report, IOGP E&P SML JIP, JIP Grant No.22 07-14. Beehler, B. M., & Pratt, T. K. (2016). Birds of New Guinea: Distribution, Taxonomy, and Systematics. Princeton University Press. Birdlife (2016) Ardea alba & Egretta garzetta Factsheets http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/factsheet/22697043 Birdlife (2016) Black lory Chalcopsitta atra factsheet http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/factsheet/22684488 Birdlife (2016) Cekakak Pita Tanysiptera nympha Factsheet http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/factsheet/22683597 Birdlife (2016) Forest Honeyeater Meliphaga montana Factsheet http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/factsheet/22703984 Birdlife (2016) Southern Cassowary Casuarius casuarius & Northern cassowary Casuarius unappendiculatus Factsheets http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=6 Birdlife (2016) Western Crowned-pigeon Goura cristata Factsheet http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/factsheet/22691865 Bonaccorso, F. (1998). Bats of Papua New Guinea. Conservation International, Washington, DC, USA Borgmann, K.L., (2011). A review of human disturbance impacts on waterbirds. Audubon California.[Online.] Available at www.sfbayjv.org/news-general. php. BP (2003). BP Indonesia Biodiversity Action Plan. BP Indonesia. Jakarta. BP (2015). Flora Field Guide - Buku Panduan Pengenalan Flora. BP Indonesia. Jakarta. Clarke, C., Cantley, R., Nerz, J., Rischer, H. & Witsuba, A. (2000). Nepenthes ampullaria. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2000:. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2000.RLTS.T39640A10253611.en [Accessed 20-03-2016]

Page 118 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Clarke, C.M. (2014). Nepenthes mirabilis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2014: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2014-1.RLTS.T49122515A21844202.en [Accessed 20-03- 2016] Corlett, R.T. (2009). Seed Dispersal Distances and Plant Migration Potential in Tropical East Asia. Biotropica 41(5): 592–598. CSBI (2015). A cross-sector guide for implementing the mitigation hierarchy. Prepared by the Biodiversity Consultancy on behalf of IPIECA, ICMM and the Equator Principles Association: Cambridge UK. De Wilde, W.J.J.O. (1998). More notes on Knema and Myristica (Myristicaceae). Blumea 43: 241-254. del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., and Sargatal, J. (1996). Handbook of the Birds of the World, vol. 3: Hoatzin to Auks. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. del Hoyo, J.; Elliot, A.; Sargatal, J. (1992). Handbook of the Birds of the World, vol. 1: Ostrich to Ducks. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Dickerson, D. D., Wolters, M., Theriot, C. and Slay, C. K. (2004). Dredging impacts on sea turtles in the southeastern USA: a historical review of protection. Proc. World Dredging Congress. Hamburg, Germany. Dowe, J.L. and Mogea J.P. (2004). New Species of Livistona (Arecaceae) from New Guinea. Palms 48(4). 197–203. Duke, N., Kathiresan, K., Salmo III, S.G., Fernando, E.S., Peras, J.R., Sukardjo, S., Miyagi, T., Ellison, J., Koedam, N.E., Wang, Y., Primavera, J., Jin Eong, O., Wan-Hong Yong, J. & Ngoc Nam, V. (2010). Bruguiera hainesii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2010-2.RLTS.T178834A7621565.en. [Accessed 01-04- 2016] Eddowes, P.J. (1998). Calophyllum insularum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1998: e.T37579A10059189. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.1998.RLTS.T37579A10059189.en. [Accessed 20-03- 2016] Eddowes, P.J. 1998. Flindersia pimenteliana. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1998: e.T38149A10102702. [Accessed 20-03-2016] Equator Principles (2013). www.equator-principles.com [Accessed 01-04-2016] Erftemeijer, P., Allen. G. and Zuwendra (1989). Preliminary Resource Inventory of Bintuni Bay and Recommendations for Conservation and Management. Direktorat Perlindungan Hutan dan Pelestanan Alam Departemen Kehutanan Republik Indonesia I Asian Wetland Bureau Bogor. FAO. (1985). Guidelines: Land evaluation for irrigated agriculture. FAO Soils Bulletin, No. 55, Rome. Fern, K. (2014). Useful Tropical Plants Database 2014. http://tropical.theferns.info/ [Accessed 20-03-2016]. Fischer J, Lindenmayer, DB (2007). Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16: 265–280. Fisher, D.O. and I.P.F. Owens (2000). Female home range size and the evolution of social organization in macropod marsupials. Journal of Animal Ecology 69, 1083-1098.

Page 119 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Flannery, T. F. 1995. The Mammals of New Guinea, 2nd edition. Reed Books, Sydney, Australia. Flint, V.E., Boehme, R.L., Kostin, Y.V. and Kuznetsov, A.A. (1984). A field guide to birds of the USSR. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Frost, Darrel. 2013. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. GCF (2013). Lampiran Output Database GCF Infografis. Provinsi Papua Barat and Provinsi Papua. Governors’ Climate & Forests Task Force. http://www.gcftaskforce.org/documents/final_report_ID_content_king_2013.PDF [Accessed 01-04-2016]. Genesis, (2011). Review and Assessment of Underwater Sound Produced from Oil and Gas Sound Activities and Potential Reporting Requirements under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive; J71656-Final Report –G2. Goosem, M., Hoskin, C. and Dawe, G. (2007) Nocturnal noise levels and edge impacts on amphibian habitats. Report to the Marine and Tropical Sciences Research Facility. Reef and Rainforest Research Centre Limited, Cairns. Gui D., Yu, R. He, X. Tu, Q, Chen, L., Wua, Y. (2014). Bioaccumulation and biomagnification of persistent organic pollutants in Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins (Sousa chinensis) from the Pearl River Estuary, China. Chemosphere 114: 106–113. Gunther (1999) Morphological and Bioacoustic Characteristics of Frogs of the Genus Platymantis (Amphibia, Ranidae) in Irian Jaya, with Descriptions of Two New Species. Zoosystematics and Evolution. Volume 75, Issue 2: 317–335 Higgins, P. J.; Davies, S. J. J. F. (1996). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic birds vol 3: snipe to pigeons. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Hou, D. (1960). Thymeliaceae. In: Van Steenis, C.G.G.J. (Ed). Flora Malesiana Series I. Vol 6. pp 1-15. Wolter-Noordhof Publishing, Groningen, the Netherlands. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.1998.RLTS.T38149A10102702.en. [Accessed 01-04- 2016] Huynh, K.L. (2002). The genus Freycinetia (Pandanaceae) in New Guinea (part 7). Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 124: 151–161. 2002. IBSAP (2002). Indonesian Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (IBSAP) 2003-2020. Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/BAPPENAS. IBSAP (2016). Indonesian Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (IBSAP) 2015-2020. Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/BAPPENAS. IFC (2012a). Performance Standard 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources. International Finance Corporation, Washington DC, U.S.A. IFC (2012b). Guidance Note 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources. International Finance Corporation, Washington DC, U.S.A. Ineich, I. (2010). How habitat disturbance benefits geckos: Conservation implications. Comptes rendus biologies, 333(1), 76-82. IOGP (2016). Environmental fates and effects of ocean discharge of drill cuttings and associated drilling fluids from offshore oil and gas operations. IOGP Report 543. London. IPIECA/OGP (2005). A guide to developing biodiversity action plans for the oil and gas sector. London.

Page 120 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Iskandar, D. T., and Erdelen, W. R. (2006). Conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Indonesia: issues and problems. Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, 4(1), 60-87. IUCN (2004) Papua wrinkled frog Platymantis (Cornufer) punctatus IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/58478/0 IUCN (2008) Brown Dorcopsis Dorcopsis muelleri IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/6800/0 IUCN (2008) Grizzled Tree Kangaroo Dendrolagus inustus IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/6431/0 IUCN (2008) Humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis chinensis IUCN Red List. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/20424/0 IUCN (2008) Lesser Tube-nosed Bat Nyctimene draconilla IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/14956/0 IUCN (2008) Vogelkop Tree-Kangeroo Dendrolagus ursinus IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/6434/0 IUCN (2012) Olive-crowned Flowerpecker Dicaeum pectoral IUCN Red Listhttp://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22717543/0 IUCN (2013) Dusky Scrubfowl Megapodius freycinet IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22678602/0 IUCN (2014) Western Ornate Fruit-dove Ptilinopus ornatus IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22728052/0 IUCN (2015) Four-fingered skink Carlia bombarai. IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/42483197/0 IUCN (2012) Red-billed Brush-Turkey Talegalla cuvieri IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22678564/0 Ivantsoff, W., Aarn, Shepherd, M.A. and Allen, G.R. (1997). Pseudomugil reticulatus (Pisces: Pseudomugilidae) a review of the species originally described from a single specimen, from Vogelkop Peninsula, Irian Jaya with further evaluation of the systematics of Atherinoidea, Aqua: International Journal of Ichthyology: 53-64. Keith, D.A., Rodríguez, J.P., Rodríguez-Clark, K.M., Nicholson, E., Aapala, K., Alonso, A., Asmussen, M., Bachman, S., Basset, A., Barrow, E.G., Benson, J.S., Bishop, M.J., Bonifacio, R., Brooks, T.M., Burgman, M.A., Comer, P., Comín, F.A., Essl, F., Faber- Langendoen, D., Fairweather, P.G., Holdaway, R.J., Jennings, M., Kingsford, R.T., Lester, R.E., Nally, R.M., McCarthy, M.A., Moat, J., Oliveira-Miranda, M.A., Pisanu, P., Poulin, B., Regan, T.J., Riecken, U., Spalding, M.D. & Zambrano-Martínez, S. (2013) Scientific Foundations for an IUCN Red List of Ecosystems. PLoS ONE 8:e62111. Keller, J. M., et al. (2012). Perfluoroalkyl contaminants in plasma of five sea turtle species: Comparisons in concentration and potential health risks. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 31, 1223-1230. Kementarian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional (2014). Sectoral Medium-Term National Development Plan 2015-2019. Buku II - Agenda Pembangunan Bidang. Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasiona l (RPJMN) 2015-2019. Jakarta. KPPN/BAPPENAS (2016). Indonesian Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (IPSAB) 2015- 2020. Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional / BAPPENAS. Jakarta.

Page 121 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Landsberg, F., Treweek J., Stickler, M.M., Henninger, N., and Venn, O. (2013). Weaving Ecosystem Services Into Impact Assessment: A Step-By-Step Method (Version 1.0). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Langhammer, PF, Bakarr MI, Bennun LA., Brooks TM, Clay RP, Darwall W, De Silva N, Edgar GJ., Eken G, Fishpool LDC, da Fonseca GAB., Foster MN, Knox DH, Matiku P, Radford EA, Rodrigues ASL, Salaman P, Sechrest W and Tordoff AW. (2007). “Identification and Gap Analysis of Key Biodiversity Areas: Targets for Comprehensive Protected Area Systems.” Best Practice Protected Area Guideline Series 15, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Lincoln, G. A. (1974). Predation of incubator birds (Megapodius freycinet) by Komodo dragons (Varanus komodoensis). Journal of Zoology, 174(3), 419-428. Lindenmayer, D. and Burgman, M. (2005). Practical Conservation Biology. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne. Longcore, T. and Rich, C. (2004). Ecological light pollution. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2(4): 191– 198. Manangkalangi, E., Rahardjo M. F., Djadja, Sjafei, S., and Sulistiono. (2009). Musim pemijahan Ikan Pelangi Arfak (Melanotaenia arfakensis Allen) di Sungai Nimbai dan Sungai Aimasi, Manokwari. Jurnal Iktiologi Indonesia, 9(1):1-12. Marshall, A.G. (1985) Old World phytophagous bats (Megachiroptera) and their food plants: a survey. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 83(4) 251-369. Marshall, A.J & Beehler, B.M (2012) Ecology of Papua: Part Two. Periplus Editions McPherson, S.R. (2009). Pitcher Plants of the Old World. 2 volumes. Redfern Natural History Productions, Poole. Mickleborough, S.P, Hudson, A., & Racey, P (2002) A review of global conservation of bats. Oryx Vol 36 (1):18-34. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC. Mittermeier RA, Turner WR, Larsen FW, Brooks TM, Gascon C (2011). Global biodiversity conservation: the critical role of hotspots. In: Zachos FE, Habel JC (eds). Biodiversity hotspots: distribution and protection of conservation priority areas. Springer, Heidelberg Moores, N. 2006. South Korea's shorebirds: a review of abundance, distribution, threats and conservation status. Stilt 50: 62-72. Myers et al, (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858. Naturalis (2016). Bioportal Naturalis Biodiversity Centre. Calophyllum insularum. http://data.biodiversitydata.nl/naturalis/specimen/L%20%200011745 [Accessed 20-03-16] NG, S.L (2003) Behavioral response of Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin (Sousa chinensis) to vessel traffic. Marine Environmental Research 56(5) 555-567. Ogden L.J.E. (1996). Collision course: the hazards of lighted structures and windows to migrating birds. Toronto, Canada: World Wildlife Fund Canada and Fatal Light Awareness Program. OGP (2005). Fate and effects of naturally occurring substances in produced water on the marine environment. OGP Report 364. London. Ortega, C.P. (2012). Effects of noise pollution on birds: A brief review of our knowledge. Ornithological Monographs 74: 6–22

Page 122 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Pangau-Adam, M., Mühlenberg, M., & Waltert, M. (2015). Rainforest disturbance affects population density of the northern cassowary Casuarius unappendiculatus in Papua, Indonesia. Oryx, 49(04), 735-742. Pattiselanno, F (2003) Some fruit bats (Chiroptera, Pteropodidae) of the Mamberamo River Basin, West Papua, Indonesia. Asia Life Sciences 2003. Piniak, W.D. (2012). Underwater hearing sensitivity of the leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea): Assessing the potential effect of anthropogenic noise; OCS Study, BOEM 2012-01156 PT Wijaya (2015). PT Wijaya Sentosa Ringkasan Rencana Pengelolaan (Management Plan). http://www.sinarwijayagroup.com/en/pt-wijaya-sentosa/manajemen-plan/ [Accessed 20-03- 16] Pulsford, I., Lindenmayer, D., Wyborn, C., Lausche, B., Worboys, G. L., Vasilijević, M. and Lefroy, T. (2015). Connectivity conservation management, Chapter 27 in G. L. Worboys, M. Lockwood, A. Kothari, S. Feary and I. Pulsford (eds) Protected Area Governance and Management, pp. 851–888, ANU Press, Canberra. Rodríguez, J.P., Rodríguez-Clark, K.M., Baillie, J.E.M. Ash, N. Benson, J. Boucher, T., Brown, C. Burgess, N.D., Collen, B., Jennings, M., Keith, D.A., Nicholson, E., Revenga, C., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Smith, T., Spalding, M., Taber, A., Walpole, M., Zager, I., Zamin, T. (2011). Establishing IUCN Red List Criteria for Threatened Ecosystems. Conserv Biol. 25(1): 21–29. Ruitenbeek, J. (1992). Mangrove Management: An Economic Analysis of Management Options with a Focus on Bintuni Bay, Irian Jaya. EMDI Environmental Reports, 8. Environmental Management Development in Indonesia Project (EMDI). Jakarta and Halifax. Sage, B. (1979). Flare up over North Sea birds. New Scientists 81: 464-466.) Sandell, M. (1989) The mating tactics and spacing patterns of solitary carnivores. Carnivore Behavior, Ecology and Evolution (ed. J.L. Gittleman). pp. 164±182. Cornell University Press, New York, NY. Schuiteman, A. de Vogel, E.F.. (2001). Orchids of New Guinea vol. I; Illustrated Checklist and Genera. ISBN 90-75000-20-0. Simberloff D (1986) The proximate causes of extinction. In: Raup DM, Jablonski D (eds) Patterns and processes in the history of life. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 259–276. Sodhi, N.S. Posa, M.R.C., Lee, T.M. and Warkentin, I.G. (2008). Perspectives in Ornithology: Effects of Disturbance or Loss of Tropical Rainforest on Birds. The Auk 125 (3):511-519. Soerianegara, I and Indrawan A. (1998). Ekologi Hutan Indonesia. Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor. Southall , B.L., Bowels, A.E., Elison, W.T., Finneran, J.J., Gentry, R.L., Greene Jr., C.R., Kastak, D., Ketten, D.R., Miller, J.H. Nachtigall, P.E., Richardson, W.J., Thomas, J.A. Tyack, P.L., (2007). Marine Mammal Sound Exposure Criteria: Initial Scientific Recommendations. Stephens, S.E., Koons, D.N., Rotella, J.J., Willey, D.W. (2003). Effects of habitat fragmentation on avian nesting success: a review of the evidence at multiple spatial scales. Biological Conservation 115: 101–110. Takeuchi, W. (2003). Two new species from the Bomberai Peninsula of Indonesian Papua, New Guinea. Harvard Papers in Botany, Vol. 8 (1): 131-136 Tangguh LNG (2014). Tangguh Expansion Project. Rekapitulasi Laporan Hasil Cruising (LHC) Tangguh LNG). Jakarta.

Page 123 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Tappin, A.R. (2007). In-stream. Freshwater Biodiversity of New Guinea. Special Publication June 2007.Australia-New Guinea Fishes Association. Queensland Inc. Tomascik, T. et al, (1997) The ecology of the Indonesian Seas. OUP. Toone, B., Ellis, S., Wirth, R., Byers, A., & Seal, U. (1993). Conservation Assessment and Management Plan for Pigeons and Doves. BirdLife International, IUCN/SSC Captive Breeding Specialist Group, San Diego, CA. Tuxbury, S.M.; Salmon, M.l (2004). Competitive interactions between artificial lighting and natural cues during seafinding by hatchling marine turtles. Biological Conservation 121 (2): 311–316. Unmack, P.J., Allen, G.R. and Johnson, J.B. (2013). Phylogeny and biogeography of rainbowfishes (Melanotaeniidae) from Australia and New Guinea Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 67: 15–27. Vollering, J. Schuiteman, A., de Vogel, E. van Vugt, R. and Raes, N. (2016). Phytogeography of New Guinean orchids: patterns of species richness and turnover. Journal of Biogeography 43, 204–214. WCSP (2014). World Checklist of Selected Plant Families. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. http://wfo.kew.org/taxon/urn:kew.org:wcs:taxon:92281 [Accessed 01-04- 2016] Wetlands International. 2015. Waterbird Population Estimates. Available at: wpe.wetlands.org. Wikramanayake, E., Dinerstein, E. and Loucks, C.J. (2002) Terrestrial Ecoregions of the Indo-Pacific. A Conservation Assessment. Island Press, Washington DC. World Conservation Monitoring Centre. (1998). Myristica inaequalis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1998: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.1998.RLTS.T37892A10079455.en Yukawa, T, Kinoshita, A. and Tanaka, N. (2013). Molecular Identification Resolves Taxonomic Confusion in Grammatophyllum speciosum Complex (Orchidaceae). Bull. Natl. Mus. Nat. Sci., Ser. B, 39(3), pp. 137–145. Zug, G.R. and Allison, A. (2006). New Carlia fusca complex lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Scincidae) from New Guinea, Papua-Indonesia, Zootaxa 1237: 27–44.

Page 124 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

A.1 Description of Biodiversity Surveys Commissioned by Tangguh

Name Description Year Survey method Team of Experts Marine surveys Study on Sustainable Jan – Oct 2004 Creel Surveys, Frame Surveys, and Socio-economic assessment Prof. Dr. Ir. Frans Wanggai (Rector Fisheries in Teluk Bintuni of University of Papua), Dr. Lida Pet Soede (Fisheries management expert), Prof. Dr. Ir. Daniel R. Monintja (Professor at Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science IPB), University of Papua (UNIPA) senior level scientists, Bintuni Bay Marine Affairs & Fisheries staff, Bintuni Bay Rapid Sep – Nov 2005 Rapid Ecological Assessment model which included 3 geographical Benjamin Kahn (Cetacean expert Ecological Assessment sections and 3 habitat zones and 2 Tangguh Project phases from APEX Environmental), (REA): Marine Mammals Geoffrey Gearheart, Ph.D. (Marine and Marine Reptiles Biologist from APEX Environmental). Ricardo Tapilatu (UNIPA) Study on Sustainable Jun – Dec 2007 Water samples were collected from ten sampling stations to acquire data Experts from Bogor Agricultural Fishery at Bintuni Bay, on type and abundance of phytoplankton, chlorophyll-a, and nutrient. Fish University (IPB) and University of West Papua samples were collected using three types of fishing gears, such as trawl, Papua (UNIPA) fykenet, and trap. Primary and secondary data were collected to obtain information on potency of non-fish resources. Fisheries Study to Update Jun – Jul 2009 Sediment sampling was conducted in 28 points from Babo to Onar and Basic Information of Weriagar using a Ponar or van Veen grab. Sampling technique and handling Tangguh LNG Project of sea water sample and water quality analyses referred to APHA (1989). Marine biota was collected using several equipments such as gillnet, handline, trap and grap. Fisheries, Marine Mar 2013 – Jan 2014 Nineteen water sampling sites/locations that mainly represent the Experts from Institute of Research Mammals & Reptiles and Tangguh LNG activities were selected. Those sites were separated into and Community Empowerment Mangrove Ecosystem different sampling points: 8 were located off shore, another 8 located in Bogor Agricultural University (LPPM- Studies in Bintuni Bay the coastal area and 3 were surface water from rivers. Fishery resources IPB) Regency were observed by two different teams, the first one utilised a local fishermen boat with beam trawl and gillnet, while the second team utilised a tugboat type vessel equipped with pelagic trawl (10 m pocket length and 15 m pulling rope length) and gillnet. Observations of marine mammals

Page 126 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Name Description Year Survey method Team of Experts and sea turtles were carried out using a parallel transect which were also designed to estimate the fish density (resources) using hydroacoustic method and catchment using sampling fishing gear (gillnet and trawl test). Mangroves observation was conducted using a combination of two methods, namely satellite imagery (aerial survey) and ground survey. Data gathered on potential mollusc and crustacean resources consists of primary and secondary data. Data regarding fisheries business were analyzed using profit analysis and revenue cost ratio.

Terrestrial Surveys AMDAL Study September – October 2000 Vegetation: Vegetation was quantified using both quadrat (plot) and linear Experts from PT. INTERSYS Kelola transect methodologies. Qualitative data were also collected, principally Maju and AATA INTERNATIONAL, through interviews with residents of the study area in order to obtain INC. information on the economic, domestic, and medicinal uses of local plant species. Avifauna: Avifauna sampling methodology including direct observation through sight or sound, observation of bird tracks (The Stratification Point Count and Belt Transect Methodologies), nests and/or sign, and through interviews with local people in the project area. Mammals: Mammalian diversity was determined using the traverse method in forested areas and, where possible, areas of the plantation, ponds, river edges and scrub; The species collection/removal method and baited live trap techniques for the small mammal surveys were also employed. Amphibians and reptiles: Diversity levels of amphibians and reptiles were estimated using the traverse method in accessible areas of the forest, plantation, ponds, river edges, and scrub habitats. The transect method was used along footpaths and the edge of the river in the forest habitats. Both transect and quadrat methods were used in the forest and savannah ecosystems to determine amphibian and reptile population abundance. Flora and Fauna Survey of February – April 2002 Floristic assessment was conducted using Rapid Biological Assessment Professional experts from PT The Tangguh LNG Site (RBA) procedures; Field surveys of amphibians and reptiles were Hatfindo Prima (Indonesian- Papua Province, Indonesia conducted using visual observation, hand collections and two arrays of Canadian environmental pitfall traps in lowland hill forest; Mammals survey was conducted using consultancy), Indo-Pacific trapping for small terrestrial mammals in the 3 different sites with each Conservation Alliance (IPCA), trap line consisted of up to 100 live and break-back traps set at 10 m Indonesian Institute of Sciences intervals and baited with fresh or roasted coconut or live Sphingid moths, (LIPI), Cenderawasih University

Page 127 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Name Description Year Survey method Team of Experts night-time netting for low flying bats in two different sites, night-time (UNCEN), and University of Papua observations with spotlight and night scope whenever weather conditions (UNIPA). allowed (mostly along the track between Saengga and Tanah Merah), discussions with village men at Saengga and Tanah Merah; Birds survey was conducted with Bird Cencuses method (developing one kilometre transects along existing forest trails between Saengga and Mangossa rivers and at 200 m intervals along each transect all birds calls or visual sightings were recorded over a 20-minute period along with their estimated distance from the observer) and semi-structured interviews with local guides to understand the local use of birds and bird’s nomenclature in the Sumuri local language; Sampling for butterflies was conducted by collecting the butterflies with nest in lowland hill forest below 100 m above sea level (between Saengga and Tanah Merah village) meanwhile moths were collected by light- trapping at four locations, lowland hill and savannah by procedures used in similar studies in Indonesia and Malaysia; Freshwater and estuarine fish species were surveyed using various methods: most forest streams were sampled using a backpack electrofisher (Smith-Root Model 12B-POW), lower reaches of a select number of major drainages were sampled using Gee minnow traps baited with salted fish and set overnight, estuarine habitats in Saengga and Manggosa drainages were sampled using a 30 metre by 4 metre juvenile beach seine (3/4”stretched mesh). Flora Fauna Survey of The Jul – Aug 2007 Botanical survey was conducted in each forest type in the Tangguh LNG Senior experts from Bogor Tangguh LNG Project Site Project Area (hill- lowland forest, Metroxylon association, swamp forest, Agricultural University (IPB), Bintuni Bay West Papua coastal forest, and mangrove forest). Indonesian Institute of Sciences Indonesia Mammal data was collected in hill-lowland forest, Metroxylon association, (LIPI) and University of Papua and mangrove forest. Inventory of amphibian and reptiles was conducted (UNIPA) in Babo (residential areas and scrubland of former plantation around the residential area), and in the Tangguh LNG Project buffer zone. Bird observation was conducted by using sampling units of combination of line transect and variable circular plot (VCP). Fish were directly captured by using cast net, gill net, trap, and fishing rod. Collection of infauna and epifauna mollusk comprising of gastropods and pelecypods was conducted to obtain information on horizontal distribution from sea toward the upstream, and on vertical distribution on mangrove stems/stand. Insect collection was conducted by three methods, namely:

Page 128 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Name Description Year Survey method Team of Experts 1) collection with standard size insect net with long handles, 2) malaise trap, and 3) light trap. Collection was conducted in the daytime for butterflies (using insect net or malaise trap) and at night using light trap. Malaise trap was installed during day and nighttime. Flora & Fauna Sep 2011 – Jan 2012 The collection of data on the types of non-mangrove ecosystem (lowland Senior experts from Bogor Observation in The Buffer forest ecosystem, metroxylon association, swamp forest and coastal Agricultural University (IPB), Zone of Tangguh LNG forest) vegetation is conducted by using the method of line combination Indonesian Institute of Sciences Teluk Bintuni Regency, with plotted line on the sample unit in the form of line of 500 m. The (LIPI) and University of Papua West Papua method of this vegetation analysis adopts the method developed by (UNIPA). Soerianegara & Indrawan (1988). The collection of mangrove vegetation data is conducted by using the method of line combination with plotted line. The study of the diversity of the species of fungus in Tangguh LNG project site uses the method of line transects with a length of 75–150 m which are placed crossing the contour line. Five transects representing each type of ecosystem located in Tangguh LNG buffer zone have been installed with small mammals traps. Bird observation is performed by using the sample unit of transect line combination with variable circular plot (VCP). Animal search for herpetofauna survey was performed actively or passively (using traps). The collection of data on other fish and water biota species was performed by using catching tools; gill net, throw net and rod. The collection of butterflies was performed in broad daylight and the collection was performed by using sweeping net with Ø=40 cm and having long rod, as for high-flying butterflies, the collection was conducted by using traps. The collection of moths was performed at night because moths are usually nocturnal. The collection was performed by using bright lamp light placed in front of a big white sheet as the screen. Data collection method for beetle, dragonfly and ladybug is field observation using an insect net. Observation for ground animals was conducted at the observation plots in each observation transect. Flora Fauna Survey for Dec 2015 – Feb 2016 Flora Fauna Survey 2016 using transect line methodology which cover five Senior experts from Bogor Tangguh Operation ecosystem in Tangguh forest area. For vegetation : data is collected inside Agricultural University (IPB), observation plots as well as outside the plots to obtain additional species, Indonesian Institute of Observation plots are combinations of 200 m line strips with plots. Sciences(LIPI) and University of Vegetation analysis followed method developed by Soerianegara & Papua (UNIPA)

Page 129 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Name Description Year Survey method Team of Experts Indrawan (1988), where vegetation observation is conducted in plots that are further divided into subplots. Survey is conducted with sampling units in strips of varying lengths, from 80 to 240 m, constructed perpendicular to contour lines. For mammals: data is collected by installing small mammal traps using standard trap strips. Traps are installed for three nights in each ecosystem type. Traps are set up at 5 m intervals, beside that four mist nets measuring 12 by 1.85 m are set up 2 m above the ground, under tree canopies in each ecosystem. For herpetofauna: Searches are conducted intensively along forest floor, water bodies, and vegetation around the location. Existence of animals is detected through direct encounter (either of adults or young individuals), or through signs in the form of tracks, nests, skin remnants and calls/sound. For birds: data collected along the transect line for each ecosystem, bird observation is conducted by using sampling units of combination of line transect and variable circular plot (VCP). Distance between one plot centre and the next is 100 m, and the length of each transect is 1,000 m

Page 130 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

A.2 List of Species of Conservation Concern

Table 20 – Species of flora of conservation concern

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Latin Common Endemic5 IUCN6 Natio- nally pro- tected7 1 Calophyllum insularum P.F. Stevens. Tree species, 2016, Natural LF Reportedly endemic to islands in Teluk EN B1+2c - Bintangur daun 2011, Cendrawasih ver 2.3 halus 2007, 2000 2 Nepenthes ampullaria Jack. Flask-shaped 2007, Natural LF, SF - LC ver 2.3 Protected pitcher-plant 2002, Modified Kantong semar; 2000 Wanitoto; 3 Nepenthes mirabilis (Lour.) Druce Common Swamp 2016, Natural LF, S - LC ver 3.1 Protected Pitcher-Plant; 2002, Modified Wantoto Nifuri 2000 4 Grammatophyllum speciosum Bl. Orchid species; 2016, Natural LF, SF - NE Protected Anggrek kuning 2011, 2007, 2000 5 Grammatophyllum papuanum syn. of Orchid species; 2002 Natural LF - Protected Grammatophyllum pantherinum Rchb.f. Anggrek raksasa Irian

6 Bryobium sp Orchid species; 2016 Natural LF Assumed endemic NE - Anggrek

7 Bulbophyllum sp. Orchid species; 2011, Natural SF Assumed endemic NE - Anggrek putih 2007 8 Bulbophyllum sp Orchid species; 2016 Natural S Assumed endemic NE - Anggrek

Page 131 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Latin Common Endemic5 IUCN6 Natio- nally pro- tected7 9 Bulbophyllum sp-1 Orchid species; 2016 Natural LF Assumed endemic NE - Anggrek

10 Bulbophyllum sp-2 Orchid species; 2016 Natural LF Assumed endemic NE Anggrek

11 Bulbophyllum sp-3 Orchid species; 2016 Natural LF Assumed endemic NE - Anggrek

12 Robiquieta sp Orchid species; 2016 Natural LF Assumed endemic NE - Anggrek

13 Dendrobium sp Orchid species; 2003, Natural LF Assumed endemic NE Possibly Anggrek 2016, Protected Six types of Dendrobium are 2007 protected under Indonesian regulation 7/1999, however the 2003 and 2016 survey did not specify the actual Dendrobium species found 14 Flindersia pimenteliana F. Muell. Tree species 2016 Natural LF EN C2a ver related to Maple 2.3 Silkwood; Kowanitaya 15 Myristica inaequalis W.J.de Wilde Species of tree 2016 Natural LF, SF Endemic Vulnerable D2 ver 2.3

16 Livistona sp. Species of fan 2002 Natural LF, SF Assumed endemic NE Protected palm; All Livistona species are protected Palem kipas under Indonesian regulation 7/1999; Sumatera the 2002 survey suggests that the actual Livistona species found might be a new species.

Page 132 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Latin Common Endemic5 IUCN6 Natio- nally pro- tected7 17 Glochidion daviesii Takeuchi Species of tree 2002 Natural LF New species, Endemic NE -

18 Scaevola burnettii Takeuchi Species of shrub 2002 Natural S New species, Endemic NE -

19 Freycinetia bomberaiensis Huynh Tree (Pandanus) 2002 Natural LF New species, Endemic NE -

Notes: 1. Year of survey in accordance with Table 2. 2. Classification of modified and natural habitat follows IFC (2012b) 3. Habitat types: LF: Lowland forest; BF: Beach forest; S: Savannah; SF: Swamp forest; M: Mangroves; E: Estuary 4. Shaded area indicates principal reason for conservation concern 5. Endemic / Restricted-range definition follows IFC (2012b) 6. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated, EN and CR include qualifying criteria as per IUCN (2016). 7. List of Protected Species Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

Species of Meranti (Shorea sp.) were previously recorded present in the area in 2000, but may be misidentified: Shorea, which is protected under Indonesian law, does not occur in New Guinea (Ashton, 1982). The Flora and Fauna Survey (2003) suggest that this species may have been mistaken for one of the three dipterocarp genera documented for the island (i.e. Anisoptera, Hopea or Vatica)). Bruguiera hainesii, which is a critically endangered species, was reportedly present in Bintuni Bay (pers. observation of S.Sukardjo in IUCN Red Data List (Duke et al, 2010). It was not recorded in the project area during any of the terrestrial surveys, and the record of it being present in Bintuni Bay is contested by the survey experts (Annex A.3).

Page 133 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 21 – Bird species of conservation concern

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Latin Common Congregatory Endemic / IUCN6 Nationally pro- species Restricted-range tected7 1 Accipiter Grey headed 2000 Natural & LF, SF - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected poliocephalus Goshawk modified Guinea EOO:672,000 2 Alcedo azurea Azure 2000 Natural SF, M, LF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Kingfisher Sea surface Indonesia; Papua New (Raja-udang at an Guinea Biru-langit) elevation of EOO: 3,400,000 km2 up to 1,000 m. 3 Alcedo pusilla Little 2002 Natural SF, M, LF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Kingfisher Indonesia; Papua New (Raja-udang Guinea; Solomon Kecil) Islands EOO: 910,000 km2 4 Aquila gurneyi Gurney’s 2000 Natural SF,LF - Indonesia and New NT ver3.1 Protected Eagle Guinea EOO: 602,000km2 5 Ardea alba Kuntul Besar 2016 Natural & M, E Migrant species Global distribution LC ver 3.1 Protected Modified from the north to Indonesia 6 Aviceda Pacific Baza 2016, Natural & LF, BF, SF, S - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected subcristata 2000 Modified Papua New Guinea; Baza Pasifik Solomon Islands; Timor-Leste 7 Cacatua galerita Sulphur- 2016, Natural & LF - Native: LC ver 3.1 Protected Crested 2000 Modified Australia; Indonesia; Cockatoo Papua New Guinea (Kakatua Koki) EOO: 3,910,000 km2 8 Calidris Great Knot 2000 Natural E, M, SF Full Migrant Native: Australia; EN A2bc+3bc+ - tenuirostris (Kedidi Besar) 4bc ver 3.1 Congregatory (and Bangladesh; Brunei dispersive) Darussalam; China;

Page 134 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Guam; Hong Kong; India; Indonesia; Iran, Islamic Republic of; Japan; etc. EOO: 1,490,000 km2 9 Casuarius Southern 2016, Natural LF - Native: Australia; VU A2cde ver Protected casuarius Cassowary 2011, Indonesia; Papua New 3.1 (Kasuari 2007, Guinea Gelambir- 2000 EOO: 394,000 km2 ganda) 10 Casuarius Northern 2001, Natural LF, SF - Papua, formerly Irian VU C2a ver 3.1 Protected unappendiculatus cassowary 2002, Jaya, Indonesia, and 2000 Papua New Guinea EOO: 186,000km2 11 Chalcopsitta atra Black lorry 2016, Natural LF - Native: West Papua LC ver 3.1 - (Nuri Hitam) 2002 EOO: 77,300km2 Country endemic and species of the Endemic Bird Area 12 Charmosyna Red-flanked 2002, Natural LF - Endemic to Papua LC ver 3.1 Protected placentis Lorikeet 2000 Native: Indonesia; (Perkici Dagu- Papua New Guinea merah) EOO: 821,000 km2 13 Chlamydera Namdur 2000 Natural LF, SF - Papua New Guinea LC ver 3.1 Protected cerviniventris Cokelat and locally fairly common in Australia EOO: 153,000km2 14 Chlidonias Dara-Laut 2000 Natural E, O Full Migrant Global LC ver 3.1 Protected hybridus Kumis EOO: 1,000,000km Congregatory (and dispersive)

15 Chlidonias White-winged 2000 Natural E,O Full Migrant Global LC ver 3.1 Protected leucopterus Tern (Dara laut EOO: 6,200,000 km2 Sayap-putih)

Page 135 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Congregatory (and dispersive)

16 Clytoceyx rex Shovel-billed 2000 Natural LF, SF, M - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected Kingfisher Guinea EOO: 341,00km2 17 Dacelo Rufous-bellied 2016, Natural & LF, SF, BF, M - Endemic to Papua LC ver 3.1 Protected gaudichaud Kookaburra 2002, Modified Native: Indonesia; (Kukabura 2000 Papua New Guinea Perut-merah) EOO: 671,000 km2 18 Dacelo leachii Blue-winged 2000 Natural S, M, SF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Kookaburra Indonesia; Papua New (Kukabura Guinea Sayap-biru) EOO: 2,180,000 km2 19 Dicaeum Olive-crowned 2002 Natural LF - Native: West Papua LC ver 3.1 - pectorale Flowerpecker EOO: 97,800km2 Country endemic. Species of the Endemic Bird Area 20 Eclectus roratus Eclectus 2016, Natural LF, SF, BF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Parrot (Nuri 2000 Indonesia; Papua New Bayan) Guinea; Solomon Islands EOO: 1,690,000 km2 21 Egretta alba Great White 2000 Natural * SF, M, E Global LC ver 3.1 Protected Egret modified EOO: 5,720,000km2 22 Egretta garzetta Little Egret, 2011, Natural & E, M Congregatory (and Global LC ver 3.1 Protected Snowy Egret 2007, Modified dispersive) (Kuntul Kecil) 2000 23 Egretta White-faced 2000 Natural & E, M - Australia; Christmas LC ver 3.1 Protected novaehollandiae Heron modified Island; Fiji; Indonesia; New Caledonia; New Zealand; Norfolk Island; Papua New

Page 136 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Guinea; Timor-Leste EOO:2,670,000km2 24 Egretta picata Pied Heron 2000 Natural E, M, SF - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Papua New Guinea; Timor-Leste EOO: 133,000km2 25 Goura cristata Western 2002, Natural SF, M, LF, BF - Native: West Papua. VU A2cd ver Protected Crowned- 2007 EOO: 83,500km2 3.1 pigeon Country endemic. Species of the Endemic Bird Area 26 Halcyon chloris Collared 2000 Natural SF, M, E - American Samoa LC ver 3.1 Protected kingfisher (American Samoa); Australia; Bangladesh; Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; Eritrea; Fiji; India; Indonesia; Lao People's Democratic Republic; Malaysia; Micronesia, Federated States of ; Myanmar; Northern Mariana Islands; Oman; Palau; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Saudi Arabia; Singapore; Solomon Islands; Thailand; Timor-Leste; Tonga; United Arab Emirates; Vanuatu; Viet Nam EOO: 3,940,000Km2 27 Haliaeetus Elang Laut 2016, Natural LF, E, M, SF, - Australia; Bangladesh; LC ver 3.1 Protected leucogaster Perut-putih 2000 BF Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China; Hong Kong; India;

Page 137 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Indonesia; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Malaysia; Myanmar; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Singapore; Sri Lanka; Thailand; Timor-Leste; Viet Nam 28 Haliastur indus Elang Bondol 2016, Natural & LF, E, M, SF, - Australia; Bangladesh; LC ver 3.1 Protected 2000 Modified BF Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China; India; Indonesia; Lao People’s Democratic Republic; Macao; Malaysia; Myanmar; Nepal; Pakistan; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Singapore; Solomon Islands; Sri Lanka; Taiwan, Province of China; Thailand; Timor-Leste; Viet Nam 29 Haliastur Whistling Kite 2000 Natural & LF, SF, E, M - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected sphenurus modified New Caledonia; Papua New Guinea EOO: 5,590,000km2 30 Henicopernis Long-tailed 2000 Natural & LF, SF, - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected longicauda Honey-buzzard modified Guinea EOO: 745,000km2 31 Megapodius Dusky 2016, Natural LF - Native: West Papua LC ver 3.1 Protected freycinet Scrubfowl 2007, and Maluku (Gosong 2002 EOO:122,000km2. Kelam) Country endemic. Species of the Endemic Bird Area 32 Megapodius Orange-footed - Natural LF, BF - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected

Page 138 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type rainwardt Scrubfowl Papua New Guinea; Timor-Leste EOO: 741,000km2 33 Meliphaga Forest 2000 Natural LF, SF - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected montana Honeyeater Guinea EOO: 118,000km2 34 Mesophoyx Kuntul Perak 2016 Natural E, M - Global LC ver 3.1 Protected (Ardea) intermedia 35 Myzomela eques Myzomela 2016 Natural LF - Native: Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Leher-merah Papua New Guinea EOO: 500,000 km2 36 Myzomela nigrita Black 2000 Natural LF - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected Myzomela Guinea EOO: 166,000km2 37 Myzomela Dusky – Natural & S, BF, M, SF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected obscura Myzomela Modified Indonesia; Papua New (Myzomela Guinea Remang) EOO: 794,000 km2 38 Nectarinia Black Sunbird 2000 Natural LF, SF,M - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected aspasia Guinea EOO: 915,000km2 39 Nectarinia Olive-backed 2000 Natural LF, SF - Australia; Brunei LC ver 3.1 Protected jugularis Sunbird Darussalam; Cambodia; China; India; Indonesia; Lao People's Democratic Republic; Malaysia; Myanmar; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Singapore; Solomon Islands; Thailand; Viet Nam EOO: 5,200,000km2 40 Nycticorax Rufous Night- 2011 Natural M, SF, E - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected

Page 139 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type caledonicus Heron (Kowak- Brunei Darussalam; malam Merah) Christmas Island; Cocos (Keeling) Islands; Indonesia; Malaysia; Micronesia, Federated States of ; New Caledonia; Northern Mariana Islands; Palau; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Solomon Islands; Timor-Leste EOO: 7,730,000 km2 41 Pandion haliaetus Osprey 2002, Natural E, M, SF - Global LC ver 3.1 Protected 2000 EOO: 31,500,000 km2 42 Paradisaea minor Lesser Bird-of- 2016, Natural LF - Native: Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected paradise 2002, Papua New Guinea (Cenderawasih 2000 EOO: 298,000 km2 Kecil) 43 Paradisaea Raggiana Bird- 2000 Natural LF - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected raggiana of-paradise Guinea EOO: 201,000km2 44 Philemon Cikukua 2016, Natural LF, BF - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected buceroides Tanduk 2000 Timor-Leste EOO: 432,000km2 45 Philemon Noisy Friarbird 2000 Natural LF, BF, - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected corniculatus Papua New Guinea EOO: 1,760,000 Km2 46 Pitta Red-bellied – Natural LF - Australia; Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected erythrogaster Pitta (Paok Papua New Guinea; Mopo) Philippines EOO: 1,250,000 km2 47 Pitta sordida Hooded Pitta – Natural LF - Native: Bangladesh; LC ver 3.1 Protected (Paok Hijau) Bhutan; Brunei Darussalam;

Page 140 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Cambodia; China; India; Indonesia; Lao People's Democratic Republic; Malaysia; Myanmar; Nepal; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Singapore; Thailand; Viet Nam EOO: 2,100,000 km2 48 Probosciger Palm 2016, Natural LF, SF, BF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected aterrimus Cockatoo 2000 Indonesia; Papua New (Kakatua Raja) Guinea EOO: 716,000 km2

49 Ptilinopus Western 2002 Natural LF - Native: northern West LC ver 3.1 Not ornatus Ornate Fruit- Papua protectedNot dove protected EOO: 29,200km2 Country endemic 50 Pycnopygius Marbled 2000 Natural LF - Indonesia; Papua New LC ver 3.1 Protected cinereus honeyeater Guinea EOO: 106,000km2 51 Rhyticeros Blyth’s 2016, Natural LF, SF, BF - Native: Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected plicatus Hornbill 2000 Papua New Guinea; (Julang Papua) Solomon Islands EOO: 754,000 km2 52 Sterna bergii Great Crested – Natural E, O Partial Full Migrant Global LC ver 3.1 Protected Tern, Swift EOO: 42,300,000 km2 Tern (Dara-laut Jambul) Congregatory (and dispersive)

53 Sterna fuscata Sooty Tern – Natural E, O Full Migrant Global LC ver 3.1 Protected (Dara-laut EOO: 12,000,000 km2 Sayap-hitam) Congregatory (and dispersive)

Page 141 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type

Sterna hirundo Common Tern 2000 Natural E, O Full Migrant Global LC ver 3.1 Protected (Dara-laut EOO: 16,000,000 km2 54 Biasa) Congregatory (and dispersive)

55 Syma torotoro Yellow-billed – Natural & LF, SF, M - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected Kingfisher Modified Indonesia; Papua New (Cekakak Guinea Torotoro) EOO: 624,000 km2 56 Talegalla cuvieri Red-billed 2002 Natural LF - Native to West Papua. LC ver 3.1 Protected Brush-Turkey EOO:1<20,000km2. Country endemic. Species of the Endemic Bird Area 57 Talegalla Black-billed 2016, Natural LF - Native: Indonesia; LC ver 3.1 Protected fuscirostris Brush-turkey 2000 Papua New Guinea (Maleo Paruh- EOO : 282,000 km2 Hitam) 58 Tanysiptera Common 2000 Natural LF, BF, SF - Indonesia; Palau; LC ver 3.1 Protected galatea Paradise Papua New Guinea kingfisher EOO: 702,000 59 Tanysiptera Cekakak Pita 2016 Natural LF - Papua and New LC ver 3.1 Protected nympha Bidadari Guinea EOO: 104,000km2 60 Todiramphus Collared – Natural M, E, SF - Native:American LC ver 3.1 Protected chloris Kingfisher Samoa; Australia; (Cekakak Bangladesh; Brunei Sungai) Darussalam; Cambodia; Eritrea; Fiji; India; Indonesia; Lao Malaysia; Micronesia, Federated States of ; Myanmar; Northern Mariana Islands;

Page 142 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Oman; Palau; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Singapore; Solomon Islands; Thailand; Timor-Leste; Tonga; United Arab Emirates; Vanuatu; Viet Nam Present - origin uncertain: Sudan EOO: 3,940,000 km2 61 Todiramphus Forest 2000 Modified & S, LF, BF - Native:vAustralia; LC ver 3.1 Protected macleayii Kingfish Natural Indonesia; Papua New (Cekakak Guinea Rimbaer ) EOO: 1,320,000 km2 62 Todiramphus Sacred 2000 Natural & S, LF, BF - Native: Australia; LC ver 3.1 Protected sanctus Kingfisher Modified Indonesia; New (Cekakak Caledonia; New Australia) Zealand; Norfolk Island; Papua New Guinea; Solomon Islands; Timor-Leste; Wallis and Futuna EOO: 5,320,000 km2

Page 143 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Conservation status4 2 3 Record1 Natural Type Notes: 1. Year of survey in accordance with Table 2. 2. Classification of modified and natural habitat follows IFC (2012b) 3. Habitat types: LF: Lowland forest; BF: Beach forest; S: Savannah; SF: Swamp forest; M: Mangroves; E: Estuary 4. Shaded area indicates principal reason for conservation concern 5. Endemic / Restricted-range definition follows IFC (2012b), but some species have been included with EOO>50,000km2 if they have a fragmented distribution. 6. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered; VU =Vulnerable, NT =Near Threatened, LC =Least Concern, DD =Data deficient, NE =Not Evaluated, EN and CR include qualifying criteria as per IUCN (2016). 7. List of Protected Species Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

A number of species were previously found in the area, but may be mis-identified or an rare vagrant These include: - Ducula concinna was previously recorded present near Mogoi and up-river from Jagiro (McLeod, 1996 cited in Tangguh LNG, 2003). Species occurs mainly in islands in the Banda and Arafura seas. - Accipiter novaehollandiae native distribution is limited to parts of Australia (IUCN 2014), was recorded at Tangguh site in 2016, this species has been renamed Accipiter hiogaster (Beehler, Pratt & Zimmerman (1986) - Threskiornis aethiopicus only recorded in 2000 near the site, likely to be rare vagrant. - Myzomela albigula only recorded in 2000 and only known from Louisiade Archipelago (IUCN 2012), similar to M.obscura. - Myzomela sclateri only recorded in 2000 and only known from small isolated populations in Papua New Guinea (IUCN 2012), similar to M.sclater. - Melidectes fuscus only recorded in 2000 and only known from forests above 2200m in the highlands of West Papua and New Guinea (Birdlife Factsheet). - Paradisaea rubra only recorded in 2000 and only previously known to occur in the islands of Waigeo, Batanta, Gemien and Saonek (Birdlife Factsheet) - Philemon brassi only recorded in 2000 and only known from three-four locations along the Mamberamo, Rouffaer and Idenburg rivers in northern Papua (Birdlife Factsheet), similar to P.mayeri.

Page 144 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 22 – Mammal species of conservation concern

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Type Conservation status record Natural Latin Common Endemic / IUCN Nationally Restricted-range protected 1 Balaenoptera edeni Bryde’s whale 2006 Natural E, O Cosmopolitan DD Protected (all cetaceans are protected) 2 Cervus timorensis Timor (Javan) All Modified & Introduced species LF, Native only to Java and VU C1 ver Protected deer Natural S, SF Bali in Indonesia. 3.1 (for Rusa Introduced to native neighbouring islands population only) 3 Dendrolagus inustus Grizzled Tree 2000 Natural LF New Guinea, and north VU A4cd Protected (all Kangaroo west Australia Dendrolagus species are protected) 4 Dendrolagus ursinus Vogelkop Tree- 2000 Natural & LF Indonesia: endemic to VU A2cd Protected kangaroo Modified the island of New ver 3.1 Guinea where it is restricted to the Vogelkop Peninsula, and possibly the Fak Fak Peninsula, of Papua Province, Indonesia 5 Dorcopsis muelleri Brown 2016, Natural LF Lowlands of western LC ver 3.1 Protected Dorcopsis 2002 Papua Province, (Walabi Esem) Indonesia, on the island of New Guinea. It also occurs on the neighbouring Indonesian islands of Misool, Salawati, and Yapen. Endemic Papua 6 Megaptera novaeangliae Humpback 2013 Natural O (single observation) Cosmopolitan LC ver 3.1 Protected whale

Page 145 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Type Conservation status record Natural Latin Common Endemic / IUCN Nationally Restricted-range protected 7 Nyctimene draconilla Lesser Tube- 2016 Natural LF,SF Endemic Papua DD ver 3.1 - nosed Bat Highlands of central (Paniki Kecil) New Guinea & single locality in Papua Province, Indonesia. Very restricted range, but may be widespread through Papua. 8 Sousa chinensis Humpback 2013 Natural E,O East and west coasts NT ver 3.1 Protected (all chinensis dolphin of northern Australia cetaceans are and from southern protected) China in the east, throughout the Indo- Malay Archipelago, and westward around the coastal rim of the Bay of Bengal to at least the Orissa coast of eastern India 9 Spilocuscus (Phalanger) Common 2011, Natural LF, SW Part of Indonesia LC ver 3.1 Protected maculatus Spotted Cuscus 2000 Australia; Indonesia; (Kuskus Bertotol) Papua New Guinea Primary Forests at an Elevation of up to 1,200m 10 Stenella attenuata Spotted dolphin 2013 Natural E,O Pantropical. Atlantic, LC ver 3.1 Protected (all Indian and Pacific cetaceans are Ocean protected) 11 Stenella longirostris Spinner dolphin 2013 Natural E,O Around oceanic islands DD ver3.1 Protected (all in the tropical Atlantic, cetaceans are Indian, and western protected) and central Pacific 12 Strigocuscus (Phalanger) Ground Cuscus 2016, Natural & LF, SF Widespread on the LC ver 3.1 Protected gymnotis (Kuskus Tanah) 2011, Modified island of New Guinea

Page 146 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Type Conservation status record Natural Latin Common Endemic / IUCN Nationally Restricted-range protected 2007 (Indonesia and Papua New Guinea), the Aru Islands, and the islands of Yapen, Misool, Salawati Elevation of up to 2,700 m 13 Tursiops aduncus Indopacific 2013 Natural E Indo-pacific coastal DD ver 3.1 Protected (all Bottlenose waters from South cetaceans are dolphin Africa to Australia protected) Notes: 1. Year of survey in accordance with Table 3 – List of biodiversity surveys commissioned by Tangguh. 2. Classification of modified and natural habitat follows IFC (2012b) 3. Habitat types: LF: Lowland forest; BF: Beach forest; Sa: Savannah; SF: Swamp forest; M: Mangroves; E: Estuary; O: Oceanic 4. Endemic / Restricted-range definition follows IFC (2012b) 5. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered: as per IUCN (2016). 6. List of Protected Species Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

Table 23 – Herpetofauna species of conservation concern

Species name Survey Modified Habitat Type Conservation status record / Natural Latin Common Endemic / Restricted- IUCN Nationally range protected 1 Caretta caretta Loggerhead turtle 2013 Natural Nesting in beaches west Globally distributed Vulnerable Protected of Tangguh site. throughout subtropical and A2b ver 3.1 temperate regions of the Mediterranean Sea and Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic

Page 147 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified Habitat Type Conservation status record / Natural Latin Common Endemic / Restricted- IUCN Nationally range protected Oceans 2 Carlia - 2014 Natural & LF, BF Endemic to West Papua, LC ver 3.1 - bombarai Modified Indonesian New Guinea, where it is known with certainty only from the lowlands of the Tangguh area, along the northern part of the Bomberai Peninsula and along the margins of Bintuni Bay 3 Chelonia Green turtle 2013, 2006 Natural E, O, Circumglobal distribution, Endangered Protected mydas occurring throughout A2bd ver 3.1 tropical and, to a lesser extent, subtropical waters 4 Cophixalius sp. - 2002 Natural LF Recorded from Tangguh NE - nov. site 5 Crocodylus New Guinea 2000 Natural E, M Indonesia (Papua); PNG LC Ver 2.3 Protected novaeguineae Crocodile 6 Crocodylus Estuarine 2016, Natural E, M Australia; Bangladesh; LC Ver 2.3 Protected porosus crocodile 2011, Brunei Darussalam; 2007, Cambodia; India; 2006, 2000 Indonesia; Malaysia; Myanmar; Palau; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Solomon Islands; Sri Lanka; Vanuatu; Viet Nam 7 Dermochelys Leatherback turtle 2006 Natural E,O Circumglobally, with VU A2bd ver Protected coriacea (Penyu Belimbing) (anecdotal nesting sites on tropical 3.1 reports sandy beaches and only) foraging ranges that extend into temperate and sub-polar latitudes 8 Elseya New Guinea 2016, Natural SF,M Indonesia (Papua); Papua LC ver 2.3 Protected

Page 148 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified Habitat Type Conservation status record / Natural Latin Common Endemic / Restricted- IUCN Nationally range protected novaeguineae Snapping Turtle 2011, New Guinea (Kura-kira Irian 2007, 2000 Leher Pendek) 9 Emoia sp. nov. - 2002 Natural LF Recorded from Tangguh NE - site 10 Eretmochelys Hawksbill turtle 2013, 2006 Natural E, O circumglobal distribution CE A2bd ver Protected imbricata Penyu Sisik throughout tropical and, to 3.1 a lesser extent, subtropical waters of the Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean, and Pacific Ocean. 11 Hylophorbus - 2002 Natural LF Only in Tangguh site NE - sp. nov. 12 Hypsilurus Crowned Forest 2007 Natural LF,BF,SF New Guinea and Moluccan LC Ver 3.1 Protected dilophus Dragon (Bunglon) islands, Indonesia 13 Lepidochelys Olive Ridley turtle 2006, 2013 Natural E,O Circumtropical distribution, Vulnerable Protected olivacea Penyu Abu- with nesting occurring A2bd ver 3.1 abu/Lekang throughout tropical waters (except the Gulf of Mexico) and migratory circuits in tropical and some subtropical areas (Atlantic Ocean – eastern central, northeast, northwest, southeast, southwest, western central; Indian Ocean – eastern, western; Pacific Ocean – eastern central, northwest, southwest, western central) 14 Morelia viridis Green tree 1989 Natural & LF, BF, S Australia (Queensland); LC ver 3.1 Protected python Modified Indonesia; Papua New Guinea

Page 149 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Species name Survey Modified Habitat Type Conservation status record / Natural Latin Common Endemic / Restricted- IUCN Nationally range protected 15 Platymantis Papua wrinkled 2011, 2007 Natural LF, SF Batanta and Waigeo LC ver 3.1 Not. Protected punctatus frog Islands and the Arfak Mountains, Vogelkop Peninsula, and southeast of Nabire, and the Fakfak Mountains of Papua, Indonesia Endemic to Papua 16 Tiliqua gigas Indonesian blue- 2007, Natural LF Indonesia & Papua New NE Protected tongued skink 2016, 2000 Guinea Kadal panana 17 Varanus Mangrove monitor 2016, Natural SF, M Northern coast of Australia LC Ver.3.1 Protected indicus (Biawak) 2007, 2000 and all around Papua New Guinea Notes: 1. Year of survey in accordance with Table 3 – List of biodiversity surveys commissioned by Tangguh. 2. Classification of modified and natural habitat follows IFC (2012b) 3. Habitat types: LF: Lowland forest; BF: Beach forest; Sa: Savannah; SF: Swamp forest; M: Mangroves; E: Estuary 4. Endemic / Restricted-range definition follows IFC (2012b) 5. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered as per IUCN (2016). 6. List of Protected Species Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999

A number of species were previously found in the area, but may be misidentified These include: - Platymantis (Cornufer) batantae was recorded at the site in 2011 but known only from Batanta and Waigeo Islands off the western coast of Papua, Indonesia (IUCN 2004) - Hydrosaurus amboinensis (pustulatus) was recorded in 2002 from a single sighting, likely to be a mis-identification as this species is endemic to the Philippines (IUCN, 2009)

Page 150 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Table 24 – Fish species of conservation concern

Species name Survey Modified / Habitat Type Endemic / Conservation status record Natural Restricted-range Latin Common IUCN Nationally protected Melanotaenia Irian Jaya 2000, 2002 Natural LF, Occurs in Bird Head’s Peninsula NE - irianjaya Allen rainbowfish rainforest creeks and and Bomberai Peninsula small rivers Melanotaenia Arfak rainbowfish 2007 Natural LF, Freshwater creeks Endemic to Arfak NE arfakensis Allen mountains. Pseudomugil Vogelkop Blue- 2000, 2002 Natural LF, Occurs in known only from a NE reticulatus Allen Eye rainforest creeks and single specimen & Ivantsoff small rivers collected from a rainforest stream, about 2 km east of Ajamaru Village in the middle of the Vogelkop Peninsula, Irian Jaya, Indonesia Notes: 1. Year of survey in accordance with Table 3 – List of biodiversity surveys commissioned by Tangguh. 2. Classification of modified and natural habitat follows IFC (2012b) 3. Habitat types: LF: Lowland forest; BF: Beach forest; Sa: Savannah; SF: Swamp forest; M: Mangroves; E: Estuary 4. Endemic / Restricted-range definition follows IFC (2012b) 5. IUCN Red Data Book classification: CR: Critically Endangered; EN: Endangered as per IUCN (2016). 6. List of Protected Species Indonesian Government Regulation No.7/1999.

Page 151 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

A.3 Consultation with Biodiversity Experts on Critical Habitat Assessment

Questions to Experts:

Questions for Dr. Ir. Nyoto Santoso, Msi – Botanical Expert 2016 Flora and Fauna Survey (He is one of the experts of flora and fauna survey since 2007)

Dear Dr. Nyoto,

You will be aware that BP is proposing an extension of the current Tangguh facility. The AMDAL has been submitted to the Government of Indonesia and has been approved. BP is now preparing a Biodiversity Action Plan. The purpose of this plan is to highlight actions that need to be undertaken to maintain habitat and species of high biodiversity value at our Tangguh site. The Biodiversity Action Plan is a requirement from the international banks and the Asian Development Bank, who are concerned with the loss of habitat and species of high biodiversity value.

The overall area at the Tangguh LNG location measures 3,266ha, of which ± 365ha (11%) has been cleared for the existing Tangguh LNG facilities, while ± 39ha have previously been cleared to build the perimeter fence around the overall site. An estimated 100ha have already been re- vegetated with native species.

For the new Tangguh Train 3 Extension Project, we currently foresee that an approximate area of up to + 250ha lowland rainforest will be clear-cut, leaving an area in excess of 3,000ha intact (buffer zone). There will also be some loss of mangrove forest (±2ha), which is 1.6 % of the current mangrove within the project site. Swamp forest will mostly be spared.

For the purpose of our Biodiversity Action Plan, we defined a plant species of high biodiversity value as a species that is either:  Classified on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species as Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN).  Protected under Government Regulation 7/1999 (List of Protected Species in Indonesia)  Endemic to West Papua Province

In our review of the survey records of Tangguh and surrounding area to date, we have identified a number of species that meet these criteria. These are listed in the attached table.

Based on your observations of the project area and buffer zone, your scientific understanding and survey experience, we would want your opinion / response to the following questions.

Questions with respect to (critically) endangered or nationally protected species in the table:

1. Do you think that the habitats in the Tangguh project area and buffer zone support globally or nationally important concentrations of the plant species mentioned? - Globally important is defined as habitat required to sustain ≥ 10 percent of the global population of an IUCN Red-listed CR or EN species. - Nationally important is defined as habitat required to sustain ≥ 10 percent of the national population of an IUCN Red-listed CR or EN species. If this is the case, do you have any papers, reports, records or anecdotal survey observations to support this statement?

Page 152 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Pada kawasan Tangguh LNG site (3000ha) terdapat 6 tipe ekosistem, yaitu : (1) ekosistem mangrove, (2) ekosistem hutan pantai, (3) ekosistem hutan rawa air tawar/ekotone, (4) ekosistem hutan rawa sagu, (5) ekosistem savanah, dan (6) ekosistem hutan dataran rendah tanah kering. Ditinjau dari kondisi ekosistem di kawasan Teluk Bintuni, keberadaan 6 ekosistem di areal LNG Tangguh (3000ha) juga terdapat pada kawasan diluar areal LNG Tangguh (3000ha), hal ini dapat dilihat pada :

(a). Kawasan konsesi IUPHHK-Hutan Alam PT Bintuni Utama Murni Wood Industries (terdapat ekosistem mangrove yang sangat luas sebagai Hutan Produksi Tetap sekitar 81.000ha, dengan keanakeragaman species tumbuhan mangrove tidak kurang 13 jenis pohon mangrove, anggrek mangrove, dan jenis-jenis fauna mangrove (mamalia, burung, herpetofauna). Perusahaan ini juga telah menyiapkan diri untuk sertifikasi FSC, dan telah dilakukan kajian HCV (High Conservation Value) dimana salah satu HCV Area adalah Hutan Dataran Rendah Tanah Kering dan Hutan Rawa Sagu.

(b). Pada kawasan Cagar Alam Teluk Bintuni (124.850ha) juga memiliki tipe ekosistem mangrove, hutan rawa sagu/asosiasi sagu, Formasi Nipah, hutan dataran rendah. Kawasan CA Teluk Bintuni ini telah memiliki Managemen Plan, namun statusnya masih penunjukkan.

(c). Demikian pula tipe ekosistem hutan pantai, hutan rawa air tawar/ekotone dan savanah, juga terdapat diluar areal LNG Tangguh (3000ha).

(d). Dengan berdasarkan karakteristik ekosistem, keterwakilan dan potensi ancaman yang mungkin akan terjadi di kawasan Teluk Bintuni, maka perlu dilakukan perhatian penuh terhadap keberadaan beberapa ekosistem yang berdasarkan kajian biodiversity (SFF Tangguh LNG 2002, 2007, 2012, 2016) pada areal Buffer Zone LNG Tangguh (3000ha). Disamping itu sebagai implementasi prinsip kehati-hatian, pada areal LNG Tangguh (3000ha) terdapat ekosistem yang perlu mendapat perhatian cukup tinggi, yaitu : (1) Ekosistem Mangrove, (2) Ekosistem Hutan Rawa Sagu/Asosiasi Campnosperna- Metroxylon, (3) Hutan dataran rendah tanah kering, (4) Savanah.

Ekosistem yang perlu mendapat perhatian tinggi adalah semua ekosistem yang termasuk dalam Land System MDW (mendawai), hal ini dikarenakan jenis tanahnya merupakan Tanah Gambut (Peat Land) yang diperkirakan ketebalan < 3 m, serta ekosistem mangrove/ekotone dengan substrat tanah gambut jarang dijumpai di Indonesia. Sepanjang pengalaman saya survai ekosistem mangrove, pernah saya jumpai ekosistem mangrove dengan substrat Tanah Gambut di Pantai Timur Sumatera Utara dan areal Buffer Zone LNG Tangguh (3000ha).

Page 153 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Pada ekosistem hutan dataran rendah tanah kering, perlu hati-hati dikarenakan keanekaragaman jenis tumbuhan paling tinggi (> 530 species tumbuhan) ekosistem dibanding 5 tipe ekosistem lainnya di areal buffer zone LNG Tangguh (3000ha). Namun demikian jika memperhatian rencana perluasan LNG Tangguh Tahap-3, yang akan membuka ekosistem hutan dataran rendah tanah kering, Saya pikir keberadaan ekosistem (6 ekosistem) pada areal tersisa tetap dapat dipertahankan, terlebih lagi keberadaan ekosistem dengan Land System MDW. Dengan kata lain, menyikapi rencana ekspansi Project Tahap-3, berdasarkan Peta Rencana Ekspansi (Gambar 2) akan terjadi pengurangan luas ekosistem hutan dataran rendah, namun ditinjau dari keunikan dan fragilitas ekosistem, maka tidak mengganggu ekosistem yang tergolong unik dan fragile (ekosistem mangrove, hutan rawa sagu dan savanah).

Page 154 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Gambar 1. Sebaran ekosistem di areal LNG Tangguh

Page 155 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Gambar 2. Land System in Buffer Zone Tangguh LNG Area

Page 156 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Translated Expert Response:

1. In Tangguh LNG Site area (3000ha) there are 6 types of ecosystem which are : (1) mangrove ecosystem, (2) coastal forest ecosystem, (3) freshwater swamp forest/ecotone ecosystem, (4) metroxylon sagu swamp forest, (5) savannah ecosystem, and (6) lowland dry soil forest ecosystem. Based on ecosystem condition in Bintuni Bay area, the existence 6 ecosystems in Tangguh LNG area (3000ha) are also found outside Tangguh LNG area (3000ha), this can be seen in:

(a). Concession Area IUPHHK – Natural Forest PT Bintuni Utama Murni Wood Industries (there is a very extensive mangrove ecosystem as Permanent Production Forest around 81,000ha with mangrove species diversity not less than 13 types of mangrove trees, mangrove orchids, and mangrove fauna (mammal, birds, herpetofauna). This company has also prepared themselves for FSC certification and already conducted HVC (High Conservation Value) assessment where one of the HVC Area is Lowland Dry Soil Forest and Metroxylon Sago Swamp Forest. (b). In Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve area (124.850ha) there is also mangrove type ecosystem, metroxylon sago swamp forest/sago association, Nypa Formation, lowland forest. Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve already has a Management Plan but the status is still designation. (c). As well as coastal forest ecosystem, freshwater swamp forest/ecotone, and savannah are also found outside Tangguh LNG area (3000ha). (d). Based on ecosystem characteristic, representation, and threat potential which can happen in Bintuni Bay area hence full attention is needed to several ecosystems which based on biodiversity assessment (SFF Tangguh LNG 2002, 2007, 2012, 2016) in Buffer Zone Tangguh LNG (3000ha). Beside that as implementation of precautionary principles, in Tangguh LNG area (3000ha) there are several ecosystems that require high attention which are : (1) Mangrove ecosystem, (2) Sago Swamp Forest/Campnosperna-Metroxylon Association, 93) Lowland dry soil forest, and (4) Savannah.

Ecosystem which require high attention are all ecosystem that belongs to Land System MDWW (mendawai) due to the soil type which is Peat Land with thickness < 3 m, and mangrove ecosystem/ecotone with peat land substrate that rarely found in Indonesia. From my experience in mangrove ecosystem surveying, I have found mangrove ecosystem with Peat Land substrate in East Coast North Sumatera and LNG Tangguh Buffer Zone area (3000ha).We need to pay high attention in lowland dry soil forest ecosystem since it has the most diverse vegetation species (>530 vegetation species) compared to other 5 ecosystem types in Tangguh LNG Buffer Zone area (3000ha). But if we consider the Tangguh LNG Train 3 Expansion plan which will open lowland dry soil forest ecosystem, I think the existence of 6 ecosystems in the remaining area can still be maintained especially ecosystem existence with Land System MDW. In another word, addressing the Train 3 Project expansion plan, based on Expansion Plan Map (Figure 2) there will be reduction of lowland forest ecosystem area but based on the uniqueness and fragility of the ecosystem then it will not disturb the unique and fragile type of ecosystem (mangrove ecosystem, sago swamp forest and savannah).

Page 157 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

2. Are you aware of any other endangered plants species in West Papua, which may have nationally or globally important concentrations in the Tangguh project area and buffer zone?

Questions with respect to endemic species: For the purpose of our study, we have defined endemic as being solely present in the West Papua Ecoregion, roughly corresponding to West Papua province (Bird’s Neck Peninsula and Bomberai Peninsula). Quite a few of the species in the table have been recorded only from West Papua province, and some have indeed only been recorded from the project site and buffer area. While for the orchid species, we have assumed that these species are likely endemic to West Papua. We now need to understand how important the project area is for the endemic species mentioned.

Expert Response:

Ditinjau hasil surfai Flora Fauna (2002, 2007, 20012, 2016), beberapa species yang diidentifikasi terdapat pada areal LNG Tangguh yang tergolong Penting (high priority) untuk diperhatikan adalah : species endemik, Critical Endangered dan Endangered, serta Dilindungi Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. Memperhatikan daftar jenis flora dan fauna seperti yang Anda Lampirkan, maka saya memperikan tanggapan sebagai berikut :

(1). Species flora (Callophylum, Nephentes, Anggrek, Palem, Shrub) yang menjadi prioritas tinggi adalah : endemik, CR dan E, serta Protected. Namun beberapa species tersebut walaupun statusnya dilindungi/CR/E dan endemis, keberadaannya atau sebarannya juga terdapat diluar areal LNG Tangguh (Kawasan Teluk Bintuni). Bahkan dalam daftar species yang boleh dimanfaatkan (daftar species yang diijinkan untuk dimanfaatkan Balai Besar KSDA Papua Barat, 2011) tercantum anggrek jenis Dendrobium sp. Hal ini dijinkan dimanfaatkan, karena sebarannya luas dan tidak dilindungi serta termasuk Appendix II Cites.

Species Livistona sp., walaupun termasuk dilindungi, namun jenis ini juga terdapat diluar areal LNG Tangguh/ di Kawasan Teluk Bintuni, seperti di Kawasan Cagar Alam Teluk Bintuni dan sering dipergunakan sebagai bahan perkakas rumah oleh masyarakat. Sedangkan kebaradaan Bruguiera haenesii di Kawasan Teluk Bintuni secara langsung saya belum pernah menjumpai. Memang dalam Report FAO (Mangrove Guidebook for Southeast Asia, 2006) disebutkan species B.haenesii terdapat di Indonesia, namun tidak dijelaskan lokasi persisnya ada dimana. Dalam uraiannya dijelaskan: Most of the southern and southeastern part of the bay is included in a mangrove logging concession held by PT. Bintuni Utama MWI. Erftemeijer et al.(1989) identified four main mangrove associations: a) pioneering Avicennia forest, b) maturing Avicennia-Sonneratiaforest, c) Rhizophora-Bruguiera forests, and d) Nypa forest. The pioneering Avicennia forest is dominated by Avicennia marina, and locally also by Avicennia eucalyptifolia, together with Sonneratia alba and Aegiceras corniculatum. The maturing Avicennia-Sonneratia forest is dominated by Avicennia marina And Sonneratia caseolaris, together with Aegiceras corniculatum, Avicennia officinalis, Nypa fruticans, Rhizophora mucronata and Xylocarpus granatum. Rhizophora –Bruguiera forests are dominated by Rhizophora mucronata, R. apiculata, R. stylosa, Bruguiera parvifolia and B. gymnorrhiza, along with Ceriops tagal, Avicennia alba, Aegiceras corniculatum and Xylocarpus moluccensis.

Page 158 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

(2). Species Fauna. Calidris tenuirostris. Jenis burung migrant ini pernah diketahui berada di areal LNG Tangguh. Habitat yang penting dari species ini adalah ekosistem mangrove, khususnya mud flat (paparan lumpur). Walaupun status tidak dilindungi Pemerintah RI, namun dikarenakan species migrant, maka perlu mendapat prioritas tinggi dalam pengelolaannya.

Chalcopsitta atra, Dicaeum pectorale. Bukan jenis dilindungi, namun dikarenakan habitatnya/sebaranya luas, statusnya tidak mengkawatirkan.

Goura cristata. Termasuk species dilindungi Pemerintah RI (PP No.7/1999), sebaranya cukup luas di Papua (Sorong, Manokwari, sampai Merauke), terutama pada kawasan hutan primer atau hutan dengan kondisi masih baik. Pada areal LNg Tangguh terdapat kecenderungan semakin sulit dijumpai keberadaan species ini, dikarenakan meningkatnya aktivitas operasi LNG Tangguh, serta aktivitas lain (masyarakat dan kegiatan ekplorasi Migas) di areal LNg Tangguh. Dikarenakan termasuk speceis burung dengan ukuran besar, maka perlu mendapat eprhatian tinggi dalam pengelolaannya.

Megapodius freycinet (burung gosong). Termasuk burung tanah, dan saat survai selalu dijumpai species ini melalui sarangnya. Tahun 2016 species ini tertangkap Camera Trap, sehingga dapat dengan jelas diketahui, dan umumnya berada di ekosistem hutan dataran rendah tanah kering. Ancaman terhadap species ini cukup tinggi, terutama dari masyarakat sekitar untuk diambil telurnya dan kadangkala juga diburu (jerat). Di kawasan Cagar Alam Teluk Bintuni, dan Kawasan Provinsi Papua & Papua Barat sebaran species ini cukup luas terutama pada hutan dataran rendah tanah kering. Spcies ini perlu mendapat prioritas tinggi dalam pelestarianya, dikarenakan tingkat ancaman yang meningkat.

Selain species diatas, menurut saya jenis burung yang perlu mendapat prioritas tinggi dalam Pelestarianya di areal LNG Tangguh adalah : burung Kasuari, burung Cenderawasih (Paradisaea minor), burung kakatua raja (Probosciger aterrimus ), burung gosong (Megapodius reinwardt), maleo (Talegalla cavieri, Talegalla fuscirostris). Hal ini dikarenakan penyempitan habitat alaminya, ancaman dari perburuan.

Nyctophilus cf. bifax adalah kelelawar pemakan serangga yang termasuk ke dalam suku Vespertilionidae, yang mempunyai ciri daun telinga yang besar dibanding tubuhnya, dan saling bersambung oleh membran kulit di atas dahi, serta tidak mempunyai anak telinga (tragus) maupun antitragus seperti kelelawar lainnya pada suku Vespertilionidae. Penyebaran (distribusi) Nyctophilus cf. bifax, diketahui tersebar luas di Australia Utara, Australia Barat, dan Papua New Guinea, (Bonaccorso, 1998; dan Flannery, 1995), keberadaannya di Papua Indonesia diketahui pertama kali dikoleksi di pegunungan Jayawijaya pada expedisi Archbold ketiga tahun 1938-1939 (Flannery, 1995), dan sampai saat ini belum pernah tercatat kembali keberadaannya, selain temuan survei tahun 2007 di kawasan hutan dataran rendah BP Tangguh.

Page 159 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Translated Expert Response:

Based on Flora Fauna Survey result (2002, 2007, 2012, 2016) some of identified species in Tangguh LNG area which are considered as High Priority to be considered are: endemic species, Critical Endangered and Endangered, and Protected by Government of Indonesia. Considering the list of flora and fauna type that you attached hence I give response as follows:

(1). Flora species (Callophylum, Nephentes, Anggrek, Palem, Shrub) which become high priority are : endemic, CR and E, and Protected. Even though the status of some of the species is protected/CR/E and endemic but they are also found outside Tangguh LNG area (Bintuni Bay Area). Even in the list of species that can be exploited (List of Species which are Allowed to be Exploited Balai Besar KSDA Papua Barat, 2011) there is listed Dendrobium sp. orchid. This species is allowed to be exploited because it is widely distributed and not protected nor included in Appendix II Cites.

Livistona sp species., even though protected but this species is also found outside Tangguh LNG area/at Bintuni Bay Area, such as Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve and often used as household appliances material by local community. Meanwhile the existence of Bruguiera haenesii at Bintuni Bay Area has never been observed directly. In FAO Report (Mangrove Guidebook for Southeast Asia, 2006) it is indeed mentioned that B.haenesii species was found in Indonesia but there is no detail explanation about the exact location. The analysis explains that : Most of the southern and southeastern part of the bay is included in a mangrove logging concession held by PT. Bintuni Utama MWI. Erftemeijer et al.(1989) identified four main mangrove associations: a) pioneering Avicennia forest, b) maturing Avicennia-Sonneratiaforest, c) Rhizophora-Bruguiera forests, and d) Nypa forest. The pioneering Avicennia forest is dominated by Avicennia marina, and locally also by Avicennia eucalyptifolia, together with Sonneratia alba and Aegiceras corniculatum. The maturing Avicennia-Sonneratia forest is dominated by Avicennia marina And Sonneratia caseolaris, together with Aegiceras corniculatum, Avicennia officinalis, Nypa fruticans, Rhizophora mucronata and Xylocarpus granatum. Rhizophora –Bruguiera forests are dominated by Rhizophora mucronata, R. apiculata, R. stylosa, Bruguiera parvifolia and B. gymnorrhiza, along with Ceriops tagal, Avicennia alba, Aegiceras corniculatum and Xylocarpus moluccensis.

(2). Species Fauna. Calidris tenuirostris. This type of migrant bird was once known to be present at Tangguh LNG Site. Important habitat of this species is mangrove ecosystem, especially mud flat. Even though the status is not protected by Government of Indonesia but since it is migrant species hence it needs to be managed with high priority.

Chalcopsitta atra, Dicaeum pectorale. Not protected species and since the distribution/habitat is widely spread hence the status is not concerning.

Page 160 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Translated Expert Response:

Goura cristata. Included in protected species by Government of Indonesia (Government Regulation No. 7 Year 1999), it is widely distributed in Papua (Sorong, Manokwari until Merauke) especially in primary forest area or forest with good condition. In Tangguh LNG Area there is a tendency that this species is getting harder to be found because of the increasing activity of Tangguh LNG Operations and other activities (local community and oil and gas exploration activity) at Tangguh LNG area. Since it is a large size bird hence it needs to be managed with high priority.

Megapodius freycinet (burung gosong). Categorized as land birds and this species was always found during survey through its nest. In 2016, this species was caught on Camera Trap so it can be clearly known and mostly found in lowland dry soil forest ecosystem. Threat to this species is pretty high especially from local community to collect its eggs and sometimes to hunt (meshes). In Bintuni Bay Nature Reserve Area, Papua and Papua Barat province the distribution of this species is widely spread especially at lowland dry soil forest. This species needs high priority in its conservation due to increased threat level.

Besides above species, other bird species that I think need to have high priority in its conservation at Tangguh LNG area are : Cassowary, Birds of Paradise (Paradisaea minor), Palm Cockatoo (Probosciger aterrimus), Orange-footed scrubfowl (Megapodius reinwardt), Brushturkey (Talegalla cavieri, Talegalla fuscirostris). This is due to a narrowing of its natural habitat, the threat of hunting.

Nyctophilus cf. bifax is insectivorous bats which include in Vespertilionidae family with characteristics earlobes bigger than its body and connected by skin membrane above the forehead, and doesn’t have tragus nor antitragus like any other bats in Vespertilionidae family. Distribution of Nyctophilus cf. bifax is known to be widely spread in Northern Australia, Western Australia and Papua New Guinea, (Bonaccorso, 1998; dan Flannery, 1995), its presence in Papua Indonesia first known by collection in Jayawijaya mountains in the third Archbold expedition 1938 – 1939 (Flannery, 1995), and up until today there has not been recorded back in existence besides survey result in 2007 in lowland forest area at BP Tangguh.

Page 161 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

3. For each of the endemic species listed in the table, which of the following statements would apply? a. The Tangguh project area and buffer zone include habitats known to sustain more than 95% of the global population of that endemic species. b. The Tangguh project area and buffer zone include habitats known to sustain between 1% and 95% of the global population of that endemic species. c. The Tangguh project area and buffer zone include habitats that harbour less than 1% of the global population that endemic species.

Expert Response:

Pantai, hutan rawa/ekoton, rawa sagu, savanah, hutan dataran rendah tanah kering) relatif kecil dibandingkan dengan luas Kawasan Hutan Konservasi (Cagar Alam,Suaka Margasatwa dan Taman Wisata Alam) di Provinsi Papua Barat (1.903.161,84ha). Di samping itu keberadaan biodiversity (flora fauna endemik dan non endemik Papua) juga terdapat pada kawasan Hutan Produk Tetap dan Hutan Lindung yang lebih luas dari Kawasan Hutan Konservasi. Memperhatikan kebaradaan species endemik/dinlindungi/ CR dan EN pada areal LNG Tangguh, maka statement yang tepat adalah : c. The Tangguh project area and buffer zone (or the marine area under consideration) include habitats that harbour less than 1% of the global population that endemic / restricted-range / migratory species.

Translated Expert Response:

Tangguh LNG area is only around 3000ha, with 6 ecosystem types (mangrove, coastal forest, swamp forest, sago swamp, savannah, lowland dry soil forest) it is relatively small compared to Conservation Forest area (Nature Reserve, Wildlife Reserve, and Nature Recreational Park) in Papua Barat province (1.903.161,84ha). Beside that biodiversity presence (Papua endemic and non-endemic flora fauna) is also found at Permanent Production Forests and Protected Forests which are wider than Conservation Forest Area. Looking at the existence of endemic/protected/CR and EN species at Tangguh LNG area then the perfect statement is : c. The Tangguh project area and buffer zone (or the marine area under consideration) include habitats that harbour less than 1% of the global population that endemic / restricted-range / migratory species.

4. Regarding the amphibian surveys, two new species of frog and one species of lizard were found during the 2002/2003 surveys (I.e. Cophixalus sp. nov, Hylophorbus sp. nov and Emoia sp. nov) – are there any further work done on these new species?

Page 162 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Species katak (Cophixalus sp nov , Hylophorbus sp nov) memang ditemukan saat survai 2016 (ada speciemen nya/foto), namun species ini belum bisa dikatakan species baru di Papua. Disamping itu Saya tidak dapat mengatakan bahwa species katak (Cophixalus sp nov , hylophorbus sp) yang dijumpai tahun 2016 itu sama dengan species yang ditemukan tahun 2002/2003, dikarenakan speciment Katak tahun 2002/2003 tidak ada gambar/fotonya. Dikarenakan sedikitnya informasi taksonomi Katak di region Papua, maka Tim SFF IPB sedang berkomunikasi dengan peneliti Expert Herpetofauna Australia untuk konfirmasi apakah nama species katak tersebut.

Informasi mengenai jenis-jenis kadal (Emoia sp nov ), pada tahun 2016 Tim SFF IPB telah dapat mengidentifikasi beberapa species Katak dari genus Emoia, yaitu : Emoia astrocostata, Emoia caeruleocauda, Emoia cyanogaster, Emoia pallidiceps, Emoia physicae. Sedangkan jenis Katak dari genus Emoia sp.1 (black) dan Emoia sp.2 (green head) belum dapat diidentifikasi nama speciesnya.

Species Katakd an Kadal tersebut diperkirakan banyak terdapat di wilayah Papua Barat, termasuk diluar areal LNG Tangguh (3000ha). Sehingga keberadaannya di areal Tangguh bukan merupakan habitat satu-satunya bagi species tersebut.

Translated Expert Response:

Frog species (Cophixalus sp nov , Hylophorbus sp nov) were indeed found during 2016 survey (specimen/photo is available) but this species cannot be considered as new species in Papua. Beside that I cannot say that the frog species (Cophixalus sp nov , Hylophorbus sp nov) which were found in 2016 are the same with species which were found in 2002/2003 since there were no pictures/photos available for frog specimens in 2002/2003. Due to lack of information of frog taxonomy in Papua region, currently SFF IPB Team is communicating with Australian Herpetofauna experts to confirm the species of the frog.

Information regarding types of lizards (Emoia sp nov ), in 2016 SFF IPB Team has identified some frogs species from Emoia genus, which are : Emoia astrocostata, Emoia caeruleocauda, Emoia cyanogaster, Emoia pallidiceps, Emoia physicae. Meanwhile the species of frog from genus Emoia sp.1 (black) and Emoia sp.2 (green head) cannot be identified yet.

The frog and lizard species were estimated to be found mostly in Papua Barat area, including outside Tangguh LNG area (3000ha). Hence their presence in Tangguh area was not the only habitat for that species.

5. Has the Great knot Calidris tenuirostris been recorded within the area of Tangguh or in Berau/Bintuni Bay? And if so do you have an estimate on the number of birds, and when the bird may be migrating through the area?

Page 163 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Calidris tenuirostris. Jenis burung migrant ini pernah diketahui berada di areal LNG Tangguh. Habitat yang penting dari species ini adalah ekosistem mangrove, khususnya mud flat (paparan lumpur). Saya tidak dapat memperkirakan populasinya (jumlah individunya), namun dijumpai tidak dalam koloni (kelompok) yang besar.

Expert Response:

Calidris tenuirostris. This type of migrant bird was once known to be present at Tangguh LNG Site. Important habitat of this species is mangrove ecosystem, especially mud flat. I cannot predict the population (numbers of individual), but they were found not in huge colony (group).

Page 164 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Questions to Experts:

Questions for Dr. Ir. Nyoto Santoso, Msi – Botanical Expert 2016 Flora and Fauna Survey (He is one of the experts of flora and fauna survey since 2007)

Dear Dr. Nyoto, According to IPB experience, does the species listed in the table also found in other localities (within Papua – West Papua area)? If so, where and when? Could you also provide any proven record, e.g. survey or study report to support the information?

Thank you.

I look forward to your response.

Pipi Pujiani

Page 165 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Flora Species

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi 1 Calophyllum Bintangur daun halus Pohon asli Indonesia (endemik Papua). Tersebar di hutan hujan dataran rendah pada bukit dengan insularum P.F. ketinggian hingga 200 m dpl. Jenis ini terancam punah akibat hilangnya habitat dan over-eksploitasi. Stevens. Referensi :  Journal of Arnold Arboretum 61: 536. (1980)  http://www.iucnredlist.org  Risa, Icha. 2012. Hanya Ada di Indonesia: 1100+Keajaiban dan Prestasi yang Mendunia. Puspa Swara. Jakarta. (ISBN: 978-602-8454-41-4)  Laporan Penilaian Nilai Konservasi Tinggi (NKT) di Areal IUPHHK HA PT Wijaya Sentosa, Kabupaten Teluk Wondama - Provinsi Papua Barat. (2015) 2 Nepenthes Kantong semar; Tumbuh di hutan lembab, teduh, hutan rawa (umumnya rawa gambut), di hutan Araucaria (Papua), juga di ampullaria Jack. Wanitoto; Flask-shaped hutan sekunder, hutan kerangas, atau rawa padang rumput. Tersebar dari dari ketinggian 0- 2.100 m dpl. pitcher-plant Penyebarannya mencakup : Thailand, Semenanjung Malaysia, Singapura, Sumatera, Kalimantan, Maluku dan Papua (termasuk PNG). Referensi :  http://www.iucnredlist.org  Clarke, C., Cantley, R., Nerz, J., Rischer, H. & Witsuba, A. 2000. Nepenthes ampullaria. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2000: e.T39640A10253611  Phillipps & A.L. Lamb, Pitcher Plants of Borneo (1996);  Shivas, Pitcher Plants of Peninsula Malaysia & Singapore (1984);  Tamin & M. Hotta. Diversity and Dynamics of Plant Life in Sumatra (1986);  Clarke. Nepenthes of Borneo (1997);  Jebb. Science in New Guinea (1991);  Adam, J.H. 1997. Species (Nepenthaceae) in Relation to Their Habitat. Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science 20(2–3): 121–134.  Bonhomme, V., H. Pelloux-Prayer, E. Jousselin, Y. Forterre, J.-J. Labat & L. Gaume 2011. Slippery or sticky? Functional diversity in the trapping strategy of Nepenthes carnivorous plants. New Phytologist 191(2): 545–554. 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03696.x  Clarke, C.M. & J.A. Moran 1994. A further record of aerial pitchers in Nepenthes ampullaria Jack. Malayan Nature Journal 47: 321–323.  Handayani, T. & R. Hendrian 1999. Jack. Conservation strategy of Nepenthes ampullaria Jack. In:

Page 166 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi Workshop & Promosi Flora Kawasan Timur Indonesia. Kebun Raya Ekakarya Bali, Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia, Bogor. pp. 1–6.  Hansen, E. 2001. Carnivorous Plant Family in Borneo. Discover 22(10): 60–68. 3 Nepenthes Wantoto Nifuri Jenis ini dapat dijumpai di habitat yang sangat luas. tetapi umumnya banyak dijumpai di daerah mirabilis (Lour.) terganggu, daerah rawa atau padang rumput. Sebagian besar tersebar hingga ketinggian 200 m dpl. Druce Namun masih dapat dijumpai hingga ketinggian 1000 m dpl (jarang pada ketinggian 1400 m dpl). Penyebarannya mencakup : Australia (Queensland); Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China (Guangdong, Hainan); Hong Kong; Indonesia (Jawa, Kalimantan, Maluku, Papua, Sulawesi, Sumatera); Laos; Macao; Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah, Sarawak); Micronesia; Palau; Papua New Guinea, Philippines; Thailand; Viet Nam Referensi :  Clarke, C.M. 2014. Nepenthes mirabilis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2014: e.T49122515A21844202. 4 Grammatophyllum Anggrek kuning Merupakan sinonim dari Grammatophyllum papuanum J.J. Sm. (sumber : http://www.theplantlist.org) speciosum Bl. Anggrek berukuran besar (raksasa) yang tumbuh epifit sesekali litofit di dekat sungai atau hutan dataran rendah pada ketinggian 100-1200 m dpl. Tersebar di Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Kalimantan, Jawa, Maluku, Filipina, Sulawesi , Sumatera, Kepulauan Bismark, Papua, PNG dan Kepulauan Solomon; dan dicatat sebagai anggrek terberat di dunia. Referensi :  Orchids of Burma Grant (1895/1995);  Die Orchideen Von Java J.J.Sm. (1905);  Orchidaceae of German New Guinea Schlechter (1914);  Atlas des Orchidees Cultivees Constantin (1920);  Flora of Malaya Vol 1 Holttum Drawing fide;  The Orchids of Thailand Seidenfaden & Smitinand (1959);  Encyclopedia of Cultivated Orchids Hawkes (1965);  AOS Bulletin Vol 39 No 11 (1970);  Beautiful Thai Orchid Species Kamemoto & Sagarik (1975);  Orchidiana Philipiniana Vol 1 Valmayor (1984);  Orchidaceae of German New Guinea Schlechter (1985);  Orchids of Java Comber (1990);  The Orchids of the Solomon Islands and Bougainville Lewis & Cribb (1991);  Die Orchideen lieferung 24 Schlechter/Brieger (1991);  The Orchids of Penninsular Malaysia and Singapore Seidenfaden & Wood (1992);  The Plants of Mount Kinabalu Vol 2 Orchids Beaman, Wood, Beaman & Beaman (1993);

Page 167 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi  A Checklist of the Orchids of Borneo Wood & Cribb (1994);  A Checklist of the Orchids of Borneo Wood & Cribb (1994);  AOS Bulletin Vol 67 No 10 (1998);  Orchids of Sumatra Comber (2001);  Orchids of the Philippines Cootes (2001);  A field Guide to the Wild Orchids of Thailand Vaddhanaphuti (2001);  A to Z of South East Asian Orchid Species Vol 1 O'Byrne (2001);  Lindleyana Vol 17 No 1 (2002);  Flora Malesiana Orchids of the Philippines Vol I Agoo, Shuiteman and de Vogel (2003);  AOS Bulletin Vol 73 No 8 (2004);  A field Guide to the Wild Orchids of Thailand Vaddhanaphuti (2005);  AOS Bulletin Vol 76 No 8 (2007);  AOS Bulletin Vol 10 (2008);  Malesian Orchid Journal Vol 8 (2011);  The Orchids of Mount Kinabalu Vol 1 Wood, Beaman, Lamb, Chu Lun and Beaman (2011);  Wild Orchids of Penninsular Malaysia Ong, O'Byrne, Yong & Saw (2011) 5 Bryobium sp Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 6 Bulbophyllum sp. Anggrek putih Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 7 Bulbophyllumsp Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 8 Bulbophyllum sp- Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat 1 genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies).

Page 168 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi 9 Bulbophyllum sp- Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat 2 genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 10 Bulbophyllum sp- Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat 3 genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 11 Robiquieta sp Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 12 Grammatophyllum Anggrek Raksasa Irian Merupakan sinonim dari Grammatophyllum speciosum Blume (sumber : http://www.theplantlist.org) papuanum Anggrek berukuran besar (raksasa) yang tumbuh epifit sesekali litofit di dekat sungai atau hutan dataran rendah pada ketinggian 100-1200 m dpl. Tersebar di Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Kalimantan, Jawa, Maluku, Filipina, Sulawesi , Sumatera, Kepulauan Bismark, Papua, PNG dan Kepulauan Solomon; dan dicatat sebagai anggrek terberat di dunia. Referensi :  Orchids of Burma Grant (1895/1995);  Die Orchideen Von Java J.J.Sm. (1905);  Orchidaceae of German New Guinea Schlechter (1914);  Atlas des Orchidees Cultivees Constantin (1920);  Flora of Malaya Vol 1 Holttum Drawing fide;  The Orchids of Thailand Seidenfaden & Smitinand (1959);  Encyclopedia of Cultivated Orchids Hawkes (1965);  AOS Bulletin Vol 39 No 11 (1970);  Beautiful Thai Orchid Species Kamemoto & Sagarik (1975);  Orchidiana Philipiniana Vol 1 Valmayor (1984);  Orchidaceae of German New Guinea Schlechter (1985);  Orchids of Java Comber (1990);  The Orchids of the Solomon Islands and Bougainville Lewis & Cribb (1991);  Die Orchideen lieferung 24 Schlechter/Brieger (1991);

Page 169 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi  The Orchids of Penninsular Malaysia and Singapore Seidenfaden & Wood (1992);  The Plants of Mount Kinabalu Vol 2 Orchids Beaman, Wood, Beaman & Beaman (1993);  A Checklist of the Orchids of Borneo Wood & Cribb (1994);  A Checklist of the Orchids of Borneo Wood & Cribb (1994);  AOS Bulletin Vol 67 No 10 (1998);  Orchids of Sumatra Comber (2001);  Orchids of the Philippines Cootes (2001);  A field Guide to the Wild Orchids of Thailand Vaddhanaphuti (2001);  A to Z of South East Asian Orchid Species Vol 1 O'Byrne (2001);  Lindleyana Vol 17 No 1 (2002);  Flora Malesiana Orchids of the Philippines Vol I Agoo, Shuiteman and de Vogel (2003);  AOS Bulletin Vol 73 No 8 (2004);  A field Guide to the Wild Orchids of Thailand Vaddhanaphuti (2005);  AOS Bulletin Vol 76 No 8 (2007);  AOS Bulletin Vol 10 (2008);  Malesian Orchid Journal Vol 8 (2011);  The Orchids of Mount Kinabalu Vol 1 Wood, Beaman, Lamb, Chu Lun and Beaman (2011);  Wild Orchids of Penninsular Malaysia Ong, O'Byrne, Yong & Saw (2011) 13 Dendrobium sp Anggrek Tidak bisa ditentukan status endemisitasnya, sebab identifikasi jenis yang ada masih baru setingkat genus (marga). Individu/jenis yang dijumpai di lapangan sewaktu survey kebetulan bukan saat berbunga; sementara secara umum kunci dasar identifikasi anggrek terletak pada bunganya (khususnya untuk genus/marga anggrek yang terdiri atas banyak spesies). 14 Flindersia Kowanitaya Tumbuh di hutan hujan tropis terutama di hutan pegunungan rendah atau di kaki bukit juga di lokasi dekat pimenteliana F. (pinggiran) sungai. Tersebar dari lokasi dekat permukaan laut sampai ketinggian 1300 m dpl. Muell. Penyebarannya mencakup : Australia (Queensland); Indonesia (Papua); Papua New Guinea. Di PNG, merupakan spesies yang tersebar luas tapi jarang dan sporadis. Jenis ini juga pernah digunakan oleh perusahaan minyak BP Tangguh sebagai program pemberdayaan masyarakat yaitu untuk pembuatan produk lokal seperti sendok, piring, mangkok, ukiran dan mainan . Referensi :  Eddowes, P.J. 1998. Flindersia pimenteliana. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1998: e.T38149A10102702.  Purnawati, Renny. 2013. Sifat Dasar dan Sifat Pengolahan Kayu Maniani (Flindersia pimenteliana F.v. Muell) asal Teluk Wondama - Papua Barat. Thesis. Sekolah Pasca Sarjana – Institut Pertanian Bogor.

Page 170 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi  Bath KM, Thulasida PK, Hussain KH. 2007. A Handbook of Lesser Known Timbers. India: Kerala Forest Research Institute.  Martawijaya A, Kartasujana I, Kadir K, Prawira SA. 2005. Atlas Kayu Indonesia (I). Bogor: Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kehutanan, Departemen Kehutanan.  Sosef MSM, Hong LT, and Prawirohatmodjo S [editors]. 1998. Plant Resources of South East Asia [PROSEA] No 5(3) Timber trees: lesser-known timbers. Bogor: PROSEA. 15 Myristica Tree Merupakan jenis endemik Papua Barat (Indonesia). Dalam IUCN disebutkan dijumpai di pegunungan inaequalis W.J. de Arfak (dari Wamare hingga Mokwam); dalam Flora Malesiana disebutkan di wilayah Semenanjung Kepala Wilde Burung (Papua Barat). Umumnya dijumpai di hutan yang berlokasi di atas atau kelerengan bukit.

Referensi :  World Conservation Monitoring Centre. 1998. Myristica inaequalis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1998: e.T37892A10079455.  De Wilde, W.J.J.O. More Notes on Knema and Myristica. Blumea 43 (1998) 241-254 16 Livistona sp. Palemkipas Sumatera Kegiatan SFF 2016 menjumpai keberadaan jenis Palem Kipas; yang ditengarai sebagai spesies Livistona benthamii F.M.Bailey. (all Livistona Secara alami, jenis palem kipas ini tumbuh di daerah rawa, dataran alluvial, belakang hutan mangrove, family is protected daerah yang lembab, semak musiman dan hutan dataran rendah. Tersebar hingga ketinggian 100 m dpl. under Indonesian Penyebaran : Queensland (Australia), Western & Central Province (PNG), Merauke (Indonesia) Regulation, (sumber : http://www.palmpedia.net/wiki/Livistona_benthamii) however the 2003 did not specify the Referensi : Livistona species  Dransfield, J., N.W. Uhl, C.B. Asmussen-Lange, W.J. Baker, M.M. Harley & C.E. Lewis. 2008. Genera found during the Palmarum - Evolution and Classification of the Palms. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. survey)  Dowe, J.L. 2010. Australian Palms: Biogeography, Ecology and Systematics. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood - Australia. 17 Glochidion daviesii Tree Dijumpai pada saat SFF Tangguh (23 Februari 2002) di lokasi sempadan Sungai Saengga, kawasan hutan Takeuchi penyangga BP Tangguh. Dijumpai di hutan dataran rendah (dryland) dan hutan rawa.

Referensi :  Takeuchi W. 2003. Two New Species from The Bomberai Peninsula of Indonesian Papua, New Guinea. Harvard Papers In Botany 8(1): 131-136. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.  Marshall, Andrew J. & Bruce M. Beehler. 2007. The Ecology of Papua: Part One. Periplus Editions (HK) ltd. (ISBN : 1462906796, 9781462906796) 18 Scaevola burnettii Shrub Sejenis semak yang jarang dijumpai. Merupakan jenis/spesies baru yang dijumpai pada SFF tangguh Takeuchi 2002. Dijumpai di lokasi Hutan Savannah (di antara tumbuhan pakis dan tanah kosong).

Page 171 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Nama Ilmiah Nama Lokal Keterangan/Konfirmasi & Referensi

Referensi : Summary Environmental Impact Assessment Tangguh LNG Project in Indonesia. 2005. Document. 19 Freycinetia Tree (Pandanus) Merupakan spesies baru pada tahun 2002. Diduga endemik Papua Barat (http://globalspecies.org) bomberaiensis Huynh Referensi :  Huynh, Kim-Lang. 2002. The genus Freycinetia (Pandanaceae) in New Guinea (part 7). Botanische Jahrbücher, Volume 124, Number 2, 1 August 2002, pp. 151-161(11) (Publisher: E. Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung) 20 Bruguiera hainesii Mangrove Spesies ini ditemukan di zona estuarin menengah di wilayah intertidal tinggi (Robertson dan Alongi, C.G.Rogers 1992). Pada daerah yang relatif kering dan hanya tergenang air laut beberapa jam sehari saja pada saat terjadi pasang tertinggi. Memiliki tingkat propagasi yang sangat rendah dan tingkat perkecambahan yang rendah pula. Dibutuhkan 18 bulan untuk melalui siklus pematangan. Jenis ini dapat tumbuh hingga 30 m. Spesies ini memiliki distribusi merata sangat terbatas. Disinyalir tersebar di Asia Selatan mencakup Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Myanmar, Filipina, Papua Nugini, dan Singapura. Namun, perkiraan saat ini, hanya terdapat di Singapura, Malaysia, dan Papua New Guinea. Dalam Australasia ditemukan di Papua Nugini (Frodin et al. 1982, Percival dan Womersley 1975), dan ada laporan bahwa itu juga ditemukan di Timika dan Teluk Bintuni, Irian Jaya (S.Sukardjo pers. Comm.). Spesies ini memiliki populasi yang sangat kecil dan secara alami langka. Total populasi yang diketahui sekitar 200 pohon meliputi : 80 pohon di Malaysia (S. Tan, pers. Comm.), 3 pohon di Singapura dan 120 pohon Papua (Papua Barat & PNG).

Referensi :  Duke, N., Kathiresan, K., Salmo III, S.G., Fernando, E.S., Peras, J.R., Sukardjo, S., Miyagi, T., Ellison, J., Koedam, N.E., Wang, Y., Primavera, J., Jin Eong, O., Wan-Hong Yong, J. & Ngoc Nam, V. 2010. Bruguiera hainesii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: e.T178834A7621565.  Giesen, Wim and Stephan Wulffraat, Max Zieren and Liesbeth Scholten. 2006. Mangrove Guidebook for Southeast Asia. RAP publication 2006/07 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific Bangkok.  Chong, K. Y., H. T. W. Tan & R. T. Corlett, 2009. A Checklist of the Total Vascular Plant Flora of Singapore: Native, Naturalised and Cultivated Species. Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, National University of Singapore. Singapore. 273 pp.

Page 172 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Translated Expert Response:

Flora Species (for cited references see table above)

No Scientific Name Local Name Description / Confirmation & Reference 1 Calophyllum Bintangur daun halus The tree is native to Indonesia (endemic Papua). Are spread in lowland rainforest on a hill with a height of up to 200 insularum P.F. m above sea level. This species threatened with extinction due to habitat loss and over-exploitation. Stevens. 2 Nepenthes Kantong semar; Wanitoto; Growing up in the forest moist, shady, swamp forests (mostly peat bogs), in Araucaria forest (Papua), also in ampullaria Jack. Flask-shaped pitcher-plant secondary forest, heath forest, or marsh meadows. 0- spread from a height of 2,100 m above sea level. Spread include: Thailand, Peninsular Malaysia, Singapore, Sumatra, Kalimantan, Maluku and Papua (including PNG). 3 Nepenthes mirabilis Wantoto Nifuri This species can be found in habitats that are very broad. but generally are found in disturbed areas, swamp or (Lour.) Druce meadow. Most of the spread to a height of 200 m above sea level. But they can be found up to an altitude of 1000 m above sea level (rare at an altitude of 1400 m above sea level). Spread include: Australia (Queensland); Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China (Guangdong, Hainan); Hong Kong; Indonesia (Java, Kalimantan, Maluku, Papua, Sulawesi, Sumatra); Laos; Macao; Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah, Sarawak); Micronesia; Palau; Papua New Guinea, Philippines; Thailand; Viet Nam 4 Grammatophyllum Anggrek kuning A synonym of Grammatophyllum papuanum J.J. Sm. (Source: http://www.theplantlist.org) speciosum Bl. Orchid is large sized (giant) which grow epiphytes occasional litofit near rivers or lowland forests at an altitude of 100-1200 m above sea level. Spread in Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Borneo, Java, Maluku, Philippines, Sulawesi, Sumatra, Bismark Islands, Papua, PNG and the Solomon Islands; and recorded as the heaviest in the world of orchids. 5 Bryobium sp Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species). 6 Bulbophyllum sp. Anggrek putih Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species). 7 Bulbophyllumsp Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species).). 8 Bulbophyllum sp-1 Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus).

Page 173 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Scientific Name Local Name Description / Confirmation & Reference Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species).). 9 Bulbophyllum sp-2 Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species). 10 Bulbophyllum sp-3 Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species). 11 Robiquieta sp Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species). 12 Grammatophyllum Anggrek Raksasa Irian A synonym of Grammatophyllum speciosum Blume (source: http: //www.the plant list.org) papuanum Orchid is large sized (giant) which grow epiphytes occasional litofit near rivers or lowland forests at an altitude of 100-1200 m above sea level. Spread in Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Borneo, Java, Maluku, Philippines, Sulawesi, Sumatra, Bismark Islands, Papua, PNG and the Solomon Islands; and recorded as the heaviest in the world of orchids. 13 Dendrobium sp Anggrek Endemisitasnya status can not be determined, because the identification of the type that is still new genus level (genus). Individual / species encountered in the field during the survey coincidence is not the time of flowering; while in general the basic key lies in the identification of orchid flowers (especially for the genus / genera of orchids that consists of many species).). 14 Flindersia Kowanitaya Grown in tropical rain forests, especially in the lower montane forest or in the foothills are also at a location nearby pimenteliana F. (edges) of the river. Spread from the location near sea level to an altitude of 1300 m above sea level. Muell. Spread include: Australia (Queensland); Indonesia (Papua); Papua New Guinea. In PNG, a species that is widespread but rarely and sporadically. This species has also been used by the oil company BP Tangguh as a community empowerment program, namely for the manufacture of local products such as spoons, plates, bowls, carvings and toys 15 Myristica inaequalis Tree Are endemic to Papua Barat (Indonesia). IUCN is mentioned found in the Arfak mountains (from Wamare to W.J. de Wilde Mokwam); in the flora malesiana mentioned in the Bird's Head Peninsula (West Papua). Generally found in woods located on top of a hill or slope. 16 Livistona sp. Palemkipas Sumatera SFF activity in 2016 find a the presence of type of Palm fans; which is considered as a species Livistona benthamii F.M.Bailey. (all Livistona family Naturally, this type of fan palm grows in swampy areas, alluvial plains, behind the mangrove forest, moist areas,

Page 174 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

No Scientific Name Local Name Description / Confirmation & Reference is protected under shrubs and seasonal lowland forest. Are spread to a height of 100 m above sea level. Indonesian Deployment: Queensland (Australia), Western and Central Province (PNG), Merauke (Indonesia) Regulation, (Source: http://www.palmpedia.net/wiki/Livistona_benthamii) however the 2003 did not specify the Livistona species found during the survey) 17 Glochidion daviesii Tree Encountered during the SFF Tangguh (February 23, 2002) at border locations Saengga river, forest buffer BP Takeuchi Tangguh. Found in lowland forests (dryland) and swamp forest. 18 Scaevola burnettii Shrub Bush types are rare. A species / new species were found in a formidable SFF 2002. Found in Savannah Forest Takeuchi location (between ferns and vacant land). 19 Freycinetia Tree (Pandanus) Is a new species in 2002. Suspected endemic to Papua Barat (http://globalspecies.org) bomberaiensis Huynh 20 Bruguiera hainesii Mangrove This species is found in the middle estuary zone in the high intertidal zone (Robertson and Alongi, 1992). In relatively C.G.Rogers dry areas inundated by sea water and only a few hours a day alone at the time of high tide. Has a very low rate of propagation and germination rates were also lower. It takes 18 months to go through the maturation cycle. This species can grow up to 30 m. This species has a very restricted distribution equitable. Allegedly spread in South Asia include Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Myanmar, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea and Singapore. However, current estimates, only in Singapore, Malaysia, and Papua New Guinea. In Australasia discovered in Papua New Guinea (Frödin et al., 1982, Percival and Womersley 1975), and there are reports that it is also found in Timika and Bintuni Bay, Irian Jaya (S.Sukardjo pers. Comm.). This species has a very small population and naturally scarce. The total known population of about 200 trees include: 80 trees in Malaysia (S. Tan, pers. Comm.), 3 plants in Singapore and 120 trees Papua (West Papua and PNG).

Page 175 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Mammal Species

Yth. Pak Aldi

Dorcopsis muelleri, record (catatan) koleksi semua dari Papua Indonesia, jadi belum pernah ditemukan di Papua New Guinea, sebaran di Papua Indonesia meliputi Mamberamo, Kaimana, Timika serta pulau pulau satelitnya seperti Salawati, Misool, dan Yapen, disamping tentunya dari Bintuni sendiri (hutan dataran rendah BP) Sumber Pustaka:

Flannery, T. F. ( 1995 ). Mammals of New Guinea, revised and updated ed. (Australian Museum & Reed Books, Chatswood, New South Wales ).

Nyctimene draconila, catatan koleksinya meliputi Mamberamo, Manokwari, Asmat, Mappi, dan hutan dataran rendah BP, penyebarannya cukup luas sampai Papua New Guinea (Endemik Pulau Papua keseluruhan) Sumber Pustaka : Bonnacorso, F.J. 1998 Bats of Papua New Guinea. Washington, DC. Conservation International

Freddy Pattiselano 2003 Some fruit bats (Chiroptera, Pteropodidae) of Mamberamo River Basin, West Papua, Indonesia Asian Life Sciences 12 (1): 45-56 The International Journal of Sciences.

Strigocuscus gymnotis (Synonim Phalanger gymnotis) catatan koleksinya meliputi, daerah Mamberamo, Timika, Kaimana, selain dari kepulauan Aru Maluku dan Papua New Guinea Sumber Pustaka: Flannery, T. F. ( 1995 ). Mammals of New Guinea, revised and updated ed. (Australian Museum & Reed Books, Chatswood, New South Wales ).

Untuk Lumba-lumba saya tidak punya data sebarannya kecuali dari laut arafuru, Maluku, seperti dalam tulisan Rudolph dkk. 1997 Sumber Pustaka: Rudolph P., Smeenk C., and Leatherwood S. 1997 Preliminary Checklist of Cetacea in the Indonesian Archipelago and Adjacent Waters Zoologische Verhandelingen Leiden 312.

Berikut saya lampirkan data spesimen koleksi jenis-jenis tersebut di atas dari Museum Zoologi Bogor.

Tim Mamalia, Martua Sinaga

Page 176 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Translated Expert Response:

Mammal Species

Yth. Pak Aldi

Dorcopsis muelleri, the collection record of all of Papua Indonesia, so it has never been found in Papua New Guinea, the spread in Papua Indonesia include Mamberamo, Kaimana, Timika and satellites islands like Salawati, Misool, and Yapen, in addition to from Bintuni itself ( lowland forest BP).

References: Flannery, T. F. ( 1995 ). Mammals of New Guinea, revised and updated ed. (Australian Museum & Reed Books, Chatswood, New South Wales ). Nyctimene draconilla, the collection notes includes Mamberamo, Manokwari, Asmat, Mappi, and lowland forests of BP, the spreading is quite widely to Papua New Guinea (Papua Island Endemic overall)

References: Bonnacorso, F.J. 1998 Bats of Papua New Guinea. Washington, DC. Conservation International Freddy Pattiselano 2003 Some fruit bats (Chiroptera, Pteropodidae) of Mamberamo River Basin, West Papua, Indonesia Asian Life Sciences 12 (1): 45-56 The International Journal of Sciences. Strigocuscus gymnotis (Synonyms Phalanger gymnotis) the record collection includes, Mamberamo region, Timika, Kaimana, besides from the Aru Islands Maluku and Papua New Guinea

References: Flannery, T. F. (1995). Mammals of New Guinea, revised and updated ed. (Australian Museum & Reed Books, Chatswood, New South Wales). For the Dolphins, I don’t have a distribution data except from Arafuru Sea, Maluku, as in the writings of Rudolph et al. 1997

References: Rudolph P., Smeenk C., and Leatherwood S. 1997 Preliminary Checklist of Cetacea in the Indonesian Archipelago and Adjacent Waters Zoologische Verhandelingen Leiden 312. Here I attached specimen data collection of the types aforementioned from the Bogor Zoological Museum.

Tim Mamalia, Martua Sinaga

Page 177 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Mammals Distribution Data According to Bogor Zoology Museum

MZB_Number Collector Collector Date_From Locality_Detail Family Genus Species TMP Number MZB.Mamm.2955 M 42625 Kitchener, D.J.Et al. 10/7/1992 Karangguli, Wokam, Aru is Phalangeridae Phalanger gymnotis 5 MZB.Mamm.3019 BP 77 Sinaga, M.H. & 8/8/2007 BP LNG Proyek Bintuni, Kab. Phalangeridae Phalanger gymnotis 7 Kurnianingsih Bintuni, Prov. Irian Jaya Barat 02°28'169"S 133°08'670"E MZB.Mamm.3211 MZB 105 Kristofer M.Helgen 11/1/2005 Kwerba, Ca. 75 m, Mamberamo Phalangeridae Phalanger gymnotis 6 Basin MZB.Mamm.3752 LAP 13 Apandi & Aksamina.Y 10/30/2014 KM 12 Desa Lobo Distrik Kaimana Phalangeridae Phalanger gymnotis 0 Kab. Kaimana Papua barat MZB.Mamm.3782 LGS 3 Semiadi, Gono. & 10/30/2014 Gua Air Jamiri, Ds. Lobo Distrik Phalangeridae Phalanger gymnotis 5 Nanang Supriatna Kaimana, Kab. Kaimana Papua barat MZB.Mamm.1785 Hatfindo Prima 3/6/1997 Kp.Nawaripi lama, Timika, Macropodidae_x Darcopsis; muelleri 4 Kab.Mimika, Irian Jaya x; Macropodidae Dorcopsis MZB.Mamm.2982 N 39 Suyanto, A & 5/4/2007 Sungai Noau, Desa Gesa, Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 9 Aksamina.Y Kec.Benuki, Kab. Waropen, Papua MZB.Mamm.2983 N 48 Suyanto, A & 5/4/2007 Sungai Noau, Desa Gesa, Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 0 Aksamina.Y Kec.Benuki, Kab. Waropen, Papua MZB.Mamm.2983 K 3 Suyanto, A & 5/7/2007 Kampung Batainisa, Ds. Kwaneha, Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 1 Aksamina.Y Kec. Benuki, Kab. Waropen, Papua MZB.Mamm.3093 HY 67 Yohanita, Aksamina. 2/22/2008 Hutan Kra, Distrik Kai, Kab. Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 1 Mamberamo Raya, Prov. Papua MZB.Mamm.3122 BT 60 Nanang Supriatna 5/6/2008 Pulau Salawati,Ht.Salawati, Ds. Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 4 Kaliyan, Distrik Selat Sagawin, Kab. Raja Ampat, Prov. Irja. Bar MZB.Mamm.3782 LGS 4 Semiadi, Gono. & 11/13/2014 Gng Kumawa, Ds. Nusa Ulan Distrik Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 7 Nanang Supriatna Teluk Arguni Bawah. Kab. Kaimana, Papua barat MZB.Mamm.3782 LGS 5 Semiadi, Gono. & 11/13/2014 Gng Kumawa, Ds. Nusa Ulan Distrik Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 8 Nanang Supriatna Teluk Arguni Bawah. Kab. Kaimana, Papua barat MZB.Mamm.3782 LGS 6 Semiadi, Gono. & 11/14/2014 Gng Kumawa, Ds. Nusa Ulan Distrik Macropodidae Dorcopsis muelleri 9 Nanang Supriatna Teluk Arguni Bawah. Kab. Kaimana, Papua barat MZB.Mamm.2473 M137 Suyanto, A 6/12/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla

Page 178 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

MZB_Number Collector Collector Date_From Locality_Detail Family Genus Species TMP Number 0 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2474 M149 Suyanto, A 6/12/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 3 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2476 M156 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 7 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2476 M163 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 8 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2476 M164 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 9 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2477 M170 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 0 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2477 M180 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 1 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2477 M181 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 2 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.2477 M182 Suyanto, A 6/13/2001 CA. Gunung Tamrau, Desa. Binasi, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 3 Kec. Amirbaken, Kab. Manokwari, Irian Jaya. MZB.Mamm.3266 MAP 10 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/2/2009 Kampung Agham, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 5 Nombioman Bapai, Kabupaten MAPPI PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3267 MAP 15 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/3/2009 Kampung Agham, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 0 Nombioman Bapai, Kabupaten MAPPI PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3267 MAP 17 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/3/2009 Kampung Agham, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 2 Nombioman Bapai, Kabupaten MAPPI PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3267 MAP 35 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/4/2009 Kampung Agham Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 8 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3267 MAP 36 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/4/2009 Kampung Agham Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla

Page 179 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

MZB_Number Collector Collector Date_From Locality_Detail Family Genus Species TMP Number 9 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3268 MAP 37 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/4/2009 Kampung Agham Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 0 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3269 MAP 93 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/14/2009 Kampung Kumasna, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 6 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3270 MAP 100 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/14/2009 Kampung Kumasma, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 3 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3270 MAP 104 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/14/2009 Kampung Kumasma, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 5 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3270 MAP 106 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/14/2009 Kampung Kumasma, Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 6 Nombioman Bapai, Kab. MAPPI, PAPUA MZB.Mamm.3274 MAP 39 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/4/2009 Kampung Agham Distrik Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 1 Nombioman, Bapai,kab Mappi,Papua MZB.Mamm.3274 MAP 51 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/7/2009 Kampung Linggua, Kec,Nambioman Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 2 Bapai Kab.Mappi, Papua MZB.Mamm.3274 MAP 52 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/7/2009 Kampung Linggua, Kec,Nambioman Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 3 Bapai Kab.Mappi, Papua MZB.Mamm.3274 MAP 70 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/8/2009 Kampung Linggua, Kec,Nambioman Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 4 Bapai Kab.Mappi, Papua MZB.Mamm.3280 AGT 10 Suyanto, A & Saim, A. 9/23/2009 Kampung ATSJ, Distrik ATSJ, Pteropodidae Nyctimene draconilla 5 Kab.Asmat, Papua

Page 180 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Herpetofauna Species

Spesies yang didapat pada survey 2002/2003 yaitu dari genus Cophixalus sp.nov, Hylophorbus sp.nov, dan Emoia sp.nov hingga saat ini belum diketahui perkembangannya, karena tidak ada deskripsi jenis dari hasil survey terdahulu. Selain itu, voucher specimen hasil survey 2002 tidak terdapat di Museum Zoologi Bogor sehingga tim mengalami kendala saat hendak membandingkan daftar jenis terkini dengan daftar jenis yang diperoleh sebelumnya. Besar kemungkinannya bahwa jenis yang belum dideskripsikan pada survey 2002 atau 2007 maupun 2011 sebenarnya dijumpai dan dikoleksi pada survey 2016 namun hanya terdata sebagai jenis lain.

Probably new species bukan berarti bahwa benar-benar spesies baru, melainkan masih diduga temuan baru. Hal tersebut bisa terjadi karena keterbatasan referensi, maka jenis tersebut tidak diketahui oleh peneliti yang bersangkutan. Kalau Cophixalus sp. Nov tahun 2002 ternyata diidentifikasi merupakan Cophixalus biroi, berarti kemungkinan bukan spesies baru. Untuk memastikan kesamaan temuan pada tahun 2002 dengan 2016, maka pihak BP bisa mengirimkan laporan atau jurnal yang berkaitan dengan survey tahun 2002. Atau jika dokumen tersebut tidak ada, bisa mengirimkan foto atau suara (bila ada) dari spesies yang bersangkutan sehingga bisa dibandingkan dengan spesies yang didapatkan pada survey tahun 2016.

Kemungkinan dijumpainya jenis-jenis dari genus Cophixalus, Hylophorbus, dan Emoia cukup besar didaerah papua barat. Tim peneliti tidak bisa memastikan apakah jenis Cophixalus sp.nov, Hylophorbus sp.nov, dan Emoia sp.nov dapat dijumpai pada banyak daerah di papua barat atau hanya tersebar pada beberapa tempat saja. Karena jenis-jenis tersebut belum diketahui pasti jenis apa, apakah Cophixalus biroi ? atau Cophixalus jenis lain, begitu juga pada Hylophorbus dan Emoia. Namun poin penting yang perlu diketahui adalah peluang perjumpaan bagi genus-genus diatas cukup besar pada daerah papua barat, maupun bintuni. Hal tersebut dibuktikan dengan didapatnya jenis dari genus-genus diatas pada survey tahun 2016 yaitu (foto terlampir):

No. Kelompok Ordo Famili Spesies

Amfibi 1 Katak Anura Microhylidae Cophixalus sp. 2 Katak Anura Microhylidae Hylophorbus sp.1 3 Katak Anura Microhylidae Hylophorbus sp.2

Reptil

4 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia astrocostata 5 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia caeruleocauda 6 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia cyanogaster 7 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia pallidiceps 8 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia physicae 9 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.1 (black) 10 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.2 (green head) 11 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.3 (Probably kordana) 12 kadal Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.4 (head stripe)

Page 181 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Herpetofauna Species

Species are obtained in 2002/2003 survey that is of the genus Cophixalus sp.nov, Hylophorbus sp.nov, and Emoia sp.nov until now is unknown development, because there is no description of the type from results of the previous survey. Moreover, specimen voucher 2002 survey results are not available in Bogor Zoological Museum so that the team having problems when trying to compare the current type list with the list of types obtained previously. It is very likely that the species that have not been described in the survey in 2002 or 2007 or 2011 actually encountered and collected in the survey in 2016 but only the recorded as other types.

Probably new species is not mean that actually as a new species, but is still suspected to new findings. This may occur because of limitations of the reference, then the type is not known by researchers concerned. If Cophixalus sp.nov in 2002 turned out to be identified is Cophixalus biroi, meaning the possibility of not a new species. To ensure similarity of findings in 2002 to 2016, then the BP can submit reports or journals related to the survey in 2002. Or if the document does not exist, can transmit images or sounds (if any) of the species concerned so that it can be compared with the species obtained in the 2016 survey.

Possibility encountered species from the genus Cophixalus, Hylophorbus, and Emoia large enough area of West Papua. The team of researchers could not be sure whether the type Cophixalus sp.nov, Hylophorbus sp.nov, and Emoia sp.nov can be found in many areas in West Papua or simply scattered in a few places. Because these species is not known for sure what kind, whether Cophixalus biroi? or Cophixalus other types, as well as on Hylophorbus and Emoia. But the important point to note is the chance encounter to a genus-the genus above substantially in the area of West Papua, and Bintuni. This is evidenced by got kind of a genus-the genus above the 2016 survey, namely (photo attached):

No. Group Ordo Family Sepcies

Amphibi 1 Frog Anura Microhylidae Cophixalus sp. 2 Frog Anura Microhylidae Hylophorbus sp.1 3 Frog Anura Microhylidae Hylophorbus sp.2

Reptile

4 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia astrocostata 5 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia caeruleocauda 6 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia cyanogaster 7 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia pallidiceps 8 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia physicae 9 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.1 (black) 10 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.2 (green head) 11 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.3 (Probably kordana) 12 Lizard Squamata Scincidae Emoia sp.4 (head stripe)

Page 182 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Questions to Experts:

Questions for Agustinus Kilmaskossu – Bird Expert 2016 Flora and Fauna Survey

Selamat sore, Pak Agustinus, berikut ada beberapa pertanyaan terkait spesies burung.

Mohon bantuannya untuk menjawab, Pak.

A number of bird species were previously found in the Tangguh area but may be mis-identified or a rare vagrant. These include:  Ducula concinna was recorded in 2002 at the site, but the IUCN only show this species at islands in the Banda and Arafura seas http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22691653  Accipiter novaehollandiae native distribution is limited to parts of Australia (IUCN 2014), was recorded at Tangguh site in 2016. http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22727714  Myzomela albigula recorded in 2000, but, only known from Louisiade Archipelago (IUCN 2012) http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22703813  Myzomela sclateri recorded in 2000, but only known from small isolated populations in Papua New Guinea (IUCN 2012) http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22703874  Paradisaea rubra recorded in 2000, but only known as endemic to the West Papuan islands of Waigeo, Batanta, Gemien and Saonek http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22706241  Philemon brassi recorded in 2000, but only known as endemic to northern Papua http://maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=22704185

Would the IPB please be able to comment on these species. Whether they think these species occur at Tangguh or may have these species been misidentified?

Page 183 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

Comments on misidentified bird species at Tangguh: 1. Ducula concina (recorded in 2002 survey). Maybe misidentified but according to Pratt and Beehler (2015) this species have a small range: Aru island, plus 1 record on islets off South Bomberai Penninsula. Also east Wallacea. 2. Accipiter novaehollandiae (recorded in 2016). .Yes, we made a picture of this species,and we recorded the grey and white phases, according to Beehler, Pratt, and Zimmerman (1986), in the first edition. But according to Pratt and Beehler (2015), in the second edition, this species should be Accipiter hiogaster (Variable Goshawk), which is formerly known as .A. novaehollandiae (Grey Goshawk). 3. Myzomela albigula (recorded in 2000). Misidentified because this species is found only in SE Island (Pacific). Similar to Myzomela obscura, which is found in Tangguh. 4. Myzomela sclater (recorded in 2000). Misidentified because this species is found only on Karkar Island, off Sepik Ramu coast (Pratt and Beehler, 2015). Similar species Myzomela eques, which has red throat in male and female. Only male of M. sclater has red throat. 5. Paradisaea rubra (recorded in 2000). Wrong identification because this species is found only in Batanta and nearby islands. 6. Philemon brassi (recorded in 2000). Wrong identification because this species is found locally along rivers and lagoon in north west lowland of Papua (Mamberamo, Taritatu, and Wapoga). Similar species Philemon meyeri.

Best regards, Agust Kilmaskossu University of Papua Manokwari, West Papua

Page 184 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Questions to Experts: Questions for Dr. Ir. Nyoto Santoso, Msi – Botanical Expert 2016 Flora and Fauna Survey (He is one of the experts of flora and fauna survey since 2007)

Dear Dr. Nyoto, On freshwater fish.

My questions on freshwater fish to IPB are: 1. Is it possible that Melanotaenia arfakensis has been mis-identified in 2007, and that this species is in fact Melanotaenia irianjaya? 2. If not mis-identified, or considered truly present in the Tangguh area, has this species also been found in other watersheds of West Papua., other than the Prafi River and Saengga River watersheds? 3. Would the experts consider these endemic species wide-spread across West Papua? And if so, why? My questions to IPB experts are: 1. Whether they have discovered any of these species during the 2016 survey, and if so, which? 2. Whether they have recorded any of these species present during other surveys in West Papua, and if so which? 3. Whether they would consider these endemic species wide-spread across West Papua? And if so why?

Page 185 of 186

Critical Habitat Assessment and Biodiversity Action Plan

Expert Response:

The answer on Flora:

1. Regarding species G. daviesii (ID 2002), Faculty of Forestry IPB team believes that species is from the genus Ficus or Ficus fistulosa, because it is based on the view that the fruit is very similar to the fruit of the genus Ficus.

2. But for Freycinetia Tim IPB did not have a picture comparison in the Report of 2002, making it difficult to confirm whether it is the same species or not. Similar with Scaveola species which also has no comparison (image comparison), so it is difficult to confirm with those observed in 2002 and name of the new species yet to find its publication.

The answer for Fish:

1. There is the possibility of misidentification between these types (Melanotaenia Arfakensis and Melanotaenian Irianjaya) because the shape and the size of them are the same. There is little difference in staining patterns of body and fins (relatively similar) and if the specimens are examined in a state of death, the pattern of color is lost so difficult to distinguish. Except for genetic identification. Efforts that can be done to definitively answer to that is through the re-arrest and identification of the life specimen.

2. Yes, the expert considers these species wide spread across west papua because there are similarities between the characteristics of rivers in West Papua but necessary to conduct study geospatial and geo inclusion.

Page 186 of 186

SUPLLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER

BP Berau Ltd. (“BP”) is the operator of Tangguh LNG, which comprises of two gas treatment and liquefaction Trains located in Teluk Bintuni Regency, Papua Barat Province, Indonesia. The onshore plant produces Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and stabilized hydrocarbon condensate as export products with the first LNG cargo shipment in July 2009. Natural gas from two offshore platforms is delivered to onshore receiving facilities via subsea pipeline. BP and its partners plan to expand the Tangguh LNG facilities to increase Tangguh LNG production capacity by developing LNG Train 3 and additional supporting facilities, referred hereafter as the Tangguh Expansion Project (TEP). Initial expansion is to include LNG Train 3, two platforms (ROA and WDA), 13 new development wells, two subsea pipelines, a combined LNG and Condensate Jetty and other supporting facilities. TEP aims to optimize LNG production of existing reserves that cannot be produced within the existing two train development prior to Production Sharing Contract (PSC) expiry. TEP will provide benefits to the Government of Indonesia and local communities, which include a contribution to fulfilling domestic gas needs, supporting local livelihoods, strengthening partnership and continuing investment in economic and social development of the region. BP and its partners are seeking external financing to support the onshore components of the project. TEP aims to comply with the environmental requirements of the Government of Indonesia and respective local government regulations, conform to ADB's Safeguard Policy Statement 2009 (ADB, 2009), and align with IFC Performance Standards (IFC, 2012), as well as the Equator Principle III (2013) standards.

This document provides additional information required to fulfill lenders requirements, to supplement the impacts assessment discussed in the AMDAL. The additional information requirements are:

- Impact assessment of LNG tankers operation - Residual impact management, i.e. Acid Sulfate Soil (ASS) management, landfill and hydrostatic test water pond closure framework - Water management - Green House Gas (GHG) management

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 1

1. LNG Tankers

LNG Tankers shall operate according to applicable Indonesian regulations and the International Requirement, i.e. International Maritime Organization (IMO), International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) and International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ship (MARPOL). The requirement to follow those applicable international standards is stated in the Master Time Charter Party Agreement between Tangguh LNG and the Ship Owner(s).

According to the agreement, BP will act as Commercial Operator/Charterer, with main responsibility to provide assurance that the LNG Tankers will fully comply with applicable requirements, e.g. SOLAS, MARPOL, while the full accountability to conduct the environmental management of the LNG Tankers belongs to the Ship Owner(s).

It is clearly stated in the Master Time Charter Party Agreement that the Ship Owner(s) shall ensure that no pollution of any description shall be discharged from the LNG tankers. The LNG tankers shall be fully compliant with all applicable international, national and state oil and air pollution laws, conventions and regulations. In case of any non-conformance of the requirement, the LNG tanker shall be ‘Off-Hire’ until it is in state to resume the normal service and operation required under the agreement.

1.1 Impact Description

Similar with the general sea transportation activities, LNG tanker movements within Bintuni bay area may generate the following impacts which need to be managed:

1. Disturbance to Marine Mammal and Marine Biota due to LNG Tanker Movement. Marine mammals (dolphins and whales) are sensitive to direct disturbance from waves caused by vessel movements, and the possibility of vessels colliding with marine mammals. In addition, acoustic energy caused by transportation activities may also disrupt marine mammals’ communication and navigation systems, so that they avoid the area.

2. Potential Pollution from LNG Tankers Waste Disposal and Wastewater Discharge. Waste disposal and wastewater discharge from LNG tankers will be mainly sourced from organic material, such as sewage and food waste. Although the disposal of both, waste and wastewater from LNG tankers, may have impact to the sea water quality, but considering the treatment facility on board to treat the waste and wastewater prior to discharge and the fulfillment of MARPOL

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 2

(and/or other applicable international requirement), the impact from disposal of waste and wastewater from the LNG tankers may be deemed insignificant.

3. Potential Invasive Alien Species Invasive alien species may occur due to ballast water change and/or barnacles on ship body. Proper management of ballast water exchange and use of anti- fouling agent have been implemented, to minimize the impact of invasive alien species.

4. Potential Collision with Community and Other Boats Passing in Bintuni bay Area Tankers operating within Bintuni bay have the potential risk of colliding with community/other boats passing the area. Although a shipping lane has been determined for tanker’s operation, additional measures such as the presence of patrol boat and security boat as described in Section 1.2 below have been put in place to prevent collision between LNG tanker and community/other boats in the Bintuni bay area.

For this assessment, the scope of impact and management will be limited within the project area of influence, i.e. within Bintuni bay area, considering also limitations of the influence of the project to the tanker operation.

Greenhouse gases (GHG) generated from LNG tanker operation is not considered as GHG impact from Tangguh activity. Therefore, there will be no trans-boundary impact from Tangguh generated from the LNG tanker operation.

1.2 Impact Management

To minimize the impact from LNG Tankers operation within Bintuni bay, the following mitigation measures have been implemented by Tangguh through inclusion into LNG Tankers Charter Agreement, Operational Procedure and Work Instruction.

1. Disturbance to Marine Mammal and Marine Biota due to LNG Tanker Movement - Tanker route shall consider the presence of endangered species and their calving grounds. - Ensure compliance on Tangguh Policy to route LNG tankers along established international sea lanes through Halmahera (Maluku) waters and avoid travel through Raja Ampat, which features high biodiversity value and whale migration corridors. 2. Potential Pollution from LNG Tankers Waste Disposal and Wastewater Discharge

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 3

Selective collection and management of wastes according to the criteria of MARPOL 73/78 Annex V Prevention Pollution Garbage Disposal of Garbage Outside of Special Area, as shown in Figure 1 below. - Disposal into the sea of all plastics, including but not limited to synthetic ropes, synthetic fishing nets, and plastic garbage bags is prohibited. - Disposal into the sea of the following garbage will be made as far as practical from the nearest land, but in any case is prohibited if distance from the nearest land is less than 25 nautical miles (nmi) (46.3 km) for dunnage, lining and packing material that will float; 12 nmi (22.2 km) for food wastes and all other garbage, including paper products, rags, glass, metal, bottles, crockery and similar refuse. - Disposal into the sea of garbage specified in sub-paragraph (b)(ii) of Annex V may be permitted when it has passed through a comminute or grinder and made as far as practicable from the nearest land, but in any case is prohibited if the distance from the nearest land, is less than 3 nmi (5.6 km). Such comminute or ground garbage will be capable of passing through a screen with openings no greater than 25 mm. - When garbage is mixed with other discharges having different disposal or discharge requirements, the more stringent requirements will apply.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 4

Offshore platforms (more than 12 nm from land) and Type of Garbage Ships outside special areas Ships within special areas all ships within 500 m of such platforms Discharge permitted Discharge permitted Food waste comminuted or 3 nm from the nearest ≥ ≥ fro the earest Discharge permitted ground land, en route and as far as land, en route and as far as practicable practicable Discharge permitted food waste not ≥ fro the earest Discharge prohibited Discharge prohibited comminuted or ground land, en route and as far as practicable Cargo residues not Discharge prohibited Discharge prohibited contained in wash water Discharge permitted Discharge permitted ≥ fro the earest Cargo residues contained in land, en route and as far as ≥ fro the earest land, en route and as far as Discharge prohibited wash water practicable practicable and subject to two additional conditions Discharge permitted Cleaning agents and ≥ fro the earest additives contained in land, en route and as far as Discharge prohibited cargo hold wash water practicable and subject to Discharge permitted two additional conditions Cleaning agents and additives in deck and Discharge permitted Discharge prohibited external surfaces wash water Carcasses of animals Discharge permitted carried on board as cargo as far from the nearest land Discharge prohibited Discharge prohibited and which died during the as possible and en route voyage All other garbage including plastics, synthetic ropes, fishing gear, plastic garbage, bags, incinerator ashes, clinkers, cooking oil, Discharge prohibited Discharge prohibited Discharge prohibited floating dunnage, lining and packing materials, paper, rags, glass, metal, bottles, crockery and similar refuse When garbage is mixed with or contaminated by other substances prohibited from Mixed garbage discharge or having different discharge requirement, the more stringent requirements shall apply

Table 1. Simplified Overview of the Discharge Provisions of the Revised MARPOL Annex V

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 5

3. Potential Invasive Alien Species For potential invasive alien species due to ballast water exchange, a ballast management has been in place to ensure the ballast water exchange activity complies with local and international regulations as applicable. Under Regulation B-4 Ballast Water Exchange (International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments – IMO 2004), all ships using ballast water exchange should: - Whenever possible, conduct ballast water exchange at least 200 nmi from the nearest land and in water at least 200 meters in depth, taking into account guidelines developed by IMO; - If the ship is unable to conduct ballast water exchange as above, this should be as far from the nearest land as possible, and in all cases at least 50 nmi from the nearest land and at least 200 meters in depth in water. - Where practicable, efforts should be made to reduce sound by ballasting unladen tankers (with consideration to the potential for relocation of invasive species in ballast water) and adjusting vessel speed. - Ballast water exchange shall be recorded for verification at Tangguh LNG sea port. - A ballast handling plan for a ballast voyage, where ballast water exchange is intended to take place, should be prepared in advance. This pre-planning is necessary in order to maintain safety and stability of the vessels during any ballast water exchange or other ballast water treatment or control option as required. Ballast water exchange is an area of concern in certain ports of the world. Vessel must at all times comply with local and international regulations as applicable.

Another potential invasive alien species from tanker operation is from the presence of barnacles on the ship body. This impact can be prevented by the use of anti-fouling systems.

The International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling System on Ships (AFS) was adopted by the IMO in October 2001 and entered into force on 17 September 2008. The AFS regulations and guidelines were adopted to prohibit the application of anti-fouling systems containing organotin compounds.

The implementation of AFS will be certified with an International Anti-Fouling System Certificate (IAFS) – see Attachment 1. The IAFS Certificate will be supplemented by a Record of Anti-Fouling Systems. Compliance of the convention have also been touched up with a TBT-free AFS. An inspection of anti-fouling systems may be carried out by Port State Control (PSC) to verify compliance with the conventions.

In order to ensure compliance with the convention, the following steps are being implemented by the Ship Owner:

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 6

a. Checking of ship’s documentation and reporting the availability of the followings: o International Anti-Fouling System Certificate o Supplement to IAFS Certificate – Record of Anti-Fouling Systems o Statement of Compliance o Paint Specification and/or a paint record issued by the paint manufacturer b. Re-validation of IAFS Certificate if one of the following actions takes place: o Change of vessel owner o Change of name of the vessel o Replacement of more than 25% of the existing AFS o Complete removal of existing AFS o Change of flag

4. Potential Collision with Community/Other Boats Passing in Bintuni Bay Area To prevent collision between LNG tankers with community/other boats during transport within Bintuni Bay, the following measures are in place and implemented: a. Dedicated Access Channel to Approach Tangguh Terminal LNG tanker approach to Tangguh area has been provided with a dedicated existing channel as shown in Figure 1. LNG Tankers entering and exit Tangguh port shall pass through this channel and will be escorted by pilot boat and security boat. b. Escort Duties Procedure Escort duties guidelines for LNG tanker entering Tangguh is provided in Marine Security Patrol Boat Operating Guidelines for Tangguh LNG (920-PRC-OP-7019). The escort duties responsibilities are: o Prior to LNG tanker entering the Tangguh access channel, the boat skipper is responsible to determine whether weather conditions have deteriorated sufficiently to suspend marine security patrol boat escort activities. o The pilot shall be informed of the weather and sea condition and is responsible for deciding if the scheduled LNG tanker movement can continue. o The pilot plus one security patrol boat shall escort LNG tanker from the pilot boarding position to their respective berth(s) and vice versa. o The pilot boat and patrol boat shall ensure the designated tanker route and jetty approaches are clear of all fishing boats and associated nets, buoys and equipment, and maintain an exclusion zone surrounding the vessel. Vessel underway in designated tanker route is shown in Figure 2. o Security patrol boat and pilot boat will conduct channel clearance along the passage of LNG tanker inward and outward from Tangguh Terminal until Pilot Boarding Ground (PBG) to ensure the mandatory pilotage tanker route is clear from fisherman’s boat and other fishing equipment.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 7

Figure 1 – Dedicated Access Channel to Approach Tangguh Terminal SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 8

Port

Ahead Astern

Starboard

Figure 2 - Vessel Underway in Designated Tanker Route

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 9

2. Residual Impact

2.1. Acid Sulfate Soil (ASS) Management

Acid Sulfate Soil (ASS) is naturally occurring within Tangguh LNG site. The high sulfate contents and acid conditions are probably results of the oxidation of pyrite that is present in a disseminated form within the Steenkool formation. In a normal undisturbed condition, the ASS is benign. However, if the soils are exposed to air, then the sulfides will react with oxygen and form sulfuric acid.

Acid sulfate soils were initially encountered during Train 1 and 2 (T1/2) constructions, where the excavations on site are exposing ASS. A pH snapshot map was made during T1/2 construction that illustrates the existing condition as earthworks progress at that time; it is shown in Figure 3. It is expected that during the earthwork activity of TEP, ASS will be also encountered.

If not managed properly, ASS may result negative impact to the environment, e.g. may affect the vegetation, seeping into and acidifying groundwater, flown to surface water and impact on fish and other aquatic organisms. Therefore, in the Invitation To Tender (ITT) document for Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) Contractor, TEP has set the following management and monitoring plan to minimize and control the impact of ASS during construction. o Management and Mitigation Measures  Where ground-disturbing work is proposed, the EPC Contractor is required to assess the soil in advance of any construction activities for ASS potential and map the area at risk.  Where ASS is excavated, the ASS needs to be covered (or re-buried) to exclude oxygen at the designated area proposed by the EPC Contractor and approved by BP (as the appointed operator on behalf of Tangguh).  Where Acid Runoff Drainage (ARD) occurs, it is to be collected into neutralization pond and neutralized (e.g. with hydrated lime or crushed limestone) to ensure its pH meet the requirement before releasing it to the environment.  Exposed ASS is to be treated and neutralized with materials such as hydrated lime or crushed limestone before final disposal to prevent ARD. o Monitoring  Record of Soil Assessment by the EPC Contractor  Record of Soil Management including ASS Management by EPC Contractor  Weekly pH monitoring at effluent of settlement/treatment pond to be conducted by the EPC Contractor.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 10

 Surface water monitoring, including pH at upstream and downstream (50-100 m from effluent) to be conducted on a monthly basis by the EPC Contractor and to be checked quarterly by External Laboratory appointed by the EPC Contractor  Surface water monitoring at upstream and downstream (50-100 m from effluent) to be conducted every 6 months as per RPL requirement by External Laboratory appointed by the EPC Contractor  Surface water monitoring at upstream and downstream (50-100 m from effluent) to be conducted every 3 months as per RPL requirement by EPC Contractor Internal Laboratory

The above requirements are also included in the EPC contract. The EPC Contractor is required to develop an Acid Sulfate Soil Management Procedure, prior to construction.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 11

Figure 3 - pH Snapshot Map

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 12

2.2. Landfill Closure

Currently in Tangguh site, there are three existing landfills; inert landfill, organic waste landfill and new sanitary landfill (for combined organic and inert waste). The existing inert landfill and organic waste landfill are considered to be decommissioned, as it is nearly reach its full capacity. The inert landfill and organic waste landfill are shown in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4 - Inert and Organic Waste Landfills

At the time of closure, it is important to ensure that any potential environmental contamination resulting from the landfill is minimized through a proper closure and rehabilitation. To achieve that objective, the following framework will be implemented for landfill closure and post monitoring activity:

1. Final Cleaning Up Prior to closure, the landfill and surrounding area should be cleaned up, so that any waste pile, debris or other windblown waste are consolidated and placed in final disposal cell for final covering.

2. Landfill Sloping Landfill sloping is important to prevent any water ponding occur and seeping into the closed landfill areas, while at the same time prevent any erosion. The final slopes of the landfill site should be at least 2%-4% in grade to prevent ponding and ensure proper water flow, with vertical to horizontal ratio of less than 1 : 3 (see Figure 5 below). Safety factor for permanent slope is 1.5. Following the sloping of the landfill, compaction needs to be done to ensure stabilization of the landfill.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 13

Figure 5 - Slope Grade and Vertical Horizontal Ratio

3. Landfill Capping Main purposes of landfill capping are: o Ensure the integrity of the waste pile in longer term o Ensure the growth of vegetation during rehabilitation program o Ensure stability of slope o Reducing water infiltration, release of gas and odor from the landfill o Prevent animal nesting on the landfill Landfill capping will consists of the following: . Soil cover for compaction layer . Clay layer . Drainage layer . Topsoil material layer An additional layer of gravel between soil and clay layer is normally be added, if gas control piping is added to the system. Typical landfill capping layer is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6 - Typical Landfill Capping Layer

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 14

4. Re-vegetation Re-vegetation is included as part of landfill closure to prevent surface erosion by rain water runoff, protect final capping layer, improve visual amenity and maintain stability of the landfill slopes. Re-vegetation will be conducted upon completion of topsoil placement and will be using native species.

5. Drainage System Drainage system shall be designed to reduce infiltration into the closed landfill. The final surface is shaped so that any rain water runoff will flow away from the landfill and not ponding. Main drainage channel will be provided in around the landfill site. The landfill slope shall be designed to be directed to the main drainage channel. Volume of drainage channel shall be determined based on the total catchment area and rainfall intensity.

6. Leachate Collection System A leachate collection system has been installed during operations to collect leachate generated in the landfill and convey the collected leachate to the sewage treatment facility. The leachate collection system will be maintained and monitored, although the volume of leachate water should be reduced significantly if the landfill closure was conducted properly.

7. Gas Control System Gas control system is required to control the methane and other gasses generated from biodegradation process in the landfill. Collected gas must be released into atmosphere, normally using vertical venting pipe. If required, the additional venting pipe for gas control system shall be provided during the closure to release the gas.

8. Post Landfill Closure Monitoring Post landfill closure monitoring is required to ensure the effectiveness of landfill closure in terms of minimizing the environmental impact. The monitoring activity will include the following aspects: - Groundwater quality monitoring - Nearest surface water monitoring – for any surface water located in less than 200m from the landfill site - Leachate water quality monitoring - Regular inspection of vegetation, drainage system and leachate system

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 15

2.3. Hydrostatic Test Water Pond Closure

Similar with landfill, existing hydrostatic test water pond closure if not conducted properly may have potential negative impact to the environment. Hydrostatic test water pond is shown in Figure 7.

During T1/2 development, the hydrostatic test water pond was a temporary facility built during the construction phase to hold the hydrostatic water. It was planned to be decommissioned prior to operations; however it has become an integral part of the wastewater treatment system, as it is used as the effluent holding pond for off-spec waste water, particularly from Produced Water Treatment (PWT) unit.

Figure 7 - Hydrostatic Test Water Pond

For TEP, an additional produced water tank will be provided to collect the off-spec effluent to be transferred back to the system. Once Train 3 is in operation, the hydrostatic test water pond will be demolished.

To ensure the demolition of the hydrostatic test water pond is conducted properly and its potential impact to environment is managed, the following framework will be implemented:

1. Water Quality Testing and Draining Prior to draining, the water quality needs to be tested to determine proper handling method and treatment. Once the water quality is tested and proper treatment method is selected, the water draining process can be started. If the water will be treated in on-site facility, it is important to ensure the water draining rate is equal with the treatment unit available capacity and rate.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 16

2. Demolition of High Density Poly Ethylene (HDPE) Liner Once the pond is drained, the HDPE liner can be demolished. The disposal of the liner will also be determined from the water quality testing result, if there is any hazardous contaminant found in the water sample, the HDPE liner will need to be managed as hazardous waste.

3. Filling, Compaction and Re-vegetation Following the demolition of HDPE liner, the soil pit can be filled with soil material and compacted. The re-vegetation will be done in the area to stabilize the soil and also prevent any soil erosion.

4. Post Closure Monitoring Post closure monitoring will include the monitoring of groundwater and soil quality in the hydrostatic pond location to ensure the environmental impact has been properly managed.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 17

3. Water Management Plan

3.1. Wastewater Management Plan

The addition of a third train at Tangguh and the associated increase in gas production will require additional facilities to handle additional volumes of produced and waste water. The management and monitoring plan of the produced water and other waste water discharges has also been described in detail in AMDAL.

The existing Produced Water Treatment (PWT) and other waste water treatment and disposal system need to be expanded to collect and treat the additional waste water from TEP facilities. These new facilities will be an extension of the existing treatment plant to process the wastewater to meet the quality standard for final disposal to the sea.

To handle the anticipated increase in produced water from the TEP facilities, a treatment plant facility similar design to the two existing units (1 x 25 m3/hr) will be added to increase the total PWT plant capacity to 75 m3/hr for 3 LNG Trains. Similar systems to the current produced water treatment process will be utilized with a new treatment plant being installed. The new PWT will include a new Dissolved Air Floatation (DAF) unit, biological treatment and a new filtration train. Design of the integrated system shall address flow distribution between the new and existing PWT plants in addition to addressing lessons learned from existing PWT plant, to be incorporated in the design of TEP PWT unit.

A produced water buffer tank with a minimum working volume of 8,580 m³ will be installed, in order to provide sufficient supply during scenario of LNG Train shutdown, PWT Plant upset, PWT Plant under maintenance and also to collect any off-spec effluent to be re-routed back to the system. Interconnecting line shall be provided between existing and new PWT system.

All new areas of the TEP facilities will be provided with drainage/sewer as required. The waste water streams from these areas will also be routed to specific area of wastewater treatment.

The intent for TEP facilities is to strictly segregate the waste water streams for the PWT plant and oily water treatment system. A separate oily water treatment will be provided (i.e. a properly designed corrugated plate interceptor (CPI), similar with the existing one). All new oily water sump pits throughout the TEP facilities will flow to this new CPI which will be located in the new utility area. The discharge line from new CPI will be routed directly to common effluent header, as oily water has a different discharge specification to produced water. The discharge line to the produced / waste water handling is still provided as back-up in case downtime of the oily water treatment package. There will be no integration between existing and TEP oily water system, considering in the existing oily water system (in Onshore Receiving Facilities (ORF) area) is still combined with produced water system.

A new chemical neutralization pit will be provided where all chemical contaminated waste water is routed to be further neutralized to effluent specification. New neutralization pit will be

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 18

located in new utility area together with associated acid/caustic storage and pumps. The capacity of the new neutralization pit will cover TEP requirements and there will be no integration with existing neutralization pit.

A new permanent integrated Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) will be built to handle sewage from TEP for both the construction and operational phases. Sewage treatment capacity will be based on peak activities during the project construction phase and will provide for treatment of the sewage from TEP dormitory / camp with increased personnel on site. Aerobic biological treatment with a disinfectant unit will be used for TEP. The sludge generated will be disposed to landfill.

Option to install a new desalination plant will produce a rejected brine stream that will be part of wastewater sources.

All of above wastewater sources will be tied-in to a new common wastewater discharge line to sea. A connection with the existing common wastewater discharge line may be implemented, in order to allow sparing to minimize potential risk due to blockage or maintenance at the existing discharge line. The discharge point to the sea will be at -6 LAT at the new LNG-Condensate jetty (LNG Jetty 2), with reference to the waste water discharge modelling stated in the AMDAL.

Each of the wastewater streams shall be monitored against applicable standard and its discharge permit. Therefore provision of sampling facility and/or online analyzer and flow meter is required at each of effluent pipe prior to tie-in to the common waste water discharge line to sea.

To finalize the option of produced water and wastewater treatment for TEP, a study has been conducted prior to Front End Engineering Design (FEED) to assess all the potential option and determine the final method to be used for TEP. The summary of analysis done in the study and its conclusion are provided in the following sections.

3.1.1. Analysis Basis

The overall project strategy for TEP is to standardize upon the existing design and ensure lessons learnt are incorporated within the design of future trains. Five main concern / strategy will be implemented for the produced / waste water management for the TEP:

1. Produced /waste water minimization – reduce the quantity of waste water if possible and segregate between the surface drainage run-off/oily water and produced / waste water stream which have different discharge standard 2. Water polishing and re-use – further treat the water to be re-used as utility water in the plant. 3. Produced water mass balance strategy – produced water mass balance shall be maintained during one LNG trip or shutdown and upset in biological process.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 19

Existing hydrostatic test water pond shall be de-commissioned and its function will be replaced by produced water tank / buffer tank with sufficient capacity. 4. Provision of facilities in Train 3 to recover water in dehydration unit and re-use the water in Acid Gas Removal Unit (AGRU) will reduce the amount of waste-water to be treated with potential contamination of the PWT Plant with traces of amine solvent. 5. Waste water treatment and disposal – treat the waste water suitable for the respective discharge specification, and standardize on the treatment technologies / system and disposal method.

3.1.2. Produced Water Reinjection

Water re-injection into the subsurface formation is a proven method for waste water disposal. However, alternative disposal options may be implemented if they are demonstrated to have significant environmental and business benefit relative to preferred method.

Attachment 2 describes the sub-surface perspective regarding the feasibility of water disposal well in the vicinity of the Tangguh plant. The study completed in 2005 and a more recent study was conducted in 2013. In summary, two storage formations and seven options for well location have been identified. Each option has pros and cons, but onshore options have proved to be unviable, since the onshore area part of the Kasuri PSC is not owned by Tangguh and therefore it is not possible for Tangguh to drill the produced water reinjection well on other PSC’s area. The only potential option for disposal underground would involve drilling a disposal well to the south of Roabiba field.

The storage formation options are Faumai Formation and/or Roabiba Sandstone. Based on the information available, Roabiba Sandstone would be technically the best solution but is also significantly more expensive. The qualitative advantages and disadvantages of water re-injection are described below.

Qualitative Advantages

 Lowest impact to the environment and minimum social risk due to no discharge to the sea.  Less stringent, in terms of quality of the discharge specification compared to the discharge to the sea option, resulting in potentially less cost for the treatment system.

Qualitative Disadvantages

 Currently there is no access to the onshore subsurface formation for water re- injection, since the area bordering the Tangguh LNG plant belongs to another PSC. This requires injection to be sent to offshore formation resulting in a significantly increased CAPEX requirement, while also add technical complexity as the produced

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 20

water separation process takes place in onshore and the separated produced water will need to be re-sent to offshore for reinjection.  A very stringent permitting process and require a more detail technical requirement.  Redundancy would be required in case of failure or problem at the injection well - provision of a spare injection well would further increase the overall CAPEX.  Capacity is limited by the selected size of the water re-injection pipeline.

The water re-injection system can be viewed as two distinct sections, which are the water treatment facility for re-injection and the water pipeline & water injection well. The cost component of the injection well is approximately of 60-75% of the total installed cost, hence is greatly influencing the economics of the system compared with the treatment for disposal to sea.

The typical treatment system is the removal of dispersed oil & grease using dissolved gas flotation system in the ORF, followed by additional filtration and chemical injection (for biocide, oxygen scavenger, etc.). The cost of this system will be lower than the treatment system for disposal to sea, however this cost differential will be negated by the high cost of the injection well and pipeline.

Considering the questions on feasibility and also cost, water re-injection will not be used as a method of produced water disposal for TEP.

3.1.3. Offshore Water Separation

Water separation & treatment in the offshore facilities, either for discharge/disposal to sea or for re-injection, is a common and proven design worldwide. The system typically consists of gravity separation, followed by further separation either using hydro cyclone or flotation unit. For re-injection, further treatment would be typically required such as filtration, chemical injection or de-oxygenation. The advantages and disadvantages of this system for the Tangguh facilities are listed below.

Qualitative Advantages

 Compared with discharges from onshore facilities, there is potentially less stringent water discharge specification for disposal to sea from an offshore facility, hence less processing /treatment equipment is required.  Reduction of water rate in the pipeline, thus reducing the pressure drop and slug volume, with potential to increase the gas production.  Direct re-injection from the offshore facilities removes the requirement for an additional water reinjection pipeline from onshore.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 21

Qualitative Disadvantages

 Additional equipment on the platform topsides. This will increase the topsides weight and potential the jacket weight and size. Additional equipment not aligned with the Normally Unattended Installation (NUI) philosophy adopted for the wellhead platforms, which aims for minimum equipment offshore in order to minimize the requirement for visits.  Additional engineering and longer schedule to design the separation system since it cannot be copied from the existing VRA/VRB platforms design (no standardization).  Although at smaller capacity, an onshore produced water treatment facility would still be required to treat the condensed water which forms along the pipeline.

Based on the above comparison, it is considered that the benefits of maintaining the NUI philosophy, design standardization and faster project delivery far outweigh the potential benefits of water disposal offshore. No increased production would result as the constraint on production is the LNG Train capacity, nor it would result a significant environmental benefit. Therefore, the offshore water separation system will not be utilized for TEP.

3.1.4. Produced Water Treatment Plant

The existing PWT plant at the Tangguh facilities was constructed at the end of the T1/2 construction after the LNG plant itself was operational, to fix the deficiencies in the original ORF design. For TEP, a similar process to the existing PWT plant is recommended based on current performance. However, there is also essential change that needs to be implemented to improve the overall system and capture the lesson learned from existing PWT plant, as shown in Table 2 below.

Interconnecting inlet lines and outlet lines to be provided to the existing PWT, and there shall be a provision to treat the off-spec effluent from the existing PWT to TEP PWT.

Qualitative Advantages

 Proven system using the bio-treatment and incorporation of lessons for the expansion design, to meet the discharge specification.  Experience and familiarity of Operation personnel to operate the similar system.  High availability / operating efficiency by proper specification and sparing philosophy.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 22

Qualitative Disadvantages

 Large plot area is required for the waste water treatment system (bio-treatment). This is also due to the potential increase in equipment sizes to accommodate the more stringent discharge specification.  Different waste stream is still generated from the PWT Plant, which is the solid bio- sludge from the bio-treatment system, requiring operating cost to handle and dispose it in the sanitary landfill area within Tangguh area. DAF-sludge from primary treatment is considered as hazardous waste and requires proper hazardous waste treatment. However, benefit from TEP is that provision of the Liquid/liquid Coalescing Package in ORF will reduce the hydrocarbon content in produced water; therefore it will reduce the amount of solid hazardous waste disposal.  Biological process relies on microorganism/bug activities, these microorganisms can be poisoned if conditions are not stable.

The proposed location for TEP produced water treatment is on the east side of the existing Main Control Building (MCB).

No Phase-1 Design Expansion Design 1 Primary treatment in PWT - removal of Primary separation at the ORF. Then dispersed oil & grease using Dissolved further dispersed oil flotation treatment Air Flotation (DAF) system at the PWT.

2 Secondary treatment in PWT - removal Similar design, adjusted for more of dissolved contaminants using bio- stringent discharge specification treatment / activated sludge system

3 Tertiary treatment in PWT - sand Similar design, with addition of ion filtration to remove TSS and activated exchange or reverse osmosis to remove carbon to remove residual dissolved TDS (higher than existing when contaminants formation water starts being produced)

Table 2 - Waste Water Treatment Design for Tangguh Expansion

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 23

3.1.5. Water Polishing and Re-Use

The existing facility requires utility water (fresh water) for the process, utilities and personnel uses, which is supplied from the seawater desalination system. For TEP, the potential to use ground water from the aquifer to supply the water needs, instead of installing a new desalination plant was also considered. The estimated continuous demand of utility water, including for personnel use, is 141 m3/h for three trains operation.

The quality specification of utility water is shown in Table 3 below, compared with the quality of treated water from existing PWT plant, as proven during the performance test. It is identified that the effluent water from the PWT plant has the potential to be further treated / polished to reach the quality of utility water. The flow rate of the effluent water is not sufficient to meet all demand of the utility water, but there is still benefit envisaged if the effluent water is re-used as utility water.

Qualitative Advantages

 (If utility water is provided by desalination unit) – Reduction of energy use and minimizing waste stream (brine) from the desalination unit thus minimizing environmental impact to the environment / Bintuni Bay.  (If utility water is provided from ground water source) – Conservation of ground water resource.

Qualitative Disadvantages

 Utility water demand exceeds the flow rate of the treated produced water (from condensed water), hence water supplied from either desalination or ground water would still be required.  Higher capital expenditures which is not driven by environmental compliance.

The envisaged system for the water polishing is primarily for removal of dissolved solids (TDS), utilizing either reverse osmosis (RO) or an ion exchange system. Other equipment would be required for pH adjustment and water de-chlorination. Design of a water polishing system would need to consider formation water breakthrough which is predicted to result in total dissolved solids (TDS) increasing above 4000 mg/l. The polishing unit would not completely remove the requirement for effluent discharges to sea but the volumetric flowrate would be reduced.

Technically there are clear advantages of meeting some of the water demand by recycling and reusing the produced water streams. However, this system introduces more risk to the users of water as the inlet specification could vary. Furthermore, although smaller in scale, other water sources would still be required, hence no costs could be fully eliminated and will add operational complexity by having more types of water treatment package.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 24

Quality / Specification Effluent from existing No Parameter (Note 1) PWT Plant (Note 2) 1 pH 6.5 – 7.5 8.2 – 8.4

2 TDS < 10 mg/l < 600 mg/l

3 Residual Chlorine 0.20 – 0.50 mg/l N/A

4 Turbidity < 5 NTU < 10 NTU

5 Iron (Fe) < 0.2 mg/l < 0.5 mg/l

Notes: 1. The utility water specification is derived from the existing requirements for Tangguh plant 2. The quality of effluent from existing PWT Plant is based on early operation and performance test, which needs to be re-confirmed based on long term monitoring of the existing PWT Plant.

Table 3 – Comparison of Required Quality of Utility Water and Typical Effluent from Existing PWT Plant

3.1.6. Other Wastewater Management and Discharge to Sea

Other sources of wastewater from Tangguh LNG are: oily contaminated wastewater, chemically contaminated wastewater, sanitary waste, and brine waste discharge.

 Oily Contaminated Wastewater The sources of oily contaminated wastewater are from oily water sump pits during normal operation and maintenance activity. Different with current practice in existing operation, skimmed hydrocarbon from produced water tank shall not be routed to this system. A separate oily waste water treatment will be provided (i.e. a properly designed corrugated plate interceptor (CPI), similar with the existing one). All new oily water sump pits throughout the TEP facilities will flow to this new CPI which will be located in new utility area. The discharge line from new CPI to be routed directly to common effluent header, as oily water has a different discharge specification to produced water. The discharge line to the produced / waste water handling is still provided as back-up in case downtime of the oily water treatment package. There will be no integration between existing and TEP oily water system, considering in the existing oily water system (in ORF area) is still combined with produced water system.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 25

 Chemically Contaminated Wastewater A new chemical neutralization pit will be provided where all chemical contaminated waste water i.e. from Boilers and Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSGs) blowdown, Demineralization Package regeneration waste and Amine Carbon Filter backwash water is routed to be further neutralized to effluent specification. New neutralization pit will be located in new utility area together with associated acid/caustic storage and pumps. The capacity of new neutralization pit will cover TEP requirement and there will be no integration with existing neutralization pit.

 Sanitary Waste and Leachate Water A new permanent integrated STP will be built to handle sewage from TEP for both the construction and operational phases. Sewage treatment capacity will be based on peak activities during the project construction phase and will provide for treatment of the sewage from TEP dormitory / camp with increased personnel on site. Aerobic biological treatment with a disinfectant unit shall be used for TEP. The sludge generated will be disposed to landfill.

 Brine waste discharge flowrates will be produced when new TEP desalination unit is installed and operated to cover utility water requirement.

All of above sources, together with effluent from PWT Plant, will be tied-in to a new common wastewater discharge line to sea. A new discharge line with interconnection with the existing line is recommended, in order to allow sparing to minimize potential risk due to blockage or maintenance at the existing discharge line. The discharge point is to the sea -6 LAT at the new LNG-Condensate Jetty (LNG Jetty 2) refer to waste water discharge modelling stated in the proposed AMDAL study. Summary of TEP wastewater management is shown in Figure 8 below.

Each of the wastewater streams shall be monitored against applicable standard. Therefore provision of sampling facility and/or online analyzer and flow meter is required at each of effluent pipe prior to tie-in to the common waste water discharge line to sea.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 26

Produced Water Produced Water Treatment Plant

Oily LNG Production Corrugated Plate Contaminated Process Interceptor (CPI) Water

Chemically Contaminated Neutralization Pit Water

LNG Jetty 1 & 2 at Desalination Unit Reject Brine -6m LAT

Domestic Sewage Sewage Activities Treatment Plant

Figure 8 – Summary of Tangguh Wastewater Management Plan

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 27

3.1.7. Conclusion

Based on the qualitative evaluations described above, the recommended strategy for produced water / waste water management and handling of the TEP is as follows.

1. Expansion of the existing waste water treatment facilities to accommodate TEP as described below:  An additional PWT comprising Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF), Biological treatment and Filtration units to process the produced water from the produced water buffer tank and also sludge handling facility.  A new separate oily water treatment will be provided (i.e. a properly designed corrugated plate interceptor (CPI), similar with the existing one). All new oily water sump pits throughout the TEP facilities will flow to this new CPI which will be located in new utility area. The discharge line from new CPI to be routed directly to common effluent header as oily water has a different discharge specification to produced water. The discharge line to the produced / waste water handling is still provided as back-up in case downtime of the oily water treatment package. There will be no integration between existing and TEP oily water system, considering in the existing oily water system (in ORF area) is still combined with produced water system.  A new chemical neutralization pit will be provided where all chemical contaminated waste water can be treated. All new chemically contaminated waste water will be routed to this pit.  A new permanent integrated Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) will be built to handle sewage from TEP for both the construction and operational phases. Sewage treatment capacity will be based on peak activities during the project construction phase and will provide for treatment of the sewage from TEP dormitory / camp with increased personnel on site.  Rejected brine from the new desalinization plant will be comingled with all other effluent streams prior to discharge to sea.

2. A new common wastewater discharge line to sea will be provided for discharge off all treated waste water streams. A connection with the existing common wastewater discharge line may be implemented, in order to allow sparing to minimize potential risk due to blockage or maintenance at the existing discharge line. The discharge point is to the sea -6 LAT at the new LNG-Condensate Jetty (LNG Jetty 2) refer to result of waste water discharge modelling stated in the AMDAL. Each of the wastewater streams shall be monitored against applicable standard. Therefore provision of sampling facility and/or online analyzer and flow meter is required at each effluent pipe prior to tie-in to the common waste water discharge line to sea.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 28

3.2. Water Supply

The water supply is used as make-up for the potable water system, demineralized water system, closed cooling water (CCW) system and firewater system, as well as supplying service water to the utility hose stations in the plant and raw water to the loading berths. There will be an additional water supply demand for the Tangguh Expansion Project.

Water supply for the existing facilities is produced by the desalination of seawater via the mechanical vapor compression process, as the original AMDAL prohibited the extraction of groundwater. The existing facilities consist of Sea Water Supply Pumps, an Electro-Chlorination Package, Desalination Packages and Desalinated Water Tank, Corrosion Inhibitor Injection Package, and Desalinated Water Pumps.

In the new AMDAL, the option to use groundwater as water supply was considered as it was deemed to have several advantages, namely a significant reduction in volume of wastewater discharge into Bintuni bay, greater energy efficiency and reduction in emission of GHG. However, before proceeding with a plan to utilize groundwater at Tangguh, further work would be required, among others to confirm the groundwater reserves, to assess the reduction of capital and operating expenditures compared to operational complexity, and how to manage the presence of shallow gas hazards beneath the Tangguh site.

To finalize the option of water supply for TEP, a thorough assessment was conducted prior to and during Front End Engineering Design (FEED) for both possible options; desalination and groundwater. The summary of the assessment and its conclusion are provided in the following sections.

3.2.1. Water Demand

The water demand for the water supply expansion study is estimated from the water demand of the existing T1/2 operations. The following Table 4 summarizes the water demand for TEP scope.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 29

No Parameter Units Requirements Water Demand

1 Normal Operation

Trains 1 and 2

1.1 Process Area m3/hr 43

1.2 Non – Process Area m3/hr 27

Train 3

1.3 Process Area (Note 1) m3/hr 35

1.4 Non – Process Area m3/hr 27

1.5 Modification Project – TAR m3/hr 9

Water Supply

3 Tangguh Trains 1 and 2

3.1 MVC (Note 5) m3/hr 48.5

3.2 Temporary Reverse Osmosis (RO) (Note 2) m3/hr 62.5

4 Tangguh Expansion

4.1 Permanent Treatment (Note 3) m3/hr 172

4.2 Temporary Treatment for Hydro-test m3/hr 340

4.3 Re-used from PWT (Note 4) m3/hr 30

Notes:

1. 15 m3/h + additional 3 m3/h demineralization for Train 3 vs 27m3/hr for Trains 1 & 2. 2. Assumption that the NPF RO Plant Refurbishment Program, for 3 +1 availability with new RO Unit 6 installed, figure represents the nameplate capacity (1500 m3/day) available. It is proposed to demolish this unit at the end of the Tangguh Expansion Project. 3. The permanent water supply treatment will be used for both the construction phase and for water supply for Train 3. This shall be a modular system and incorporated in the polishing unit for effluent PWT.

4. For 3T operation, total PWT effluent is approx. 60 m3/hr for which 30 m3/hr is re-used.

5. Design Nameplate Capacity for each Desalination Package (MVC) is 28m3/hr supplied from 2+1 available units.

Table 4 - Estimated Water Demand and Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 30

3.2.2. Firewater Demand

The existing plant (Trains 1 & 2) is divided into 15 fire risk areas and the design capacity of the firewater system is based on supplying the largest risk area, 1040 m3/hr. TEP will add fire risk areas. The current design assumption is that as none of these fire areas are any greater than the existing largest fire risk area, the firewater design capacity will remain at 1040 m3/hr. Therefore, based on the design philosophy that once a fire occurs within a fire risk area it will not spread out of that area, no additional firewater supply capacity will be required by TEP. However, TEP fire water design capacity need to be verified in Detail Engineering Design based on the likely plant layout, potential fire cases and the ability for some incidents to potentially escalate into adjacent areas. This may result in a larger maximum fire water demand and therefore potentially modifications to the existing pumps or new fire water pumps. Since the water demand for fire water case is significantly higher than water demand for normal operation, sizing of equipment will be based on provision of 100% firewater demand. Sparing concept of N+1 shall also be considered. Therefore, in existing facility, the provision of seawater intake pump/desalination systems is 3 x 50% (of firewater demand), with consideration that in normal condition 1 pump is operated to fulfill the normal operation water demand, while in case of fire water case emergency 2 pumps will be operated to fulfill fire water demand. Another 1 pump is provided as spare, in case any failure of one of the pump during fire water case. Full capacity of the pump shall be operated even in normal condition, to maintain the efficiency and performance of the pump, the excess sea water produced by the pump is re-routed to the common outfall for discharges.

3.2.3. Desalination Option

In this option, the water supply is supplied from a new seawater desalination system, as per the existing water supply. The new water supply system design would be segregated from the existing system, with provision for crossover lines between the existing and the new water supply system to provide operational flexibility. The existing seawater intake/desalination system consists of 3 x 50% seawater supply pumps, an electro-chlorination unit, 3 x 50% desalination plants and 1 x 100% fresh water tank. The seawater supply pumps feed the electro-chlorination unit where the seawater is dosed 20 minutes every 4 hours. The normal dose is 1.5 ppm in 1040 m3/hr water and the shock dose 3.0 ppm in 1040 m3/hr water. One of the three supply pumps is diesel engine driven

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 31

to ensure system availability, as these pumps provide backup for the firewater system. The other two pumps are motor driven. The dosed seawater is then fed to the desalination plants which produce fresh water from seawater by the mechanical vapor compression (MVC) process. The desalinated water is stored in the desalinated water tank. The design capacity of the storage tank is four hours firewater plus one week’s plant use, excluding potable water demand. Since the desalinated water tank is commonly used as a source for other services, the pumps for such services take their suctions above the required fire water storage level so that the required amount of fire water is reserved at all times. The desalination system will standardize existing system; however a more optimized approach has been assessed during FEED, which instead of duplicating the provision of 3 x 50% sea water supply pump, an option to design an integrated system for three trains operation is being considered. Therefore, for TEP, the provision of additional sea water supply pump will be based delta of water volume required to cover the water need for total three train operation; rather than directly provide a single capacity for one additional train. A concept of pre-treatment system for desalination was also assessed during FEED. The objective of adding pre-treatment system is to increase the efficiency of the desalination unit and minimize the volume of brine reject discharged to sea. Qualitative advantages of using Desalination:  Familiarity of operations on site  Lower schedule risk  Less risk of project and operations disruption due to the sensitivity of groundwater usage (e.g. local community villages complain that their water usage is being disrupted or Regent wants to change price)  Less implications to Partners, Government of Indonesia (GOI) or stakeholder  Less uncertainties, in terms of permit, reserve and potential social issue Qualitative disadvantages of using Desalination:  Increase of brine discharge into Bintuni Bay  High in capital and operating expenditures

3.2.4. Groundwater Option

For TEP, the potential to use of groundwater as a replacement or supplement to desalination system was assessed. The estimated continuous demand of utility water, including for personnel use, is approx. 65 m3/h for three trains operation.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 32

However, it should be noted that the actual amount of abstraction will be subject to determination and approval by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), based on their technical assessment of the results of the proposed investigation program. If the approved amount is less than TEP requirements, then groundwater would be used as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for desalination. In addition, TEP would still need to construct, install and operate desalination system to mitigate against the potential of having to stop groundwater extraction in case of concerns from the local community of perceived impact to their won groundwater supply.

Based on existing groundwater analyses from the Tangguh LNG area, groundwater from 150 – 300 m depth may need treatment to remove dissolved iron and manganese, and possibly ammonia.

The presence of iron and manganese concentrations in water is not known to cause health problems. These elements are primarily associated with aesthetic factors, such as unpleasant taste and odor, and domestic problems, such as staining of laundry and fixtures, and can potentially be a serious problem for industrial uses. Another potential problem is the growth of iron bacteria within distribution mains.

The selected method for the removal of iron and manganese is oxidation by aeration continued by rapid sand filter and then disinfection by addition of chlorine.

Qualitative advantages of groundwater supply  Significant reduction in the volume of brine wastewater discharge into Bintuni Bay  Better energy efficiency  Reduction in emission of greenhouse gases  Considerably lower capital and operating expenditures

Potential risk in the development and use of groundwater supply  Potential seawater intrusion  Potential adverse effect on nearby community water supply  Potential ground subsidence  Uncertainty of groundwater reserves  Water-table decline  Potential construction problems leading to well collapse or failure  Refusal or delay of permit approval  Management of potential shallow gas

A comprehensive study has been done to assess potential seawater intrusion, impacts to community water supply and ground subsidence. The study result confirms that the impacts will not be significant as long as the groundwater supply system is designed as recommended, such as extraction from more than 150 meter depth and install steel casing for protection at water depth of over 150 m.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 33

Although groundwater offers advantages for water supply, the desalination water plant would need to be kept as back-up during normal conditions. It would be necessary to maintain at least one of the pumps and the electro-chlorinator in operation to ensure that the intake channel and outfall are kept flushed in order to:

 Avoid build-up of sediments.  Inhibit marine growth.  Maintain readiness of the pumps as backup to the firewater system.  Control effluent temperature to be <2ºC above intake temperature.

As required in the AMDAL, to confirm the groundwater reserves and to submit the groundwater extraction permit at some point in the future, the pumping test need to be conducted. Pumping test will be done in one production well with depth of 400 m and one monitoring well with depth of 150 m for 10 days pumping test will need to be drilled. Should the test indicate the positive result and groundwater option is confirmed to be feasible, Tangguh would drill additional production wells up to 400 m depth and additional two monitoring wells up to 300 m depth, to monitor potential impact of seawater intrusion and land subsidence, also to monitor the availability of groundwater resource for the community.

However, during the preparation of pumping test, shallow gas issue was encountered in the area where the test well will be drilled. This discovery added additional risks and uncertainty for the groundwater option, which are drilling uncertainty and HSSE risk of a blowout. To mitigate the drilling and blowout risk, the type of drilling rig for testing and later on for drilling of groundwater well would need to be changed. This change however, results in significantly higher capital expenditures which erodes significantly the CAPEX savings when compared with the desalination option. Due to the shallow gas issue and other uncertainties, including potential high capital expenditures it is unlikely that groundwater supply will be used for TEP.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 34

4. GHG Management Plan

4.1. CO2 Emission from Tangguh LNG Plant Operation

CO2 from existing T1/2 operation are generated from flaring, fuel gas, gas to Acid Gas

Incinerator (AGI)/flare, vehicle fuel, diesel and aviation fuel (<1%) with total CO2 emission as shown in Table 5 below.

Year CO2 (million tons) 2013 5.15 2012 4.66 2011 4.51 2010 4.56 2009 2.50

Table 5 – CO2 from LNG T1/2 Operation

Based on above data, it is estimated that CO2 emissions which will be generated from LNG Train 3 (one train) operation are as follow:  Flare = 0.25 million tons/year (8.1% of total);

 Fuel gas = 0.79 million tons/year (25.5% of total);

 Gas to AGI/flare (CO2 from wellhead) = 1.96 million tons/year (63.2% of total); and

 Fuel consumption and CH4 emission (converted to CO2) = 0.097 million tons/year (3.2% of total);

 Total CO2 from Train 3 operation = 3.1 million tons/year.

4.2. Tangguh Operation and TEP GHG Management Plan

A. Flare Based on current Tangguh LNG normal operation (T1/2), the amount of flared gas is less than 3% of feed gas amount. According to Ministry of Energy Resources and Mineral (ESDM) Regulation No. 31 Year 2012, flared gas optimization study and approval from related department are required if the amount of flared gas is more than 3% of feed gas amount.

Management efforts that could be done to maintain air quality from flaring emission are as follows:

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 35

 Minimizing flaring emissions by: - Implementing BOG (Boil of Gas) recovery from LNG storage facility and loading system; - Designing plant facility that will enable the transfer of process gas to a flaring system for safe burning and emergency conditions including relief valves, blowdown valves and operation/maintenance vent; - Optimizing Turnaround (TAR – LNG Plant major maintenance activity) frequency and minimizing numbers of plant shut downs, whether planned (gas turbine inspection) or unplanned; - Maintaining the balance of the fuel management system as a whole (supply and demand) to reduce flaring emission by calculating fuel balance from whole system (existing plant and new plant).  Conducting calculation and recording of flaring amount.

B. Air Emission from Process Activity

Activities which will be conducted to manage air emission from process activities are:  Utilizing energy efficient design, such as Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) to recover excess heat from gas turbines to produce high pressure steam;

 Utilizing more efficient gas turbines;

 Utilizing Dry Low Nox burner for gas turbines;

 Installing and operating Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) at stacks with reference to applicable regulations;

 Conducting CEMS monitoring recording;

 Providing adequate facilities for safe monitoring and/or sampling;

 Conducting calibration and CEMS maintenance to ensure CEMS is working properly.

C. Green House Gas Emission LNG production has the potential to reduce GHG emission on the consumer side, compared to other commonly used energy sources such as coal and oil. On the other hand, the low fuel emission on the consumer side means a concentrated GHG emission on the LNG processing

side. 10% to 15% CO2 produced by Tangguh operational activities is from the feed gas. The

higher the production rate of LNG, the higher CO2 level produced.

Tangguh LNG has conducted a study to evaluate a number of alternatives to significantly reduce the GHG emission produced by LNG plant through increasing energy efficiency, excess heat utilization and re-utilization of hydrocarbon that is usually emitted to the air, to

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 36

be processed in the plant. A few examples are listed in the flare and air emission from process activity management above.

Actions to be taken to monitor GHG emission are as follow:

 Conducting calculation and recording the amount of GHG emission (CO2 and CH4) from all activities in LNG plant and its supporting facility;  Conducting recording of fuel consumption, including diesel and aviation fuel.

Tangguh will continue to monitor the development of Indonesian regulations and new

technology on CO2 and GHG management.

4.3. Other GHG Management Options

During its operation, Tangguh has assessed other management options for GHG, such as offset and sequestration. Follow up action on those other options has also been taken by Tangguh. However, the final conclusion that generated from those studies is, both options are not feasible to be conducted.

4.3.1. Sequestration

- Tangguh had completed a comprehensive desktop study based on the available information on potential options for sequestration in 2002 – 2003 involving university experts and consultants. The reports were presented to MOE and the study indicated that the sequestration may technically feasible, but a series of field test is required to confirm the assessment. - The desktop study need to be confirmed with a series of field test including seismic program, which cost around $30M (at that time – c.a. 2003). Tangguh had proposed the field test study to SKKMIGAS at that time, but was rejected. - There is no mandatory requirement from Indonesian regulation and international standards, nor approval from SKKMIGAS for carbon sequestration. Therefore it is found to be challenging to implement the option as there is no strong basis of reinforcement, particularly in the PSC scheme where Tangguh LNG is currently operated. - Government permits would be required for sequestration and there is no regulatory basis in Indonesia to support this permit application. - Sequestration is economically not feasible; the estimated cost in 2002 is >$200 M, it would be 3 to 4 times higher now. Therefore it is concluded that the sequestration options is not a feasible option for Tangguh.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 37

4.3.2. Offset

A study has been conducted by Forestry Consultant to review the feasibility of the offset option. The result of the study is summarized as follow: - During T1/2 development, the study considered an initial offset approximately 5- 10% of Tangguh’s emissions from venting by applying a similar mechanism like the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) program on about 50.000 to 100.000 ha of forest, but did not make it as commercial project. Based on this proposed mechanism, Tangguh will allocate budget and resources required

to preserve the forest and use the forest carbon to offset of CO2 emission. - The calculation used for the assessment at that time was based on example from a forest location in Bintuni Bay, it is concluded that the project’s carbon stock over 24 years is 4.1 million tons CO2, with a carbon flow of approximately 225,000 tons CO2/year starting in 2016. If compared to Tangguh emission of 5 million tons CO2/year of venting emissions from existing Train 1 & 2, this represents about 5%. - The estimated cost at that time are as shown in Table 6, but with this budget and

efforts, the delivered offset will be only 3 to 5 million tons CO2 (over 20 years), while

Tangguh is generating about 5 million tons CO2/year.

Feasibility Costs $150,000

Project Development Costs $3 million

Ongoing Costs $7.6 million (over 20 years)

Trust Fund Contributions $2/tons CO2 (for example)

Delivered Offsets 3-5 million tons CO2 (over 20 years)

Estimated Price / tons $4-6/tons CO2

Table 6 – Estimated Cost of Offset Program (at that time)

Considering that this offset strategy will only contribute to 5-10 % of Tangguh existing CO2 emission, while it requires a huge efforts and a dedicated team to develop detail plan, get all the stakeholders engagement and alignment, secure all required permits and approval from government, develop and maintain it over the 20 years period, then the carbon offset option is also deemed not feasible, as it will only represent a very small percentage of the CO2 generated.

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 38

References

1. 087-TDN-PS-0001 Technical Decision Note – Produced/Waste Water Management

2. 900-TDN-PS-0008 Technical Decision Note – Water Supply

3. 900-DBS-EM-BP2-0002 Basis of Design for Onshore Facilities

4. Tangguh LNG Train 1 and 2 Independent Environmental Compliance Audit Report – Greencap, 2016

5. Tangguh LNG Project Engineering Geology Assessment Consolidated Report Volume 1 of 2 – Text, Figures & Appendices – Baynes Geologic, 2006

6. Suntown Landfill Closure – Closure and Post Closure Management Plan – Aecom Gold Coast, 2011

7. Lampiran III Peraturan Menteri Pekerjaan Umum No. 03 Tahun 2013 Tentang Penyelenggaraan Prasarana dan Sarana Persampahan dalam Penanganan Sampah Rumah Tangga dan Sampah Sejenis Sampah Rumah Tangga

SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENT TO LENDER 39