River Basin: Belawan Ular Padang

Administered by: BWS Sumatera II

Contracted PPC: PT Yodya Karya
Reports Reviewed by EWSIP: Inception Report, Schedule

Inception Report (IR)

Chapter/Sec. Inception Report Comment of EWSIP Comment of Consultant

No.
2. Overview of Data Collection
Topography, The report is limited to the The report shall report main The reviewer obviously had the incorrect
Geology and Serang - Lusi - Juwana references for data names of our DAS and mentioned the
Soil, Land Use watershed, which is collection, limitations in the Serang-Lusi-Juwana watersheds. These
and Land presented in reference to context of spatial/temporal are watersheds in a different province and
Coverage, and the data source from representativeness and under a different contract. The comments
Hydrometeorol Digital Elevation Model proposed approaches to however are common to all watersheds
ogy (Rainfall, Nasional (DEMNAS) for use these data sets in the and thus we will follow the points made in
Water Level the Seluna Watershed. context of i) numerical the comment section.
and models in flood hydrology
Discharge, and hydraulics, ii) FRM Not all data that needed and collected has
Climatology, master plan, iii) surveys characteristics that suit the needs of the
Sea Level, and and investigations, iv) project, processing efforts and reference
Sediment Yield). safeguards (environment equations are needed.
and social), v) detailed
engineering design, and vi)
riparian zone study.

3. Project Organization and List of Stakeholders

3.1 Project The Project Organization, The skills/expertise of key
Organization as documented in the experts shall be consistent
Terms of Reference is with the technical and
listed. safeguards requirements of
the FRM project.
In terms of technical
and safeguards
requirements:
- HYDMOD is referenced for
both the international and
national hydraulic modeler.
- The Consultant should
note that HYDMOD is a
program for extracting and
processing time-series data
from the USGS modular
three-dimensional finite-
difference ground-water
flow model MODFLOW,
which is not related to the
numerical modelling tasks
for flood hyrology and
hydraulics.
- The Consultant shall
consider survey
requirements in presenting
the key and non-key
experts.
3.2 List of The names and positions The stakeholders shall be
Stakeholders of stakeholders are presented based on data
presented based on requirements:Topography,
geographical positions Geology and Soil, Land
(i.e., Medan area and Use and Land Coverage,
Jakarta area) Hydrometeorology
(Rainfall, Water Level and
Discharge, Climatology,
Sea Level, and Sediment
Yield), Safeguards
(Environment and Social),
and Riparian Zone Study.
The Project Organization Chart has not
changed and this was as discussed with
the DRC and local government and thus
was maintained as that shown in the
TOR. We will of course provide our
consultants with respect to the technical
requirements and safeguards of the
Project. In our general discussion on the
types of models to be used during our
study we have worked closely with the
DRC in identifying the most likely
candidates. At the inception phase, we
are not trying to second guess our
decisions on the model and types of
surveys to be carried out.
Based on (Hanson and Leake 1999),
HYDMOD is a hydraulic model that
generates simulated time-series data as
output at user-specified point locations or
a collection of points that compose a
profile through the modeled region.
However, this model has a limitation, in
which the model can process as many
points as the user specifies and is limited
only by the size of the X vector of
MODFLOW. The model is inconvenient to
apply in a complicated study site such as
Medan City. In Medan City, the flood
inundation caused not only by river
flooding but also by the local rainfall. In
order to understand the main factors of
flood in Medan city, we need a model that
can include both of the flood types.
Therefore, we proposed to use MIKE
FLOOD, which is a hydrodynamic couple
model (1D and 2D). The model can solve
numerically the two-dimensional
momentum and continuity equations. The
model also succeeds to simulate flood
numerical model in Jakarta (Moe et al.
2015; 2016; Januriyadi et al. 2018).
Fortunately, we also have the software
license under PUPR. Additionally, we also
use a multilayer rainfall-runoff model to
generate the flood discharge each sub-
basin (Kure and Yamada 2004).
There seems to be a misunderstanding
about the definition of “stakeholder”. A
stakeholder is one or a party or a group
that has an actual concerned interest in
the Project. This would be the national
and local government, NGOs, local
communities, and other such groups. It
is not based on data requirements. We
will continue to update our list of
stakeholders as the Project work
proceeds particularly when the
Consultant is working with Focus Groups
and during the resettlement and/or
relocation analyses.
4. Original Tasks and Activities of the Consultant Under the Contract
4.1.1 – 4.1.6 The six items listed in the The detailed
report include i) FRM implementation plan is
Master Plan, ii) Survey limited to a basic list of
and Investigation, actions to be taken as
Environment Safeguards, documented in the terms of
iii) Social Safeguards, iv) reference.
Detailed Engineering It is important to note that
Design (DED), and v) the Consultant should be
positioned to provide details
Riparian Zone Study
for all items (considering the
start date of contract in May
2019). This is specifically
important for the FRM
master planning, which is
the main reference to all
other activities
The list as shown in the Inception Report
are the actual ones that were given to us
and as outlined in the TOR. We thus
repeated them in this Inception Report so
the reader would be well aware of the
main work to be done by us. At this
stage, the Consultant was not expected to
critically assess whether these tasks were
correct or not but to state only that these
are the main ones that will be the primary
focus of the assignment. The review is
incorrect regarding the start date of the
Consultant. The reviewer stated that we
began our work in May 2019. This is
incorrect by about 4 months as we only
had a contract in early August and only
mobilized the Team Leader in mid-
August. In other chapters of the Inception
Report, CONSULTANT provided
information, although early, on surveying,
mapping, GIS, and other technical
aspects.
 including i) collection and review of
data and information, ii) topographic
survey, iii) geotechnical investigation,
iv) aerial photography survey, v)
survey
of LARAP, vi) hydrological
analysis, vii) hydraulic
model analysis, viii) coastal
engineering study, ix) geology and
geotechnical study, x) flood control
and drainage system, xi) preparing
GIS map, and xii) preparation of FRM
master plan.
Works Schedule The six items listed in The work schedule for the six items Amendment and addendum regarding
Figure 4.1 shall be updated to reflect current the Work Plan Schedule are in the
include i) FRM Master status/progress. process of being agreed with the
Planning, ii) Survey Technical Team. We basically agree
and Investigation, iii) with the reviewer. The work schedule
will be updated as required based on
Environment the progress of the work.
Safeguards, iv) Social
Safeguards, v)
Detailed Engineering
Design (DED), vi)
Riparian Zone Study,
and vii) Deliverables

Staffing Schedule The list of The list of key/non-key Change is needed in terms of
key/non-key national/international experts and preparing staffing schedules and in the
national/international associated duration of assignments process of being agreed with the
experts do not reflect current status. Technical Team and these changes
are documented in The skills/expertise of key experts are adjusted to the conditions on the
Figure 4.2. shall be consistent with the technical site.
and safeguards requirements of the The staffing schedule will be updated
FRM project, as documented in as required based on the progress of
comment to Section 3.1-Project the work and the changing work
Organization. schedule. One cannot expect that at
this early stage the Consultant would
be able to identify the exact changes
to be made during the study. As we
mentioned at the start of this letter, we
believe that the main office should be
in Medan and that the assignment in
the field should be divided into two
Phases. The two phase approach was
presented to the client, DGWR-DRC,
and they accepted it as the best
solution and that we should proceed
accordingly. The reviewer did not
even mention that the most rationale
approach to the assignment was to
divide it into two Phases. The
Consultant will provide a more up-to-
date staffing and work schedule based
on the two phases.
5. Approach and Methodology
5.1 Approach The approach for The descriptions provided for the
the FRM FRM master plan lack the processes
works is presented. implemented in EWSIP mainly in
the context of flood hydrology and
flood hydraulics.
The proposed approach for flood
hydraulics should follow the
integrated flood risk management
approach presented in EWSIP. The
application should follow flood extent-
hazard-risk approach by using two-
dimensional hydraulic modelling at
the river basin scale.
The descriptions for the other five
items (ii) – (vi) provide generic
descriptions. The approach and
methodology should reflect site
specific conditions and associated set
of actions.
The FRM method has been applied in
accordance with the EWSIP
suggestions, but still on process. And
for hydraulic analysis using the HEC-
RAS model.
We agree with the reviewer that the
Consultant will work closely with the
EWSIP consultant and utilize the
process and procedures as identified
by them. However, the Consultant
shall not accept these processes and
procedures out of hand but will take
them into consideration on every
aspect of the assignment. We expect
to work closely with the EWSIP
consultants in order to provide, at the
end, technically sound results and
solutions that are implementable taken
into consideration all solutions that are
physical and socially acceptable.

Topographic Survey/ The topographic/bathymetric surveys We agree with the reviewer.

Bathymetric Survey are shall consider both the river reaches For the floodplains and river reaches
documented in a and floodplains at the river basin will be completed using LIDAR
generic manner. scale by considering four key Photography which is currently in the
elements including i) hydraulic process of approval with the Technical
connectivity along the upstream, Team.
midstream,
and downstream reaches, ii)
hydraulic connectivity
between the river reaches and
floodplain areas, iii) historical floods
(extent and hazard to people,
households and agriculture areas),
and iv) flood risk designations (to
people, households and agriculture
areas) driven by two-dimensional
hydraulic models.

The survey standards shall meet both

national Agency (as set by the
Geospatial Information Agency
(Badan Informasi Geospatial-BIG)
and international standards.
BIG’s geospatial information We have already used the base map
products including national geodetic (Map Framework) from BIG and all
control networks and base maps shall activities related to the mapping works
be used as reference sources, have been consulted with the DGWR.
which consist of horizontal, vertical
and gravity control networks, while
the base maps include topographic
maps (up to scale 1:1,000). The
requirements for the vertical and
horizontal accuracy of the surveys
shall be set with the BIG and
communicated with the DGWR.
Geotechnical The geotechnical survey and associated We agree with the reviewer’s comments.
and site investigations for structures and However, at the inception phase, it would be
Geological dredging works are presumptuous of us to outline the actual details
investigations necessary to acquire data that will of any geotechnical investigation and or
are facilitate successful foundation design, geological investigation. This particular work
documented site/route selection, choice of foundation would only be carried out during the final
in a generic type, dimensioning, installation and feasibility stage and/or final design stage once
manner. operational integrity of the proposed subprojects and locations of structures have
structures, which will require a well been identified. We are a long way from these
prepared budget, good planning, and tasks.
attention to quality and safety to develop
an acceptable risk profile. Geotechnical and Geological works will be
carried out according to the schedule (February
The data collected by the Consultant shall 2020).
include site- specific information on i)
nature of soils and rocks, their
stratification and variability, ii) soil
strength, deformation and consolidation
characteristics, iii) influence of specific
factors such as cyclic loading, rate of
loading, soil sensitivity and thixotropy, and
v) possibility of scouring.

The geotechnical report prepared by the

Consultant shall present i) soil conditions
and characteristics of the site, ii) field test
results (geology of the area and field
investigations: drilling bore holes,
standard penetration tests, undisturbed
samples, determination of ground water
results), iii) laboratory tests (sieve
analysis, Atterberg limits, moisture
content, shear strength, specific gravity,
consolidation, chlorides, sulphates, pH
values, CBR, etc.).

The Consultant shall supervise the

laboratory tests to ensure that they are
carried out on representative samples.
The quality of samples for testing in the
laboratory has a large influence on the
reliability of test results. The quality is
determined by the sampling method
environment, transport and storage
conditions. It is important to note that the
geotechnical investigation provides
information only at specific test locations.
Therefore, the Consultant shall
extrapolate the information between test
locations by using experts with
geotechnical knowledge and experience.
However, interfaces between ground
materials may be more abrupt or gradual
than expected and actual conditions in
areas not tested may differ from
predictions.
 Therefore, it is not realistic to expect that a
geotechnical investigation can predict
ground conditions entirely.

In this context, a properly planned and

conducted geotechnical investigation shall
be planned to reduce the risk associated
with unforeseen.
conditions to an acceptable level. The plan
shall be approved by the DGWR prior to
the start of survey activities.

In the case of structures with sheet piles,

the main design issues to be considered
shall include i) axial pile capacity, ii)
thickness of sediment layers and their
capacity to produce sufficient skin
friction for axially loaded tension piles;
cemented soils may yield special
problems, iii) thickness of sediment layers
and their capacity to produce sufficient
horizontal resistance for horizontally
loaded piles (including sheet piles), iv)
elasticity of foundation soil for short
duration loads, v) drivability of pile;
presence of local rock outcrops cap can
yield large problems, especially for sheet
pile wall, vi) friction forces developed on
sheet piles surfaces, vii) scour around
The generic piles.
The surveys to be implemented for Geotechnical and Geological works will be
information environmental and social safeguards (by carried out according to the schedule (February
related to considering IP and IR) should follow the 2020).
environmenta requirements in ADB SPS for i) The survey for environmental and social
l and social environmental survey requirements (in safeguards will use the ADB SPS and the
safeguards support of IEE Government Regulations.
were report), and ii) social/community surveys
presented. (as part of
LARAP report and associated IP/IR).

Detailed The concepts, processes and The Consultant has reviewed the work done by
Engineering enhancements presented in the EWSIP the EWSIP consultant and had noted in the
Design (DED) technical pre-feasibility report shall serve Inception Report that the work was well done
is described as the reference for enhancements to the and the results clear. We will follow their work
with very brief design concepts proposed by the BBWS. as closely as possible but not accept it out of
descriptions hand. One must remember that the EWSIP
on structural The foot-prints of these concepts shall be work was done at the “pre-feasibility level” and
and non- finalized by the Consultant in coordination our work will be carried out at the feasibility and
structural with the BBWS during the master plan final design levels. There is a significant
works (Flood stage. The final foot-prints of these difference. We also must package interventions
Warning proposed subprojects shall serve as the into a subproject that are linked to a particular
system, basis of site- specific surveys and solution. We would only recommend an
Improvement associated DEDs. intervention that is linked to a final flood
of mitigation solution on a river basin and not be
Hydro- an isolated intervention.
meteorologic The Detailed Engineering Design (DED)
al network). implementation phase will be complemented
with more detailed stages of the DED
implementation.
 The general The general framework should
framework is be enhanced to integrate
presented in Figure components described above.
5.1.
The framework should also consider
the enhancements documented by
the EWSIP.
We appreciate the reviewer’s
comments and agree that the general
framework would be enhanced as
more information is collected. Again,
the Inception Report presents the
early findings by the Consultant and
all aspects of it will be improved and
shown in future routine reports
(monthly and quarterly) and technical
reports that are way out of the scope
of an Inception Report.
The general framework would be
enhanced more related to each
activity

6. Initial Findings/Observations During the Inception Phase

The Consultant The Consultant has received all data EWSIP report and data sets will be
makes reference to sets and associated technical pre- reviewed in-detail to represent the
the draft technical feasibility report from the EWSIP main findings and tools.
report. team. In this context, EWSIP report
and data sets shall be reviewed in-
The Consultant The potential FRM interventions The reviewer did not even mention
states that twenty- shall be clearly described as part the most important findings and
nine interventions of the inception report. observations that were made during
have been the inception phase. We had listed
identified and and provided suggestions to about 20
recommended by key points which were thoroughly
the BWS Medan discussed with the client, DRC, with
and TA consultants. their understanding and concern
regarding each of them. The reviewer
pointed out that we should include
more discussion with respect to the
draft EWSIP technical report and its
findings. Our Inception Report had
done this although not in depth as
perhaps expected by the reviewer
and we have included the 29 possible
interventions as stated in the EWSIP
draft report in one of the Inception
Report’s appendix.

7. Main Activities of the Consultant During the Inception Period

7.3 Meetings with The list of The meetings with EWSIP should We will include the meetings held with
Stakeholders meetings are also be listed. the EWSIP consultant as well.
documented Meetings with EWSIP will be listed.
8. Main Issues, Recommendations, and Next Steps
The pre-feasibility study EWSIP report and data
prepared under ADB financing sets shall be reviewed
(TA 9506-INO) in-detail to represent
main findings and tools.
Socio-economic baseline All required
surveys. surveys technical
(topography,
geotechnical, etc.),
safeguards
(environmental and
social) shall be clearly
described.
Agreement needs to be made The use of public-
early on the hydrology and domain and globally
hydrodynamic models used numerical models
in hydrology (HEC-
HMS) and hydraulics
(HEC- RAS) shall be
confirmed with the BWS
and DGWR asap.
Coordination with the The discussions
International Fund for shall consider
Agricultural Development applications/best
(IFAD) practices in watershed
protection.
We will consider all results and
recommendations in this TA study.
However as stated above, we will
not agree to accept all of the
results or recommendations out of
hand. We will use our own
technical expertise and modeling
results to guide us in our
conclusions and recommendations
to the client, DRC.
The Consultant has prepared the
TORs for topographical surveys,
LIDAR surveys, and socio-
economic baseline surveys and
included these in the Inception
Report. Some of this work was
started in the 4th quarter of 2019
and is continuing to date. The
baseline survey will be linked to
the Technical Survey and has
been stated in the revised ToR
last January.
The Consultant is working closely
with the client, DRC, and with the
EWSIP consultant in selecting the
models to be used in our study.
The selection must be made
based on its reliability, verifiability
of results, and agreement with the
client, DRC.
HEC-RAS and FRM Modelings
has been approved by the client
and the Technical Team.
In our TOR it states that we will
coordinate and assist in the work
to be done under IFAD funding.
However, we have not been
notified by the ADB or DGWR
regarding “who”, “where” or
“when” with respect to our
coordination. The Consultant is
fully willing and prepared to assist
but we must know the details of
this assistance. IFAD usually
deals with the upper watershed
conditions such as erosion,
improved farming techniques, and
reforestation which is out of our
scope of work. However, we
would be pleased to assist IFAD
in any way possible and as
directed by DRC.
The Consultant has asked the
Technical Team to facilitate
coordination with the IFAD, but
until now it hasn't been done yet.
Boundary of the Consultant’s
work area in each DAS.
Topography surveying and
bathymetric surveys as well as
LIDAR are expected to be
contracted in mid-November
2019 but only for the Deli river.
Unfortunately, the necessary
survey work will only be done on
the Deli river. No surveys will
done on the main drains in DAS
Belawan, DAS Deli, and DAS
Percut
Topographic Surveys and
Existing Designs
The terms of reference The Consultant is working closely
should be discussed with the local officials on this
with the SDA and BWS. matter. It appears that the flooding
begins at about elevation 55-60 msl
in all of the 4 DAS and thus this
might be the upper most starting
point of our assignment from there
to the sea.
Boundary of the Consultant's works
area has been implemented/
discussed with the SDA and BWS.
The Consultant shall The reviewer expected the
consider survey in all Consultant to start the surveying
river systems (Belawan, type of work in all 4 DAS
Deli, Percut and simultaneously. However, this is
Padang). impossible as there is a
significant shortage of funds to
carry out all of this survey work in
this fiscal year. The funds
available were only sufficient for
work on the Deli river. A LIDAR
footprint was identified from the 4
DAS and this is expected to being
in early 2020 in the Medan area.
The Consultant must be careful in
carrying out any surveying as
some of the work may already
have been done by the SDA and
or BWS Medan. We would like to
note that some of the surveys
used in the EWSIP analyses were
relatively old and most likely not
providing current conditions. The
Consultant is carefully reviewing
the need for additional or new
surveys and working closely with
the SDA and BWS as well as
DRC. We have provided a clear
TOR for all of this work that was
included in the Inception Report.
Topography and bathymetry
works was carried out in
November 2019, while the LIDAR
works has been attempted since
mid-September however the
approval process from the
Technical Team was only
completed in January 2020. At
the moment the addendum
process is ongoing.
The Consultant shall Alignment in taking the reference
clearly describe the point with the existing design in
proposed the topography survey.
approach/methodology
for all surveys.
Addendum to the Consultant’s
Contract
The context of the The Consultant is working closely
Amendment should be with the DRC and BWS with
discussed with the SDA respect to changes and revisions
and BWS. to the Consultant’s contract.
Moving the main office to Medan
and restructuring out consultants
timing to a new approach and
schedule of two phases will take
considerable amount of time. We
are undergoing this task at the
present time.
The amendment and addendum
process will be discussed with the
SDA and BWS.