Scoping Phase Supporting Document for the Angola LNG Project
March 2005



Prepared for:
ANGOLA LNG



Prepared by:



 

CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction	1–1
1.1	The Context, Scope, and Purpose of this Report	1–1
1.1.1	Introducing Angola LNG	1–1
1.1.2	Project Standards and Commitments	1–2
1.1.3	ESHIA Scoping	1–3
1.1.4	The Scope of this Report	1–4
1.1.5	The Purpose of the ESHIA and this Report	1–5
2.0 The Angola LNG Project	2–1
2.1	Introduction	2–1
2.2	The Selected Project Alternative	2–1
2.2.1	Overview of the Selected Project Alternative	2–1
2.2.2	The Selected Project Alternative	2–2
2.2.3	The Angola LNG Project Design, Construction & Commissioning Schedule	2–8
2.2.4	Program of Preparatory Works & Construction	2–8
2.2.5	Operation of the Project Facilities	2–14
2.3	The AIternative Engineering Design Process	2–16
2.3.1	Introduction	2–16
2.3.2	Angola LNG Project Policy and Philosophy	2–17
2.3.3	Angola LNG Project Design Justification Processes	2–32
3.0 The ESHIA Process	2–34
3.1	Introduction	3–1
3.2	Requirement for EIA under Angolan Legislation	3–2
3.2.1	Introduction	3–2
3.2.2	Legislation on Environmental Impact Assessment	3–2
3.2.3	EIA Contents	3–2
3.2.4	The Approval Process	3–5
3.3	The World Bank Group Requirements for EIA	3–5
3.4	ESHIA Scoping	3–7
3.5	The Overall Scope of the ESHIA Process	3–7
3.5.1	Introduction	3–7
3.5.2	Baseline Data Collection	3–8
3.5.3	Impact Identification and Assessment	3–8
3.5.4	Consultation & Disclosure	3–8
3.5.5	Production of the ESHIA Report	3–9
3.6	ESHIA Schedule	3–10
4.0 Preliminary Evaluation Program	3–12
4.1	Introduction	4–1
4.2	The No Project and Competing Technologies Evaluation	4–2
4.3	Decision to Develop a Coastal LNG Project at Soyo	4–3
4.4	The Final Four Soyo Options	4–6
4.4.1	The Evaluation Approach	4–6
4.4.2	The Four Soyo Locations and Environmental and Socioeconomic Setting	4–8
4.4.3	Environmental and Socioeconomic Data Collection and Public Consultation and Disclosure	4–10
4.4.4	Stakeholder Perceptions	4–12
4.4.5	Safety	4–13
4.4.6	Results of the Evaluation	4–14
4.4.7	Conclusions	4–18
4.4.8	Final Site Selection Decision	4–18
5.0 The Environmental & Socioeconomic Context to the Project	5–1
5.1	Introduction	5–1
5.2	Environmental Summary	5–1
5.2.1	Site Setting	5–1
5.2.2	Climate	5–3
5.2.3	The Offshore Environment	5–3
5.2.4	The Coastal and Terrestrial Physical Environment	5–6
5.3	Socioeconomic and Community Health Summary	5–11
5.3.1	National Overview	5–11
5.3.2	Province of Zaire Overview	5–12
5.3.3	Cultural Heritage in Soyo	5–13
5.3.4	Planning and Development in Soyo	5–14
5.3.5	Economic Profile and Livelihoods in Soyo Municipality	5–16
5.3.6	Health	5–19
5.4	Key Gaps and Deficiencies in the Data	5–21
5.4.1	Identified Data Gaps	5–21
5.4.2	Strategy for Filling Data Gaps	5–24
6.0 Impact Screening And Issues Identification	6–1
6.1	Introduction / Methodology	6–1
6.2	Impact Issue Identification	6–2
6.3	Indirect & Cumulative Impacts	6–3
6.4	Cross Cutting Issues	6–5
6.5	Conclusions of the Scoping Assessment	6–7

Appendix A – List of Documents Referenced by Angola LNG
Appendix B – List of Consultees

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1:  Key National Legislation	2–20
Table 2.2:  Key International Legislation, Regulations and Guidance	2–23
Table 5.1:  Fish in the Coastal/Congo Estuary Study Area	5–9
Table 5.2:  Rare, Protected or Endangered Species that may be Present	5–10
Table 5.3:  Physico-chemical and Biological Data Gaps	5–21
Table 5.4:  Status of Socioeconomic Information Collection Including Identified Data Gaps	5–22
Table 6.1:  Impacts Identified and their Management	6–9

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Natural Gas Resources	2–5
Figure 2-2: Selected Project Alternative Approach Channel and Turning Basin	2–6
Figure 2-3: Selected Project Alternative Onshore Facilities and Marine Terminal Footprint	2–7
Figure 3-1: The ESHIA Process	3–3
Figure 3-2: Angolan EIA Approval Process	3–6
Figure 3-3:  ESHIA Schedule	3–11
Figure 4-1:  Site Selection Activities	4–5
Figure 4-2:  Site Alternatives	4–9
Figure 5-1: Geographical Context	5–2
Figure 5-2: Habitats in the Region	5–8
Figure 5-3: Zaire Province	5–15
Figure 5-4:  Settlements and Cultural Sites	5–17
Figure 6-1:  Potential interactions of the Angola LNG Project with the natural and human environment	6–4
Figure 6-2: Cross-Cutting Issues	6–6



1.0   
1.0   INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Context, Scope, and Purpose of this Report
1.1.1 Introducing Angola LNG
The Angolan offshore Congo River Basin oil and gas deposits have been developed since the late 1970s.  Historically, there has been no market for the natural gas, and any gas produced with the oil has been flared.
The need for a solution for the management of gas from oil and gas production offshore Angola emerged from the decision of the Angolan Government to enact a policy, coupled with the Partners’ commitments to environmental and social responsibilities and responsible custodianship of hydrocarbon resources.
The goal of the Angolan Government’s policy was:
* To restrict flaring of gas associated with oil.
* To require oil and gas operators to develop plans for monetization of gas associated with oil production and that all new oil development applications have a plan for gas utilization.
* To promote economic growth in Angola through the commercialization of gas associated with oil production.
The two key objectives of this policy and the Partner commitments are to protect the environment and to improve benefits for the country from oil and gas activities in Angola.  In response to this a series of proposals for solutions for the management of gas were submitted to Sociedade Nacional de Combustiveis de Angola – Empresa Publica (Sonangol – the State Oil Company of Angola) by the oil and gas operators in 1997.  The proposal from Texaco (now ChevronTexaco) promoting onshore LNG was selected as the preferred solution for the management of this gas, and Angola LNG was subsequently established.
In 1998, Texaco (now ChevronTexaco) signed a Joint Planning Agreement with Sonangol.  This Agreement was subsequently reframed in April 2002 in order to accommodate new investors – BP, ExxonMobil, Total, and Norsk Hydro.  Norsk Hydro withdrew from the project in June, 2003, leaving BP Exploration (Angola) Limited, Esso Angola Gas Company Limited and Total Angola LNG with respective shareholdings of 13.6% each.  Under the reframed Agreement Cabinda Gulf Oil Company Limited (ChevronTexaco) and Sonangol were named as the Co-Leaders with shareholdings of 36.4% and 22.8% respectively.
The Angola LNG Project developed an opportunity statement based on the policy requirements of the Angolan Government for the management of this gas (see Box 1.1) in order to provide the basis for the process of identification and assessment of available options for the Angola LNG Project (see Section 4.0).



The key objectives of this opportunity statement were to ensure that the Angola LNG Project resulted in:
* Protection of the environment through elimination of routine flaring of gas, thus restricting flaring to emergency and essential maintenance situations only.
* Commercialization of the gas.
* Promotion of economic growth in Angola.
* Opportunities for improvements in socioeconomic conditions in Angola.
Through the elimination of routine flaring of gas the project will result in significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from current oil production operations.  Additionally, through the commercialization of the gas, the project will promote economic growth in Angola.
1.1.2 Project Standards and Commitments
Angola LNG is in the process of undertaking a program of studies and consultation and disclosure as part of an ESHIA (Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Health Impact Assessment) for the construction and operation of a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) plant and supporting infrastructure (see Section 2.2).
The ESHIA is part of an ongoing process in developing the overall Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Health Management Plan for the development and operation of the proposed project.  The intent is to conduct this process consistent with World Bank Guidelines and relevant international industry guidelines; however, at the current time it is not anticipated that any funds or financial guarantees will be sought from the World Bank or any of its associated organizations.  Additionally, the Project is committed to using the Energy and Biodiversity Initiative Tools (EBI) to make biodiversity conservation an integral part of the project.

The ESHIA will also:
* Meet the Angolan legislative requirements for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and related documents (see Section 2.0);
* Provide input to the Angola LNG Project team and design engineers to ensure an optimized design that minimizes environmental, socioeconomic and health impacts;
* Be thoroughly integrated, meaning that impacts and related mitigation measures for environmental, socioeconomic, and health aspects are coordinated; and
* Incorporate stakeholder input as the ESHIA studies are developed and executed and communicate successfully at key points to a wide range of stakeholders.
International standards that will be followed in executing the ESHIA are discussed in more detail in Section 2.0.
The Angolan EIA Regulations and the World Bank Policies require that the ESHIA be undertaken on behalf of the project sponsor by a suitably qualified independent consultant.  Angola LNG has therefore contracted Environmental Resources Management (www.erm.com), an independent international consultancy firm, to undertake the ESHIA on its behalf.
1.1.3 ESHIA Scoping
Scoping is an important part of the ESHIA process since it allows a provisional identification of what are believed to be key issues.  The ESHIA can then focus its efforts on these most important issues in terms of collecting information on existing conditions, engaging stakeholders, understanding the impacts and developing the measures to avoid or control and monitor them.  It is important to note that this document presents the current views of the Angola LNG Project, based on past experience and professional judgment.  The purpose of circulating this document and undertaking associated scoping consultations is to obtain third party inputs leading to a scope or Terms of Reference (TOR) for the full ESHIA that addresses the concerns and views of all parties to the extent this is practicable.
Angola LNG has produced this report and a separate non-technical summary of this report to support the consultation and disclosure program for the Scoping Phase.
These reports will be circulated to key stakeholders as a basis for consultation to identify the potential most important environmental, socioeconomic, and health impacts, which may have design implications and require project decisions.  The potential impacts, in turn, will be the primary input for the preparation of the TOR for the ESHIA for the Angola LNG Project.  Comments and questions may be directed to the Angola LNG Project at:
Website:  http://www.angolalng.com
Phone number in Luanda: 340 452 or 340 453
Phone number outside Luanda: 244-912-340-452 or 244-912-340-453
(Monday – Friday 8 am – 5 pm Luanda time) 
Written Comments:
Angola LNG Project
Rua Guilherme Pereira Ingles No. 43 – 3 Andar – Fraccao A
Municipio da Ingombota
Luanda, Republica de Angola
All comments for the Scoping Phase of the ESHIA process must be received by June 20, 2005.
1.1.4 The Scope of this Report
This report presents the following:
* A description of the Preferred Project Alternative for the Angola LNG Project, highlighting the basis for the Environmental, Safety, Socioeconomic, and Health Philosophy and Policy (see Section 2.0).
* An overview of the ESHIA process, describing in particular the opportunities for stakeholders to influence the decision-making process for the Angola LNG Project (see Section 3.0).
* The proposed contents for the ESHIA (see Section 3.0).
* A summary historical record starting from the point at which the need for the Angola LNG Project was identified and continuing through the activities undertaken to identify the Preferred Project Alternative (see Section 4.0).
* A summary of the studies undertaken by the Angola LNG Project team to date to characterize the baseline health, environmental, and socioeconomic conditions for the footprint for the Preferred Project Alternative, and the initial findings of these (see Section 5.0).
* A summary of the gaps in the available data on the baseline health, environmental, and socioeconomic conditions and the activities required to address these gaps (see Section 5.0).
* A summary of the key potential health, environmental, and socioeconomic effects and the key project risks and opportunities identified by the Angola LNG Project team and the proposed mitigation measures (see Section 6.0).
The summary of the key impacts and project risks and opportunities and mitigation measures represents current views of the Angola LNG Project team, based on the extensive foundation of knowledge from the program of studies and consultation and disclosure undertaken to identify the Project Site, past experience, professional judgment and the current status of the engineering design process.
1.1.5 The Purpose of the ESHIA and this Report
Under Angola legislation the Angola LNG Project requires an EIA to be undertaken and submitted as part of the approval process.  Throughout this document, reference will be made to the term ESHIA – Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Health Impact Assessment.  This term has been chosen to reflect the fact that although Angolan legislation requires an EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) to be undertaken (see Section 4.0), socioeconomic, socio-cultural, and community health and safety are also addressed as important elements of the Project.  In a legal and procedural context, the Angola LNG ESHIA will meet all the requirements of Angolan legislation.
The Angola Ministry of Petroleum Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment states that the EIA procedure includes the Environmental Impact Study, the Environmental Impact Assessment Final Report, and Public Consultation.  Section 4.1 of this Scoping Phase Supporting Document describes the Project approval process and how the EIA and consultation fit into it.
Regardless of its role in the approval process it is also important to note that the ESHIA is a tool that can help project design and decision-making, by identifying impacts early so that mitigation options can be fully evaluated and incorporated into design.
The purpose of this report is to provide:
* The key potential environmental, socioeconomic, and health impacts and the key project risks and opportunities identified by the Angola LNG Project team and the way forward to address these proposed by the Angola LNG Project team.
* The available data and data gaps for the ESHIA process identified by the Angola LNG Project team and the activities proposed to fill these gaps.
The main objective of this report is to provide the appropriate information to enable stakeholders to participate in determining the Terms of Reference for the ESHIA.

2.0   THE ANGOLA LNG PROJECT
2.1 Introduction
The Angola LNG Project team has been responsible for implementing a rigorous preliminary evaluation program in order to identify the Selected Project Alternative and site location.  The process and findings of this preliminary evaluation program are summarized in Section 4.0 of this report.
The preliminary evaluation program implemented by the Angola LNG Project team led to the selection of the Preferred Project Alternative as described in Section 2.2.  A preliminary ESHIA was conducted for the project by the consulting firm ERM.  This work was then fed into the Site Selection process to arrive at the best possible answer from environmental, socioeconomic, and safety perspectives.
The Angola LNG Project team has initiated a comprehensive engineering design process that will be integrated with the ESHIA process.  The primary objective of these initiatives is to optimize the project design so that associated potential environmental, socioeconomic, health, and safety impacts are either eliminated or minimized and the associated beneficial opportunities are identified and integrated.
An overview of the current understanding of the components of the Preferred Project Alternative based on engineering design work in progress at the time of writing is presented in Section 2.2.
An overview of the interactive engineering design process is provided in Section 2.3.
2.2 The Selected Project Alternative
2.2.1 Overview of the Selected Project Alternative
The Angola LNG Project concept involves the collection of associated gas from oil production facilities operating offshore Angola, and transportation of this gas to onshore gas treatment and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) process facilities.
The LNG process facilities will convert the gas into a liquid and store it for future delivery for export via tankers.  The process of conversion of the gas to a liquid, referred to as cryogenic liquefaction, involves alternating pressurization and cooling and ultimate decompression of the gas in order to reduce the temperature to a point at which the gas condenses to form a liquid.
The LNG plant will produce LNG, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and gas condensate for export.  In addition, a supply of natural gas (75MMCF/day) will be available from the processing plant for use within Angola as determined by Sonangol and the government of Angola. 
A marine terminal will be required to handle the berthing and loading of tankers and a shipping channel and turning basin of sufficient depth and width will be required to accommodate the tankers.
The initial supply of gas for the LNG plant will come from associated gas in existing oil producing facilities in License Blocks 0 and 14 (operated by Cabinda Gulf Oil Company Limited), 15 (operated by Esso Exploration Angola Limited), 17 (operated by Total Exploration and Petroleum Angola), and 18 (operated by BP Angola BV).  Future developments currently planned include non-associated gas (NAG) production facilities (to be operated by Angola LNG in the future) in License Blocks 1 and 2 offshore Angola (see Figure 2-1).  1  Other gas sources may also be considered in the future.
In order to gather gas from the License Blocks and deliver it to the onshore LNG Plant, the Angola LNG Project will involve the development of a gas gathering pipeline system linking existing offshore facilities in the License Blocks to the onshore LNG Plant.
Permanent onshore supporting facilities, including offices and residential housing and associated recreational and service infrastructure will be required.  Support facilities including a workers camp, laydown area and dock will also be required during the construction phase.  A participatory needs assessment is being conducted for the area affected by Angola LNG to help determine which of these facilities should be temporary or permanent.  Additional studies are being conducted to help determine the need for upgrading the onshore transport infrastructure such as roads and bridges for use by the Angola LNG Project during construction and operation activities.
2.2.2 The Selected Project Alternative
The Selected Project Alternative involves location of the onshore facilities on the south bank of the Congo River on the northern shoreline of Kwanda Island in the Soyo Municipality of the Zaire Province of Angola (see Figure 2-2).  This location has previously been referred to, during the program of studies and consultation and disclosure undertaken to support the selection of the location, as the ‘Best Shipping Alternative’ (see Section 4.0).
The proposed footprint for the onshore gas reception and treatment, LNG process and storage facilities, and associated marine terminal is shown in Figure 2-3.  The proposed locations of the infrastructure dock,/marine base and a laydown area are also indicated in Figure 2-3.
Specifically Figures 2-2 and 2-3 illustrate the following key aspects of the Selected Project Alternative:
* The proposed footprint, including a laydown area, will occupy approximately 252 hectares (ha) including reclaimed land, existing land, and over water (see Figure 23).
* The marine terminal will be located at the northern shoreline of the land reclamation area in Baia Diogo Cão.  The marine terminal will comprise two dedicated marine berths, one for LNG only and one for LPG and condensate.  These berths will be located approximately 1,000 m from the nearest facilities on Kwanda Base and will occupy approximately 15 ha (see Figure 2-3).
* The marine terminal will be served by an approximately 14 m deep and 250 m wide approach channel, constructed by widening and deepening the existing shipping channel from Ponta do Padrão to Kwanda Island and the new dedicated turning basin (see Figure 2-2).
* An infrastructure dock will be located to the west of the plant site, immediately adjacent to and north of the existing commercial jetty at Kwanda Base.  A newly constructed road will connect the infrastructure dock with the LNG plant site (see Figure 2-3).  It is planned that the infrastructure dock and road will be available for use by other commercial enterprises in the Soyo area.
* A construction dock/marine base dock will be located to the east of the plant site.  This dock will serve as the main dock to be used during construction and will be converted after construction into a permanent marine base for the accommodation of tugboats, customs office, and other related maintenance shops.
* A construction workers camp is anticipated to be located to the southeast of the LNG e which will be restored or reused after construction is completed.
Figures 2-2 and 2-3 do not show the locations of the permanent supporting facilities such as offices, residential housing and associated service infrastructure as the locations of these have not yet been determined.  These figures also do not show all roads and pipelines associated with the Angola LNG Project.  A number of options are currently being considered and evaluated for the routing of these facilities.

Figure 2-1: Natural Gas Resources


Note:  This schematic of potential gas pipeline routes is for illustrative purposes only.  The actual pipeline routes will only be determined after all environmental and geotechnical considerations are fully evaluated.

Figure 2-2: Selected Project Alternative and Turning Basin


Figure 2-3: Selected Project Alternative Onshore Facilities and Marine Terminal Footprint

* 
2.2.3 The Angola LNG Project Design, Construction & Commissioning Schedule
The estimated duration of the design, construction and commissioning of the Preferred Project Alternative is approximately 5 years based on a scheduled initial start-up for the Angola LNG Project facilities in 2010.  However, this initial start-up timetable includes only partial construction of the offshore gas collection pipeline system (see Figure 2-1).
The first phase of the construction program will be the preparatory works comprising dredging of the channel, land reclamation and infrastructure improvements such as housing, water and sanitation supply, warehouses, medical facilities, road improvements and docking facilities.  The preparatory works are scheduled to commence in late 2005/early 2006 for a period of 18 months.
The construction program for onshore Angola LNG Project facilities is scheduled to commence in 2007 for a period of 42 months.
The construction and commissioning of the offshore gas collection pipeline system will be phased over several years.  The first phase will be completed to ensure an available gas supply for the initial start-up of the LNG plant in 2010.
A tentative timeline for the construction program will be developed by the engineering design team in collaboration with the environmental consultant so as to eliminate or minimize potential adverse environmental, socioeconomic, and health risks and impacts, and to optimize positive impacts and beneficial opportunities.  The project team will have the final approval on the construction timeline.
2.2.4 Program of Preparatory Works & Construction
2.2.4.1 Introduction
The program for preparatory works and construction for the Angola LNG Project will involve a process that will be undertaken by means of multiple, separate contracts.
An overview of the scope of the preparatory works highlighting the current status of the engineering design work is provided in Section 2.2.4.2.
The facility construction program will comprise the following main components:
* Construction of the LNG process facilities and marine terminal, and supporting infrastructure.
* Construction of offshore pipelines north and south of the Congo River including connection to existing offshore platforms, deepwater and shallow water installation, crossing of the Congo River, and construction of pipeline landfall and onshore component.
These components of the construction program are described in more detail in Sections 2.2.4.3 and 2.2.4.4 with reference to the current status of the engineering design work.
2.2.4.2 The Preparatory Works
The scope of the preparatory works encompasses the following:
* Dredging (both deepening and widening) of the existing shipping channel from Ponta do Padrão to Kwanda Island to accommodate the deeper draft ships and provide a turning basin for the safe arrival and departure of the tankers to and from the proposed marine terminal (see Figure 2-2).
* Land reclamation in the shallow waters north of the existing Kwanda Base to create the northern portion of the site.  The reclaimed area will comprise a parcel of land extending from the existing Kwanda Island approximately 750m out into the Baia Diogo Cão (see Figure 2-3).
* Local infrastructure improvements comprising construction of a new infrastructure dock (on the west side of Kwanda Peninsula near entrance to Pululu Channel), a construction dock/marine base, a new road, and potential additional transport infrastructure improvements.
* Site clearing activities, including clearing of unexploded ordnances (UXO). 
Dredging - The existing shipping channel that currently serves Kwanda Base is 7 to 8 m deep and approximately 80 m wide.  This channel is dredged periodically (maintenance dredging) to maintain the water depth, and the dredged materials are disposed in the Congo River Canyon area.  Movement of the deeper draft tankers to and from the planned LNG marine terminal will require creation of a deeper and wider shipping channel and associated turning basin.  The existing shipping channel from Ponta do Padrão to Kwanda Island will be dredged and widened to create a channel that is estimated to be 14 m deep and 250 m to 300 m wide.  Dredging activities will produce an estimated 30 to 40 million m3 of dredged materials.  Geochemical testing of the shallow sediments has been performed, to ensure compliance with London Dumping Convention Guidelines for it’s disposal in the Congo River Canyon area.  Additional geochemical testing is underway to confirm that this material and the deeper sediments would also be suitable for use as construction fill for land reclamation.  Any excess dredged materials may be disposed in the Congo River Canyon area or considered for utilization as land fill in other areas if the material is suitable and needed.  Spoils from maintenance dredging of the existing ship channel are currently disposed in the Congo River Canyon area as a normal practice.
Land reclamation - The land reclamation activities will be undertaken in the nearshore area of the Baia Diogo Cão immediately north of the Kwanda Base where the water depth is relatively shallow (approximately 2 to 3 m).  This situation significantly reduces the required fill volumes.  It is estimated 10 to 12 million m3 of fill will be required in the nearshore reclamation area to form the required reclaimed area.  As noted above, it is intended to use the material from the dredging activities, assuming that it is confirmed to be suitable, as the source of the fill material.  Should dredging operations not produce sufficient quantities of suitable fill material, alternate sources will be located and utilized.
Preliminary engineering evaluations related to the dredging and land reclamation components of the project have recently been initiated.  The focus of these evaluations is the assessment of alternative dredging and land reclamation techniques and development of plans for mitigation of potential coastal erosion, turbidity, and/or sedimentation impacts on the shoreline and marine environment.  These will be fully developed during the engineering design process.  The bathymetric, hydrodynamic, geotechnical, and geochemical evaluations of the offshore area in the vicinity of the planned dredging/land reclamation site are also in the initial stages. When completed, they will provide the information needed to design and implement dredging and land reclamation activities that incorporate best management practices to eliminate or minimize potential impacts to the marine and nearshore environment.
Infrastructure improvements: The preparatory works will also include several improvements to regional infrastructure such as a new infrastructure dock and a road, as well as other improvements that are currently under evaluation (see Figure 2-3).  The infrastructure dock and road are intended to serve the Soyo area by providing a heavy load (deep water) unloading dock and a heavy load haul road that is connected to the main Kwanda Base road.  Endeavors will be made to schedule the construction of the dock and the road to make it available for use in support of the land reclamation phase of the project.  Since most of the construction equipment and materials will arrive by sea, preliminary site work will also include building a construction dock.  This dock will be located near the construction lay down area and will be designed to accommodate the heavy loads associated with offloading of construction material and equipment.  It is anticipated that this dock may also serve as a permanent docking facility and converted to a marine base to be used by support vessels (e.g., tugboats) during the operation of the LNG marine terminal facility.
Other infrastructure improvements are also under consideration and will be identified during the ongoing iterative engineering design process.
Site Clearing: Initial site preparation activities will include clearing of the existing land area, grading, and leveling the site. The construction of a temporary surface water drainage system and construction of temporary construction access roads will follow.  Prior to construction, the Angola LNG Project team will engage the services of a specialized company for the removal of unexploded ordnance (UXO).
For the preparatory works, the use of local Angolan workers will be optimized.  This will be facilitated through the prior identification of skills and training needs and the provision of appropriate training as required.  Some specialist workers will need to be recruited from outside of Angola.  It is anticipated that many of these non-local workers will live onboard marine vessels.  However, if necessary, a small, self-sufficient temporary construction work camp (with independent potable water and wastewater treatment facilities) will be established to house non-local employees.  The location and need for this will be determined during the ongoing engineering design process.  
2.2.4.3 The Construction Program for the LNG Process Facilities & Marine Terminal & Supporting Infrastructure
The construction program for the LNG process facilities and marine terminal, and supporting infrastructure will include:
* Construction of construction work camps and associated infrastructure.
* On-site civil construction including roadways, building foundations, tank foundations, pile installation (if required), etc.
* Civil/mechanical/electrical construction of LNG process facilities including gas inlet and treatment facilities, LNG liquefaction facilities, LPG fractionation facilities, condensate facilities, and associated refrigeration/storage facilities.
* Construction of the marine terminal and associated LNG, LPG, and condensate transfer equipment.
* Construction of associated support facilities such as power generation units, water and wastewater treatment facilities, etc.
Construction camp: An approximate 11 ha parcel of land has been set aside for the construction of a worker camp.  The number, type and skill levels of the construction work force will vary over the course of the construction project, and the use of local Angolan workers will be optimized.  The criteria for who will be housed in the planned construction camp will be determined as the project progresses.
Civil Works: The civil construction activities including permanent roadways, building foundations, tank foundations, and other major scale civil construction will start after the site clearing.  Geotechnical evaluations will be performed to determine the need for pile-support for the various foundations and structures.  Civil construction will be followed by other civil/mechanical/electrical construction of the various LNG process facilities and supporting permanent structures.
Marine Terminal: Construction of the marine terminal facility will involve certain additional activities in the shoreline area of the newly reclaimed site.  Construction of the tanker jetties and the marine and process flares will be accomplished using a combination of land-based and marine-based construction equipment.
Support Facilities: Support facilities such as diesel-fired power generating facilities, technical/process and potable water supply/treatment systems, technical/process and sanitary wastewater treatment/discharge systems, and associated storage units (fuel oil storage tanks, potable water storage tanks, etc.) will be constructed at or in the direct vicinity of the project site.  Several options are being considered for water supply for the construction site.  An impact assessment will be conducted to determine the best means for collection, treatment and appropriate handling of construction site wastewater that may include discharge.  A qualitative risk assessment process will be used to determine the feasibility and appropriateness of the options prior to selection and take into account the relevant guidelines and standards adopted by the project.   
A concrete batch plant will be constructed within the project site footprint to produce the concrete required for the various building and tank foundations.  It is anticipated that this plant will have independent water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities to ensure that the concrete produced by the plant will meet required quality standards and that any potential water discharges from the plant are of an acceptable quality and discharged in an appropriate location.
Personnel support infrastructure will also be constructed at the construction worker campsite.  This includes water supply/treatment systems, sanitary wastewater treatment/disposal systems, and diesel-fired power generation facilities at the construction worker camp. are expected to be similar to those constructed at the project site.  Evaluations are planned to determine if this infrastructure will be temporary or permanent.
The Angola LNG Project team is evaluating alternatives for the construction of permanent worker facilities (housing and support facilities) for the use of employees and guests during the operational phase of the project.  The permanent residential housing will be constructed to serve up to 300 residents.
2.2.4.4 The Construction Program for the Offshore Gas Gathering Pipeline System
Preliminary routes for the proposed offshore gas gathering pipeline system to be constructed in support of the Angola LNG Project are shown in Figure 2-1.  It is expected that multiple pipelines will be constructed; however, the final number of lines coming to shore may vary, depending on whether a hub structure is constructed offshore to combine flows from two or more lines.  Final decisions on pipeline diameters have not yet been made, however, it is expected that most pipelines will be in the 30 cm to 55 cm (12” to 22”) diameter range.  If a hub platform is used, the large pipeline transporting the combined flow from the various platforms could be approximately 75 cm (30”) diameter.
Conventional methods are expected to be used for the construction and installation of pipelines in the deepwater offshore areas.  Several options are being considered, and the preferred option will depend on the size of pipe and the lay barges that are available during the construction time frame.  For the Congo River Crossing, the well intersection method (WI) and Bottom Founded Trench (BFT) method are being considered.  For WI, two semi submersibles will be used to install the pipe.  For the BFT, a barge or barges will be used.  Each offshore lay barge will have between 100-200 persons on board.  The barge personnel will reside on the barge during the work period and will not require onshore housing.  
In shallower water, various options are still under consideration for the onshore/nearshore pipeline sections.  Appropriate methods will be developed for the selected option. 
Several methods of pipeline landfall have been evaluated.  Presently for the landfall construction, the preferred method is horizontal directional drilling (HDD).  However, no final decision has been made and other methods will be looked at during front end engineering and design (FEED) before a final decision is made.  If HDD is used, this would be done from the shore where possible or from a barge where it is not.  It is expected that HDD will be used to “stitch” the pipeline through and beneath sensitive resource areas to avoid damage to sensitive resources.
Pipeline construction will likely take place over the course of several years under a series of separate construction projects.
2.2.5 Operation of the Project Facilities
2.2.5.1 The LNG Process Facilities 
The LNG facility will receive associated gas (AG) and multi-phase non-associated gas (NAG) from offshore platforms.  The raw gas will undergo pre-treatment to remove acid gas (CO2 and H2S), water (dehydration), and mercury.  The treated and dehydrated gas stream will then be routed to a liquefaction unit in which it will undergo multiple stages of chilling, with each sequential stage subjecting the gas stream to a lower temperature and pressure.  The product from the final chilling stage will be LNG, which will then be transferred to an LNG storage tank for storage prior to export.  During the chilling processes (including dehydration and liquefaction), heavy hydrocarbons liquids (unstabilized condensate streams) will be removed from the system and will be routed to the LPG and condensate separation system (LPG fractionation unit), producing propane, butane and stabilized condensate.  The LPG will be transferred to dedicated tanks for storage prior to export.
It is anticipated that conventional acid gas removal, dehydration and mercury removal systems will be utilized.  The engineering design process will involve assessment of available options (see Section 2.3).
There are two proposed liquefaction processes under consideration:
* The Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (APCI) propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant process (often referred to as C3-MR).
* The ConocoPhillips Optimized Cascade Refrigeration Process.
As noted above, each of these processes involves multiple sequential chilling stages.  The APCI C3-MR process uses two cooling stages.  The first stage uses propane (C3H8, thus the “C3” nomenclature) as a cooling fluid and the second stage uses a “mixed refrigerant” of ethanol, propane, methane and nitrogen to further cool the gas stream and produce LNG.  The ConocoPhillips process uses a three-stage chilling process that sequentially uses compressed propane, ethylene, and methane as cooling mediums.
The refrigeration cycles for each of these liquefaction processes are expected to require the use of multiple compressors, each likely served by a dedicated gas fired combustion turbine.  As such, the liquefaction processes will represent a significant component of the overall LNG facilities air emissions inventory.  Similarly, compressors and combustion turbines will generate a significant heat load.  Cooling systems (air or water) will be required to dissipate the heat load.
A typical fractionation process involves multi-stage heating and cooling of the LPG, sequentially removing the individual LPG components by distillation.  The lightest product (ethane) is typically removed in a “de-ethanizer” unit.  The heavier products, including propane, are then removed in a “de-propanizer” unit.  After fractionation, the gases (butane and propane) will be cooled and pressurized to produce LPG and will be stored in dedicated refrigerated tanks.  The fractionation facility will have heating, cooling, and compressor demands and, similar to the liquefaction facility, will have air emissions associated with combustion turbines and will need to reject heat. 
The LNG facility will require support facilities including power generating facilities, water supply/treatment facilities, process and sanitary wastewater treatment facilities, and possibly cooling water intake/discharge facilities (although air cooling is the most likely alternative).  Details of these facilities are not available at the time of preparation of this report.  It is expected that power-generating facilities will include one or more natural gas-fired combustion turbines and likely a diesel fired combustion turbine (for startup and as emergency backup).  A water supply source has not been identified yet.  Options include a surface water source or groundwater and would likely require some type of filtration, desalination and disinfection process.  Evaluations are ongoing to identify appropriate handling of the reject water and treated waste water, which may include discharge after treatment.  An impact assessment will be conducted to determine if discharge is appropriate. The sanitary wastewater treatment system is expected to include biological treatment and disinfection.  The design of the process wastewater treatment system will be a function of the waste streams and will likely involve some type of oil/water separator and possibly pH adjustment (neutralization).
The facility will have some ground-level flares that will be situated at the perimeter of the reclaimed area.  The purpose of these flares will be to safely handle any process upsets, emergencies, and excess gas volumes during startup.
Approximate facility specifications have been determined by the Angola LNG Project team.  These include:
* LNG storage tank(s) 
* Liquid propane storage tank(s) 
* Liquid butane storage tank(s) 
* Condensate storage tank(s) 
* Natural gas supply pipeline (at battery limits of site) with a 75 million standard cubic feet per day (MMscfd) sendout.
The LNG, propane and butane tanks will be, as a minimum, of a double-containment design.  The specific location of these storage tanks and other LNG process facilities on the project site will be identified at the completion of the FEED.
2.2.5.2 Marine Terminal Facilities
Two ship-berths will be constructed as part of the marine terminal facilities.  Each berth will be dimensionally and structurally designed to accommodate LNG tankers and a minimum water depth alongside of minus 14 meters as measured at low astronomical tide (LAT).  The actual size of the LNG tankers to be used here is yet to be decided.  The berths shall be capable of handling smaller tankers as required.  
One berth will be dedicated to handling LNG tankers, while the second berth will be primarily used for the loading of LPG (butane and propane gases) and condensate product as applicable.
Loading operations may be conducted simultaneously at the two separate berths once the tankers are safely moored.  However, only one ship at the time will be allowed to move to/from the berths. 
Loading of LNG and LPG products will be conducted using multiple loading arms and at least one vapor return line to allow vapors to flow back into on-shore storage tanks.
Ships will be required to maintain all times readiness status for immediate departure while moored at either of the berths.
2.3 The AIternative Engineering Design Process
2.3.1 Introduction
Separate contracts will be held by international engineering and construction firms for each aspect of the work, namely the preparatory work, the LNG process, marine terminal and supporting facilities and the offshore gas collection pipeline system respectively.  In addition, the gas collection pipeline system work will be further subdivided by segment.
The engineering teams for each component of the Angola LNG Project will be required to work in close collaboration with the ESHIA consultant and specialists within the Angola LNG Project team in order to ensure that the facilities design eliminates or minimizes environmental, socioeconomic, health, and safety effects and the associated beneficial opportunities are identified and integrated.
In order to facilitate this collaboration, the engineering design process that will continue to further develop the project conceptual design as outlined in Section 2.2 will be undertaken in parallel with the ESHIA process (see Section 3.0).
The Angola LNG Project team is in the process of developing an Angola LNG Project Health, Environment, Socioeconomic, and Safety Policy, Environmental Design, Philosophy, and Functional Specifications (see Section 2.3.2).  These will provide the engineering design teams with the necessary guidance and reference standards for the elimination or minimization of environmental, socioeconomic, health, and safety impacts. 
In addition, the Angola LNG Project team has developed a design justification process that requires the engineering design teams to implement a rigorous program to evaluate design options against a set of criteria that includes environmental, socioeconomic, and health aspects, and stakeholder views (see Section 2.3.3).
2.3.2 Angola LNG Project Policy and Philosophy
2.3.2.1 The Development Process
The Angola LNG Project team is developing its Health, Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Safety Policy.  One of the preliminary steps in this process was the development of the Angola LNG Project Team Vision (see Box 2.1).  The commitment contained in this Vision statement together with the stated core values regarding people, safety, environment, and health, provides the basis for the definition of guidance and reference standards for the development of the Angola LNG Project Health, Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Safety Policy.
Tables 2.1 and 2.2 (see Section 2.3.2.2), present an overview of national and international guidance and reference standards identified as potentially relevant for the development of the Angola LNG Project Health, Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Safety Policies.  Relevant portions of these standards are also being used to develop goals, requirements, commitments, objectives, targets, and practices that reflect the commitment to responsible development with respect to safety, environmental, and social issues.
In addition to the reference guidance and standards presented in Tables 2.1 and 2.2, the Angola LNG Project team will draw on the statements contained in the Angola LNG Project team Vision and on the Corporate Health, Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Safety policies and commitments and business ethics values of the Angola LNG partners (namely ChevronTexaco, Sonangol, BP, Exxon Mobil, and Total).  The team will also undertake benchmarking against other similar projects.

The Angola LNG Project has already adopted ChevronTexaco’s Operational Excellence Policy (www.chevrontexaco.com) as the initial model for development of the Health, Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Safety Policies, Design Philosophy and Functional Specifications.  The ChevronTexaco Operational Excellence Policy incorporates an Incident and Injury-Free (IIF) vision that promotes a mindset that is intolerant of any level, frequency or severity of incident or injury.  IIF is founded upon a shared set of beliefs, respect for others, supportive and participatory mannerisms, and the wellbeing of one’s self and colleagues, rather than numbers and statistics.  It is more than operational disruptions and equipment outages; more than mere compliance with standards and policies; more than an attempt to avoid punishment—it is value-based and not a trade-off with cost and/or schedule.
In addition, the Angola LNG Project team has completed the Environmental Design Philosophy and has committed to the following preliminary set of Health, Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Safety and Business Ethics Objectives:
* Ensuring the Project achieves excellence in safety and environmental performance.
* Developing and creating an Incident and Injury-Free safety culture.
* Providing HES guidance and direction to all project workers during all phases of the Angola LNG Project.
* Ensuring all procedures, processes, activities, and records are in full compliance with all applicable HES laws and regulations.
* Ensuring the Project is consistent with appropriate industry and international HES standards, including World Bank Guidelines and Policies.
* Designing the new facilities so they conform to relevant industry design standards.
* Contributing to the development of Angolan regulations to provide consistency with international and industry standards and best practice.
2.3.2.2 Reference Guidelines and Standards
The Angola LNG Project will be in compliance with the statutory requirements of Angola.  To this end the reference standards and guidance include both Angolan legislation and international standards and guidance (see Tables 2.1 and 2.2, respectively).
National Standards and Guidelines
Angolan laws and regulations address various aspects of the human and natural environment, including environmental protection, land ownership, and resettlement.  The key statutes and the related requirements are summarized in Table 2.1.
Environmental protection measures are contained within Angola's constitution and the General Environment Law.  There are no specific technical standards yet developed for protection of environmental media (e.g. air quality, water quality, etc.) applicable to the Angola LNG Project; current measures are focused on regulating upstream hydrocarbon activity.
The Angolan Land Law 09/04 of November 9, 2004 grants citizens access to land and the right to use it.  Prior to the enactment of the land law, the Angola legislation only covered surface land rights.  However, the land law regulates all land rights.  The legislation establishes the basis for the property regime, land ownership and various types of land occupation.  Under the land law, land is basically owned by the State and it may be made available for ‘useful and effective’ purposes.  The land law is also intended to ensure respect for traditional land rights of the population that are protected by the Constitution of Angola.  In any case, the site selected is currently underutilized relative to other site options and will in fact be adding usable land through partial reclamation of the bay.

Table 2.1:  Key National Legislation
Regulation
Key Aspects
Environmental Protection 
Angolan Constitution, Article 12
The State shall promote the protection and conservation of natural resources guiding the exploitation and use thereof for the benefit of the community as a whole.
Angolan Constitution, Article 24
All citizens shall have the right to live in a healthy and unpolluted environment.  The State shall take appropriate measures to protect the environment and flora and fauna species to maintain ecological balance.  Acts that damage or directly or indirectly jeopardize conservation of the environment shall be punishable by law.
General Environment Law 1998, Law 5/98
This law contains general standards that require regulation in order to be applied in practice, which are complemented by various international conventions ratified by Angola.  This law establishes the principle of strict liability for environmental offences.  This law also establishes the requirement for major activities in Angola to be subject to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and sets out general requirements.
Impact Assessment
Decree 39/00 on Environmental
Protection for the Petroleum
Industry (PIEFD)
This decree is administered by the Ministry of Petroleum and sets out specific EIA requirements for the petroleum industry following the framework requirements set out in General Environmental Law 5/98.
Decree 51/04 on Environmental Impact Assessment - Council of Ministers 
This decree provides the content and structure of the EIA, including consultation, approval procedure, time frame, roles of regulators and issuance of permits.
Land Use and Resettlement
Angolan Constitution, Article 12
Land belonging to the State may be transferred to individuals or corporate bodies in accordance with the law.  The Constitution provides that the State will respect and protect the property and ownership of land, owned by individuals or corporate bodies, without prejudice to the possibility of expropriation in the public interest.
Land Law 09/04 (November 2004)
This law establishes the general basis for the legal system regulating land owned by the state, including the rules for establishment, transfer, exercise and lapse of property rights.  The law reinforces the constitutional principle that the land belongs to the State.  The State may transmit or constitute property rights on land falling under its private domain. However, the State cannot transmit the right to explore for minerals, so mining rights are still inalienable. The basic principle which governs the Draft Land Law is that the State may transmit the property or constitute property rights over the land, but, it does not imply acquisition by accession or any other manner of any right over natural resources.
Decree No. 1/01 and Decree No. 79/02
Provincial Governments are empowered to schedule, organize and ensure the execution of all the processes related to the return and resettlement of displaced people.  Each family being resettled should be awarded half a hectare of cultivable soil without payment.  Resettlement areas must have sufficient space for the construction of shelters.


International Standards and Guidelines
Angola is signatory to various international treaties, conventions and protocols. These relate to such issues as biodiversity, climate change, marine pollution, social justice and human rights.  A non-exhaustive list of international conventions, treaties, and protocols is presented in Table 2.2.
International organizations such as the World Bank and International Finance Corporation (IFC) have environmental and socioeconomic guidelines and standards that relate to both conducting an EIA (or ESHIA) as well as to the technical performance standards of the Project.  It is the intention of the project to meet or exceed these standards.  World Bank and IFC requirements are summarized in Table 2.2.
International best practice has also been established through a variety of other guidance documents.  This guidance derives from the oil and gas industry itself, as well as various NGOs.  The Project will demonstrate best practice in relation to a number of voluntary guidelines including those relating to biodiversity, human rights and social welfare.  A non comprehensive summary of these standards and guidelines is provided in Table 2.2.  The Project is committed to conform with the intent and spirit of these standards and guidelines, fully recognizing that many specific recommendations within these guidelines are reserved for Government action not industry.  The Project will work in partnership with Government, communities and others to address relevant and applicable specific recommendations from these standards and guidelines.
The Angola LNG Project will develop a comprehensive management plan and commitment matrix that will be the bases for monitoring of activities and adherence to the commitments of the project throughout its lifecycle.

Table 2.2:  Key International Legislation, Regulations and Guidance
Organization 
Item 
Comment
International Treaties, Conventions and Protocols
ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND SAFETY
International Maritime Organization
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974
The main objective of the SOLAS Convention is to specify minimum standards for the construction, equipment, and operation of ships, compatible with their safety. Flag States are responsible for ensuring that ships under their flag comply with their requirements, and a number of certificates are prescribed in the Convention as proof that this has been done.


International Maritime Organization 
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78)
The Convention includes regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing pollution from ships - both accidental pollution and that from routine operations.  It comprises several annexes dealing, inter alia, with oil, sewage, solid wastes, ballast water, emissions, etc.
International Maritime Organization
International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties, 1969
The Convention affirms the right of a coastal State to take such measures on the high seas as may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate danger to its coastline or related interests from pollution by oil or the threat thereof, following a maritime casualty. The 1973 Protocol extended the Convention to cover substances other than oil, but Angola did not sign the 1973 Protocol.
International Maritime Organization
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, London Convention, 1972
The Convention has a global character, and contributes to the international control and prevention of marine pollution. It prohibits the dumping of certain hazardous materials, requires a prior special permit for the dumping of a number of other identified materials and a prior general permit for other wastes or matter.  Angola also signed the 1996 Protocol, which  is much more restrictive.
International Maritime Organization
International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990
Ships are required to report incidents of pollution to coastal authorities, and the convention details the actions that are then to be taken. The convention calls for the establishment of stockpiles of oil spill combating equipment, the holding of oil spill combating exercises and the development of detailed plans for dealing with pollution incidents.
Parties to the convention are required to provide assistance to others in the event of a pollution emergency, and provision is made for reimbursement of any assistance provided.

International Maritime Organization
International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (FUND), Protocol 1992
The 1992 Protocol established an International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund, known as the 1992 Fund, to be subscribed to by the cargo interests, which would be available for the dual purpose of, on the one hand, relieving the ship owner of the burden by the requirements of the new convention and, on the other hand, providing additional compensation to the victims of pollution damage in cases where compensation under the 1969 Civil Liability Convention was either inadequate or unobtainable.
Organization of African Unity
Bamako Convention (1991)
The Convention, affirming a commitment to address the problem of Hazardous Wastes in Africa, bans the import into Africa and the control of transboundary movement and management of hazardous wastes within Africa.
SOCIOECONOMIC
United Nations 
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
International Law providing for a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations to strive for through teaching and education.  The law also provides for the promotion of respect for these rights and freedoms and for progressive national and international measures to secure the effective recognition and observance of these among peoples of signatories themselves and among the territories under their jurisdiction.  Key provisions include:
•	Article 19:  Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, this includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of borders.
•	Article 20:  (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association
•	Article 23:  (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment (2) Everyone who works has a right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for his/her and his/her family an existence worthy of human dignity and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his/her interests.
•	Article 24:  Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and holidays with pay.
United Nations 
Global Compact Principles 
Human Rights: Businesses should support and respect the protection of internationally proclaimed human rights within their sphere of influence, and ensure that they are not complicit in human rights abuses.
Labor Standards: Businesses should uphold the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; the elimination of all forms of forced labor and compulsory labor; the effective abolition of child labor; and eliminate discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
Environment: Businesses should support a precautionary approach to environmental challenges; undertake initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility; and encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies.

Lenders’ Guidelines
ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND SAFETY
World Bank Group
World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment (January 1999, as updated)
Environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas must be identified and the impacts compared with the impacts of feasible project alternatives including the ‘without project’ situation.  The assessment should consider natural and social aspects in an integrated way.  OP 4.01 also requires that project-affected groups and local NGOs be consulted about the project’s potential environmental and social impacts in order to take into account local views in the project design.
World Bank Group
World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.04 Natural Habitats (June 2001)
Projects involving the significant conversion of natural habitats are not supported unless there are no feasible alternatives for the project and its siting, and comprehensive analysis demonstrates that overall benefits from the project substantially outweigh the environmental costs.
World Bank Group
Environmental Assessment Sourcebook Volumes I and III (1991) & Updates
This provides additional information on the topics presented in the World Bank Safeguard Policies.  Key updates include:
Update No. 17 (December 1996) Analysis of Alternatives
Update No. 18 (July 1997) Health Aspects of Environmental Assessment
Update No. 28 (June 2002) Wetlands and Environmental Assessment

World Bank Group
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook  (1998)
General Environmental Guidelines
The World Bank Group may finance industrial projects for which no specific environmental guidelines have been written.  In such cases, the Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook (PPAH) General Environmental Guidelines chapter can be used.
World Bank Group
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook  (1998)
Oil and Gas Development (Onshore)

This document establishes general environmental guidelines for those onshore oil and gas explorations projects as well as drilling and production operations. 
World Bank Group
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook  (1998)
Thermal Power For New Plants
This document sets forth procedures for establishing maximum emissions levels for all fossil-fuel based
thermal power plants with a capacity of 50 or more megawatts of electricity (MWe) that use
coal, fuel oil, or natural gas.
World Bank Group
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook  (1998)
Petroleum Refining
This document addresses general environmental guidelines for the petroleum refining industry.  These guidelines also apply to fractionation facilities.
World Bank Group
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook  (1998)
Monitoring
Pollutants of concern for the environment must be monitored to obtain reliable information on the quality of ambient air and media.
World Bank Group International Finance Corporation (IFC)
Hazardous Materials Management Guidelines (December 2001)
This document provides guidance for development and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Management Program.
World Bank Group (IFC)
Environmental Health & Safety Guidelines (July, 1998)
Gas Terminal Systems
The International Finance Corporation (IFC) (member of the World Bank Group) has established environmental, health and safety guidelines for Gas Terminals Systems, including liquid effluents, stack emissions, ambient noise and solid and liquid wastes.  These are also applicable to liquefied natural gas facilities in absence of specific sector guidelines.
World Bank Group (IFC)
EH&S Guidelines (June 2003)
Environmental and Social Guidelines for Occupational Health and Safety
This guideline applies to places of work associated with IFC financed projects. The place of work may be a building, an installation or an outdoor area. The guidelines also apply to temporary places of work.  The guideline covers general aspects of occupational health and safety only.
World Bank Group (IFC)
EH&S Guidelines (December 2000)
Offshore Oil and Gas Development
Facilities and activities that are covered under the guidelines include offshore exploratory drilling, development and production activities, pipeline delivery of products, tanker loading and unloading, ancillary and support operations. 
World Bank Group (IFC)
EH&S Guidelines (July 1998)
Port and Harbor Facilities
IFC has established environmental, health and safety guidelines for the design, construction and use of ports, harbors and associated facilities. 
World Bank Group (IFC)
EH&S Guidelines (July 1998)
Roads and Highways
These guidelines are for the design and construction of roads and highways.  The guidelines incorporate the provisions of the World Bank Policies for cultural properties, indigenous people, involuntary resettlement and water resources management. 
SOCIOECONOMIC
World Bank Group
World Bank Operational Directive OD 4.20 Indigenous Peoples (September 1991) and Draft Operational Policy (OP) 4.10 and Draft Bank Procedure (BP) 4.10 Indigenous Peoples (23 March 2001)
These guidelines provide the reference characteristics to assist with the identification of Indigenous Peoples.
These guidelines further define the required actions to be taken to ensure that affected Indigenous Peoples are not disadvantaged in the development process.
These guidelines require the adoption of a direct consultation and informed participation approach for identification of adverse effects and development of appropriate measures to minimize or mitigate these and to ensure that Indigenous Peoples benefit from development projects and receive culturally compatible social and economic benefits.  This should form an integral part of the social assessment process.
These guidelines require that special efforts and made to avoid displacement of Indigenous Peoples.
These guidelines require that a screening exercise is undertaken to determine whether or not there are Indigenous Peoples in the project area.
World Bank Group
World Bank Operational Policy OP 4.12 (December 2001, as Revised April 2004) & Annex A (December 2001) and OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement
This policy addresses the requirements for the development of appropriate resettlement measures following involuntary taking of land that results in (i) relocation or loss of shelter (ii) loss of assets or access to assets (ii) loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected persons must move to another location.
The guidance requires that the avoidance or minimization of involuntary resettlement is a key criterion in project design.
The guidance addresses both physical resettlement and compensation issues and requires the adoption of a direct consultation and informed participation approach for development of the strategy and measures.
World Bank Group
World Bank Operational Policy Note OPN 11.03 Management of Cultural Property in Bank-Financed Projects (September 1986)
The general objective of this policy note is to assist in the preservation of cultural properties and to seek to avoid their elimination.
This policy note requires that projects avoid significant damage to nonreplicable cultural property and recommends that projects are sited or designed so as to prevent such damage.  In some cases, the project is best relocated in order that sites and structures can be preserved, studied, and restored intact in situ.
World Bank Group
World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.11 Cultural Property (August 1999)
This policy requires that projects avoid significant damage to nonreplicable cultural property and recommends that projects are sited or designed so as to prevent such damage.  In some cases, the project is best relocated in order that sites and structures can be preserved, studied, and restored intact in situ.  The Bank normally declines to finance projects that will significantly damage nonreplicable cultural property and will assist only those projects that are sited or designed so as to prevent such damage.

World Bank Group
World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment (January 1999, as updated)
Environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas must be identified and the impacts compared with the impacts of feasible project alternatives including the ‘without project’ situation.  The assessment should consider natural and social aspects in an integrated way.  OP 4.01 also requires that project-affected groups and local NGOs be consulted about the project’s potential environmental and social impacts in order to take into account local views in the project design.

World Bank Group
World Bank Safeguard Policy OP 4.04 Natural Habitats (June 2001)
Projects involving the significant conversion of natural habitats are not supported by the World Bank unless there are no feasible alternatives for the project and its siting, and comprehensive analysis demonstrates that overall benefits from the project substantially outweigh the environmental costs.

World Bank Group
Environmental Assessment Sourcebook Volumes I and III (1991) & Updates
This document provides additional information on the topics presented in the World Bank Safeguard Policies.  Key updates include:
Update No. 17 (December 1996) Analysis of Alternatives
Update No. 18 (July 1997) Health Aspects of Environmental Assessment
Update No. 28 (June 2002) Wetlands and Environmental Assessment

World Bank Group
Integrating Social Concerns into Private Sector Decision Making: A review of Corporate Practices in the Mining, Oil and Gas Sectors, 1998
This World Bank Discussion Paper (No. 384) addresses the integration of social concerns into project planning and development in the mining and oil and gas sectors.  The primary focus of the report is to present recommendations to help corporations manage the social aspects of their activities.  It explores linkages between social and environmental assessment of projects, identifies current practices with respect to social assessment and makes specific recommendations on their integration.  The paper is aimed at both strategic decision-makers within corporations, government, and NGOs and at those with direct responsibility for managing social issues at project level.
World Bank Group (IFC)
Extractive Industries Review Recommendations, 2003
Recommendations for adopting a strategy for extractive industries development that focuses on reduction of poverty, protection of the environment, improving people’s lives and supporting equitable growth.  Specific recommendations include: ensuring that extractive industry benefits reach the poor; mitigation of environmental and social risks; promotion of renewable energy and efficiency to combat climate change; strengthening governance and transparency; and protecting the rights of people affected by extractive industry investments.

World Bank Group (IFC) 
Doing Better Business Through Effective Public Consultation and Disclosure: A Good Practice Manual (1999)

The key objective of this manual is to ensure that meaningful consultation (i.e. adequate and timely information, sufficient opportunity to voice opinions) with relevant stakeholders, including affected groups and other interested parties, is carried out and that their views are taken into account.
The manual requires that a Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP) is prepared and that public consultation should be part of the scoping phase of the ESHIA process.
World Bank Group (IFC)
Investing in People: Sustaining Communities, Through Improved Business Practice: A Community Development Resource Guide for Companies, 2000

This guide aims to serve as a ‘how-to-guide’ to assist IFC clients and other companies in establishing effective community development programs to channel benefits to communities near, or affected by, their operations
World Bank Group (IFC)
The Equator Principles, 2003
These principles provide a banking industry framework for environmental social risks in project financing.  This provides specific guidance for scoping of the ESHIA and sets out specific requirements for the content of an ESHIA
International Best Practice Guidance (Industry and NGOs)
Energy and Biodiversity Initiative
EBI, 2002
The EBI is a partnership of conservation organizations and oil and gas companies that have developed a series of procedures for ensuring that biodiversity issues are incorporated into all aspects of development projects, including site selection, project design and management systems.  ChevronTexaco and BP are members of the EBI.
US and UK
Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights
The Voluntary Principles were developed by the US and UK Governments, industry, NGOs and trade unions as a guide for companies to maintain the safety and security of their operations and ensure respect for human rights.  The Principles are based on international standards including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.  They address issues such as the potential for violence, human rights records, security arrangements and conflict analysis.  Several UK and US based energy and extractive companies participate in the Principles including ChevronTexaco and BP.
Amnesty International
Human Rights Principles for Companies (1998)
Amnesty International has developed a series of best-practice principles, based on international standards, to establish operational procedures for ensuring human rights and social justice.  The principles cover:
• Human Rights
• Security
• Health and Safety
• Slavery
• Discrimination
• Community Engagement
• Fair Working Conditions
• Monitoring Human Rights
World Conservation Union (IUCN)
Protected Areas Categories, 1994
This initiative was established to facilitate the collection and dissemination of comparable data and to improve communication between countries on the management of comparable ecosystems.  The objective of the protection status is to maintain biodiversity and natural resources and there must be a specific legal or social basis for the protection activities.
All protected areas have been classified into 6 categories (remote, national park, natural monument, habitat/species management area, protected landscape/seascape, and managed resource protected area).
This initiative does not provide specific management criteria for activities in Protected Areas.  However, there are useful guidelines for working with local communities (and protecting their rights and supporting their livelihoods) in protected areas.
International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP)
Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Operations in Mangroves Areas: Guidelines for Environmental Protection, 1993
These guidelines have been jointly prepared by OGP and IUCN.  They are intended to provide practical direction to achieve conservation of mangroves and enhance protection of marine ecosystems during oil and gas exploration and production activities.  They provide introduction to the functioning and importance of mangrove forests, aspects of environmental management and planning which should be implemented by companies and detailed guidance for carrying out specific types of field operations in mangrove areas.


2.3.3 Angola LNG Project Design Justification Processes
The overall design work for this project is the subject of multiple contracts with separate engineering design contractors.  In an effort to ensure consistency, the Angola LNG Project team has provided FEED teams with project definitions, project philosophies and functional specifications.  The use of these guidance documents and reference standards will help to ensure overall design consistency and to eliminate or minimize environmental, socioeconomic, health and safety risks.  The overall project risk and opportunities identification and evaluation process being incorporated is a hazard and risk based approach for addressing safety and related issues.  The requirement for adopting such an approach for the ESHIA process is contained in the World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.01 on Environmental Impact Assessment (see Box 2.2).
Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) methodologies are typically used to identify where risks need to be reduced to as low as reasonably practicable and to identify potential incidents that may have consequences to people and the environment, and the frequency with which they may occur.  The consequences will also be assessed as part of the ESHIA and where these are deemed to be potentially significant (in terms of a combination of magnitude of impact and probability of occurrence) further risk reduction and or contingency measures will be evaluated as necessary.
An initial QRA was performed for the Project by an independent consulting company to thoroughly evaluate safety risks associated with the locations being evaluated during the LNG Plant site selection process.  Subsequently, an additional QRA was performed on the selected LNG Plant site alternative by another independent consulting firm to further evaluate safety and ensure that the Project team’s recommendation on site selection was valid from this perspective.  This latter QRA study identifies and ranks the major contributors to individual and societal risks and provides recommendations for risk reduction measures.  This information will be used as essential input data for the engineering design and ESHIA processes.  Further QRA studies will be undertaken as required during the engineering design and ESHIA processes.
In addition to utilizing QRAs during design, the ESHIA contractor will interface with the engineering design teams to share information as developed during baseline characterization, to identify potential effects and make recommendations on mitigation options.  Such recommendations will be worked with the engineering design teams to ensure that solutions are achieved that address environmental, health, and socioeconomic conditions to the extent practicable. 

A crucial feature of the engineering design and ESHIA processes will be the collaboration between the Angola LNG Project engineering design teams and the ESHIA consultant.  This will allow mitigation measures to be built into the design and will help ensure that management plans are developed to address critical issues.  Each FEED team has a dedicated HES representative to facilitate this collaboration.





3.0   THE ESHIA PROCESS
3.1 Introduction
The ESHIA process is an iterative process forming an integral component of all stages of project design and implementation, from concept selection through operations management and operations abandonment and, where relevant, reinstatement.  A flow diagram indicating the overall ESHIA process is shown in Figure 3-1.
The Angola LNG Project intends to conduct the ESHIA in alignment with the World Bank Guidelines and Policies and EBI Tools as well as in compliance with the Angolan legislative requirements relating to the EIA process and control over the construction and operation activities for the Project facilities.
In order to implement the commitment to carry out an ESHIA, Angola LNG has brought together an international and Angolan national team that includes engineers and health, safety, socioeconomic, and environmental specialists.
Regardless of its role in the permitting and approvals process it is also important to note that the ESHIA is a tool that can help project design and decision-making, by identifying impacts early so that mitigation options can be fully evaluated and incorporated into design.
There will be a collaborative effort between the Angola LNG Project engineering design teams and the ESHIA consultant to allow mitigation measures to be built into the design and help ensure the development of appropriate environmental, socioeconomic and health management plans.
An integrated approach will be taken by the ESHIA consultant to ensure that the assessment of effects and the development of related mitigation measures for environmental, socioeconomic, and health aspects is coordinated.
The ESHIA process will incorporate a stakeholder consultation and disclosure program to facilitate the incorporation of stakeholder views in the development and execution of the ESHIA studies and to communicate at key points with a wide range of stakeholders.
The Angola LNG Project team is also committed to working with and providing information regarding environmental sensitivities and social issues for the “Conceptual Plan for Coordinated Industrial Development for the Soyo Municipality” study being conducted by Sonangol.  In addition to representing a key supporting program for the Angola LNG Project environmental and socioeconomic impact assessment, it is anticipated that the plan can be used to assist with the establishment of a planning basis for consideration by key stakeholders involved in promoting other industrial development, within the Soyo Municipality and the greater Zaire province.
3.2 Requirement for EIA under Angolan Legislation
3.2.1 Introduction
Under Angola legislation the Angola LNG Project requires an EIA to be undertaken and submitted as part of the approvals process.  Throughout this document, reference will be made to the term ESHIA – Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Health Impact Assessment.  This term has been chosen to reflect the fact that although Angolan legislation requires an EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) to be undertaken (see Section 3.2.2), socioeconomic, socio-cultural, and community health and safety are also addressed as important elements of the Project.  In a legal and procedural context, the Angola LNG ESHIA will meet all the requirements of Angolan legislation.
The Angola Ministry of Petroleum Regulation on EIA states that the EIA procedure includes the Environmental Impact Study, the Environmental Impact Assessment Final Report and Public Consultation.
Section 3.2.4 describes the project approval process and how the EIA and consultation fit into it.
3.2.2 Legislation on Environmental Impact Assessment
The requirement for an EIA is set out under the General Environment Law 1998 (5/98); decree 39/00 on Environmental Protection for the Petroleum Industry; and the Republic of Angola Ministry of Petroleum Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment  Decree 51\04 (2004).  In addition, the need for public consultation is also addressed under the General Environment Law (5/98) and the Decree 51/04.
3.2.3 EIA Contents
Under the terms of the Angolan Regulations, the Environmental Impact Study shall include the following:
a.	A description of the project and of the technological alternatives;
b.	The objectives and justifications of the project and how they relate to the plans and programs that already exist or are under way in the affected area;

Figure 3-1: The ESHIA Process

1.1 
c.	Environmental diagnosis of the area impacted by the project, detailed description and analysis of the environmental resources and its interactions, as they exist, in order to ascertain the environmental status of the area before implementing the project, taking into account:
i.	the physical environment – subsoil, water, air, climate, focusing on mineral resources, topography, types of soil, water bodies, the hydrological regime, sea and atmospheric currents;
ii.	the biological environment and natural ecosystems – fauna and flora, focusing on the species that indicate the quality of the environment, species with scientific and economic value, rare and endangered species and permanently protected areas;
iii.	the socioeconomic environment – use and occupation of land, use of water and social economy, dependency relationships among local communities, the environmental resources and the potential future use of these resources;
iv.	The characterization of the future environmental quality of the impacted area, comparing the different adopted situations and their alternatives, as well as the possibility of not executing the project;
v.	review of possible positive and negative environmental impacts of the project, identification and forecast of its magnitude and duration, direct and indirect impacts, immediate and short and long term impacts, temporary and permanent impacts, as well as the chances of reversing them, its cumulative properties and synergies and socioeconomic benefits;
vi.	legal, financial, economic and practical measures that need to be taken in order to reduce as much as possible the negative environmental impact; and
vii.	Environmental impact surveying and monitoring programs.
In addition the results of the study will be submitted together with a non-technical Summary of the main issues discussed and the proposed conclusions, in a form and language readily understood by the general public.
The report will also be supported by photographs, charts and maps, and clear reference (including excerpts) to laws, decrees and international or regional conventions that support the study.
3.2.4 The Approval Process
The EIA approval process in Angola for hydrocarbon projects is led by the Ministry of Petroleum (MinPet) with inputs from the Ministry of Urbanism and Environment (MinUA). It is the latter that eventually grants the Environmental License. Key points in relation to the EIA permitting procedure are highlighted in Figure 3-2.
The project team intends to work cooperatively with the appropriate Angolan government ministries to ensure that the ESHIA process can be completed in a timely manner.
3.3 The World Bank Group Requirements for EIA
While this is not a World Bank Group project, the Angola LNG Project has voluntarily undertaken the intent to be consistent with World Bank Group Guidelines.  As such, the ESHIA processes adopted will be similar to that for a Category A defined project within the World Group Guidlines.  Project-affected groups and local NGOs must be consulted about the potential effects.  The IFC’s manual ‘Doing Better Business Through Effective Public Consultation and Disclosure: A Good Practice Manual’ provides action oriented guidelines aimed at ensuring that consultation is both effective and meaningful. The guidelines emphasize the need for the project sponsor to ensure that the process of public consultation is accessible to all potentially affected parties, from national to local level. Emphasis is placed on the engagement of local stakeholders, namely people who are likely to experience the day-to-day impacts of a proposed project.
The World Bank Group also has specific requirements for disclosure and consultation for documentation resulting from the EIA process.  The IFC recommends the preparation and publication of a Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP) for consultation and disclosure during each phase of the ESHIA process.  The Angola LNG Project has therefore voluntarily undertaken to prepare a PCDP to direct the consultation and disclosure program for their ESHIA process.
The IFC also recommends the preparation of an Environmental Action Plan (EAP) and promotes a number of other environmentally and socioeconomically related factors including biological diversity, wetlands and wild birds, cultural property; waste management, natural resource use evaluation, hazardous and toxic materials, major and natural hazards; indigenous people; involuntary resettlement; and induced development and other socio-cultural aspects.


Figure 3-2: Angolan EIA Approval Process

1.1 
Guidance contained in the World Bank Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook sets out limits for effluent discharges to water, pollutant emissions to atmosphere and noise (see Table 2.2).
Further World Bank Group requirements pertaining to Indigenous Peoples’ rights and involuntary physical and economic resettlement are outlined in specific Safeguard Policy Documents (see Table 2.2).  The Safeguard Policy relating to Indigenous Peoples requires that a screening exercise is undertaken to determine whether or not Indigenous Peoples will be affected by the development.  If it is determined that this is the case then specific attention will need to be paid in the ESHIA on the effects on Indigenous Peoples, the determination of appropriate mitigation measures and the identification of culturally compatible social and economic benefits.  Further, a management plan will need to be developed in consultation with the affected people.  The Safeguard Policy relating to Involuntary Resettlement provides guidance for the development of appropriate levels of compensation and assistance to people who would require economic or physical resettlement as a consequence of the development.  It requires the preparation of a resettlement plan (the scope of which is dependent on the level of involuntary resettlement identified) in consultation with the affected persons.
3.4 ESHIA Scoping
Scoping is an important part of the ESHIA process (see Figure 3-1).  The key objective of which is to develop the Terms of Reference for the ESHIA through the provisional identification of what are believed to be the key issues through consultation and disclosure with stakeholders.  Subsequent phases of the ESHIA process can then focus on these key issues in terms of collecting information on existing conditions, engaging stakeholders, understanding the impacts and developing the measures to avoid or control and monitor them.
This document and a separate non-Technical summary of this report have been prepared to support the scoping consultation and disclosure process.  These documents present the current views of the Angola LNG Project, based on past experience and professional judgment and the findings of the preliminary program of consultation and disclosure undertaken in support of the site selection process.  The purpose of circulating these documents to key stakeholders and undertaking associated scoping consultations is to obtain their inputs so that the Terms of Reference for the full ESHIA addresses the concerns and views of those consulted.
3.5 The Overall Scope of the ESHIA Process
3.5.1 Introduction
This section summarizes the general considerations for progressing the ESHIA process.  The management of specific issues is discussed in Section 6.0, while the integration of the ESHIA process with the engineering design process is discussed in Section 2.3.
The full ESHIA process comprises the following key elements:
* Scoping leading to the production of the Scoping Report and Terms of Reference (TOR).
* Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Health Baseline Characterization.
* Effects Identification and Assessment
* Stakeholder Consultation and Disclosure involving production of a Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP).
* Production of the ESHIA Report.
* Development of ESHIA Management Plan in accordance with World Bank Guidelines and Policies.
3.5.2 Baseline Data Collection
A significant amount of data has already been collected as part of the site selection and scoping activities. Now that a specific site for the Angola LNG facilities has been selected, future data gathering activities can be targeted and can focus on key issues for the Angola LNG (see Section 5.0).
3.5.3 Impact Identification and Assessment
The full ESHIA will adopt a quantitative approach to impact prediction to the extent possible.  This will include the use of mathematical and computer modeling. Where qualitative approaches have been adopted, the ESHIA will clearly set out how and what professional judgment has been applied and will reference sources from which past experience has been drawn.  As part of the ESHIA potential impacts will be identified and their individual, cumulative and inter-practice impacts will be assessed in a fully integrated manner (see Section 6.0).
3.5.4 Consultation & Disclosure
Stakeholder responses to this scoping report will be the focus of the next stage of public consultation and will be used to shape the ESHIA process moving forward.  Public consultation will continue throughout the ESHIA process, particularly with regard to addressing the key issues and ensuring the input of local knowledge.  The Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP) will guide these consultation activities and will be appended to the draft ESHIA report.  The latter will be disclosed to all key Project stakeholders and feedback will be solicited as required by both national Angolan legislation and international guidelines.
The PCDP will provide a program for consultation and disclosure that will ensure accessible and timely opportunities for stakeholders to become involved in the Angola LNG Project decision-making process.  The consultation process will continue throughout the ESHIA process and extend into the project construction, commissioning and operations phases of the Angola LNG Project.
3.5.5 Production of the ESHIA Report
The proposed content for the ESHIA is presented in Box 3.3.  This will need to be agreed with the regulators, and has been presented here for review and comment by stakeholders other than partners.
Box 3.3 Proposed Contents for the ESHIA
Executive Summary
Glossary
Introduction
Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework
ESHIA Methodology
Project Description
Alternative Options Assessed
Emissions, Discharges and Waste Inventory
Environmental Baseline
Socioeconomic and Health Baseline
Health Assessment
Socioeconomic Assessment
Consultation and Disclosure
Environmental Aspects and Impacts
Socioeconomic Aspects and Impacts
Health Mitigation, Monitoring, and Management
Cumulative Impacts
Transboundary Impacts
Environmental Mitigation, Monitoring and Management
Socioeconomic Mitigation, Monitoring and Management
Conclusions
Stakeholder Comments and Angola LNG Responses
Commitments Register
References
Appendices

3.6 ESHIA Schedule
Prior to construction, the Project will complete the ESHIA process.  The Angola LNG Project requires that the preparatory works (see Section 2.2.4) are undertaken significantly earlier than the main construction program for the onshore facilities and the marine terminal.  As a consequence there is a requirement from the government to produce a separate EIA report for the dredging, land reclamation and unexploded ordnance clearance works that comprise the preparatory works.  The schedule for preparation and submission of this document is separate from the schedule for the ESHIA process for the main construction program for the onshore facilities, marine terminal, and the offshore pipelines.  The EIA for the Dredging and Land Reclamation activities will be completed prior to the submittal of the ESHIA report.
The outline schedule for the ESHIA process is provided in Figure 3-3.

Figure 3-3:  ESHIA Schedule

1.0   



4.0   PRELIMINARY EVALUATION PROGRAM
4.1 Introduction
The preliminary evaluation program, as outlined in this section, commenced in 1997, prior to the establishment of Angola LNG and subsequent to the decision of the Angolan Government to enact a policy that would lead to the restriction of flaring of gas associated with oil and gas production operations offshore Angola.  In addition, oil and gas operators were required to develop plans for monetization of this gas that would in part lead to the promotion of economic growth in Angola through utilization of the gas for commercial purposes (see Section 1.2).
Angola LNG was established to take forward the proposal originally submitted by Texaco in 1997 to Sonangol for the management of the gas associated with oil and gas production activities offshore Angola.  The proposal was subsequently selected  by Sonangol as the preferred solution for the management of gas.  The proposal from Texaco included the evaluation of competing technologies and the ‘No Project’ scenarios (see Section 4.2).
Since its establishment in 1998 the Angola LNG Project has undertaken conceptual engineering design and implemented a rigorous preliminary evaluation program in order to identify the Preferred Project Alternative and site location.  The key focus of this preliminary evaluation program has been a phased site selection exercise involving extensive consultations with stakeholders (see Section 4.3).
This preliminary evaluation program led to:
* Identification of the most suitable region of Angola for the location of the LNG project facilities.
* Identification of the most suitable site options within that region for further consideration.
* Identification of the selected site, namely the Best Shipping Alternative, located in the Soyo municipality of the Zaire Province in Angola.
The Angola LNG Project team has undertaken a rigorous site selection exercise that started in 1997, that has: 1) served to identify the most suitable region of Angola for the location of the LNG Project facilities; and 2) identified within that area the most suitable site options for further consideration.
A full account of the site selection process from an environmental and socioeconomic perspective is documented in:
* Environmental and Socio-Economic Considerations for the Siting of the Angola LNG: Final Report.  ERM, May 2004.
4.2 The No Project and Competing Technologies Evaluation
The scope of this study was two-fold.  First, to consider the implications of not undertaking any new development to effect commercialization of the natural gas generated by the offshore oil and gas production activities (the ‘No Project’ scenarios).  Second, to identify and evaluate alternative solutions for the management of gas produced from oil and gas production activities offshore Angola that would lead to commercialization of the gas.
The ‘No Project’ scenarios and the various competing technologies for commercialization of the natural gas that were considered are listed below:
‘No Project’ Scenarios:
* No action (continue flaring out of compliance with the Angolan Regulations).
* Re-injection of gas into the producing reservoir (elimination of flaring only).
* Re-injection of gas into depleted reservoir (elimination of flaring only)
* Re-injection of gas into saltwater aquifer (elimination of flaring only).
* Shut-in host oil production (elimination of flaring and loss of oil and gas revenues).
Competing Technologies:
* Gas to Liquids (GTL) Production and Export (Commercialization of the gas).
* Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and Export (Commercialization of the gas).
* Methanol Production and Export (Commercialization of the gas).
* Ammonia Production and Export (Commercialization of the gas).
* Hydrate Production and Export (Commercialization of the gas).
* Gas export pipeline (Commercialization of the gas).
The ‘No Project’ options were concluded to be unacceptable or technically or economically unfeasible.  Therefore, oil and gas operators would need to develop plans for commercialization of the natural gas.
The Project’s decision to propose LNG as the technical solution was based on an assessment of competing technologies.  Worldwide there are numerous natural gas reserves that are considered “stranded” since there are little or no local markets to absorb the gas.  This is true of the natural gas found offshore Angola.  In these cases, the natural gas must be transported a considerable distance to suitable markets.  It was concluded that the only economically and technically viable method of achieving this for Angola was through export of LNG.
The conclusion of the ‘No Project’ study was therefore, that there is not an option to ‘do nothing’ if oil production in Angola is to continue and achieve compliance with national legislation.  The only viable option therefore, being the Angola LNG Project.  The ‘No Project’ Scenarios will be developed in greater detail in the ESHIA.
4.3 Decision to Develop a Coastal LNG Project at Soyo
Subsequent to identifying the LNG process as the preferred solution, the Angola LNG Project embarked on a series of studies leading to the assessment of the Final Four Soyo Site Options that form the focus of the discussion in Section 4.4.  The sequence of this series of site selection studies is presented below:
* Early Conceptual Studies of Offshore Options (3rd Quarter 1998).
* Early Conceptual Studies of Onshore Options (4th Quarter 1998).
* Final Conceptual Studies (4th Quarter 2002).
* Original Soyo Alternatives (2nd Quarter 2003).
* Assessment of original Soyo Shortlist (2nd Quarter 2003).
* Addition of final Soyo options (4th Quarter 2003).
* Assessment of Final Four Soyo Options (December 2003 to May 2004).
These studies involved the following:
* The assessment of offshore versus onshore options.
* The assessment of various potential development sites along the Angola coast.
* The assessment of various potential development sites in Soyo.
* The detailed assessment of the short-listed four Soyo options (see Section 4.4).
In assessing alternatives a number of factors were considered, including environmental, socioeconomic, health and safety, operability, security, cost, schedule, potential to promote economic growth and stakeholder views.
The choice of sites for the Angola LNG facilities changed several times during the course of the evaluation program.  A number of possible locations along the Angolan coastline were examined by the project during this time. 
During the second stage of the evaluation (April 2002 through to October 2002) both offshore and onshore sites were still under consideration.  The key onshore focus areas were Luanda Refinery, Near Luanda, Onshore Soyo Area and Onshore Ambriz.
Soyo was not identified as a potential focus region until the later stages of the evaluation primarily because of civil war activities in this area and the associated security issues.  When the war ended in 2002, the Soyo area became a viable option.
During the third stage of the evaluation (November 2002 through to May 2004) an onshore solution in the Soyo area was established as the focus for the evaluation program.  The Soyo area, although containing some environmental and socioeconomic sensitivities was thought to be the most viable option due to the capacity to ensure security and, more importantly to promote secondary economic growth.  The Angola LNG Project team deemed the potential positives of the Soyo area outweighted any potentially negative environmental and socioeconomic sensitivities associated with it.  
It was therefore decided that the Soyo area was the only location that should be progressed as part of site selection.  As a consequence, the area underwent a more detailed level of screening for feasibility of Project location and design.  During this third stage of the evaluation program, the viable alternatives for the siting of the onshore processing and storage facilities, marine terminal and import gas line were identified and screened.  The viable alternatives were narrowed down to four final sites in the Soyo area which were then subject to the site selection process described in Section 4.4 and resulted in the subsequent selection of ‘The Best Shipping Alternative’ as the selected site.
It is important to note that a fundamental factor that has influenced the selection of Soyo as the most viable option for the Angola LNG Project has been the clear guidance by the Angolan government that the site accommodate secondary development and be capable of promoting economic growth.  This factor focused the Project to the Luanda and Soyo options.  With the Luanda option being fundamentally flawed from a socioeconomic perspective due to the need for significant physical resettlement, the Soyo area became the most viable option that conformed with these expectations.
A summary of the evaluation program is provided in Figure 4.1.


Figure 4-1:  Site Selection Activities


4.4 The Final Four Soyo Options
4.4.1 The Evaluation Approach
Project acceptability boundaries and site selection criteria were developed by the Angola LNG Project team to enable a comparative assessment of the four site options available.
The Project acceptability boundaries were that the site must align with World Bank requirements (with respect to socioeconomic and environmental impacts and public participation in the decision-making process) and that the public safety risk must be acceptable.
In order to address the latter project acceptability boundary, Quantitative Risk Assessments (QRAs) were commissioned by the project team (see Sections 2.2.3 and Section 4.4.4).
In order to address the former acceptability boundary a review was undertaken of the relevant World Bank Guidelines and Policies and a baseline data collection, public consultation and disclosure and impact assessment program was integrated into the evaluation.
The World Bank Guidelines and Policies against which the site selection options were assessed are included in Table 2.2.  In particular, the World Bank Policies address the following issues: environmental assessment, natural habitats, cultural property, involuntary resettlement, indigenous peoples, wetlands, and other issues.  The guidelines provide guidance on how to reduce pollution, and in many cases they include numerical targets and maximum emission and discharge limits to be achieved.
The site selection criteria developed were:
* Socioeconomic Impacts
> Resettlement
> Cultural sites
> Land Acquisition, rights-of-way
> Intervention of NGOs
> Infrastructure
> Decommissioning strategy
* Environmental Impacts
> Impact of construction, especially on wetlands (mangroves)
> Impact of operations, especially on wetlands (mangroves)
> Water Quality
> Coastal morphology
> Biodiversity
> Erosion and sedimentation
> Threatened species
> Sediment quality
* Health and Safety Impacts
> Impact of construction on local population
> Impact of operations on local population
> Impact of construction on facility and workforce
> Impact of operations on facility and workforce
* Economic Growth
> Potential to promote secondary industry
> LNG plant expandability
> Consultations and stakeholder acceptance
> Capital expenditure (CAPEX) impacts
> Operability and operational expenditure (OPEX) impacts
> Schedule impacts
> Security
A key objective of the evaluation was to ensure that the work was conducted in accordance with international expectations of such an exercise.  In addition to the World Bank Guidelines and Policies, the Angola LNG Project team also made reference to the Energy and Biodiversity Initiative (EBI) Tools for site selection in order to design and implement their evaluation program in such a way as to satisfy this key objective.  The EBI, a partnership of four energy companies and five conservation organizations, has developed the EBI Tools to assure integration of biodiversity conservation into oil and gas development.  The EBI website address is www.theebi.org.
The work supporting the third stage evaluation took place over approximately six months.  During that time, data were collected on the project area through literature studies, provision of information from other studies commissioned by Angola LNG, visits to the sites to collect environmental and socioeconomic data, and review of satellite imagery.  Consultations and workshops were undertaken with local community representatives, government regulators, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
The evaluation was supported by analysis of the four alternatives using Geographical Information System (GIS) and a hydrodynamic model.  This degree of quantification allowed the comparative exercise of site selection to be considerably enhanced.
The key environmental and socioeconomic issues focused on as part of the site selection work were as follows:
Environmental:
* Geomorphology and coastal processes.
* Biodiversity.
* Water quality.

Socioeconomic:
* Land-based livelihoods and recreation.
* Settlements and buildings.
* Fisheries-base livelihoods and waterborne transport.
* Cultural sites.
* Planning and development.
* Community Health and Safety.

4.4.2 The Four Soyo Locations and Environmental and Socioeconomic Setting
The environmental and socioeconomic setting for the general area is described in Section 5.0.
The locations of the four Soyo site alternatives that were considered are shown in Figure 4-2 and their key characteristics are summarized in Box 4.1:


Figure 4-2:  Site Alternatives


1.1.1 
4.4.3 Environmental and Socioeconomic Data Collection and Public Consultation and Disclosure
The Angola LNG Project team has undertaken a number of visits for the purpose of stakeholder consultation and high level environmental and socioeconomic data gathering and project orientation.  The focus of these consultations was consulting local and Angolan stakeholders with the most relevant day-to-day experience with issues of immediate concern.  Some of the key visits are described below:
* An initial site visit in May 2003 served to orient the Angola LNG Project team to understand high level environmental issues in the area and determine the appropriate category under the World Bank criteria. 
* In September 2003, a visit was conducted to clarify and understand issues identified in May 2003 by the Angola LNG Project team.  This included visits to the potential Project sites and to community projects.
* In December 2003, a two-week field trip was undertaken with the purpose to consult with national and local Angolan Government officials, academics and local NGOs.  In addition a high-level study of physical aspects of the mangrove system was undertaken.  A program of socioeconomic fieldwork was also initiated.
* The focus of a visit in April 2004 was on socioeconomic data gathering and consultations with the communities, local government and other Soyo-based stakeholders about specific siting alternatives.
* In August 2004, a visit was conducted with the purpose to inform the local traditional leaders and local government representatives of the Angola Project decision to select the Best Shipping Alternative as the Selected Project Site.
The key objectives of the first round of consultations, in December 2003, were:
* Introduce the Angola LNG Project and the site selection process.
* Demonstrate that Angola LNG was committed to engagement with the public.
* Lay the foundation for future stakeholder participation.
* Support the early identification of key issues and concerns, expectation and opportunities.
The key target stakeholder groups for this first round of consultations were:
* Key national decision makers.
* Key regional and local decision makers.
* Respected knowledge holders (i.e., academic institutes and NGOs).
The key objective of the second round of consultations in April 2004 was to invite local stakeholders to voice preferences and concerns on alternative siting locations and to disclose further information on the potential environmental, socioeconomic, and health impacts.
The key target stakeholder groups for the second round of consultations were:
* Communities potentially directly affected by any of the four siting options under consideration.
* Key regional and local decision makers and advisors.
* Respected knowledge holders, influencers and local businesses (i.e. Soyo-based NGOs, businesses and church leaders).
The project’s focus at this time was consulting local and national stakeholders with the most relevant day-to-day experience for site selection issues.
During the first round of consultations 20 meetings were held, and a further 16 meetings were held during the second round of consultations.  The list of consultees is provided in Appendix B.
4.4.4 Stakeholder Perceptions
The key messages from the first and second rounds of consultations are summarized in Box 4.2. 
Box 4.2. Key Messages from the Consultations 
Issue
First Round
Second Round
Project Overall
* Strong support for the Project.
* High expectations – particularly in terms of perceived local employment and socioeconomic investment benefits.
* Concern over the lack of local benefits and negative impacts from previous oil investments.
* Strong support for the Project.
* High expectations – particularly in terms of perceived local employment, socioeconomic investment, and local gas supply benefits.
* Concern over the lack of local benefits and negative impacts from previous oil investments, particularly related to perceived negative impacts of flaring processes on agricultural crops.
Site Selection
* Preference for sites away from Kwanda Base from government stakeholders. Low Tech option particularly preferred.
* Trust in the Project to select the most appropriate location.
* Community preference for the Project to be situated in their neighborhood, due to perceived benefits.
* A strong desire by most communities and Soyo civil society for the Project to lead to secondary development opportunities away from Kwanda Base.
* Government stakeholders expressed predominant preference for Best Shipping site, with condition that appropriate HES safeguards are in place.
* Development Workshop (local NGO) viewed Best Shipping as the obvious siting option and warned against other siting options.
* General trust for the Project to make the appropriate final site selection decision. 
ESHIA Process
* High approval of the ESHIA process.
* Strong recommendations to maximize local consultation.
* High approval and expressions of gratitude for the opportunities to contribute to the site selection process.
* Impatience for the final decision on site location.  Recommendation that further consultation on site selection would not be worthwhile.
Potential Impacts
* Differing views on difficulty of resettlement should this be required by the Project.
* Recognition that the Project will be a catalyst for other industry and for in-migration into the area.
* Recommendations regarding maximizing local benefits.
* Welcome the potential for other industry, in-migration and generic local development.  Local employment and local gas provision were seen as particularly important benefits.
* Recognition by Development Workshop (local NGO) that such development does not need to be located next to the LNG facility but in the general Soyo Municipality, or even Zaire Province, area.
* Welcome the end of flaring, which is seen as a particular threat to agricultural crops.
* Differing view on whether or not particular agricultural and cultural areas could be used by the Project for the Low Tech Alternative.
* Concern over community safety issues and impacts due to extracting and moving landfill materials by government stakeholders.
Stakeholder perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of the different sites were mixed, but can be summarized as follows:
* Government stakeholders were generally better disposed to the Low Tech and Channel options as these were deemed to offer the best opportunities for secondary development.
* Local community stakeholders generally expressed a preference for a siting alternative close to their community on the basis that this provided the greatest opportunity to them to benefit.  There was a general perception that options other than Best Shipping would provide more development stimulus and local benefits probably because the existing operations at the Kwanda Base were perceived to have provided limited opportunities for the local community to date.
* Soyo administrators expressed concern over the Low Tech alternative due to the potential livelihood impacts, but found Channel broadly acceptable on the basis that potential cultural impacts could be minimized.
* International (and some national) stakeholders generally favored Best Shipping on the basis it has least environmental and socioeconomic impacts.
There was a general view that Soyo is an appropriate general location for the development, with most stakeholders positively welcoming the Angola LNG Project.
Overall the positive view towards the project is strongly linked to expectations that the Angola LNG Project will provide employment opportunities and will be the catalyst for stimulating secondary industry and hence economic growth locally.  In addition local communities stressed the need for local access to energy and voiced the expectation that elimination of gas flaring would lead to the cessation of negative impacts on crop production in the local area that are perceived to be linked to current flaring activities.  Local NGOs highlighted the potential for other benefits that the Angola LNG Project could stimulate through socioeconomic investment.
4.4.5 Safety
Safety to neighbors was a key issue in site selection evaluation.  Angola LNG commissioned an independent initial QRA of the four alternatives to assess each alternative against individual and societal risk tolerability criteria.
Due to the early design stage and the preliminary nature of the assessment a conservative approach was adopted.  For example, allowances were not made for specific risk mitigation techniques, such as automatic shutdowns, fire and gas detection.
The study concluded that with certain additional risk reduction measures (e.g. the location of certain plant elements, numbers of product tanks) all four of the alternatives could be designed to operate within acceptable levels of risk.
Facility safety was not therefore a critical factor in distinguishing between the siting alternatives.
However, community safety was identified as a key concern of many consultees and therefore a key factor to be addressed in facilities design and the development of operational procedures.
Subsequent to the initial QRA, a further QRA study was undertaken following the selection of the Best Shipping Alternative as the Selected Project Site as part of the process of verifying this selection (see Section 2.3.3).
In accordance with the Angolan legislative requirements, company and international standards, further QRA studies will be undertaken as required during the engineering design and ESHIA process.
4.4.6 Results of the Evaluation 
A brief summary of the results of the evaluation is presented here.  It should be noted that the site alternatives are discussed in comparative as opposed to absolute terms and they were ranked as preferred, acceptable and least acceptable.  For example all alternatives may have potential secondary impacts to some of the mangrove areas due to wake wave effects that would need to be mitigated.
The site selected, the Best Shipping alternative, represents the best available alternative for the Angola LNG Project, with particular reference to the principal project acceptability boundaries set for the Angola LNG Project, namely, alignment with World Bank Guidelines and Policies and acceptable public safety risk (see Section 4.4.1).
If for any reason the selected site is found to be inconsistent with the Project principle of choosing the site with the least environmental or social impacts, then remaining available sites would require further evaluation in order to identify the next best available alternative and necessary mitigation measures for such.
It is important to note that the above conclusions apply only to siting the Angola LNG Project, comprising the facilities for LNG production, export and providing a major dredged channel for the tankers.
The requirement for major dredging and its potential effects on the natural environment and fisheries is a critical factor in making the Best Shipping alternative the preferred alternative for the Angola LNG Project development.  However, this would not preclude the other alternatives (or others nearby) from appropriate development that did not require such major dredging.
Refer to Figure 4-2, Site Alternatives, for clarification of site locations discussed below.
4.4.6.1 Low Tech Alternative
From the socioeconomic perspective the Low Tech site is considered to encompass agricultural land of good quality for the Soyo area.  A preliminary site survey identified that a significant number of people from the local communities work the land on the Low Tech site or are engaged in fruit and wood collection and charcoal production.  The Low Tech alternative was therefore deemed likely to have significant impacts to land-based livelihoods, fisheries, a cultural site, and the natural environment. Therefore it would require a physical and economic resettlement effort, the scope of which would need to allow for maintaining a suitable buffer zone to ensure an acceptable level of public safety.  Secondary effects to nutrition due to loss of agricultural land and fisheries could also result.  These impacts would be associated both with the direct footprint of the development site and the dredging of the entire Pululu channel and the attendant direct and indirect impacts to the mangroves.  A number of cultural sites were also identified in this area.  Coastal morphology could also be significantly impacted by the choice of this option.
From an environmental impact perspective, this option would lead to the significant alteration of wetlands, especially mangroves associated with accommodating the shipping channel and ship turning basin required in the Pululu Channel.
While some of the impacts are amenable to mitigation (e.g, economic and physical), impacts to local fishermen can be mitigated through implementation of a Resettlement Action Plan. Others, especially those associated with habitat loss and dredging would be costly to implement and their full success difficult to guarantee.
From the perspective of the potential to promote economic growth the key concern would be that the Lower Pululu Channel area would become a major port area, which could lead to further alteration to the mangrove habitat.  However, there is land area available for potential future expansion of the LNG facilities and for the development of secondary industrial facilities.
As suitable alternatives are available that would lead to no or much reduced, resettlement, then the Low Tech site is less preferable for LNG project purposes from the point of view of socioeconomic impacts.  As suitable alternatives are available that would not require alteration of wetlands, especially mangroves, the Low Tech site is also less preferable than the other three options from the point of view of environmental impacts.
4.4.6.2 Channel Alternative
The Channel alternative is deemed to have socioeconomic and environmental impacts similar in nature to those associated with the Low Tech alternative although they are expected to be quantitatively less.
From a socioeconomic perspective the direct impacts to fisheries and to agricultural land and the associated secondary impacts to nutrition and human health are considered to be less than for the Low Tech alternative.  However, both physical and economic resettlement would still be required.
From the environmental perspective, although potential impacts to the mangrove area could still be significant (especially direct mangrove loss on the development site), these are considered more amenable to mitigation compared to those for the Low Tech alternative.
From the perspective of the potential to promote economic growth the Channel alternative would have land available for secondary development in the immediate vicinity.  However the location of the shipping access for this alternative is considered to be less than optimal.
The Best Shipping and Hybrid alternatives would involve less resettlement and have fewer direct environmental impacts on mangroves that the Channel alternative.  Therefore, the Channel alternative is considered less preferable than these two sites for LNG project purposes from environmental and socioeconomic impacts perspective.
4.4.6.3 Best Shipping Alternative
The Best Shipping Alternative avoids the two key environmental and socioeconomic impacts (i.e., extensive resettlement and alternation of the mangroves) associated with the two other alternatives discussed above.
From a socioeconomic perspective, limited resettlement will be required.  The focus will be on compensation for fisheries interference.  No cultural sites have been identified, and the land is already allocated for industrial use.  However, the site is in closest proximity to the more densely populated areas of the Soyo surrounds, and therefore safety and communication of safety to local stakeholders are important issues for this alternative.
From an environmental perspective, no direct and minimal indirect damage to the mangrove is anticipated from this alternative. 
From the economic growth perspective, the Best Shipping alternative has limited space available for future expansion of the LNG facilities or for secondary development and occupies land of value for other potential development.  However, this limited land availability on Kwanda Island would not preclude the possibility of running a domestic gas pipeline from the LNG site to an industrial site elsewhere in the Soyo area.
As this alternative would lead to little or no disturbance to the mangrove area and to minimal resettlement, this site is preferred over the other available alternatives.
4.4.6.4 Hybrid Alternative
The Hybrid Alternative combines elements of the Best Shipping and Channel alternatives with the process facilities located on the Channel site, and the marine terminal and storage areas located at the Best Shipping Site (northern shoreline of Kwanda Base).  The key differences compared to the Best Shipping and Channel alternatives are listed below:
* It would require less dredging than Channel alternative.
* It would occupy less potential development land on Kwanda Base compared to the Best Shipping alternative.
* Some of the perceived risk to the local community would be farther away from Soyo compared to the Best Shipping alternative.
* The pipelines from the plant to the marine terminal would comprise an additional loss of mangrove in comparison with Channel alternative.
From a socioeconomic perspective the footprint for the Hybrid alternative on the Channel Site would be smaller compared with the Channel alternative.  Thus although resettlement would be required the scale is likely to be reduced compared with the Channel option.  Further, the facilities could be planned so as to avoid the cultural sites known to be present on the Channel site.
From an environmental perspective less direct damage to the mangroves would result compared with both the Low Tech and Channel alternatives as for the Hybrid alternative, the storage area has effectively been transferred from the Channel site to the Kwanda Base, and less dredging of the Channel will be required.
4.4.7 Conclusions
From environmental and socioeconomic perspectives, and taking into account stakeholder views, the sites were ranked in the following order:
Best Shipping	Preferred
Hybrid	Acceptable
Channel	Acceptable
Low Tech	Least Acceptable

Channel or Hybrid could be made to work as sites for the Angola LNG Project subject to the following key assumptions on mitigation measures being implemented effectively:
* Development of a Resettlement Action Plan that provides the appropriate levels of compensation and assistance to those individuals who would require physical resettlement such that they are able to maintain and improve their livelihoods.
* Development and implementation of mitigation measures to minimize impacts on the mangrove habitats that may include environmental offsets for mangrove habitat loss.
* Development of appropriate measures for management of an extended and costly (relative to the Best Shipping option) dredging program.
It