Dirjen Perhubungan Laut PDF
Dirjen Perhubungan Laut PDF
             FEBRUARY 2017
                                TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I Introduction
1.1. Summary Description of Activity Plan -------------------------------------------I-1
  1.1.1. Background, Objectives, and Benefits of the Project ----------------------I-1
  1.1.2. EIA Preparation------------------------------------------------------------------I-8
  1.1.3. Description of Project Plan which will be Examined ----------------------I-9
  1.1.4. EIA Status Study ----------------------------------------------------------------I-14
  1.1.5. Conformity with Spatial Plan--------------------------------------------------I-14
  1.1.6. Components of Project Plan Cause Impact ----------------------------------I-22
1.2. Summary of Hypothetic Significant Impact ------------------------------------I-108
  1.2.1. Determination of Hypothetic Significant Impact ---------------------------I-108
1.3. Study Area and Period Boundary ------------------------------------------------I-117
  1.3.1. Study Area Boundary -----------------------------------------------------------I-117
  1.3.2. Period of Study Boundary Based on Scoping Result in KA --------------I-118
APPENDIX
Environmental Management Plan and Environmental Monitoring Plan
                                                                       Chapter I - Introduction
 CHAPTER I
 INTRODUCTION
1.1.1.1 Background
 Important part of the sea transport is the port infrastructure, which serves oceangoing and
 coasting activities such as loading and unloading of various goods and passengers as a
 connecting point for marine and land traffics. Activities in ports may decide a high or low
 economic growth in a region.
 Ports north of Greater Jakarta Metropolitan Area have an important and indispensable role to
 support the national economy. Especially, Tanjung Priok Port as one of such ports which
 serves the container transportation in the western part of Java Island, internationally and
 domestically. The above official decisions attach great importance to the urgency of Patimban
 Port development plan from the following views :
    1. To reduce the logistic cost by building a new port near to the center of production
         (manufacturing);
    2. To ease the land traffic congestion in the Jakarta Metropolitan area by shifting heavy
         freight traffic through Tanjung Priok Port;
    3. To strengthen the resilience of the economy with providing a complemental port to
         Tanjung Priok Port.
 To respond the issues above, Government of Indonesi (GOI), in this case, Ministry of
 Transportation conducts Comprehensive study as Pre-Feasibility Study and Feasibility Study
 that have produced technical feasibility and economic and financial shipping safety aspects
 and environmental carrying capacity. Pre-FS is carried out testting 6 alternative locations that
 lie in North coast of West Java as Cilamaya Port Replacement :
     1. Tarumanegara, Bekasi
     2. Pusakajaya, Karawang
     3. Patimban, Subang
             Pre - F / S has compared six (6) candidates from aspects of “Legal / Institutional regulations
             and restrictions”, “Benefits of Transportation / Logistics”, “Technical issues” and “Impacts on
             oil / gas facilities”. As the conclusion, Patimban in Subang Regency has been selected as the
             appropriate site to be a new port on the North Coast in West Java as shown in following table.
 With the enactment of Patimban as planned of devlopment location a new port on the North
 Beach of West Java, has been supported by some regulations set by the Indonesia Government
 to accelerate the progress of the action plan development, such as :
     •   President Decree (Perpres) No. 3 Year 2016 : Accelerating the Implementation of the
         National Strategic Projects, Patimban Project to be “Development of New Seaport in
         West Java (North Beach).
     •   Presidential Decree (Perpres) No. 47 Year 2016 : Determination of the Patimban Port
         In Subang, West Java Province, As a National Strategic Projects.
     •   Minister of Economy Decree (Permenko) No. 12 Year 2015 about Preparation
         Acceleration of Infrastructure Priority.
     •   Minister of Transportation Regulation Republic of Indonesia No. 420 Year 2016 :
         Team Planning, Development and Operation Readiness Port Patimban, Subang, West
         Java Province.
     •   Ministry of Transportation Decree No. 475 Year 2016 : On Amendment Decree No.
         KP 420 2016 About Tim Planning, Development and Operation Readiness Port
         Patimban In Subang, West Java Province.
 Considering the future road conditions and the upper limit of Tanjung Priok Port’s capacity,
 Directorate General of Sea Transportation (DGST) has made a policy on the demarcation of
 both port such as like :
     •   The hinterland of Patimban New Port is established in the northeast of West Java
         Province.
     •   The hinterland of Tanjung Priok Port is established in DKI Jakarta, Banten Province,
         and the Southwest of West Java Province
Figure 1.1. Hinterland of Tanjung Priok Port and Patimban New Port
 Development of patimban new port will be parted in four stages of development, these are
 Phase I Stage 1 (2018-2019), Phase I Stage 2 (2020-2022), Phase II (2023-2026), and Phase
 III (2027-2036). But, in preparation of EIA Document, it will be limited in study of
 development of Phase I Stage 1 and Phase I Stage 2 only because detail planning is not able
 to develop at this time.
 The back-up area development is conducted by Public Private Partnership (PPP) so detail
 design will be made by each invester. Hence, zoning plan is made for the back-up area and
 based on the zoning plan, environmental impact is assessed.
 With the above prospects, DGST’s F / S has forecasted the cargo demands such as containers
 and vehicles, which are main commodities of Patimban new port. it is forecasted that for
 Patimban New Port which will operate in Phase I Stage 1 (2019), will have 250.000 TEUs
 (Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit) Capacity and Demand 250.000 TEUs, and will also have large
 capacity of 7.500.000 TEUs when Development Stage (Phase III/ Year 2029) is completed
 with predicted demand as large as 5.096.000 TEUs.
 While Car terminal will have 198.902 CBU (Completely Built-Up) capacity in early operation
 in 2019 with demand 101.788 CBU, and after entire stages have completed (Phase III/ year
 2036) it is forecasted total demand for car terminal will be up to 455.990 CBU with terminal
 capacity up to 500.000 CBU. Figures of capacity demand and predicted capaity for container
 terminal and car terminal of Patimban New Port can be seen in figures below.
 Patimban Port will be constructed as a large - scale and deep - sea international port, which
 will be categorized as a Major Port (Pelabuhan Utama). As main facilities, there are four (4)
 container terminals and one (1) car terminal. The whole facilities are expected to be completed
 in 2036 with the target cargo volume of 7.5 million TEUs and 500 thousand cars (CBU).
 The Development of Patimban New Port includes in EIA mandatory criteria. Regarding the
 environmental protection laws and regulations, there are Law No. 32 in 2009 on the Protection
 and Management of the Environment, Government Regulation No 27 in 2012 on
 Environmental Permits, and Regulation of the Ministry of Environment No 05 in 2012 on
 Type of Business Plan and of Activity Requiring EIA. Therefore Ministry of Transportation
 will conduct only one type of Activity/Bussiness whose development and/or supervision
 authority is under one ministry, non-ministry government institution, provincial government
 unit, or city/regency government. Then in the study, single EIA (AMDAL) Approach is
 implemented.
 As shown in Table 1.2, the dredging and dumping volume, length of jetty, length of
 breakwater, terminal (container yard) area and reclamation volume.
         Patimban New Port will be classified as an international port. Thus, in accordance with the
         Regulation No. 08 in 2013 on Protocols of Assessment and Examination of Environmental
         Document and Enviroment Permit Issuance, for development of main port or Collecting Port,
         then the Authority of EIA Document Assessment is on Centre Commission of AMDAL
         Assessment of Ministry of Environment and Forestry.
         Objectives
         Objectives of Patimban New Port Project are as follows :
             1. Building a supplemental port instead of Tanjung Priok which is reaching the upper
                  limit of its capacity;
             2. Coping with the demand growth of port cargoes such as containers and vehicles at an
                  international port with international standards in West Java;
             3. Easing the road traffic condition in order to shorten the delivery time, to save the
                  logistics cost and to improve the energy efficiency;
             4. Stimulating the economic growth and the development of industrial areas in the west
                  of Java Island due to the facilitation of exports and imports;
             5. Developing the economy of the surrounding area of Patimban New Port;
             6. Creating job opportunities for the local community.
 Benefits
 Benefits from Patimban New Port project are as follows :
       1. Overcoming a “bottleneck” of port infrastructure’s capacity, which will attract various
             investments and activities to West Java Province, among Subang Regency;
       2. Providing an alternative port for port users, which will induce a competitive condition
             to Tanjung Priok for saving logistics cost and time;
       3. Building and operating a large international port, which will bring job opportunities
             and an economic growth in surrounding areas.
          Table 1.3. List of EIA Study Preparation Team of Patimban New Port Development
  No              Name                          Competention Sertificate                  Position
                                     Reg. Kompetensi KTPA No. 001610/SKPA-P1/LSK-
   1      J. Yanto, S.Si, MIL                                                           Team Leader
                                                 INTAKINDO/IV/2015
          Dr. Ir. Muhammad           Reg. Kompetensi KTPA No. 001624/SKPA-P2/LSK-    Physic and Chemical
   2
              Nur Aidi, MS                       INTAKINDO/XII/2015                        Expert
              Dadan Sudana           Reg. Kompetensi ATPA No. 001698/SKPA-P2/LSK-     Social and Culture
   3
             Wijaya, SE., MIL                    INTAKINDO/XII/2015                        Expert
                                     Reg. Kompetensi ATPA No. 001611/SKPA-P1/LSK-      Environmental
   4         Santi Trilina, ST.
                                                 INTAKINDO/IV/2015                         Expert
                                     Reg Kompetensi ATPA, No Reg : No 001336/SKPA-
   5          Deri Ramdhani                                                            Biology Expert
                                              P1/LSK-INTAKINDO/I/2015
                                      Reg. Kompetensi ATPA No. 001431/SKPA/LSK-        Transportation
   6     Ir. Tedi Setiadi, M.Si.
                                                 INTAKINDO/VII/2015                        Expert
 Patimban New Port will be a International level Container Loading-Unloading and Car Port.
 Plan of development of the port is one of biggest for Port Sector of Indonesia, because of
 owned cargo volume will be same as Tanjung Priok Port one, which is the biggest port in
 Indonesia. Plan of Development of Patimban new Port, consists of some development
 activities where + 178 Ha Area will be used for Terminal Area Development, 15.38 Ha Area
 will be used for Road Access construction 8 km long, also + 10 Ha will be used for back up
 area, from 356.23 Ha land acquired, will be built by DGST of Ministry of Transportation.
 Main location of development of Patimban new Port is Village of Patimban, Sub-District of
 Pusakanagara, Regency of Subang, with area boundaries as below :
 The entire location of project that covers back up area and road access, covers several Villages
 such as Villages of Patimban, Kalentambo, Gempol, Kotasari and Pusakaratu that include in
 Pusakanagara District, also Pusakajaya Village, Pusakajaya District.
                        Causeway                               356 m x 8 m
                        Trestle                                573 m x 8 m
 Patimban regional feeder seaport existing condition can be seen in this following figure. While
 the cross-sectional picture of this existing jetty can be seen in the appendix page.
 EIA study is made after feasibility study has conducted, but at same time with feasibility study
 and Master Plan of Port Study reviews. However study of detail design will be create soon
 after review of feasibility study has completed. In project location, there is existing Patimban
 Port with status as Regional Feeder Port.
 Development of Patimban New Port Plan is expected will be centre of regional and national
 main growth. With this peroject, it will strengthen PKL Perkotaan Pusakanagara as regional
 centre of Main growth. Location of project, Patimban Village, is directed as location of
 Development of Patimban new Port as Feeder Port (Article 16 Perda No. 3 year 2014). In this
 times, Regulation Regional Spatial Plan has been observe again in parth of ravision phase to
 change Feeder Port area into a major Ports, by virtue of the Subang Regent Recommendation
 No. 511.43 / 1688 / Bapp, on November 25, 2016.
 Based on map of spatial pattern of Subang Regency, location of project includes in wetland
 agriculture as local port plan/feeder port. With plan of development of Patimban New Port
 becomes international-scale Port, Spatial Plan of Regency of Subang is needed to be revisioned,
 so Patimban Port is able to become Main Port. And with recommendation letter from Subang
 Regent No 511.43/1688/bapp, Patimban Port development has been compliance and will be
 priority in change process of spatial plan of Subang Regency.
 that location of the project is directed as Village residences, while based on direction of
 development area Allotment that the project plan includes in WP Purwakarta with
 development direction to develop food crop agriculture, agroindustry, non-pollutive and non-
 extractive manufacture industry, creative and multimedia industry, marine business that is
 highly competitive and export oriented. Subang Regency is directed to be supporting node to
 PKN Kawasan Perkotaan Bandung Raya, directed to be sustainable wetland agriculture, non-
 pollutive and non-extractive manufacture industry or not disrupt irrigation and water reserve
 and to not cause function change of paddy field lands, marine business, and non-metal mineral
 Mining.
 While according to Spatial Sturcture of West Java Province, Patimban Port Location yet
 includes in Map pf Spatial Structure of West java Province, where plan of development of
 main port is still in Cilamaya. According to that, based on recommendation letter from West
 Java Governor No 550/5917/Dishub, that Patimban Port development will be integrated with
 region development plan and will be included from in West Java Spatial Plan by revised on
 Perda Provinsi Jawa Barat No. 22 tahun 2010, about West Java Spatial Plan Years 2009-2029.
 Therefore, revised of spatial plan is needed included Patimban Port development.
 Conformity with National Master Plan of Port and Master Plan of Port of Patimban
 Based on Ministry of Transportation Decree No. KP 745 Year 2016 regarding Second
 Amendment of Ministry of Transportation Decree No. KP 414 Year 2013 on Establishment of
 National Port Master Plan, that the construction of Patimban Port located in Subang, West
 Java Province. Then, based on the Decree of the Ministry of Transportation No. 901 2016
 About the National Ports Master Plan, Patimban Port designated as major Ports. The Terms of
 Reference Document prepared in accordance with the Port Development Plan of Patimban in
 Patimban Port Master Plan of West Java Province No. KP 87 Year 2017. Therefore Patimban
 Port development has been accordance with changes in National Masterplan and RIP Patimban
 that have been prepared.
Figure 1.9. Spatial Structure Plan Maps of Subang Regency, 2011 - 2031
                                          Figure 1.10. Spatial Structure Plan Maps of West Java, Year 2009
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                                                          I-19
                                                                                                   Chapter I - Introduction
 Development plan of Patimban New Port will be examined in depth in EIA Document, covers
 Phase I Stage 1 and Phase I Stage 2, with Types of Activities as Below :
      a. Construction of Terminal Area with 178 Ha Area, consist of:
            •   Development Phase I Stage 1 (2018-2019) : 68 ha
            •   Development Phase I Stage 2 (2020-2022) : 110 ha
      b. Zoning plan of back up area is 10 ha, including 3 Ha for utility area, 2 Ha for Outer
          road, and 5 ha for public area; with total Land acquisition as vast as 356.23 Ha.
      c. Construction of Access Road as long as 8,100m x 20m, Connecting Bridge 1,000 m
          x 20m, and Jetty Extention 35m x 8m.
 In the future, back up area is still zoning plan, because of the consideration that the director
 general of sea transportation will cooperate with the private sector in back up area development
 so the details of design will be prepared and constructed by the private in the next phase. For
 the development phase I, after land acquisition, fencing activity will be held on all of back up
 area and access road locations. The purpose of fencing is to zone the area between seaport and
 public land, so it will not make public unrest between seaport party and public as the result of
 land use change. Even so, although fencing activity is carried but the manager will make access
 road and access bridge for public needed in the location.
 In the Patimban seaport plan, it will use green port concept that will be developed by Sydney
 Ports CoRporation. Where the guideline is developed to improve environmental sustainability
 for the development of new port and to maintain the continuity of the environment from the
 existing seaport activity. The green port concept which is applied in this development plan is
 organizing container yard on the 20 m distances from outter wall to minimize horizontal
 pressure. Moreover, mangrove will be cultivated in the side part of back up area to look after
 marine and terestrial life existence and also to minimize abrasion and wind impacts.
 Other than that, the advanced environmentally friendly technologies will be used in every
 construction method and structur, such as the use of dredging material to mix with cement for
 on shore facility development needed in order to minimize dumping volume. Moreover, steel
 sheet pile will be used for revetment construction which can minimize the fishing ground
 impact because of the use of slightly rock material.
 Furthermore, the details of development schedule for each phase of development can be seen
 in the table 1.7.
0      Land Acquisition
                                                                                                                                                                                              Phase 1-1
                                                                                                                                                                                              Soft Open
1      Preparation
2 Dredging (-10m)
3 Strut Berth
6 1 CDM
2 CPM
3 Surface Sand
5 Breakwater
Phase I-2
1 Preparation
2 Dredging (-14m)
8 Extention of Jetty
9 Outer Road
   Table 1.8. Total Requirement of Land for Development of Patimban New Port Phase I Stage 1 –
                                          Phase I Stage 2
                          No                Land Usage             Total (ha)
                          Terminal Area
                           1   Container Terminal                       80
                           2   Car Terminal                             25
                           3   Ro-Ro Terminal                           5
                           4   Truck waiting Area                       11
                           5   Utility Facility Area                    17
                           6   Port Service Boat Terminal               2
                           7   Port Administration Area                 6
                           8   Inspection Area                          3
                           9   Waste Oil Treatment Facility             2
                          10 Future Railway                             11
                          11 Inner Road                                 9
                          12 Buffer Zone                                7
                               Total                                   178
                          Back Up Area
                           1   Public Area                              5
                           2   Utility Area                             3
                           3   Outer Road                               2
                               Total                                    10
                          Access Road
                           1   Access Road 8100 m                       30
                           2   Connecting Bridge 1000 m                2.1
                           3   Existing Jetty Extention 350 m          0.7
                              5000 m (up to back up area) x 60 m for land
                                                 acquisition
  Total access road which will build is 8,100m x 20m with 30 ha. While, the land that will be
  acquired just only 5,000m x 60m with 15,38 ha, because 3,100m is include in back up area
  land acquisition with 356.23 ha.
  a. Container Terminal
  For development in Phase I Stage 1 until Phase 1 Stage2, container terminal which will be build is No
  1 and No 2, with total area 40 ha. For dimension of container terminal are figure in following table.
                              Table 1.9. Dimension of Container Terminal
                                                        Berth No 1 depth (m)               -14
                                                        Berth No 1 length (m)              840
                                    Terminal No 1
                                                        Berth No 3 depth (m)              -12,5
                                       (40 ha)
           Container Terminal                           Berth No 3 length (m)              480
              Dimension                                 Back distance of terminal (m)      480
                                                        Berth No 2 depth (m)               -14
                                    Terminal No 2
                                                        Berth No 2 length (m)              840
                                       (40 ha)
                                                        Back distance of terminal (m)      480
                                     Source: RIP Patimban, 2016
  b. Car Terminal
  Vehicle terminal that willl be built is 1 unit on 25 Ha area with capacity of 3.500 CBU. Berth
  that will be built is berth no 7, with -12,5 m depth, 690 m x 35 m dimension. Vehicle terminal
  development activity will start in Phase I stage 1 on 9 Ha areas which is consist of outdoor
  parking area as much as 2 location which each capacity is 3.500 CBU, and then will be
  enlarged in phase I stage 2 on 16 Ha areas with the addition of outdoor parking area and
  workshop area, so the total area of vehicle terminal is 25 Ha.
  At this moment, there is special Ship that is designed for carrying vehicle. One of Shipping
  line that has the most Vehicle Carrier is NYK Line. Below, There are some plan specifications
  of Vehicle Carrier for Patimban Port.
  Terminal Area for Ro-Ro Ship is 48.500 m2. This area is divided into :
        •    Truck waiting yard     : 40.000 m2
        •    Apron                  : 8.500 m2
        Table 1.12.Dimension of Petroleum Terminal, Ro-Ro Ship Terminal, and Boat Service Port
                                             Terminal
                                                     water depth (m)                    -7
                     Ro – Ro Ship Terminal
                                                     length (m)                        170
                             (5 ha)
                                                     distance of back terminal (m)     250
                                                     Berth No 8 depth (m)               -7
                     Port Service Terminal
                                                     Berth No 8 length (m)             330
                             (2 ha)
                                                     distance of back terminal (m)      50
                                    Source : RIP Patimban, 2016
  d. Utility Area
  Utility area will be placed in the back side of terminal, consists of various kind of activities
  compenents such as fire station, WWTP, gate, tank water, electricity transformer substation,
  parking lot, and security area, on the 17 Ha areas. This area will be built in Phase I stage 1.
  e. Inspection Area
  This area is inspection area for container and vehicle that will be transported by truck. It will
  be used 3 Ha areas and will be built at Phase I stage 1.
  Although other terms from the regulation above have to prepare oil cleaning water
  management facility from the tank or ship where the bulk cargo ship, chemical product, crude
  oil, or petroleum product ship are anchored, these terms are not applied in Patimban Seaport.
  The sludge ship will be received by sludge collective ship which is located beside the ship,
  and then anchored in berth no. 8, then transferred to management facility through pipeline or
  tank truck.
  For ballast water management, it will refer to International Convention for the Control and
  Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments.
  k. Breakwater
  Breakwater has function to protect port from waves that can harm port activities. Wave height
  design is arranged in facility condition time for 50 years, 100 years of re-periode, and less than
  40% chance will repeat
Based on created plan, total length of breakwater is 2.338 m. with detail below :
For the location of breakwater that will be build are seen in following figure.
     l. Revetment / Seawall
     Seawall contruction will be built in the side part of Seaport with total length 6.416 m. Seawall
     dimension can be seen in this following table.
Seawall and revetment dimension which will be build can be seen in following figure.
  m. Berth
  Berth development for Patimban Seaport terminal is planned to be built as much as 6 units for
  all phase I, with different form and location according to terminal needed. Berth size that will
  be built is :
                                   Table 1.15. Berth Type and Size
                          Facility     Description    Unit   Length      Depth
                        Berth No 1     Container      m      840      -14 m CD
                        Berth No 2     Container      m      540      -14 m CD
                        Berth No 3     Container      m      480      -12,5 m CD
                        Berth No 7     Car            m      60       -12,5 m CD
                        Berth No 8     Service Ship   m      330      -7 m CD
                        Berth Ro Ro    Ro Ro          m      170      -7 m CD
                                      Source : JICA Survey Team
  Typical cross section and container berth plan ( No 1 – 2 ) and vehicle berth (No 7) can bee
  seen in the following figure :
            Because the data about pipe thickness that is intersected with sailing channel are surely
            unknown, so corrotion assumption that is used in analysis is 3 mm. It conclude that risk
            possibility of the pipe to the ship is on ALARP condition (yellow border), so it doesn’t need
            protection or modification of the pipe.The following table shows the classification of risk to
            the color code.
                                                                                    Consequence Of         Risk
                                Threat    Hazardeous    Probability Of Failure                                    RM ID
Zone             Line                                                                  Failure             Rank
                                 ID         Event
                                                        Probability       Score   Downtime Score
                                T-2      Acceptable     0.00E+0       1           0            1           1      T-2.1.6
         10” FPRO-ECOM          T-2      Failure        4.57E-06      1           12           4           4      T-2.2.5
                                T-2      Acceptable     0.00E+0       1           0            1           1      T-2.2.6
         16” FPRO-ECOM          T-2      Failure        4.57E-06      1           12           4           4      T-2.3.5
                                T-2      Acceptable     0.00E+0       1           0              1         1      T-2.3.6
                                             Source : RIP Patimban, 2016
       While for risk posibilities that are caused by anchoring activity can be seen in the following
       table :
       Although the predicition shows that it doesn’t need any protection, because the result of study
       about risk possibility is low, so in the seaport develompent will not be made pipe protection.
       However, the plan of Patimban seaport development has pipe protection plan aims to prevent
       the risk of accident. Relating to the skill of pipe method construction and contruction cost, it
       is recommended to use protection with gravel. The used method can be seen in this following
       table.
                                                     Protection
                                                     system with
                                                     concrete
                                                                         4 x 0.3 m      1 x 0.3 m       1 x 0.3 m
                                                     matress
                                                     placement
2 Rock Dumping
                                                     Protection
                                                     system with
                                                     rock dumping.
                                                     That the rock
                                                     dumping tidy        475.2 mm       178.1 mm        178.1 mm
                                                     and scattered,
                                                     so one of
                                                     option is using
                                                     Clamshell
     After studying the pictures of underwater pipelines in the waters around the activity location,
     it can be known that pipe protection using heavy materials will cause damage to the pipe,
     bacause the very soft soil layers can cause the pad for supporting pipe can’t withstand the
  given load weight. In consequence, there are some option to overcome it, in example with not
  giving the protection to the pipe according to the risk assesment study conclusion and
  underwater existing pipe condition. From the environment point of view, it is not
  recommended to disturb or change the existing sediment condition so it’s not affecting the
  friction that can damage the pipe.
  In the other hand, in pipe protection that will be applied, the load in the pipe using gravel has
  to be minimized with the lower height than the pile of grave on the pipe.
  While for ship lines that will be used in Patimban seaport with the pipe intersection on the
  sailing line can be seen in this following picture :
  Based on layout of sailing line and restriction zone to off-shore platform and seabed pipe, it
  proposed the installation of navigational aids facility as shown in the table below and drawn
  in the following figure :
           Figure 1.23. Proposed Layout of Patimban New Port SBNP Placement (Overall)
                               Source : RIP Pelabuhan Patimban, 2016
  For handling cargo especially Container type ULCS, Quayside Container Gantry Cranes from
  super post panama type will be installed. For handling system container inter-field, System
  Transfer Crane (RTG) is suggested will be used considering size of container volume that will
  be handled.
  Design and number of quayside container cranes are decided based on container volume
  estimation as much as 3.75 milion TEUs for container terminal no.1 and no. 2 in Phase I.
  related to quayside container rames, super post Panamax-type gantry rames capable to
  transport 13,000 container TEUs with 20 rows on deck, it projected for quay no.1 and no.2,
  and conventional sized cranes catering for 2,550 container TEUs with 12 or 13 rows on deck
  will be used for quay no. 3.
                                                                                   Container
                                                        Container Terminal
                                                                                   Terminal
                                                              No. 1
                                                                                     No. 2
               Item               Symbol Unit       Quay No. 1    Quay No. 3       Quay No. 2
  Berth Length                      Bw     m           840           450              840
 Number of QC                       Q     Unit          9             5                10
 Yearly work time                   H     Hour        8,760         8,760            8,760
 Handling Capacity (per hour)        P   Q'ty/hr        30            30               30
 QC operational availability        Sf     %            90            90               90
 Berth operational availability     Sw     %            50            50               50
 Conversion rate from TEU to
                                    TF                  1.5           1.5              1.5
 actual quantity
          Notes: QC means "Quayside Container Crane".
Quayside Container Crane and main specification can be seen in following figure and table :
OUTREACH
                                                                                  LIFT ABOVE
                                                                                  W.S. G. RAIL
  Design and number of Rubber Tyred Gantry Crane (RTGC) are decided based on container
  volume estimation as much as 3.75 milion TEUs for container terminal no.1 and no. 2 in Phase
  I. and same volume also estimated for container terminal no. 3 and no. 4 in Phase II and Phase
  III. Main Specification of Rubber Tyred Gantry Crane is presented in the following figure and
  table:
                                SPREADER
                               Figure 2. 1. Rubber Tyred Gantry Crane
                    ENGINE-
                    GENERATOR
                    SET
  Container Handling Equipment which are required in Phase I is sumerized in the following
  table :
Source : http://www.maersk.com/en/hardware/fleet/maersk-line
         On shore facility development location in the back up area is planned in the back part of
         terminal. Director general of Sea transportation conduct the land acquisition on the whole of
         back up area in 356,23 Ha area, which will be built at Phase I, is public area as much as 5 Ha
         areas, utility area 3 Ha, and 2 Ha areas for outer road.
The future plan for back up area zoning is seen in the picture 1.13.
  Construction of access road is planned to be built in west side of the port which is connecting
  port location plan with Pantura national road in 8.1 km length and 60 m width, approximately
  23 m width will be built as road, and the rest will be used for future development. Construction
  of acces road through 6 villages, Patimban village, Pusakaratu village, Kotasari village,
  Gempol village, and Kalentambo, with another village in different district, Pusakajaya village,
  Pusakajaya District, Subang Regional. Access road along 8.1 km have been acquisited partly
  by Subang local goverment with 30 m width.
  Access road plan is devided to 4 (four) part; construction of main access road (5.0 km),
  construction of access road to back up area (3.1 km), construction of access bridge to connect
  terminal area with onshore area (1,000 m), and jetty extension (350 m).
  Based on consideration of bridge design standard, it will prefer to the newest bridge
  development design, which the design standards are following :
  In the construction of Access road phase, it will be installed iron fence along the path that has
  been released, which aims to mark the port area, and to prevent unauthorized parties into the
  road construction area. It is done to maintain the security and orderliness in the construction
  of road aspect. Moreover, traffic signs will be installed to avoid accident. Construction of
  access road for Patimban Seaport consist of road construction and fly over which is connected
  to the road that built in certain location. Road design that has been planned for this access road
  construction can be seen in the following figure:
Phase I (4 Lanes)
  End point of access road is on west side of back up area, in Patimban Village. Road design
  that will be built is the same.
  Bend Section
  Bend section is on 2/3 of end of the access road part, that is located in Patimban village. This
  construction is planned to be built as smooth as possible by making the turn into a slightly
  rounded corner, and not too retire a corner. it’s also imposed maximum speed limit when pass
  this turn with 60 km/hour speed to minimalize accident risk. For more details can be seen in
  this following figure.
R=150 5+800
                               5+500
                                                                     Existing ROW
  Meanwhile for access road development, flood return period that is used to determine the tilt
  is 50 years. Flood rate on Chart Datum Level (CDL) :
Figure of bridge location along the access road can be seen in this following picture
                                                                                      Sta.3+913 Bridge
                                                                                      ForLocal Road where only motorcycles
                                                                                      pass: Vertical Clearance 3.0m
Sta.1+36 Bridge
Figure 1.32. Location of Bridge and Under Pass along the Access Road
Stages of development activities of Patimban Port which includes the pre – construction phase,
construction phase and the operational phase, can be seen in the following sub-chapter
A. Land Acquisition
Land acquisition for Patimban seaport development will be started in 2017. Land acquisition
team will free the land for back up area and access road. The estimated impact that can be
caused by land acquisition activity in access road and back up area are the decreasing of land
productivity, livelyhood lost, and public unrest.
Back Up Area
The area for back up area is 356,23 Ha, where on that area, 314,96 Ha are owned by public
and government and the rest of 41,27 Ha area are owned by private. The number of
householder affected in the back up area location is 340 householder consist if 754 person.
The tenure for back up area can be seen in the table below.
               Table 1.28. Total Area for Back Up Area in Each Block that Acquired
                                Blok    Extents (m2)    Extents (ha)
                                 15      757,335.48        75.73
                                 16      222,105.85        22.21
                                 17      729,667.51        72.97
                                 18      377,854.42        37.79
                                 19     1,090,140.59      109.01
                                 20      385,194.15           38.52
                                Total   3,562,297.99          356.23
                                 Source : LARAP Survey Team
Meanwhile the number of building affected in the land acquisition activity at back up area
location can be seen in this following table.
buildings that are used for vend along the Patimban beach. While the number of
householder/unit and people affected can be seen in this following table.
Table 1.32. Number of Units and Human Affected of Land Acquisition in Back Up Area
                                      Human Type            Total KK/
            Affected Asset                                                    Total Person
                                         Affected             Unit
                                   Owners                      105                 244
        1. Agricultural Field      Tenants                       1                  1
                                   Workers                      27                  27
                                   Owners (Individu)            24                  55
                                   Owners (Company)              1                   -
        2. Fishpond
                                   Tenants                      23                  48
                                   Workers                      18                  18
                                   Owners                       21                  45
        3. Shop/restaurant         Tenants                      43                 242
                                   Workers                      64                  64
                                   Owners                        5                  5
        4. House
                                   Tenants                       1                  5
                                   Owners (Government            2                   -
        7. Graveyard
                                   Land)
        8. Mosque                  Owners                        1                  -
        9. Other                   Owners                        4                  -
         Total                                            340             754
                 Source : LARAP Survey Team, 2017; Note : KK = Head of Family
Development land needed for back up area is presented in the following table.
Access Road
Access road that will be built will pass through land acquisition area in 5 village; Kalentambo, Gempol,
Pusakaratu, and Kotasari, and another village outside Pusakanagara district, that is Pusakajaya village.
Construction of access road is held on Subang regency land acquisition area along 5 km with 30 m
width. But, for Patimban Seaport access road requirment, road wide that needed is 60 m, so it’s needed
additional land acquisition area that is planned as much as 30 m to the south east of access road that
has been freed by Subang regency government, with total area needed is 15.38 Ha. Generally, location
that released is land that has various activity such as field, fishpond/embankment, and stall. For acces
road land acquisition plan, from 15.38 Ha area needed, 12.07 Ha area is government’s land. The
following table shows area per village that will be freed. The number of householders (KK) affected
in access road location are 177 householders consist of 378 person.
           Table 1.34. Extent Area of Government and Public which would be Acquiring
      Ownership      Village   Area(m2)       Area(ha)     Ownership       Area(m2)     Area(ha)
                    Gempol    71,818.43         7.18                       7,591.25       0.76
                   Kalentambo 30,251.08         3.03                           -            -
                    Kotasari   2,085.28         0.21       Government       689.98        0.07
         People
                   Pusakajaya  2,542.62         0.25                         40.17        0.00
                   Pusakaratu 14,029.75         1.40                       24,711.41      2.47
                   Luas Total 120,727.17       12.07                       33,032.81      3.30
                               Source: LARAP Survey Team, 2016
Condition of public and government land use that affected by the biggest impact is ricefields
area. For the details look the following table.
Number of affected building that has been recorded is 23 units. For more detail data are figure
in following table.
          Table 1.37. Total Unit and Human Affected by Access Road Acquisition
                                  Type of Human           Total KK/
          Property Affected                                               Total People
                                     Affected               Unit
                               Owners                        45                104
        1.Agricultural Land    Tenants                       14                 20
                               Workers                       14                 14
        2. Fishpond            Owners (Individu)              1                 4
                               Owners (Company)              34                 97
        3.Agriculture Land     Tenants                       13                 24
                               Workers                       14                 14
        4. Shop/restaurant     Owners                         1                  -
                               Tenants                        1                  -
        5. Office
                               Workers                        6                 6
                               Owners                        25                 68
        6. House
                               Tenants                        8                 27
                               Owners (Government             1                  -
        7. Graveyard
                               Land)
                            Total                            177               378
        Source : LARAP Survey Team, 2017
a) Land
b) Ground level and underground level space
c) Building
d) Plantation
e) Things related to the land
f) Other countable loss
Transportation Ministry more prioritize the compensation in the form of money in trading
system with the owner, so they don’t provide replacment land according to LARAP
recommendation. On the other hand. The Ministry of Transportation will develope livelyhood
recovery program such as:
a) Prioritizing the people affected by land acquisition in the employment of construction
    worker according to the require qualification.
b) Arrange the training program such as:
    •   Enterpreuneurship training especially for people affected which change the livelyhood
    •   Technical training in the field of agriculture, animal husbandry, and fishery
    •   Institutional capacity building in the improvement of business production,
        management, and marketing.
    •   Training of small and medium scale enterprises improvement
    •   Training of skill such as mechanics, sewing, and crafting.
c) Arrange venture capital assistance program
d) Arrange new business activity program
e) Arrange marketing assistance program
f) Arrange equipment aid program
Impacts that possibly will appear from the activity of land acquisition are land productivity
loss, livelyhood loss, and public unrest.
Construction workers for the project were estimated at 1030 persons in Phase I Stage 1, and
680 person in Phase I Stage 2, and among of them, about 20% is consists of local people, as
shown in table below.
Office and basecamp for commuter construction workers will be built 2 units in the south part
of existing berth on 1 Ha area, and in the crossingg of Pantura road and access road
construction.
To keep the environmental cleanness as the result of workers domestic activities, so it will be
built toilet and septic tank for domestic liquid waste, and temporary garbage dump (TPS) for
domestic solid waste with 5 m3 capacity. It’s estimated that the biggest amount of midden is
1.030 person x 2,5 liter/person/day (Damanhuri, 2004) = 2.575 litre/day or equal with 2,57
m3/day. These garbage will be transported daily by cleanliness agencies of Subang regency to
the TPST/TPA in Subang regency.
Domestic liquid waste produce from workers domestic activities/workers needs such as
bathing, washing, etc. Standard that is used to get the domestic liquid waste volume is 80%
from clean water needs or in the mathematics form is calculated as follow (Metcalf dan Eddy,
1981).
Table 1.40. The Estimation Of Water Volume That Is Required For Workers And Construction Phase
                                                  Terminal                      Access Road
       Requirements             Unit        Phase I      Phase I            Phase I      Phase I
                                            Stage 1      Stage 2            Stage 1      Stage 2
   Number of construction
                               Person           560           390            470             290
          workers
    Construction Periode         Day         720             1050            540             540
      Domestic Waste            L/day       1,400             975           1,175            725
      Portable Water           ton/day       11.2             7.8            9.4             5.8
   Water for construction      ton/day      18-20            18-20           6-8             6-8
                                   Source: JICA Survey Team
The procurement of employee activity and basecamp operation are predicted to make the
appear of the impact such as opened job opportunity and infectious diseases.
    Table 1.41. Estimation of Construction Heavy Equipment Planned for Phase I Stage 1 (Port)
            Heavy                                                Heavy
  No                        Capacity     Numbers      No                      Capacity     Numbers
          Equipment                                           Equipment
  1    Backhoe               0.7m3         27         16   Tire Roller            20t          2
  2    Grab Dredger          2.0m3         7          17   Belt Conveyer        800m           1
  3    Backhoe Barge         0.7m3         7          18   Soil Barge         5000m3           2
  4    Material Barge         600t         7          19   Tug Boat            4000ps          2
  5    Tug Boat              300ps         7          20   Patrol boat             -           4
  6    Crane Barge             50t         7          21   Piling Barge          40m           3
  7    PVD Machine           H 10m         0          22   Material Barge      1,000t          3
  8    TSHD Dredger         3,500m3        4          23   Tug Boat             300ps          8
  9    Dump Truck              10t         15         24   Bulldozer              D4           4
  10   Grab Dredger          23m3          1          25   Concrete plant    100m3/day         3
  11   Bulldozer               D6          4          26   Concrete Truck         10t          12
  12   Tire Roller             20t         4          27   Crane                  50t          3
  13   Grader                  6m          4          28   Crane                  25t          3
  14   Wheel roader           2m3          3          29   Flat truck             10t          3
  15   CDM Ship                 -          3
                                      Source : JICA Study Team
      Table 1.42. Estimation of Consruction Heavy Equipments Planned For Phase I Stage 2 (Port)
                 Heavy                                                    Heavy
    No                            Capacity        Numbers       No                           Capacity        Numbers
              Equipment                                                 Equipment
     1         Soil Barge         5000m3             6           5      Crane Barge             50t               5
     2          Tug Boat          4000ps             4           6     TSHD Dredger          16,000m3             1
     3        Piling Barge          40m              5           7     Grab Dredger            23m3               3
     4       Material Barge        1,000t            5           8       Tug Boat             300ps               5
                                             Source : JICA Study Team
  The transportation of heavy equipment to the project site will be done by land transportation
  (road) passing through Pantura national road using heavy vehicles such as trucks and other
  kind of simillar vehicle .And the transportation of heavy equipment to the project site will also
  be done by sea (ships). With the quarry location in Purwakarta, so transportation is held by
  land track through Pantura National road, and head to the road that has been freed by Subang
  regency government (Red soil).
The estimation of vehicle volume amount at the Phase I stage 1 can be seen in this following
table.
         Table 1.44. Embankment And Volume of Vehicles For Access Road and Back Up Area
                              Aspect               Unit     Phase I Stage 1
                         Volume Embankment          m3          292.722
                           Truck capacity           m3              8
                           Work Duration          Month            10
                          Number of Truck         Month          3659.0
                                                  Rit/Day        122.0
                                    Source: JICA Survey Team
While for the estimation of the ship number for sand transportation (sea track) and truck
number for rock transportation for offshore facility development (land track) can be seen in
the table below.
             Table 1.45. Estimation of Ship Number for Sand Transportation (Sea Route)
                    Item                 Unit     Phase I Stage 1       Phase I Stage 2
                                       3
           Sand Volume               m               1,400,000             6,600,000
           Barge Capacity            m3                 3,000                3,000
           Work Duration             Day                 93                   440
           Total Ships               Day                  5                    5
                                   Source : JICA Survey Team
             Table 1.46. Estimation of Ship Number for Rock Transportation (Land Route)
                     Item                 Unit      Phase I Stage 1      Phase I Stage 2
            Rock Volume                m3               331,000                 -
            Truck Capacity             m3                  8                    -
            Work Duration              Day                540                   -
            Total Truck                Day                76,6                  -
                                    Source : JICA Survey Team
1. Reclamation
Reclamation activity is conducted in Phase I Stage 1 and Phase I Stage 2 construction, which
is used in terminal development (off-shore). Total soil material landfill that require for
reclamation is 10.300.000 m3, which is for Phase I Stage 1 development, beside rely on sand
that purchased from third parties, it als will use the mixture of cement and rake soil from
dredging activity. Description of reclamation requirements can be seen in the following table:
Based on the plan, sand material sources that will be purchased and used for reclamation, will
be took from quarry, which came from Lampung and Purwakarta. Sand supplier location were
selected because there are abundant minerals providers in those location and they are licensed
for sea sand minning activities. Description of licensed mining companies can be seen in the
letter issued by the directorate general of minerals and coal, Ministry of Energy and Mineral
Resorces of Indonesia Republic, number 1343.Pm/04/DJB/2016 about Determination of 19th
IUP Clear and Clean, and list of IUP that has been revoked by governor/regent/mayor
(attachment X). As for the list of major companies mining material provider can be seen on
the pages of appendices.
As previously described that reclamation activity will use sand and dredging materials from
basin and sailing line to mix with cement. In the aspect of method used, Patimban seaport
development will use method as written in this following table.
 Reclamation materials transportation will be done by sea track using big size ship.
 Reclamation materials which come from Lampung will be sent directly to Patimban Seaport
 location. While the transportation of rock material for construction activity will use land track,
 so it need calculation of the potential of transpotation volume increase.
 For the route of transportation, because the rock materials will be take from Purwakarta, so
 the using routes are : materials is transpported from Purwakarta - Jalan Raya Sukatani – Jl.
 Ciganea – Jl. Tol Cipularang – Jl. Tol Jakarta Cikampek –Jalan Pantura – Seaport access road
 ( Red soil/seaport access road that has been freed by Subang government). While for the class
 of road that will be passed in the material transportation route from Purwakarta can be seen in
 the following table.
Table 1.49. Road Class and Tonase Route of Rock Transportation for Off-Shore Facility Development
      No                  Road Name                       Road Class               Tonase
      1     Jl. Raya Sukatani                       Regancy Road                    8 ton
      2     Jl. Ciganea                             Province Road                  10 ton
      3     Jl. Tol Cipularang                      Tol Road                       12 ton
      4     Jl. Tol Jakarta Cikampek                National Tol Road              12 ton
      5     Jl. Pantura                             National Road                  12 ton
      6     Jalan Akses Pelabuhan (tanah merah)
                                                     Cement
  Soil                                             improvement
dredging                                                                                     Soil Cement
Design that is used for Patimban Seaport development will use cement soil mixture as drawn
in the figure below.
CPM
CDM 50 % CDM 20 %
To reduce ground pressure in berth retaining wall and to protect the building from berth
construction, use of CDM with low ratio about 20 % will be enough to sustain terminal decline
process. CPM will be used on the soil surface with 0.7 height and sub – base part with the
marge will be used on cement soil used.
Standard design for terminal compounding with PVD method in terminal from Phase I Stage
1 untill Phase I Stage 2 can be seen in the figure below.
CDM 50 %
Figure 1.43. Terminal Development Design Phase I Stage 1 until Phase I Stage 2
2. Breakwater
Breakwater will be built in the beginning phase of development. Material for breakwater
development will use rocks with composite pile type with breakwater block.
For East side revetment, there are very deep area, so the use of concrete pillars will be changed
with iron pillars which are stronger than concrete, thus suitable to use in that agitated area.
Seawall structure and revetment area are designed following the concept of the peak of the
sea wall to the design of waves up to 1.5 m. Waves Design height (Wh) is adopted for seawall
design, but for southern revetment area and shore area of back-up area is set on 0.5 m of height.
Height of top of West and East Side Seawalls/Revetment Areas is is set on HWL + ½ Wh (1.5
m). Height of Top Of West Side Seawall is set to +2.5 m from CDL considering height of 1.5
m waves design, Period of waves design is 6 seconds and Dominate direction is from North-
East side.
Considering soil condition of Revetment Area Foundation and Phase I Schedule, foundations
of west and east side Seawalls will be strengthen by removing the soft mud material and
replace it with soft sand. Containing materials of Yard Area is planned using material dredged
from basin. Containing material will be strengthen by environmentally friendly Prefabricated
Vertical Drain (PVD) method and surcharged soil on the area.
Seawall/ revetment area Structure is designed with gravity type (concrete block wall is placed
on pile of boulders from sea basin depth to -4.0-4.5 m LWS). Both side of Seawall are
protected by pile of armoured debris and concrete block is placed on pile of boulders. Steel
boulder (500 kg-1 ton type) will be placed on slope of off-shore side of revetment area as wave
absorber facility and debris of boulder layer (250-500 kg) will be placed slopingly. Below of
concrete block reclamation sand filled until +1,50 m (MSL +1.00) and approximately 15 m
from surface height concrete block is increased gradually until reached +3.5 m (MSL +3.0 m)
by filling material.
4. Berth
To build berth, berth section is required so that the building on it still steady. Berth section has
the smaller number of pole than berth structures in general. Pile interval is selected based on
calculation every 10 m in longitudinal direction, although it normaly will require 5 – 6 m. Low
pole will produce low sound and vibration for environment and public around the project site.
Construction of pillar section will be done in the factory with welding method. Total work for
this development is devided into 2 parts, in the factory and in the project site. Every process
will be done in parrarel so shorten development time. Construction of this berth section will
be done critical phase from the entire development in Phase I Stage 1.
Crane Barge
Concrete cover board structure that is planned on the berth section is using pre-cast type and
is going to give a little sustain in development area.
The estimation of dredging volume in each development phase is shown in the following table.
           The estimation of dredging total volume from Access Chanel (Navigation Chanel) and port
           basin reach approximately 26.050.000 m3 , which 6.626.000 m3 are from navigation channel
           and 19.424.000 m3 are from the basin. As much as 2.300.000 m3 from that volume will be used
           for port terminal reclamation, and the rest as much as 23.750.000 m3 will be dumped in
           sugested offshore area.
           Characteristics of each dredging tools can be seen on Table 1.53. While dredging method can
           be seen in Table 1.54. In that table also is seen the dredging depth, beside dredging and
           dumping limit volume is also seen. Location of offshore dumping is sugested at 15 km distance
           in offshore from construction site with 23 m depth.
                                                                                           HOPPER
SHD:
Trailer Suction Hopper                                                                              157.0
                                                                                                             28.0 -     12.5 -    10.5 -
Dredger                                                                                               -
                                 HOPPER                                                                       31.0       15.5      11.0
(Hopper     Capacity :                                                      BOW THRUSTER            167.0
16,500 - 20,000 m3)
                                   DRAG HEAD                 SUBMERGED DREDGE PUMP
SEABED
                                                                                              Dimention (m)
         Type                                   Ilustration                       Length    Width                Draft
                                                                                                     Depth (D)
                                                                                  (LOA)      (B)                  (d)
Grab Dredger
                                                                                   60.0      24.0       4.0       2.0
(Grab Bucket 20 - 26 m3)
             Reclamation activity is predicted will be cause many impact such as decreasing of sea water
             quality, disturbance of marine life (nekton and benthos), change of fishing ground, and public
             unrest.
     In table 1.55, seen that dredging method will be used by TSHD method and Grab Dredger
     method, so it predicted that turbidity impact can minimalized. Then, for the minimalized of
     turbidity impact by dredging and dumping, some plan for reduce of turbidity is such as seawall
     construction in earlier, reduce the dumping volume for reused again the dredging material for
     port reclamation, and installation of silt protector.
  Table 1.56. Capacity and Duration of Reclamation Work of Phase 1 Stage 1 – Phase 1 Stage 2
                              Aspects              Unit        Total
                     Reclamation Sand Volume        m3       23.750.000
                          Series Capacity           m3          800
                          Work Duration           Month          40
                          Number of Ship        Per Month      742.2
                               Total             Per day        24.7
Dredging and dumping will make some impact in environment like decreasing of sea water
(increasing of TSS) and disturbance of marine life (nekton and benthos).
Back up area is only zoning plan while the detail of construction methodology will be planned
in the future. But, construction plans which are possibly conduct during phase I are as follow.
1. Land Handling
There are so many fishponds and ricefields on the land that will be built as back up area. That
lands have soft soil texture so it need a treatment so that the entire of activities components in
back up area can run safely and smoothly. There are some design in that land treatment, by
adding cement to the soil surface. That method is choosen because it easy to apply. Soft soil
then excavated using Excavator 0.7 m3 – 1.2 m3 class, and added cement that mixed with the
soil the same time, so the soil will be hard.
After soil treatment for strengthening, then reclamation is held. Reclamation soil is transported
by dump truck and reclamation is proccessed by Excavator 0.7 m3 – 1.2 m3class. Basically
the height of reclamation in one layer is 30 cm and every layer will be compacted by compactor
to make a good foundation. Landfill materials are taken from outside area of Subang regency
such as Lampung.
3. Revetment
Revetment will be built along the seaside which is needed to anticipate the soil collapse piles
in the back up area. Mangrove green area will be also prepared in the seaside are.
Access road development activity can rise various impacts. Estimation of impacts are the
decreasing of air quality , the increasing of noise, the decreasing of water surface qualtiy, the
increasing of water run-off, and public unrest.
    After installation of the reinforcement cage into the bored hole, the concrete is poured into
    the excavated hole using a tremie pipe. At the end of the casting operation, the temporary
    steel casing will be removed.
2. Pile Cap
   After installation of steel sheet piles, excavation works will be carried out up to the
   required level. Then, lean concrete will be poured so as to prepare a plane surface on
   which the formwork and re-bar can be installed. After casting the pile cap and removal
   of the formwork, the backfill work will be carried out up to the top surface of pile cap
   shortly afterwards..
3. Pier
   After installing re-bars overlapping the starter bars of the pile cap, vertical formwork
   will set up and concrete casting will be done eventually.
   For the pier head, support should be assembled from the ground and the formwork
   will then be installed on top of pier head. After that the installation of re-bars and the
   pier head casting will be done sequentially.
   This method involves casting long sections of the bridge superstructure in a stationary
   formwork behind abutment, and carrying completed sections towards bridge
   longitudinal axis following girder erection method
The numbers of heavy equipment that are used based on access road development activity will
be started from Phase I Stage I until Phase I Stage 2 development, can be seen in this following
table.
In the operational phase, seaport activity consists of some activities that will be done, such as:
    •    Procurement of employer
    •    Off-shore facilities operational
    •    On-shore facilities operational
    •    Maintenance of basin and sailing line
    •    Access road operational
A. Employment of Workers
The workers have been employed in Phase I Stage 1 to start port activity, although the required
amount for this phase is not large. In order to manage and to operate Patimban New Port,
operator terminal will be designed through a connection scheme (KPS, Koneksi Pelabuhan
Skema). Required workforce for the port management and operation is estimated in the table
below.
Workers for the container terminal and car terminal can be hired from local people. The estimation of
the possible number of worker is 240 parsons (30%).
Employment of workers can make a positive impact like opened of career opportunity and
negative impact like Incidence of Communicable Diseases.
Off-shore facilities operational activity predicted can produce impacts such as air quality
decline (TSP and emision), sedimentation, sealine change, water quality decline (increasing
of TSS), sea traffic disruption, marine life disruption (benthos and necton), fishing ground
change, and public unrest. Description of activity in this phase can be seen as follow.
Before ships anchored, ships must stop outside of the port water before unloading and loading
time. The number of ships is according to the pattern of ships trafic and berth capacity. Vessels
Arrival is started with announcement from vessel or agent of vessel about arrival completed
by identity of vessel, cargo, and unload/load plan. The arriving vessel must be guided so the
one arrived at port before must wait for guidance of port officer.
Guidance is conducted by guidance officer or ship puller. Guidance finished until vessel and
tetherer tethered correctly. Duration for guidance process between 20 - 50 minutes depend on
guidance distance. The delay of ship is general agenda and assigned set the benchmark amount.
Departure of vessel depart from the port activity (tethering and Anchoring). Departure finished
after administrative requirements is fulfilled. For traffic safety, then socialization and
coordination to head of the fish aution and Pertamina Co. about sailing Route and applied the
OSP of ships tethering and departure activity.
Patimban Seaport is an international harbor, then there are ships coming from overseas,
thereby potentially carry disease from the source region, for it has been established the
following rules:
       1. At the time of the foreign vessel at the jetty, the quarantine was the first to board the
           ship beforehand to double check the health of the crew, animals and plants
       2. If ditemukaan their disease is suspected, it's crew will soon be brought to the hospital
           and for animals and plants will be quarantined.
       3. The ship was banned to enter and perform loading and unloading.
       4. To overcome the disease vectors such as rats, then the boat rope tied around Bolard,
           will be rigged with a kind of ball in the middle of mice did not get past the rope.
      Design and numbers of quayside container cranes are determined based on container volume
      estimation of 3.389 million TEUs for container terminal No.1 and 2 in Phase I. Associated
      with quayside container cranes, super post Panamax-type granty cranes can transport 13,000
      TEU container with 20 rows in the deck, projected for Quay No.1 and 2, and conventional
      sized cranes catering for 2,250 TEU container with 12 (twelve) or 13 (thirteen) rows in the
      deck will be used for Quay No.3.
            Table 1.60. Summary of Volume Yearly Unloading Cargoes Activity Patimban Seaport
                                             Phase I Stage 1 (2019)
              Demand Container Ship Ship Call Qcc/Ship Quay Length         Total Qcc ASC SCs
                TEU         Type       (Ship/Week) (Unit)           (m)    Twin Qcc (Unit) (Unit)
               200,000  Internasional       2           2           238        2      4      6
               300,000    Domestik          5           2           210        2       4        6
                                  Total                             447        4       8        12
                                             Phase I Stage 2 (2022)
              Demand Container Ship Ship Call Qcc/Ship Quay Length         Total Qcc ASC SCs
                TEU         Type       (Ship/Week) (Unit)           (m)    Twin Qcc (Unit) (Unit)
              1,355,482 Internasional       4           4           764        8      16     24
              2,033,022   Domestik          33          2          1,124       10      20       30
                                  Total                            1,888       18      36       54
                                       Source : RIP Patimban, 2016
               Table 1.61. Summary of Volume Yearly Unloading Car Activity Patimban Seaport
                                                    Berth
                                                                                                     Length    Total
        Phase          Demand                 Ship Plan                    Ship Call       Nb
No                                                                                                    Quay     Cost
     Development
                         Cars         Name         Capacity    Loa (m)     Ship/week   Berth
1    Phase 1 Stage 1   215.975    GAIA LEADER       7.500       199,4          1        2             439       186
2    Phase 1 Stage 2   2911.069   GAIA LEADER       7.500       199,4          1        2             439       186
                                       Source : RIP Patimban, 2016
      Heavy equipment will be operating in container terminal. Numbers of heavy equipments that
      has been planned can be seen in this following table.
    Waste will be collected after separation by type, and then transported by licensed contractor
    according to the regulation. For the details about the waste generation that may produce and
    management methode can be seen in the table below.
              Table 1.63. Estimation Of Ship and Terminal Activity Waste Type and Volume
                                          Terminal
          Waste type          Phase I Stage 1   Phase I Stage 2          Treatment Method
                                (ton/day)          (ton/day)
                                                                  Collected in Decided Area,
                                                                  Dumping is conducted as soon as
           Oil Waste               0.3                1.1         possible by related party.
                                                                  Collecting frequency is suggested
                                                                  by contructor
                                                                  Collecting Waste is conducted in
                                                                  decided location and dumped by
      Ship Supply (Plastic)        1.3                4.3         related party. Frequency of
                                                                  collecting is formulated by
                                                                  contructor.
                                                                  Collecting Waste is conducted in
                                                                  decided location and dumped by
        Domestic Waste             53.8              173.4        related party. Frequency of
                                                                  collecting is formulated by
                                                                  contructor.
                                                                  Collecting Waste is conducted in
                                                                  decided location and dumped by
        Oil Waste from
                                   3.4                9.3         related party. Frequency of
            Vessel
                                                                  collecting is formulated by
                                                                  contructor.
                                                                  Collecting Waste is conducted in
                                                                  decided location and dumped by
       Solid Waste from
                                   3.5                9.8         related party. Frequency of
            Vessel
                                                                  collecting is formulated by
                                                                  contructor.
                                          Source: JICA Survey Team.
    Toxic and hazardous (B3) liquid waste management that produce from ships and terminal
    activities are collected in the collective tank ang then will be submitted to the licensed third
    party. The number of tanks that required are 7 tanks with volume of 25,000 gallon.
5. Water Supply
Water needs and water suply facility
Water needs for the ship, fire station, and building are include. Water suply facility for phase
I is estimated for container terminal handling activity.
Water suply system for Patimban will use water reservoir (Ground Tank 3.000 ton, 50 m x 25
m x 3 m), pump house (50 m x 25 m), and high water tank (50 m). All of water reservoir line
for Patimban Seaport will be built by each user operator. Water pipe in the terminal will be
connected with main water reservoir in the project site.
The outdoor-hydrant boxes are installed in the Maintenance Shop and CFS. The indoor-
hydrant boxes are provided for the other buildings. The water supply pits and pipeline along
the berth of the terminal will be installed to supply the water to ships. Minimum pressure at
the farthest supply point should be 50 psi for the domestic demand and ship supply, while
much higher pressure of 65 psi should be provided for the fire fighting.
and planned to provide from the adition of Compreng water suply with the total of all suply is
50 L/second in 2019. But, for water suply in phase I stage 1 that owned by PDAM has suffice
all operational activity.
Network system that will be used to meet water needs of Patimban seaport can be seen in the
following figure.
                                              Waste      Water
                                              Septic Tank
                                              96ton/day                                        IPAL
                                                                                             500ton/day
                                                                         Ship supply
                                            Dumping to sea
                                            (sludge is collected)      3,200ton/hari
                                                                                         Discharge to the Sea
                                                                                         (sludge is collected)
  Figure 1.56. Flow Chart of Water Supply and Waste Water Flow in Patimban Port (Phase I) by
                                           PDAM
Raw water source in the irrigation of PDAM Taruma Timur has SIPA (license withdrawals)
200L/second. At this moment, PDAM take raw water 150 L/second (100L/second for WTP
Binong and 50 L/second for WTP Compreng). Raw water source that is used can be seen in
the following table.
            Table 1.66. Raw Water Quality Standard in Compreng for Drink Demand
                                                                   Maximum                Result of
      No               Parameters                Units
                                                                   Standard              Laboratory
Transmission pipe
Subang PDAM has installed transmission pipe with 4,000 m length. PDAM need the new
transmission pipe for patimban seaport along 17.890 m with 250 mm diameter.
Figure 1.57. Existing Water Supply System around the Patimban Surrounding area
                                                    Water Demand
        No             Description                                              Note
                                               Ton/day           LPs
                                                                         Calculation of water
        D-1     Port Administration Area          97             1.123   demand       include
                                                                         losses 10% and Fire
        D-2     Roro Terminal                    135             1.563   Fighting each area
                                                                         25 ton/day
        D-3     Car Terminal                     200             2.315
          D-1
                                           D-3
D-2
D-4
Elevated tank capacity arrange in the volume of 100 m3 and height level of 50 m for under the
ground. Elevated tank construction is made by combining cement with steel columns to
support the underlying structure.
Water waste total volume that estimated to be processed is 816 ton/day or 9,4 L/second. Water
waste management location will be in the public utility area.
Disposal system is planned to follow water suply network in the opposite direction.
Water waste management installation is sugested to use Rotating Biological Contractor type
with modular system improvement. These tools consist of 3 modular and each modular has
capacity 3 L/second or 1.296 ton/day = 1.300 ton/day.
Modul of RBC
Figure 1.60. Plan of Water Supply Pipe and Electric Power Cable within the Area
7. Electricity Supply
Electricity Needs for Phase I
Electricity needs for all activities at Phase I is summarized in the table below.
Patimban Seaport electricity needs will be obtained from national electricity company (PLN)
Subang regency. A unit of generator equipment is prepared for emergency condition for office
and terminal needs.
PLN cabang Purwakarta will suply power needs in coordination with PLN centre. PLN centre
agree to suply the Patimban Seaport power needs.
PLN branch office propose to connect electricity directly to the high voltage, because the
demand volume more than 30,000 KW and PLN has high voltage cable near to Patimban
Seaport about 3 km of distance from the seaport.
       During the meeting with PLN, thera are 3 alternatives. Alternative 1 and 2 will be
        arrange by PLN, while alternative 3 will be arrange by port operator.
       Profit of alternative 1 and 2 is port operator will not take responsibility in the operation
        and maintenance of electricity suply, but the main weakness is there is no guarantee
        for third party when the disturbance occured.
For phase I seaport operational, it is suggested to install 2 units x 30 MVa (high voltage). For
phase 2 project, it is suggested to install 2 units x 30 MVa (high voltage).
        5. Office Building
        6. Transformer Building (Power Electricity Building)
        7. Waste Water Treatment Plant
Public facilities location is planned in seaport administration area, total area required is 10.000
m2. Layout plan is as follow
Onshore facilities operational is a series of activities that consist of support and port employee
activity, loading-unloading vessel activity, and other supporting activity in the back up area.
Some important component related to activity of on-shore facilities operational are:
    -   Waste management
    -   Water suplly and Waste Water Treatment
    -   Electricity utility
Development plan for back up area in the future is will be operated by private company and
detail design will be developed by invester. For the impact prediction in this activity such as
decreasing of air quality (TSP and exhaust gas), increasing of noise level, increasing of run
off, decreasing of sea water quality (increasing TSS), terrestrial fauna disruption, and public
unrest.
1. Waste Management
Waste from on-shore activities is categorized as domestic waste such as domestic waste and
shipping supply waste such as plastic. Solid waste will be collected at collection station which
located in each facility, then handed to the licenced company for the dumping.
3. Electricity Utility
Generaly, the requirements of Patimban electricity will obtain from coorporation with PLN
for a while, which the power source is from PT. PLN Purwakarta branch, Purwakarta Regency
same as the port system (refer to prior section). It has been proposed that for electricity usage
will use high voltage direct connection because the demand is more than 30.000 KW,
moreover PLN has been has high voltage cable near Patimban New Port which is 3 Km
distance. For location of building can be seen in figure 1.13. In the future plan, Patimban Port
will be used electricity channel by it self for port supply, and UKL – UPL will be done by
PLN.
Estimation of dredging volume and time of dredging, with assumption that maintenance is
done after deposition as thick as 50 cm, so based on calculation can be seen on this following
table.
Maintenance of basin and shipping line will make the impact like decreasing of sea water
quality (increasing TSS), and disturbance of marine life (benthos and nekton)
In order to provide good and adequate service, it is necessary to make a new facility
development and maintenance. Maintenance activities are generally intended to prevent
further deterioration of the road, such as resurfacing the road surface, repairing traffic signs,
etc.
Prediction for vehicle volume in access road can be seen in following table.
Operational of access road is predicted can be make some impact such as decreasing of air
quality (TSP and exhaust gas), increasing of noise level, land conversion, road traffic
disruption, road damage, and public unrest.
Begin from identification process of significant impact that is conducted based on interaction
between activity plan description and environmental baseline. This potential significant impact
identification process is done by using interaction matrix and flow chart methods. To know
the hypotetical impact, all of potential impact is analyzed. The result of those evaluation is
producing Hypothetical Significant Impact, are explained simple by following table.
Land Acquisition
                                                                        Decline in land
              Loss of Livelihood                                         productivity
Social Unrest
Construction Phase
       Mobilization of                   Mobilization of                  Reclamation and                   Dredging and                   Onshore Facility                  Access Road
         Workers and                    Heavy Equipment                   Marine Facility                     Disposal                      Construction                     Construction
     Operational Basecamp                 and Material                     Construction
                                                                             Change of
                                                                          Fishing Ground
Social Unrest
OPERATIONAL PHASE
                                                Waste
                                              Generation
                                                                                          Disturbance of
                                                                                           Marine Life                                                                                                 Road
                                                                                                                                                                                                      Damage
                                                                                             Change of
                                                                                          Fishing Ground
Social Unrest
                                                                                            • Off-shore facility
           Decreasing of air quality                         Equipment and materials      operational
     1.
           (TSP and emision)                                 mobilization                   • Access road
                                                                                          operation
                                                                                          Off-shore facility
     3.    Sedimentation
                                                                                          operational
                                                             On-shore facility            On-shore facility
     4.    Increasing of water run-off
                                                             developmnet                  operational
                                                                                          Off-shore facility
     5.    Shoreline change
                                                                                          operational
                                                            • Reclamation and off-shore
           Decreasing of sea water                          facility development          Basin and sailing line
     6.
           quality                                                                        maintenance
                                                             • Dredging and dumping
                                                             Equipment and materials
     7.    Land traffic disruption                                                        Access road operational
                                                             mobilization
                                                             Equipment and materials
     8.    Sea traffic disruption
                                                             mobilization
                                                             •    Reclamation and off-
                                                                  shore facility
                                                                  development             Basin and sailing line
     9.    Marine life disruption
                                                                                          maintenance
                                                             • Dredging and dumping
                                                                         ACTIVITY
               Hypothetical Non-
    NO
               Significant Impact
                                               PRE-
                                                                  CONSTRUCTION                    OPERATION
                                           CONTRUCTION
                                                             • On-shore facility
          Decreasing air quality (TSP                                                        On-shore facility
    1.                                                       development
          and emision)                                                                       operation
                                                             • Access road contruction
                                                             · On-shore facility
                                                             development                     On-shore facility
    2.    Increasing of noise
                                                                                             operation
                                                             • Access road contruction
4. Increasing of water run off Access road construction Access road operation
                                                                                             Off-shore facility
    6.    Sea traffic disruption
                                                                                             operation
    7.    Road damage                                                                        Access road operation
    8.    Land conversion                                                                    Access road operation
                                                                                             On-shore facility
    9.    Terestrial Fauna disruption                        On-shore facility development
                                                                                             operation
                                                                                             Off-shore facility
    13.   Waste generation
                                                                                             operation
1. Project Boundary
      Project boundary is space where the project development activities occur start from pra-
      construction phase until post-construction phase (operational) which located in the land of
      534.23 Ha (356.23 Ha for back up area, and 178 Ha for port area in Patimban village,
      Pusakanagara District, Subang Regency). And 15.38 Ha for access road 8.1 km length,
      which passing through Patimban, Pusakaratu, Kotasari, Gempol, and Kalentambo village.
      Pusakanagara District, Subang Regency.
2. Ecological Boundary
      In order to see the distribution of impact in air media, based on hypothetical significant
      impact, degradation of air quality are measured when equipment and material mobilization
      as long as the process of construction. Considering the wind direction, air ecological
      boundary is determined in radius 50 meter in the left and the right side along the access
      road that will be passed, especially residences area in Patimban, Pusakaratu, Kotasari,
      Gempol and Kalentambo village, Pusakanagara District, Subang Regency. And for access
      road is assumed in 100 m radius.
3. Social Boundary
      Social boundary is a space where occurred an activity and social interaction. In that space,
      there are several social interactions that contain norms and values that have been
    established. Areas that are predicted to experience a change is around the project site that
    is Patimban, Pusakaratu, Kotasari, Gempol, and Kalentambo village, Pusakanagara
    District, Indramayu Regency.
4. Administrative Boundary
    Administrative boundary is space limit where public can do their social economic and
    social culture in accordance with the applicable regulations, that is Patimban, Pusakaratu,
    Kotasari, Gempol, and Kalentambo village, Pusakanagara District, Subang Regency.
    Study area boundary is integration and resultant from those four boundaries above (project
    boundary, ecological boundary, social boundary, and administrative boundary), thus
    obtained resultant outer boundary which is the boundary of study area.
Scope of ANDAL period of study boundary is determined by consideration of business and/or activity plan
execution limitation period. Period of study boundary is a study time limit that will be used in estimating
and evaluating the impact in ANDAL study. Determination of this period boundary then used as a base to
determine environmental setting change without activity plan or with activity plan
          Livelyhood and Income         1 month after land acquisition, impact is predicted occur after
   2
          Loss                          land acquisition
 B. Construction Phase
                                        In the first year of back up area and access road construction
          The decreasing of air
  1.                                    activity (2018), it is estimated that in that year will occur peak
          quality
                                        of activities which are affected to the decreasing of air quality.
       Hypotetical Significant
 No                                                  Period of Study Boundary
              Impact
C. Operational Phase
                                   Second year (2020) operational activity, estimated occur in that
 1.    Decreasing of air quality
                                   year
       Increasing of water run     Second year (2020) operational activity, estimated occur in that
 3.
       off                         year
      Hypotetical Significant
No                                               Period of Study Boundary
             Impact
      Decreasing of sea water   Second year (2020) operational activity, estimated occur in that
6.
      quality                   year
      Opening of job and        First year operational (2019) operational activity, estimated in
9.
      business opportunity      that year occur the peak of workers recruitment.
                                          Figure 1.66. Detail of Project Boundary, Administrative, Social, and Ecologic (Air)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                                                                         I-121
                                                                                                                     Chapter I - Introduction
Figure 1.67. Maps of Study Boundary, Project Boundary, and Water Ecologic Boundary
CHAPTER II
DETAIL DESCRIPTION OF PRELIMINARY
ENVIRONMENTAL
1. Climate
 a. Rainfall
  Rainfall data is acquired from Meteorological Climate and Geophysic Agency, Station Class I
  Bandung, it is rain station Pusakanagara District since 10 years ago (2007-2016). Total rainfall
  average is 1.300 mm/years and rainy day total in one year is 78 rainy days. Rainfall data and
  rainy day show that rainy season is in october until may with rainfall highest is 273.50 mm it
  is in January and lowest rainy days is 36.00 mm in August, while high rainy frequency is in
  February with average is 14 days (Table 2.1 and 2.2.)
       Table 2.2. Average Monthly of Rainfall Data, Rainy Days And Air Temperature
                Rainy Sta Pusakanagara District-Subang Regency Period 2007-2016
                                                ___          ∑ Xi
                                                X =          i =1
                                                                 N
   While for deviation standard calculated based on formula :
N ___
∑ ( Xi − X ) 2
SX = i =1
N −1
Daily maximum data of rainfall in every years with statistic calculation can seen in Tabel 2.3.
  According to formula in table, number of rainy days maximum average in Back Up Area location
  Patimban Port is :
                                      ___
                                            334
                                      X =       = 33.4 mm
                                            10
  While deviation standard is :
                                            6398
                                    SX =           = 26,66 mm
                                            10 − 1
  Calculation of rainfall daily maximum in reset period 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 years is using
                              ___
  forecasting formula : X T = X + K T ⋅ S X
Where :
                                      6              T  
                           KT = −      0,5772 + Ln  Ln      
                                     π               T − 1  
  The maximum daily rainfall data in the period of re-transformed into the intensity of the rainfall
  in mm per hour using the approach Mononobe (duration 2.5 hours) as follows;
                                                            2�
                                                  𝑅𝑅24 24     3
                                             𝐼𝐼 =     � �
                                                   24 𝑡𝑡
  Where :
  I       = Rainy intencity (mm/jam)
  t       = Duration of rainy (jam)
  R24 = Rainfall maximum in one day (24 hours) (mm)
  Based on value n = 10, so rainfall daily maximum in location for reset period 2, 5, 10, 25, 50,
  and 100 years, are show in following table.
b. Wind
 Wind speed distribute per direction and per class of speed in study location, where wind
 dominant came from west and south east. From data in 11 years back, show the wind speed
 Distribution.
From windrose per month, show that west monsoon wind came from Desember until March,
and east monsoon wind from May until October, and wind transitional season from April
until November. From these data, can be concluded that from Desember until May, waves
are high because fetch estimate which used from hindcasting process came from south, south
west, west, north west, and north.
In May, 3th 2016, ambient air quality sampling has been done. Result of air quality and noise
in three station at nearest terminal (06°14’615”S – 107°54’302”E), Patimban village
(06°15’033”S - 107°54’283”E) and national road Pantura (06°17’070”S - 107°52’487”E)
show tahat all parameters is still standard which assigned by government (PP No 41 year
1999). Analysis result can seen by following table. Air quality in each station in good
condition, because in every sampling location is minimum in resident activity which affected
of air quality, like industry, port, or another activity. Many location is different, so sampling
result is not same, but has a simmiliar number.
Result of noise quality sampling in three location on 24 hours, indicate the values (LSM)
are below standard quality for noise level in terminal location and villages area. However,
Noise level mean in AN 3 is higher than both of two area and exceeds standard quality for
noise level. This result maybe because the AN 3 area is near the national road that
transportation activity is very high compared another area.
Large value of noise level can be caused by a vibrating source. Vibration noise sources
disturbing the air molecules around so that the molecules vibrate to participate. Vibration
sources caused a wave of mechanical energy propagation in the medium of air according to
the pattern of longitudinal propagation (Sasongko and Hadiyarto, 2000). Type of
environmental noise sources come from :
        -    Natural noise sources, such as high winds, waterfalls, the roar of waves.\
        -    Anthropogenic noise sources, such as road traffic, aviation, human activities
             (Hadi NA, 1998).
Value of noise level around the sampling locations that exceed the standard quality for
citizen area, are caused by various sources of noise, mainly from anthropogenic noise
sources (human activities and road traffic) and natural noise sources.
3. Morphology
The location study is in the coastal areas of the northern part of Java Island with the plain
surface relief sloped terrain varies less than 5%, generally land in the vicinity of the site plan
as a fish farm activity (Figure 2.4).
b. Seismic Setting
peak ground acceleration (PGA) in the project area should be taken as 0.15 to 0.2g, with a
10% probability of exceedance in 50 years. the following earthquake coefficient was adopted
for structural design at Patimban port :
The seismic coefficient for the preliminary design of the new terminal facilities is upgraded
to 0.1 for Kh given the importance of Patimban port facilities.
c. Goetechnical Condition
Acoording to Geological Maps of Pamanukan Scale 1 : 100,000 that has been make by Abidin
and soetrisno (1992), scoping area is composed by 2 (two) rocks formation, it is deposition
Rawa Gempol Coast (Qac) and deposition causeway coast (Qbr). Deposition Rawa Gempol
Coast wide spread westward fine sand, silt, shells of mollusks oral dank, while Deposition
Coastal in the form lenses Coastal Sediment Formation consists of fine sand that is rich shells
of mollusca and corals (Figure 2.6 Geological map).
Based on the drilling technique performed by the JICA Survey Team to obtain physical and
engineering properties of soil layers down to a depth of -35 m below ground surface locals
still have not found bedrock. Penampang geotechnical drilling results demonstrate the value
of N Standard Penetration Test (N-SPT) from the area along the outer wall of the west, Along
the Path Access and Basin Area and the Outer Wall Along the East Section.
Note :
            Figure 2.9. Soil Profiles Along Access Channel And Turning Basin Area
                                  Source : JICA Survey Team
5. Hydrological
Tread planned activities as presented occupies the northern coastal areas of Java which
contained around major river mouths, like in the east part of Kali Sewo which empties into the
estuary Sewo and in the western part of Kali Genteng. Tread plan of activity is between both
rivers are used by local people as fishpond. The meandering river flow patterns and watering
throughout the season as well as influenced by the tide.
Result from that table, show that in every parameters that tested in ranged of standard quality.
Relate to Guidance in TOR, locations are decied by following Coordinate (UTM 48s) below :
Coastal water quality survey has been doing in rainy and dry season. In rainy season, based
from observations result of sea water quality at tide condition, the obtained parameters
exceed the quality standard, except Total Suspended Solid (TSS) at CW 1 in surface
sampling (324,00 and standard is 80). Organic materials are composed of suspended
substances of different types of compounds such as cellulose, fats, proteins, bacteria, and
algae. These organic materials derived from natural sources and also derived from the
waste of human activities such as industrial activities, agriculture, mining or household
activities.
pH condition in every sampling location are different, and the result show that some of
sampling area are a little more of high from quality standard, like CW 3 in bottom sampling
(8,59 standard are 8,5), CW 4 in surface sampling (8,54 standard are 8,5), CW 5 in surface
sampling (8,58 standard are 8,5), and CW 7 in surface and bottom sampling (8,52 standard are
8,5 and 8,51 standard are 8,5). From the total ammonia parameter, the result show that two
sampling area that exceeded quality standard in CW 1 and CW 3 (0,613 and 0,610; standard
are 0,3). The difference is also shown in lead (Pb) level, the reslt show that in every sampling
area, Pb level are exceeded except in CW 4 (< 0,049 ; standard are 0,05). Some of parameters
are a little more quality standard, but from another physical and chemical quality in every area
is still good. Maybe some of parameters are higher than standard because from the result of
human activity who take a water from river and another activity in sea like fish pond which
always give a woof for they fish in they pond.
Result of coastal water quality measurement in dry season on low tide condition, it is showed
that almost of all parameters are still at and below quality standard, except TTS parameter
which is in sampling point of CW 1 (118 mg/L), CW 2 (102 mg/L), CW 4 (119.5 mg/L), CW
5 (118.5 mg/L), dan CW 7 (110.5 mg/L), exceeds quality standard which is 80 mg/L. beside,
transparency parameter in several locations also has various value. On location CW 1 and CW
3, it has value below the standard which is set to >3m, the value is 0.5 m. TSS has effect on
turbidity. Whose value is high in some locations, is caused by much of particles are brought
by waves when sampling, so it affects to result of measurement. Transparency also is related
to turbidity, that affects to visibility of Assessors.
Coastal water quality measurement on high tide condition in dry season, it can be showed
almost of all measured parameters have value in the range of quality standard but TSS, Total
Phenol, Total Ammonia, and Accumulated Cd parameters. In TSS measurement, it shows that
measured parameters in all of locations have value exceeds the standard (80 mg/L) although
on some locations, the values are not too high like the CW 6 (85 mg/L). Other Parameters as
Total Ammonia are measured in every locations have value below standard but in location
CW 7 where total ammonia value is 0.933 mg/L with standard 0.3 mg/L. parameter of total
phenol also has various values, which are in the some locations the values are below standard
and in other locations the values are above standard, such as CW 1 (0.013 mg/L), CW 3 (0.008
mg/L), CW 4 (0.009 mg/L), and CW 7 (0.011 mg/L) where the standard is 0.002 mg/L. last
but not least, dissolved Cadmium (Cd) which has value above standard in location CW 6,
though the amount is not too high (0.03 mg/L standard : 0.01 mg/L).
Complete data from result of coatal water quality survey in rainy season can be seen in
following table.
                                                                     Table 2.9. Coastal Water Quality in Rainy Season in Low Tide Condition
                                                                                                                            Result (Location)
No              Parameter                  Unit        Standard         CW 1 (± 6m)       CW 2 (± 6m)       CW 3 (± 3m)       CW 4 (± 5m)           CW 5 (± 10m)        CW 6 (± 18 m)        CW 7 (± 25m)
                                                                        S         B       S         B       S         B       S          B           S        B          S         B          S        B
A.     Physical Parameters
                                      0
1      Temperature                     C          Natural            25.0      25.0    25.0      25.0    25.0      25.0     25.0      25.0       25.0       25.0      25.0       25.0      25.0        25.0
       Total Suspended Solid
2                                     mg/L        80                 320.00            <11.75            73.00              16.00                36.00                <11.75               <11.75
       (TSS)*
                                                                     No        No      No        No      No        No       No        No         No         No        No         No        No          No
3      Odour                          -           No Odour
                                                                     Odour     Odour   Odour     Odour   Odour     Odour    Odour     Odour      Odour      Odour     Odour      Odour     Odour       Odour
4      Transparency                   m           >3                 3.2               3.5               3.2                3.2                  3.5                  3.3                  3.5
5      Turbidity                      NTU         -                  29.52     0.92    <1        <1      2.813     5.35     <1        <1         <1         <1        <1         0.25      <1          <1
6      Rubbish (S)/Garbage (B)        -           -                  -         -       -         -       -         -        -         -          -          -         -          -         -           -
7      Oil Slick (S)/ Oil Layer (B)   -           -                  -         -       -         -       -         -        -         -          -          -         -          -         -           -
B.     Chemical Parameters
                                                  6.5-8.5 (S)/7.0-
1      pH*                            -                              7.10      8.56    7.36      8.52    8.62      8.59     8.70      8.50       7.43       8.47      8.03       8.49      8.84        8.51
                                                  8.5 (B)
2      DO                             mg/L        -                  3.1       3.0     3.3       3.0     3.2       3.0      3.2       3.0        3.0        3.0       3.1        32.0      3.0         3.0
3      Salinity                       -           Natural            31.0      27.0    31.7      31.0    33.4      28.0     32.4      31.0       31.0       32.0      32.3       3.0       37.2        32.0
4      Total Ammonia (NH3-N)          mg/L        0.3                0.412             0.218             0.66               0.28                 0.211                0.042                0.235
5      Sulphide (H2S)                 mg/L        0.03               0.006             <0.0003           <0.0003            <0.0003              <0.0003              <0.0003              <0.0003
6      Total Hydrocarbon              mg/L        <1                 0.311             <1                <0.01              <0.1                 <0.1                 0.652                0.149
7      Total Phenol Compund           mg/L        0.002              <0.001            <0.001            <0.001             <0.001               <0.001               <0.001               <0.001
8      MBAS                           mg/L        1                  <0.070            0.146             <0.070             0.114                <0.070               <0.070               0.077
9      Oil & Fat                      mg/L        5                  <0.103            <0.103            <0.103             0.133                <0.103               0.121                <0.103
10     PCBs                           μg/L        0.01               <0.005            <0.005            <0.005             <0.005               <0.005               <0.005               <0.005
11     TBT                            μg/L        0.01               <0.005            <0.005            <0.005             <0.005               <0.005               <0.005               <0.005
D.     Microbiology Parameter
                                      MPN/
1      Total Coliform                             1000               700               600               630                600                  700                  550                  610
                                      100mL
                                                          Table 2.10. Coastal Water Quality in Dry Season at Low Tide Condition
                                                                                                                Result (Location)
No              Parameters           Unit    Standard     CW 1 (± 6m)       CW 2 (± 6m)       CW 3 (± 3m)       CW 4 (± 5m)              CW 5 (± 10m)         CW 6 (± 18 m)          CW 7 (± 25m)
                                                          S         B       S         B       S         B       S          B             S         B          S          B           S         B
A.    Physical Parameters
                                      0
1     Temperature                      C      Natural    30.4     30.1     31.1     30.1     29.7      30      29.3       29.4          29.4       28.3       29.3       28.1       29.2            28.5
2     Total Suspended Solid (TSS)*   mg/L       80        95               191               97.5              158                     110.5                   85                   102
                                                          No       No       No       No       No       No       No        No             No         No         No        No          No           No
3     Odour                            -     No Odour
                                                        Odour     Odour   Odour     Odour   Odour     Odour   Odour      Odour         Odour      Odour      Odour      Odour      Odour        Odour
4     Transparency                    m         >3       0.5       0.5       6        6      0.5       0.5       4         4              8          8          8         8           8            8
5     Turbidity                      NTU         -      27.93     15.73   18.17     19.55   15.62     20.61   25.45      25.45         111.71      32.8      18.17      27.93      25.49        25.488
6     Rubbish (S)/Garbage (B)         -          -         -        -        -        -        -        -        -         -              -          -          -         -           -            -
7     Oil Slick (S)/ Oil Layer (B)    -          -         -        -        -        -        -        -        -         -              -          -          -         -           -            -
B.    Chemical Parameters
                                             6.5-8.5
1     pH*                              -     (S)/7.0-    6.56     7.41     8.04      8.1      7.3     7.57     5.71       5.63          8.29       8.28       8.27       8.27       8.27            8.25
                                             8.5 (B)
2     DO                             mg/L        -        0.1      0.1      0.1     0.1       0.2      0.1      0.1       0.1           0.1        0.1        0.1        0.1        0.2             0.1
3     Salinity                         -     Natural      31       31       31      32.5      32       32       32        32            33         33         33         33         30              33
4     Total Ammonia (NH3-N)          mg/L      0.3       0.071             0.019             0.231             0.024                   0.114                 0.687                 0.933
5     Sulphide (H2S)                 mg/L      0.03     <0.0003           <0.0003           <0.0003           <0.0003                 <0.0003               <0.0003               <0.0003
6     Total Hydrocarbon              mg/L       1        <0.1              0.149             0.189             0.464                   0.122                 <0.1                  <0.1
7     Total Phenol Compund           mg/L     0.002      0.013            <0.0001            0.008             0.009                  0.0004                <0.0001                0.011
8     MBAS                           mg/L       1       <0.070            <0.070            <0.070            <0.070                  <0.070                <0.070                <0.070
9     Oil & Fat                      mg/L       5        <0.1              <0.1              <0.1              <0.01                   <0.1                  <0.1                  <0.1
10    PCBs                           μg/L      0.01     <0.005            <0.005            <0.005            <0.005                  <0.005                <0.005                <0.005
11    TBT                            μg/L      0.01     <0.005            <0.005            <0.005            <0.005                  <0.005                <0.005                <0.005
C.    Dissolved Metal Parameters
1     Mercury (Hg)                   mg/L     0.003     0.0002            0.0002            0.0002            0.0015                  0.0009                0.0007                0.0018
2     Cadmium (Cd)                   mg/L     0.01      <0.0081           <0.0081           <0.0081           <0.0081                 <0.0008                0.03                 <0.0081
3     Copper (Cu)                    mg/L     0.05       0.037             0.029            <0.0079           <0.0079                  0.036                <0.0079                0.036
4     Lead (Pb)                      mg/L     0.05      <0.0238           <0.0238           <0.0238            0.038                  <0.0238               <0.0238               <0.0238
5     Zinc (Zn)                      mg/L      0.1       0.036             0.034             0.052             0.06                    0.042                 0.046                 0.048
D.    Microbiology Parameter
                                     MPN/
1     Total Coliform                           1000      700               700               800               700                      900                   700                   800
                                     100mL
                                                                             Source : Primary Data, 2016
                                                 Note : S = Sampling in Surface of Sea Layer; B = Sampling in Bottom of Sea Layer
                                                            Table 2.11. Coastal Water Quality in Dry Season at Low Tide Condition
                                                                                                                  Result (Location)
No              Parameters           Unit    Standard        CW 1 (± 6m)      CW 2 (± 6m)       CW 3 (± 3m)        CW 4 (± 5m)             CW 5 (± 10m)          CW 6 (± 18 m)        CW 7 (± 25m)
                                                             S        B       S         B       S         B        S           B           S         B            S         B         S         B
A.    Physical Parameters
                                      0
1     Temperature                       C     Natural       25.4     25.7     26.5    26.7     25.1     25.3      23.3       25.4         29.1       28.2       29.2       28.3      29.4            28.3
2     Total Suspended Solid (TSS)*   mg/L       80          118               102              76.5              119.5                   118.5                  60.5                110.5
                                                             No      No        No      No       No       No        No        No            No        No          No        No         No           No
3     Odour                            -     No Odour
                                                           Odour    Odour    Odour    Odour   Odour     Odour    Odour      Odour        Odour      Odour      Odour      Odour     Odour        Odour
4     Transparency                    m          >3         0.5      0.5        6       6      0.5       0.5        4         4             8         8           8         8          8            8
5     Turbidity                      NTU          -        13.29    27.93    20.61    27.33   27.93     27.93    27.93      27.93        10.27      25.49      27.93      20.61     111.71        32.8
6     Rubbish (S)/Garbage (B)         -           -           -       -         -       -        -        -         -         -             -         -           -         -          -            -
7     Oil Slick (S)/ Oil Layer (B)    -           -           -       -         -       -        -        -         -         -             -         -           -         -          -            -
B.    Chemical Parameters
                                               6.5-8.5
1     pH*                              -     (S)/7.0-8.5    6.32     7.41     7.87    7.95     7.02     7.31      5.4        5.32         8.28       8.26       8.33       8.27      8.29            8.28
                                                 (B)
2     DO                             mg/L         -         0.1      0.1       0.1     0.1      0.2      0.2      0.1         0.1         0.2         0.1        0.1       0.1        0.1            0.1
3     Salinity                        -        Natural       29      30       32.5     32       32       32       33          32           33         33         33        33         33             33
4     Total Ammonia (NH3-N)          mg/L        0.3       <0.015            0.0044            0.034             0.029                   <0.015                 0.065                0.114
                                                           <0.000
5     Sulphide (H2S)                 mg/L       0.03                        <0.0003           <0.0003           <0.0003                  <0.0003              <0.0003               <0.0003
                                                             3
6     Total Hydrocarbon              mg/L        1          <0.1              <0.1             <0.1              0.172                    <0.1                  <0.1                0.122
7     Total Phenol Compund           mg/L      0.002       0.012             0.011            <0.0001            0.011                   0.0004                <0.001               0.0004
8     MBAS                           mg/L        1         <0.070            <0.070           <0.070             <0.070                  0.301                 0.087                <0.070
9     Oil & Fat                      mg/L        5          <0.1              <0.1             0.159             <0.01                   0.104                  <0.1                 <0.1
10    PCBs                           μg/L      0.01        <0.005            <0.005           <0.005             <0.005                  <0.005                <0.005               <0.005
11    TBT                            μg/L      0.01        <0.005            <0.005           <0.005             <0.005                  <0.005                <0.005               <0.005
C.    Dissolved Metal Parameters
1     Mercury (Hg)                   mg/L      0.003       0.0002            0.0002           0.0016             0.0007                  0.0006                0.0003               0.0009
                                                           <0.008
2     Cadmium (Cd)                   mg/L       0.01                        <0.0081           <0.0081           <0.0081                   0.01                  0.009               <0.0081
                                                              1
3     Copper (Cu)                    mg/L       0.05       0.018             0.038             0.041             0.0033                   0.014                 0.008                0.036
                                                           <0.023
4     Lead (Pb)                      mg/L       0.05                        <0.0238           <0.0238           <0.0238                  <0.0238              <0.0238               0.0238
                                                              8
5     Zinc (Zn)                      mg/L       0.1        0.084             0.089             0.041             0.039                    0.011                 0.009                0.042
D.    Microbiology Parameter
                                     MPN/
1     Total Coliform                           1000         900               700              700                800                     300                   400                  900
                                     100mL
                                                                               Source : Primary Data, 2016
                                                 Note : S = Sampling in Surface of Sea Layer; B = Sampling in Bottom of Sea Layer
     ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
     NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
     IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                                                                                                                 II-22
                                                     Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
Because there are no quality standards for sediment quality in Indonesia and Southeast Asia, the
quality standards of sediment Australia and Canada are used to assess sediment pollution. As for
the quality standard selected is the standard of Canada (SQG), because the range of values for
each parameter applied, the average value is higher than the standard of Australia, resulting in the
analysis of the sampling results can be more stringent. Comparison with quality standards, all
parameters are below the quality standard.
             1.   National Assessment Guidelines for Dredging 2009. Australian Government. Screening Level
             2.   Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQG) for the Protection of Aquatic Life (Canadian Council of Minister
                  of the Environment/ CCME). ISQG: Interim marine sediment quality guideline,
             3.   Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQG) for the Protection of Aquatic Life (Canadian Council of Minister
                  of the Environment/ CCME) PEL: Probable Effect Level.
                                                                                  Result (Location)
             No      Test Description              Unit        Standard
                                                                             FP 1           FP 2       FP 3
             16 Lead (Pb)                    mg/L              0.05        0.074          0.04       0.048
             Microbiology Parameter
              1 Total Coliform               MPN/100 mL        1000        660            800        700
                                     Source : Primary Data, 2016
                  Note : Based on Ministry of Environment Permit No 51/2004 Attach 1
2.1.2. Oceanography
   Measurements were done to get the detailed data on the field either natural object or building
   bridges, roads, and other. The objects that has been measured then measured in horizontal position
   and vertical position, to further contour line can be estimated by interpolation.
   From the topographical survey in an alternative location for new access roads to the Patimban Port
   show that most of these locations are paddy fields. In some locations also found near the shoreline
   ponds and mango gardens. Residential area are not too much visible along the survey line.
   Elevation of land along the topographic survey ranged from -0.67 meters to in the rice fields, ±
   2.00 meters for a residential area, ± 1.00 meters for the area along the shoreline.
   The observation of the bathymetry of the Port Patimban locations can be seen in the following
   picture.
b. Tide Condition
    Tide observations conducted to obtain data on the high tidal / water at a given location. Tide
    observations done with the data record or record high ocean tides or water at any certain time
    interval. In this work done tide observations during 30 days 30 nights from the 23rd May-June
    23, 2016 at hourly intervals.
Tide observations are done at three observation sites as shown in the following table.
         According to calculated in formzhal value is 1.56 so type of tide in Patimban Port is mix
         and dominated by diurnal type. From this figure can seen the graphic of tide level in
         Patimban.
          Figure 2.14. Graphic of Tide sampling in Patimban from 23 May until 23 jun 2016
                                    Source : JICA Survey Team, 2016
c. Waves Condition
   In wave analysis we know that the wind make the sea waves, therefore the wind data can be
   used to estimate the height and direction of the waves at sampling location. Given the wave
   data field measurement results are not available, and if there is only a short note, the data are
   less reflect the overall condition of the wave, then to the analysis of this wave will using wave
   forecast results based on the wind data. Wind data required as input data in order to obtain a
   high wave forecasting waves plan.
   The maximum wind speed and direction will be used to predict the daily high and the period
   of maximum wave that can be generated winds in the period of time certain. Methodology
   wave analysis as follows :
After fetch is determining then we will calculate the effective fetch in each direction of the
wind. Fetch effective is wave formation area indicated by area wind blowing from the deep
sea. Effective fetch length calculation is done using the help of a topographical map location
with a large enough scale so that it can be seen islands / mainland that affect the formation of
waves in a given location. Here are the steps of determining the effective fetch length :
•    From wind coming direction from the sea then made 450 to the left and right. Then
     divided into 9 pieces of fingers at a distance, for example 50. As sumbucutama is the
     radius which coincides with the dominant wind direction.
•    Calculate the radius length and forecast point until the point where the radius is cut the
     mainland.
•    Calculating the effective fetch.
In following table we can seen the calculated of effective length fetch from eight direction.
Hindcasting is calculated method for predicted the waves, where in calculating process is
using wind data from past. Hindcasting method can seen in following figure.
Start
Finish
 Waves height values of hindcasting result can generate waverose at location of study.
 Waverose is showed on figure below.
On figure above can be seen dominant waves come from west and dominant wave
height estimated 1,0-1,5 meter.
January February
March April
May June
July August
September October
               November                                             Desember
          Figure 2.20. Waves Distribution from January – Desember 2004 – 2005
     Source : (i) Masterplan of Patimban, 2016 ; (ii) maximum daily resolution data
Result from hindcasting method that is a time series data of waves and periode, will be
analyzed its extreme value to obtain waves height plan. At analysis of extreme value will be
used six distribution methods. From those 6 methods will take relative error value, and
   method result with small relative error value that will be taken as extreme value of wave
   height of study location. This is wave result plan which will be used in location around
   Patimban Port.
Prediction (m)
Prediction (m)
Prediction (m)
Prediction (m)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Prediction (m)
                                                                       Std. Deviation
Std. Deviation
Std. Deviation
Std. Deviation
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Std. Deviation
       0.995           200                         3.7               7.2923               0.54                0.2522              3.16                1.3166             3.59                1.5364             3.31              0.6863
0.99 100 2.69 3.7573 0.49 0.1918 3.16 1.2732 3.21 1.1475 3.15 0.5538
0.98 50 1.95 1.9078 0.44 0.1408 3.16 1.1532 2.85 0.8324 2.99 0.4361
0.96 25 1.41 0.9424 0.39 0.0999 3.14 0.9531 2.5 0.5838 2.81 0.3361
0.9 10 0.9 0.3574 0.32 0.0631 3.07 0.5693 2.06 0.3487 2.54 0.2378
0.8 5 0.63 0.1841 0.26 0.0478 2.94 0.2417 1.73 0.2359 2.31 0.1925
0.667 3 0.48 0.1229 0.21 0.0401 2.77 0.2411 1.48 0.182 2.1 0.1716
        0.5             2                          0.37              0.0837               0.17                0.0335              2.51                0.4021             1.27                0.1485             1.9               0.1575
                                                                                        Source : F/S Patimban Port, 2015
    From table above, 50 years repeat periode is choosed, whose highest wave height comes
    from Northeast as much as 3.16 m.
d. Current Condition
Current sampling is done with observation directly on the field and simulation program. Field
observation is doing to current measurement.Assesement of sampling result based on RMAE
(Relative Mean Absolute Error). Verification will used for significant current height, lowest period
current, and direction result simultaneous current. Current measurements is doing in November
10th until November 23th 2016 (still continue). Current survey doing by RDI ADCP Sentinel
Workshore 600 kHz. In bottom part of ADCP is installed with -18 depth for each point. For the
coordinate of current measurement are seen in following table.
Result from current measurement that has been done are figure in following figure.
e. Sediment
  The type of seabed sediments in around location is described by the results of analysis of
  samples of the seabed at some point in the image below.
    Based on particle analysis, composition of seabed sediments in the study area is dominated by
    silt.
Figure 2.25. Predicted future variation in the mean waterlevel of the Earth’s Ocean Surface according to
                                              IPCC’s Report
                                      Source : JICA Survey Team
g. Erosion Potential
Based in obtained data of the shoreline positions and shoreline changes in 2009 and 2015, Erosion
Potential data for Patimban Port is obtained, where :
   • Tendency to Erosion :
       1. Distance 3,500m to 6,000m
        Because of interference with the sediment transport toward west by the fish pond at the
        east side of this area.
       2. Distance 6,700m to 8,900m (the west side of the power plant)
        Because of interference with the sediment transport toward west by the jetty
   •   Stable Trend :
        1. Distance 0m to 900m (at the west side of the jetty)
          Because of the stone revetments
4000
3000
2000
1000
2.1.3. Transportation
The location of Patimban Port development is Patimban Village, Pusakanagara District, Subang
Regency, West Java Province. It location can access from Subang and Indramayu/Cirebon.
Around road in Patimban Port is Gempol intersection of Pusakanagara, intersection of
Pusakanagara in Jatireja road, and Pantura road of Pusakanagara.
                   Access road to
                   port (Red Soil)
                                                       Pusakaratu
                                                      Road (National
                                                         road of
                                                        Pantura)
      Gempol Road
     Intersection of
       Pusakaratu
Pantura Pusakanagara road is national road with construction structure is asphalt and the condition
of road is good, with traffic volume is low and traffic flow is smoothly. The type of vehicles that
pass in this road is bike, sedan, bus, and truck. This road has 16 m wide and has a median.
    Red soil road is road that has been acquired by Suabng Government, and that road is still without
    asphalt and concrete. The condition of road are figure in following figure.
Figure 2.32. Condition Road in Access Road Plan into Patimban Port (Red Soil)
Gempol
intersection of
Pusakanagara
                                                                                                                2
and                 Good       -         -            6                  Asphalt                Smooth                  -
                                                                                                               way
intersection of
Pusakanagara
in Jatireja road
Pantura
                                                                                                                2
Pusakanagara        Good                             16                 Concrete                Smooth
                                                                                                               way
Road
Figure 2.33. Section Road of Gempol Intersection and Jatireja Road of Pusakanagara Intersection
Patimban Port development will be affected of traffic condition in Gempol Road Intersection of
Pusakanagara, Jatireja road Intersection of Pusakanagara, and Pantura Pusakanagara Road. To
known the effect of traffic, observation is done in that two section road. Observation is done from
06.00 until 21.00. the type of vehicles that count is light vehicles (general transportation, and
private car), heavy vehicles (bus and truck) and bike. In following table are presented about
vehicles volume that pass in observation point.
From following table are known taht VCR value of Pantura Pusakanagara Road in point sampling
is 0,27-0,69., while Gempol Intersection Road and Jatireja Intersection Road is 0,06-0,12.
Based on characteristic of service level, VCR value that highly in Pantura Road that is 0.69 and
Gempol Intersection Road and jatireja Intersection Road that is 0.12. based on characteristc table
of Services Level that Pantura Road has highly services level C and Gempol Intersection Road
and Jatireja Intersection Road has highly services level A. It shown that Pantura Road has steady
flow, but speed and vehicles movement are controlled. The driver is limited from choose of speed,
while Gempol Intersection Road and Jatireja Intersection Road has free flow condition with
maximum speed, driver can choose speed that they want without obstacle.
Other national parks and Ramsar wetlands do not exist in and around the project site.
General condition of the seabed around the port development site is muddy and coral reef and
seagrass have not been confirmed. The land for the backup area is used as fish ponds. Major part
of the coast line has been covered by revetment except for the sandy beach located at the south
part of the existing pier. On the other hand, the protected forest is located around northwest to
west side of the backup area, where mangrove forest is observed. In addition, the south part of the
west side of the protected forests has been developed as fish ponds.
There are no existing information on flora/fauna and ecosystem in and around the backup area.
Important bird and biodiversity areas (IBA) designated by Bird Life International are located in
about 100km west and about 40km east of the project site, however, no IBA is existed in and
around the project site. Picture of surrounding areas which are significant biologically can be seen
on figure below.
Mangrove Habitat
Fishpond
Project Location
Backup Area
Project site
             Figure 2.37. Important Areas for Avifauna and Biodiversity Areas (Green)
                                   Source : Bird Life International
2. Benthos
Sampling of benthos has carried out on preliminary study in Mei 4th 2016. Data are taken from
11 similar locations with sediment quality sampling. Benthos that can be found in every location,
but the number is not too many. Identified Benthos species can be seen in Table 2.30.
          Follow barbour et al (1987), classified the diversity index Shanon and Wiener result diversity is
          very low. This result figure that in S10 has highly diversity index (1.26), and S1, S3, S4, S7, S8,
          and S11 has low diversity index (0). This result figure in S10 are contaminated medium, and S1,
          S3, S4, S7, S8, and S11 are contaminated weight. Odum (1971) said that diversity in ecosystems
          tend have lower species cause pressure of physical or chemical factors. Fisherman activities
          through in every sampling location. They are catch fish and shrimp in every sampling location
          especially in sea side (near ashore).
          The species which most frecuency in every sampling location is Anadara sp. (Bivalvia) And
          Melanoides sp. (Gastropoda). This species can be being an indicator of pollutant water, because
          that ability which pollutant absorb.
3. Plankton
Plankton sampling process has been done in May, 4, 2016. Sampling Location of plankton are in
7 locations, with each Coordinates are written in table below.
Based on plankton analysis result in wet/rainy season at observation location, there are
zooplanktons and Phytoplanktons that consist of 22 species phytoplankton are divided into 9
classes, and 15 species zooplankton are divided into 9 classes. From obtained data, it can be seen
that every locations has species difference which is found and affect plankton diversity in the sea.
For complete data can be seen in the table below.
    Table 2.33. Phytoplankton Species and that Diversity in Rainy Season in Every Sampling Area
                                                                        ∑ Individu/L (Location)
   No                  Species
                                                  P1           P2          P3       P4         P5       P6            P7
   PHYTOPLANKTON
   Charophyta
     1 Closterium gracile                        5000           4000       6000     23000      2000      3000         3000
     2    Gonatozygon kinahani                   9000          23000     39000      63000     26000     43000        26000
     3    Zygnemopsis circumcarinatum            1000               0           0        0          0    1000              0
     4    Closterium cornu                             0            0      1000        3000         0        0             0
     5    Closterium sp.                               0            0           0        0          0        0        1000
                                                                 ∑ Individu/L (Location)
   No                    Species
                                              P1        P2        P3        P4        P5        P6            P7
    6    Spirogyra prolifica                       0         0         0         0         0         0        1000
  Chlorophyta
    1    Volvox aureus                             0         0         0         0         0         0        1000
  Cyanophyta
    1    Spirulina major                     1000       1000      1000      1000      2000      1000               0
  Dinoflagellata
    1    Ceratium fusus                     18000            0   23000           0         0         0             0
    2    Ceratium furca                      2000            0    1000           0         0         0             0
    3    Ceratium tripos                     1000            0    7000           0         0         0        3000
    4    Noctiluca sp.                             0         0         0    1000           0         0             0
  Bacillariophyta
    1    Bacillaria paxillifera                    0         0         0         0    1000           0             0
    2    Biddulphia mobiliensis                    0         0         0         0         0         0        1000
    3    Triceratium sp.                           0         0    1000           0         0         0             0
    4    Synedra acus                       25000      57000     43000     133000    48000     50000         23000
    5    Melosira granulata                 15000            0    4000           0         0         0             0
    6    Asterionella sp.                    1000            0    8000           0         0         0             0
    7    Pinnularia sp.                      6000       3000      4000      5000      2000      3000          3000
    8    Leptocylindrus minimus                    0         0    1000           0         0         0             0
    9    Chaetaceros sp.                     2000      12000     20000      2000           0         0        1000
  Euglenophyta
    1    Euglena acus                              0         0         0         0         0         0        1000
  Total (N)                                 86000      100000    159000    231000    81000     101000        64000
  Taxa Total (S)                              12         6        14         8        6          6            11
  Diversity Index, Shanon – Wienner (H’)    1.960      1.192       2         1        1          1            2
  Equitability Index (E)                    0.789      0.665     0.756     0.547     0.556     0.564         0.648
  Domination Index (D)                      0.178      0.394     0.177     0.416     0.456     0.428         0.302
                                    Source : Primary Data, 2016
NOTE :
Shannon-Wienner (Wilhm and Doris (1968) in Wilhm (1975 dan Wilhm et al.,(1975) in Mason (1981)):
                               = H’<1 = Low Diversity and Polluted Level High
                               = 1<H’<3 = Average Diversity and Polluted Level is Average
                               = H’>3 = High Diversity and Polluted Level is Low
Equitability Index (E):        = E<0,4      = Low Equitability
                               = 0,4<E<0,6 = Average Equitability
                               = E>0,6      = High Equitability
Dominancy Index (D):           = D<0,4      = Low Diminance
                               = 0,4<E<0,6 = Average Dominance
                               = D>0,6      = High Dominance
Supporting factor for phytoplankton growth are very complex and interacting between the factors
of physico-chemical waters such as light intensity, dissolved oxygen, temperature stratification,
and availability of nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, while the biological aspect is activity of
predation by animals, natural mortality and decomposition (Goldman and Horne, 1983).
Pollution factor in Patimban waters came from ponds effluent in surround of the beach. The
effluent stream carrying life materials that sustaining nutrients for phytoplankton life in Patimban
sea water. However, effluent ponds also carries sediment that can inhibit the growth of
phytoplankton because sediment turbidity in water and inhibits sunlight for photosynthesis. This
is consistent with the values of quality of sea water.
Based on the table, diversity index and total species of phytoplankton in Bacillariophyta Phyllum
is highest. This is because this phyllum can be adapted with around environment condition
between with othe class. This is suitable eith atatement by Arinardi et al (1997), that
Bacillariopyceae is more adapted with environment condition. This class is cosmopolite and
tolerant with change of environment.
Other index that supporting of Shannon-Wiener index can be seen in the table, among other things,
Equitability Index (E), this index to analyze the level of evenness while dominance index to
analyze dominance level of a certain species. In the above table, the value of both index is
inversely proportional to each other. At a certain sampling point that has high Equitability Index
values, will have a value of low dominance index. It is shows, in P1, P2, P3 and P7, the types of
phytoplankton are spread evenly and no one dominated at these points.
For the types of Zooplankton that has been found are figure in following table.
Table 2.34. Zooplankton Species and that Diversity in Rainy Season in Every Sampling Area
                                                                 ∑ Individu/L (Location)
      No                    Type
                                                    P1    P2          P3    P4      P5      P6       P7
     ZOOPLANKTON
     Artropoda
     1      Acanthacyclps robustus              1000     0        0        0       0       0        0
     2      Copepod nauplius                    3000     0        0        0       0       0        0
     3      Cyclopoid copepodite                4000     0        13000    0       0       0        0
     4      Cyclops bicuspidatus                2000     0        0        0       0       0        0
     5      Undinula vulgaris                   9000     0        23000    0       0       0        0
     6      Barnacle nauplius                   0        0        1000     0       0       0        0
     Ciliophora
     1      Tintinnid sp.                       52000    1000     1000     0       0       0        0
     Crustaceae
     1      Alonella dadayi                     1000     0        0        0       0       0        0
     2      Hyperia sp.                         0        1000     0        0       0       0        0
     Eurotifera
     1      Keratella sp.                       2000     0        3000     5000    6000    4000     3000
     Sarcodina
     1      Arcella vulgaris                    1000     2000     2000     0       1000    1000     1000
     Adenophorea
     1      Rabdalaimus sp.                     0        2000     0        1000    0       0        0
     Maxillopoda
     1      Nauplius sp.                        0        0        2000     0       0       0        0
     Urochordata
     1      Tunicate larva                      0        0        1000     0       0       0        0
     Malacostraca
     1      Procambarus sp.                     0        0        0        0       0       1000     0
                     Total (N)                  75000    6000     46000    6000    7000     6000    4000
                   Taxa Total (S)                   9        4        8        2       2       3        2
     Diversity Index, Shanon – Wienner (H’)     1.106    1.329    1.404    0.450   0.410   0.867    0.562
              Equitability Index (E)            0.503    0.959    0.675    0.650   0.591   0.789    0.811
             Domination Index (D)               0.500    0.277    0.339    0.722   0.755    0.5     0.625
                                       Sourrce : Primary Data, 2016
Based on the data in the table, the number of species of zooplankton is 30 species in 9 classes.
Patimban sea water is moderate polluted and height based on Shannon-Wiener index calculations
with a range of 1.1 to 1.4 value and height polluted from 0.41 to 0.86. If compared with Shannon-
Wiener value of phytoplankton, sampling points that suitable with phytoplankton value and
     zooplankton are P1, P2, and P3. While sampling points of P4-P7, the number of Shannon-Wiener
     index value Zooplankton is heavily polluted. This is probably due to the number of species
     obtained at points P4-P7 sampling is lower than the sampling points P1-P3. Thus resulting index
     values of other affected as well.
     4. Nekton
     Nekton sampling has been done in May, 4, 2016, at seven location in rainy season and follow
     same as plankton sampling location. Coordinate location which used for this sampling are figure
     in following table.
     Result of this sampling there are 8 species are found in every location which divided two class,
     pisces and crustaceae, like showed in following table.
                                                                Location                                               Total
                         Local
No     Species                       N1      N2       N3          N4          N5          N6          N7             Individu
                         Name
                                   RS DS   RS DS    RS DS       RS DS       RS DS       RS DS       RS DS            RS DS
     Charybdis          Rajungan                                                                                     1
8                                  1
     feriatus           Karang
                        Kepiting                                                                                           1
9    Scylla Sp.                        1
                        Bakau
        Total Species              4   3   1   1     2     3     3     0     2     0     2     3     2           2   80   29
                                           Source : Primary Data, 2016
                        Note : RS = Sampling in Rainy Season; DS = Sampling in Dry Season
     From table, we can see the table show that many species are found in N 1 with 4 species and the
     fewest species is in N 5 with nol species. This result figured that sea condition are not good due
     to too few diversity in every sampling area. The few number of species found in area maybe
     because sampling place, timing, and equipment that used are less fit. Sampling time is significant
     to fishes that are obtained, equipments affect catchment result, and sampling location affects fish
     presence in one location whether there are plenty or not. In number of fishing result, Ikan Petek
     (Leiognathus equulus) is the most caught fish with 66 indiviuals in all of sampling location. This
     species also is found in other location, where in 4 locations, this species is capable to be found, so
     is Udang Jerbung (Litopenaeus vannamei).
Figure 2.38. Petek Fish (Leiognathus equulus) and Jerbung Shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei)
     a.   Terrestrial Flora
     Vegetation types in every observation location such as leftside and rightside of port and access
     road. Flora types that are found from every observation locations can be seen in table below.
                                                                                  F1      F2      F3     UU-RI     IUCN
1     Akasia Daun Lancip        Acacia auriculiformis         Fabaceae             √      √       √
2     Angsana                   Pterocarpus indicus           Papilionaceae                       √
3     Bakau Akar                Rhizopora sp.                 Rhizoporaceae        √
4     Belimbing                 Averrhoa sp.                  Oxalidaceae                         √
5     Cabai Rawit               Capsicum frutescens           Solanaceae                          √
6     Jabon                     Neolamarckia cadamba          Rubiaceae                   √       √
7     Jagung                    Zea mays                      Poaceae              √
8     Jambu Air                 Syzygium aqueum               Myrtaceae                           √
9     Jambu Biji                Psidium guajava               Myrtaceae                           √
10    Jarak                     Ricinus communis              Acalypheae                          √
11    Jeruk Nipis               Citrus aurantifolia           Rutaceae                            √
12    Kangkung Laut             Ipomoea pescaprae             Convolvulaceae       √      √
13    Katuk                     Sauropus androgynus           Phyllanthaceae                      √
14    Kayu Manis                Cinnamomum verum              Lauraceae                           √
15    Kemangi                   Ocimum citriodorum            Lamiaceae                           √
16    Kelapa                    Cocos nucifera                Arecaceae            √      √       √
17    Kersen                    Muntingia calabura            Mutingiaceae                        √
18    Ki Hujan                  Albizia saman                 Fabaceae                            √
19    Lamtoro                   Leucaena leucocephala         Fabaceae                    √       √
20    Lengkeng                  Dimocarpus longan             Sapindaceae                         √
21    Leunca                    Solanum nigrum                Solanaceae                          √
22    Mangga                    Mangifera indica              Anacardiaceae                       √
23    Nangka                    Artocarpus heterophyllus      Moraceae                            √
                                                                                       Sampling          Conservation
No           Local Name           Scientific Name                 Family               Location             Status
                                                                                  F1      F2      F3      UU-RI     IUCN
24     Padi                    Oryza sativa                   Poaceae              √       √       √
25     Pepaya                  Carica papaya                  Caricaceae                   √       √
26     Petai                   Parkia speciosa                Fabaceae                             √
27     Pisang                  Musa sp.                       Musaceae             √       √       √
28     Rumput teki             Cyperus rotundus               Cyperaceae                   √
29     Salak                   Salacca zalacca                Arecaceae                            √
30     Sidagori                Sida rhombifolia               Malvaceae            √       √       √
31     Soka jawa               Ixora javanica                 Rubiaceae            √
32     Sukun                   Artocarpus altilis             Moraceae                             √
33     Suren                   Toona sureni Merr              Meliaceae            √       √
34     Talas                   Colocasia esculenta            Araceae                              √
35     Tebu                    Saccharum sp.                  Poaceae                              √
36     Tembelekan              Lantana camara                 Verbenaceae                  √
37     Terong Ungu             Solanum melongena              Solanaceae           √
38     Tomat Besar             Solanum lycopersicum           Solanaceae           √
39     Waru Laut               Thespesia populnea             Malvaceae            √       √       √
                                              Source : Primary Data, 2016.
     Note:
                F1      = Coastal area Behind Terminal (Right side)
                F2      = Coastal area Behind Terminal (Left side)
                F3      = Access road area
                UU-RI   = Protected by Indonesia Government (PP No 7, Tahun 1999)
                IUCN    = International Union for Conservation of Nature (VU means Vulnerable)
     The Plant community in F1 location are agricultural plants such as Paddy (Oryza sativa),
     Coconut (Cocos nucifera), Eggplant (Solanum melongena), Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum),
     Banana (Musa sp.), and Corn (Zea mays). Another plants that are present such as Acacia (Acacia
     auriculiformis), Root Mangrove (Rhizopora sp.), Kangkung Laut (Ipomoea pescaprae), Sidagori
     (Sida rhombifolia), soka (Ixora javanica), dan suren (Toona sureni Merr) can be found in this
     area too. But, the very dominant plant in this area is Paddy. From this sampling area, there are no
     plant who status categorized is protected by government. Even so, there is flora species that in
     the ecosystem become significant things because their function and role in ecosystem, that is
     mangrove. Mangrove that is found, is Rhizopora sp. This plant has important role in habitat and
     presence of animals in the mangrove ecosystem as place for fishing, protection, and breed.
      Figure 2.39. Dominant plants in F1 (Coastal area behind the terminal (Right)) sampling area
                                     Source : Primary Data, 2016
From F2 (Coastal area behind the terminal (Left)) sampling location, the dominant plant who can be found
like Paddy (Oryza sativa), Grass (Cyperus rotundus), Banana (Musa sp.), Coconut (Cocos nucifera),
Acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), Suren (Toona sureni Merr), and Jabon (Neolamarckia cadamba). Some
plants who can be found in this area are not really dominant like Kangkung Laut (Ipomoea pescaprae),
Lamtoro (Leucaena leucocephala), Papaya (Carica papaya), Sidagori (Sida rhombifolia), Tembelekan
(Lantana camara), and Waru laut (Thespesia populnea). Plant community of this site is a transition
between plant near rim of sea and settlement, so that’s why the plants from this site like a mix plant from
both of transition area. There are no plants who protected categorized by government from this site.
       Figure 2.40. Dominant plants in F2 (Coastal area behind the terminal (Left)) sampling area
                                   Source : Primary Data, 2016
   From F3 (Access road area) sampling location, the dominated plants who can be found
   are Paddy (Oryza sativa), Lamtoro (Leucaena leucocephala), Manggo (Mangifera indica),
   Jabon (Neolamarckia cadamba), and Coconut (Cocos nucifera). Especially plant is Mango
     and Paddy. Some plants who can be found in this area but not really dominant like Waru laut
     (Thespesia populnea), Tebu (Saccharum sp.), Talas (Colocasia esculenta), Sukun
     (Artocarpus altilis), Sidagori (Sida rhombifolia), Salak (Salacca zalacca), Banana (Musa
     sp.), Petai (Parkia speciosa), Papaya (Carica papaya), Nangka (Artocarpus heterophyllus),
     Kersen (Muntingia calabura), Cinnamon (Cinnamomum verum), Citrus(Citrus aurantifolia),
     Jarak (Ricinus communis), Guava (Psidium guajava), Star Fruit (Averrhoa sp.), Angsana
     (Pterocarpus indicus), and Acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). There are some annual and
     agriculture plant who can be found in this area like Pepper (Capsicum frutescens), Katuk
     (Sauropus androgynous), Kemangi (Ocimum citriodorum), and Leunca (Solanum nigrum).
     The plant communities in this sampling area are transitions from home garden plant
     community, agriculture plant community, and paddy field. That’s why in this area we can
     found those plants. There are no plants who protected categorized by government from this
     site.
b.     Terrestrial Fauna
Mammals, Reptile, and Amphibian
Type of fauna except bird that found in around of sampling location, are wild animals and domestic
animals. Terrestrial fauna survey is conducted with 2 methods, first direct observation and indirect
       method as interview to local people for collecting fauna information that is present in the
       observation location but is not observed directly. From those methods, the result is number of
       fauna is 18 species from 3 classes and 14 families. 10 species are found directly, other 8 species
       are interview result. For more completed data can be seen in following table.
                      Table 2.39. Mammals, Reptile, and Amphibia that Founded in Around Location
                                                    Name                                          Location         Conservation
No.       Family
                         Local Name           Binomial                      English             F1 F2 F3              Status
Mammals
1      Ovidae           Kambing          Ovis aries              Sheep                          V     V     V      Least Concern
2      Gallidae         Ayam             Gallus gallus           Chicken                        V     V     V      Least Concern
3      Felidae          Kucing           Felis domesticus        Domestic Cat                   V     V     V      Least Concern
4      Canidae          Anjing           Canis lupus             Dog                            V     V     V      Least Concern
5      Bovidae          Kerbau           Bubalus bubalis         Water Buffalo                              V      Least Concern
6      Muridae          Tikus*           Rattus sp.              Rat                            V     V     V      Least Concern
7      Sciuridae        Bajing Kelapa*   Callosciurus notatus    Plaintain Squirrel             V     V     V      Least Concern
Reptile
8      Agamidae         Kadal            Mabuia multifasciata    East Indian Brown Mabuya       V     V     V      Least Concern
9      Agamidae         Kadal Terbang    Draco volans            Common Flying Dragon                 V     V      Least Concern
10     Agamidae         Londok           Calotes jubatus         Garden Lizard                              V      Least Concern
11     Colubridae       Ular Air         Enhydris enhydris       Rainbow Water Snake            V           V      Least Concern
                        Pelangi*
12   Colubridae         Ular Kisik*      Xenochrophis vittatus   Striped keelback               V                  Least Concern
13   Colubridae         Ular Sapi*       Natrix pittatus         Grass Snake                          V     V      Least Concern
14   Elapidae           Ular kobra*      Naja sp                 Cobra Snake                          V     V      Least Concern
15   Varanidae          Biawak*          Varanus salvator        Monitor Lizard                       V            Least Concern
Amphibia
16   Ranidae            Katak            Rana sp                 Frog                           V     V     V      Least Concern
17   Discoglossidae     Katak sawah*     Fejervarya sp.          Rice field frog                      V     V      Least Concern
18   Bufonidae          Kodok            Buffo melanotictus      Toad                           V     V     V      Least Concern
        Note : *mean : Animals that may exist in the location of the observations but were not observed
       directly (by interview).
       Habitat types of F1 location are backyards, fields, and fishponds. Type of fauna except bird
       (avifauna) that are found in F1 location are Sheep (Ovis aries), Chicken (Gallus gallus), Cat (Felis
       domesticus), Dog (Canis lupus), and Amphibia and Reptillia, those are East Indian Brown Mabuya
       and Common Flying Dragon (Mabuia multifasciata, Draco volans), also frog and toad (Rana sp.
       and Bufo melonotictus). While fauna that are not observed directly (interview result) are Monitor
       Lizard (Varanus salvator), Grass Snake, Cobra, Striped Keelback and Rainbow water snake
       (Natrix pittatus, Naja sp., Xenochrophis vittatus, Enhydris enhydris), also rice field frog
       (Fejervarya sp.), and Rat (Rattus sp.).
Habitat types of F2 location are shoreline, paddy field, vegetable farm (tomato, chilli, and corn),
and fishpond. Fauna species that are found in F2 location are Sheep (Ovis aries), Chicken (Gallus
gallus), Cat (Felis domesticus), Dog (Canis lupus), herpetofauna such as frog and toad (Rana sp.
and Bufo melonotictus) and East Indian Brown Mabuya (Mabuia multifaciata). Fauna that are not
observed directly (interview result) are snakes, Rainbow water snake and Striped Keelback
(Enhydris enhydris, Xenochrophis vittatus).
Habitat types of F3 location are paddy field and backyard. Sheep (Ovis aries), Chicken (Gallus
gallus), Cat (Felis domesticus), Dog (Canis lupus) also water buffalo (Bubalus bulalis), East
Indian Brown Mabuya and Common Flying Dragon (Mabuia multifasciata, Draco volans), and
Garden Lizard (Calotes jubatus), Toad (Bufo melanostictus). While Fauna that are not observed
directly (interview result) are Grass Snake, Cobra, Striped Keelback and Rainbow water snake
(Natrix pittatus, Naja sp., Xenochrophis vittatus, Enhydris enhydris), also rice field frog
(Fejervarya sp.), and Rat (Rattus sp.). Mudflat or shoreline that is formed of mud material, is not
found in every observation locations.
In observation locations, there is no fauna that is protected by Law or stated in ‘High Risk’ in
IUCN Red Lits. But, with Port Development in Patimban, it may cause some wild fauna disappear
or move to other place, that has better or equal condition with existing habitat due to its habitat is
changed, such as Monitor Lizard that requires humid location and far from human. While, other
fauna may still adapt with environmental changes in their habitat and can live coexist with human.
Birds (Avifauna)
Avifauna is a group of the birds that live in a period, or in a certain area (Lincoln et al, 1993). For bird
sampling is used IPA method, where the observe silence for 20 minutes at one point, then move as far as
200 m from the previous point to the next point. Total distance of each point of observation is 800 m for
each location. Bird watching is done by observing the extent to within view of observers on all sides to
follow the wind direction, then records the type of the bird species along with the numbers.
Birds present in every station sampling area in Patimban Village can be seen at following table.
2 Bondol Peking Lonchura punctulata (Linnaeus, 1753) Scally-Breasted Munia Estrildidae 122 14 28
15 Gereja Erasia Passer montanus (Linnaeus, 1758) Eurasian Tree Sparrow Ploceidae 24 93 65
16   Punai Gading          Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771)                Pink-Necked Green Pigeon      Columbidae              0        0    2
                           Lonchura leucogastroides (Horsfield &
     Bondol Jawa                                                          Javan Munia                   Ploceidae               1        5    59
17                         Moore, 1858)
18   Cerek Tilil           Charadrius alexandrinus (Linnaeus, 1758)       Kentish Plover                Charadriidae            20       33   0
      The dominant bird species in this sampling area is Glossy-Swiftleft (Collocalia esculenta),
      Eurasian Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus), and Scally-Breast Munia (Lonchura punctulata), with
      consecutive dominance value is 30,28%, 16,21%, and 14,6%. Table 2.41. show the high
      dominance is Glossy-Swiftleft and Eurasian Tree Sparrow. Glossy-Swiftleft life in every type
      habitat like beach, lake, ponds, farm, paddy field, road, trees, garden, and agricultural land. While
Eurasian Tree Sparrow life in agricultural land, paddy field, road, trees, and garden. The bird
species that not really dominant in this sampling area is Oriental White-Eye (Zosterops
palpebrosus), Scarlet-Headed Flowerpecker (Dicaeum trochileum), White-Shouldered Triller
(Lalage sueurii), Cerulean Kingfisher (Alcedo coerulescens), Golden-Bellied Gerygone
(Gerygone sulphurea), Pink-Necked Green Pigeon (Treron vernans), and Olived-Backed
Sunbird (Nectarinia jugularis), with consecutive dominance value is 0,09%, 0,09%, 0,09%,
1 2 3
4 5
Diversity Index Shannon-Wienner (H’) in the study area is 2,24 or in condition moderate category.
Based on primary data of 2016, in the study area recorded Olived-Backed Sunbird (Nectarinia
jugularis), that have a status protected by regulation and legislation of Republic of Indonesia,
        Act No. 5 Year 1990, and Government Regulation No. 7 Year 1999. In addition, from 22 species
        found, based on Government Regulation No. 7 Year 1999 about Preservation of Plant and Animal,
        five types of birds that is Javan-Pond Heron, Chinese Egret, Little Egret, Cerulean Kingfisher,
        and Olived-Backed Sunbird, are wildlife that is protected.
1    Glossy Swiftlet         Collocalia esculenta (Linnaeus, 1758)        340   30.28      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
2    Scally-Breasted Munia   Lonchura punctulata (Linnaeus, 1753)         164    14.6      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
3    Zitting Cisticola       Cisticola juncidis (Rafinesque , 1810)       33     2.94      2      0.67   4.54             Sub-dominant
4    Oriental White-Eye      Zosterops palpebrosus (Temminck, 1824)        1     0.09      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
     Scarlet-Headed
5                            Dicaeum trochileum (Sparrman, 1789)           1     0.09      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
     Flowerpecker
6    Javan-Pond Heron        Ardeola speciosa (Horsfield, 1821)           37     3.29      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
     White-Shouldered
7                            Lalage sueurii (Vieillot, 1818)               1     0.09      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
     Triller
8    Cerulean Kingfisher     Alcedo coerulescens Vieillot, 1818            3     0.27      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
9    White-Headed Munia      Lonchura maja (Linnaeus, 1766)               71     6.32      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
     Golden-Bellied
10                           Gerygone sulphurea (Wallace, 1864)            1     0.09      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
     Gerygone
11   Zebra Dove              Geopelia striata (Linnaeus, 1766)            27     2.4       3      1.00   6.82             Sub-dominant
                                                                                                                   2.24
12   Yellow-Vented Bulbul    Pycnonotus goiavier (Scopoli, 1886)          36     3.21      2      0.67   4.54             Sub-dominant
13   Chinese Egret           Egretta eulophotes (Swinhoe, 1860)           33     2.94      3      1.00   6.82             Sub-dominant
14   Little Egret            Egretta garzetta (Linnaeus, 1766)            44     3.92      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
15   Eurasian Tree Sparrow   Passer montanus (Linnaeus, 1758)             182   16.21      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
     Pink-Necked Green
16                           Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771)               2     0.18      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
     Pigeon
                             Lonchura leucogastroides (Horsfield &
17   Javan Munia                                                          65     5.79      3      1.00   6.82             Dominant
                             Moore, 1858)
18   Kentish Plover          Charadrius alexandrinus (Linnaeus, 1758)     53     4.72      2      0.67   4.54             Dominant
19   Pacific Swift           Apus pacificus (Latham, 1802)                13     1.16      1      0.33   2.27             Sub-dominant
20   White-Headed Stilt      Himantopus leucocephalus (Gould, 1837)        7     0.62      1      0.33   2.27             Sub-dominant
21   Pacific Swallow         Hirundo tahitica (Gmelin, 1789)               8     0.71      2      0.67   4.54             Sub-dominant
22   Olive-Backed Sunbird    Nectarinia jugularis (Linnaeus, 1766)         1     0.09      1      0.33   2.27             Not Dominant
                                                    Source : Primary Data, 2016
            Note: AR =       Relative Abundance                         H ‘= Diversity Index Shannon -Wienner
                  FR =       Relative Frequency                         D = Dominance
After classifies avifauna to each family, total of 17 family that inhabit in study area. The most
dominant family from Ardeidae with four species. Family Ardeidae is birds with long legs, long
neck and long straight beak used to prey small fish or small invertebrates (MacKinnon et al,
2010).
         Table 2.42. Conservation Status of Avifauna Species which Found in Sampling Location.
                                                                                                Conservation Status
No        Family                         Binomial                           English
                                                                                             IUCN      CITES      UU-RI
1    Appodidae          Collocalia esculenta (Linnaeus, 1758)       Glossy Swiftlet
2    Estrildidae        Lonchura punctulata (Linnaeus, 1753)        Scally-Breasted Munia
3                       Lonchura maja (Linnaeus, 1766)              White-Headed Munia
4    Silvidae           Cisticola juncidis (Rafinesque , 1810)      Zitting Cisticola
5    Zosteropidae       Zosterops palpebrosus (Temminck, 1824)      Oriental White-Eye
                                                                    Scarlet-Headed
6    Dicaeidae          Dicaeum trochileum (Sparrman, 1789)
                                                                    Flowerpecker
7    Ardeidae           Ardeola speciosa (Horsfield, 1821)          Javan-Pond Heron                                √
8                       Egretta eulophotes (Swinhoe, 1860)          Chinese Egret             VU                    √
9                       Egretta garzetta (Linnaeus, 1766)           Little Egret                                    √
                                                                    White-Shouldered
10   Campephagidae      Lalage sueurii (Vieillot, 1818)
                                                                    Triller
11   Alcedinidae        Alcedo coerulescens Vieillot, 1818          Cerulean Kingfisher                             √
                                                                    Golden-Bellied
12   Acanthizidae       Gerygone sulphurea (Wallace, 1864)
                                                                    Gerygone
13   Columbidae         Geopelia striata (Linnaeus, 1766)           Zebra Dove
                                                                    Pink-Necked Green
14                      Treron vernans (Linnaeus, 1771)
                                                                    Pigeon
15   Pycnonotidae       Pycnonotus goiavier (Scopoli, 1886)         Yellow-Vented Bulbul
16   Ploceidae          Passer montanus (Linnaeus, 1758)            Eurasian Tree Sparrow
                        Lonchura leucogastroides (Horsfield &
17                                                                  Javan Munia
                        Moore, 1858)
18   Charadriidae       Charadrius alexandrinus (Linnaeus, 1758)    Kentish Plover
19   Apodidae           Apus pacificus (Latham, 1802)               Pacific Swift
20   Recurvirostridae   Himantopus leucocephalus (Gould, 1837)      White-Headed Stilt
21   Hirundinidae       Hirundo tahitica (Gmelin, 1789)             Pacific Swallow
22   Nectariniidae      Nectarinia jugularis (Linnaeus, 1766)       Olive-Backed Sunbird                            √
                                            Source : Primary Data, 2016
Note :
  IUCN = International Union for Conservation of Nature (VU mean Vulnerable Status)
  CITES = Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna
  UU-RI = Protected by Government Regulation (No 7, Tahun 1999)
The welfare of population is a parameter of the success of a nation, so that the welfare population
is always a main target in the process management of the country. This goal is not unattainable if
the Government cannot solve the problem of population: as the magnitude of the population and
not meratanya or not terberdayakannnya residents spread all the inhabitants. Based on the results
of the projection figure, Subang Regency by 2014 amount to approximately 1,524,670 inhabitants
with a population density of approximately 743.10 inhabitants per square kilometer.
The spread of residents in Subang Regency is not evenly between other district. Subang district is
a district with the highest population density level it is 2896.13 inhabitants/km2. The plan of the
development activities of the port Patimban located in Pusakanagara district also affect the
surrounding area namely Pusakajaya Village. Pusakanagara and Pusakajaya District was 2 region
in Subang Regency which will be affected directly from physical development of the Patimban
Port.
One of the major changes that will affect by 2 district are aspects of demography. Social change
will occur significantly, in the medium term as well as long demographic change will occur
(succession demographics), socio-economic (employment, income, changes in consumption
patterns) and cultural (lifestyles) and diversity. This region would be a "melting pot" gathering
place for people with diverse backgrounds. Therefore to consider changes in the population from
year to year of Pusakanagara District and Pusakajaya District, Subang Regency. The goal is to see
the economic development of the region as seen from the growth of the population.
According to the BPS Subang Regency in 2015, rate of population growth per year in 2000-2010
and 2010-2014. Population growth rate years 2000-2010 in Pusakanagara District was 0.48 and in
2010-2014 is 0.45. In Pusakajaya District, the rate of population growth years 2000-2010 is 0.43,
and in 2010-2014 is 0.39. Rate of population growth in Pusakanagara District and Pusakajaya
District as well as predictions of population growth until the year 2024.
  Table 2.43. Number of Residents and Growth Rate in Pusakanagara District and Pusakajaya District
                                      Number of Residents
              No.      Years      Pusakanagara    Pusakajaya                   Note
                                     District       District
             1.         2000              36.451        42.808         Source : BPS
             2.         2010              38.253        44.668         Subang Regency
             3.         2014              38.951        45.373
             4.         2015              39.125        45.549         Sumber :
             5.         2016              39.299        45.725         Consultant
             6.         2017              39.473        45.901         Analyzed based on
             7.         2018              39.647        46.077         prediction of
             8.         2019              39.821        46.253         residents growth,
             9.         2020              39.995        46.429         2107
             10.        2021              40.169        46.605
             11.        2022              40.343        46.781
             12.        2023              40.517        46.957
             13.        2024              40.691        47.133
                Source : BPS Subang Regency and Analyzed by Consultant, 2017
A fairly high population growth have an impact on the issue of employment. The growth of the
workforce less offset by growth in employment will cause employment levels tend to decline.
However the number of residents who work do not always describe the amount of job
opportunities that exist.
This is because often the occurrence of discrepancies in the job market. Labor is capital for the
movements of the wheel of development. The number and composition of the workforce will
continue to undergo changes in line with the demographic process. Such is the case with the
development plan of the port Patimban which will slowly increase the number of inhabitants in
the region. The impact that must be anticipated is the provision of supporting facilities and
infrastructure for the population as well as the field of jobs appropriate education and expertise.
a. Education Degree
Composition of education degree, most of residents of Pusakanagara District have Elementary
school degree with percentage 28.87% of 27,781 persons and other ones have Diploma (D3)
degree is the lowest number of residents that is 153 persons with 0.55% percentage. Residents that
have Bachelor degree are up to 255 persons with percentage 0.92%. this condition shows that
human resources around project area have low degree of education. In the Table below, education
degree of Pusakanagara District and Pusakajaya Village is showed.
                                   Not                                          Finished
                   Not/Yet
No    Village                  Finished in
                  in School                                    Junior High       Senior high
                               Elementary     Elementary                                           Academic   University
                                                                 School            School
        b.   Age Group
        In Tabel 2.45, number of resident of Pusakanagara District based on grup age year 2014 and
        Pusakajaya Village in 2015 is showed. This shows that Pusakanagara District is dominated by
        55+ age group whose number is 3,439 persons. Therefore, ratio of dependence in this area is
        low, so productive age residents do not burden to fund the non-productive and yet-productive
        age. While in Pusakajaya Village, in dominated by 55+ age group with 1.113 people.
        c.   Main Livelihood
        People in Pusakanagara District have various main occupations. Following table shows main
        occupation types based on profile and Typology data of Pusakanagara District year 2014, and
        Pusakajaya Village in 2015.
                                                 Table 2.45. Total population based on age in Pusakanagara District year 2014.
     No.         Village       0-4       5-9        10 – 14     15 - 19   20 - 24       25 - 29    30 - 34       35 - 39       40 - 44     45 - 49     50 - 54      55 +        Total
      1      Pusakaratu         829       791         835         749       640           749        762           641           557         477         454         953        8.437
      2      Gempol             236       265         260         218       171           218        235           266           258         240         218         471        3.057
      3      Kalentambo         467       453         516         424       379           433        451           439           356         330         276         711        5.236
      4      Kotasari           438       410         479         369       332           413        376           369           292         260         185         543        4.466
      5      Patimban           634       677         715         532       452           474        544           593           458         403         341         760        6.585
             Total             2.603     2.597       2.805     2.292       1.976         2.288      2.369         2.308         1.920       1.710       1.474       3.439       27.781
     1       Pusakajaya         948      1.028       1.081        907       817           959        821           805           766         640         530        1.113       10.415
             Total              948      1.028       1.081        907       817           959        821           805           766         640         530        1.113       10.415
                                                  Source : Pusakanagara District, 2014 ; and Pusakajaya District, 2015
                             Agriculture                                                                Trading,
                                                  Mining and     Indust   Electrical,     Construc                         transport      Financial
No         Village                                                                                     Hotel, and                                      Services       Other       Total
                                                   Dredging       rial    Gas, Water        ted                              ation       Institution
                       Farmer          Labor                                                           Restaurant
1        Pusakaratu         261         986            6           145        10             100             1.047           175             26           614             104     3.473
2        Gempol             141         532            0           28         11             22               265            92              4            256              8      1.359
3        Kalentambo         295        1.116           0           73         8              42               395            86              13           144             25      2.199
4        Kotasari           165         626            4           43         6              290              417            63              7            139             129     1.889
5        Patimban           366        1.299           2           20         11             27               613            59              6            115             43      2.539
          Total            1.206       4.558           12          310        47             480             2.738           474             55          1.269            309     11.459
1        Pusakajaya         330        1.249           4           175        12             129             1.081           351             26           445             172     3.956
          Total             330        1.249           4           175        12             129             1.081           351             26           445             172     3.956
                                                  Source : Pusakanagara District, 2014 ; and Pusakajaya District, 2015
            2. Economical Facility
            Residents of Pusakanagara District are dominated by Farm Workers (39.78%) and the least
            livelihood (occupation) is Mine and Quarry (0.1%). Majority of instutions of economy in
            Pusakanagara District are small shops that are up to 541 units. While for major owner for
            marketing place in Pusakajaya Village is shopping complex with n 102 units. Economical
            Facilities that located in Pusakanagara District and Pusakajaya Village is able to be seen in
            following table.
                   Table 2.47. Marketing Place in Pusakanagara District, 2014 and Pusakajaya Village, 2015
                           No         Village    Market       Kios    Warung        Shop        Other
                          1        Pusakaratu      -           26      115            48          1
                          2        Gempol          -           22       76             7          1
                          3        Kalentambo      -           13       54            30          -
                          4        Kotasari        -           5        32            27          -
                          5        Patimban        -           5       264            50          1
                                   Total           -           70      541           162          3
                          1        Pusakajaya      1           49      264           102          2
                                   Total           1           49      264           102          2
                              Source : Pusakanagara District, 2014 and Pusakajaya District, 2015
            In term of Land use, most of lands in project area are used as farmlands. Most of farmlands in
            project area are paddy field 1,687.2 Ha or 44.43% or total lands in the project area. While,
            majority land used in Pusakajaya Village is paddy field among 512.00 Ha. Extents area by
            type of soil used in Pusakanagara District year 2014 and Pusakajaya Village years 2015.
According to paddy productivity in Pusakanagara District, can seen that total area that used
for paddy field is 3.060 ha with total production is 20.611,18 ton. The most of paddy
productivity is Rancadaka village with 5.909,20 ton.
3. Perception of Resident
a. The Respondents Knowledge About The Port Patimban Construction Plan
The Knowledge of its society about the Construction of the Port Patimban Plan is the one thing
that is important in the smooth construction in the future. The society need to know the action
plan and its possible impacts, both positive and negative.
From the results of the survey and interview data showed that people in the research area most
of which amounted to 85% of respondents who have already knew about the plan Port
Patimban Construction will be implemented and only 15% of respondents were not aware of
these activities. The are still the majority of respondents who do not know Port Patimban
Construction plan shows which needs an intensive socialization so that people will know about
and support Port Patimban Construction Plan. The data presented in Table and Figure below.
      Table 2.50. The Respondents Knowledge About The Port Patimban Construction Plan
                                   The Respondents Knowledge About The
             The Village
                                     Port Patimban Construction Plan
   No.    Respondents Origin                                                             Total
                                          Know                Does Not Know
  PUSAKANAGARA DISTRICT
   1. GEMPOL                                11                         1                   12
   2. PATIMBAN                              32                         6                   38
   3. KALENTAMBO                            12                         0                   12
   4. PUSAKARATU                            9                          3                   12
   5. KOTASARI                              10                         3                   13
  PUSAKAJAYA DISTRICT
   6. PUSAKAJAYA                            11                         2                   13
          Total                             85                        15                  100
        Percentage                        85,0%                     15,0%               100,0%
                             Source : Social Survey Team, 2016
                                    Know
                                  MENGETAHUI
                                       85%
                                       85,0%
                                               TIDAK MENGETAHUI
                                               Doesn’t  Know
                                                     15,0%
                                                   15%
From the results of questionnaires, data showed that the source of most information obtained
from neighbors / friends to the percentage of 61% followed by resources from the village /
district which was answered by 11% of respondents then information from the proponent in
this case the Ministry of Transportation, which was answered by 9% of respondents. Further
information is derived from the RT / RW / Society Figure who answered by 3% of respondents,
and the last is the information from the media answered by 1% of respondents. The data
presented in Table and Figure below.
from the community to the plan activities. However, there are 38% of respondents who do not
agree of the Port Patimban Construction plan. The data presented in Table and Figure below.
  Pusakanagara District
    1.     Gempol                                10                       2                   12
    2.     Patimban                              14                      24                   38
    3.     Kalentambo                            12                       0                   12
    4.     Pusakaratu                            10                       2                   12
    5.     Kotasari                              7                        6                   13
  Pusakajaya District
    6.     Pusakajaya                            9                        4                   13
                Total                            62                      38                  100
             Percentage                      62,0%                      38,0%              100,0%
                               Source : Social Survey Team, 2016
                          PERSEPSI TERHADAP
                                Perception    RENCANA PEMBANGUNAN
                                           to Development Plan
                                  TIDAK
                                    Not SETUJU
                                        Agree
                                      38 %
                                     38,0%
                                                               SETUJU
                                                              Agree
                                                               62,0%
                                                              62  %
           There are also 5% of respondents who answered that the Port Patimban Construction can
           increase the income of the population that has had a current job and the last answer is by 5%
           of respondents Port Patimban Construction will make the environment more crowded and
           developed into the region. The data presented in Table and Figure below.
The order of disagree reason of Port Patimban construction is the greatest percentage loss of
livelihoods, especially for the farmers whose land will be the site of Port Patimban
Construction, it is stated by 30% of respondents. Similarly, the associated disquiet over land
eviction of citizens which has been used for the benefit become the reason of the large disagree
enough also is stated by 27% of respondents. There are 8% of respondents who do not agree
to the construction of the Port of Patimban because it would give the occurrence of jam. Its
conditions are expected by 7% of respondents that will cause a reduction in income due to the
activity of the locals to earn a living will be disrupted.
         For residents who work as fishermen go to sea there is a concern because less land will be
         hindered by the activity of the Port Patimban Construction, as stated by 6% of respondents.
         Port Patimban construction also makes 6% of respondents are upset their noise pollution from
         large ships that will be docked in the port of this Patimban. It being more in percentage is small
         enough that concerns the susceptibility of criminality in the environment, the risk of flooding,
         residents become individualistic and original residents be left behind because of their arrivals,
         things were equally stated by 1% of respondents. The data presented in Table and Figure below.
The Village
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                original residents be
                                                                                                                                                                                                          the risk of flooding
                                                                                    loss of land to sea
                                                                                                                                                              becomes prone to
                                             loss of livelihood
                                                                                                                               land eviction of
                                                                                                             noise pollution
                         Not Answered
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              individualistic
                                                                  Less Income
No. Respondents
congestion
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        left behind
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 become
                                                                                                                                                   citizens
                                                                                                                                                                                     crime
            Origin
Pusakanagara District
 1.    Gempol                 5                     4                 0                     1                      0                              0                              0               1                0                       0                                             1              12
 2.    Patimban               1                18                     6                     4                      1                              7                              0               1                0                       0                                             0              38
 3.    Kalentambo             3                     4                 1                     0                      0                              3                              1               0                0                       0                                             0              12
 4.    Pusakaratu             3                     0                 0                     1                      1                              5                              0               2                0                       0                                             0              12
 5.    Kotasari               3                     3                 0                     0                      0                              7                              0               0                0                       0                                             0              13
Pusakajaya District
 6.    Pusakajaya             1                     1                 0                     0                      0                              5                              0               4                1                       1                                             0              13
         Total            16                   30                     7                     6                      2                              27                             1               8                1                       1                                             1              100
      Percentage
                        16,0%               30,0%                 7,0%             6,0%                     2,0%                   27,0%                          1,0%                       8,0%         1,0%                      1,0%                                   1,0%                       100,0%
Some expectations from those surveyed respondents are sorted from the start of the most
substantial: 49% of respondents expect that local residents can be involved work in the
construction of the Port of Patimban that would adapted to the educational qualifications
acquired; 27% of respondents would like to be given of a place of business aound of Patimban
Port, particularly for local residents who have had to be prioritized; 5% of respondents expect
that the construction of the Patimban Port would not to the detriment the society; 4% of
respondents expect for residents who affected by land evictions for Patimban Port
Construction will get compensation / reimbursement prices as they desired; The next 4% of
respondents there are also expect that his land is not evicted because they do not have
anywhere else as a source of livelihood; 3% of respondents expect this Port Patimban
Construction can be controlled from the side of safety and not to cause any disturbance to the
environment; 2% of respondents expect the Port Patimban later can become a tourist attraction;
2% respondents wanted the Port Patimban Construction can bring the environmental progress
            and prosperity for the society; 2% of respondents want the population who are farmers but the
            land be evicted for the Port Patimban Construction can still farming in a new better
            replacement location and the last 1% of respondents expect for residents affected by land
            acquisition so that the price of it could rise up from the previous replacement. The data
            presented in Table and Figure below.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Total
                                                             The respondent’s expectation concerning to The Port Patimban Construction
         The Village
                            construction of the
get compensation /
can be controlled
reimbursement
                                                                                                                                                                                                 environmental
                                                                                                                                                         Disadvantages
No.
can become a
Flood Causes
                                                                                                                                                                                                  progress and
                                                                                                                                                                                 Considering
                                                                                                                                          Not Evicted
           Origin
                                work in the
                                                                            cause any
                                                       business
prices
                                                                                                                                                                                                      Price
Pusakanagara District
 1.   Gempol                               5                      4                 0                        0                        0          1                           2            0            0         0                          0       12
 2.   Patimban                           20                     14                  1                        1                        1          0                           0            0            0         0                          1       38
 3.   Kalentambo                           7                      3                 0                        0                        0          0                           0            0            0         1                          1       12
 4.   Pusakaratu                           4                      4                 2                        0                        0          0                           1            0            1         0                          0       12
 5.   Kotasari                             6                      0                 0                        3                        1          2                           1            0            0         0                          0       13
Pusakajaya District
 6.   Pusakajaya                           7                      2                 0                        0                        0          1                           1            1            1         0                          0       13
         Total                           49                     27                  3                        4                        2          4                           5            1            2         1                          2      100
       Percentage                                                                                                                         4,0
                                  49,0%               27,0%                   3,0%                   4,0%             2,0%                                   5,0%                1,0%              2,0%     1,0%        2,0%                    100,0%
                                                                                                                                           %
                                                                        Source : Social Survey Team, 2016
Based on the questionnarie spreading result, the fresh water sources which is mostly used by
the respondents who is obtained from the drilled well is about 56%, and the respondents who
are obtained from the dig well is about 33%, and the respondents who use the water from their
neighboor is baout 5%, and the small part of respondents also use the water from the small
river is about 1%.
The respondents who use the water from the dig well or drilled well using the water sourced
from the lower ground / and the depth is around the various average value from <10 which is
answered by 49% respondents and the depth 10-20m is stated by 8% respondents. The data
itself shown by the table and the figure below.
Table 2.56. The Fresh Water Sources Which is Used to Bathing and Washing
           Figure 2.50. Fresh Water Sources Which is Used to Bathing and Washing
                              Source : Social Survey Team, 2016
water for drinking and cooking, and 2% respondents keep the water from theirs neighbour’s
help for drinking and Cooking. Those data is presented in this table bellow.
            Table 2.57. The Fresh Water Sources Which is Used to Drinking and Cooking
                                       THE WATER SOURCES FOR DRINKING AND COOKING
 NO.         The Village Respondents                                                               TOTAL
                                         DIG      DRILLED           NEIGHBOUR’S
                      Origin                                 BUY
                                        WELL       WELL                 HELP
 Pusakanagara Distict
  1. Gempol                              0             0            12               0                12
     2.     Patimban                     2             1            35               0                38
     3.     Kalentambo                   1             1            9                1                12
     4.     Pusakaratu                   2             5            5                0                12
     5.     Kotasari                     1             0            12               0                13
 Pusakajaya District
     6.     Pusakajaya                   0             2            10               1                13
                   Total                 6             9            83               2               100
                Persentage              6,0%         9,0%         83,0%            2,0%            100,0%
              Figure 2.51. Fresh Water Sources Which is Used to Drinking and Cooking
                                 Source : Social Survey Team, 2016
respondents. Some of them are said that the water sources which is used for daily needs
(bathing and washing) is less good condition, as stated by 18% respondents which are stated
that the water sources is turbid, 4%respondents stated that the water sources is salty tasted
because of the water sources position is near by the North beach of the Java. There are also
2% respondents who stated that the water sources they are used is smells bad. The data is
presented in this table below.
j.     Sewerage System
 The society around the Port development generally manage the wastewater invidually in each
 household. The system used is the local sanitation (on-site sanitation), by the managing tools
 lavatory waste water in the form of a septic tank, as stated by 62% of respondents. Furthermore,
 there are 21% of respondents who distribute the dirty water from the house with a direct
 channel to the sea, the next 16% of respondents discard the dirty water into drainage channels
 and 1% of respondents channeling dirty water directly into the gutter. For sewerage without
 septic tank system, wastewater is usually a former laundry and kitchen waste water. The data
 is shown in Table and Figure below.
                                                           Sewerage System
           The Village Respondents
     NO.                                                                                              Total
                    Origin              Septic    Drainage        A Direct Channel To       The
                                        Tank      Channels              The Sea            Gutter
     Pusakajaya District
      1. Gempol                           6           5                      1                0         12
      2.   Patimban                      25           10                     3                0         38
      3.   Kalentambo                     8           0                      4                0         12
      4.   Pusakaratu                     7           1                      4                0         12
  5.   Kotasari                   8            0                    4                  1         13
 Pusakajaya district
  6.   Pusakajaya                 8            0                    5                  0         13
              Total              62            16                   21                 1        100
           Percentage           62,0%        16,0%                21,0%              1,0%     100,0%
k. Waste Management
System Level Waste Disposal in Household
The waste disposal system arounf the Patimban ort development mostly use the communal
system that is collected and combusted directly as stated by 47% respondents. This is due to
the presence of the waste management system provided by the government. Besides the
dominant summited waste is the household waste in relative quantity does not full. In addition
to more practical, the pollution also level has not too high and would be done by local people.
Things need to be done is should to do an approval together by the local society is about the
waste location which is carried out of the arson. Certainly, the chosen location is far away
from the location of settlements so it would not influence the health of the population.
There are 27% of respondents who throw trash household activities directly into the river,
especially for the respondents whose home is close to the river flow. There is also 26% of
respondents who collect it in the landfill at their home / put in the trashbin. The data shown in
Table and Figure below.
                         400
                                                           368
                                                                                                        Kerapu
                         350
                                                                                                        Bawal Putih (Loan)
                         300                                                                            Rajungan
                         250                                                                            Udang
                                                                                                        Cumi
           Volume (Kg)
                         200
                                                                                                        Kepiting
                         150                                                                            Sotong
                                                                                                        Petek
                         100
                                                              66                                        Kembung
                                                                                  50
                         50                     37,3
                                 25 22       26.2                      23 25 22                         Tenggiri
                                         5        12.520           5
                                                                                       20
                                                                                            3
                          0                                                                             Teri
                                                            1
                        350
                                                     300
                        300
                        250                                                                     Rajungan
                                                                                                Udang
          Volume (Kg)
                        200
                                                                                                Petek
                        150                                                                     Kembung
                        100                                                                     Tenggiri
                                                                                                Kuro
                        50                  36,7
                                                                                25
                                     8.2                       10     7
                         0
                                                           1
Loan 152
Shrimp 119
5. Fishing Ground
Fishing ground names are taken based on nearest area to fishing ground, for example, Ciasem
Fishing ground is named because the location near with Karang Asem region, and Mayangan
Fishing ground is taken from Mayangan Region.
Based on survey which has conducted, there are 6 fishing grounds that often become place to
fish for fishermen of 3 TPIs. The locations are :
        1. Ciasem
        2. Mayangan
        3. Bobos
        4. Pantai Patimban
        5. Gebang
        6. Eretan (Electricity Steam Power Plant)
According to collected data, fishermen do not only fish in one fishing ground, but also fish in
another fishing grounds.
1. Ciasem
2. Mayangan
3. Bobos
4. Pantai Patimban
5. Gebang
6. Eretan
                                                            3
                                     2
                       1
                                                                                                                    5
                                                                                       5
                                                                 4
                     Figure 2.59. Maps of Kali Genteng Fishermen Fishing Route by Fishing Ground
                                         Source : Fishing Ground Survey Team, 2016
1. Ciasem
2. Mayangan
3. Bobos
4. Pantai Patimban
5. Gebang
                                                          3
6. Eretan
                                    2
                      1
                                                                                                                 5
                                                                                     5
                                                               4
1. Ciasem
2. Mayangan
3. Bobos
4. Pantai Patimban
5. Gebang
                                                          3
6. Eretan
                                    2
                      1
                                                                                                                 5
                                                                                     5
                                                               4
From the results of a survey of the field, there are two categories of fishpond if classified based
on the technology culture, i.e. the fishpond with extensive/traditional technologies and technology
intensive farm. On cultivating technology extensively cultivated commodity, is fish, while the
cultivation technology of intensive shrimp commodity vanamei has.
In this patimban port development activities, in particular for back up area will be. There is a land
of ponds covering an area of 113.15 Ha are affected by the project footprint. Most of the land is
farmed with technology-intensive.
In this patimban port development activities, in particular for back up area. There is a land of
ponds covering an area of 113.15 Ha are affected by the project footprint. Farmed land affected
by the project footprint is located in Block 16, 18, 19 and 20. As for the area of land farmed for
each block can be seen in the following table:
If viewed from the condition of the asset, identified 34 businesses from fishpond but which is a
productive farm as much as 19 fishpond. the following is a productive farm data on each block.
        The following is an analysis of income from fish farming activities milkfish per production cycle
        per swath in the region of the project footprint (back-up area) in the village of Patimban.
Based on the second table above, note that the loss of income due to loss of land that is used as
the project's footprint is Rp. 3,500,000/outdoor/cycle.
As for the aspirations of farmers, fish farmers/milkfish farmers is the replacement of the
corresponding land, and diolibatkan in the development activities of the port.
Shrimp harvest Activities carried out in partial vanamei, where harvest is first done on size/size
80 (tail/kg), while the second harvest is done at the time of the size/size 50 (tail/kg). the average
market price for size 80 is Rp. 60,000 head/kg, while for size 50 is Rp. 80,000. partial harvesting
activities are generally carried out by doing the harvest by 30% in phase 1 for size 80 and 70% in
phase 2 for size 50. In one production cycle, the resulting average production of 8 tons.
                      Table 2.68. Expenditure for Production Intensive Vanamei Shrimps Per Cycle
       Component                      Unit            Price (Rp)          Unit               Total         Description
Cost of preparation
Plastic                      Roll                     5 million       4                 20 million
benur PL-5                   Tail                     45              500,000           22,500,000
Lime                         Kg                       1,000           2,000             2 million
Maintenance costs
Urea                         Kg                       15              2,000             30,000
Bran                         Kg                       3,000           300               900,000
Feed                         Kg                       16,000          10,000            160 million
Electric                                              40 million      1                 40 million        1 cycle
Windmills                    Unit                     572,000         7                 4,004,000
Labor costs
                             Today The Working
land preparation                                      7 million       1                 7 million         Wholesale
                             People (HOK)
                             Today The Working
Harvest                                               4 million       1                 4 million         Wholesale
                             People (HOK)
                             Person Of The Month
Security/security guard                               2,500,000       4                 10 million
                             (OB)
                             Person Of The Month
Feeder                                                2,500,000       4                 10 million
                             (OB)
                             Person Of The Month
Technician                                            4 million       6                 24 million
                             (OB)
Expenditure                                                                             304,434, 000
         Source: Survey and analysis, 2017
                   Table 2.69. Revenue from production of the Vanamei Shrimps Intensively Per Cycle
                       SR = 80%                           400,000                Tail
                       partial harvesting 1               120,000                Tail
                       partial harvest 2                  280,000                Tail
                       partial harvest production 1       1,500                  Kg
                       partial harvest production 2       5,600                  Kg
                       partial harvest revenue 1          RP                     120 million
                       partial harvest income 2           RP                     448 million
                      the amount of income                RP                     568 million
                 Source: survey and analysis, 2017
Based on the results of the analysis of pengeluaan and income above, it can be noted that in one
production cycle per pond, making a profit of Rp. 263.566.000/cycle/pond. so if that value then
may be known to an average loss of income from their respective employers and workers farmed
due to loss of land for the construction of the back-up area of the harbour.
As for the aspirations of the farmers affected by the construction of the port area to back up is
the obvious replacement with a price to match. Given the magnitude of the gains were lost due to
loss of land farmed.
7. Farming Activities
a. Extensive Areas of potentially impacted by the project in a Back-Up Area
Based on survey results obtained in the field, total area of back-up area is 356.23 acres . The total
area is planned, as many as 10 hectares will be used for the back-up on the phase 1, while the rest
of the land will be used for long-term development, the Green open space and buffer zone. Based
on the mapping and logging results, then the project location the port of Patimban in the
Pusakanagara subdistrict of Subang Regency is divided into 6 main blocks, namely Blocks 15, 16,
17, 18, 19, and 20. Spacious, each block can be seen in the following table.
           Table 2.70. Broad Back-Up The Area in each block (in addition to PT. Wahana)
                          Block         Area (M2)         Area (Ha)
                           15           757,335.48          75.73
                           16           222,105.85          22.21
                           17           729,667.51          72.97
                           18           377,854.42          37.79
                           19          1,090,140.59        109.01
                           20           385,194.15          38.52
                          Total        3,562,297.99        356.23
                                  Source: LARAP Survey Team, 2016
The results of the field survey also shows that in the area there are the roads, rivers and irrigation
canals.
The Total area of land owned by the company or the local community and the private sector that
will be affected by the plan of the harbor construction project Patimban is 3 1 2, 38 hectares and
land area owned by the Government is 43, 85 hectares.
             Table 2.71. The Total area of land belonging to local people and Companies
              Block            The owner of the            Area (m 2)           Area (ha)
               15      Public land                      730,396.05           73.04
               16      Public land                      200,646.45           20
               17      Public land                      716,757.12           71.68
               18      Public land                      353,162.52           35.32
                       Public land                      344,604.30           34.46
                19     Private land (PT. Governance
                                                        412,705.36           41.27
                       Dynamics)
               20      Public land                      365,518.37           36.55
           Total area                                   3,123,790.18         312.38
      Source: LARAP Survey Team, 2016
Access Roads
Based on the survey, there were 106 the owner of land in the Kalentambo Village, Gempol Village,
Kotasari Village, Pusakajaya Village, and Pusakaratu Village. Meanwhile, the number of fields
that are potentially affected by the expansion of the access road to the project is as much as 229
fields. The number of land owners and land areas per village presented in the following table.
                   Table 2.74. The number of Fields and Land Owners per Village
                           Village         Fields      Land Owner
                           Gempol          56          47
                           Kalentembo      20          18
                           Kotasari        19          19
                           Pusakajaya      7           7
                           Pusakaratu      20          19
                           Total           122         106
                       Source: LARAP Survey Team, 2016
        • Land Crooked, which in this case is not the village land devoted to the public interest.
        • Subang Regency, lands, which in this case is in the form fields that are used as samples
           to estimate the volume of the construction project for the port of Patimban.
Land Ownership status that are mentioned above are compiled through surveys of assets on the
LARAP with Deploy questionnaires to residents potentially affected, where its status 25.97% as
owner, landlord and tenant 41,56%, and the status of the remaining 32.47% as a tenant. A complete
overview of the status of land tenure can be seen in the following table.
From all areas of land, most of the land had the ownership documents, such as certificates, girik,
and the deed of sale and purchase. The land is mostly have ownership documents or documents
that explain the legal basis of their tenure, such as certificates, girik, and the deed of sale and
purchase of land. The number of residents who have proof of ownership such as certificates, girik,
and the deed of sale was as much as 96,1%, and that can't be a legitimate document indicating as
much as 2.9%. In this case, the good citizens who have land ownership documents, do not
understand the problem, or they do show documents, however, is not a proof of ownership rights
to the land. In the acquisition of land or compensation, in the process of land use conditions are
relatively similar, proof of ownership documents are also factors that determine the amount of
compensation, because this document is evidence of the legal rights of land ownership. The higher
the status of ownership, then the compensation obtained will be higher.
 Table 2.76. Proof of ownership of land documents that potentially affected by the Port Development
                                                          Block
      Proof of Ownership Documents                                                Total         %
                                         15       16    17 18        19    20
     Certificate                         13       3     14     6      8     5       49         47.1
     Without Certificate                 0        1      0     1      0     1        3          2.9
     Girik/Tax Payment                   2        0      5     4      4     1       16         15.4
     The Deed Of Sale And Purchase       12       1     17     0      1     5       36         34.6
     Total                               27       5     36 11        13    12      104        100.0
     Source: LARAP Survey Team, 2016
Tenants in most affected areas occupying land with permission, but without paying (60%) and
rent (40,0%).
       Table 2.79. Extensive land use in each Block the port development project Patimban
                  Block                     Land use          Area (m2)           Area (Ha)
                                       Irrigation              669.19                0.07
                    15                 Road                   22, 387.91             2.24
                                       Rice fields           734, 216.54            73.42
     The total area of the block 15                          756, 372.28            75.64
                                       Rice fields           207, 374.39            20.74
                    16                 Brackish Water
                                                              14, 731.46              1.47
                                       Fishponds
     The total area of the block 16                          222, 105.85             22.21
                                       Irrigation             5, 920.45               0.59
                                       Road                   2, 253.24               0.23
                    17
                                       Awakened Lands         9, 154.73               0.92
                                       Rice fields           712, 339.09             71.23
     The total area of the block 17                          729, 667.51             72.97
                                       Irrigation             2, 919.44               0.29
                                       Road                   1, 390.97               0.14
                    18                 Rice fields            49, 672.12               5
                                       Brackish Water
                                                             323, 871.88             32.39
                                       Fishponds
     The total area of the block 18                          377, 854.42             37.79
                                       Irrigation              466.18                 0.05
                                       Road                   5, 326.58               0.53
                                       Graves                 2, 549.44               0.25
                                       The Field Of
                                                              90, 617.21              9.06
                    19                 Agriculture
                                       Awakened Lands         64, 983.19              6.50
                                       The Meadow             26, 183.63              2.62
                                       Rice fields           325, 624.53             32.56
                                       River                  7, 895.23               0.79
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                            II-116
                                                   Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
Access Roads
Based on the results of quantification, the total area of land belonging to the local community and
Government is of 61.50 hectares. There are several land use in the area, the largest land use in the
region for rice is as big as the land belongs to 28.63 acres in local communities, and land acres
17.21. The results of extensive quantification on land use in areas potentially affected by the
presented on the following table.
        Table 2.80. Land use by the community and the Government of the Inventoried
                        No.         Land use            Area (m2)         Area (ha)
                       Local Community
                             Brackish Water
                         1                          875.38             0.09
                             Fishponds
                         2 Irrigation               952.25             0.10
                         3 Road                     112.76             0.01
                         4 Builded Lands            43,440.29          4.34
                         5 The Meadow               10,519.23          1.05
                         6 Farm                     89,984.27          9.00
                         7 Paddy fields             286,413.16         28.64
                             Total                  432,297.35         43.23
                       Government
                         1 Irrigation               981.80             0.10
                         2 Road                     3,539.47           0.35
                         3 Graves                   1,291.15           0.13
                         4 Awakened Lands           1,529.09           0.15
                         5 Farm                     656.27             0.07
                         6 Rice fields              172,058.63         17.21
                         7 River                    1,101.61           0.11
                         8 Riverside                2,214.61           0.22
e. The General conditions of the Owner and tenant Farmers Or Peasants Land in Back Up
   Area
Based on a map of land use, land tenure in back-up area was dominated by the ownership of the
fields and fishponds. Paddy field owned by unidentified individuals and village in the form of
Crooked Land or land that is used as the paddy fields to finance salaries of village officials.
Meanwhile, ownership of the Causeway is divided into individual and corporate ownership or
private ownership. There are two companies that do business in areas of brackish water fishponds
of the administration of the village of Patimban, namely PT. Wahana Mitra Semesta and PT.
Laksana Dinamika.
Owners of land in Patimban Village mostly living outside in Patimban, among others, in the village
of Kalentambo, village Rancadaka, Gempol village, and some of them even lived outside the
District of Subang. Different from owner, tenant of the land generally lived in the village of
Patimban and they have lived in the village for a very long time. A total of 156 owners of land in
back-up area. Dominant livelihood of renter in back-up area are identified in line with land use,
among other things :
With pattern of land management, in general, owner of the land to manage their own land with
employs several workers. However, there are also some land owners who cede their land
management they land to tenants or farmers. In addition, there is also the owner of the land who
manage their own land and also became farmers on land belonging to another person. The
following table contains the number of the quantification of owners and tenant farmers or land
tenants per block in the back-up area.
 Table 2.82. The number of land Owners and Land Tenants in the area of the port of Patimban Project
                                 The number of
                       Block                          The Number Of Tenants
                                    Owners
                        15            50                           -
                        16            25                           -
                        17            43                           -
                        18            13                           6
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
 NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
 IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                            II-119
                                               Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
                        19              35                        72
                        20              22                         2
                       Total           156                        80
                     Source: LARAP Survey Team
            Table 2.83. The number of plants that are Potentially affected by the Project
                                                    Block
      No.      Type Of Plant                                                         Total       %
                                  15      16     17      18         19       20
      1      Akasia                3       0      0       9         43       16        71       2.62
      2      Angsana               0       0      0       0         8        0          8       0.30
      3      Asem                  0       0      0       0         0        4          4       0.15
      4      Bakau                 0      15      0      16        160       0        191       7.06
      5      Belimbing Wuluh       0       1      0       0         0        0          1       0.04
      6      Beringin              5       0      0       1         9        0         15       0.55
      7      Bintaro               0       0      0       0         1        0          1       0.04
      8      Gamal                45      80      0       0         12       15       152       5.62
      9      Gempol                0       1      0       0         0        0          1       0.04
      10     Glodokan              0       0      0       0         0        1          1       0.04
      11     Jabon                25       2      0       0         0        0         27       1.00
      12     Jambu Air            30       5      0       0         0        0         35       1.29
      13     Jambu Biji           13      14      0       0         0        10        37       1.37
      14     Jati                  1       1      0       0         1        0          3       0.11
      15     Kelapa               39     241      0       2         8        24       314      11.60
      16     Kersen               29      43      2       6         47       0        127       4.69
      17     Ketapang              0       0      0       1         49       8         58       2.14
      18     Lamtoro              46      66      0      15         67       69       263       9.72
      19     Mahoni                0       0      0       0         0        4          4       0.15
      20     Mangga               41     171      0       0         0        73       285      10.53
      21     Mengkudu              7      21      0       0         0        3         31       1.15
      22     Nangka                0       8      0       0         0        1          9       0.33
      23     Palem putri           0       0      0       0         0        13        13       0.48
      24     Palem tiang           0       0      0       0         0        11        11       0.41
      25     Palem tupai           0       0      0       0         0        5          5       0.18
      26     Pepaya                8      33      0       0         0        6         47       1.74
      27     Pete                  0      14      0       0         0        0         14       0.52
      28     Pisang               70     121      1      58        189      268       707      26.12
      29     Randu                 9      17      0       0         0        1         27       1.00
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
 NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
 IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                             II-120
                                                  Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
                                                       Block
      No.      Type Of Plant                                                            Total       %
                              15       16           17      18         19       20
       30 Kisah                0        4            0       0         0        0          4       0.15
       31 Sawit                0        1            0       0         0        0          1       0.04
       32 Sawo                 0       10            0       0         0        2         12       0.44
       33 Srikaya              0        0            0       0         0        1          1       0.04
       34 Sukun                0       17            0       0         0        0         17       0.63
       35 Trembesi             0        2            0       0         9        10        21       0.78
       36 Waru                 4       95            0      24         32       34       189       6.98
           Total             375      983            3     132        635      579      2707       100
Source: LARAP Survey Team, October 2016
Based on the results of questionnaire distribution in each block, plants that are potentially affected
by the project can be seen in the following description.
           Table 2.84. The number of Annual Crop Fields are potentially affected by the Project
              Types Of Annual                            Block
     No.                                                                                Total       %
                   Plants            15      16       17       18       19       20
       1    Onion                     0       0        0        0        2        0        2        4.3
       2    Buntung                   0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
       3    Corn                      0       0        0        0        0        1        1        2.2
       4    Nut                       0       0        1        0        0        0        1        2.2
       5    Long Beans                0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
       6    Coconut                   0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
       7    Coconut                   0       0        0        0        1        1        2        4.3
       8    Kormis                    0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
       9    Mango                     2       0        0        0        0        1        3        6.5
      10    Mango                     0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
      11    PADI                      5       1        4        0        2        2       14       30.4
      12    Reduce                    0       0        1        0        0        0        1        2.2
      13    Papaya                    0       0        0        0        0        1        1        2.2
      14    Banana                    2       0        0        1        4        2        9       19.6
      15    Mustard greens            0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
      16    Watermelon                0       0        0        0        2        0        2        4.3
      17    Eggplant                  0       0        0        0        1        0        1        2.2
      18    Cucumber                  0       0        0        0        2        0        2        4.3
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
 NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
 IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                                II-121
                                               Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
Plant Woody
There are 13 species of woody plants that potentially affected by land acquisitions, it is, Earleaf
Acacia and Terminalia Catappa (18.2%) and Sonneratia (13.6%).
Based on the age of the plant, 69.7% of woody plants that could potentially have affected more
than 10 years, and then followed by ages 6-10 years as much as 21.2%.
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
 NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
 IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                                 II-122
                                                       Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
   Table 2.87. The amount of Woody Plants that are Potentially Affected (based on the age of the plant)
                                                                               Block
  No.                 The age of the plant                                                              Total       %
                                                               15   16        17 18     19        20
   1 1-3 years                                                 0    0         0    0    1         1       2         6.1
   2 4-5 years, with a wood diameter of 4-6 cm                 0    0         0    0    1         0       1         3.0
   3 6-10 years, with a wood diameter of 7-8 cm                0    0         0    0    7         0       7        21.2
       Over 10 years, with a wood diameter of more
   4                                                           1     0        0   10    12        0      23        69.7
       than 20 cm
  Total                                                        1     0        0   10    21        1      33       100.0
Source: LARAP Survey Team , 2016
 Fruit Plants
 There are 27 kinds of fruit plant that potentially affected by the project, it is, bananas (29.6%)
 and mango (22.2%). More details on this can be seen in the table below.
 Based on age, 47.2% of fruits that could potentially have affected is 1-3 years, 47.1% of the
 plants have more than 10 years of age, and 11.8% of the plants have aged 4-5 years.
          Table 2.89. The number of Fruits that are Potentially affected by the project (based on age)
                                                                     Block
    No.           Operate Plant Fruit                                                                  Total       %
                                                  15      16        17   18        19    20
  1      1-3 years                                1       0         1     3        0     2              7          30.4
  2      4-5 years                                0       0         0     0        0     1              1           4.3
  3      6-10 years                               1       0         0     1        3     0              5          21.7
  4      Above 10 years                           2       1         2     0        2     3              10         43.5
  Total                                           4       1         3     4        5     6              23        100.0
 Source: LARAP Survey Team , 2016
Total production in one age category based on crop plants can be seen in the following table.
             Table 2.90. Production Per Plant in one Harvest (based on the age of the plant)
                           Production Per Plant               Block
       Age Of Plant                                                                      Total     %
                                  (Kg)              15    16 17 18       19        20
                                    20              0     0 1 0          0         0      1        8.3
                                   200              0     0 0 1          0         0      1        8.3
     1-3 years
                                    3               0     0 0 1          0         0      1        8.3
                                    5               0     0 0 1          0         0      1        8.3
                                    1               0     0 0 0          1         0      1        8.3
     4-5 years
                                    5               0     0 0 0          1         0      1        8.3
                                   100              1     0 0 0          0         0      1        8.3
     6-10 years                     15              0     0 0 1          0         0      1        8.3
                                    40              0     0 0 0          1         0      1        8.3
                                   100              1     0 0 0          0         0      1        8.3
     Above 10 years                200              0     0 0 0          0         1      1        8.3
                                    40              0     0 0 0          1         0      1        8.3
     Total                                          2     0 1 4          4         1      12      100.0
  Source: LARAP Survey Team , 2016
         Table 2.91. The frequency of the Harvest in a year (based on the age of the plant)
                          The Frequency                   Block
        Age Of Plant                                                               Total          %
                           Of Harvest15           16     17 18     19    20
                                 2    0           0       1   0    0     3          4             30.8
                                15    0           0       0   1    0     0          1              7.7
      1-3 years
                                20    0           0       0   1    0     0          1              7.7
                               100    0           0       0   1    0     0          1              7.7
      4-5 years                 12    0           0       0   0    1     0          1              7.7
                                 1    1           0       0   0    0     0          1              7.7
      6-10 years
                                10    0           0       0   1    0     0          1              7.7
                                 1    1           0       0   0    0     0          1              7.7
      Above 10 years
                                12    0           0       0   0    1     1          2             15.4
      Total                           2           0       1   4    2     4          13           100.0
         Source: LARAP Survey Team , 2016
Fruit sale price ranges between Rp 800 to Rp 1.000.000 per kg at each harvest.
             5 5,000            0      0       1       0        0       0       1        5.9
             6 6,000            1      0       0       1        0       1       3       17.6
             7 7,000            0      0       0       0        1       0       1        5.9
             8 10,000           0      0       0       0        2       1       3       17.6
             9 12,000           0      0       0       0        0       1       1        5.9
            10 14,000           0      0       0       0        1       0       1        5.9
            11 15,000           1      0       0       0        0       0       1        5.9
            12 20,000           0      0       0       1        0       0       1        5.9
            13 1.000.000        1      0       0       0        0       0       1        5.9
           Total                3      1       1       4        4       4       17      100.0
     Source: LARAP Survey Team 2016
h. The attitude of Society backed Up the Area Affected On the development plan of the port
   Patimban
After learning about the existence of Patimban Port development plan, 78.5% community argue
agree of this Patimban Harbor Development, only 3.8 percent who disagreed.
 Table 2.93. The Attitude of the Affected Communities Regarding Patimban Port Development Plan
                                     The Attitude Of The Society
             No.    Block                                                            Total
                             Agree    Do Not Agree       Don't Answer
             1     15          42            1                  8                     51
             2     16          14            0                  1                     15
             3     17          25            3                  4                     32
             4     18          7             0                  1                     8
             5     19          8             0                  3                     11
             6     20          6             1                  6                     13
             Total            102            5                 23                    130
             Percentage of
                             78.5%         3.8%                 17.7%                100%
             the
       Source: LARAP Survey Team 2016
The reason of affected people in back up area are supported in Patimban Port development
include:
  - Can change the fortunes of the balance
  - It can help the economy
  - For development
  - Can replace in same land
  - Compensation in accordance with the wishes of the community
  - Join with others
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
 NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
 IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                          II-125
                                                Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
The reason of community affected in back up area not support in Patimban Port project include:
-     Should Start a business from beginning
-     Land Price is expensive, they fear can not buy anymore
-     Fear of displaced from place of birth
-     Worry about loss of work
Based on those data above, Pusakanagara District is known to have the most number of Health
Facilities as Posyandu 30 units, pos KB 5 units, and Puskesmas 2 units, but other health facilities
is none. While in Pusakajaya Village, public health facility which have is posyandu in 11 units.
The nearest health facility located in port development activity site is health center (posyandu) of
Pusakanagara which located in Pusakajaya village, as well as local general hospitals (Hospital),
Subang regency.
    ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
    NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
    IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                          II-126
                                              Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
   160
   140
   120
   100
    80
    60
    40
    20
     0
According to figure above, in Pusakanegara Puskesmas in 2014, the most dominant disease is
other acute infection of respiratory tract disease as many as 141,12 cases.
Table 2.95. Number of Cases of HIV/AIDS, STI(Sexually Transmitted Infection), Dengue Fever, TBC,
                       Diarrhea, Malaria in Pusakanagara District Year 2014.
        Sub-District          HIV/AIDS      IMS      Dengue Fever        Diarrhea      TBC      Malaria
  Pusakanagara (Pusakaratu,
    Gempol, Kalentambo,
    Kotasari, Rancadaka,
                                  13         226            3              1010         39          0
    Patimban, Mundusari)
           Total                  13         226            3              1010         39          0
                              Source : BPS Subang Regency, 2015
To find out information about the existence of a population of around HIV / AIDS around Port
development plan Patimban, secondary as well as primary data required to support information.
The method used to obtain the primary data is in-depth interview to the officer Responsible for
the field of HIV / AIDS in sub-district Puskesmas Pusakanagara. Primary data was also supported
by a survey in the community about the people living with HIV / AIDS. Secondary data obtained
through Literature Review of Books Reports in Public Health District Health Clinics Pusakanagara.
Based on data from the health center UPTD Pusakanagara 2015 recorded a number of findings of
infectious diseases in 2014. The data is described in the following table.
People With HIV / AIDS (PLWHA) in this region, but they currently live and mingle with other
people. Especially for community data that has been recorded HIV / AIDS, health centers
Pusakanagara officer detailing the amount Based on year. The data is described in the following
table.
         Table 2.97. Number of people living with HIV / AIDS in the District Pusakanagara
          Year Identification       Number of
No.                                                                      Information
              PLWHA                  people)
1.            2009 -2014                69        Gender was not recorded
                                                  - 5 men (Customer)
2.               2015                   12        - 7 women (Housewife, instead Female Sexual Worker
                                                  / WPS)
                                                  Information :
3.               2016                    3        - 2 people died,
                                                  - 1 treatment
            amount                  84
Source: Data HIV and Leprosy Program UPTD PHC Pusakanagara 2015
 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
 NEW PORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
 IN EASTERN METROPOLITAN AREA (PATIMBAN)                                                              II-128
                                               Chapter II – Detail Description of Preliminary Environmental
From these data it can be seen that the number of AIDS patients has declined every year her. Since
unidentified number of people living with HIV from 2009 to 2016 recorded 86 (+) AIDS. Until
mid 2016 PLHIV diminishing as have many died. There is only one HIV-positive people who are
still identified and are currently undergoing treatment at the health center Pusakanagara, especially
HIV and Leprosy Field Services. To identify people living with HIV in particular, the detection
process is carried directly to lokalisasis in the area around Patimban.
Party information Pusakanagara based health centers, in Patimban there are 3 Localization namely
tiles, Truntum and Palm Beach. The WPS / PSK on the localization were from the local population
(around Subang) as well as newcomers. Locals who became WPS in localization are from the
region and Patokbeusi Ciasem. WPS is a newcomer coming from Indramayu, Cirebon and also
from Tasikmalaya region.
HIV / AIDS is often associated with sex, drug use and death, many people who do not care, do
not accept, and the fear of this disease in almost all walks of life. It makes people living with HIV
are often shunned because society considers dirty disease that can be transmitted and has no cure.
Questions pertaining to HIV / AIDS presented a rather sensitive question when asked of
respondents. Most respondents / 74% tend to respond with answers not know people with HIV /
AIDS in their immediate environment and even some respondents did not answer 4%. But there
are also 22% of the respondents answered that there are people living with HIV / AIDS who live
in the surrounding neighborhood. The data shown in the table below.
4,0%
                                                                 KNOWING
                                                                     22,0%
DO NOT KNOW
74,0%
In order to prevent the development of disease transmission of HIV / AIDS, sub-district Puskesmas
Pusakanagara Party has undertaken various programs / activities, including :
    1. Socialization prevention disease sexually transmitted directly to Lokali sasi, either to
        Customers Sex and the WPS / PSK. one of form prevention is with use condom if do risky
        sexual relationships.
    2. Treatment for patients suffering from STI, GO and syphilis with Inject and Oral methods
        in health centers Pusakanagara.
    3. Examination regularly (every 3bulan once) through VCT method
    4. Cooperation with NGOs Resik for socialization prevention of STIs and HIV / AIDS.
    5. Cooperate with Organization residents AIDS Care (WPA) in level village for do various
        activity positive with PLWHA, one only Gathering activities. time this WPA-level
        organizations village new in the Village Patimban and Village Kotasari while WPA level
        districts not yet formed.
Existing condition in location which would be port is trading activity like warung and shop, shrimp
pond, fish pond, fishermen, agricultural, (paddy), and other industry activity like salted fish
making and terasi. Beside, there are education facility (SD) and religion facility (Mosque). Other
than that, until now, sea traffic of Patimban are dominated by fishermen ship with 5 PK size. For
that reason, in process of Patimban Port socialization and coordination with head of TPI, fishermen
group, and PT. Pertamina is must to do. Beside, signs will be installed in this sea.
With the planned construction of Patimban Port would make largely affect it’s existence and
activities of the days in public. In construction location of back up area (for example), would be
erased of fishpond area and agricultural area for build to be access road, operational office, parking
area, electrical installation, and clean water installation. For sea area, would be affected in
fishermen activity in search of fish, cause construction activity like container terminal, car terminal,
petroleum terminal, seawall, berth, and other facilities. Maps of another surrounding activity in
port location area figure in following figure
K 16
CHAPTER 3
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Table 3.1 Unit and People Number Affected by Back Up Area Land Acquisition
Furthermore, the number of people affected by access road land acquisition is in this
following table
Table 3.2. The Number of People Affected by Access Road Land Acquisition
  Table 3.4. The Whole Number of Unit and People Affected by Back up area and Access
                               Road Land Acquisition
The change or loss of livelyhood especially will occur to farmer owners, tenants, or workers,
along with brackish water fish farmer (fishpond) both of owner, tenants, and workers (with
commodity of fishmilk and vannamei shrimp) whom affected by land acquisition for Back up
area and access road.
Income
   Paddyrice productivity of Pusakanagara district based on Subang regency BPS data 2014
    = 47,02 ton/ha/year (as describe previously in section 2).
   After exsiccate 18% so the result ,1 ton GKG per hectare
   Therefore Pusakanagara net paddyrice productivity is 38,56 ton/ha.
   Price for 1 kg GKG is Rp. 4.000.
So, the crops that obtained by farmer per Pusakanagara district = 38.560 kg x Rp. 4.000= Rp.
154.240.000
Notes :
GKP = Gabah Kering Panen (crop dry grain)
GKG = Gabah Kering Giling (dried paddy)
Profit
= Income – outcome
= Rp. 154.240.000– Rp.15.190.000
= Rp. 139.050.000/year
The milkfish farming activity is done by the stocking density of 4.000 – 5.000 fish/Ha. The
milkfish farming activity is carried out for 4 months/cycle, so the farming activity can be
done as much as 3 cycles in a year. The harvesting activity is done when the milkfish reach
the size of 6-8 fish/kgs. These are the income analysis of milkfish farming activity per swath
per production cycle in the project site area (back-up area) in Patimban Village:
	
                             Table 3.7. Income for Fishmilk Production
                       SR =80%                     4,000    Fish
                       Production              666.67       Kg
                       Income                        Rp     10,000,000 / cycle
                                                    Rp.     30.000.000/year
Source: Survey and analysis, 2017
   Based on both table above, it is known that the loss of income caused land lost that used as
   project site is Rp.3.500.000/pond/cycle. Therefore, loss of income from fishpond farming is
   Rp.3.500.000/pond/cycle x 3 cycle/year = 10.500.000. The negative impact felt quite large
   by fishpond owners and workers. While the aspiration from fishpond/milkfish farmer is
   suitable land replacements, and they could be involved in Patimban Seaport development
   activity.
   Venamei shrimp harvest activity is done partialy, where the first harvest is done in size 80
   (shrimp/kg), while the second harvest is done in size 50 (shrimp/kg). Average market price
   for size 80 is Rp.60.000 ekor/kg, while for size 50 is Rp.80.000.
   Partial harvesting activity is generally done 30% at phase I for size 80 and 70% at phase 2
   for size 50. In 1 cycle of production, production average is 8 ton.
   Venamei shrimp farming is capital intensive activity. However, this activity is also
   producing high profit from each production. Here is the analysis of income from venamei
   shrimp farming intensively in the project site area.
Table 3.8. Expenditure for Shrimp Vanamei Production Intensively per cycle
Table 3.9. Income from Vanamei shrimp production Intensively per Cycle
   Sdayng profit system for both of agriculture land owner and fishpond farming with the
   sharecroppers in Patimban is using “maro” system. Profit sdayng system bridge land owners
   needs to the sharecroppers to manage their land with the needs of land availability from
   farmer community whom landless.
            Table 3.10. Estimation Analysis of livelyhood and Income Loss Impacts caused by
                                           Patimban Seaport Development
No.   Livelihood     Worker unit      Without Project (Wo/P)      With Project (Wi/P)               Besaran Dampak
        sector                                                                                       (Wi/P - Wo/P)
                                       Person   Rupiah/Year      Person      Rupiah/Year       Person     Rupiah/Year
1.                  Owner                348    695.250.000       348             0             348        -695.250.000
2.    Agriculture Tenant                 21     695.250.000        21             0              21        -695.250.000
3.                  Worker               41     102.000.000        41             0              41        -102.000.000
4.                  Milkfish             59     150.000.000        59             0              59        -150.000.000
                    Owner
                    (Induvidual)
5.                  Shrimp owner                5.680.000.000                      0                       -5.680.000.000
                    (Induvidual)
6..                 Milkfish             48      150.000.000      48               0             48         -150.000.000
      Fishpond      ponds tenant
7.                  Shrimp pond                 5.680.000.000                      0                       -5.680.000.000
                    tenant
8.                  Milkfish pond        18      60.000.000       18               0             18         -60.000.000
                    worker
9.                  Shrimp pond                  84.000.000                        0                        -84.000.000
                    worker
                           Amount        535    13.296.500.000    535               -            535      -13.296.500.000
       Source : Calculation result, 2017
      Land acquisition will cause loss of livelyhood and change of income from agriculture aspect
      and brackish water fishponds (fishmilk and shrimp) untill 0 rupiah/year. Therefore land
      acquisition can be categorized into activity that can cause significant impact to the
      decreasing of farming production and brackish water fishponds (fishmilk and shrimp).
    sectors. Although the activities happens in short duration, but the impact will continue
    especially when they do not get a replacement livelihood. It will cause aftereffects to the
    loss of income that reach total number of (–) Rp13.296.500.000/ year. So, this impact is
    significant impact (P).
4. Other Component Affected
    Other component affected is social component, which is public unrest, so the impact
    rated as significant impact (P)
5. Cummulative Nature of Impact
    Impact source of livelihood loss only come from land acquisition activity, so the impact
    is not cummulative. Based on estimation in this criteria, impact is rated as non
    significant impact (TP).
6. Reversible or irreversible impact
    Impact is irreversible, because farmer and farm/pond workers can’t back to work on that
    land untill they able to find other job. So, impact is rated as significant impact (P).
Here is the analysis of farming, ricefields, and brackish water fishpond productivity decline
from land use of Patimban Seaport back up area.
Scale of impact to the farming, ricefields, and brackish water fishpond productivity decline
will be count with formulas:
                                             n
                                     Pr0  1 j Pr j
                                            j 1
                                             n
                                     Prtp  1tpj Prtpj
                                             j 1
                                                 n
                                     Prdp   (1tpj  1ij ) Prdpj
                                             j 1
Where :
          l                =   Land area of farming/ricefield/brackish water fishpond;
          Pr               =   production (Rp/ha);
          ltp dan Pr tp    =   consecutive area and production at time t1 without project;
          li               =   Land area of farming/ricefield/brackish water fishpond developed
          Prdp             =   Production with project at time t1
          J                =   Kind of plantation;
Answer:
Paddyrice production :
Prtp      = 1.710,48 ha x 47,02 ton/ha = 80.427 ton/ha
Pr dp     = (1.710,48 – 225,95) ha x 47,02 ton/ha
          = 1.484,53 x 47,02 ton/ha
          = 69.803 ton/ha
                           Pr = (Prdp – Prtp) = 69.803 - 80.427 ton/ha/year
                                            = (minus) 10.624 ton/ha/year
Patimban seaport development project in 2027 potentially make Pusakanagara district area
loss of farming production potency as much as (minus) 10.624 ton/ha/year x 10 year =
106.240 ton/ha.
Answer :
Fishmilk ponds production
Prtp      = 461,73 ha x 2 ton/ha = 923,46 ton/ha
Pr dp     = (461,73 – 113,15) ha x 2 ton/ha
         = 348,58 ha x 2 ton/ha
          =697,16 ton/ha
                       Pr = (Prdp – Prtp) = 697.16 - 923,46 ton/ha/year
                                        = (minus) 226,30 ton/ha/year
Patimban seaport development project in 2027 potentially make Pusakanagara district area
loss of fishmilk ponds production potency as much as (minus) 226.3 ton/ha/year x 10 =
2.263,0 ton/ha
                                      Pr = (Prdp – Prtp)
If:
Answer :
Brackish water production
Prtp       = 461,73 ha x 8 ton/ha = 3.693,84 ton/ha
Pr dp      = (461,73 – 113,15) ha x 8 ton/ha
          = 348,58 ha x 8 ton/ha
           = 2.788,64 ton/ha
                      Pr = (Prdp – Prtp) = 2.788,64 - 3.693,84 ton/ha/year
                                           = (minus) 905,2 ton/ha/year
Patimban seaport development project in 2027 potentially make Pusakanagara district area
loss of brackish water production potency as much as (minus) 905,2 ton/ha/year x 10 =
9.502 ton/ha
Table 3.12. Analysis of Impact Estimation of Land Productivity Loss with Patimban Seaport
                          Development in Pusakanagara District
 No.             Type of Land             Without Project      With Project         Magnitude of
                                              (Wo/P)             (Wi/P)             impact (Wi/P-
                                             (ton/ha)           (ton/ha)            Wo/P) (ton/ha)
1.        Farm and Ricefields                 69.803             80.427                -10.624
2.        Brackish     water       pond       697,16             923,46                -226,30
          (Fishmilk)
3.        Brackish     water       pond        2.788,64          3.693,84                -905,20
          (Fishmilk)
                              Amount         73.288,80           85.044,30             -11.755,50
Source : Consultant analysis, 2017
Seen from the magnitude of land productivity loss which is 11.755 ton/ha from land
acquisition activity, it can be categorized into causing significant impact.
    fishpond owners are 59 person, tenants are 48 person, and workers are 18 person. So the
    impact is rated as significant impact (P).
2. Impact Spread Area
    Impact spread area is more than one village consist of Pusakaratu village, Kalentambo
    village, Kotasari, and Patimban, Pusakanagara district and Pusakajaya village,
    Pusakajaya district. So the impact is rated as significant impact (P).
3. Duration and Intensity of Impact
    Based on the calculation above, Patimban seaport development project in 2027
    potentially make Pusakanagara district area loss of agriculture production potency as
    much as (minus) 10.624 ton/ha, fishmilk ponds (minus)226.3 ton/ha and Venamei
    shrimp ponds (minus) 905,20 ton/ha. Thus the impact is rated as significant impact (P).
4. Other Component Affected
    Other component affected is social component sosial that is public unrest, So the impact
    is rated as significant impact (P).
5. Cummulative Nature of Impact
    Impact source of livelihood loss only come from land acquisition activity, so the impact
    is not cummulative. Based on estimation in this criteria, impact is rated as non
    significant impact (TP).
6. Reversible or Irreversible Impact
    Impact is irreversible, because farmer and workers can’t work in those land anymore
    untill they able to look for another job. So, the impact is rated as significant impact (P).
public. So that, land acquisition activity can be categorized to arouse significant impact of
\public unrest.
	
So that, land acquisition activity can be categorized as rise big impact to the public unrest.
	
    Table 3.13. Analysis of Public Unrest Impact Estimation in The Construction Phase
 No.      Types of Impact        Without Project      With Project         Besaran Dampak
                                     (Wo/P)              (Wi/P)              (Wi/P- Wo/P)
1.      Public          unrest   Public unrest is    There are 30%        30% respondents feel
        percentage as the          unidentify       respondents state        worried due to
        effect of development    without seaport         worries         livelihood and income
        plan                         project                                      loss
    Impact is irreversible, because farmer and farm/pond worker is not able to back to work
    in those lands untill they can look after another job. So, the impact is significant impact
    (P)
Estimation of job and business opportunities impacts are determined by comparing recruited
local workers ratio with the required total workers to recruited total workers ratio with
unemployment number in the study area. In the description of the environmental baseline, it
is known that the number of other category (people who do not have a permanent job) from 2
districts is 481 person (See section type of work). The ued formula is:
LO = x 100 %
Which :
    LO             :       Job opportunity rate
    LO in          :       Number of recruited local worker
    LO n           :       Total number of total recruited workers
    UL             :       Number of unemployment people around study area
LO = x 100 %
        =    2,3
Through that calculation, it is obtained the conclusion that job opportunity impact criteria
has fair value. However, job opportunity is very needed by local people, so it is very
important to be sought for job seekers around the location of Patimban seaport development.
It need to be consider that the impact of created job opportunity is different with business
opportunity. With the huge number of required workers, it will create job opportunities and
business opportunities for the people around the project location. Most of workers who are
not come from that area will stay in basecamp which is completed with canteen that can be
managed by local people. Providing shelter and its supporting facilities will also completed
with canteen/food stalls with expected capacity that can fullfill workers eat and drink needs
everyday. Beside canteen/food stall, workers also need other daily needs such as bathing
and washing needs. Those needs can be fullfilled by shop/groceries around the project site.
The impacts of created business opportunity are estimated by counting the potential
foodservice and lodging that may appear from Patimban seaport development activity :
 Food service
The total number of construction workers (person) x construction time (day) x 3 times
eating/day x Price of a meal (rupiah) :
1.030 person x 720 days x 3 x Rp.15.000 = Rp. 33.372.000.000
 Lodging services
The number of recruited commuter (non-local) construction workers (person) x construction
time (month) x rent price/month (Rupiah) :
824 person x 24 month x Rp.300.000 = Rp. 5.932.800.000
	
	
	
	
	
	
      Table 3.15. Analysis of Job and Business opportunities Impact with Patimban Seaport
                                Development in Location affected
    No.        Business opportunity      Without Project      With Project           Scale of impact
                                             (Wo/P)              (Wi/P)               (Wi/P- Wo/P)
1.          Food service                       0             33.372.000.000          33.372.000.000
2.          Lodging service                     0            5.932.800.000           5.932.800.000
                                Total           0            39.304.800.000        (+) 39.304.800.000
Source: Consultant analysis, 2017
It is expected with the appearance of food and lodging services business will increase local
peopple standard of living. Regarding the calculation result, so the positive impact that
occured is categorized as significant. Seeing from impact of interset based on significant
impact criteria, so the impact of workers employment activity to the job opportunity
parameter can be described as follow :
   Based on description above, so the impact of workers employment to the job opportunity is
   estimated as positive significant impact (+P).
   Rock material will be taken from Purwakarta, so the mobilization route is : material is
   transported from purwakarta – Jalan Raya Sukatani – Jl. Ciganea – Jl. Tol Cipularang – Jl.
   Tol Jakarta Cikampek – Jalan Pantura – seaport access road (seaport access road that has
   been freed by Subang government). The estimated number of trucks are 123 ritation per day
   for access road construction materials mobilization and 77 ritation for seaport development
   material mobilization (rocks). Using work assumption 8 hours, calibrated with 1,3 and
   round-trip transport, so the extra traffic volume obtained from materials mobilization is 40
   smp per hour. Based on that route and high amount of truck, traffic disruption is estimated to
   occur around the crossing between access road and Pantura road.
   Table 3.16. VCR Value in Material and Heavy Equipment Mobilization Construction Phase
                                       Existing                    Tahap konstruksi + Eksisting
                                                                                                      Magnitude
                                   (Without Project)                      (With Project)
                                                                                                       impact/
                                                                                                       Change
    Time          Point                                                                                 from
                           Volume                       VCR        Volume                Service
                                        Capacity                               VCR                    existing +
                          (smp/jam)                    existing   (smp/jam)               rate
                                                                                                     construction
                                                                                                         (%)
Morning peak        1       536           1576          0.34         576       0.37         B            7.47
hour
(07.00-08.00)       2       827           1576          0.52         867       0.55         C            4.84
Afternoon           1       585           1576          0.37         625       0.40         B            6.84
peak hour
 (12.00-13.00)      2       779           1576          0.49         819       0.52         C            5.14
Evening peak        1       899           1576          0.57         939       0.60         C            4.45
hour
 (16.00-17.00)      2       1083          1576          0.69        1123       0.71         C            3.69
Night peak          1       432           1576          0.27         472       0.30         B            9.25
   From the table above, it show that VCR average is increasing around 0.03 or the average of
   the increasing traffic volume is around 9.25 %. It show non-significant increasing volume.
   The rise of traffic volume around 200 trucks per day will affect the traffic around the
   crossing between access road and Pantura road crossroads. Deceleration of vehicle speed
   will occur in the crossroads as the result of traffic volume increase and material mobilization
   activity.
   Seen from the aspect of the impact of interest, so it can be analyzed as follows:
   1. The Number of People Affected
         The number of people affected are people along the crossing between access road and
         Pusakanagara Pantura road which is became mobilization route and road user make this
         impact as significant impact (P)
   2. Impact Spread Area
         Impact dispersion area is Pusakanagara Pantura road which is became mobilization route
         in the study area. So, the impact is significant (P).
   3. Duration and Intensity of Impact
         Impact occur during material mobilization activity which is 60 months with vehicle
         ritation is 200 truck. The deceleration is estimated to be occur and will affect to others
         vehicle speed, so it will cause traffic jam. So that, this impact is significant impact (P).
   4. The Other Component Affected
         The other environmental component that will be affected by impact is public unrest as
         the result of traffic jam. So the impact is significant (P).
   5. Cummulative Nature of Impact
         Traffic seizure impact is cummulative because it will occur increasing of traffic volume
         during 8 hours per day for 60 months. It can be categorized into significant impact (P).
   	
   	
   	
Based on description above, it can be said that material mobilization activity has significant
negative impact (-P) to the land traffic.
Material transportation activity will through Pantura national road and then heading to access
road. Based on the laboratory analysis result in baseline survey measurement, it is known
that the current levels of SO2 is 100.34 µg/Nm3 (BM 900 µg/Nm3), NO2 is 24.77 µg/Nm3
(BM 400 µg/Nm3), CO is 9.144 µg/Nm3 (BM 30.000 µg/Nm3) and dust (TSP) is 175,42
µg/Nm3 (BM 230 µg/Nm3), still below the quality standard.
The material transportation activity potentially increase the burden of air pollutants
especially the spread of dusts that can exceed the quality standard and spread to the
settlements.
Estimation of Air Quality Impact without Patimban Seaport Activity (Without Project)
Because it is estimated that there is no another significant development in activity location
which conduce traffic arouse except Patimban Seaport develompent, so it is assumed that air
quality during 24 months of construction period is simillar to the baseline.
Estimation of Air Quality Impact with Patimban Seaport Activity (With Project)
The calculation of pollutant number estimation that emited form diesel-fueled vehicle can be
calculated with Gaussian formula with line source model as follows:
                                          2QL                  H  
                                                                      2
                          C ( x, z )                .Exp  0,5  
                                       (2 ) 0,5 zu           z  
            where:
             C (x, z)     = Pollutant concentrations in ambient air (atmosphere), g/m3
             X            = Distance between road and receptor, m
             Z            = Height of receptor above ground, m
             QL           = emision rate per distance unit, gr/det.m
             Π            = Coefisien; 3,14
             U            = Wind speed average on the x axis, m/det
             H            = Height of vehicle exhaust gas source point, m
             z           = Gaussian vertical dispersion coefisien, m
In the estimation of impact during this construction material mobilization, assumption that
used is :
       Using of truck fuel is 0.2 litre diesel fuel for mileage of 1 km, so diesel fuel
        consumption = 0,2 Lt/km = 0,0002 Lt/m
       Average vehivle velocity is about 30 km/hour which is operated for 8 hours per day,
        so in vehicle/meter 0,00083 vehicle/meter.
        Based on that unit, it can be predicted :
        Diesel fuel needs per vehicle per day
            = ( 0,0002 Lt/m : 0,00083 kend/m ) x 200 = 48 Lt/day = 0,048 m3/day
       Wind speed is known from baseline data as much as 5,3 m/dt from the west
       Gaussian disperse coefficient (    ) at the stability of atm B is 3,4 m
       Recipient height (H) is 2 m
Meanwhile for diesel fuel oil vehicle emition factor based on WHO standard is presented in
this following table :
After those data are inserted into Gaussian equation with Line Source model, obtained
distribution number due to activity of construction material transporting vehicle as follows:
	
	
	
    Particulate
     Q Source particulate emision= (0,048 m3/day) x (2,4 kg/ m3)
                               = 0,1152 kg/day= 0,0013 gr/sec
     Concentration (C)
                                      2  0,0013           1  2 2 
              C partikulat                           .Exp          = 0,000049g/m3
                               (2  3,14)  5,3  3,4
                                         0, 5
                                                           2  3,4  
 SO2
Q Emision source SO2                  = (0,048 m3/day) x (19 kg/ m3)
                                      = 0,912 kg/day = 0,0105 gr/sec
Concentration (C)
                               2  0,0105               1  2 2 
             C SO2                               .Exp            = 0,00039g/m3
                       (2  3,14) 0,5  5,3  3,4       2  3, 4  
    NO2
    Q Emision source NO2              = (0,048 m3/day) x (11 kg/ m3)
                                      = 0,528 kg/day = 0,0061 gr/sec
    Concentration (C)
                               2  0,0061           1  2 2 
             C NO2                           .Exp            = 0,00023g/m3
                       (2  3,14)  5,3  3,4
                                  0,5
                                                    2  3, 4  
    CO
    Q Emision source CO               = (0,048 m3/day) x (43,5 kg/ m3)
                                      = 2,08 kg/day= 0,0241 gr/sec
Consentration (C)
                               2  0,0241           1  2 2 
              C CO                           .Exp           = 0,0009g/m3
                       (2  3,14)  5,3  3,4
                                  0,5
                                                    2  3,4  
	
    Table 3.18 Pollutant Contribution to the Ambien Air Quality When Construction Material
                            Mobilization in Pantura National Road
                     No.       Parameter            Piece        Magnitude
                     1.        Particulate/dust     µg/m3        0,000049
                                                        3
                     2.        NO2                  µg/m         0,00022
                                                        3
                     3.        SO2                  µg/m         0,00039
                                                        3
                     4.        CO                   µg/m         0,0009
                      Source: Calculation result, 2016
Especially for dust parameter, the increasing estimation is also obtained from the dusts
resuspension which are lifted into the air as the result of the truck wheels movement. The
 calculation of dust quantity can be approached by empirical formula from Midwest Research
 Institute (MRI, 1979) as follows:
                            eu = 5,9( 0,083 x s )( 0,033 x S )( 0,143 x W )0,5( 0,0027 x d)
 where :
           eu     =   Amount of dust per road length (lb/mile)
           s      =   Silt content (%)
           S      =   Vehicle speed (mile/jam)
           W      =   Vehicle weight (Ton)
           d      =   Amount of non rainy day in a year
 So, the amount of dusts that will be produced by the moving of one transporting vehicle
 (dump truck) on the road is 1,374 lb/mile (384,3 kg/km), If there are about 200 operating
 vehicle ritation per day and the dispersion area is assumed 1000 m2, so the amount of dusts
 will be 76,86g/m3. The estimation of air quality condition with the project (Construction
 material mobilization activity) is presented in the table below :
 	
      Table 3.19. Analysis of Ambien Air Quality Estimation Without and With Project while
                               Construction Materials Mobilization
                                                                                               Standard
                                                        Final             Impact
No.        Parameter          Piece     Baseline*)                                          (PP No 41 Year
                                                       hue**)            magnitude
                                                                                                 1999)
                                   Location : National Pantura Road
1.       Particulate/dust     g/m 3     175,42      252.2805       76.86048                       230
2.              NO2           g/m 3      24,77        24.7704             0.00039                 400
3.              SO2           g/m 3      100,34      100.3402             0.00023                 900
4           CO              g/m   3    9.144         9144.0009     0.0009                       30000
Source: Calculation result, 2016
Description :
*) Ambien air quality estimation without Patimban Seaport Development
**) Ambien air quality estimation with Patimban Seaport Development
 Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, the impact of air quality
 decline can be describe as follows:
 	
	
1. The Number of People Affected
    The number of people affected is the people along Pantura road that become
    mobilization route according to the study area boundary. The number of residents who
    live around the mobilization route make this impact as significant impact (P)
2. Impact Spread Area
    The spread of impact only include settlements area in transport lane, which are including
    6 villages; Pusakaratu, Gempol, Kalentambo, Kotasari, and Patimban village,
    Pusakanagara ditrict and Pusakajaya village, Pusakajaya district. So it is considered as
    significant impact (P).
3. Duration and Intensity of Impact
    Material transportation activity involve many heavy vehicle with dump truck type as
    many as 200 trucks/day during the construction which is 18 months, so the decreasing of
    air quality impact will occur continuously during that times.
    The intensity of impact, especially dust parameter rise significantly during the
    mobilization activity, so the final hue is 252.2805g/m3 which closes to quality standard
    230 g/m3. So it is considered as significant impact (P).
4. The Other Component Affected
    The other environmental that affected is public health, so it is considered as significant
    impact (P).
5. Cummulative Nature of Impact
    The impact of air quality decline is cumulative. So it is considered as significant impact
    (P).
6. Reversible or Irreversible Impact
    Irreversible impact because the decreasing of air quality is occur continuously. So it is
    considered as significant impact (P).
Based on the explanation above, the decreasing of air quality impact as the result of
equipment and material mobilization is considered as significant negative impact (-P).
The mobilization of construction materials will arouse traffic flow especially in the
mobilization route from/to project site, so the noise intensity will arouse too. The baseline
condition of noise intensity in Pantura national road is 72 dBA. Where that quantity was on
standard noise level according to KepMenLH No. Kep-48/MENLH/11/1996 (for settlement
area is 55 dBA). It is caused by transportation activity in Pantura national road, the vehicle
volume in Pantura national road is 432 – 1083 smp/hour.
Estimation of the increasing of noise level impact without Patimban Seaport Development
Activity (without project)
Because it is predicted that there is no other significant development activity which cause
traffic arouse except Patimban seaport development, so it assumed that noise level during 24
months of construction periode is simillar to the baseline 75 dBA with vehicle volume 432 –
1083 smp/jam.
Estimation of the increasing of noise level impact with Patimban Seaport Development
Activity (with project)
To determine the noise intensity as the result of material mobilization trucks, theoritically it
can be approached by formula from Rau and Wooten (1980):
= 90,82 dBA.
So that, the increasing of noise level impact magnitude is the difference between noise level
with project and without project; 90,82 – 72 = 18,82 dBA. Furthermore, it can be seen in the
table below :
    Table 3.20. Analysis of Noise Level Impact Estimation With Equipment And Material
                                        Mobilization
No         Parameter              without project       With project        Impact magnitude
1     Noise level (dBA)        72                   90,82                  18,82
2     Vehicle        volume 1083 vehicle/hour       1108 vehicle/ hour     25 vehicle/ hour
      (Evening peak hour
      17.00-18.00)
Source : Analysis result, 2017
	
1. The Number of People Affected
     The number of people affected are people which do their activity along the transporting
     route, National Pantura Road. At this moment, the traffic on that road always dense
     because it is the main lane between city and between province. So the residents have
     been being accustomed with high noise level. It make the impact is categorized as non-
     significant impact (TP).
2. Impact Spread Area
     Spread of impact is only limited in settlements area on the transporting lane. Beside, the
     activity of vehicles movements are occured shortly. Thus, it is estimated as non-
     significant impact (TP).
3. Duration and Intensity of Impact
     Material transportation activities involve many heavy vehicle with dump truck type as
     many as 200 ritation/day during the construction which is 18 months, so the decreasing
     of air quality impact will occur continuously during that times. The intensity of impact
     rise significantly during the mobilization activity, the increasing of noise level
     occur as many as 18,82 dBA from 72 dBA into 90,82 dBA which has exceeded
     noise level standard        in the amount of 55 dBA (settlement area). So it is
     considered as significant impact (P).
4. Other Component Affected
     No other environment component affected, so the impact is rated as non-significant
     impact (TP).
5. Cummulative Nature of Impact
     Increasing of noise intensity impact is cummulative. So, the impact is predicted as non
     significant impact (TP).
	
	
	
Based on analysis above, so the impact of noise intensity due to equipments and materials
mobilization is predicted as non-significant impact (-TP).
Based on baseline, activitiy in the project site (Patimban beach) is dominated by fishermen
from TPI Truntum, the data shows that fishermen who have ship in the TPI are 109. So it
assumed that if all of ships are operating on the same day, so the highest traffic activity
without project will be 109 ships per day.
The number of ships is predicted as many as 5 ships per day for material transportation from
Lampung and 24 ships per day for material transportation from dredging area to the dumping
area (15 km off-shores). The reclamation and dumping material transporting ships movement
will disturb fishermen ships movement which will pass activity location . Thus, it is
estimated that because of impact of seaport activity, ship traffic in the activity location is
become 135 ships/day.
	
    Table 3.21. Analysis of Sea Traffic Disruption Impact Estimation with Equipment and
                                   Material Mobilization
No          Parameter              without project       With project          Magnitude of
                                      condition           Condition                Impact
1     Vehicle volume             109 ship/day        138 ship/day           29 ship/day
Source : Analysis result, 2017
Based on that calculation, it can be conclude that Patimban seaport plan activity doesn’t
make significant public unrest. It is shown by Urs calculating result as many as 61,29% that
smaller than 100%.
    Table 3.22. Analysis Of Public Unrest Impact Estimation With Equipment And Materials
                                         Mobilization
No           Parameter              without project         With project            Magnitude of
                                      Condition              Condition                  impact
1       Public unrest when       No public unrest      8 % restless bacause     Restless        stated
        equipment      and       from       Patimban   of traffic jam, 6%       appear when %Urs
        material                 seaport development   restless bacause of      more than 100%,
        mobilization             plan                  noise        pollution   magnitude of impact
                                                       potency          from    shows Urs as much
                                                       material transporting    as 61,29%, So the
                                                       ships activity           restless     is    not
                                                                                significant.
Source : Analysis result, 2017
Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so heavy equipment and
materials mobilization impact to the public unrest parameter can be described as follow:
Based on the analysis above, so the material mobilization impact to the public unrest is
estimated as significant negative impact (-P).
After that facility development, it continue to reclamation activity which is landfill activity
for terminal construction (part of the sea) and back up area (terestrial). The total of landfill
material that is required for reclamation untill Phase II is 15.023.135 m3, but for phase I
stage 1 and 2, which is studied in this EIA, the reclamation volume reachs 10.300.000 m3.
Based on the result of seawater quality measurements at the activity area, it is known that
from 7 measurement location, 6 points show that TSS parameter is below quality standard
(80 mg/L). As well as turbidity estimation due to off-shore facility development, in the
reclamation phase also estimated that turbidity rate will be low and limited in the
consideration as follow :
  Table 3.23. Analysis of Sea Water Quality Impact Estimation fron Reclamation Activity
 No            Parameter              without project       With project           Magnitude of
                                        Condition            Condition               impact
 1       TSS and turbidity        From 7                Selection of            Turbidity as the
                                  measurement           technology and          effect of this marine
                                  location, 6 point     material for            facility development
                                  show TSS parameter    reclamation is made     will not significant.  
                                  are below quality     in order to sludge
                                  standard (80 mg/L)    materials do not
                                                        spread so the
                                                        increasing of
                                                        turbidity become
                                                        small.
     Source : Analysis result, 2017
Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so the impact of off-
shore facility development activity and reclamation to the sea water quality can be described
as follow:
	
1. The Number of People Affected
     People who affected by the impact of sea water quality are the fishermen, so from this
     criteria, the impact is estimated as significant impact (P).
2. Impact Spread Area
     Area that experience sea water quality decrease is area in reclmation plan. So, it is
     estimated as non significant impact (TP).
3. Duration and Intensity of Impact
     The impact intensity of sea water quality deacrease from off-shore facility development
     activity and reclamation only occur during activity. So, it is estimated as non significant
     impact (TP).
Based on the analysis above, so the impact of sea water quality decrease in reclamation
activity is estimated as significant negative impact (-P).
also the increasing of water turbidity can cause the death of benthos. Habitat change also will
affect to the benthos habitat loss.
Based on the result of sea water measurements in the activity location, it is known that from
7 measurements location, 6 points show TSS parameter is below quality standard (80 mg/L).
Total landfill material needs for reclamation reachs 15.023.135 m3, so the reclamation
activity has potency to cause turbidity and the increasing of TSS rate in the waters that can
exceed quality standard because of the entry of landfill materials such as sands and cements
into the sea waters. In the other hand, fishpond water quality that will be reclamated as back
up area has rate above water quality standard such as in the ammonia and fenol contents
parameters. But, it still below waste water standard quality. However, with the plan of
seawall construction before dumping activity, so the increasing of turbidity will not be
significant. Even so, waters quality control is needed.
     Table 3.24. Analysis of Marine Life Disription Impact Estimation from Reclamation
No           Parameter           without project          With project        Magnitude impact
Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so the impact of
reclamation activity to the marine life can be described as follow:
Based on the analysis above, so the impact of marine life disruption (Benthos) in the
reclamation activity is predicted as non significant impact (-TP) and not managed because
of derivative impact, so the management is optimized in its primary impact.
The increasing of turbidity in the waters will disturb fish respiratory system generally
because the increasing of suspended particle will affect to the spawn. The spawns in the
waters with high turbidity and sediment rate will have high mortality rate. Dissolved
particles can also cause the death of non benthic egg through absorbtion in the eggshell
surface. Both of influence make the decreasing of water current and dissolved oxygen into
the egg. Both of influence to the fish behavior occur in fish refusal to the turbid water, eating
disoreder, and the increasing of finding shelter. Other than that, turbidity also decrease
activity and influence the fish’s migration lane. Reduction in the number of marine fish will
affect to the amount of the catch in that area.
Based on the fishing ground survey, there are 3 fish auction (TPI) in the activity location,
Kali Genteng, Truntum and Tanjung Pura. The number of registered fishermen is 381 people.
Based on the interview result, those fishermen catch the fishes not only in one fishing ground
but also to others area if they did not catch a fish in the area before. Fishing ground areas
around those 3 TPI are Ciasem, Mayangan, Bobos, Patimban beach, Gebang, and Eretan.
      1. Ciasem	
      2. Mayangan	
      3. Bobos	
      4. Pantai	Patimban	
      5. Gebang	
      6. Eretan	
Among the 6 fishing grounds above, there is a fishing ground that located in the project site
of terminal development; Pantai Patimban. Pantai Patimban area give a quite big
contribution to the fishermen catch in that area. Necton species that give big contribution is
Petek fish (Leiognathus equulus).
To know the impact of fishing ground loss in Patimban waters, here is the data of catches
fish in that area.
    Table 3.25. Average Catches of Fish (kg/trip) based on the interview result of Fishermen in
                                        the TPI Kali Genteng
                                                         Fishing Ground
No         Type of Fish
                             Ciasem    Mayangan         Bobos          Patimban       Gebang       Eretan
1        Grouper                                                                        25
2        White pomfret                                                    15            95
3        Fresh water crab                                 10                               8
         (rajungan)
4        Shrimp                70                         77              80            165
5        Squid                 70                        165              50            200
6        Crab                                                                           25
7        Cuttlefish                                                                     40
8        Petek fish           2200                       300             1100           820
9        Salmon                10                        200             120
10       Mackerel                                         5
11       Anchovy               46
12       Black jewfish         35                                                       15
13       Balakutak                                        26                            18
14       Blama                                                                          50
15       Jerbung shrimp                                                                 20
16       Kuro fish                                        3
           Total              2431          0            796             1365          1502           0
Source: Fishing Ground Survey Team (Interview Survey, October 2016)
Table 3.26. Average Catches of Fish based on Fishermen Interview Result in Trumtum TPI
                                                        Fishing Ground
    No     Type of Fish
                             Ciasem    Mayangan        Bobos          Patimban      Gebang        Eretan
    1     Bilis               500        300            500              500                       900
    2     Lapan                                                                                    1100
    3     Salmon                                         10
    4     Kuro fish                                      25
    5     Mackerel                                        7
    6     Fresh      water                                6              6
          crab (rajungan)
    7     Barramundi                                     50              0             5
    8     Shrimp                           50
    9     Petek                           300
           Total              500         650            598            506            5           200
Source: Fishing Ground Survey Team (Interview Survey, October 2016)
    Table 3.27. Average Catches of Fish based on Fishermen Interview Result in Tanjung Pura
                                             TPI
                                                              Fishing Ground
No          Type of Fish
                                Ciasem       Mayangan        Bobos         Patimban        Gebang        Eretan
1        Shrimp                    0            4             46               29           77,5          39,5
2        Pomfret                   0              0             22             20            50,5         15,5
3        Rajungan                  0              0             10             0              0             0
             Total                 0              4            78              49            128           55
    Source: Fishing Ground Survey Team (Interview Survey, October 2016)
    Based on the data above, fishing ground location in Patimban gives big contribution to the
    fisherman catches, which the calculation result of cathches contribution from Patimban
    fishiing ground is 21,65% from the recapitulatuion in the six fishing ground. The estimation
    impact of with and without project to the fish production refers to the data above is as
    follow :	
                                                                                         	
      Figure 3.2. Estimation of with and without project reclamation activity impact to the fish
                                                 productivity
    Based on the picture above, impact of reclamation activity to the fishing ground loss is
    Patimban waters has implication with fish production loss in that location. The result of
    calculation based on survey result is estimated that the loss/reduction of catches is 1920
    kg/trip when the fishermen choose Patimban waters location as the fishing ground.
    Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so the impact of
    reclamation to the fishing ground can be described as follow:
Based on the analysis above, so the impact of fishing ground change in the reclamation
activity is estimated as significant negative impact (-P).
Patimban waters is fishing ground for fishermen from Tanjung Pura TPI, Trumtum, and
Kaligenteng because the location is near to the TPI so the operational cost can be reduce.
Based on the result of intervies, the fishermen opinion about fishing ground loss as the effect
of reclamation activity is as follow :
    Table 3.28. Impact of Fishing Ground (Loss or disruption of lane) Faced by Fishermen Due
                                          To Seaport
                                                              TPI
        No       Fishing Ground
                                          Kali Genteng      Truntum           TanjungPura
        1. Ciasem                               -              D                   D
        2. Mayangan                             -              D                   D
        3. Bobos                                -              D                   D
        4. PantaiPatimban                       E              E                   E
        5. Gebang                               D              -                   -
        6. Eretan                               D              -                   -
Description:
• E = fishing ground loss
• D = Lane disruption to fishing ground
Moreover, the fishing ground change as the result of off-shore facilities construction will
arouse the anxiety of fishermen. The anxiety that occur is disruption of Patimban and Bobos
fishing ground. Both of the fishing ground have near distance to the three of fish auction
location (TPI) around the seaport location. In other hand, the result of catches from both
fishing ground is quite high if compared with all of fishing ground location.
Facing the disruption of fishing ground location, fisherman can look after new location of
fishing ground with the risk of higher operation cost and the condition of new fishing ground
that is unknown. The fishermen operation cost and income in normal condition (without
project) and with project are as follow :
           Table 3.29. Operational Cost and Income of Fishermen in TPI Kali Genteng
          Average Cost per year                Without project (Rp)        With project (Rp)
A, Fuel cost                                             27,216,000                 35,380,800
B, Ships maintenance                                      3,425,000                  4,452,500
C, Ships machine maintenance                              2,231,250                  2,900,625
D, Fishermen fishing equipment                            8,662,500                  8,662,500
               Net Income                              Rp                         Rp
Ship owner fishermen average income                      34,800,000                 24,360,000
Ship non-owner fishermen average income                  25,200,000                 17,640,000
 Source : Survey and analysis, 2017
          Table 3.31. Operational Cost and Income of Fishermen in TPI Tanjung Pura
          Average Cost per year                    Without project (Rp)        With project (Rp)
A, Fuel cost                                                  24,864,000                32,323,200
B, Ships maintenance                                           1,393,000                 1,810,900
C, Ships machine maintenance                                   1,531,250                 1,990,625
D, Fishermen fishing equipment                                13,281,250                13,281,250
               Net Income                                  Rp                        Rp
Ship owner fishermen average income                           46,800,000                32,760,000
Ship non-owner fishermen average income                       18,000,000                12,600,000
 Source : Survey and analysis, 2017
With the project, which are reclamation and off-shore facility development activity, so the
disruption will be occur to the fishing ground and the lane to the fishing ground. The farther
the route to the fishing ground, the higher the cost of operation such as 20-30% for fuel oil,
ships and machine maintenances. The increasing of operational cost                    will reduce net
production as many as the increasing of the operational cost.
             Table 3.32. Analysis of Impact Estimation of Public Unrest from Fishing Ground
                                     Change in Reclamation Activity
No            Parameter           without project          With project         Impact magnitude
                                     condition              condition              (Rupiah)
1       Disruption of fishing    Average Income         Average Income
        ground affect public     (fishermen have        (fishermen have
        unrest due to the        ships) :               ships) :
        increasing of               34,800,000          24,360,000           (-) 10.440.000
        operational cost            31,540,000          22,078,000           (-) 9.462.000
                                    46,800,000          32,760,000           (-) 14.040.000
     Source : Analysis result, 2017:
So, by seeing the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, it can be described
as follow:
Based on the analysis above, so the impact of public unrest to the reclamation and marine
facilities development are estimated as significant negative impact (-P).
Before dredging activity at the phase I in the Patimban seaport area, marine facilities have
been built partially such as breakwater and revetment as in this following picture
  Figure 3.3. Topographical Conditions (in the starting period of dredging at Phase1-1 and
               initial situation of Phase1-2 after the completion of Phase1-1)
In the phase I-2, all of breakwater and revetment around the Patimban seaport have been
built as in this following picture :
Mathematics modeling is done in two condition, rainy season and dry season as follow :
The intensity of simulation period is 240 hours that has represented steady state condition in
the modeling. Here is the sediment particle size and settling velocity from sediment that is
used in the mathematics modeling.
Turbidity that occur when dredging and dumping in dumping area is estimated as the effect
of many sediment volume that taken or disposed, the following is estimation of dredging
volume per day :
    Table 3.34. Estimation of sediment volume in dredging and dumping activities in the
                                       dumping area
Figure 3.5. Turbidity Source Assumption Location in the Dredging and Dumping Sediment
              Based on Activity Phase (Phase 1 Stage 1 and Phase 1 Stage 2)
               R
         w=        w0            (a)
               R75
         Ws=w × Qs               (b)
Where,
                                       3
w:turbidity source basic unit (kg/m )
                                                                                                3
w0 :existing turbidity source basic unit standardized with current velocity of7cm/s (kg/m )
R:particle size accumulation distribution percentage of critical turbidity sediment particle
size by applying the local current velocity as the critical turbidity velocity (%)
R75:particle size accumulation distribution percentage of sediment smaller than 0.075mm
by applying the existing turbidity source basic unit ofw0(%)
Ws :amount of yielded turbidity (kg/day)
                           3
Qs :Execution volume (m /day)
-   Representative particle size of the bottom sediment from the cumulative particle
    distribution curve and obtaining the critical particle size of turbidity
-   Obtaining the ratio of clayey and silty sediment particle smaller than 75μm and particle
    percentage (R75) which are obtained from the calculated procedure of particle size
    accumulation distribution percentage (R) of critical turbidity sediment and existing
    basic unit (w0)
-   Obtaining the turbidity source basic unit based on equation (a) by multiplying the
    existing turbidity source basic unit standardized with current velocity of 7cm/s and
    above mentioned ratio of clayey and silty sediment particle smaller than 75μm and
    particle percentage (R75)
-   Obtaining the amount of yielded turbidity based on the equation (b) by multiplying the
    turbidity source basic unit and Execution volume
According to the simulated results of current field, maximum current velocity of flood and
ebb tide conditions was about 30cm/s at the dredging access channel site. On the other hand,
maximum current velocity at the anchorage basin area was about 5cm/s blocking by
breakwater and revetment.
The relation between the sediment particle size and critical turbidity velocity was shown in
the following figure and considered particle size for turbidity becomes smaller from 0.062 to
1.5 mm.
Channel, 30cm/s
                                                     Basin, 5cm/s
                Critical turbidity velocity (cm/s)
                                                                       0.062mm                            1.5mm
                                                                         Particle size (mm)
Source : “Guideline of prediction of effect of turbidity diffusion by port construction work (by MLIT)
Figure 3.6. Relation between Sediment Particle Size and Critical Turbidity Speed
The comparison between typical particle and particle size that mentioned above show that
silt and clay are smaller than 1.5mm and so the typical particle size are smaller than
0.062mm. On the other hand, Sand is bigger than 0.062mm and typical sand particle size is
smaller than 1.5mm.
Based on those considerations, R=100% was used for material at the access channel and
dumping site and R=94% (61%+33% except sand) for material at the anchorage basin area.
This following table is turbidity unit basic source applied in the modeling :
                Working Ship        Specification        Materials        source basic     (%)         basic unit (t/m3)
                                                      Percentage (%)       unit (t/m3)    Average          Average
                Taker dredger            8m3                      94.5      25.80×10-3
               ship(Phase1-1,            8m3                      58.0        9.91×10-3        71.9          22.55×10-3
                7.5m3 Class)             8m3                      63.1      31.94×10-3
                                        18m3                      97.0        5.10×10-3
Excavation
               Suction dredger
                                 1765kW(2400PS)                   68.6       22.72×10-3        68.6          22.72×10-3
                     ship
Dumping
   According to the construction work plan, there are two possible occasions of turbidity
   generation, dredged soil dumping into hopper barge and overflow from effluent outlet of
   reclamation area. The estimation of calculating below use the reference of simillar study
   from	 “Detailed Design Study for Lach Huyen Port Infrastructure Construction Project,
   Government of VietNam (Port and Road and bridge)”	
   Turbidity unit basic source by overflow from hopper barge is assumed to be the same as
   Trailer Suction Hopper Dredger. Turbidity source basic unit by overflow from Trailer
   Suction Hopper Dredger was considered to be 0.8 times, the details of calculation is as
   follow :
                                                             (1)Phase I stage 1
                                                                           Existing
                                                                                                                    Turbidity                   SS loading
                                                                          Turbidity                                                 Volume
 Location             Type of activity        Machine and Ship                                R75         R         basic unit                   amount
                                                                          basic Unit                                                (m3/day)
                                                                                                                   (t/m3)×10-3                    (t/day)
                                                                         (t/m3)×10-3
                                              Trailer hopper                      1.92
               Dredging                                                                         90.1      100                2.13       6,000       12.780
                                              suction dredger               (9.60*0.2)
Sailing lane
                                              Trailer hopper                      7.68
               Overflow from the dredger                                                        90.1      100                8.52       6,000       51.120
                                              suction dredger               (9.60*0.8)
Basin Dredging( 3 parties ) Grab Dredger 22.55 71.9 94 29.48 2,000*3 58.960*3
                                              Trailer hopper
 Offshore      Dumping                                                             22.72        68.6      100              33.12        6,000      198.720
                                              suction dredger
In the following table is conditions of turbidity source from dredging activity which refers to	
“Guideline of prediction of effect of turbidity diffusion by port construction work, April 2004,
Ministry Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)”. Where in the SS source
modeling is given to all of layers from 3 dimensions modeling.
 Construction
                                                                                     Turbidity
   Method                                           Turbidity generation
                        Turbidiy Source                                               source
                                                           model
 (Equipment)                                                                         condition
Table 3.38. Turbidity Source Condition in Mathematic Model of Sediment Disposing in the
                                        Dumping Area
 Construction                                                                       Turbidity
   methode                                          Turbidity generation
                         Turbidity sorce                                             Source
 (Equipment)                                               model
                                                                                    Condition
The figure below shows the daily maximum SS distribution in the surface and bottom of the
sea in each observation point with the worst condition assumption, where the source was
conditioned to be continue during simulation period.
The spread of turbidity diffusion by the basin dredge and sailing channel would not reach the
west shore around the river mouth in both cases of rainy and dry season. Although the
turbidity diffusion in rainy season with west wind reach the beach behind the new port, the
concentration would be under 2mg/l.
The threshold which can give impact to the estimation in an area is shown in the table below.
Based on that threshold, the turbidity area is high (5-10 mg/L) also limited to 2 – 3 km from
project site.
3) Dredging Program for the Cape Lambert Port Upgrade Referral Document
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
                                     (b)	Bottom	Layer	
            ‐	Daily	Maximum	Turbidity	in	the	rainy	season	with	west	wind	‐	
    Figure 3.7. Results of Turbidity Diffusion by Construction Works for Phase 1 Stage 1
                                                                                       	
                                          (a)	Surfce layer
The following is estimation of TSS concentration value to the distance if transect line is
made to the sediment distribution model.
Based on the result of modeling, it can be known that turbidity increase in the dumping area
has smaller distribution distance (10 mg/l distribution distance <1 km) than during dredging
activity (10 mg/l distribution distance <3 km). The increasing of average maximum
Suspended Sediment concentration occur in the area less than 500 m from the activity source.
This simulation predicts that TSS input continuosly (24 hours), so the result shows distance
of turbidity maximum distribution.
Dominant particle from dredging material is silt that consist of 61% particle which the size is
0,0194 mm and settling velocity is 30,58 m/day. Based on that speed, turbidity will
disappear from the surface to the bottom at 2 hours in 5 meter depth and 7,8 hours in 10
meter depth.
Figure 3.11 Transect sample in one of sediment distribution modeling result (phase 1 – 2)
35
               30
                                                Rainy Season, Surface
               25
                                                Rainy Season, Bottom
  SSC (mg/l)
               20                               Dry Season, Surface
                                                Dry Season, Bottom
               15
10
                0
                    ‐10    ‐9      ‐8     ‐7     ‐6      ‐5    ‐4      ‐3    ‐2    ‐1   0     1     2     3       4       5    6         7    8       9   10
                                                        West <‐‐        Distance from the loading place (km)          ‐‐> East
35
               30
                                                Rainy Season, Surface
               25
                                                Rainy Season, Bottom
  SSC (mg/l)
               20                               Dry Season, Surface
                                                Dry Season, Bottom
               15
10
                0
                    ‐3.0        ‐2.5      ‐2.0          ‐1.5        ‐1.0      ‐0.5      0.0       0.5      1.0           1.5       2.0         2.5        3.0
                                                      West <‐‐        Distance from the center of channel (km)          ‐‐> East
This impact is considered as negative significant impact (-P) based on the following
considerations :
   Based on the baseline, phytoplankton abundance in the rainy season are around 64.000 –
   231.000 sel/litre. While zooplankton are between 4.000 – 75.000 sel/litre. Bacillariophyta
   phylum have the highest abundance and species number such as Synedra acus. There are
   total of 31 kinds of plankton which consist of 22 kinds of phytoplankton that devided into
   9 classes, and 15 kinds zooplankton that devided into 9 classes. Shannon – Wiener
     diversity index is around 1 – 2 for phytoplankton, while for zooplankton is around 0,41 –
     1,40. Based on that value, it can be said that current conditions in the activity plan
     location are categorized as moderate untill heavy polluted.
     Dredging and dumping activities give the direct impact to the plankton. Dredging and
     dumping are causing the increasing of sedimentation rate and suspended solids contents,
     also the increasing of waters turbidity that will cause reduction of sun light penetration in
     to the waters so the primary production decline and dissolved oxygen content in the
     waters reduce. It especially can disturb photosynthesis process of phytoplankton which in
     the worst case can obstruct food production process and cause the death. The reduction of
     producer organism can also cause derivative impact to the food suply in the chain food
     above, zooplankton which has high dependency to the phytoplankton and possibly get
     indirect impact.
     Impact Magnitude
     The baseline for plankton in the rainy season shows that phytoplankton abundance is
     dominated by Bacillariophyta class with the abundance between 28.000 – 140.000
     cel/litre. Based on seawater quality measurement result in the activity location, it is
     known that from 7 measurement locations, 6 points show TSS parameter below the
     quality standard (80 mg/L). Marine construction work such as dredging and dumping will
     cause turbidity in the sea water. But the impact intensity is estimated small and limited.
     Turbidity distribution by the basin and sailing line dredging materials will not reach west
     beach around the estuary both of dry and rainy season. Although the turbidity in the rainy
     season with the west wind reach the beach behind seaport, the concentration is still below
     2 mg/L.
b.    Benthos
     Estimation of Impact without Patimban Seaport Development Activity (without project)
     Based on baseline, current condition at the activity plan location there are 8 kinds of
     benthos which consist of 3 kinds of Gastropods and 5 kinds of Bivalves. Benthos
     diversity index at the activity plan location is between around 0 – 1,26. According to
     Barbour et al (1987), Shannon Wiener diversity index classification shows that diversity
     index at the activity location is very low. Sampling station location S10 has the highest
    diversity index as many as 1.26, while S1, S3, S4, S7, S8, and S11 have low diversity
    index as many as 0. Those results show that S10 is categorized to moderate contaminated,
    while S1, S3, S4, S7, S8, and S11 are heavy contaminated. The kinds of Benthos that the
    most commonly found in the sampling location are Anadara sp. (Bivalves) and
    Melanoides sp.(Gastropods). Both of them can be one of indicators of water pollution,
    because of its ability in absorbing the pollutant.
c. Necton
    Estimation of Impact without Patimban Seaport Development Activity (Without Project)
    Based on the baseline, current condition at the activity plan location there are 9 kinds of
    necton which consist of 5 species of fishes (Pisces) and 4 spesies of shrimps (Crustaceae).
   The amount of catch fish are more commonly found in rainy season, while in the dry
   season are less. The amount of Induvidualal of each fish species found in all sampling
   location is varied. In the number of catches, the species that most commonly found is
   petek fish (Leiognathus equulus) with 66 Induvidualal in all of sampling location. This
   species is often found in others location, which is 4 locations. So does jerbung shrimp
   (Litopenaeus vannamei) that found in the sampling location.
   Impact Magnitude
   In the reclamation plan area, there are 9 kinds of necton, with majority are kinds that
   become consumption or livelyhood source of fishermen around the location. Patimban
   beach is one of fishermen fish cathcing area. Patimban beach area give a quite big
   contribution to the fishermen catch in that area. Necton species that give big contribution
   is Petek fish (Leiognathus equulus). Dredging and dumping activities can give high
   pressure to the waters environment in Patimban beach so it can cause disruption of necton.
   Disturbing or reducing necton not only can bother surrounding waters ecosystem but also
   give direct impact to the fishermen catch decrease.
   Marine construction work such as dredging and dumping will cause turbidity in the sea
   water. But the impact intensity is estimated small and limited. Turbidity distribution by
   the basin and sailing line dredging materials will not reach west beach around the estuary
    both of dry and rainy season. Although the turbidity in the rainy season with the west
    wind reach the beach behind seaport, the concentration is still below 2 mg/L.
          Table 3.41. Analysis of Marine Life Disruption Impact Estimation from Dredging
                                      and Dumping Activity
No     Parameter     without project condition         With project           Magnitude of
                                                        condition               impact
1      Plankton     Phytoplankton abundance in     Disrupted. Will        pytoplankton :
                    rainy season range 64.000 –    cause decreasing of    Minus (64.000 –
                    231.000 cell/litre.            abundance              231.000 cell/litre)
                    While zooplankton 4.000 –
                    75.000 cell/litre                                     Zooplankton : Minus
                                                                          (4.000 – 75.000
                                                                          cell/litre)
2      Bhentos      Benthos abuncance 0 –          Disrupted. Will        Minus 0 – 205,88
                    205,88 Induvidual/m2           cause decreasing of    Induvidual/m2
                                                   abundance
3      Necton      9 kinds of necton consist of    Disrupted, but,        Decreasing of
                   5 fishes species (Pisces) and   necton can moving      abundance
                   4 shrimps species               to another place
                   (Crustaceae)
        Source : Analysis result, 2017
This impact is considered as a non significant negative impact (-TP) based on the
following considerations :
Land use change from farm land and fishpond into built land will cause the change of run off
rate. Public facilities and social facilities development in the back up area on the 100.000 m2
area, with the details ; covered by building (social facilities, public facilities, road) is 70.000
m2 and green open space (utility) is 30.000 m2 will increase water run off coefficient which
increase water run-off debit to the early land condition.
To know water run-off debit after construction in the back up area to the early condition with
flood plan debit in 50 years, maximum daily rain intensity (I=21 mm/hour), back up area
(A=0,1km2) can be described as follow :
1. Initial water run-off debit is when the land in the general condition fishpond with
   coefficient 0.21 is Qawal = 0,278 x 0,21 x 21 x 0,1 = 0,12 m3/second
2. Final water run-off debit (built) with assumption that building ratio to the road/channel 70
   : 30, coefficient water run-off for building which involve to light industri 0,70 and road
   0,90 (Suripin, 2004), so compound water run-off coefficient 0,75. Water run off
   coefficient for utility as green open space 0,25 is as follow :
    a. Social facility, Public facility, and road Qakhir terbangun = 0,278 x 0,75 x21 mm/hour x
           0,07 km2 = 0,29 m3/second
    b. RTH (Utility) Qakhir RTH = 0,278 x 0,25 x21 mm/jam x 0,03 km2 = 0,04 m3/second
Total built water run-off debit Qakhir total terbangun = 0,33 m3/second.
Magnitude of increasing water run off debit after development in the back up area for flood
plan period 50 years is 0,33 m3/second – 0,12 m3/second= 0,21 m3/second for back up area
built land is 10 Ha area.
    Table 3.42. The Increasing of Water run off impact estimation Analysis in On-shore facility
                                      development activity
No       Parameter      Without project condition          With project             Magnitude of
                                                            condition                 impact
1        Water run    Qawal = 0,278 x 0,21 x 21       Qakhir total terbangun =   0,33 m3/second –
         off debit    x 0,1 = 0,12 m3/second          0,33 m3/second             0,12 m3/second =
                                                                                 0,21 m3/second
Based on the analysis of significant impact criteria, so the impact of on-shore facility
development to the increasingg of water run off is categorized as significant negative
impact (-P).
Based on that calculation, it can be conclude that Patimban seaport plan activity doesn’t
make significant public unrest. It is shown by Urs calculating result as many as 61,29% that
smaller than 100%.
      Table 3.43. Analysis Of Public Unrest Impact Estimation With On-shore Facility
                                          Development
	
Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so the impact of on-
shore facilities development activity to the public unrest parameter can be described as
follow :
 Based on the analysis above, so the onshore facilitiy construction impact to the public unrest
 is estimated as significant negative impact (-P).
 Procurement of labor has done inPhase I stage 1 to start sea port activity. To manage and
 operate Patimban seaport, operator terminal will be designed by consesion scheme (KPS,
 Konsesi Pelabuhan Skema). The estimation of labor that is required in operational phase can
 be recruited from local people. The estimation of local worker is 285 person (30% from 950
 person).
Table 3.44 Estimation of required labor for operational phase, Phase I stage 1 – Phase I stage 2
 The amount of worker needed are 950 people (Administration; 150 people, Terminal labor;
 800 people). Among the terminal laber, 285 people migh be hired by local people (30%).
 With labor needs are so great, that will create employment opportunities and to create and /
 or improve business opportunities for residents around the project site. Beside
 canteen/restaurant that fullfill worker food needs, they will also need bathing and wasing
needs. These needs will be fullfilled by shop around the seaport and will arouse business
opportunities.
Estimation of job and business opportunities impact are determined by comparing the
amount of recruited local workers ratio with the required total workers to the ratio of
recruited workers with the amount of unemployment in the study area. In the description of
the environmental baseline, it is known that the number of others categorized residents
(residents who have not permanent job) from 2 ditrics are 481 person (see the Type of work
section). The used formula is:
LO = x 100 %
Where :
    LO             :        Job opportunity rate
    LO in          :        Number of recruited local worker
    LO n           :        Total number of total recruited workers
    UL             :        Number of unemployment people around study area
                       =   2,05
As for the impact criterias are as follow :
  (i)    Activity will has significant impact in giving job opportunity if LO = 1
  (ii)   Activity will has fair impact if LO is between 0 to less than 1 and between more than
            1 to 2; and
  (iii) Activity will has less impact if LO more than 2
= 1,73
Through that calculation, so it can be conclude that impact criteria of job opportunity is rated
as Fair. So, job opportunities are very needed by local people, thus it is significant impact
for the job seeker around the location of Patimban seaport develompent.
It need to be consider, that impact of impact of created job opportunity is different with
business    opportunity. With the huge number of required workers, it will create job
opportunities and business opportunities for the people around the project location. Most of
workers who are not come from that area will stay in basecamp which is completed with
canteen that can be managed by local people. Providing shelter and its supporting facilities
will also completed with canteen/food stalls with expected capacity that can fullfill workers
eat and drink needs everyday. Beside canteen/food stall, workers also need other daily needs
such as bathing and washing needs. Those needs can be fullfilled by shop/groceries around
the project site.
It is expected with the appearance of food and lodging services business will increase local
people standard of living. Regarding the calculation result, so the positive impact that
occured is categorized as significant. Seeing from impact of interset based on significant
impact criteria, so the impact of workers employment activity to the job opportunity
parameter can be described as follow :
	
1. The Number of People Affected
    The local residents that will accept the benefits of this activity is estimated around 285
    people (30%), they have big opportunities to be recruited as labor. As for business
    opportunities, the big opportunities comes from eat and drink needs of the workers that
    managed by canteen in the port area. So that employment and seek for business
    opportunities in employment procurement activities are predicted as significant impacts.
2. Impact Spread Area
    Employment procurement activities will involve workers from outside and also villages
    around project area such as Pusakaratu Village, Gempol Village, Kalentambo Village,
    Kotasari Village and Patimban Village, District Pusakanagara. Because of that the
    impact is considered to be significant impacts.
3. Intensitas dan Lama Dampak
    Employment procurement activities is predicted to take very long as port operation, so
    the impact is predicted as significant impact.
4. Component Lain yang Terdampak
    There are no other environmental components affected by the activities of employment
    procurement, so that the impact is considered as not significant impact.
	
5. Cummulative Nature of Impact
    Impact of opening job and business opportunties is not cummulative. So the impact is
    rated as non significant impact.
6. Reversible or Irreversible Impact
    The impact is reversible because the residents can work and make a business somewhere
    or other fields. So the impact considered to be not significant impact.
The used estimated method to predict emision rate from the ship is determined in “Manuals
for Total Volume Control of NOx” 1 which is used to estimated magnitude of NOx and SOx
content, while “IPCC Guideline”2 is used to estimated magnitude of CO2 content.This is the
following formula :
PContainer=2.2X0.6×1.88, PPCC=1.4X0.7×1.88,
PContainer=1.9X0.97, PPCC=4.1X0.96,
N=1.49×P1.14(A1.14×T×d)×10-3×(46/22.4)
S=W×s×(64/32)
C=40,190×W×21.1×(44/12)×10-6
Which :
*assumed 1 sub-machine during anchored and 1 main machine when ship sailing
Ship specification to estimate the emision can be seen in this following table
Based on the calculation above, obtained that around 2,1 ton of NOx, 1,1 ton SOx and 106
ton CO2 will emited everyday from the ship activity which anchored in Patimban seaport.
The result of ship emision estimation in 2037 is seen in Table 3.46.
Beside of the calculation above, it is also calculated pollutant concentration in the ambient
air using Plume Model, that shows emited pollutant dispersion from the moving ships when
the wind velocity is above 1 m/s. Emision from ships is estimated as source of point. So the
pollutant concentration in the points (x, y, z) is given by :
Where:
       C(x, y, z) : Pollutant concentration in all of prediction points (x, y, z) (μg/m3)
       Q          : Air pollutant emision rate (kg/s)
       u          : average wind rate (m/s)
       H          : Emision source height, determined 30 (m)
       x          : distance from emision source to the prediction points along the wind
       direction (m)
       y          : Horizontal distance from the prediction points perpendicular with axis x-
       (m)
       z          : Vertical distance from the prediction points perpendicular with axis x- (m)
   Wind velocity : 3,0 m/det (5.8 knot, observed average rate for 11 years in Patimban on
    March, April, and November when the wind direction head to the northeast).
   Wind direction : Northeast is determined as the most influenced wind direction to the
    impact prediction points.
Impact prediction points which is determined as the most affected area illustrated in figure
below. Where the sampling points in primary survey are shown with notation AN1, AN2 dan
AN3. While for estimating air quality in the future with the existency of seaport, the value of
AN2 measurement result is used for P1 and P2, while AN3 value is for P3.
AN1
                                                              AN2	
                                                       P1	
P2
P3 AN3
Model simulation that is made has consider the structure that will be built in phase II, in
order to estimate maximum accumulation impact for whole activity.
Based on the table and chart above, it can be seen that pollutant concentration such as NOx
and SO2 far below quality standard that are required in accordance with PPRI No.41 1999.
																																																													
1
  National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management, Ministry of Land Infrastructure Transport and Tourism, Japan, Grounds for the
Calculation of Motor Vehicle Emission Factors using Environment Impact Assessment of Road Project etc. (Revision of FY 2010), Technical
note of National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management No.671, 2012.
	
       2. The total area of the impact spread
           The area of the impact spread is limited near vessel. Therefore, it is predicted as
           non significant impact (TP).
       3. Intensity and Duration of the impact
           The duration of the impact is short term, with low intensity. Therefore, the impact
           is predicted as non significant impact (TP)
       4. Many other environmental components affected
           No other environmental components affected, so the impact is considered as non
           significant impact (TP).
       5. The nature of cumulative impacts
           The impact will not cumulative. So predicted as non significant impact.
       6. Reversible or irreversible impact
           The impact is reversible because of the impact occurs temporary. So the impact is
           considered as non significant impact (TP).
3.3.2.2.   Sedimentation
Marine facility and reclamation area affect to the sediment transport change process. Based
on that condition so seabed morfology change modeling is done to estimate sedimentation
patern change as the result of Patimban seaport existence.
Sedimentation
                    sVs
Dry Density: ρ=                                                               (1)
                  Vw  Vs
D=Vw+Vs=G/ρ                                                                   (2)
Here, ρw is the density of sea water(≒1025 kg/m3), ρs is the soil particle density (≒2650
kg/m3), Vw is the volume of sea water, Vs is the volume of soil particles and G is the dry
weight of sediment.
                                       Ww wVw Vw      
Water content of sediment       : W=          ,,    W s                               (3)
                                       Ws sVs    Vs   w
1       1           Vw   1 W
                                                                                 (4)
       s          sVs s w
      1 W
D  G                                                                           (5)
       s w 
Following formula widely accepted to obtaine the amount of suspended sediment volume E
and settling volume D that were used.
 
E  M ( b /  ec  1) (6)
D  W s (1   b /  dc )C bed (7)
Where, M is the empirical suspension constant,  b is the bottom shear stress by current and
wave actions,  ec is the critical shear stress for suspension,  dc is the critical shear stress for
settling and Cbed is the concentration of suspended sediment in the bottom layer, W s is the
settling velocity.
                                         1 ( s  1) gd
                                                       3
                          w0
Stokes formula:                                                                (8)
                      ( s  1) gd       18      
where, w0 is the settling velocity of single particle, s is the submerged specific gravity of soil
particle, gis the gravitational acceleration, d is the diameter of soil particle, ν is the kinematic
viscosity coefficient of fluid.
2.58mm/sec
                                         1
                                                      上図によるSS濃度と沈降速度の関
                                                  Settling	velocity	by	SSC	
                                                    係から求まる沈降速度
           Settling	Velocity	(cm/s)	
                                        0.1
                         沈降速度(cm/s)
0.01
                                                                       SS=1000mg/l
                                                                       SS=100mg/l
    Empirical constants of the suspension shown in table below, it have been used for calculation
    of channel deposition for future topography with port facilities.
    -   Wave conditions in rainy and dry season: energy average wave (which represents the
        waves with wave height less than 1.5m)
    -   Severe wave conditions in rainy and dry season: wave with expected occurrence of
        around once a year (which represent the waves with wave height over 1.5m)
    -   River flush condition in rainy season: extreme river discharge
    External Influence
    Figure 3.19 below shows each external influence condition for sedimentation.
Time)
Annual occurrence                       4.0 times*1)      2.4 times*1)
of the hydrological                      (4.0 * 15         (2.4 * 15          3.7 times*1)         3.5 times*1)         2.5 times*2)
conditions                                 days)             days)
                                                           Offshore wave heights are set in
Remarks                             Steady Condition except Tide
                                                           time series shown by Figure 5-10
     *1) Based on the result of wave statistic analysis (refer to Figure 3.19)
*2) Based on existing data of river flow by BNBP (refer to Figure 3.19)
Calm
                                                                                        Ordinary Wave Condition in
                                                                                        Rainy Season
                                                                                        Ordinary Wave Condition in
                                                                                        Dry Season
                                                                                        SevereWave Condition in
                                                                                        Rainy Season
                                                                                        Severe Wave Condition in
                                                                                        Dry Season
                                                                                        River Flush Condition
1600
1400
1200
                 1000
                                                                                                       10	times	of	monthly	
       Q(m3/s)
                 800
                                                                                                       average	flow	discharge	
                 600
400
200
                    0
                        0   2   4   6   8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72
                                                                              Time(hour)
             1.0
             0.9
             0.8
                                                                                                  Total	accumulated	wave	
             0.7
                                                                                                  energy	is	equal	to	three‐
 H/H1/3max
             0.6
                                                                                                  eighths	(0.375)	times	of	
             0.5
                                                                                                  the	case	of	continuous	
             0.4
             0.3
                                                                                                  H1/3max	
             0.2
             0.1
             0.0
                   0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72
                                                                Time(hour)
Figure 3.21 Estimated Time‐series of Wave Height at the Severe Wave Condition
Model simulation considers structur that will be built in phase II, in order to estimates
maximum impact for all activity.
	
Estimation result and prediction of channel deposition
Figure 3.22 to Figure 3.24 show the predicted results of channel and anchorage basin
deposition for each natural condition. Figure 3.25 shows the zoning for evaluation which was
divided by 3 block as access channel block, anchorage basin block and inner basin channel
block.
Table 3.51 and Figure 3.26 show the estimated deposition volume and thickness of above-
mentioned three blocks by numerical simulation.Most of the deposition at the access channel
would occur during the severe wave conditions that have low frequency. On the other hand,
most of the deposition at the anchorage basin and inner channel would occur, accumulating
by ordinary waves from east in dry seasona little by little.
Annual deposition at the access channel is about 10 cm. According to this result, it need
interval dredging maintenance at the access channel can be considered to be around 5 years.
Although the deposition volume at the inner basin channel is less than the access channel and
anchorage basin, its thickness is larger than others.
Finally, the impact of river flush to the channel deposition would involve uncertain
conditions in this prediction. It should be take care of unexpected natural phenomenon.
                                                                  Navigational	
                               Anchorage	                         channel	block	
                               basin	block	
60,000
Deposition Volume (m3/year) 50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
                                             0
                                                  Ordinary Wave Ordinary Wave SevereWave       Severe Wave       River Flush
                                                   Condition in Condition in Dry Condition in Condition in Dry   Condition
                                                   Rainy Season     Season       Rainy Season     Season
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
                                              0
                                                  Ordinary Wave Ordinary Wave SevereWave       Severe Wave       River Flush
                                                   Condition in Condition in Dry Condition in Condition in Dry   Condition
                                                   Rainy Season     Season       Rainy Season     Season
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
                                             0
                                                  Ordinary Wave Ordinary Wave SevereWave       Severe Wave       River Flush
                                                   Condition in Condition in Dry Condition in Condition in Dry   Condition
                                                   Rainy Season     Season       Rainy Season     Season
45
     Deposition Thickness (cm/year)
                                      40
                                                                                               Navigational	channel	
                                      35
                                      30                                 Anchorage	basin	block	
                                      25                       Inner	basin	channel	block	
                                      20
                                                                 Clearance	gap	between	the	revetments	of	the	port	
                                      15                         and	the	existing	pier	to	enable	to	the	local	fishing	
                                      10                         b t
                                       5
                                       0
                                           0    1000    2000          3000    4000      5000       6000       7000    8000       9000
                                                                 On‐offshore sectional distance (m)
Based on the calculation above, if assumed that dredging and maintenance will effect
deposition every 50 cm, so dredging volume is predicted as follows:
	
                                                   Table 3.52 Dredging time and volume estimation
	
The distributions of the wave height of the energy average waves in rainy and dry season,
whose direction offshore are WNW and NE. It is recognized that wave field change by port
facilities is larger in dry season than in rainy season.
Shoreline change due to construction of port facilities were studied in order to understand the
effect of long term shoreline change.
Coordinate system is shown in Figure 3.29 was used in numerical simulation method for the
prediction of shoreline change and alongshore multi-cell by introducing incrementation
length of dx was introduced for the numerical simulation.
Incident wave height and wave direction at wave breaking point were calculated by
numerical simulation of wave field and the obtained wave height and wave direction were
used to obtain the longshore sediment transport rate Q along the shoreline.
Shoreline change rate was obtained by the balance of efflux and influx of longshore
sediment transport (Qi+1-Qi). Seaward movement of shoreline, in other words accretion,
will occur in case the influx surpasses the efflux and landward movement of shoreline, in
other words erosion, will occur in the contrary case.
For the calculation of rate of shoreline change, cross-sectional beach profile was considered
to maintain original profile on the condition of onshore and offshore shoreline movement as
seen in Figure 3.30.
Numerical simulation conditions such as the estimation of unknown parameters for littoral
sediment transport rate formula, duration of design wave action and sediment transport rate
at the boundary will be determined by trial and error approach in a reproducible fashion for
past shoreline change due to wave action. This procedure was so-called reproductive
calculation of the past phenomenon.
                             y        Incident	wave	
                                      波
                 岸
                 沖
                                                                Shoreline	change	
                  On‐offshore	
                 座                                          Δy 汀線変化量
                 標
                                      Qi          Qi+1                    Shoreline	
                                                                          海岸線
                                                                              x
                                                             Alongshore	coordinate	
                                                               沿岸座標
                                            Δx
                                           Grid	spacing	
                                          格子間隔
                                                       Δy Shoreline	change	
                                                           汀線変化量
                                  Beach	height	
                                           砂
                                           移         Accretion	
                                                      堆積
                                           動
                                           高
                                           さ
Basic Equations:
1-line model which use the single shoreline as the representative of entire beach process due
to wave action was employed. Basic equation was shown below.
            Q      y
                Ds    0
            x      t
where, Q is the total longshore sediment transport rate including void, x and y are the
coordinate of alongshore and on-offshore direction (positive for offshore direction), Ds is the
representative depth of beach process (sediment transport height or critical water depth for
sediment movement) and t is the time for duration of wave action.
Total longshore sediment transport rate induced by wave action is calculated using so-called
Power Model shown below which employ the assumption that the longshore sediment
transport is proportional to the alongshore component of wave energy flux at wave breaking
point.
         ( Ec )
          g B is the wave energy flux at wave breaking point which is obtained by the
where,
product of wave energy density per unit area and group velocity shown below. Alpha is the
incident wave direction which is defined by the angle between shoreline and wave crest line
                                     cg
at the wave breaking point, EB and B are density of sand particle and seawater, g is the
gravitational acceleration, v is void ratio and K is the non-dimensional constants
               1
          E B  gH B 2
               8
Basic idea for the determination of trapping ratio of longshore sediment transport by jetty is
schematically shown in Figure 3.31. Cross-shore distribution of longshore sediment transport
proposed by Tsuchiya and Yasuda (1978) shown in Figure 3.32 has been used to determine
the amount of trapped longshore sediment transport based on the wave conditions at the jetty
                                                Jetty	
                                                                            Offshore	boundary	of	longshore	
                                                                            sediment	transport	
         Tendency to erosion:
         X= 3.500~6.000 m
              > Because of interference with the sediment transport toward west by the fish
              pond at the east side of this area
X= 6.700 ~ 8.900 m
> Because of interference with the sediment transport toward west by the jetty
         Stable trend:
         X= 0~900 m (the west side of jetty)
X= 1.100 ~ 3.500 m
         Tendency to deposit:
         X= ~0m
X= 1.000 m
                           200
                           150              2015‐2009
     Shoreline change(m)
                           100
                            50
                             0
                            ‐50
                           ‐100
                           ‐150
                           ‐200
                                  0       1000     2000   3000      4000      5000     6000    7000     8000      9000
                                                                 Longshore distance(m)
hc  6.75H 1 / 3 , h R  0 .32 hc
where H 1 / 3 is the annual average significant wave height. H 1 / 3 at the Patimban site is 0.64m
and resultant sediment transport height becomes 5.7m
24.5°
Figure above shows the results of reproductive calculation. This result shows the accordance
with the pattern and the quantity of erosion and accretion of the beach in the target area with
considerable accuracy.
In the following analysis, this simulation model will be applied to the prediction of the future
shoreline change by the construction of new port.
                            200
                            150
      Shoreline change(m)
                            100
                             50
                              0
                             ‐50
                            ‐100
                            ‐150
                            ‐200
                                   0   1000    2000   3000      4000       5000       6000     7000     8000     9000
                                                             Longshore distance(m)
Table above shows the major calculation conditions for the calculation of shoreline changes.
For the prediction of future shoreline,training jetty at 2,875m were considered.
Figure 3.36 and Figure 3.37 show the distributions of the wave height of the energy average
waves in rainy and dry season, whose direction offshore are WNW and NE. It is recognized
that wave field change by port facilities is larger in dry season than in rainy season.
                                                                              	
                                (1)	Without	port	facilities	
(3) Difference
Figure 3.36. Distribution of the wave height of the energy average wave in rainy season
                                                                             	
                                (1)	Without	port	facilities	
                                                                       	
                                     (3) Difference
 Figure 3.37.	Distribution	of	the	wave	height	of	the	energy	average	wave	in	dry	season
Figure 3.39 to Figure 3.42 show the predicted shorelines after 50 years using the results of
wave field simulation.
Around the fishing port at the river mouth of Sewo River (x=2,875m)
According to the result of the prediction of the future shoreline after 50 years, the west side
of the river mouth is a little tendency to erosion, but the construction of the new port has
only a small impact. The shoreline around the river mouth is not a tendency to erosion and a
possibility that the river mouth is closed by the construction of the new port is low.
	
Around	the	existing	jetty	(x=1,025m)	
The waves from the northeast, the dominant wave in this area, become lower as the waves
approach the jetty because of interference by the new port facilities, and the amount of a
west sediment transport becomes lower too. As a result, a tendency to deposit at the east side
of the jetty will be strong, and the shoreline advance about 70 meters compared with the one
without the new port. Therefore, the beach, at the east side of the jetty, used by the local
residents is expected to extend.
On the other hand, the west side of the jetty is a result of erosion because the sediment
transport turns westward by a change of the wave direction and the wave height and the
amount of the west sediment transport going around the jetty decreases. Since the area will
be used as the back-up area, a prevention measure for the erosion should be conducted.
For the protected forest west side of the port area, the change of the coast line nore the
change of water current/wave don’t leacht the protected forest, hence the impact on the
protected forest is not predicted.
2000
1000
           0	
                0	        1000   2000   3000    4000    5000      6000    7000      8000      9000
                                          Longshore	distance	(m)	
2000
1000
                0	
                     0	                 1000               2000                3000
4000
3000
2000
1000
                                0	
                                     0	   1000     2000    3000     4000    5000    6000       7000     8000      9000
                                                            Longshore	distance(m)	
                           200
                           150    -:Simulated  shoreline change after 50 years
                                         2066‐2016
    Shoreline change(m)
                           100
                            50
                             0
                           ‐50
                          ‐100
                          ‐150
                          ‐200
                              ‐1000    0      1000      2000    3000      4000     5000    6000       7000     8000         9000
                                                                 Longshore distance(m)
                                                                                                                                   	
	
                               Figure 3.39.	Predicted Shoreline After 50 Years Without the New Port
4000
3000
2000
1000
                             0	
                                  0	       1000      2000      3000     4000    5000        6000      7000      8000      9000
                                                                Longshore	distance	(m)	
                       200
                       150                                            -:Simulated shoreline change after 50 years
                                                                                                         2066‐2016
Shoreline change(m)
                       100
                        50
                         0
                       ‐50
                      ‐100
                      ‐150
                      ‐200
                          ‐1000        0      1000      2000      3000     4000      5000      6000      7000      8000     9000
                                                                   Longshore distance(m)
	
                                       Figure 3.40.	Predicted Shoreline after 50 years with New Port
1000
                                                  ‐:Initial	shoreline	
                                                  ‐:After	50	years	(Simulated	shoreline)	
                                            0	
                                             0	                      1000                            2000
                                                             Longshore	distance	(m)	
                                                                                                                                    	
Figure 3.41. Predicted Shoreline Around the Existing Jetty After 50 Years with the New Port
                                     200
                                     150
               Shoreline change(m)
                                     100
                                      50
                                       0
                                      ‐50
                                     ‐100
                                     ‐150
                                     ‐200
                                         ‐1000    0   1000    2000   3000    4000    5000    6000   7000    8000   9000
                                                                     Longshore distance(m)
Figure 3.42.	Difference of the Shoreline Change After 50 Years Between Without and With
                                       the New Port
Table 3.55 Analyisis of Shoreline Change Impact Estimation With and Without Project
In addition to the above, since wake generated by vessels are likely to cause impacts on
natural environment or water area use by local people, height of the wave generated by the
vessels are estimated,
Estimated wave height generated by the largest size and smaller size of the container ship is
shown in Table 3.56. As the speed of the ships is regulated to be slow, height of the wave
will be very small, 7 to 10 cm.
This impact is considered as significant negative impact (-P) based on the following
considerations :
	
1. The number of people who will be affected
     No people affected, so this impact is categorized as non significant impact (TP).
2. The total area of the impact spread
      The area of the impact spread is only around the port area. Therefore, it is predicted as
      non significant impact (TP)
3. Intensity and Duration of the impact
      The duration of the impact is longterm, although low intensity. Therefore, the impact is
      predicted as significant impact (P)
	
	
	
Finite difference method was used for the calculation of current field which was expressed
by the combination of continuity equation and momentum equation. Basic equations are
shown below.
Figure 3.43 shows the computational domain.Figure 3.44 shows topographic data of each
computation domain.
It is modelled that the acritical structures like breakwaters or revetmentsare the hydro-
impermeable. On the other hand, it is considered that the piers of access bridge are
completely permeable because those widths are enough smaller than the minimum spatial
resolution of simulation grid (50m).
65.5°
(1) Area-1
(2) Area‐2
(a) Present (b) Future with the Port after the completion of Phase2
(3) Area-3
Bathymetri      Sea graph       Sea Chart No, 79 by Indonesian Government          Aug. 2013
Map                             British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3279              Feb. 2012
                Bathymetri      DGST Survey                                        Oct. 2015
                survey
                                JICA Indonesia Office                              May. 2016
Terrestrial     Sea graph       Sea Chart No, 79 by Indonesian Government          Aug. 2013
Map                             British Admiralty Nautical Chart 3279              Feb. 2012
                Topography      JICA Indonesia Office                              May. 2016
                map
Tidal Flow
For the computation of tidal current, sea surface water level at the computation boundary due
to tide were given. Tide modeling with 0.5 degree spatial resolution by by the Global Model
of Matsumoto et.al(2000) was used for the evaluation of tidal constituent of amplitude and
phase. Amplitude of K1 component (lumi-solar diurnal tide with frequency of about
24hours) which is the predominant tidal constituent at the site. More over, it was also taken
account of M2 component (principal lunar tide with frequency of about 12 hours).
Patimban
Figure 3.46. Location	of	open	sea	boundary	where	the	amplitude	of	K1	constituents	by	
                               Matsumoto	et	al.(2000)
Wind
 Wind flow over the sea surface was considered to generate the wind current. Constant and
 steady wind conditions in January (rainy season) and July (dry season) were set on the basis
 of the average values. By NCEP reanalysis data with 1.875 degree spatial resolution, wind
 situation on the ground surface (10m of altitude) around Patimban in 2009 was almost
 average since 1979 to 2011.
 Figure 3.47 shows time series wind data at an altitude of 10m around Patimban in January
 and July 2009 by JMA Reanalysis value with 0.5 degree spatial resolution, more detailed
 than the above-mentioned NCEP. With these data, it was analyzed average values as bellows.
	
River discharge
Figure 3.48 shows local survey results of river discharges around Patimban. Flow
dischargeswere calculated with results of the cross-section survey of rivers and the current
velocity measurement. Furthermore, sediment discharges were calculatedwith the flow
discharges and results of the suspended sediment measurement.
Yearly and monthly discharges of Cipunagara River, the largest river around Patimban New
Port, were estimated by the above-mentioned local survey results. Here, some assumptions
asfollows were put.
- Precipitation in the catchment area of Cipunagara River before the local survey was up to
the average.
- Flow discharge of the river (Q) is directly proportional to amount of the precipitation (R).
- Sediment discharge of the river (L) is directly proportional to the square of the flow
discharge (Q).
On the other hand, the result of local survey of Sewo River is highly possible to be
overestimated by the comparison with catchment area of Cipunagara River (Figure 3-50). It
is supposed that the tidal current from the sea and the river current from the land were mixed.
It is reasonable that the flowand sediment discharges of Sewo River and other small rivers
are estimated with the value of Cipunagara River and the ratios of catchment areas against
the Cipunagara River.
350
300
                   250
   Rainfall (mm)
200
150
100
50
                    0
                          Jan     Feb   Mar   Apr   May   Jun   Jul   Aug   Sep   Oct   Nov   Dec
                                                                                                     	
                                    Source: BMKG
    Table 3.58 Estimated results of flow discharge (Q) and sediment discharge (L) of the
                                      Cipunagara River
Subang Regency
                                                                                                                    	
    Source : Directorate	of	Water	Resources	Management,	Ministry	of	Public	Works	
Finite difference method was used for the calculation of current field which was expressed
by the combination of continuity equation and momentum equation. Basic equations are
shown below.
Continuity Equation
【Total layer】
       k k max    k max 
         M k     N k   0 、 M  uh、 N  vh
    t x  k 1     y  k 1 
【Each layer】
                      
w k 1 / 2       Mk     N k  w k 1 / 2
               x      y
Where,  is water level、 u and v are horizontal velocity, w is vertical velocity,                      h   is layer
thickness、 kmax is number of layers and suffic            k   denote value at      k   layer.
Momentum Equations
【 x direction】
    M k Muk Mvk ( wM ) k 1 / 2  ( wM ) k 1 / 2
                
     t   x   y                 hk
         hk p k      2M k      2M k
 fN k           Ax        Ay
          k x        x 2       y 2
       2 (u k 1  u k )Vk 1 / 2  2 (u k  u k 1 )Vk 1 / 2 
 hk                                                             
                 hk 1 / 2                    hk 1 / 2           
【 y direction】
    N k Nu k Nvk ( wN ) k 1 / 2  ( wN ) k 1 / 2
                 
     t   x    y                 hk
                hk p k      2 Nk       2 Nk
 fM k                  Ax        A
                 k y
                                       y
                              x 2        y 2
       2 (vk 1  vk )Vk 1 / 2  2 (vk  vk 1 )Vk 1 / 2 
 hk                                                         
                hk 1 / 2                  hk 1 / 2          
1 p     g                 p      1 p     g           p
 x
     g   
        x           z      x
                                 dz 、
                                       y
                                           g   
                                              y     z      y
                                                                 dz
         1 layer:sea surface~2m(DL-)
         2layer:2~5m
         3 layer:5~9m
         4 layer:9~13m
         5 layer:13~17m
         6 layer:17~25m
         7 layer:25m or over
Field observation current data at the location C1 has been used for the verification of the
modeling of current field. Figure 3.51 shows the local survey results of current measurement.
Tidal current ellipse of major 4 components has been shown in Figure 3.52. With respect to
the tidal current ellipse of the principal K1 component, although the predominant
Range of the tide at the site is rather small and resultant tidal current is weak. Because of this
reason, effect of wind induced current and fresh water inflow from the river becomes rather
large. By considering that the detailed wind data and river discharge data are lacking in order
for the detailed numerical simulation of current field, present numerical simulation results of
current field can be considered to have shown the reasonable accuracy for the study purpose.
                                                                                                     	
                               (0)	Depth	Changes	by	Tide
(1)Surface Layer
(3)Bottom Layer
	
                                                         Calculation result
                Observation result   Normal condition in rainy           Normal condition in dry
                                             season                             season
Figure 3.52. Comparison of the tidal current ellipse of major 4 tidal components at C1
	
Comparation with current raw data (Reference)
	
Currents monitoring in the field did from 4th – 19th June 2016. While wind condition is
typical and steady, and river discharge in dry season and rainy season are used as input data
in hidrology modeling because lack of detail information. Current patern is also calculated in
typical condition for analysis purpose.
So that, it’s not correct to compare simulation result with that current raw data, but scattering
diagrams is made as refference (this is also as explanation why only the ebb and flow that
summarized from data and compared with simulation result).
Survey result either in layer surface or middle layer show various result. It is considered as
wind effect because ebb and flow currents is not too strong in this area (or data may include
some sampling error).	 	 Calculation result are in the range of survey result variation. Because
it is simulated in typical and steady wind condition, and river discharges in dry and rainy
season, the difference between survey and calculation result are estimated caused by wind
fluctuation and river discharges.
Based on the condition above simulation result can be considered as reasoning acuration for
study purpose.
	
	
                                                	
                                                                                        Surface Layer
                                                                                        30
                                                                                        20
                         Velocity North Component  (cm/s)
10
                                                                                                                                     Survey (June)
                                                                                         0
                                                             ‐30       ‐20      ‐10           0       10         20          30      Dry Season
                                                                                                                                     Rainy Season
                                                                                       ‐10
‐20
                                                                                       ‐30
                                                                             Velocity East Component  (cm/s)
                                                                                        Middle Layer
                                                                                        30
                                                                                        20
   Velocity North Compornent  (cm/s)
10
                                                                                                                                     Survey (June)
                                                                                         0
                                                             ‐30       ‐20      ‐10           0       10         20          30      Dry Season
                                                                                                                                     Rain Season
                                                                                        ‐10
‐20
                                                                                        ‐30
                                                                             Velocity  East Component  (cm/s)
                                                                                                                                                         	
Figure 3.53. Comparation between Currents raw data and Simulation result
Model simulation that is made has consider the structure that will be built in phase II, in
order to estimate maximum accumulation impact for whole activity.
	
Result
Wave change is predicted only occur limited in the area around the structure and most of it
show that change velocity will not exceed 2 – 3 cm/s in the distance of 5 km except when
there are shortly fast wave, so the impact of wave change to the fishery is considered as non
significant.
Therefore, Patimban fishing ground area has closed by reclamation since construction phase.
The others fishing ground locations are not disturbed by reclamation or seaport massive
building, because the wave change limited only in the distance of 5 km around project
location.
Impact magnitude with the operational of seaport/massive building can be seen in this
following table.
      Table 3.59 Analysis of Fishing Ground Impact EstimationWith and Without Project
                                 Without the         With the Project
               Item                                                            Magnitude
                                   Project            (After 5 years)
    Water stream             12 – 16 cm/s           8 – 20 cm/s             -4 - +4 cm/s
    (residual stream)
    Fishing Ground           Total 5      fishing Total 4        fishing 1 fishing ground
                             ground       around ground          around change
                             location             location
Source : JICA Survey Team, 2017
Rate of this impact significance is categorized as negative significant impact (-P) based on
consideration :
            Table 3.60. Analysis of Public Unrest Impact Estimation from Fishing Ground
                                 Change Continuation in Operation
No               Parameter               without project          With project          Magnitude Impact
                                            condition              condition               (Rupiah)
1      Fishing ground change cause     Income (fishermen      Income (fishermen
       public unrest to the people     that have ship) :      that have ship) :
       because operational cost will      34,800,000          24,360,000
       increase then the income           31,540,000          22,078,000             (-) 10.440.000
       decrease                           46,800,000          32,760,000             (-) 9.462.000
                                                                                       (-) 14.040.000
    Source : Analysis result, 2017
As seen in the table before, considering significance rate of impact, public unrest is negative
significant impact (-P), as describe below :
	
Table 3.61. Analysis of water run off rate impact estimation in the operational activity of on-
                                        shore facility
No       Parameter    without project condition        With project             Magnitude of
                                                        condition                 Impact
1        Water run   Qawal = 0,278 x 0,21 x 21    Qakhir total terbangun =   0,33 m3/second –
         off debit   x 0,1 = 0,12 m3/second       0,33 m3/second             0,12 m3/second =
                                                                             0,21 m3/second
Based on the analysis of significant impact criteria, so the impact of on-shore facility
development to the increasingg of water run off is categorized as non significant negative
impact (-TP).
Based on that calculation, it can be conclude that Patimban seaport plan activity doesn’t
make significant public unrest. It is shown by Urs calculating result as many as 61,29% that
smaller than 100%.
Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so heavy equipment and
materials mobilization impact to the public unrest parameter can be described as follow:
Based on the analysis above, so the impact of public unrest in the on-shore facility
development activity is predicted as non significant impact (-TP) and not managed because
of derivative impact, so the management is optimized in its primary impact.
Sea water quality without Patimban Port development activities is assumed as equal with
environmental baseline because there is no other significant development in activities
location that lead to decreasing in sea water quality. While the TSS levels in basin and
shipping lanes are represented by sampling points in CW4 with a maximum value of 15.8
mg / L at low tide conditions in the rainy season.
With maintenance activities in basin and navigation channel such as dredging will result in
increased levels of TSS and will decreased of sea water quality. As mentioned in the
previous discussion of sedimentation, total volume by maintenance dredging up to
2,065,039 m3 and will be done every four to 15 years. Comparing with dredging volume in
the construction phase with a volume of 26,050,000 m3 (Phase I-1 and Phase I-2), the
volume of maintenance dredging is only about 10% of its.
Thus, TSS which generated will be smaller than when the dredging in construction phase is
currently underway. If it is assumed that turbidity which generated in maintenance dredging
is the same as in construction phase, then turbidity which result is estimated as in the
following table.
 Table 3.62 Analysis Of Sea Water Quality Decrease Impact Estimation With And Without
              Project In The Basin And Sailing Line Maintenance Activity
             Area               Without Project         With Project                Unit
                               10,2 – 11,25 mg/L     15,2 – 16,25 mg/L
 Dumping Site                                                                 5 mg/L
                                (at CW7)              (maximum at 3km)
                               12,0 – 15,8 mg/L      14,5 – 18,3 mg/L
 Dredging Site                                                                2,5 mg/L
                               ( at CW4)             (maximum at 3km)
Source : Analyzed Result by JICA Survey Team, 2017
	
3.3.4.2.    Disturbance of Marine Life (Nekton and Benthos)
a. Plankton
   Estimation of Impact without Patimban Seaport Development Activity (without project)
   Based on the baseline, phytoplankton abundance in the rainy season are around 64.000 –
   231.000 cell/litre. While zooplankton are between 4.000 – 75.000 cell/litre.
   Bacillariophyta phylum have the highest abundance and species number such as Synedra
   acus. There are total of 31 kinds of plankton which consist of 22 kinds of phytoplankton
   that devided into 9 classes, and 15 kinds zooplankton that devided into 9 classes. Shannon
   – Wiener diversity index is around 1 – 2 for phytoplankton, while for zooplankton is
   around 0,41 – 1,40. Based on that value, it can be said that current conditions in the
   activity plan location are categorized as moderate untill heavy polluted.
   Maintenance of basin and shipping lanes can cause decreasing of sea water quality that
   impact with disruption of aquatic biota such as plankton. The effects that can occur such
   as increasing of turbidity in around project site until a certain distance, considering the
   sea water quality can affect to interaction of environmental components in marine area.
   However, given the impact of turbidity were relatively small and unimportant then it will
   not have a significant effect as well on marine biota.
   Impact Magnitude
   Environmental baseline for plankton in the rainy season showed that the abundance of
   phytoplankton was dominated by Bacillariophyta class with an abundance ranged from
   28000-140000 cells/liter. Distribution of turbidity that arised from maintenance
   activities (dredging) is limited and will not have a significant impact on the marine
   plankton.
	
b. Benthos
   Estimation of Impact without Patimban Seaport Development Activity (without project)
   Based on baseline, current condition at the activity plan location there are 8 kinds of
   benthos which consist of 3 kinds of Gastropods and 5 kinds of Bivalves. Benthos
   diversity index at the activity plan location is between around 0 – 1,26. According to
   Barbour et al (1987), Shannon Wiener diversity index classification shows that diversity
   index at the activity location is very low. Sampling station location S10 has the highest
   diversity index as many as 1.26, while S1, S3, S4, S7, S8, and S11 have low diversity
   index as many as 0. Those results show that S10 is categorized to moderate contaminated,
   while S1, S3, S4, S7, S8, and S11 are heavy contaminated. The kinds of Benthos that the
   most commonly found in the sampling location are Anadara sp. (Bivalves) and
   Melanoides sp.(Gastropods). Both of them can be one of indicators of water pollution,
   because of its ability in absorbing the pollutant.
   Spread of turbidity which occur from maintenance activity (dredging) will not significant
   affected to marine biota (benthic).
	
c. Necton
   Estimation of Impact without Patimban Seaport Development Activity (Without Project)
   Based on the baseline, current condition at the activity plan location there are 9 kinds of
   necton which consist of 5 species of fishes (Pisces) and 4 spesies of shrimps (Crustaceae).
   The amount of catch fish are more commonly found in rainy season, while in the dry
   season are less. The amount of Induvidualal of each fish species found in all sampling
   location is varied. In the number of catches, the species that most commonly found is
   petek fish (Leiognathus equulus) with 66 Induvidualal in all of sampling location. This
   species is often found in others location, which is 4 locations. So does jerbung shrimp
   (Litopenaeus vannamei) that found in the sampling location
    quality that affect to marine life (especially necton) which use that area as nursery ground,
    feeding ground, and spawning ground.
    Benthos is main food for sea fish. If benthos is disturbed so the sea fish will has the
    impact. The increasing of turbidity in the waters will disturb fish respiratory system
    generally because the increasing of suspended particle that stick to the gill. Beside the
    mature Induvidualal, the increasing of suspended particle will also affected to the spawns.
    The spawns in the waters with high turbidity and sediment rate will have high mortality
    rate. Dissolved particles can also cause the death of non benthic egg through absorbtion in
    the eggshell surface. Both of influence make the decreasing of water current and
    dissolved oxygen into the egg. Both of influence to the fish behavior occur in fish refusal
    to the turbid water, eating disoreder, and the increasing of finding shelter. Other than that,
    turbidity that occur from maintenance activity (dredging) is relatively small and not
    significant to marine biota (necton).
    Magnitude of Impact
    The baseline show that there are 9 kinds of necton, with majority are kinds that become
    consumption or livelyhood source of fishermen around the location. Patimban beach is
    one of fishermen fish cathcing area. Patimban beach area give a quite big contribution to
    the fishermen catch in that area. Necton species that give big contribution is Petek fish
    (Leiognathus equulus).
       Table 3.63. Analysis of Marine Life Disruption Impact From Operation Activity
No     Parameter      Without project condition       With project condition      Magnitude of
                                                                                    impact
1      Plankton      Phytoplankton abundance in     Slightly disrupted, but not   Relative small
                     rainy season range 64.000 –    occur decreasing of
                     231.000 cell/litre.            significant abundance
                     While zooplankton 4.000 –
                     75.000 cell/litre
2      Bhentos       Benthos abuncance 0 –          Slightly disrupted, but not   Relative small
                     205,88 Induvidual/m2           occur decreasing of
                                                    significant abundance
3      Necton       9 kinds of necton consist of    Slightly disrupted, but not   Relative small
                    5 fishes species (Pisces) and   occur decreasing of
                    4 shrimps species               significant abundance
                    (Crustaceae)
         Source : Analysis result, 2017
This impact is rated as negative non significant impact (-TP) based on consideration :
Based on the description above, so the impact of marine life disruption in the maintenance
activity is predicted as non significant negative impact (-TP) and no managed becaues it
is derivative impact, so the management is optimized in primary impact only.
      Which:
      V is average velocity of vehicle type at- i
      a, b, c, and d is regression coefficient
      Table berikut ini menunjukan faktor emisi terhitung untuk kendaraan ringan maupun
      berat pada kelajuan
      Following table shows calculated emision factor either for light or heavy vehicle in the
      rate of 60, 70, 80 km/hour
                                       Table 3.64. Pollutant Emision Factor
                Vehicle                                                                       Average velocity [km/hr]
Pollutants                         a              b              c             d
                  size                                                                       60         70          80
  NOx            Light         -0.902        -0.00578        4.39E-05       0.261          0.0572     0.0586      0.0683
                Heavy           -7.12         -0.0895        0.000735        3.93          1.0873     1.1648      1.3850
  PM10           Light         -0.069        -0.00039        2.87E-06       0.017          0.0031     0.0031      0.0037
                Heavy          0.0318         -0.0031        2.27E-05        0.158         0.0543     0.0527      0.0557
   CO            Light          -12.5         -0.0559        0.000448         2.2          0.2505     0.3036      0.4390
                Heavy           10.9          -0.0168        0.000115        1.19          0.7777     0.7332      0.7183
  SO2            Light         0.0783        -0.00016        1.31E-06       0.0112         0.0075     0.0074      0.0076
                Heavy          0.0411         -0.0007        5.51E-05       0.0424         0.1995     0.2640      0.3396
         Source: Based on Technical note of National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management 1
Emision calculation based on traffic volume that has been projected in this following table :
Which:
      C(x, y, z) : Pollutant concentration in all of prediction points (x, y, z) (μg/m3)
In the calculation of pollutant dispersion above, direction and wind speed are determined as
follow :
The increasing of pollutant concentration is counted at the specified point that is same point
as seen in the Figure 3.13 above. Width and height road from given source emision are 30 m
and 2 m with the assumption that pile slab structure is in the condition of without sound
barrier.
           Location                       P1                    P2                       P3
                                                                                 Crossing in Nasional
    Description                 Patimban village           Gempol village
                                                                                    Pantura Road
    Height prediction on the
                                          9m                    0m                         0m
    road
    Distance from road               700m                      300m                        50m
    Average speed                  40km/hour                 60km/hour                  40km/hour
Simulation models are made has to consider of the structure that will be built on stage II, in
order to forecast the accumulation of maximum impact to the overall activities.
Pollutant rate from the ambien air is predicted by adding counted increase to the beginning
pollutant concentration which is observed in the baseline survey. The result can be seen in
these following table and figure.
                             St.                                                    P1                                P2                   P3
                                           2025                                     88.27                             88.28                101.3
                                           2037                                     88.27                             88.31                102.5
                                           Quality standard                         365
                                    Source : Analisis, 2017
        Based on the table above, pollutan concentration in the ambien air from vehicle emision in
        the acces road still comply quality standard as illustrated in the following figure.
             200                                                                                       250
                                          Baseline    2019      2025   2037                                                                       Baseline   2019   2025      2037
             180
             160                                                                                       200
                                                                                                                      Standard:230 μg/m3
             140
                         Standard:150 μg/m3
NOx(μg/m3)
                                                                                          SPM(μg/m3)
             120                                                                                       150
             100
              80                                                                                       100
              60
              40                                                                                             50
              20
               0                                                                                             0
                       PN1                    PN2                      PN3                                               PN1                    PN2                   PN3
             12,000                                                                                          400
                                               Baseline      2019   2025     2037                                                                Baseline    2019   2025     2037
                                                                                                             350
             10,000
                                                                                                                            Standard:365 μg/m3
                             Standard:10,000 μg/m3                                                           300
              8,000
                                                                                                             250
                                                                                                SO2(μg/m3)
CO(μg/m3)
6,000 200
                                                                                                             150
              4,000
                                                                                                             100
              2,000
                                                                                                              50
                   0                                                                                              0
                        PN1                     PN2                    PN3                                                 PN1                   PN2                  PN3
        The increasing of pollutant level both the port operation and access road are integrated to
        predict cummulative impact that occur when both activity are running. Result of prediction is
        shown in the table below.
                 200                                                                           400
                                                                                                                                Baseline   2019   2025    2037
                                          Baseline      2019   2025   2037
                 180                                                                           350
                 160                                                                                       Standard:365 μg/m3
                                                                                               300
                 140
                             Standard:150 μg/m3                                                250
                                                                                  SO2(μg/m3)
    NOx(μg/m3)
120
100 200
                  80                                                                           150
                  60
                                                                                               100
                  40
                                                                                                50
                  20
                   0                                                                             0
                           PN1                    PN2                 PN3                                 PN1                   PN2                 PN3
Figure 3.57. Estimated of Ambien Air Quality from Seaport operation and Access Road
	
Green House Gas
Green House Gas (CO2) will be emitted by the vessels and vehicles visited to the new port.
If the new port is not developed, all of the vessels and vehicles are going to Tanjung Priok
Port (assuming Tanjung Priok Port has enough capacity), which causes severe traffic jam
and generate more CO2. Therefore CO2 emission from port related vehicles is estimated in
the case with new port and without new port. Number of calling vessels to the new port is
only shifted from a part of calling vessels to Tanjung Priok Port and the changes of travel
distances depend on where the vessels from, hence only emission from the vehicles is
estimated.
Figure 3-58 shows the result of CO2 emission from the vehicles in case with the new port
and without. The CO2 emission will be reduced by 2,430 ton/day in case with the new port
because the travel distance will become shorter and the CO2 emission rate will be reduced
due to smooth traffic.
                 Table 3.68 CO2 Emission from the Vehicles at the Access Road in the case With and
                                               Without New Port
                                       (ton/day)
                                       9000
                                       8000
                                       7000
                                       6000
                        CO2 Emission
                                       5000
                                       4000
                                       3000
                                       2000
                                       1000
                                          0
                                              With New Port and Access Without New Port and
                                                       Road                Access Road          	
    Figure 3.58. CO2 Emission from the Vehicles at the Access Road in the case With and
                                    Without New Port
	
This impact is considered as non significant negative impact (-TP) based on the following
considerations :
1. The number of people who will be affected
    The Number of People Affected are peopple who live around access road which are
    Pusakanagara district residents. There are so many residents that live around the road but
    from calculation result it is estimated that air quality decline non significant, so the impact
    is categorized as non significant impact (TP).
2. The total area of the impact spread
    Impact Spread Area include settlements around access road based on the administration
    there area covers six villages namely Pusakaratu, Gempol, Kalentambo, Kotasari and
    Patimban, District Pusakanagara, Pusakajaya village district Pusakajaya. But from
    calculation result it is estimated that air quality decline non significant, so predicted as a
    non significant impact (TP).
3. Intensity and Duration of the impact
    The duration of the impact is longterm, but because prediction result is nit significant so
    the impact is predicted as non significant impact (TP).
4. Many other environmental components affected
    Other component affected is public health but as stated in the point 1 so the impact can be
    categorized as non significant impact (TP).
5. The nature of cumulative impacts
    The impact of decreasing air quality is cummulative, but because the intensity is small so
    it is predicted as non significant impact (TP).
	
6. Reversible or irreversible impact
  The impact is reversible because once the emission of cars is reduced, the air quality will
  be improved. So the impact is considered as non significant impact (TP).
Mathematic model ‘’ASJ RTN-Model 2008’’ that improved by Acoustical Society of Japan is
used to predict noise level based on projected traffic volume.
First, obtain time variation of noise level that have weight A LA (unit patern), observe
prediction point data for one single vehicle that pass along the road in consideration.
Then, count the value that is integrated with time from passing duration, such as LAE (noise
exposure level single occurence).
         LA, i       : Weighed noise pressure level at prediction phase that emited from road
                       part-i (dB)
Pressure noise level that have weight A LA,I for noise propagation from source at – i to the
prediction point is calculated with considering noise in the hemi-free fields from all direction
source point with :
Where:
LWA, I : Weigh noise pressure level A at the single vehicle at source - i (dB)
difraction and correction for atmosfer absorption; it was ignored in this simplification
prediction. This simplification provides conservative estimation such as quite high noise
level.
Power level of noise that have weigh A from land vehicle LWA, i[dB] is given by :
Which are V is vehicle velocity (km/h), a and b are regression coefficient, and c is
termcorrection like correction of pavement condition, road gradient, etc. In this prediction, C
termcorrection is eliminated for simplification. Then, noise pressure level that have weigh A
in the single vehicle LWA,I along trafic flow is as follow:
Light vehicle :
Light vehicle :
In the end, time average value from noise at prediction point, LAeq (noise pressure level that
have weigh A which equal and continuous is obtained by calculating traffic condition such
as traffic volume (N; vehicle amount per hour) and types of vehocle (light or heavy).
Noise level that will be inflicted in the acces road is shown in the Table 3.69. Based on the
result, the increasing of noise level around survey baseline can be predicted in the future.
Although noise intensity when development activity does not exceed standard quality for
settlement and housing, considering measurement result in the baseline, noise in the point P3
has surpassed standard qualtiy while point P1 and P2 will surpass standard quality after 2025.
Calculation of noise increasing prediction has included possibility after seaport and road
operated, so it is recommended to do noise monitoring at present condition.
                          Location             P1         P2              P3
                           2019                 43.4          50.5          54.1
                            2025                54.2          61.3          64.9
                            2037                57.7          64.8          68.3
	
Simulation models are made has to consider of the structure that will be built on stage II, in
order to forecast the accumulation of maximum impact to the overall activities.
	
     Table 3.70. Predicted Noise Level by Summing up Present Baseline condition and the
                                    Generated Noise (dB)
                                   Location                                 P1          P2         P3
                   Baseline                                                    50.7       50.7          72
                    Year                      2019                             51.4       53.6      72.1
                                              2025                             55.8       61.7      72.8
                                              2037                             58.5       64.9      73.6
                   Standard Housing and Settlements                                     55
                            Government and Public
                                                                                        60
                            Facilities
                            Offices and Trade                                           65
                              Trade and Services                                        70
                              Industry                                                  70
                              Sea port                                                  70
                       (dB)
                        100
                                                      Baseline (LSM)    2019     2025   2037
                         90
                         80
                                         Standard for Sea Port
                         70
                                   Housing and Settlements
                         60
50
40
30
20
10
                          0
                                    P1                      P2                     P3
	
This impact is considered as significant negative impact (-P) based on the following
considerations :
1. The number of people who will be affected
    The number of people affected is people who stay around the access road which is the
    resident of District Pusakanagara. There area so many residents who live around the road,
    so this impact is categorized as significant impact (P)
From the table above, it is changed into smp per hour 1581 smp per hour (with assumption
24 hours operational and truck calibration 1,3), So traffic volumes with operational activity
are in the following table :
Morning
peak hour                  536      1576        0.34         628       0.40      C             17.17           2257         1.43             F       321.20
               1
(07.00-
08.00)
                           827      1576        0.52         969       0.61      C             17.17           2598         1.65             F       214.12
               2
Afternoon
peak hour                  585      1576        0.37         685       0.43      B             17.17           2314         1.47             F       295.60
               1
(12.00-
13.00)
                           779      1576        0.49         912       0.58      B             17.17           2541         1.61             F       226.41
               2
Evening
peak hour                  899      1576        0.57        1053       0.67      C             17.17           2682         1.70             F       198.45
               1
(16.00-
17.00)
                          1083      1576        0.69        1269       0.80      C             17.17           2898         1.84             F       167.62
               2
Night
peak hour                  432      1576        0.27         507       0.32      B             17.17           2136         1.36             F       393.94
               1
(18.00-
19.00)
                           642      1576        0.41         753       0.48      B             17.17           2382         1.51             F       270.77
               2
                Based on the table above, it will be occur significant extra traffic volume as big as 1581 smp
                per hour. In that condition, Pantura road service rate become F, it’s mean the flow that
                separated or jam, low speed, under capacity volume, long queue, and big obstruction
                occurance.
                This following table present magnitude of public unrest estimation magnitude in the
                operation of access road:
                	
                	
                	
                	
                	
                	
                	
                	
                	
 Table 3.73. Analysis of Land Traffic Disruption Impact estimation in Operational Access
                                          Road
                                                      With project
No       Parameter        Without project                                       Magnitude impact
                                                        (2025)
1     Amount of          < 100 /day           Small vehicle/day: 2.710          + 2.610
      vehicle passing                         Big vehicle/day:27.104            + 27.104
      on access road
2     Amount of          Evening peak hour    Evening peak hour (17.00-18.00)
                         (17.00-18.00)        2682smp/jam
      vehicle passing    1053smp/hour         2898smp/jam
                                                                                +1629
      on Pantura road    1269smp/hour
3     Service rate in    Service rate B and   Service rate F                    B/C to F
      Pantura Road       C
	
    6. Reversible or Irreversible Impact
       Impact is not reversible because vehicle volume will increase along with access road
       operation. So the impact is rated as significant impact.
	
3.3.5.4. Public Unrest
Type of activity that include in access road operation is road operation. Access road is
planned starting to operate in 2019 to support materials mobilization to the port area. In the
early operation period, access road trafic frequency is low, because it is located on the land
acquisition area in the ricefield-line area. However, with the passing of population growth
and development in the whole area, vehicle volume will be rise than before, which is
estimated will induce road service quality.
Access road operational activity are predicted will cause the impact such as the decreasing
of air quality, the increasing of noise level, increasing of water run off rate, land conversion,
land traffic disruption, road damage and public unrest.
Public unrest that appears in the access road operation is derivative impact from land traffic
disruption in the longterm. That impact is in accordance with quesioner distribution result to
the people around Patimban seaport development location who feel worried, such as : 8 %
respondents feel worried of traffic jam and 7 % respondents argue that it can cause reduction
of their income because of disturbance of their activity in earn the living.
Data       analysis   method     to   calculate    public   unrest   is    done     by     comparing
attitude/argument/negative perception as the result of public unrest to the occupation with
positive perception to the occupation. Public unrest appear when %Urs is bigger than 100%
as seen in this following formula:
	
Based on that calculation, it can be conclude that Patimban seaport plan activity doesn’t
make significant public unrest. It is shown by Urs calculating result as many as 61,29% that
smaller than 100%.
The following table shows magnitude of public unrest impact to the access road operational :
   Table 3.74. Analysis of Public Unrest Impact Estimation in the Acces Road Operation
                                                                      Magnitude of
           No    Parameter     without project     With project
                                                                        Impact
                   Unrest
            1
                   Level
                                     0%             61,29%              + 61,29%
Seen from the impact of interest based on significant impact criteria, so the access road
operational activity impact to the public unrest parameter can be considered as negative
significant impact (-P) based on consideration :
CHAPTER 4
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT EVALUATION
Evaluation of significant impacts which are obtained from result of hypothetic significant
impact with the impact source. Various environmental components deemed to affect a
significant impact (positive or negative), it was studied as a single entity related and
influence each other, so that it can be seen how far the balance between positive and negative
impacts.
To facilitate understanding of the impact from the project plan on the environment
component, the significant impact as a results from impact assessment on chapter 3
presented on matrix as below (Table 4.1).
The relation of major impact (primary) which cause the continued impact (secondary) and so
on as a result from each activity is using a flow chart on the image below (Figure 4.1).
                                                                                          Activity Component
                                                          Pre –
No                 Environmental Aspect                Construction           Construction Phase                       Operational Phase                       Note
                                                          Phase
                                                            1          2      3       4    5      6      7       8      9      10      11    12
A    Physic – Chemical                                                                                                                             Pre – Construction Phase
1    Decreasing of Air Quality (TSP and Exhaust Gas)                          -P                                       -TP                   -TP   1. Land Acquisition
2    Increasing of Noise Level                                               -TP                                                              -P
                                                                                                                                                   Construction Phase
3    Decreasing of Surface Water Quality                                                                                                           2. Mobilization of Workers and
B    Hidrology                                                                                                                                        Operational Basecamp
1    Increasing of Run Off Water                                                                 -P                            -TP                 3. Mobilization of Heavy
C    Oceanography                                                                                                                                     Equipment and Material
                                                                                                                                                   4. Reclamation and Marine
1    Sedimentation                                                                                                      -P                            Facility Construction
2    Change of Shoreline                                                                                                -P                         5. Dredging and Disposal
3    Decreasing of Sea Water Quality                                                -P     -P                                          -TP         6. Onshore Facility
D    Space, Land, and Transportation                                                                                                                  Construction
1    Land Conversion                                                                                                                               7. Access Road Construction
2    Land Traffic Disruption                                                 -P                                                              -P    Operational Phase
3    Marine Traffic Disruption                                               -P                                                                    8. Employment of Workers
4    Road Damage                                                                                                                                   9. Marine Facility Operational
E    Biology                                                                                                                                       10. Onshore Facility Operational
1                                                                                  -TP    -TP                                          -TP         11. Maintenance of Basin and
     Disturbance of Marine Life (Nekton and Benthos)
                                                                                                                                                       Shipping Line
2    Disturbance of Terrestrial Fauna (Bird)
                                                                                                                                                   12. Operational Access Road
3    Disturbance of Terrestrial Flora
F    Social, Economic, and Culture
1    Opened Employment and Bussiness Opportunities                    +P                                        +P
2    Loss of Land Productivity                              -P
3    Change of Fishing Ground                                                       -P                                  -P
4    Loss of Livelihood and Income                          -P
5    Social Unrest                                          -P               -P     -P           -P                     -P     -TP           -P
G    Public Health
1    Incidence of Communicable Diseases
                                         -P
                      -P                              +P   +P               -P         -P                -P            -P      -TP                  -P                  -P      -P   -P   -TP
                                                      Opened
                                  Loss of Land                                                                                                                                   Decreasing of
Primary            Loss of                         Employment and          Land Traffic         Marine Traffic         Increasing of                               Change of
                                  Productivity                                                                                                  Sediment                         Coastal Water
Impact            Livelihood                         Bussiness              Disruption           Disruption           Flowing Water                                Shoreline
                  And Income                        Opportunities                                                                                                                  Quality
                                                                                                                                                                               Disturbance of
Secondary                                                            Decreasing of             Increasing of                                         Change of
                                                                                                                                                                             Marine Life (Nekton
 Impacts                                                              Air Quality               Noise Level                                       Fishing Ground
                                                                                                                                                                                and Benthos)
-P -P -P -P -P -P -TP
Tertiary
                                                                                                                    Social Unrest
Impact
There is one activity cause significant impact in pre-construction phase, that is land
acquisition. There are three significant impact on this phase, those are loss of livelihood, loss
of land productivity and public unrest that are declared as negative significant impact.
There are five activities cause significant impact in construction phase, those are
Procurement of Labor and Operation Basecamp              (1 impact), Mobilization of Heavy
Equipment and Materials (5 Impacts). Reclamation and Marine Facility Construction (4
Impacts), Dredging and Disposal (2 Impacts) and Onshore Facility Construction (2 Impacts).
There are 11 significant impact in construction phase, those are 1 positive impact of job and
bussiness opportunity in procurement of workers and operation basecamp, 1 negative impact
of decreasing air quality, 1 negative impact of road traffic disruption, 1 negative impact of
sea traffic disruption in mobilization of heavy equipment and materials, 1 negative impacts
of increase of run-off in construction of onshore facilities, 2 negative impacts of decreasing
of sea water quality in reclamation; dredging and disposal, 1 negative impact of fishing
ground changes in reclamation and marine facility construction, and 3 negative impacts of
public unrest as derivative impact from mobilization of heavy equipment and materials,
reclamation and marine facilities construction, and onshore facilities construction. Beside
that, there are 3 non significant impact consist of 1 negative impact of increasing noise, 2
negative impact of marine life (nekton and benthos) disruption in reclamation; dredging and
disposal.
There are 5 activities cause significant impact on operational phase, those are procurement of
workers (1 impact), marine facility operational (5 impacts), onshore facility operational (2
impacts), maintenance of basin and access channel (2 impacts) and operation of access road
(4 impacts).
There are 8 significant impact in operational phase, those are 1 negative impact of
increasing noise and 1 negative impact of road traffic disruption in operation of access road;
1 negative impact of sedimentation, 1 negative impact of coastline change and 1 negative
impact of fishing ground changes in marine facility operational ; 2 negative impact of public
unrest in marine facility operational and access road operational ; and also 1 positive impact
of job and business opportunity       in workers recruitment. Beside that there are 6 non
significant impact, those are 2 negative impact of decreasing air quality in marine facility
operational and access road operational, 1 negative impact of increasing of run-off in
operation of onshore facilities, 1 negative impact of decreasing sea water quality, and 1
negative impact of marine life (nekton and benthos) disruption in maintenance of basin and
access channel, and 1 negative impact of public unrest in operation of onshore facilities.
The loss of livelihood impact for the people who depend on the land acquired an area of
356.23 ha is the important thing to be considered before and after the land acquisition
process is done. Improper handling of the impact will lead to problems of public
dissatisfaction and negative perceptions that could lead to public unrest.
Public unrest if there since the beginning of land acquisition will have implications for the
next stage of development activities, especially the construction process of building the port
itself. The impact that occurred at the stage of construction will accumulate to the impact of
previously incurred and may continue in the next development phase.
Disruption to fishermen activities (fishing ground) due to the project plan will further burden
the lives of fishermen around, beside that with the loss of livelihood for the people who
depend on the land acquired, making the potential for public unrest will be higher.
Disruption to the fishing ground will also occur continue until the operational phase and it is
irreversible, because one of fishing ground locations has change become an area of sea port
facilities. So that, this impact will occur continously and strengthen the probability for public
unrest that may occur.
But on the other hand, the project plan will also bring employment opportunities for local
residents, estimated at more than 1,000 workers required for the implementation of the port
construction, and 900 workers needed during the operation. This is the number of
employment opportunities are very large and open for local residents to participate in
accordance with the qualifications possessed.
Business opportunities that arise with the project plan is also a huge positive impact for the
benefit of local people. Balancing the positive impact that occurs is expected to reduce the
potential negative impacts. Appropriate management to reduce the impact and minimize the
negative impacts that will occur is indispensable.
According to previous elucidation, it can be seen that Development of Patimban New Port
Plan will decrease some environmental parameters, but other than that, it also will opening
chance of job and bussiness opportunity. Based on the significant impact flow chart (figure
4.1) , it can be seen that derivative impacts that occur in many times so primary impact must
be really noted and managed wisely, so the negative impact can be minimalized or overcome,
while positive impact can be optimalized.
A. The activities that most causing significant impact is the activity in the construction
    phase, where there are 11 significant impacts. That construction activities is a
    mobilization heavy equipment and material that causes 4 significant impact there are
    decreasing of air quality, road traffic disruption, sea traffic disruption and public unrest.
    Activity components that is rated potentially to inflict impact from the biggest to the
    tiniest in the project location are :
    2. Operation Of Marine Facilities that inflict negative significant impact in form of:
        sedimentation, coastline changes, fishing ground changes and public unrest as result
        of fishing ground changes (4 significant impact)
    4. The land acquisition that inflict 3 significant impact those are loss of land
        productivity, loss of lovelihood and income, and public unrest (3 significant impact).
    5. Operation of access road that inflicts negative significant impact : increasing of noise,
        road traffic disruption and public unrest (3 significant impacts).
    8. Dredging and Disposal (construction phase) that inflict significant impact in form of
        decreasing of sea water quality (1 significant impact)
B. Component of environment that the most inflicted by impacts is social economy, and
    culture component, inflicted by 10 significant impact those are 6 negative significant
C. The region that is the most inflicted by impact is especially to residences that are
    brodering with Port Project and access road project which are covering 6 villages, those
    are Patimban village, Pusakaratu village, Kotasari village, Gempol village, and
    Kalentambo village, Pusakanagara District and also Pusakajaya Village, Pusakajaya
    District.
    c. Patimban beach fishing ground areas that direct bordering with project site
    d. Noise and entrance and along the access road that direct bordering with residences
    e. Volume of run off in water channel receiver around project site
    f.   Traffic generation and road damage in entrance access road to project site
    g. Livelihood of farmer and fishermen around project site
    h. Chance of working and entrepreneur at construction and operational phases for
         residence around project site
Impact that inflicted from development of patimban new port covers pre-construction,
construction, and operational phase. In pre-construction and construction generally, impacts
that are inflicted are temporary, while impacts of operational are long-term.
Pre-Construction
     Give alternative livelihood for ex-farmer, i.e prioritize in construction workers
         recruitment
     Accommodate public aspiration by doing discussion
Construction
       Prioritize local workers
       Cooperate with local government officer in recruitment
       Using decent transporter vehicle and heavy equipment
       Keep the cleanliness of the road that passed by near residence
       Prevention of increase of parameter content of TSS especially in seawater so it does
          not exceed the environment quality standard
       Place officer to arrange traffic in entrance access road
       Limit tonnage of transporter vehicle
       Repair damaged road
Operational
       Optimalize the managements of the impacts
       Optimalize local worker potential for operational of the port
       Cooperate with local government officer in recruitment
       Maintain the breakwater and revetment/seawall
       Coordination with head of TPI and other party the related to TPI about fishing
          ground
       Install the silt protection for restrict sediment spreading in sea water
       Place the officer to arrange the circulation of ship flow and ship parking
       Create wetland to replace previous wetland for avifauna new habitat
       Mangrove cultivation and many types of trees to the available land
7) Plan of Business and/or activity that does not disrupt social values or people views
   (emic view)
   Patimban port is not a new thing for the people around, because at the existing location
   had previously been awakened causeway and trestle port Patimban as a feeder port. So
   the plan became the main port will not disrupt social values or people views that means
   for such perception is not new for the people around, because from the beginning of these
   locations have been planned as a place for the boat was docked, although not up to the
    operational stage. Nevertheless, the perception of the community was ready to support the
    plan.
 8) Plan of Business and/or activity that does not disturb Ecological Entity
    Same with things that have been explained in Environment Baseline in Chapter II,
    location of Patimban Port is bordering with paddy field and fishpond. In this area there
    are 5 species of birds that are protected, those are javan pond heron, Chinese egret, little
    egret, blue kingfisher, and olive-backed sunbird. But, land side development (back up
    area) Patimban Port in Phase I just only will constructed in < 3% from land which
    acquired, and also mangrove cultivation in beach area. Therefore, Patimban Port
    development can protected all of ecological in local concerned area.
 9) Plan of Business and/or activity that does not disturption to activity around
    Plan of activity will not disturb to activity near the project because it has been planned the
    management of impact that are possible occur, so disturbance that occurs, can be
    overcome. It is included with the Oil and Gas activities in the surrounding area shipping
    lanes, where this has been done in coordination with various stakeholders so that activity
    around that there will not be disturbed
10) The non-exceed the carrying capacity and contain capacity of environment
    With environment management plan that will be applied, development of Patimban new
    Port is expected not to exceed carrying capacity and contain capacity. Although until now
    the assessment of carrying capacity and contain capacity of port location is still unknown.
 Based on those ten criteria of environment feasibility above and considering negative
 significant impact that are inflicted, still can be managed technologically by technical
 engineering, and objectives of this project is for national strategic project so the project plan
 is feasible environmentally.