Georgia: BTC Pipeline-09/Tetritskaro

Date Filed
29 May 2004
Status
Closed
Phase
Dispute Resolution (DR)
Country
Georgia

Case Tracker

Eligibility
Eligibility
Assessment
Closed
Assessment
Dispute Resolution
Compliance
CURRENT Status
Assessment
Closed

Complaint Overview

Complainant

Green Alternative

Cross-Cutting Issues
Resource Efficiency Community Health and Safety Land Resettlement Air Land Private / Personal Property Damage

Project Information

Region
Europe & Central Asia
Institution
IFC
Name & Number
Baku Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline 11251
Company
Baku Tiblisi-Ceyhan Pipeline
Sector
Mining, Oil, Gas and Chemicals
Department
Other
Category
A
Commitment

$125 million (A loan) $125 million (B loan)

Synopsis

Complaint

The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil and gas pipeline is a 1,768 km long crude oil pipeline stretching from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean Sea. It is the second longest oil pipeline in the world and passes through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. IFC has invested $250 million since 2003 and the total project cost is approximately $3.6 billion. The project is operated by BTC Co., which comprises a consortium of 11 partners. To date, CAO has received 33 complaints in relation to the project ranging from individuals to communities to local organizations. In May 2004, the CAO received seven complaints related to the BTC pipeline project in Georgia, filed by a Georgian NGO named Green Alternative on behalf of affected residents. Among the complaints was a claim from an individual in TetriTskaro, who alleged that his telephone line and a wall surrounding his property were damaged by BTC construction trucks. He also alleged that the movement of these trucks near his house caused damage to his water pipes.

CAO Action

CAO accepted the complaint for further assessment on June 8, 2004, and released an assessment report in September 2004. CAO found that a lack of evidence or witnesses to the individual’s claims made his allegations extremely difficult to substantiate.

Status

CAO determined that the lack of evidence and witnesses made negotiated resolution of the claim impossible, and accordingly closed the complaint on February 8, 2005.

Case Documents

  • Dispute Resolution

    Assessment Report(s)
    Assessment Report
    May 21, 2004
    English
    Assessment Report
    Assessment Report
    May 21, 2004
    Georgian
    Assessment Report