Georgia: BTC Pipeline-19/Atskuri

Date Filed
03 May 2005
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

Confidential

Cross-Cutting Issues
Community Health and Safety 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. On May 3, 2005, the CAO received a confidential complaint alleging that construction traffic vibration caused damage to a 1st Century temple with significant cultural and religious significance.

CAO Action

The CAO accepted the complaint on June 13, 2005. As a result of a number of other villages along the pipeline route filing similar complaints related to construction vibration, CAO included the Atskuri temple case in a collective assessment of vibration-related complaints. In response to the collection of vibration-related complaints, CAO recommended an independent study to assess whether vibration from blasting and construction traffic may have caused damage to the claimants’ buildings. In August 2005, BTC Co. commissioned an independent study. The study concluded that although there were shortcomings in the adequacy of the traffic vibration monitoring when compared with international standards, construction traffic was unlikely to have caused the cracking to the buildings.

Status

After reviewing the study’s results and comparing them to other similar studies around the world, CAO concurred with the findings of the independent study, and determined that no further progress could be made toward resolution of the claim. CAO closed the complaint on June 16, 2006.