Turkey: BTC Pipeline–28/Adana & Ceyhan

Date Filed
06 Jul 2006
Status
Closed
Phase
Dispute Resolution (DR)
Country
Turkey

Case Tracker

Eligibility
Eligibility
Assessment
Assessment
Dispute Resolution
Mediation
Closed
Compliance
CURRENT Status
Mediation (DISPUTE RESOLUTION)
Closed

Complaint Overview

Complainant

Society for the Protection of the Environment and Consumer

Cross-Cutting Issues
Land Resettlement Biodiversity Land Loss of Livelihoods

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 July 6, 2006, CAO received a complaint from an NGO named Society for the Protection of the Environment and Consumer, filed on behalf of Central Fishery Products Cooperative. The complaint alleged that the terminus of the BTC pipeline resulted in a loss to local fishermen of their fishing areas and fish stocks. They requested compensation for existing and predicted financial losses.

CAO Action

In an assessment of the parties willingness to work together to reach an agreement, the CAO encouraged a meeting between BTC Co’s social and environmental specialist, the NGO, and the fishermen to discuss the pertinent issues. In September and December 2006, meetings between BTC Co. and the NGO were reportedly held.

Status

After multiple attempts to contact the NGO for a report on the outcome of those discussions and the status of their complaint, the NGO failed to respond. CAO informed the parties in advance of its intent to close the complaint, and accordingly did so in February 2007.