Overview
The Eighth Papua LNG Independent Advisory Panel (IAP) was held from 7 – 11 October in Port Moresby with a three day visit on site. Three IAP panelists (Pete Lowry, Nicholas Garnier and Vojtech Novotney) were on the site trip. Dr Orovue Sepoe, fourth IAP panelist, participated in the two day plenary sessions in Port Moresby. Three villages were visited by the IAP, Evara and Kaevaria on 8 October and Mapaio during a classroom inauguration on 9 October.
A visiting delegation from the TotalEnergies Head office in Paris (Romaric Roignan, Elizabeth Pion and Claude Henri Chaineau) had the opportunity to meet the panelists and travelled to site at same time as the IAP mission.
A Glimps in Pictures
Here are some pictures taken during the session
Based on the discussions held during the IAP meeting, the following key recommendations were formulated and presented after the session:
Recommendations Panel #8
| IAP 8 RECOMMENDATION | TotalEnergies RESPONSE |
|---|---|
| 1/ Project delay resulting from postponement of the FID The IAP identified the delay in proceeding with implementing the Papua LNG Project due to postponement of the Final Investment Decision (FID) as a matter of concern. During the discussions held between members of three Purari villages and three IAP members during their site visit, it became clear the delay is provoking anxiety among concerned populations that TotalEnergies needs to address urgently. | TotalEnergies acknowledges that the postponement of the Final Investment Decision (FID) may be of concern to the neighboring communities of the Project. In that frame, detailed explanations have been provided to the Community Liaison Officers (CLOs) for proper dissemination. In addition, two Lida Kibung (local leadership forums) have been organized on the 6th and the 7th of March respectively in Kerema and Poroi 2, gathering several hundred people in total, to explain why the Project has suffered from some delays, provide a way forward and answer the questions from the attendees. Both meetings were chaired by the Managing Director of the affiliate himself, to give more weight to the messages delivered. In addition, the quarterly Gulf Provincial Working Group meeting was chaired by the Managing Director on the 5th of march at Kerema, to express the points discussed above. Those public meetings were very well-received by the communities, and the Operator is now in the opinion, based on regular and ongoing engagements, that the communities are understanding the situation. |
| 2/ Communication, dialogue, and support of Purari villages Drawing on information gathered by the IAP during discussions with villagers and Papua LNG staff, we were left with the impression that communication is inconsistent. Specifically, we detected a disconnect between, on the one hand, the information delivered by Papua LNG to the communities and the ways in which it is being given to them, and on the other hand, the messages that are actually being received and taken on board by the villagers. It is essential that exchanges with local community members be conducted in a manner to which they can easily relate, using language they are comfortable with and a cultural framework with which they are familiar. Papua LNG has made a significant investment in many projects on various scales, for which villagers appear to be grateful. We noted, however, that the villagers have conveyed numerous requests to Papua LNG, many if not most of which are modest and reasonable in the context of expectations from large extractive projects in PNG, largely without any clear feedback or response, which is a cause of significant frustration and confusion. This has prompted the IAP to wonder how the decisions made by TotalEnergies to implement specific actions and interventions in support of the communities actually align with 1) the project’s overall vision and goals regarding community engagement and 2) the needs, wishes, and expectations of the communities themselves. In an effort to address these issues, the IAP recommends that TotalEnergies: 1. Draft an articulated vision for the project to prioritize its social engagement (see recommendation 5 below); 2. Establish an inventory of all village requests, recording the author(s) of each request, the village from which it came, and the date. The inventory should be organized village by villages and by sector of activities (education, health, agriculture, governance…). 3. Design a charter (probably to be implemented following the FID) that states the engagement of TotalEnergies vis-à-vis each of the concerned villages. | TotalEnergies ’s approach to investment and community activities has been supported by independent studies establishing baseline assessments of workforce, economy, health, education and environmental needs of the Project Area communities. From this background data, strategies to address immediate needs have been articulated and captured for implementation within a comprehensive Environment and Social Management System (ESMS). This system establishes management plans and procedures that provide a strategic approach to our capacity-building community-based initiatives. In that frame, Papua LNG Project has adopted a grassroots consultative approach to share all information about the project, training and employment opportunities, local business development and social investment activities with all community groups (clans, churches, ward representatives), including vulnerable cohorts (youth, women, people with disability). A network of Village Liaison Officers (VLO) and Community Liaison Officers (CLO), from Orokolo Bay to Wabo have been employed to assist our technical experts explaining in plain terms and concepts, the various components of the Project, whilst also listening and gathering enquiries and expectations expressed by communities. To ease dialogue, VLOs and CLOs work in duo with representatives of both genders. In Parallel, Affiliate’s senior management regularly visit the communities, providing explanations on dedicated aspect of the Project, including optimization strategies and design changes. TotalEnergies takes note of the disconnect in communication, as described by the Panel. As a mitigation, the affiliate will: – Reinforce its multi-channel communication approach, continue using the local language of the community, reinforcing its communication on several support channels (CLO, VLO, Lida Kibung, leaflet, Gulf Provincial Working Group meetings, FPIC) – To reinforce the clarity and culturally adapted talking points which are provided to the CLOs for the benefit of the communities. They are now validated at Management level on a monthly basis. – Engage the Managing Director twice a year to deliver in-person information and clarification during Lida Kibung and Gulf Provincial Working Group meetings. Prior to FID, the interventions of TotalEnergies in support of the communities have been dictated by the immediate basic needs identified by the Social Performance teams and third-party Social Baseline Assessments: – access to health, – access to education, – access to clean water and sanitation, – access to energy, communications and logistics. In that frame, the Papua LNG Project has provided more than 50 community infrastructure buildings and completed a program of upgrade and maintenance of existing community infrastructure items, financed community health workers and teachers from the National Volunteer Service, enabled logistics and communications that support emergency health care response, supported the Kapuna Hospital’s service delivery and upgrade, encouraged and supported children’s attendance at school, amongst others. It is clearly noted that, beyond this first phase, the Papua LNG Project will deploy a more comprehensive and structured approach to prioritize its social engagement. To that end, the Project has issued, within the ESMS, both a ‘Stakeholder Engagement Management Plan’ and a ‘Community Development Plan’, the latter describing the Social Baseline of the Project Area of Influence, the Project positions on community development issues, and the drivers for the selection of community development themes. It is understood that such a plan must be periodically revised, considering the requests of the communities and their representative groups, which can vary over time. To achieve that aim, and since inception, all of our interactions with the communities, including their expression of needs, are recorded in a single database called Borealis, a tool shared by others within the Oil and Gas Sector. Based on the Panel’s recommendations, we proceed to review the Borealis inventory by sector of activity, to support the update of the Community Development Plan. On a longer term and as recommended by the Panel, TotalEnergies will provide a pluriannual detailed plan of interventions village by village, meeting communities’ expectations vis-a-vis engagement and participatory development activities and provide a clear program of interventions. |
| 3/ Categorization of support to Purari villages During discussions with project staff, the IAP proposed a way to distinguish the types of support provided by TotalEnergies to Purari villages, and that could help clarify understanding among community members: 1. “Good will projects” that aim to demonstrate the project’s commitment to the villages. These investments can be understood as a form of acknowledgement, as a form of Melanesian reciprocal engagement. They do not need to be sustainable, and they can take multiple forms (school, training, any answer to a village request…). 2. “Sustainable projects” that aim to enable and facilitate communities and community members to increase their cash incomes and improve their livelihoods. Based on our discussions with Purari community members, small scale agriculture seems to offer interesting opportunities (for example, developing vanilla or cocoa production and marketing). We therefore recommend that TotalEnergies liaise with PNG experts in this domain (NARI, UNITECH) and establish a program of “sustainable projects” to benefit Purari villages. Vocational training was also identified as a possible sector for sustainable support, and we thus recommend that TotalEnergies identify vocational and technical schools that could offer assistance. Considering that most villagers do not have the academic level to be eligible for vocational and technical training in PNG, we suggest that TotalEnergies and its partners design and implement curriculums that are adapted to their needs and limitations, for implementation onsite. | TotalEnergies takes good note of the Panel’s recommendation. “Good will projects” will be developed, focusing on spot engagement and on the basic needs of vulnerable populations as expressed by and within the communities (children, disabled people, women and the elderly). We envisage those good will initiatives that demonstrate reciprocity being an extension of the efforts we’ve undertaken in the past such as back to school kits donated to school children at the commencement of academic year, donation of school materials based on one-time needs, donation of fuel and food (kaikai) to facilitate community meetings, health access, or the dinghy donations made to community in 2024. We may extend this to sport and arts project once FID has been taken. Even if the Final Investment Decision for Papua LNG Project is not taken yet, TotalEnergies has invested in vocational training for youth (since 2019) through MOUs with institutions and in coordination with the Gulf Provincial Government. TotalEnergies have invested 9.5 million Kina in vocational training in PNG. The training program that TotalEnergies is sponsoring addresses the apparent education gap and limited access to further education in Gulf Province, by facilitating the improvement of access to education in very remote locations such as Wabo Village. We have enabled Government school inspections infrastructure upgrades, teacher transport, teacher placement through sponsorship of NVS, delivery of school materials and other local initiatives, all. working with and enabling the Government’s capacity, for sustainable futures. The sustainable approach to Gulf Province education is for the Project not to design education curriculum which is already under renewal, thanks to existing partnerships in PNG Government with DFAT, World Bank and others institutions, but to facilitate school infrastructure, school inspections, delivery of resources, enabling teacher attendance, and supporting parents to encourage education in their communities. Once Final Investment Decision (FID) is taken, the Social Performance Team will liaise with local specialists to develop and implement small-scale agriculture, fisheries, and other community owned and operated initiatives adapted to the local communities along the Purari River. via independent baseline assessments, and per the IFC’s “Strategic Community Investment” good practice guidelines, reinforce the need for a sustainable approach to development in emerging market settings. Moreover, The Project has initiated its National Content Plan (NCP) and submitted to PNG Government in September 2023. The NCP has based its strategy under three thematic Pillars: Workforce Development (WFD), Business Development (BD) and Strategic Social Investment (SI). |
| Please note recommendation #4 is currently being re-formulated by the IAP and will be shared once completed. | Please note recommendation #4 is currently being re-formulated by the IAP and will be shared once completed. |
| 5/ Project vision In a previous recommendation (3-P.2), the IAP suggested that the project needs to develop long term vision that clearly describes and articulates the goals, objectives, and required/desired outcomes of the project (a vision of what ‘success’ would look like following closure), which would be invaluable for understanding and communicating about the importance of investing in a robust environmental and social program. The need for a clear project vision and associated goals and objectives remains just as evident 18 months later. The IAP continues to regard the lack of a clearly articulated vision as a significant handicap, for several reasons, including 1) for ensuring that planning and implementation are truly aligned with project needs and that available resources (human and financial) are used optimally, and 2) for providing project staff with a clear and understandable framework so they can see the purpose of their work and link their activities to planned outcomes. | As stated in the answer to the recommendation 8.2, the Project has issued a ‘Community Development Plan’, describing the Social Baseline of the Project Area of Influence, the Project positions on community development issues, and the drivers for the selection of community development themes. This plan defines the long-term strategy the Project intends to implement for the sake of the communities. Once FID is taken, our team management will be tasked with resource development and adaptation to project needs for support services to EPC Contractors. In this regard we take a calculated, phased approach to ensure sufficient coverage of work packages occurs and in line with workforce mobilization of the contractors who are engaged to build the project. There is a significant amount of planning and design to ensure workstreams are resourced appropriately and subject matter experts are aligned within their field of experience. Meanwhile, TotalEnergies welcome with interest the recommendation of having a larger review of what a successful project looks like following closure. A dedicated session including TotalEnergies experts in environment and societal, panelists, affiliate and/or any appropriate consultant will be scheduled shortly to collectively discuss and mature the answer to this question. |
| 6/ Flora program During the site visit, the IAP toured the nursery and greenhouse facilities recently established at Herd Base, where they were provided with an overview of the plant recovery work that is being done and the various species that have been brought into cultivation. Project staff explained that this work is primarily focusing on bringing a limited number of individuals of ‘sensitive species’ into cultivation, including species identified as Critically Endangered (CR) and Endangered (EN) in the baseline study conducted for the project impact assessment, i.e., those that are Critical Habitat (CH) triggers under IFC Performance Standard 6 (PS6), as well as those that are of particular importance to local communities and those potentially new to science. This program will play an essential role in managing and mitigating the project’s impacts on plant species, and the current activities represent a valuable set of initial trials. However, the IAP identified several issues that will need to be addressed moving forward, including the following: 1. The current list of ‘sensitive species’ is clearly not sufficient for ensuring that the project will be able to meet its obligations under PS6. Having been based on the initial, project-wide general flora inventory, it provides only partial knowledge of the flora of the areas that will be impacted by the project and contains many incompletely identified taxa. Moreover, it is based only on published IUCN Red List assessments, a significant portion of which are out of date, and does not consider the risk of extinction of the majority of species for which published assessments are not available, some of which are almost certain to represent CH triggers. The current list of ‘sensitive species’ thus contains some whose threat status is in fact not CR or EN, but omits others whose status does correspond to these levels of threat and therefore require management and mitigation. 2. The plant recovery and nursery activities do not appear to be explicitly directed toward and guided by a broader vision of ‘project success’ with respect to plant species, associated with outcomes to ensure compliance with the project’s obligations and commitments. This leads to several important question, including the following: a) Is the list of ‘sensitive species’ adequate (i.e., sufficiently complete and accurate) to ensure PS6 compliance, and if not, how can this situation be remedied? b) What role does the recovery and cultivation work play with respect to the project’s overall restoration program and meeting its restoration obligations as part of the mitigation hierarchy? How will this work be scaled up to deliver the massive amount of material that will be needed for field-based restoration trials and ultimately for implementing restoration at the project level? And what role do ‘sensitive species’ play in the restoration program? c) How does the recovery and cultivation work relate and contribute to the development and implementation of individual action plans for each of the project’s ‘sensitive species’ to ensure net gain, as required by PS6. Addressing these issues and several related matters (not enumerated here) will be essential in order to ensure that the project is on course to meet its obligations and commitments. TotalEnergies may wish to consider seeking outside advice and guidance to review the current situation and help develop a fully integrated plan that draws from experience gained in other projects operating in biodiversity-rich areas and incorporates best practice. | The IUCN Red List is a worldwide accepted and adopted standard. However, TotalEnergies and its specialist Biodiversity consultants acknowledge its potential limitations in the current context and are taking steps to ensure that CH-triggering species (including restricted range and those that are potentially new to science) are included, with specific mitigation measures to be developed. Therefore, a list of sensitive species known or considered likely to occur in the Project Upstream Area is maintained in the Project’s Priority Species Register (PSR). This is a live document maintained by species specialists engaged by the Project. It has been regularly updated based on: – information from the IUCN Red List (including recent Red List updates) – numerous Project-commissioned biodiversity studies, most of which have been undertaken since the ESIA baseline surveys (including 13 Pre-Clearance Surveys (PCSs)) – unpublished findings from other surveys conducted for other projects in neighbouring catchments – ongoing taxonomic studies into several dozen scientifically undescribed species, many of which are local endemics known only from the Purari and Era River basins – results of Critical and Natural Habitat Assessments (CNHAs – terrestrial, marine and freshwater, separately assessed), themselves live documents that are updated with additional findings from ongoing surveys as to the local occurrence, status and distribution of priority species. We believe that the current list of priority species, as described above, provides an adequate basis for activities ensuring PS6 compliance. Moreover, the list is conservatively inclusive as PS6 requires that net gains are demonstrated only for those CHq features for which a ‘significant’ Project impact is predicted. Both the original ESIA and a recent EIS Addendum have concluded that the significance of residual impacts to most priority plant species will be minimal or low, based on the Project’s small overall footprint in most areas (due to its largely linear nature) and particularly in relation to the large and continuous expanse of similar surrounding forest habitat. However, the Project maintains a full list of priority species regardless of the degree of predicted impact. Among the priority plant species currently listed in the PSR, there is a further hierarchy of conservation significance that informs current/immediate Project actions. This hierarchy is based largely on the number of populations and individuals found during recent PCSs. Those species that are considered to have the highest sensitivity are of greatest current focus for the plant nursery located at Herd Base, to collect from the field and explore propagation methods and demonstrate propagation success prior to clearing for construction. This is an ongoing process, and in future the nursery will propagate a wider variety of plant species, and in greater numbers, so that they can be included in rehabilitation works as required. The overall restoration program is being developed as part of the Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Action Plan. Recovery and cultivation work in these initial stages allows for knowledge to be gathered on the propagation success for various sensitive species but it is not necessarily intended to be a pilot for large-scale plant propagation. Much of the restoration work along pipelines and other areas will rely on passive reinstatement, whereby good erosion and sediment control practices (spelled out in detailed site-specific erosion and sediment control plans) will ensure stable landforms are left behind, which in turn allows for natural regeneration. This natural regeneration will be supplemented by re-planting as many individuals as possible from the priority species list. Given the vast number of plant species being identified, it is not feasible or useful to have an individual action plan for each. However, they could be grouped according to their habitat, ecological requirements and or suitability for certain rehabilitation scenarios. This is something that will need to be further analyzed, however one plant group already identified is Orchids. TotalEnergies has put in place an MoU with the Port Moresby Nature Park, which plans to expand its Orchid facility. TotalEnergies considers this as a potential avenue for additional collaboration and capacity-building. A Management Procedure specific to orchids is currently being developed and will be communicated to Contractors for them to pay specific attention and collect them during the construction phase. Finally, it is worthwhile noting that most of the Project’s net biodiversity gain will likely be achieved through the establishment of protected areas. Monitoring will be undertaken to ensure that relevant priority plant species are present in these areas, and to monitor their population change. |
| 7/ Risk-based approach The Panel recommends that TotalEnergies consider using a risk-based approach for matters relating to the environment in order to ensure that programs and activities are on track to deliver full compliance with all project obligations and commitments. Experience from other projects in the extractive sector has shown this to be an effective basis for strategic planning, identifying needs and issues, prioritizing actions and investments, and monitoring progress and outcomes. | TotalEnergies usually applies a risk-based approach in all aspects of its operations. At Headquarter level, an Environmental Risk Assessment Simplified Methodology (ERASM); and Preliminary Environmental & Social Screening have been developed. At Project level, a Social and Environmental (Hazard and Risk) Identification (SENVID) is in force. Similar to a HAZID that is commonly used in industry for identifying safety risks/hazards, the SENVID process identifies Environmental and Social risks/hazards associated with the Project as a whole. This process involves various stakeholders and subject matter experts including design engineers so that detailed assessment of risks and appropriate mitigations can be workshopped. An Engineering risk assessment is completed in the design phase which considers risk to safety, environmental and people, leading to a Detailed Risk Assessment (DRA), a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA), an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) and a Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP). An ALARP/Risk Reduction Workshop is also carried out to review all the risk assessments undertaken for the project including DRA, QRA, ERA, HAZOP, LOPA and other studies, and to confirm that the design decisions taken have resulted in a design that is “As Low As Reasonably Practicable” (ALARP) At affiliate level, TotalEnergies, together with our Environmental and Social consultants, has also developed an “Alternatives Analysis” Matrix/Tool that can help to assess the relative E&S risks of various project aspects or activities. It includes ~35 specific topics classified under key categories of · Physical Constraints · Executability/Technical Feasibility · Health, Safety & Security · Environmental Sensitivity; and · Social Sensitivity TotalEnergies takes good note of the recommendation from the IAP and is ready to capitalize on any other extractive project experiences that the country has faced in the past for better improvement |
| 8/ IAP Terms of Reference Members of the IAP invite TotalEnergies to review the Panel’s current Charter and to consider how it might appropriately be updated to ensure full alignment with the role currently being played by the Panel and reflect more accurately the company’s ambition for the project. | TotalEnergies takes good note of the recommendation from the IAP. An amendment to the Charter has been shared during IAP#9 and the Operator is working on a finalized version to better encapsulate the role of the Panel, which will be submitted to the IAP#10 |