ENGINEERING REPORT KATINGAN COAL MINE PROJECT HAUL ROAD ALIGNMENT STUDY Document Control Level C – Subject to GRM and Client confidentiality Submitted to: PT Segah Energy Resources Ariobimo Central 4th Floor Jl HR Rasuna Said Block X-2, No 5 Jakarta Indonesia 8 March 2010 Prepared by: GRM PT Ground Risk Management Wisma GKBI, Level 39 Jl Jendral Sudirman Jakarta 10210, INDONESIA Ph: +62 (0)21 5799 8015 Fx: +62 (0)21 5799 8080 Email: [email protected]Web: groundrisk.com
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ENGINEERING REPORT
KATINGAN COAL MINE PROJECT
HAUL ROAD ALIGNMENT STUDY
Document Control Level C – Subject to GRM and Client confidentiality
Submitted to: PT Segah Energy Resources
Ariobimo Central 4th Floor Jl HR Rasuna Said Block X-2, No 5
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Location Plan Figure 2 Proposed Project Layout Figure 3 Alignment Options and Drainage Figure 4 Alignment Options with Satellite Image LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Existing Study Basis Information Appendix B Acquired Study Basis Information
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 001 Kaningan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
- ii -
Appendix C Budget Cost Estimate Calculation Sheet Appendix D Alignment Sheets for Option M1-a
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 1 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
This report provides findings from a haul road alignment study carried out by PT Ground Risk Management for SER for the Katingan Coal Mine Project in South Kalimantan located on Figure 1.
A preliminary version of this report was provided on 10 October 2009. PT Segah Energy Resources suggested minor changes in a meeting on 13 October 2009 and a revision was provided on 3 November 2009. Further meetings were held with SER on 11 and 16 November 2009 in order to clarify the longer haulage option that was proposed down to the Mentaya River. During these meetings sub-options of the Mentaya River option were also proposed; and we had suggested that inspections be carried out.
An additional criteria was suggested by SER that the haul road alignment start point is from the SE corner of the KP areas.
A revision of the report that incorporated findings from additional inspections and the new start point was produced dated 11 December 2010.
During discussions of that report, a new option to the Mentaya River was proposed (M4) and a request was made by SER to carry out further inspections. A revision of the report that included those inspections was made dated 17 January 2010, although illustrated that the M4 option was unfavourable due to high Capex associated with bridges. Option M1 was preferred due to low Capex and Opex combination delivering coal to the Mentaya River.
A meeting was held on 26 January 2010 to review the findings of that report and new options were proposed by SER for consideration; termed the CM options. A Technical Note was produced dated 27 January 2010 that provided evaluation of all options and that concluded with M1 remaining the preferred option.
A meeting was held with SER on 19 February 2010 to request inspection of the CM options as well as further inspections on Option M4 in order to confirm earlier findings.
The current version of this report provides findings of the recent inspections and re-assesses all options.
The objective of this report is to document the port location and haul road alignment selection process and provide a basis for ongoing Feasibility level definition and costing of the haul road.
1.2 Terms and Abbreviations
Capex Capital expenditure Ccm Compacted cubic meters CPO Crude Palm Oil ESA Equivalent Standard Axel GPS Global Positioning System GRM PT Ground Risk Management Lcm Loose cubic meters MTPA Million Tonnes per Annum SER PT Segah Energy Resources TPD Tonnes per day TPH Tonnes per Hour 1 kilometre = 0.54 International Nautical Miles. 1 kPa = 1 kN/m2 = 0.01 kg/cm2.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 2 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
2. STUDY INFORMATION
2.1 Study Criteria
Criteria for the study are based on information from SER and are listed below:
i. Determine the shortest possible/economical route from the coal concessions to the proposed jetty point; as shown in Figure 2.
ii. Alternative proposed jetty areas should target high strength ground (not low lying flood plain ground, which is typically underlain by soft compressible soils as outlined below).
iii. The route should be easily strengthened / renovated for transporting coal on 30-50 tonne coal trucks with a total of 14,000 TPD capacity (around 5 MTPA).
iv. The routes need to be able to be shared with existing users / owners under reasonable long agreements.
v. A cost and schedule estimate for construction is required.
vi. The mine will ramp up production; starting at around 1 MTPA and culminating at around 7 MTPA.
vii. Nominated port site on the Cempaga River, around 40 linear kilometres north from the confluence with the Mentaya River (around 95 km by river, or 51 nm).
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 3 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
2.2 Study Basis Information
2.2.1 Data
This work has been carried out based on the following information:
1. Desk top compilation and interpretation of the existing information listed below and provided in Appendix A:
i. Regional SRTM topography; Figure A1.
ii. Published geological plan at 1:150,000 scale; Figure A2.
iii. Forestry zonation plan; Figure A3.
iv. Terrametric Satellite image dated 16 June 2004; Figure A4.
v. Published land use plan (Rupa Bumi) at 1:50,000 scale; Figure A5.
vi. Marine bathymetric chart; Figure A6.
2. Engineering field inspection by engineers from GRM during the following periods:
i. 20 until 24 August 2009.
ii. 15 until 20 September 2009.
iii. 14 until 16 January 2010.
iv. 25 and 26 February 2010. This inspection was carried out by Simon Ballantyne together with Peter Santarossa and KM Seam from SER. The proposed M4 port location and CM3 port location were inspected and efforts were made to find hilly (terrain) close to these locations.
The port authority at Sampit was also visited, although it was a public holiday and technical staff were not available. An informal discussion was held with one of the administrators.
The GPS routes, photo indexes and photos are provided in Appendix B.
3. Meetings with representatives of SER.
2.2.2 Discussion of Basis Information
Topography and Drainage
The KP areas to be mined lie approximately 40 linear kilometres to the NW from Kosongan town within moderately undulating terrain with relief that extends from around RL 40 m up to RL 100 m; as indicated by the SRTM topography; provided as Figure A1.
Ground elevations generally decrease away from the site towards the south, and local drainage becomes concentrated into three main river systems; as shown on Figure 2 and described below:
1. The Katingan River, which runs through the NE corner of the KP areas at a point around 458 m from the river mouth. This river is relatively fast flowing although meanders significantly and has a high sand load, which results in frequent bars forming and migrating in the river.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 4 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
2. The Cempaga River to the south of the KP areas that is sourced from a catchment around 10 km to the west of the mine area and reportedly becomes tidal at a point below the public road crossing bridge around 35 km to the south of the site. The Cempaga River flows into the larger Mentaya River around 100 km downstream from the road crossing and the Mentaya River mouth is around 90 km further downstream from this point.
3. The Mentaya River, which also runs to the south but is around 30 km to the west of the site.
Interviews with the administration staff member at the port authority in Sampit indicated that the Mentaya River draft at 2 locations downstream from Sampit was limited to a minimum depth of around 4 m (at low tide) although the Central Government had been approached with a request for dredging to increase traffic capacity.
The restricted areas are shown to the right:
Extensive flood plains are developed around the lower reaches of the Cempaga and on either side of the Mentaya Rivers.
The area is not within tropical typhoon zones although receives around 2.8 m of annual rainfall, which is largely concentrated in a wet season that typically extends from November through to around April.
Geotechnical Conditions
The deeper level geotechnical conditions through the mine area and regions to the south are relatively complex compared with other parts of Kalimantan, although this works in the overall favour of the proposed development.
The geological plan provided as Figure A2 indicates that the mine area and most of the area to the south comprises layered mudstones, sandstones and conglomerates. These materials are of very low rock strength and the dominant geo-mechanical character is extreme shear strength reduction in the plane of layering. Based on field observations, the layering is usually only gently inclined; which means it should not be excessively undercut in road-cuts and should therefore remain relatively stable.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 5 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
There are occurrences of volcanic rock in the area south of the mine; usually coinciding with higher relief topography, although these are typically weathered at the surface to comprise up to several meters of high to medium plasticity clay soil. The rock below the weathered material is typically of very high strength and either comprises a pale coloured, coarse grained granite, or a dark green coloured fine grained basalt.
A layer of fine grained sand overlies much of the lower level terrain (both sedimentary and volcanic). The layer appears to be up to around 5 m in thickness.
The flood plain areas around the Cempaga and Mentaya Rivers are invariably underlain by some thickness of recent alluvial soils, which typically comprise low strength and compressible clays with some areas of peat and zones of loose sand. The extent of these soils is shown approximately by green on the geological plan provided as Figure A2.
Existing Land Use
The forestry zonation (shown in Figure A3) indicates that the mine KP areas and the ground to the south are entirely within Production Forest.
The satellite plan (shown as Figure A6) is from 2004, although shows much of the land between the mine area and the Cempaga River to the south has been developed for CPO; or under development for CPO. The CPO plantations are typically developed with regular roadways aligned N-S and E-W spaced at around 1,000 m and 300 m respectively.
The CPO plantations in the area are typically operated as collectives; whereby land ownership is retained by the individuals, who have agreed to cultivate and sell palm fruit to the mill owner.
Recent site inspections indicate that nearly the complete strip of land bordering the south side of the KP areas to the main Sampit – Palangkaraya road is currently comprises CPO.
Areas without CPO development are patchy in distribution, although include a strip of land adjacent to the south side of the KP area. This land has been selectively logged and has a network of logging tracks although most of these have completely overgrown and are impassable.
There is significant small scale zircon mining activity within the fine grained sand that overlies much of the area. Most of this activity is around 20 linear kilometers to the west of Kosangan town and reaches to around 10 km south of the KP areas.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 6 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
Hard rock quarries have been developed in volcanic rock areas where the weathered soils are relatively thin. These quarries include:
Bukit Tengkiling Hard Rock Quarry
Bukit Tengkiling is located around 40 linear kilometers from Kosongan town towards Palangkaraya (as shown in Figure 1) and appears to be established over a large area on the side of a hill. The hill is comprised of granite rock which is broken using hydraulic rock breaker and then crushed onsite.
The potential available rock at this location is considered to be extremely large, although the production rate is limited by the method of excavation. The crushing facility is also likely to offer only very low production due to judged probable poor reliability of the equipment.
Batu Banama Hard Rock Quarry
This quarry is only around 10 km from Kosongan village towards Palangkaraya (as shown on Figure 1) although involves excavation of granite rock at a relatively low elevation and groundwater is evident in some of the workings. The quarry has been primarily developed within the upper weathered clay soils to provide a clayey sand material for general embankment construction fill although high strength rock is being won by breaking manually. There is no crusher onsite.
Availability of significant quantities of rock at this location is considered practical although would likely require excavation below groundwater level.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 7 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
Pelantaran Hard Rock Quarry
This quarry area is around 10 km to the SW from the proposed port site on the Cempaga River (as shown on Figure 1) and involves excavation of basalt rock using manual methods. The rock is used as crusher feed for an asphalt plant located around 1.4 km further to the north.
The potential for this source to provide large amounts of rock is considered to be high. The crushing facility is likely to offer only very low production due to judged probable poor reliability of the equipment.
A bridge has been developed across the Mentaya River around a short distance upstream from the confluence with the Cempaga River. The bridge dimensions were measured using tape measure (so accurate to within 0.5 m or so) during the 26 February 2010 inspection and are provided below:
Note; 1; Measurements taken at 11:00 on 26 February 2010 when the water level was 2.6 m below the level of local house floor levels, which are usually raised to provide minor freeboard against probably the 5 year ARI flood event.
15. 8 m Air Gap1
10.0 m Water Depth1 91.0 m horizontal separation between fender pile groups
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 8 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
3. SELECTION
3.1 Port Site Options
Notwithstanding the nominated port site (on the Cempaga River) alternative options were proposed by GRM for assessment on the Katingan River to the east of the site (and partially running through the site) as well as the Mentaya River, just upstream from the confluence with the Cempaga River (M1 to M3) and one downstream from the bridge (M4).
As noted in the Introduction to this report, more recent options have been proposed on the Cempaga River; and of these, CM3 is also nominated for evaluation.
The port site options are shown on Figure 3.
3.2 Haul Road Alignment Options
The following alignment options have been chosen between the mine area and the port site options:
• C1-a; outside of existing CPO (as shown on 2004 satellite photos (needs to be ground checked)). Leaves west side of the mine area. Picks up relatively high drainage (bridge / culvert requirements).
• C1-b; inside of existing CPO. Leaves the middle of the mine area. Moderate drainage.
• C1-c; inside of the existing CPO. Leaves the east end of the mine area. Low drainage.
• C2-a; inside of existing CPO. Leaves the middle of the mine area. Moderate drainage.
• C2-b; inside of the existing CPO. Leaves the east end of the mine area. Low drainage.
• M1 to M3; largely outside of existing CPO (as shown on 2004 satellite photos and indicated from ground checks). Leaves west side of the mine area and runs down to the Mentaya River on the west side of the Cempaga River. Although picks up relatively high drainage (bridge / culvert requirements).
These alignments have been straightened (the N-S sections lengthened to the north) since previous revisions of this report in order to avoid cutting across CPO at an angle.
• M4; which runs within CPO for most of the initial length although enters grassland and scrub through low lowing land to the south of around km 67. This option runs down the east side of the Cempaga River to the Mentaya River downstream of the confluence with the Cempaga River.
• K1 – K3; Outside of CPO (as shown on 2004 satellite photos (needs to be ground checked)). Leaves the east side of the site. Minor road drainage only.
• CM3; this alignment is largely outside of existing CPO (as shown on 2004 satellite photos and indicated from ground checks). Leaves the west side of the mine area although splits from the M1 to M3 alignments at around km 70 and runs SE to a point on the Cempaga River.
The alignments are shown on Figure 3 in relation to SRTM topography and on Figure 4 in relation to the existing satellite image.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 9 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
3.3 Evaluation of Alignment Options
3.3.1 Land Procurement and Compensation
All of the proposed haul roads will have to pass through some amount of CPO. Most of the plantations in the area are operated as collectives and the following points should be considered for these developments:
1. Check that the terms of the agreement between the mill owner and the individual land-owners allows for co-use.
2. Provide compensation to the land owner if palm trees are destroyed.
3. Operate using a traffic management plan in order to minimise disturbance to the existing CPO traffic along these roads. The management plan would probably need to comprise:
i. Speed limitations through the CPO areas.
ii. Use of roads in one direction only in order to improve safety conditions and to minimise required road widening, which would create problems with the local farmers due to the loss of trees.
iii. Agree to improve the condition of the road and drainage structures.
iv. Establish traffic control at intersections.
It is very unlikely that a haul road could be developed within the CPO areas to run trucks significantly larger than 30 tonne.
A Borrow-Use permit will need to be gained from the Forestry Department before the land (associated with any option) can be used for other purposes given that the mine area and haul road are located within Production Forest.
Award of the Borrow-Use permit requires approval from government departments that depend on:
i. Demonstration that the land will be ultimately returned to ‘original condition’.
ii. Evidence that the proposed alternative land use area (together with other existing uses) will not exceed a specific percentage (we understand 10%) of land already awarded as part of a single concession to a logging contractor.
iii. The typical period of such an application has recently been taking anywhere from 6 months upwards.
iv. The Pinjam Pakai requires an approved AMDAL (Environmental Impact Assessment).
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 10 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
3.3.2 Road Design Profiles
The following design profiles are considered appropriate for 20 to 50 tonne trucks:
In CPO
Pioneered Road
Pavements are not always incorporated on coal haul roads, although there is a large sacrifice in haulage costs and safety when they are left out. Nevertheless, leaving out the pavement would meet a low Capex approach to the road and may remain cost-effective for low tonnages (less than say 1.5 MTPA).
A compromise approach may also be considered where road operational windows are increased by paving only the high gradient sections of road.
~ 10 m wide
Pavement lifted from subgrade and allowed to drain out of notches.
• 250 mm nominal thickness
Around 1H:1V
Safety bund – to be formed from compacted soil at least 1 m high with a steep inside face and with drainage notches nominally every 25 m
Min 2%
~ 6 m wide (one way mine traffic)
Pavement lifted from subgrade and allowed to drain out of notches.
• 150 mm on unloaded road. • 250 mm on loaded road
Around 1H:1V
Safety bund – to be formed from compacted soil at least 1 m high with a steep inside face and with drainage notches nominally every 25 m
Min 2%
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 11 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
The nominal pavement thicknesses above should be varied in relation to tonnage as outlined below:
Coal Loading Nominal Pavement Thickness1
0 to 0.5 MTPA No pavement
0.5 to 2 MTPA 250 mm
2 to 4 MTPA 350 mm
4 to 6 MTPA 450 mm
Notes; 1; based on documented observation from other sites with similar subgrade and environmental conditions.
Thickness is related to Mine tonnage given that ESA conversions are similar and depend on gross tonnage.
3.3.3 Earthworks Estimate
Most 30 tonne purpose built haul trucks typically used in Indonesia (Renaults, Nissans or Scania) run most efficiently when gradients are limited to 4% and 6%. More general purpose trucks, such as the 20 tonne Mitsubishi Colt PS120 or the 30 tonne Tronton can handle 6% and 8% gradients, although at reduced efficiency.
For initial start-up, we have assumed 6% and 8% gradient allowances, which can be upgraded to improve haulage efficiency at later dates.
In order to provide an estimate of earthworks required to achieve the design grades, existing gradients along each alignment have been derived using the SRTM topography and are compared with the 6% and 8% grades in the following charts. The SRTM is not detailed and can be smoothed compared with actual ground topography. However, it does provide a qualitative basis for earthworks required for each concept.
100 m Section Gradients C1-a
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
2,00
1
4,00
2
6,00
3
7,99
8
9,99
9
12,0
00
14,0
01
16,0
02
17,9
99
19,9
97
21,9
98
23,9
99
26,0
00
28,0
01
30,0
02
32,0
02
34,0
02
36,0
03
38,0
04
40,0
05
42,0
06
44,0
05
46,0
06
48,0
07
50,0
08
52,0
08
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 12 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
100 m Section Gradients C1-b
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
2,00
0
4,00
0
6,00
0
8,00
1
10,0
01
12,0
01
14,0
01
16,0
01
18,0
01
20,0
01
22,0
02
24,0
02
26,0
02
28,0
02
30,0
02
32,0
02
34,0
02
36,0
02
38,0
02
40,0
03
42,0
03
44,0
01
46,0
01
48,0
01
50,0
01
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
100 m Section Gradients C1-c
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
1,99
8
3,99
7
5,99
5
7,99
4
9,99
2
11,9
90
13,9
89
15,9
87
17,9
85
19,9
84
21,9
82
23,9
79
25,9
78
27,9
76
29,9
74
31,9
73
33,9
71
35,9
69
37,9
68
39,9
66
41,9
65
43,9
60
45,9
58
47,9
57
49,9
31
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 13 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
100 m Section Gradients M Options
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
01,
999
3,99
85,
997
7,99
19,
990
11,9
8913
,988
15,9
8717
,985
19,9
8121
,980
23,9
7925
,978
27,9
7329
,973
31,9
7233
,971
35,9
7037
,969
39,9
6841
,968
43,9
6745
,964
47,9
6349
,962
51,9
6153
,960
55,9
5957
,959
59,9
5861
,957
63,9
5665
,955
67,9
5469
,954
71,9
5373
,952
75,9
4877
,947
79,9
4681
,945
83,9
4485
,944
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
100 m Section Gradients K1
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
2,00
2
4,00
3
6,00
3
8,00
5
10,0
08
12,0
10
14,0
13
16,0
15
18,0
17
20,0
08
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
100 m Section Gradients K2
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
1,99
8
3,99
6
5,99
4
7,99
0
9,98
8
11,9
87
13,9
85
15,9
83
17,9
82
19,9
80
21,9
77
23,9
74
25,9
73
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 14 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
100 m Section Gradients K3
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
0
1,99
8
3,99
3
5,98
9
7,98
7
9,98
4
11,9
82
13,9
79
15,9
77
17,9
74
19,9
68
21,9
65
23,9
62
25,9
56
27,9
50
29,9
47
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
100 m Section Gradients M4
-10%
-8%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
01,
998
3,99
75,
995
7,99
49,
992
11,9
9013
,989
15,9
8717
,985
19,9
8421
,982
23,9
7925
,978
27,9
7629
,974
31,9
7333
,971
35,9
6937
,968
39,9
6641
,965
43,9
6045
,958
47,9
5749
,931
51,9
2753
,927
55,9
2757
,927
59,9
2761
,927
63,9
2765
,927
67,9
2769
,927
71,9
2773
,927
75,9
2777
,927
79,9
2781
,927
83,9
27
Distance from Mine Site (m)
SR
TM G
radi
ent i
n 10
0 m
sec
tions
Earthworks quantities have then been estimated as:
Roads in CPO (upgrade) • 3 m3 per linear meter of road; which is a general allowance for embankment formation
/ improvement. • 900 m3 per 100 m section where existing grades exceed design grades (4% and 6%) per
degree of variation (taken from the charts above). Pioneered Road
• 10 m3 per linear meter of road; which is a general allowance for embankment formation / improvement.
• 1,500 m3 per 100 m section where existing grades exceed design grades (4% and 6%) per degree of variation (taken from the charts above).
3.3.4 Drainage and Road Crossings
Drainage requirements for each alignment option are provided on Figure 3.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 15 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
3.3.5 Quantities
Quantities taken from the parameters provided above and from Figure 3 and are tabulated for each option below:
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 16 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
Budget haul road construction costs and coal transport costs have been estimated for each alignment option based on the following rates, which are typical within Indonesia at the current time:
Item Unit Assumed Rate (USD)
Capex Items
Cut to fill earthworks (haulage maximum 1,000 m) m3 $3.50
Land procurement and compensation 30 m either side of centreline
Per km of road $7,200.00
Sheeting materials (imported) Loose cubic meter $45.00
Sheeting materials (quarried locally) Loose cubic meter $20.00
Bridge Linear meter $30,000.00 Large Culvert Each $100,000.00 Medium Culvert Each $50,000.00 Standard Culvert Each $20,000.00 Culverting for minor drainage Per km $7,000.00
Level Crossings Each $5,000.00 Flyovers Each $500,000.00
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 17 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
3.4 Comparison of Alignment Options
Resultant Capex and Opex estimates for road and barge transportation are provided in Appendix C and shown in the chart below. Please note that these estimates are budget level only – and do not include costs for mining, crushing, stockpiling, barge loading or transhipment. The cost estimates are for option selection purposes. Wide bars are for Capex and narrow bars are for Opex.
As noted above, these cost estimates have been prepared for the purpose of alignment and site selection and would not be suitable for a typical Feasibility level evaluation. If the costs were to be taken to assess feasibility, then we would suggest that sensitivity is carried out over a range of +/- 35%.
Opex
Capex
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 18 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
The cost estimates outlined above are for the purpose of option comparison. Actual costs for both upgrade and new road will depend on:
• How well the design parameters outlined above can be applied to the project. If future designs lose track of these (without very good reason) then costs will increase.
• The quality of the design. A better design should result in a lower cost road to build and operate.
• Whether or not the high quality local rock can be used for pavement material production. Capex is very sensitive to this aspect.
• The contractor engaged for the work.
A small contractor will tend to provide very low materials and labour rates although is likely to struggle to meet specifications compliance and will struggle with schedule and cash flow (potentially to the point of simply not being able to deliver).
A large contractor will tend to provide higher rates but will provide a high level of compliance with specifications and will come close to schedule.
• The nature of the contract – whether the owner wishes to provide engineering supervision and adopt responsibility for risk on design issues.
• Scheduling of the work and land procurement and compensation. Some projects have had large schedule delays (and hence cost increase) due to problems with land procurement and compensation.
A recurrent theme from previous projects is “procure and compensate all land along the alignment before starting construction on any part of it”.
Typical truck unloading, stockpiling and barge or ship-loading rates in Indonesia are around US$1 per tonne.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 19 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
Options are further compared below based on investment payback, assuming:
a. 100% equity financed construction and loan interest of 10%.
b. A build and operate contract with a gross profit of 15%; 85% of which is used for loan repayment.
c. A haul rate of 14 cents / tonne / km (on all options).
Production rates of less than around 1.5 MTPA do not appear to be profitable under the conditions outlined above.
Budget Estimate of Truck Haulage Payback Period
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
C1-a C1-b C1-c C2-a C2-b M1 M2 M3 M4 CM3 K1 K2 K3
Option
Yea
rs
2 MTPA 3 MTPA 4 MTPA 5 MTPA
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 20 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
3.5 Option Short-Listing
The following rationale has been used for options short-listing:
K Options
a. Observations made during the September 2009 inspection upstream from the Katingan River bridge indicate that the river is essentially dry; motorbikes can be ridden across the river bed as shown below:
b. Available bathymetry near the mouth of the Katingan River does not show charted water depths in excess of 1 m. It should be noted that water depths over 1 m in the mouth of the Mentaya River are also not shown – although it is known that significant sized vessels move up this river at least to Sampit city. A sketch from the available bathymetry is shown below:
Katingan River Mouth
Sampit River Mouth
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 21 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
The shallow water combined with the potentially high transportation costs (of around $16 tonne / km) associated with the long barge distance have been used as rationale for dropping all Katingan River options from this study.
C Options and CM Options
c. We believe that barge navigation along the Cempaga River is likely to be limited by both draft and width (given required barge fleet and co-use with CPO barges) which could provide significant and recurring interruption to barge transportation.
Therefore, we would suggest that Cempaga options be dropped from further consideration until survey and evaluation by barging specialists (which we understand has been carried out although have not seen that information) is made available.
d. Furthermore, the CM3 option is around 13 km from hilly terrain, so would require a 13 km OLC in order to avoid high portsite Capex and Opex (required with repair and maintenance during operation).
M Options
e. Only the M options offer very high barge reliability.
f. The bridge on the Mentaya River would not provide an obstacle to an 8,000 tonne barge.
g. In terms of river draft; the two areas downstream from Sampit woud pose a tidal obstacle for most barges over 6,000 tonne.
The river draft upstream from these areas is assumed to be sufficient for any typical barge size, although this needs to be checked by detailed river survey and input from barging specialists as part of future work.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 22 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
h. Option M4 is almost the lowest Opex of all options.
However, the alignment crosses numerous water courses that require bridging and this significantly increases Capex. The bridges are shown below:
M4 (and C2 options) river at around km 38 (from the mine) crossing from the 136 km2 catchment area. This river was in flood at the time of inspection on 16 January 2010.
M4 river crossing at around km 42 (from the mine) from the 300 km2 catchment area.
M4 river crossing at around km 54 (from the mine) from the 100 km2 catchment area.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 23 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
Another unknown with Option M4 is the presence of hilly terrain in order to meet Criteria ii outlined in Section 2.1 of this report; to locate the stockyard.
There is an occurrence of high strength materials shown on the Geological plan (Figure A2) in the generally area of the potential M4 port site, although efforts to identify this terrain (as hilly ground) failed to find it (see GPS tracks on Figure 3). Reports from local people did indicate “hilly ground” further upstream, and vegetation changes to the north of the small creek leading into the M4 area may have been indicative of higher ground.
We recommend that a further field inspection into the area to the north of the small river near M4 is undertaken in order to identify hilly terrain.
i. Of the remaining M Options, M1 is likely to represent lowest Capex and Opex and does have confirmed hilly terrain within around 5 km of the river bank, which would meet Criteria 2 of this study, although would require an OLC of around 4 or 5 km.
Similar port developments are being built around Indonesia. Examples in Sanga Sanga could be visited in order to assess feasibility from the Owner’s perspective.
Further inspections at M1 (in January 2010) indicate that:
• The area around the high ground is only lightly occupied by villagers.
• The boundary between swamp and high ground runs for some distance out from the edge of the hill as shown on Figure 3 and in Appendix D.
• The terrain between the hilly ground and the Mentaya River is not particularly swampy (low lying), as shown in the photo to the right.
M4 river crossing at around km 67 (from the mine) from the 350 km2 catchment area. This location was reached on the 25 February 2010 inspection and the actual channel width was judged to be in the order of 40 m, and was consistent down to the confluence with the Cempaga, although vegetation masked the width in lower reaches.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 24 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
4. OPTION CONCLUSION
With the basis information available at the time of reporting (which does not include consideration of the information understood to be available from barging specialists engaged by SER) we recommend that Option M1 be selected for further definition evaluation.
At the same time as the further definition is being carried out for M1, we recommend that a field inspection is carried out to identify hilly ground that may allow the M4 stockyard to be founded off low lying swamp. Bridge costs should also be refined with a bridge builder.
5. DEFINITION STAGE
The vertical and horizontal alignment sheets based on the broad level SRTM topography for Option M1 are provided in Appendix D and this should provide the basis for more detailed study and negotiations.
We recommend the following steps in order to advance the haul road design to a FS level:
1. Liaise with the local quarry owners to determine a schedule on production of crushed rock quantities required for the project. Costs from the supplier would need to include royalties and taxes.
2. Refine the M1 alignment given possibilities to move the road slightly east or west through the middle section (to coincide with existing CPO road ways in both directions) and in relation to the proposed river crossing locations determined above.
A final alignment (and any remaining or new options) should then be nominated.
3. Clarify with the Forestry Department the conditions of the Pinjam Pakai required to develop this land. Note that much of the land is occupied by CPO, so remaining availability (from the 10% allowance) may be low.
4. Obtain detailed topographic survey through the refined alignment developed from Points 1 and 2 above. This survey should extend to say 250 m either side of the refined centreline.
5. Stage 1 (light) geotechnical information to upgrade some parameters provided in this report. This investigation should be limited to engineering mapping (supported by test pitting) along the alignment (say to 200 m either side). Main things to pick up are depth to rock head, and orientation of strata layering.
6. Site inspection and characterization of drainage points along the alignment. Upgrade the locations and refine the sizes of culverts nominated in this report.
7. Development of a geometric design based on the upgraded geotechnical and hydrology design parameters.
8. Stage 2 geotechnical investigation at specific geometric locations. This investigation may involve drilling at the location of high cuts (in excess of say 10 m) and at bridge embankment locations and test pitting at all cuts and fill footprints.
9. Collation of design input from other disciplines (social, environmental, co-usage etc).
10. Specific bride design.
11. Finalisation of the geometric design using all parameters (geotechnical, hydrology, other disciplines and bridge design).
12. Documentation and quantities take off for cost estimation purposes.
8 March 2010 PT Segah Energy Resources 09 ICM 001 ER 01 - 25 - Katingan Coal Mine
PT Ground Risk Management
6. CLOSURE
Please contact the undersigned for further information.
Yours Faithfully, GROUND RISK MANAGEMENT
Simon Ballantyne MIEAust CPEng Senior Geotechnical Engineer C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\SBALLANTYNE\AA-GRM\CURRENT PROJECTS\09 ICM 001\TECHNICAL\REPORTS\09 ICM 001 ER 001 8 MARCH 2010.DOC
!(
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
X
X
X
Pundu
Lahang
Ampalam
Pendara
Menduin
Belingan
Kulubali
Selucing
Nahanbiru
Talangkon
Singalang
Kalanaman
Natabidun
Batutinggi
Danan Kapa
Lubuklayang
Tewanggaruga
Tumbangsamak
Tumbangbawang
Tewangpanjang
Tumbangkuling
Bunutkalamanan
Tewangberingin
Tumbangterusan
Tawangrangkang
Dahuyantunggal
Tewangkerangan
Tumbangtanjung
Tumbang Panjang
Tumbangkobongan
Buntabali
Tirusandanum
Tewangderayu
680,000
680,000
700,000
700,000
720,000
720,000
740,000
740,000
760,000
760,000
780,000
780,000
800,000
800,000
820,000
820,000
840,000
840,000
860,000
860,000
9,72
0,00
0
9,72
0,00
0
9,74
0,00
0
9,74
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0±
Katingan R
iver
Revision Description Date
G R M PT. SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCESArio Bimo Central 4th FloorJl HR Rasuna SaidBlock X-2 No. 5Jakarta 12950INDONESIA
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009 2. Road based on GPS Track survey by GRM Engineer taken 20-23 August 2009 & 16 - 18 Sept 20093. River based on forest status map from department of forestry year 20004. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
Pelantaran Village
Banama Hill
Tengkiling Hill
")
710,000
710,000
720,000
720,000
730,000
730,000
740,000
740,000
750,000
750,000
760,000
760,000
9,77
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
±
PT. Gueng Alam Semesta
PT. Karunia Ilahi Insan Sejahtera
proposed jettySite location
Road
River
") Proposed Jetty
LEGEND
Kat in
gan R
iver
Kalanam
an River
Ca
mpa
gah u
lu R
iver
Notes :
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009
2. Image background based on Terrametric Satellite image dated 16 June 2004
3. River and road based on forest status map from department of forestry year 2000
4. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
Revision Description Date
G R M GRM PT Ground Risk ManagementWisma GKBI, Level 39Jl Jendral SudirmanJakarta 10210INDONESIAPh: +62 (0)21 5799 8015Fx: +62 (0)21 5799 8000Email : [email protected]
Project
Tittle
Drawn Drawing date
Checked Checked date
Designed Designed date
Client
Scale
Size
EPU
SHB 12/10/2009
12/10/20090 2,900 5,8001,450
Meters
1:200,000
A3
Project No.
KATINGAN COAL PROJECT
Figure No.
Proposed Project Layout
09 ICM 001 2
PT. SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCES
PT. SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCESArio Bimo Central 4th FloorJl HR Rasuna SaidBlock X-2 No. 5Jakarta 12950INDONESIA
Approximate Mine Area
!(
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")
495.7 km 2
370.6 km 2
97 km 2
136.1 km 2
125.7 km 2
68.6 km 2
62.1 km 2
37.9 km 2
27.3 km 2
15.4 km 2
15.2 km 2
14.1 km 2
12.2 km 2
12.2 km 2
12.1 km 2
9.9 km 2
8.7 km 2
7.2 km 2
3 km 2
3.8 km 2
2.9 km 2
1.8 km 2
1.6 km 2
1.3 km 2
0.9 km 2
0.6 km 2
300.8 km 2
297.6 km 2
93.5 km 2
75.8 km 2
26 km 2
8.5 km 2
Pundu
Lahang
Ampalam
Pendara
Menduin
Belingan
Kulubali
Selucing
Nahanbiru
Talangkon
Singalang
Buntabali
Kalanaman
Natabidun
Batutinggi
Danan Kapa
Lubuklayang
Tirusandanum
Tewangderayu
Tewanggaruga
Tumbangsamak
Tumbangbawang
Tewangpanjang
Tumbangkuling
Bunutkalamanan
Tewangberingin
Tumbangterusan
Tawangrangkang
Dahuyantunggal
Tewangkerangan
Tumbangtanjung
Tumbang Panjang
Tumbangkobongan
680,000
680,000
690,000
690,000
700,000
700,000
710,000
710,000
720,000
720,000
730,000
730,000
740,000
740,000
750,000
750,000
760,000
760,000
9,72
0,00
0
9,72
0,00
0
9,73
0,00
0
9,73
0,00
0
9,74
0,00
0
9,74
0,00
0
9,75
0,00
0
9,75
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
Revision Description Date
G R M GRM PT Ground Risk ManagementWisma GKBI, Level 39Jl Jendral SudirmanJakarta 10210INDONESIAPh: +62 (0)21 5799 8015Fx: +62 (0)21 5799 8000Email : [email protected]
Tittle
Drawn Drawing date
Checked Checked date
Designed Designed date
Scale
Size
EPU
SHB 12/10/2009
12/10/20090 4,700 9,4002,350
Meters
1:350,000
A3
Project No.
±PT. Gueng Alam Semesta
PT. Karunia Ilahi Insan Sejahtera
proposed jetty
KATINGAN COAL MINE
Figure No.
Alignment Options and Drainage
09 ICM 001 3
K1
K2
K3
C1
C2
Approxima te Mine Area
C1-a
M1
C2-a
C2-b
C1-b
C1-c
Ka
tinga
n Rive
r
Kalanam
an River
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî íî
íîíî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
PT Segah Energy ResourcesArio Bimo Central 4th FloorJl HR Rasuna SaidBlock X-2 No. 5Jakarta 12950INDONESIA
PT SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCES
íî
íî
M2
M3
M1-a
ProjectClient
Site location
M4
M4PS
Notes :
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009 2. Topography based on SRTM Elevation data dated 22 February 20023. River and road based on forest status map from department of forestry year 20004. GPS Track based on survey by GRM Engineer taken dated 20-23 August 2009 & 16 - 18 Sept 2009 and based on data "Road Alignments PS.gdb" dated 10 Dec 2009 and "05012010.gdb" dated 5 Jan 20105. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009 2. Image background based on Terrametric Satellite image dated 16 June 20043. River and road based on forest status map from department of forestry year 20004. GPS Track based on survey by GRM Engineer taken dated 20-23 August 2009 & 16 - 18 Sept 2009 and based on data "Road Alignments PS.gdb" dated 10 Dec 2009 and "05012010.gdb" dated 5 Jan 20105. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
PT Ground Risk Management
APPENDIX A
EXISTING STUDY BASIS INFORMATION
!(
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
") ")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")
")
")")
")
Pundu
Lahang
Ampalam
Pendara
Menduin
Belingan
Kulubali
Selucing
Nahanbiru
Talangkon
Singalang
Buntabali
Kalanaman
Natabidun
Batutinggi
Danan Kapa
Petakputih
Lubuklayang
Tirusandanum
Tewangderayu
Tewanggaruga
Tumbangsamak
Tumbangbawang
Tewangpanjang
Tumbangkuling
Bunutkalamanan
Tewangberingin
Tumbangterusan
Tawangrangkang
Dahuyantunggal
Tewangkerangan
Tumbangtanjung
Tumbang Panjang
Tumbangkobongan
690,000
690,000
700,000
700,000
710,000
710,000
720,000
720,000
730,000
730,000
740,000
740,000
750,000
750,000
760,000
760,000
9,74
0,00
0
9,74
0,00
0
9,75
0,00
0
9,75
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
Revision Description Date
G R M GRM PT Ground Risk ManagementWisma GKBI, Level 39Jl Jendral SudirmanJakarta 10210INDONESIAPh: +62 (0)21 5799 8015Fx: +62 (0)21 5799 8000Email : [email protected]
Tittle
Drawn Drawing date
Checked Checked date
Designed Designed date
Scale
Size
EPU
SHB 12/10/2009
12/10/20090 4,000 8,0002,000
Meters
1:300,000
A3
Project No.
±
PT. Gueng Alam Semesta
PT. Karunia Ilahi Insan Sejahtera
proposed jetty
KATINGAN COAL MINE
Figure No.
Regional SRTM Topography
09 ICM 001 A1
Approxima te Mine Area
Ka
tinga
n Rive
r
Cam
paga
hulu
Riv
er
PT Segah Energy ResourcesArio Bimo Central 4th FloorJl HR Rasuna SaidBlock X-2 No. 5Jakarta 12950INDONESIA
PT SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCES
ProjectClient
Site location
River
!( Proposed Jetty
LEGEND
Elevation
200
150
100
50
10
Notes :
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009 2. Topography based on SRTM Elevation data dated 22 February 20023. River and road based on forest status map from department of forestry year 20004. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
K1
K2
K3
C1
C2
C1-a
M1
C2-a C2-b
C1-b
C1-c
Ka lanam
an River
M2
M3
M1-a
M4M4PS
CM1ACM2CM3
CM4 CM Option
!(
")")
")
")")
")
700,000
700,000
710,000
710,000
720,000
720,000
730,000
730,000
740,000
740,000
750,000
750,000
760,000
760,000
770,000
770,000
9,74
0,00
0
9,74
0,00
0
9,75
0,00
0
9,75
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,76
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,77
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,78
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,79
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,80
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,81
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,82
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
9,83
0,00
0
Revision Description Date
G R M GRM PT Ground Risk ManagementWisma GKBI, Level 39Jl Jendral SudirmanJakarta 10210INDONESIAPh: +62 (0)21 5799 8015Fx: +62 (0)21 5799 8000Email : [email protected]
Project
Tittle
Drawn Drawing date
Checked Checked date
Designed Designed date
Client
Scale
Size
EPU
SHB 12/10/2009
12/10/20090 4,300 8,6002,150
Meters
1:300,000
A3
Project No.
±PT. Karunia Ilahi Insan Sejahtera
Site location
KATINGAN COAL MINE
Figure No.
Published Geological Planat 1:100,000 Scale
09 ICM 001 A2
Ka
tinga
n Rive
r
Ka lanam
an River
PT Segah Energy ResourcesArio Bimo Central 4th FloorJl HR Rasuna SaidBlock X-2 No. 5Jakarta 12950INDONESIA
PT SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCES
Notes :
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009
2. Image background based on Geological map of Tewah and Palangkaraya sheets from Geological Research and Development Center Indonesia
3. River and road based on forest status map from department of forestry year 2000
4. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
RoadRiver
!( Proposed Jetty
LEGEND
Dahor Formation : Conglomerate, dark brown to blackish, rather compact, clast consist of quarzite and basalt fragments.
TQd
Alluvium : Peat dark to blackish brown (paludal deposits); loose sands, yellowish colour, fine coarse grained, unbedded (fluvial deposits)
Qa
Volcanic Rocks: Vulcanic breccia, greenish gray, very compact, clast consit of andesiteTRv
Granite : Plutonic rock with granite togranodioritic composition, white withblack spots, phaneritic, holocrystelline,medium gray, hinidiomorphic, granular
G R M GRM PT Ground Risk ManagementWisma GKBI, Level 39Jl Jendral SudirmanJakarta 10210INDONESIAPh: +62 (0)21 5799 8015Fx: +62 (0)21 5799 8000Email : [email protected]
Tittle
Drawn Drawing date
Checked Checked date
Designed Designed date
Scale
Size
EPU
SHB 01/04/2010
01/04/20100 4,700 9,4002,350
Meters
1:350,000
A3
Project No.
±PT. Gueng Alam Semesta
PT. Karunia Ilahi Insan Sejahtera
proposed jetty
KATINGAN COAL MINE
Figure No.
Alignment Options and Photo Inspections
09 ICM 001 B1
K1
K2
K3
C1
C2
Approxima te Mine Area
C1-a
M1
C2-a
C2-b
C1-b
C1-c
Ka
tinga
n Rive
r
Kalanam
an River
Cam
paga
hulu
Riv
er
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî íî
íîíî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
íî
PT Segah Energy ResourcesArio Bimo Central 4th FloorJl HR Rasuna SaidBlock X-2 No. 5Jakarta 12950INDONESIA
PT SEGAH ENERGY RESOURCES
íî
M2
M3
M1-a
ProjectClient
Site location
GPS Tracks by GRM Engineer
River
!( Proposed Jetty
LEGEND
Elevation
200
150
100
50
10
GPS Tracks based on"Road Alignments PS.gdb"
GPS Tracks based on"Road Alignments PS2.gdb"
M4
M4PS
GPS Tracks based on"05012010.gdb"
Notes :
1. Mine area and proposed jetty based on data from client coordinat of the coal concession.doc dated 08 June 2009 2. Topography based on SRTM Elevation data dated 22 February 20023. River and road based on forest status map from department of forestry year 20004. GPS Track based on survey by GRM Engineer taken dated 20-23 August 2009 & 16 - 18 Sept 2009 and based on data "Road Alignments PS.gdb" dated 10 Dec 2009 and "05012010.gdb" dated 5 Jan 20105. Coordinate system is UTM Zone 49 South, Datum WGS 84
Notes; 1 These costs are for budget cost estimation purposes only with the primary purpose of providing a basis for haul road alignment coparison and selection.2 The costs are derived from typical rates found in Indonesia, although these can change significantly based on the cost of diesel, source of local aggregates and cost variations in land procurement and compensation.