Republic of Indonesia
Japanese ODA Loan Mid-term Review Report
Water Resources Existing Facilities Rehabilitation and Capacity Improvement ProjectEvaluator：Hiroshi AOKISanshuu Engineering Consultant
Field Studies：May 2009 – July 2009

１．Project Profile

Location of Project Site

Upper Solo River Protection・Revetment

1.1 Objectives
The objectives of the project are to restore the functions of existing facilities of completed
Japanese ODA loan projects (hereinafter called as "the Project") in the water resource sector and to
improve and strengthen operation and maintenance (O/M) organizations through rehabilitation ofurgent and necessary facilities and assistance for enhancing abilities of O/M organizations, thereby
contributing to assuring sustainability of the completed projects. The project location is shown in the
Figure 1 and 2.

1

Figure. 1

Location of Solo River & Brantas River Basin

Figure. 2
1.2

Location of Ular Irrigation

Outline of Loan Agreement
Loan Amount

14,696million yen

Loan Signing／Closing Date

October 2002／February 2011

Terms and Conditions

Construction works: 1.8 %, 30years (10 years), General-Interest rate
-Repayment

untiedperiod(grace Consulting Service: 0.75%, 40 years(10 years), bilateral

period)tied-Procurement
Borrower

Government of Indonesia

Executing Agency

Ministry of Public Works,
Directorate General of Water Resources（DGWR）

Construction Work Contractor

PT. BRANTAS ABIPRAYA（Indonesia）・PT.
HUTAMA KARYA(Indonesia)・PT.NINDYAKARYA (Indonesia)・PT.PEMBAN GUNANPERUMAHAN（Indonesia）,PT.ADHI KARYA(Indonesia)・PT. WASKITA KARYA（Indonesia）・
PT. WIJAYA KARYA（Indonesia）・PT.ISTAKAKARYA（Indonesia）
Consulting Services

Nippon Koei, Co. Ltd. （Japan）・YACHIYO ENG. CO.
（Japan）・NIKKEN CONSULTANTS, INC. （Japan）・
PT. TATA GUNA PATRIA（Indonesia）・PT.TRI

2

TUNGGAL KONSULTAN（Indonesia）
Feasibility Study

SAPS “Assistance Effectiveness Promotion Study on
Rehabilitation

ProjectsofKarangkates

Dam

Construction Project and others”

1.3

Background

The project faced cost increase and extension of construction period due to flood damage of the
Solo River basin during construction. Thus, it is essential to analyze these impacts, which may exert
on efficiency and effectiveness of the project and recommend the actions to be taken. Taking thisproject as a target for mid-term review, the project was reviewed in terms of evaluation criteria basedon the results of field surveys and conclusions were derived.

2．Mid-term Review Results
2.1
2.1.1

Relevance
Consistency with national/government policies

The Five Year National Development Plan (Propenas;2000 – 2004), which was valid at the time ofappraisal, stipulated the following five items as important agendas: 1) security assurance, politicalrenovation, and democracy, 2) legal renovation and improvement of public sector management, 3)
economic recovery and sustainable economic growth, 4) improvement of social services, and 5)
de-centralization and poverty reduction. In the economic recovery program, it was planned tomaintain the function, by rehabilitation and improvement, of existing infrastructure in “Program to
Maintain Service Level of Public Facilities and Infrastructure”. “Development and Management
Program for Water Resources”targeted increase of food production and promotion of agri-businessby expansion of water resources and improvement of water system management. The program alsoemphasized that the water system organizations of local farmers in cooperation with provinces,prefectures and city governments, and managed water systems, thus creating fair water supply
systems and appropriate water management organizations and agencies.
Under this policy, the Government of Indonesia had been making efforts to renovate the water
resource sector. More specifically, they focused on the following areas: 1) improvement of legal
structures related to the National Policy on water resource development and management, 2)
improvement of laws and ordinances of organizational and financial system on comprehensive river
basin, 3) establishment of effective regulations and implementation systems for water quality
improvement and river basin water quality management, and 4) improvement of legal systems

3pertaining to irrigation system management policy.
As for the operation and maintenance (O/M) of the irrigation sector, the Indonesian Government
amended the irrigation management and irrigation service fee (ISF) policy in 1998. Water Users
Associations (WUA) were entitled to collect and manage irrigation fees, which would be used for
O/M of irrigation facilities. It was also planned to expand scope of WUA's O/M by organizing WUA
federations (WUAF) and introducing joint O/M with regional governments and WUA for trunk
irrigation facilities.
Furthermore, RPJM 2004-2009, which is the valid National Plan at mid-term review (March 2009),
has three important objectives: 1) Forming a society based on fairness and justice, 2) Realization of asafe and peaceful country, and 3) Realization of a both economically and socially affluent society.
Especially, in terms of the third objective, they emphasized promotion of investment and export, job
creation, poverty reduction and economic growth. One of the ways to achieve economic growth wasrevitalization of agriculture, forestry and fishery industries, and development of infrastructure, roads,
and irrigation system in rural areas are considered vital. In the light of this situation, the objective of
the project is still consistent with the national policies and plans. The Strategic Plan of water
resource management is stipulated by the Minister of Public Works Decree No. 51/PRT 2005 dated
March 7, 2005. In relation to flood control, the decree mentions the following activities; 1) to protect
the residential and production center (agriculture and industry) areas from 10 years return period
flood (the target area is about 10,000 ha and the budget requirement is about Rp. 876,000 billion);and 2) to improve and maintain 1,500 km of river course (the budget requirement is Rp. 56.0
billion).
The activities in water system management area to support a safe and peaceful society areclassified as the following: 1) Rehabilitation of irrigation area, 2) Increase of water supply, 3)Construction of wells to use ground water in remote areas, 4) Program to support formulation of
WUA, and 5) Program for strengthening of WUA. In addition to it, the programs for improving
welfare of people include the following activities and have their planned budget: 1) Irrigation system
improvement, lake irrigation system improvement; and 2) Construction of irrigation ponds andrehabilitation and maintenance of man-made and natural lakes and ponds. Thus, the objectives of the
project are consistent with current Indonesian national policy and plans.
2.1.2

Consistency with development needs

The development needs of the water resource sector at the time of appraisal were the followings:【River Management】
The legal and organizational structures have been discussed to establish State and Provincial level4

institution for river basin management including water allocation, fees for water supply, and water
quality monitoring. Public corporations for the sustainable management of water resources havebeen introduced for major and important river basin. The Brantas River Management Corporation
for the Brantas River basin (Perm Jasa Tirta: PJT1) was established and has operated comprehensive
and independent O/M of the river basin since 1990. The Indonesian Government was considering the
introduction of river basin management by public corporation for major six rivers. It was pointed out
as an issue that the legal structures to establish river basin management organizations consistent withdecentralization policy implemented since 2001 as well as to reinforce stable management bases ofsuch public corporations are keys to success.
【Irrigation】
At the time of appraisal, rice deficit caused by increased rice consumption due to population andincome growth and reduction of farm lands in Java was exposed as a structural crisis. Food security,especially self-sufficiency of rice, was one of the pillars of national policy, and thus development ofirrigation facilities to solve this problem was high-priority. The law on management of the irrigation
sector was prepared based on decentralization and the above irrigation management policy. The
challenges were clarification of the role of central and regional governments and strengthening
capacity of WUA and the water users’ association federation (WUAF) after transferring irrigation
management to WUA and WUAF.
On the other hand, the needs for water resource sector at the time of mid-term review (July 2009)
are identified as follows:【River Management】
As for assistance needs for O/M capacity development, though the transfer of authority for water
resources management and operation including clarification of the role and responsibility of thecentral, province, prefecture and city government was promoted based on the decentralization policy,
necessary budget allocation and transfer of maintenance technology were not sufficient. In fact,
Brantas River Management Public Corporation (PJT1) and Solo branch, which are responsible
bodies for the O/M of the project, activities are limited to daily and periodical maintenance due tolack of budget. Large scale repair and improvement depend on other financial sources such as loans.
The training of staff for O/M has not been sufficiently practiced, again due to the lack of a sufficientbudget.
【Irrigation】
President Yudhoyono (reelected in July 2009) announced the plan to reduce the rice import by2008 and to increase the self-sufficiency rate by expanding domestic production, and declared to5increase the current rice production of 55 million tons per year to 61 million tons per year by 2008.
Development of irrigation facility is necessary to achieve this commitment, however, the irrigation
rate in farmlands greatly varies by region while about 6.77 million ha farmlands are irrigated inIndonesia. Moreover, in the 25% (about 1.67 million ha) of farmlands, the irrigation facilities are notproperly functioning, and in Java and Sumatra about 30% of irrigation facilities have deteriorated
due to insufficient O/M activities. As for O/M capacity, farmers (WUA) who are responsible for
tertiary irrigation facilities have growing needs for assistance of O/M capacity development whiletransfer of irrigation management authority and assets to prefecture and regional government andWUA based on decentralization policy since 1999.
In conclusion, the Project is consistent with the national development plan and development needs
both at the time of appraisal and mid-term review and thus, the relevance of the project is high.
2.2

Efficiency

2.2.1

OutputThe output of the project is composed of two elements: 1) Civil works and 2) Consulting
services.
(a) Civil Works
The civil works of the project are 1) Solo River basin located in the Central and East Java
Province, 2) Brantas River basin in East Java Province, and 3) Irrigation project in North Sumatra.
The contents of civil works are shown in the Table-1.
Table-1Civil Works and Progress (as of July 2009)
River basin

Work Items (Appraisal)

Work Items (Mid-term Review)➀ Solo river basin improvement* Upper Solo river protection/repair*Madiunriver
protection
rehabilitation/ Rubber gate repair➁ Karangkates multipurpose dam(reservoir sedimentation problem)* Procurement of a dredging machine(cancelled, note 1）*Construction of Sabo dam* Construction of Sabo dam*Improvement of revetment at * Improvement of revetment at
spillway plunge
spillway plunge
Wlingi
multipurpose
dam➂
Wlingi multipurpose dam ➂(reservoir sedimentation problem)(reservoir sedimentation problem)* Procurement of a dredging machine* Procurement of a dredging machine* Construction of Sabo dam* Construction of Sabo dam* Construction of bypass channel*Construction of bypass channel➃ Brantas Middle Reaches river ➃ Brantas Middle Reaches river
improvement
improvement➀ Solo river basin improvement
1)
Central/East *Upper Solo river protection/repair
Java:
Solo *Madiun river protection rehabilitation*Rubber gate repair
River Basin
2) East Java: ➁ Karangkates multipurpose dam
Brantas(reservoir sedimentation problem)
River Basin*Procurement of a dredging machine

6

Progress(July 2009)
Ongoing
Ongoing

Completed
Completed

Completed
Completed
Ongoing

* River protection/repair* River protection/repair
Ongoing*Repair of intake weir for irrigation* Repair of intake weir for irrigation
Completed➄ Porong improvement➄ Porong improvement* River protection/repair* River protection/repair
Ongoing➅ Mt. Kelud Sabo dam repair➅ Mt. Kelud Sabo dam repair*Construction/rehabilitation of sabo * Construction/rehabilitation of sabo Completeddamdam➆ Ular irrigation rehabilitation
3)
North ➆ Ular irrigation rehabilitation
Ongoing* Intake weir for Ular irrigation*Intake weir for Ular irrigation
Sumatra：On going* Link canals construction
Ular Irrigation *Link canals construction
Note: 1 The procurement was cancelled because the dredging equipment purchased for Ulingi dam reservoir
sedimentation was utilized for the Karangkates multi-purpose dam reservoir sedimentation problem.

Major changes from the time of appraisal were the cancellation of dredging equipment andaddition of the bypass channel for sediment removal of the sediment control dam as written in Note
1 to the above table.

Groundsill down stream of a bridge in the Brantas River(b) Consulting Services
Progress of consulting services as of July 2009 is shown in the table-2.
Table-2 Consulting Services and Progress (as of July 2009)
Item

Progress

1) Overall Project Management
2) Monitoring of operation and maintenance of each subprojects and assistance inOngoing
Ongoing

preparing monitoring meetings held by executing agency
3)

Detailassistanceindesign,Detail design, Assistance for PQ, bidding activities

P/Q

Completed

Construction supervision (Brantas, Solo, Kelud)

Ongoing

evaluation and bidding

Construction supervision (Ular irrigation)

On going

activities for civil works

Construction supervision (Rubber dam)Completedof each subprojects andconstruction supervision74) Assistance in strengthening of the operation and maintenance system for Perum

Completed

Jasa Titra-1 covering the Brantas River and the Bengawan Solo River basins
5) Preparation of comprehensive basin-wide sediment management plans for theCompleted

Brantas River and the Bengawan Solo River basins
6) Monitoring and evaluation of activities for establishment and strengthening ofNot started

WUA along the Ular irrigation
7) Environmental management

Ongoing

Two items out of seven components of consulting services, 4) and 5), were completed. Two
sub-items, detail design, assistance for PQ and bidding activities and construction supervision of therubber dam, of 3) were completed. 1) and 2) as well as the rest of 3) construction supervision of theBrantas and Solo River basins, Mt. Kelud and Ular irrigation will be completed by the amended term,
September 2010. 6) monitoring and evaluation of activities for establishment and strengthening of
WUA has been temporarily suspended based on the following reason after discussions with theexecuting agency and not started yet.
At the time when the consulting service of the project started in October 2003, the transfer ofmanagement of tertiary irrigation facilities to WUA was being implemented under the PKPI
(Pembaharuan Kebijakan Pengalolaan Irigasi) program financed by the World Bank based on thedecentralization policy. The purpose of the PKPI program was to transfer irrigation management
authority and assets previously under central government control to regional governments and WUA.
According to the Water Resources Law (PP77/2001), the irrigation responsibility of trunk systems(Intake weir, primary and secondary irrigation system) belonged to prefectures and tertiary systems
to WUA. The PKPI program attempted gradual and total transfer from central to prefectures andregional offices including budget allocation and technology guidance.
The Water Resource Law, (U.U.No.7/2004) was passed by the congress in February 2004, because
efficient management of irrigation facilities based on the Water Resource Law, PP77/2001 slowed
down and became difficult due to budget constraints. However, the transfer still did not proceed.
In 2006 a Government Regulation on Irrigation (PP20/2006) as an implementation regulation,
which is stipulated in article 41 of the law No.7/2004, became effective. According to this regulation,
the central and regional governments take responsibility for O/M of primary systems (Intake weir,primary and secondary channel) and WUA takes responsibility for tertiary irrigation system. The
central government also takes responsibility for irrigation areas of more than 3,000 ha andcross-border of prefectures. Since Ular irrigation, which has an area of 18,500ha, belongs to thiscategory, the central government is in charge of management of the intake weir and primary andsecondary water channels.
The consulting services for monitoring and evaluation of PKPI activities for strengthening of8

WUA in Ular irrigation area, 6) in Table-2) was decided to be suspended on January 26, 2006
because the responsibility of WUA was not clear at the time of January 2006, when the new law for
irrigation had not been determined. The TOR was to be reviewed after the new law was determined.
Even after the new law became determined, the basic concept of transfer of irrigation management to
WUA was abolished. Thus, implementation of the PKPI program was suspended and the consulting
services for monitoring and evaluation of activities for establishment and strengthening of WUA
along the Ular irrigation was also suspended. Since then the related consulting services have been
stopped.
On the other hand, the Water Irrigation Sector Management Project (WISMP) for strengthening of
WUA financed by the World Bank began in 2006. The Ular irrigation area was included in a part of
the WISMP target area. The consulting services for monitoring and evaluation of establishment andstrengthening of WUA along the Ular irrigation were not to strengthen WUA but to monitor andevaluate the program. Thus, it would be appropriate to propose WUA strengthening activities bycollecting information of activities of the Bank financed project.
7) in Table-2) of the consulting services, environmental management consisting of seven items
were almost completed except for assistance in guidance on environmental consideration andmonitoring impacts on water quality during project implementation. All items will be completed by
the completion of works and supervision of construction in September 2010.
2.2.2

Project Period

Although there are some delays, river protection (revetment and groundsill) of Solo, Brantas, andPorong River Basin will be completed by the loan closing date. Bypass channel construction of
Kelud sabo will be completed by the loan closing date while warranty period will be several months
later due to delay of procurement. The construction of Ular irrigation work will finish before theloan closing date including the maintenance period, though a construction delay is recognized. The
project schedule at the time of appraisal, start of consulting services and proposed revision ofschedule are shown in the Table-3.

Table-3 Planned and Revised Schedule by Item
Item
Selection of Consultant
Consulting services
Civil Works (Brantas river middle

Schedule

Schedule at start ofproposed Revision

Appraisalatconsulting servicesof Schedule

October 2002 ~March 2003 ~May 2003 ~December 2002

October 2003

December 2003

January 2003 ~October 2003 ~October 2003 ~December 2007

May 2008

September 2010

December 2003 ~January 2004 ~May 2004

May 2004－note)

reach protection/repair)9

Civil Works (Brantas river middle
reach protection/repair, Mt. Kelud

December 2003 ~sediment control dam repair/bypass

October 2005

December 2003 ~August 2005 ~October 2005

November 2006

channel, others )January 2008 ~Civil Works (Mt. Kelud bypass

November 2008

channel construction)
Civil Works (Brantas river middle

note)reach protection/repair )June 2004 ~June 2004 ~December 2005

October 2006

Civil works (Brantas river middle

May 2005 ~May 2005 ~June 2006 ~reach

September 2007

September 2007

August 2010

January 2005 ~January 2005 ~June 2005 ~December 2005

December 2005

June 2007

protection/repair,Keludemergency sediment control dam
bypass channel, others)
Procurement of Equipment

Note): Additional work of replacement of rubber gate of the Jatimelek weir (Package 3A) was necessary andadded after appraisal.

The main delay was attributed to consultant selection. The delay during the construction stage is
as follows.
1) Central/East Java Province: Solo River basin・Flood damage (Solo River)
2) East Java Province: Brantas River basin
・Delay of P/Q procedure (sediment control bypass channel)
・Design change (Increased quantity-Brantas River)・Additional works (Replacement of rubber gate)
3) North Sumatra Province: Ular irrigation
・Additional design (Change of intake weir and weir type)・Design change and delay in construction due to unexpected soil conditions andworsened weather conditions

It seems crucial to monitor and promote the smooth progress of works in Ular irrigation because
there may be unforeseen factors such as adverse weather conditions.

10Link Canals under Construction in Ular
2.3 Effectiveness
2.3.1

Quantitative impact(1) Operation and effect indicators
Target values of operation and effect indicators and EIRR at appraisal were reviewed at the time of
mid-term review and new operation and effect indicators reflecting current conditions are proposed.
The target year is proposed as two years after completion based on the current ex-post evaluation
scheme, although the initial target year agreed at appraisal was five years after completion of the
project. It was also confirmed that there was no need to modify the target value by this target yearchange.
1) Solo River Basin Rehabilitation Project【Operation and Effect Indicator】
Examination has been conducted if review of indicators and their target values is necessary or notin consideration of flood damage conditions in 2007 of Upper Solo, Madiun, and Lower Solo River
Basins. The flood in 2007 was roughly a fifty year return period and far serious from the flood of ten
year return period, which was assumed at appraisal to establish the operation and effect indicators of
the rehabilitation project. Table-4 shows flood damages and operation and effect indicators.
Table-4 Operation and Effectiveness Indicators and Flood Damage of 2007 of Solo River Basin
Upper Solo River

Madiun River

Lower
Solo River

Indicator

Baseline atFlooding

Target atBaseline atFlooding(unit)

appraisalin 2007

appraisal

appraisalin 2007(2 years(2001)(2001)

after project11

Target at

Flooding

appraisalin 2007(2 years
after projectcompletion)
Damaged river965

completion)

0

protection (m)
Flood

area

12,500

6,920

9,500

6,700

4,248

4,550

47,1902,500

16,307

1,900

1,340

1,101

909

121,527(ha)
Floodedhouses (no)Note 1: The damage data of Solo River flood in 2007 was provided by the Solo River Basin Management Office
which collected data from surrounding towns and villages. Flood areas were estimated based on
information in the region.
Note 2: Operation and effect indicators for Solo River Basin are for the Upper Solo River Basin according to the
Solo River Basin Development Office.
Note 3: The blank in the table are due to difficulty in data collection.

The numbers of flooded houses of the Upper Solo River flood in 2007 were far extensive incomparison with area because the flood water, for a short time period, reached not only low land andpaddy fields (with few houses) but also high land which was densely populated residential area. Thisdamage is not expected with a flood of 10 year return period. Since operation and effect indicators of
the Project assume a flood of only 10 year return period, it is appropriate to keep the same operationand effect indicators established at appraisal as for the target values of the project as shown in the
Table -4.
【EIRR】The EIRR at appraisal was 10.7%. The new EIRR at mid-term review (2009) calculated based on thereview of the assumption at appraisal is 11.2% for the Solo and Madiun River.
2) Brantas River Basin Rehabilitation Project【Operation and Effect Indicators】
The target value for the Brantas River at the time of mid-term review is still valid since there is no
flood damage after the start of the Project.
Table-5 Operation and Effect Indicators of Brantas River Basin
Indicator (unit)

Baseline at appraisal(2001)

Target at appraisal (2013)(2 years after projectcompletion)

Damaged river protection (m)（m）

1,550

0

Dredging volume of Wlingi Dam

200,000

500,000

198

0

12,0400(m³/year)
Flood area (ha)Flooded houses (no)【EIRR】

12

The EIRR at appraisal was 21.4%. The new EIRR at mid-term review (2009) calculated based on
the review of the assumption at appraisal for sediment control dam, dredging and bypass channel is
21.4 %, and that for Brantas River protection, rubber weir, and Poron River rehabilitation is 14.1 %due to increased cost of additional work of replacement of the rubber gate of the Jatimelek weir(Package 3A) .
3) North Sumatra Province Ular Irrigation【Operation and Effect Indicators】
The target value will be altered because a higher unit crop rate will be attained for the target
irrigation area based on performance in recent years (from 5.2ton/ha to 5.5ton/ha).
Table-6 Operation and Effect Indicators of North Sumatra Ular Irrigation
Indicator (unit)

Target at appraisal

2001

Revised Target at
Mid-term review(2013)

Rice harvest (ton/year)(rainy season)

75,40096,200101,750(dry season)

50,456

98,050101,750

6,066

9,166

9,749

90

100

100

Income per household of farmers(Rp. 1,000/year)
Participation rate in WUA (%)

【EIRR】The EIRR at appraisal was 22.2 %. The new EIRR at mid-term review (2009) calculated based on
the review of the assumption at appraisal is 19.9 % for the intake weir and irrigation channel. The
reason for lower EIRR value is the increased construction cost.
2.3.2

Qualitative impact

The qualitative impacts vary depending on the kind of project components, because the Project iscomposed of different kinds of works including dredging of a multipurpose dam, river protection
and rehabilitation of irrigation facilities. Stable and safe life conditions will be possible by reducing
flood damage to the downstream area through better river management. The quality of life will beraised as a result of stable and increased electric power supply (peak electric supply of 54,000kw andincreased generation of 136 MWH) with restored water reservoirs. Overall, farmers’ lives will be
improved by increased rice harvests brought by the rehabilitation of irrigation facilities. These
qualitative impacts should be confirmed by beneficiary surveys during the ex-post evaluation stage.
2.3.3

ImpactRegarding water resources management, the safe and stable life of people will be secured through13

sustainable flood damage mitigation, effective use of water resources, and better O/M of rivers. It is
foreseen that the project contributes to higher productivity, strengthening of social and production
infrastructures of farmers and thus poverty reduction through efficient use of water resources by
WUA/farmers.
2.4
2.4.1

Others (Items influencing project effect and maintenance)
Cooperation with NGO/Local Universities

The environmental study (fish, flora and ecology) entrusted to the Brawi Jay University. Except
for that, there is no further cooperation with local institutions which influence project effect andmaintenance.
2.4.2

Grant Assistance/Technical Cooperation

River bed change analysis was conducted for the formulation of sediment management plans for
the Brantas River and the Upper Solo River basins, respectively. Among those, the expected amountof sediment supply data were given by the “JICA Study on Countermeasures for Sedimentation in
Wonogili Multipurpose Dam Reservoir”. There is no further cooperation with grant projects which
influence project effects and maintenance.
2.4.3

Coordination with Other Donors

There was no cooperation with other donors with regard to river management and irrigation
development. However, the World Bank financed project, Water Resources and Irrigation Sector
Management Project (WISMP), started from 2006. It is possible to promote monitoring andevaluation of the WISMP activities as explained in 2.2.1 (b). Cooperation with World Bank will benecessary because the Ular irrigation area is one of the target irrigation areas of WISMP.

Meeting with WUA
2.4.4

Environmental and social impact

14

For environmental and social protection, the construction of civil works was based on theEnvironmental Impact Analysis (EIA), Environmental Management Plan (RKL), and Environmental
Monitoring Plan (RPL) regarding environmental and social impact. The environmental and social
study for the Brantas River basin, which was within the scope of the consulting services of the
project, was written in the Report on Environmental Study（January 2005). Environmental factors
including soil and water quality, farm land and irrigation area influences, and land acquisition werestudied. The Executing Agency reviewed the contents of the EIA before starting the project for Ular
irrigation. The results were written in the various reports1. Items including water pollution, waste
disposal, soil contamination, ground water, and ecology were studied. The impacts on animals andnatural conditions were minimized. Also, the possibility of adverse effects on the water and air
quality is low. Adverse effects on the environment by the construction work were not identified.
There were four relocations of houses for Kelud sediment control dam construction. Landacquisition was for the purpose of an access road and water covered area of the dam. There was no
relocation of houses in the Ular irrigation area. Even though land acquisition was delayed, it is notforeseen that this will influence the progress of the project.
2.4.5

System, technical capacity, and financial status for operation and maintenance（1）Operation and maintenance
The O/M of the rehabilitated facilities by the Project have been implemented based on each river
basin. The Solo River Basin Development Office has been developing water resources and managing
the Solo River since 1969. However, the preparation of establishing the Brantas River Management
Corporation (PJT1) Solo branch started based on the Presidential Order of September 14, 2000, andO/M of the Solo River was transferred gradually to PJT1. The present bodies responsible for O/M
for each river basin are shown below. O/M organization of irrigation facilities is based on theamended Water Resources Law in 2004. The primary and secondary irrigation facilities are operated
and maintained by the central and regional governments, and the tertiary facilities by WUA or
WUAF.
1) Solo and Madiun River Basin O/M
Item/facilities
River structures

Responsible Body
Brantas River Management Corporation (PJT1) Solo branch
Solo River Basin Management Office (Balai Besar Wilaya Sungai

11) Environmental Management Efforts and Environmental Monitoring Efforts, Irrigation Rehabilitation Region II, Deli

Serdang District, May 2004、2) Environmental Management Program and Environmental Monitoring Program, Irrigation
Rehabilitation and Dike Construction of Ular River, April 2006, 3) Design Report of Modification Design Work for
Rehabilitation for Ular River Flood Control and Improvement of Irrigation Project (Volume-XI) Environmental Investigation15

Bengawan Solo)
Irrigation facilities

Provincial River Basin Management Office (Balai PSDA)

Small rivers

Provincial River Basin Management Office and regional
government2）Brantas River Basin O/M
Item/facilities
River

structures,

flood

warning

Responsible Body
PJT1、Brantas River Basin Management Office (Balai
Besar Wilaya Sungai Brantas)

system, dam
Kelud/Semeru

Kelud/Semeru sediment control Officevolcano area

3) North Sumatra Ular Irrigation
Irrigation Area

Responsible Body

Intake Weir and Trunk
Water Channel
more than 3,000ha

Balai Wilaya Sungai Sumatera II (central)

1,000ha - 3,000ha

North Sumatra Province Water Resource Bureau, RiverManagement Office（Balai PSDA）(province)

less than 1,000ha
Tertiary Channel

Prefecture
WUA（2）Technical capacity in operation and maintenanceThe central and regional governments take responsibility for O/M of the river protection
facilities. The number of engineers who have sufficient technology and commitment are few
due to budget constraints for various works. However, there will be no serious problems of
O/M of rehabilitated river facilities, which do not require advanced technology in daily O/M.
The inventory data for asset management should be prepared and maintained for future O/M
activities.
Strengthening of O/M organization for irrigation facilities including intake weir and link
canals, which are being constructed in the ongoing works, is to be done based on the new
regulation. Water Resource Law No. 7/2004 and Government Regulation on Irrigation No.
20/2006. Involvement of the central and provincial governments is crucial both financially16and technically for large scale repair of small irrigation facilities and tertiary facilities, which
was transferred to WUA.
（3）Financial status on operation and maintenanceO/M of river basins is twofold. There are two corporations for water resource managementof the Brantas and Solo River Basin: The Brantas River Management Corporation (PJT1)
Solo branch and related River Basin Management Office. The scale of budget for eachcorporation differs: the expense of PJT1 Solo Branch is less due to limited income of the SoloRiver because water supply to farmers, which comprises a large proportion, is free of charge;
whereas the PJT1 in Brantas River has ten times as much budget as the Solo Branch becauseof more water supply to be sold. The budget of the other O/M organizations, which are theBrantas River Basin Managment Office and Solo River Basin Management Office, have
opposite trends against those of PJT1. The budget amount of the Solo River is three times asmuch as that of the Brantas River in 2007. Based on this fact, it is reasonable to say that PJT1
mainatains the river according to the income amount and especially the maiantenance of the
Solo River might not be satisfactory. In general, the budget amount for O/M and
improvement is unstable and depends on the budget allocated to a specific project. A large
proportion of an ordinary budget is used for a salary of staff, office operation costs, andinspection and minor maintenance.
The primary and secondary irrigation water channels are managed by the central and local
governments because of the large irrigation area of 18,500 ha in Ular. The provincial budget
for North Sumatra Ular Irrigation from 2006 to 2009 is shown in the Table-7. The amount of
Rp. 200,000/ha is necessary but securing the budget is difficult according to the Irrigation
Department of the Province.
Table-7 Budget for North Sumatra Ular Irrigation
2006
2007
2008
Rp. 88,887/ha
Rp. 128,827/ha
Rp. 120,000/ha

2009
Rp. 88.887/ha

Source: Balai Wilaya Sungai Sumatra, Dinas PU Sumatra

The O/M budget of tertiary irrigation systems is covered by Rp. 250,000/ha/year equivalent to Rp.
125,000/ha/harvest/year (twice the harvest collected from WUA farmers in Ular). Major daily
maintenance activities are removing of waste materials in the channel and cleaning of pipe culverts.

3．Conclusions, Lessons Learned, and Recommendations
3.1

Conclusions

This project coincides with the National Development Policy/Plan and development needs and is a17higher priority project at the mid-term review stage. Therefore, it is necessary to support project
implementation continuously.
3.2

Recommendations

3.2.1 Recommendations to the Executing Agency
The Monitoring and evaluation of activities for establishment and strengthening of WUA along theUlar irrigation in the PKPI program, which is a part of the consulting services of the rehabilitation
project, has been suspended since 2006 as stated in 2.2.1. On the other hand, the strengthening of
WUA program financed by the World Bank under the Water Irrigation Sector Management Project(WISMP) including Ular irrigation area, started in 2006. Although it seems difficult to finish every
item of monitoring/evaluation as previously planned within one year before the Project completion,some recommendations for strengthening of WUA can be provided from consultations from local
government officials, WUA management officials and farmers with reference to the results andcontents of activities of WISMP. It is desired that the consultant examines the possible contents ofactivities within a limited time and promote implementation as soon as possible.
As pointed out in 2.2.2, the main delay was attributed to delay in consultant selection before thephysical construction of the project. There was a delay in P/Q process of additional work of bypass
channel construction. It is necessary for the executing agency to minimize delays by prompt decision
making and selection process.
The O/M of river basins was not satisfactory due to budget constraints. Water resource operationand maintenance efforts should be continued by PJT1. Water Resource management is to be
conducted with a collaboration of the Balai Besar, Provincial Government and PJT 1. On the other
hand, enough budgets should be allocated to maintain the effects brought by the rehabilitation
project.
3.2.2 Recommendations to JICA
(1) It is necessary to give proper guidance during meetings between the executing agency and theconsultant in order to promote implementation of the monitoring and evaluation activities forestablishment and strengthening of WUA along the Ular irrigation.
(2) The target values of the operation and effect indicators of the Ular irrigation have beenreviewed and the new values were proposed at mid-term review as explained in 2.3.1. It is necessary
for the executing agency and JICA to confirm, examine and reach consensus of indicators to be
adopted at the ex-post evaluation stage.

18