ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

(ESIA)
FOR
SHOBAK 45 MW WIND POWER PROJECT
IN
MA’AN

Final ESIA
31 August 2017
REV - 2

Project Developer:

ESIA Practitioner:
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Document title: ESIA for Shobak Wind Power Project

Status Final
Date 31 August 2017
Client Shobak Wind Power Company

REVISION RECORD
Rev. Created By Internal Review By Date Submission Reviewed Date
No. Status By
REV 0 ECO Consult ECO Consult 24 Jul 2017 Draft Alcazar 3 Aug 2017
Energy
REV 1 ECO Consult ECO Consult 14 Aug2017 Draft EBRD 21 Aug 2017

REV 2 ECO Consult ECO Consult 31 Aug 2017 Final

Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

CONTACTS

ECO Consult

Physical Address:

ECO Consult
Jude Centre, 4th floor, Building #1
Salem Hindawi Street
Shmeisani
Amman
Jordan

Mailing Address:

ECO Consult PO Box 941400 Amman 11194 Jordan

Tel: +962 6 569 9769
Fax: + 962 6 569 7264
Email: [email protected]

Contact Persons:

Laith El-Moghrabi

[email protected]

Ibrahim Masri

[email protected]

PAGE | II
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents....................................................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. vi
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. ix
Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... xiii
Executive Summary in Arabic ....................................................................................................................xv
Executive Summary In English ..................................................................................................................xvi
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 17
1.1 Project Background ......................................................................................................................... 17
1.2 Project Location and Setting ........................................................................................................... 17
1.3 The Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report .................................................. 18
1.4 Document Structure ........................................................................................................................ 19
1.5 Project Proponent and Key Contributors ........................................................................................ 20
2. Project Description............................................................................................................................ 21
2.1 Administrative Setup of Project Location ....................................................................................... 21
2.2 Project Location .............................................................................................................................. 21
2.3 Outline of Wind Turbine Technology .............................................................................................. 23
2.4 Project Components........................................................................................................................ 23
2.5 Footprint of the Project Components ............................................................................................. 26
2.6 Overview of Project Phases............................................................................................................. 26
2.7 Workforce and Training .................................................................................................................. 28
2.8 Resource Use Efficiency .................................................................................................................. 28
3. Project Alternatives .......................................................................................................................... 30
3.1 Site Selection Alternatives .............................................................................................................. 30
3.2 Design Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 31
3.3 Technology Alternatives .................................................................................................................. 32
3.4 No Project Alternative ..................................................................................................................... 33
4. Regulatory and Policy Framework..................................................................................................... 35
4.1 Jordanian Environmental Clearance Process .................................................................................. 35
4.2 Summary of Jordanian Environmental and Social Regulatory Context .......................................... 37
4.3 International Agreements ............................................................................................................... 38
4.4 Requirements for Project Financing................................................................................................ 40
5. ESIA Approach and Methodology...................................................................................................... 44
5.1 Screening, Scoping & Assessment ................................................................................................... 44
5.2 Analysis of Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 44
5.3 Stakeholder Engagement ................................................................................................................ 45
5.4 Delineation of Study Boundaries and Scope of Assessment ........................................................... 45
5.5 Environment & Social Baseline Conditions ..................................................................................... 47
5.6 Impact Assessment Methodology ................................................................................................... 47
PAGE | III
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

5.7 Assessment of Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................ 50

5.8 Development of an Environmental and Social Management (ESMP) Plan..................................... 50
6. Stakeholder Consultation and Engagement ...................................................................................... 51
6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 51
6.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 51
6.3 Requirements and Policy Requirements for Stakeholder Engagement .......................................... 51
6.4 Stakeholder Identification and Analysis .......................................................................................... 53
6.5 Stakeholder Consultation and Engagement To-Date .................................................................... 57
6.6 Future Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation ...................................................................... 63
7. Overview of Strategic Environmental and Economical Impacts ........................................................ 65
7.1 Master Strategy of Energy Sector in Jordan.................................................................................... 65
7.2 Energy Security ................................................................................................................................ 66
7.3 Economic Benefits ........................................................................................................................... 66
7.4 Environmental Benefits ................................................................................................................... 67
8. Landscape and Visual ........................................................................................................................ 68
8.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................. 68
8.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................... 74
9. Land Use ......................................................................................................................................... 103
9.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ............................................................................................... 103
9.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................. 110
10. Geology and Hydrology (Soil & Groundwater) ................................................................................ 114
10.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ............................................................................................... 114
10.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................. 117
11. Biodiversity ..................................................................................................................................... 125
11.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ............................................................................................... 125
11.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................. 131
12. Birds (Avi-Fauna) ............................................................................................................................. 135
12.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ............................................................................................... 135
12.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................. 154
13. Bats ................................................................................................................................................. 164
13.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ............................................................................................... 164
13.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................. 165
14. Archeology and Cultural Heritage ....................................................................................................... 0
14.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................... 0
14.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts ...................................................................................................... 6
15. Air Quality ......................................................................................................................................... 10
15.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................. 10
15.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................... 10
16. Infrastrucutre and Utilities ................................................................................................................ 12
PAGE | IV
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

16.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................. 12

16.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................... 20
17. Community Health, Safety and Security ............................................................................................ 27
17.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................. 27
17.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................... 27
18. Socio-Economic Conditions ............................................................................................................... 58
18.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................. 58
18.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................... 61
19. Occupational Health and SAfety ....................................................................................................... 63
19.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions ................................................................................................. 63
19.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts .................................................................................................... 63
20. Summary of Anticipated Impacts ...................................................................................................... 66
21. Assessment of Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................... 70
22. Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) ....................................................................... 73
22.1 Institutional Framework and Procedural Arrangement for ESMP Implementation ....................... 73
22.2 Training and Awareness Raising ...................................................................................................... 74
22.3 Control of Non‐Compliances ........................................................................................................... 75
22.4 Compilation of Environmental and Social Management Plan ........................................................ 75
23. Aseessment of Impacts From Associated Facilities ........................................................................... 86
24. References ........................................................................................................................................ 94
25. Annexes ............................................................................................................................................ 96

PAGE | V
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location in Relation to Amman and the Surrounding Human Settlements ........................ 18
Figure 2: Elevation Profile of the Project Area ................................................................................................ 22
Figure 3: Project Area ...................................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 4: Facilities near the Project Site .......................................................................................................... 23
Figure 5: (a) Typical Structural Components of a Wind Turbine, (b) Typical Components of a Wind Farm
(Source: EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy, IFC) ............................................................................................... 24
Figure 6: Turbine Layout ................................................................................................................................. 25
Figure 7: Typical 33/132kV Substation............................................................................................................ 26
Figure 8: Wind Map of Jordan with Promising Location for Wind Farm Developments ................................ 31
Figure 9: Solar Map of Jordan with Location of Project site ........................................................................... 33
Figure 10: Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 46
Figure 11: Affected Communities ................................................................................................................... 54
Figure 12: Selected Photos from the Scoping Session of 10 January, 2017.................................................... 58
Figure 13: Selected Photos from the Local Community Consultation Session 10th May 2017 ...................... 60
Figure 14: Selected Photos for Onsite Consultations with Nomads and Local Communities ......................... 62
Figure 15: Visual Receptor Map ...................................................................................................................... 71
Figure 16: View from site towards the North ................................................................................................. 72
Figure 17: View from site towards the east .................................................................................................... 72
Figure 18: View from site towards the south.................................................................................................. 73
Figure 19: View from site towards the west ................................................................................................... 73
Figure 20: Cross Section Profile taken from north to south ........................................................................... 74
Figure 21: Cross Section Profile taken from west to east ............................................................................... 74
Figure 22: Identified Visual Receptors Map .................................................................................................... 78
Figure 23: Wind Farm ZTV – 5km buffer ......................................................................................................... 79
Figure 24: Wind Farm ZTV – 15km buffer ....................................................................................................... 79
Figure 25: Wind Farm ZTV – 25km buffer ....................................................................................................... 80
Figure 26: Wind Farm ZTV – 35km buffer ....................................................................................................... 80
Figure 27: View from Shobak Castle towards site........................................................................................... 81
Figure 28: Visual Presentation from Shobak Castle ........................................................................................ 82
Figure 29: View from Dawsaq Castle towards site.......................................................................................... 83
Figure 30: Visual Presentation from Dawsaq Castle ....................................................................................... 83
Figure 31: View from Al-Qadissyeh towards site ............................................................................................ 84
Figure 32: Visual Presentation from Al-Qadissyeh.......................................................................................... 85
Figure 33: View from Zaitooneh Village towards site ..................................................................................... 85
Figure 34: Visual Presentation from Zaitooneh Village................................................................................... 86
Figure 35: View from Faisaliyeh Village towards site...................................................................................... 87
Figure 36: Visual Presentation from Faisaliyeh Village ................................................................................... 87
Figure 37: View from Shobak Town towards site ........................................................................................... 88

PAGE | VI
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 38: Visual Presentation from Shobak Town ......................................................................................... 89

Figure 39: View from Al-Jaya Village towards site .......................................................................................... 89
Figure 40: View from Nejel Village towards site ............................................................................................. 90
Figure 41: View from Shamakh Village towards site....................................................................................... 91
Figure 42: View from Bi’r Khidad Village towards site .................................................................................... 92
Figure 43: View from Shobak Village 1 towards site....................................................................................... 93
Figure 44: View from Shobak Village 2 towards site....................................................................................... 94
Figure 45: View from Shobak Village 3 towards site....................................................................................... 95
Figure 46: View from Shobak Village 4 towards site....................................................................................... 96
Figure 47: View form King’s Highway towards site ......................................................................................... 97
Figure 48: View form Route 814 towards site ................................................................................................ 98
Figure 49: Visual Presentation from Route 814 .............................................................................................. 98
Figure 50: View form Highway 15 towards site .............................................................................................. 99
Figure 51: Visual Presentation from Highway 15 .......................................................................................... 100
Figure 52: MoMA Land Use Master Plan of the Project Site ........................................................................ 105
Figure 53: Areas of Critical Environmental Concern in Relation to Project Site ........................................... 106
Figure 54: Grazing Reserves in Relation to Project Site ................................................................................ 107
Figure 55: Forest Areas in Relation to Project Site ....................................................................................... 108
Figure 56: Leased Land Parcels within Project Area ..................................................................................... 109
Figure 57: Location of nomad Bedouin tents during the spring of 2017 (ECO Consult, 2017) ..................... 110
Figure 58: Older boundaries covered by the geology and hydrology assessment (black) and the final project
boundaries (red) ............................................................................................................................................ 114
Figure 59: Geological Formations of the Area .............................................................................................. 115
Figure 60: Surface Water Basins of the area ................................................................................................. 116
Figure 61: Catchment area for the Project site ............................................................................................. 116
Figure 62: Rainfall Stations around the project site...................................................................................... 118
Figure 63: Calculated Unit Hydrograph ......................................................................................................... 119
Figure 64: Catchment Area and Drainage System Discharging through the Project Area ............................ 119
Figure 65: Biogeographical Regions in the Project Site (Albert et al., 2003). ............................................... 126
Figure 66: Vegetation type in the project Site (Albert et al., 2003). ............................................................. 127
Figure 67: Cousinia moabitica, a nationally threatened species that was recorded in the main wadi by the
western part of the project site. ................................................................................................................... 128
Figure 68: The wadi (in green) by the western part of the project site along which the nationally threatened
Cousinia moabitica was recorded ................................................................................................................. 132
Figure 69: Locations of vantage points and turbine coverage based on the turbine layout provided prior to
autumn migration assessment (ECO Consult, 2017)..................................................................................... 137
Figure 70: Locations of vantage points and turbine coverage based on the final turbine layout provided
during autumn migration assessment (ECO Consult, 2017) ......................................................................... 137
Figure 71: Location of routes and point counts for the breeding bird survey .............................................. 139
Figure 72: Division of the project site based on coverage of in-flight monitoring (ECO Consult, 2017) ...... 147

PAGE | VII
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 73: Location of the breeding of the regionally Endangered Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe moesta
....................................................................................................................................................................... 154
Figure 74: Location of Routes and Point Counts for the Bats and Breeding Bird Assessment ..................... 165
Figure 75: Older boundaries covered by the archaeology and cultural assessment (black) and the final
project boundaries (red) ................................................................................................................................... 1
Figure 76: Archaeological Sites Recorded within the survey area (DoA, 2016) ................................................ 3
Figure 77: The survey area and the final project boundaries, showing the archaeological sites and the area
that was not covered in the first survey of DoA (ECO Consult & DoA, 2017) ................................................... 3
Figure 78: Sites 1 – 4 ......................................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 79: Sites 5 - 8 .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 80: Sites 9 - 11 ........................................................................................................................................ 6
Figure 81: Sites located in close proximity to planned construction activities ................................................. 7
Figure 82: Schematic of Shobak Water System .............................................................................................. 13
Figure 83: Water Network of Shobak Water System in relation to the Project site. ...................................... 14
Figure 84: Location of Closest WWTP in Relation to Project Site ................................................................... 15
Figure 85: Shobak Transfer Station in Relation to the Project Site ................................................................. 16
Figure 86: Location of Ma’an Central Landfill in relation to the Project Site.................................................. 16
Figure 87: Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility in Relation to the Project Site ................................. 17
Figure 88: Location of project site in relation to nearby civil and military air bases ...................................... 18
Figure 89: Location of JRTV Broadcasting Tower ............................................................................................ 19
Figure 90: Southern Section of the Transportation Route .............................................................................. 20
Figure 91: Northern Section of the Transportation Route .............................................................................. 20
Figure 92: Local Communities Surrounding the Project Site .......................................................................... 27
Figure 93: Location of Noise Baseline Survey Receptors (R1, R2 and R3) ...................................................... 32
Figure 94: Noise Prediction Map for Site Preparation and Foundation Construction of all Turbines ............ 34
Figure 95: Noise Prediction Map for WTG Construction and Assembly ......................................................... 35
Figure 96: Sound Power Levels for Vestas V136 3.45 MW ............................................................................. 41
Figure 97: Noise Sensitive Receptors for the Project ...................................................................................... 43
Figure 98: Noise Propagation with the 35 dBA Limit ...................................................................................... 45
Figure 99: Noise Contour Map for Wind Farm – Worst-case, 10 m/s wind speed with All WTGs operating . 45
Figure 100: Relation between Position of Sun, Wind Direction and Occurrence of Shadows ....................... 50
Figure 101: Shadow Flicker Sensitive Receptors for the Project .................................................................... 52
Figure 102: Shadow Flicker Map for Worst Case Shadow for all WTGs Operating ........................................ 53
Figure 103: Local Communities to the Project Area ....................................................................................... 59
Figure 104: Wind Farm Projects in the Area ................................................................................................... 71
Figure 105: Route for the Overhead Transmission Line.................................................................................. 86
Figure 106: Land Ownership in relation to the OHTL...................................................................................... 90
Figure 107: MEGA Jordan Search Results ....................................................................................................... 90
Figure 108: Project Site in Relation to Grazing Reserves ................................................................................ 91
Figure 109: Project Site in Relation to Areas of Critical Environmental Concern ........................................... 91
PAGE | VIII
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 110: MoMA National Land Use Master Plan for the Project Site and its Surroundings ...................... 92
Figure 111: Shobak Water Supply Systems in Relation to the Project Site..................................................... 92
Figure 112: Location of WWTP in relation to Project Site .............................................................................. 93
Figure 113: Location of Swaqa Hazardous Dumpsite in relation to the Project Site ...................................... 93

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Summary of the ESIA Content ........................................................................................................... 19
Table 2: Administrative Setup of Ma’an Governorate .................................................................................... 21
Table 3: Summary of Key Project Components............................................................................................... 23
Table 4: Turbines Specifications ...................................................................................................................... 24
Table 5: Footprint of the Project Components ............................................................................................... 26
Table 6: Wind Turbine Alternatives Considered for the Project Development .............................................. 31
Table 7: Legislative Context for each E&S Parameter being Studied and Assessed within this ESIA ............. 37
Table 8: Overview of EBRD PR and IFC PS of Social and Environmental Sustainability .................................. 41
Table 9: Determination of Significance ........................................................................................................... 49
Table 10: List of Key Governmental Stakeholders .......................................................................................... 55
Table 11: List of Key NGO and Academic Institutional Stakeholders .............................................................. 56
Table 12: Methodology for Stakeholder Engagement .................................................................................... 57
Table 13: Summary of Comments Raised during Scoping Session and Response .......................................... 58
Table 14: List of Other Consultations during the ESIA .................................................................................... 62
Table 15: Impact Significance Rating .............................................................................................................. 68
Table 16: ZTV Visibility Rating in terms of proximity ...................................................................................... 70
Table 17: ZTV Visibility Rating in terms of Proximity for the different receptors of the project site ............. 76
Table 18: Shobak Castle Significance Rating ................................................................................................... 81
Table 19: Dawsaq Castle Significance Rating .................................................................................................. 82
Table 20: Al-Qadissyeh Significance Rating ..................................................................................................... 84
Table 21: Zaitooneh Village Significance Rating.............................................................................................. 85
Table 22: Faisaliyeh Village Significance Rating .............................................................................................. 86
Table 23: Mothallath Al-Shobak Town Significance Rating............................................................................. 88
Table 24: Al-Jaya Village Significance Rating ................................................................................................... 89
Table 25: Nejel Village Significance Rating...................................................................................................... 90
Table 26: Shamakh Village Significance Rating ............................................................................................... 91
Table 27: Bi’r Khidad Village Significance Rating ............................................................................................ 91
Table 28: Shobak Village 1 Significance Rating ............................................................................................... 92
Table 29: Shobak Village 2 Significance Rating ............................................................................................... 93
Table 30: Shobak Village 3 Significance Rating ............................................................................................... 94
Table 31: Shobak Village 4 Significance Rating ............................................................................................... 95
Table 32: King’s Highway Significance Rating ................................................................................................. 96
PAGE | IX
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 33: Route 814 Significance Rating ......................................................................................................... 97

Table 34: Highway 15 Significance Rating ....................................................................................................... 99
Table 35: Tourists Significance Rating (during operations)........................................................................... 100
Table 36: Average Significance Rating on Visual Receptors (during operations) ......................................... 100
Table 37: Land Use Classification of the Project Area by MOMA ................................................................. 104
Table 38: Areas of Critical Environmental Concern by MoEnv ..................................................................... 106
Table 39: Calculated Tc, Tp and Qp values .................................................................................................... 119
Table 40: Floral Species within the Site ........................................................................................................ 128
Table 41: Terrestrial Mammals recorded from the Vicinity of the Study Area............................................. 130
Table 42: Reptilian Species Known to Occur within the Study Area ............................................................. 130
Table 43: Reptiles Observed in the Study Area ............................................................................................. 131
Table 44: Target Species to be recorded by Flight Activity Surveys.............................................................. 135
Table 45: Level of effort of in-flight monitoring assessments per season .................................................... 136
Table 46: Species records and numbers during autumn monitoring, and their status according to IUCN Red
List of threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia (Symes et
al, 2015)......................................................................................................................................................... 139
Table 47: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different
vantage points in autumn monitoring. ......................................................................................................... 141
Table 48: Species records and numbers during the winter monitoring, and their status according to IUCN
Red List of threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia
(Symes et al, 2015). ....................................................................................................................................... 142
Table 49: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different
vantage points in winter monitoring. ........................................................................................................... 143
Table 50: Species records and numbers during the spring monitoring, and their status according to IUCN
Red List of threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia
(Symes et al, 2015). ....................................................................................................................................... 143
Table 51: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different
vantage points during spring monitoring...................................................................................................... 144
Table 52: Species records and numbers during summer monitoring, and their status according to IUCN Red
List of threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia (Symes et
al, 2015)......................................................................................................................................................... 146
Table 53: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different
vantage points during summer monitoring. ................................................................................................. 146
Table 54: Number of birds flying at risk height in the different seasons of monitoring in the different parts
of the project site .......................................................................................................................................... 148
Table 55: Total flight time at collision risk height in the different seasons in the different parts of the
project site. ................................................................................................................................................... 148
Table 56: Species recorded in the survey ..................................................................................................... 149
Table 57: Total number of observations, relative density (per hectare) and frequency of occurrence as
percent of point counts in each block of breeding species. ......................................................................... 153
Table 58: Magnitude of Impacts on Bird Species (ECO Consult, 2017)......................................................... 159
Table 59: Bat Species..................................................................................................................................... 165

PAGE | X
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 60: List of Archaeological Sites Recorded during the DoA survey and their location in relation to the
final project boundaries .................................................................................................................................... 4
Table 61: Shobak Well Fields........................................................................................................................... 13
Table 62: Anticipated Water Requirements for the Project ........................................................................... 21
Table 63: Table E.1, BS 5228-1 ‘ABC’ Method Thresholds .............................................................................. 29
Table 64: Noise Limits for Construction Noise ................................................................................................ 30
Table 65: Summary of Noise Measurements .................................................................................................. 31
Table 66: Summary of Baseline Noise Levels .................................................................................................. 31
Table 67: SoundPLAN Model Settings ............................................................................................................. 33
Table 68: Excavation and Foundation Construction Equipment ..................................................................... 33
Table 69: Turbine Assembly Construction Equipment .................................................................................... 33
Table 70: Noise Contour Map Setup Specification – ISO 9613-2 .................................................................... 34
Table 71: Predicted Contribution Noise Levels for Construction Activities .................................................... 35
Table 72: Assessment Periods and Noise Limits ............................................................................................. 35
Table 73: Assessment of Day-time / Evening Excavation and Foundation Construction Noise ..................... 36
Table 74: Assessment of Night-time Excavation and Foundation Construction Noise ................................... 36
Table 75: Assessment of Day-time / Evening WTG Assembly ......................................................................... 36
Table 76: Assessment of Night-time WTG Assembly ...................................................................................... 36
Table 77: VESTAS V136 3.45 MW Specification .............................................................................................. 40
Table 78: Model Calculation and Parameter Settings for ISO 9613-2 ............................................................ 42
Table 79: Receptor details and coordinates ................................................................................................... 43
Table 80: Noise contour map setup specification – ISO 9613-2 ..................................................................... 44
Table 81: Predicted Contribution Noise Levels (W10) .................................................................................... 44
Table 84: Proposed Noise Limits for WTG Noise Assessment ........................................................................ 46
Table; 85: Jordan Regulation Noise Impact Assessment for Day-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario .......... 46
Table 86: Jordan Regulation Noise Impact Assessment for Night-Time Period, Worst-Case Scenario .......... 46
Table 87: IFC Limit Level Noise Impact Assessment for Day-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario ................. 46
Table 88: IFC Limit Level Noise Impact Assessment for Night-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario............... 47
Table 89: IFC Background Level + 3dB Noise Impact Assessment for Day-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario
......................................................................................................................................................................... 47
Table 90: IFC Background Level + 3dB Noise Impact Assessment for Night-Time Periods, Worst-Case
Scenario ........................................................................................................................................................... 47
Table 91: Sensitive Receiver Locations fort Shadow Flicker Assessment ....................................................... 52
Table 92: Worst Case Shadow Flicker Values for Identified Sensitive Receivers ............................................ 52
Table 93: Socio-economic Assessment of the Local Communities ................................................................. 59
Table 94: Summary of Anticipated Impacts during the Planning and Construction Phase ............................ 67
Table 95: Summary of Anticipated Impacts during the Operation Phase....................................................... 68
Table 96: Summary of Anticipated Impacts during the Decommissioning Phase .......................................... 69
Table 97: Overall proposed institutional and procedural arrangement for ESMP Implementation .............. 73
Table 98: Roles and Responsibilities of Entities Involved in ESMP ................................................................. 74
PAGE | XI
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 99: ESMP for the Planning and Construction Phase.............................................................................. 76

Table 100: ESMP for the Operation Phase ...................................................................................................... 81
Table 101: Summary of Anticipated Impacts from Associated Facilities ........................................................ 87

PAGE | XII
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

ABBREVIATIONS
BOO Build, Operate and Transfer

CARC Civil Aviation Regulatory Commission

CBO Community Based Organization

CEA Cumulative Effect Assessment

DLS Department of Lands and Survey

DoA Department of Antiquities

DoS Department of Statistics

EHS Environment, Health and Safety

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EPC Engineering, Procurement and Construction

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plant

GWh Gega-Watt Hour

IBA Important Bird Area

IFC International Finance Corporation

IFI International Financing Institutions

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

JoD Jordanian Dinar

JRTV Jordan Radio and Television Corporation

kWh Kilo-Watt Hour

MCM Million Cubic Meters

MEMR Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources

MoA Ministry of Agriculture

MoEnv Ministry of Environment

MoH Ministry of Health

MoL Ministry of Labor

MoMA Ministry of Municipal Affairs

MoT Ministry of Transport

MW Mega Watt

PAGE | XIII
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

MWI Ministry of Water and Irrigation

NEPCO National Electric Power Company

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NTS Non-Technical Summary

OHTL Overhead Transmission Line

PPA Power Purchase Agreement

PS Performance Standard

RJAF Royal Jordanian Air Force

RSCN Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature

SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan

SNH Scottish Natural Heritage

TRC Telecommunication Regulatory Commission

VP Vantage Point

WAJ Water Authority of Jordan

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

PAGE | XIV
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN ARABIC

‫ﻤﻠﺨص ﺘﻨﻔﻴذي‬

PAGE | XV
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN ENGLISH

PAGE | XVI
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background
His Majesty King Abdullah Ibn Al Hussein II has charged His Royal Highness Prince Hamza Ibn Al Hussein
with the presidency of a Royal Commission to review and update the “Master Strategy of Energy Sector in
Jordan”, in order to meet the energy demands and challenges facing the energy sector in Jordan. In 2007,
the Royal Commission updated the Strategy and provided a vision for the development of the energy
sector till the year 2020 to become the “Updated Master Strategy of Energy Sector in Jordan for the period
(2007-2020)”. One of the main outcomes was the need to diversify energy resources and increase the
share of renewable energy to 7% in 2015 and 10% in 2020 – with the major share coming from wind and
solar power.

To this extent, and in accordance with “Updated Master Strategy”, the renewable energy sector in Jordan
is gaining momentum since a temporary Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Law was approved in
March 2010 and officially entered into force in April 2012, known as the “Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency Law No. (13) of the year 2012 and its amendments No. (33) of the year 2014”. With this law,
‘Direct Proposal Submission’ of renewable energy projects to the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources
(MEMR) was allowed, where investors (or developers) had the opportunity to develop renewable grid‐
connected electricity production projects.

Developers responded at the end of July 2011 by submitting Expressions of Interest (EOI) to MEMR.
Following the evaluation of such EOI, MEMR invited the shortlisted developers to enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the objective to undertake all due diligence needed in order
to submit a proposal for the proposed project. To this extent, Shobak Wind Power Company (hereafter
referred to as the ‘Developer’) has been qualified as an approved project developer by MEMR and signed a
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) in September 2016 for a total capacity of 45 MW.

The project will be implemented on a build, own and operate basis (BOO) with the developers signing a
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with national power utility NEPCO.

1.2 Project Location and Setting

The Project is located in Ma’an Governorate in the South of Jordan approximately 160km south of the
capital city of Amman. The Project is located within the District of Shobak which hosts 11 villages. The
closest villages to the Project site include Mdhaibie’ (also known as Al-Faisaliyeh and which is located
around 1km to south), Zaitooneh (located 1km to the west), Zobeiriyeh, (located around 1.3km to west)
and Mothallath Al-Shobak (located around 1km to the west). From a municipality perspective, the Project
site is located within Al-Shobak Al Jadeda Municipality but outside of the municipal administrative
boundary. The location of the Project site is presented in the figure below.

The Project area is around 14.5km2 with a maximum length of around 7.2km and a maximum width of
1.5km The Project site is all governmentally owned lands. Figure 1 below presents the location of the
Project site within Jordan.

PAGE | 17
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 1: Project Location in Relation to Amman and the Surrounding Human Settlements

The District of Shobak is located within the western parts of Ma’an Governorate near Tafileh and Aqaba
Governorates, in an area which is known to be part of Al-Sherah Heights. The Al-Sherah Heights are
characterized with their highlands which can reach up to 1,700m ASL (Above Sea Level), and its relatively
high rainfall and fertile soil unlike the majority of the Ma’an Governorate and specifically the eastern parts
which are characterized by its desert and barren nature.

1.3 The Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report

The environmental clearance for this Project is governed by the Ministry of Environment (MoEnv), as
stipulated by the “Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation No. (37) of 2005”. The MoEnv requires the
preparation of a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for such a Project before an
environmental permit is granted, in order to commence with construction and operational activities.

The Developer will be seeking financing for the Project from prospective lenders, including international
Financial Institutions (IFIs). Therefore, the Developer wishes to design and manage the project in
accordance with good international industry practice and standards. For the purpose of the ESIA this has
therefore been developed in accordance with:

 EBRD Environmental and Social Policy (2014) and Performance Requirements (PR)

 IFC Environmental& Social Sustainability Performance Standards (IFC, 2012);

 IFC General Environment, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines (IFC. 2007); and

 Applicable IFC Industry Sector EHS Guidelines – mainly the EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy (IFC, 2015).

ECO Consult was commissioned by Shobak Wind Power Company to prepare the Environmental and Social
Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the Project in order to apply for the necessary environmental permit. This
report is the ESIA report to be submitted to the MoEnv. This ESIA is undertaken in accordance to the
MoEnv’s ““Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation No. (37) of 2005” and the IFC Performance
Standards and EHS Guidelines and EBRD performance requirements.

PAGE | 18
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

1.4 Document Structure

Table 1 provides an overview of the Chapters within this ESIA document.

Table 1: Summary of the ESIA Content

Chapter Description of Content
Chapter 2 – Project Provides a detailed description of the Project in relation to its location, the key project
Description components and an overview of the proposed activities that are to take place during the
various Project phases.
Chapter 3 – Project Provides an analysis of certain alternatives to the Project development in relation to: (i)
Alternatives the Project site selection alternatives, (ii) the Project design, (iii) the chosen technology,
and finally investigates (iv) the ‘no action alternative’
Chapter 4 – Regulatory Provides an overview of the environmental clearance process for the Project as governed
and Policy Framework by the Ministry of Environment (MoEnv)
Chapter 5 – ESIA Presents the methodology and approach that was adopted for the ESIA study.
Approach and
Methodology
Chapter 6 – Stakeholder Discusses in detail the stakeholder consultation and engagement plans which were
Consultation and undertaken as part of the ESIA process for the Project and provides an overview of the
Engagement findings. In addition, this Chapter also discusses the future stakeholder engagement and
consultation plans which are to take place at a later stage.
Chapter 7 – Overview of This Chapter provides an overview of the significant positive environmental and
Strategic Environmental economical impacts that will result from the Project development on the strategic and
and Economical Impacts national level. The Chapter also highlights the site specific negative environmental and
social impacts anticipated from the Project throughout its various phases – each of which
is discussed in detail in the subsequent chapters.
Chapter 8 – Chapter 19 Presents the environmental and social attributes that will be studied throughout the ESIA.
This includes: landscape and visual (chapter 8), land use (chapter 9), geology and
hydrology – soil and groundwater (chapter 10), biodiversity (chapter 11), birds – avifauna
(chapter 12), bats (chapter 13), archaeology and cultural heritage (chapter 14), air quality
(chapter 15), infrastructure and utilities (chapter 16), community health, safety and
security (chapter 17), socio-economic conditions (chapter 18), and occupational health
and safety (chapter 19). For each attribute and where relevant, the baseline conditions
within the Project site and its surroundings was assessed. Each chapter then moves on to
identify and assess the potential impacts from the Project on each attribute and for each
impact a set of mitigation measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impacts to acceptable levels
Chapter 20 – Summary of Provides a summary of all the identified impacts discussed throughout the previous
Anticipated Impacts Chapters which are anticipated throughout the various phases of the Project to include
planning and construction phase, operation phase, and decommissioning phase.
Chapter 21 – Assessment This Chapter investigates the cumulative impacts which could result from other known
of Cumulative Impacts existing and/or planned developments in the area, and based on currently available
information on such existing/planned developments.
Chapter 22 – Presents the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) for the Project; which
Environmental and Social mainly summaries the impacts identified as well as the mitigation measures and
Management Plan monitoring requirements to be implemented throughout the various Project phases. In
(ESMP) addition, this Chapter describes the institutional framework and procedural arrangement
for the ESMP implementation.
Chapter 23 – Assessment provides an assessment of the anticipated impacts from the associated facilities to the
of Impacts from Project and which mainly include the OHTL
Associated Facilities

PAGE | 19
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

1.5 Project Proponent and Key Contributors

Different entities are involved in the planning and implementation of the Project. The responsibilities of
each key entity which is of relevance to the ESIA are listed in the text below along with a general
description of their roles.

 Shobak Wind Power Company (hereafter referred to as the ‘Developer’): owner and lead developer of
the Project. The company is owned by Alcazar Energy (70%) and Hecate (30%);

 Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) Contractor: The EPC Contractor will be responsible
for preparing the detailed design and layout of the Project; supply of the material, wind turbines, and
equipment; and construction of the internal access roads, crane pads, foundations, operation building
and the medium voltage and data interconnection between the individual wind turbines and the wind
farm substation. Vestas will be the EPC Contractor for this Project;

 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Contractor (or referred to as Project Operator): will be responsible
for the daily operation of the Project and undertaking all maintenance activities required for the
turbines and other utilities. O&M Contractor will also be Vestas;

 National Electric Power Company (NEPCO): is the national electricity company of Jordan with whom
Shobak Wind Power Company signed the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). NEPCO is responsible for
the high voltage electric grid in Jordan. For this Project, NEPCO will be responsible for designing and
building the high voltage overhead line from the Project substation till its connection to the existing
high voltage electric grid;

 The Ministry of Environment (MoEnv): the Regulator and the official governmental entity responsible
for the protection of the environment in Jordan. The MoEnv is responsible for the approval of the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study and making sure it complies with the “EIA Regulation
No. (37) of the year 2005” and responsible for granting the environmental clearance for the Project;

 ECO Consult: hereafter referred to as the ‘ESIA Team’ who is the ESIA Practitioner and the consultant
commissioned by Shobak Wind Power Company to prepare the Environmental and Social Impact
Assessment (ESIA) for the Project in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Environment
(MoEnv) and its “EIA Regulation No. (37) of the year 2005”. The ESIA will also be prepared in
accordance with EBRD Environmental and Social Policy and Performance Requirements (PR) and IFC
Performance Standards (PSs) and Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Guidelines.

PAGE | 20
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This Chapter provides a detailed description of the Project in relation to its location, the key project
components and an overview of the proposed activities that are to take place during the planning and
construction, operation, and decommissioning phase.

2.1 Administrative Setup of Project Location

It is important to highlight the administrative setup as framed by district and municipal boundaries within
Ma’an Governorate as those will be referred to many times throughout this document.

The Project is located in Ma’an Governorate in the South of Jordan approximately 160km south of the
capital city of Amman. Ma’an Governorate consists of 4 main districts and 4 main sub-districts that belong
to the District of Qasabit Ma’an (as highlighted in Table 2 below). From a municipality perspective, the
project site is located within Al-Shobak Al Jadeda Municipality but outside of the municipal administrative
boundary.
Table 2: Administrative Setup of Ma’an Governorate
Governorate District/Sub-District Municipalities
District of Qasabit Ma’an Ma’an Municipality
Eel Sub-district Al-Husseiniyeh Municipality
Al-Jafr Sub-district Al-Sherah Al Jadeda Municipality
Mregha Sub-district Al-Jafr Municipality
Ma’an Athroh Sub-district Al-Shobak Al Jadeda Municipality
District of Petra Eel Al Jadeda Municipality
District of Shobak Al-Asha’ri Municipality
District of Al-Husseiniyeh Petra Development and Tourism
Region Authority (PDTRA)

2.2 Project Location

The Project is located within Ma’an Governorate in the South of Jordan, approximately 160km south of the
capital city Amman. More specifically, the Project site is located within Shobak District which hosts several
villages. The closest villages to the Project site include Mdhaibie’ (also known as Al-Faisaliyeh and which is
located around 1km to south), Zaitooneh (located 1km to the west), Zobeiriyeh, (located around 1.3km to
west) and Mothallath Al-Shobak (located around 1km to the west). From a municipality perspective, the
Project site is located within Al-Shobak Al Jadeda Municipality but outside of the municipal administrative
boundary.

The proposed wind farm site is located within a hilly terrain area with altitudes ranging from around 1200
to about 1322m above sea level (a.s.l) as shown in Figure 2 below. The Project site has an area of around
14.5km2 (14,522 Dunums). The Project site can be accessed through Highway #15 also known as (Desert
highway) and which is located 13km east of the Project site. From Highway #15 an exit on the left connects
with (AlMolouky Highway) which leads directly to the Project site. As shown in Figure 3.

PAGE | 21
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 2: Elevation Profile of the Project Area

Figure 3: Project Area

The closest 132 kV transmission line is approximately 5 km north of the Project site as shown in Figure 4
below.

PAGE | 22
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 4: Facilities near the Project Site

2.3 Outline of Wind Turbine Technology

Wind turbine technology relies on harvesting the kinetic energy in wind (i.e. movement of wind) and
turning it into mechanical energy which in turn is used for electricity generation. To capture wind, turbines
consist of rotor blades which are elevated from the ground using towers to take advantage of faster and
less turbulent wind. As wind speed increases, the rotor blade begins to rotate which then spins a shaft that
is connected to a generator thereby converting wind energy to electricity.

Wind turbines produce Direct Current (DC) electricity from wind, which can be used for grid connected
power generation. However, electricity at the grid is usually in a different form (known as Alternating
Current (AC)) and thus inverters are used to convert DC current to AC current. In addition, wind turbines
produce electricity at a certain voltage which must be matched to the grid it connects to. Therefore,
transformers are used to convert the output to a higher voltage that matches the grid.

2.4 Project Components

Table 3 provides a summary of the key Project components for the Project, along with a detailed
description of each of those components below.
Table 3: Summary of Key Project Components
Component Description
Project Generation Capacity (MW) 44.85
Technology Type Wind Power
Number of Wind Turbines Vestas V136 3.45MW model (13 turbines)

Rated Power per Turbine (MW) 3.45

Rotor Diameter (m) 136

Hub Height (m) 112

Tip height (m) 180

2
Project area to be covered 14.5 km
Infrastructure and Utilities This includes: (i) internal road network; (ii) underground cables; (iii)
warehouse and offices; (iii) substation; and (iv) associated facilities.

PAGE | 23
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

2.4.1 Wind Turbines

Generally, a wind turbine consists of a foundation, tower, nacelle, rotor blades, a rotor hub, and a
transformer, see Figure 5 (a) below). The foundation is used to bolt the tower in place. The tower contains
the electrical conduits, supports the nacelle, and provides access to the nacelle for maintenance. Typically,
three (3) blades are connected to the hub which then connects with the nacelle; the box-like component
that sits atop the tower and which most importantly contains the gear box (which steps up the revolutions
per minute to a speed suitable for the electrical generator) and the generator (which converts the kinetic
energy into electricity).

Figure 5: (a) Typical Structural Components of a Wind Turbine, (b) Typical Components of a Wind Farm (Source: EHS
Guidelines for Wind Energy, IFC)

The designated EPC Contractor for this Project will be Vestas. The EPC Contractor will be supplying the
wind turbines and preparing the detailed design of the Project. Table 4 presents the specifications of the
wind turbines that Vestas will be supplying while Figure 6 below presents the layout prepared by Vestas.
Table 4: Turbines Specifications
Company Technology Project Number of Turbine Hub Rotor Tip
Size Turbines Size Height Diameter Height
(MW) (MW) (m) (m) (m)
Vestas V-136 3.45MW 44.85 13 3.45 112 136 180

The project was prepared to show the layout of wind turbines within the Project site, see Figure 6. In
addition, the wind farm design has been subject to an intensive process which took into account technical
criteria (wind resources in the specific Project site, spacing between the turbines to minimize wake effects
which could lead to a decreased wind energy production, accessibility to the turbines, etc.) as well as
environmental considerations as presented throughout this ESIA.

As discussed earlier, according to the detailed design there will be 13 turbines spread out throughout the
Project site. Foundations will be constructed to bolt the tower of the turbine in place. The EPC Contractor
will be constructing 13 foundations (one for each turbine) – no details were available for the specifications
for the foundations however they are likely to be around 300m2 in area. In addition, each turbine is
equipped with a transformer that converts/steps up the output from the turbine to a higher voltage (from
11kV to 33kV) to meet a specific utility voltage distribution level that is appropriate for connection with a
substation (explained in detail below). Each turbine will also be equipped with an inverter that will convert
electricity from the turbine from DC current to AC current.
PAGE | 24
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 6: Turbine Layout

2.4.2 Infrastructure and Utilities

The following highlights the infrastructure and utilities requirements of the Project.

 Medium Voltage Cables: The wind turbines will be connected through medium voltage cables (33kV)
to a substation located within the Project site. It is likely that the connection between the turbines and
the substation will be made using underground transmission cables buried in ground by trenches.

 Substation: the substation will be located onsite and is a high voltage transformer substation that
collects and converts the output from the turbines to a higher voltage (from 33 kV to 132 kV) that is
appropriate for connection with the High Voltage National Grid (132 kV), see Figure 7.

The turbines will be connected to the national grid through a new overhead line (OHL) with a length of
approximately 5.0 km is required to transport the power to existing Al Fujeij substation (refer back to
Figure 4) which will be under the responsibility of the National Electric Power Company (NEPCO).

 Other infrastructure and utilities in the Project site could include the following:

- Building Infrastructure: onsite building infrastructure could be required for the daily operation of
the Project. This could include an administrative building (offices) used for normal daily operational
related work and a warehouse for storage of equipment and machinery such as spare parts, oil,
fuel, lubricants, etc.
- A crane pad next to each wind turbine to accommodate cranes for the installation of the wind
turbines and for maintenance activities during operation. The crane pads will be suitable to
support loads required for the erection, assembly an operation and maintenance of the turbines;
and
- Road network: a road network will be required for installation of the turbines during the
construction process and for ease of access to the turbines for maintenance purposes during
operation.

PAGE | 25
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 7: Typical 33/132kV Substation

2.5 Footprint of the Project Components

This section provides an estimate on the footprint of the Project taking into account the components
discussed in the previous section. The number and figures have been based on either preliminary
information provided by Vestas or based on previous experiences from wind farm developments in Jordan.

As noted in the table below, the total area of disturbance for the project is significantly small and is less
than 1% of the Project area (which is 15km2). As discussed earlier, this number is based on preliminary
numbers available at this stage and could be subject to change at a later stage of the project development,
see Table 5.
Table 5: Footprint of the Project Components
Component Footprint Description
2
Turbines 0.02km This includes the footprint for the foundation and the crane
pad area for each of the 13 turbines. Each crane pad is likely to
2
be around 1,500m in area (38m in width and 40m in length),
2
whereas each foundation is likely to be around 300m in area.
2
Substation and Warehouse 0.02 km Includes footprint of the substation area and all building
and Storage facilities facilities.
2
Trenches for MV cables and 0.04 km Trenches are likely to be around 8km in length and a width of
communication cables around 6m.
2
Road networks 0.05 km Road network is likely to be around 8.5km in length and a
width of around 6m.
2
Total Project Footprint 0.13 km Project footprint is around 0.9% of the total boundary of the
2
Total Project site Boundary 15km Project area.
Area

2.6 Overview of Project Phases

This section presents the likely activities to take place during the Project development and which will
include three distinct phases: (i) planning and construction, (ii) operation and (iii) decommissioning each of
which is summarized below.

PAGE | 26
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

2.6.1 Planning and Construction Phase

The typical activities that will take place during the planning and construction phase for wind farms include
the following:

 Preparation of the detailed design and layout of wind turbines within the Project site in addition to the
various other infrastructure/utility elements (buildings, roads, substation, etc.);
 Transportation of wind turbine components to the Project site. The components are expected to be
transported to the Port of Aqaba and then transported by road to the Project site;
 Site preparation of the turbine foundation. Such activities are limited to relatively small individual
footprints of the foundations and will include excavations and land clearing activities for bolting of the
tower to the foundation;
 Installation of turbine components to include tower assembly, hub, rotor, and nacelle lift and rotor
assembly which most likely will occur through onsite mobile cranes;
 In addition to the erection of each turbine, there is additional construction work (which could include
excavations, land clearing activities, electrical work, etc.) that must be conducted to connect each
turbine to the power grid, this could include the installation and laying of transmission and
communication cables, and the installation of the substation;
 Internal road network and foundation construction; and
 Other construction works (which could include excavations, land clearing activities, etc.) for the
potential access road construction or upgrade and for the building infrastructure (warehouse and
offices).

There is additional construction works to be undertaken for the associated facilities by NEPCO discussed
earlier, and which include the NEPCO substation and the overhead high voltage transmission line.

2.6.2 Operation Phase

 Commissioning tests of the wind farm which usually involves standard electrical tests for the electrical
infrastructure as well as the turbine, and inspection of routine civil engineering quality records. Careful
testing at this stage is vital if a good quality wind farm is to be delivered and maintained.
Commissioning of an individual turbine can take little more than two days with experienced staff;
 Normal daily operation of the wind farm. The long-term availability of a commercial wind turbine is
usually in excess of 97 percent (i.e. 97% of the time, the turbine will be available to work); and
 Maintenance will also take place through a dedicated team. Typical routine maintenance time for a
modern wind turbine is 40 hours per year. Non-routine maintenance may be of a similar order.
Although minimal, maintenance activities may include turbine and rotor maintenance, lubrication of
parts, washing of blades, maintenance of electrical components, full generator overhaul, etc.

2.6.3 Decommissioning Phase

According to the PPA agreement signed between the Developer and NEPCO, MEMR has the option to
acquire the Project at the end of the PPA term (set for 20 years) and continue operating it at a mutually
agreed price with the Developer. If MEMR and the Developer cannot agree on such a price, then the
Project will be completely decommissioned. Therefore, there are two (2) scenarios for the
decommissioning phase of the Project as follows:

 MEMR acquisition: the most dominant scenario is that once selected, a well-sited wind farm remains in
operation, as well as the tracks, gates, distribution network tie-ins and local maintenance resources;
it’s cheaper to repower a site than to establish a new site. This means that an out-of-date wind turbine
PAGE | 27
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

is replaced with a working turbine of equivalent or even better faceplate generation capacity. As such,
wind farms will generally see replacement of old turbines and emplacement of new wind turbines in
adjacent areas; or
 Decommissioning: in the case of complete decommissioning of a wind turbine, which is a low-
likelihood scenario, the tower and blades of the removed wind turbine will be taken down by crane,
disassembled into components, and then the turbine will be refurbished at source and used elsewhere
for another Project. The base will typically be left in place and covered by gravel and peat or loam.
Tracks used for maintenance vehicles will be restored and can be kept as agricultural routes (given that
the road network will be mostly built on the existing agricultural routes). Gates and fences will be
removed.

2.6.4 Project Schedule

Construction of the Project is anticipated to commence around the second quarter of 2018, and will
require approximately 16 months for construction and commissioning (i.e. October 2019). Operation of the
project is therefore anticipated to commence in November 2019 for a period of 20 years as agreed with
NEPCO and based on the PPA signed.

2.7 Workforce and Training

According to information provided by the Developer, the Project will require the following workforce
throughout the construction and operation phase:

 Around 60 job opportunities during the construction phase for a duration of approximately 16 months.
This will mainly include skilled opportunities (to include engineers, technicians, consultants, surveyors.)
and unskilled job opportunities (mainly labour force but will also include a number of security of
security personnel).
 Around 3 job opportunities during the operation phase for a duration of 20 years. This will include
skilled job opportunities (such as technicians) and unskilled job opportunities (such as drivers.). This
number does not take into account the security personnel that will be required onsite.
Taking the above into account, the Developer is aiming to hire local community members to the greatest
extent possible throughout the construction and operation phase for skilled and unskilled jobs.

2.8 Resource Use Efficiency

The objective of this section is to demonstrate how the Project development has endeavoured to optimize
the use of all natural resources (fossil fuels, water, etc.) involved in the Project processes.

 One of the key positive impacts of the Project, as far as resource efficiency, is that it will be utilizing
wind energy to produce electricity. The Project is expected to be of an installed capacity of 45MW and
will contribute to supplying electricity to the national grid for the use of bulk suppliers and help meet
the increasing electricity demands throughout the Kingdom – as opposed to meeting such increasing
demands through electricity production from conventional thermal power plants using fossil fuels. The
Project is expected to provide 174 Gigawatt Hour (GWh) of electricity per year, which is enough to
power over 18,000 average local households in Jordan. This has been based on taking into account that
in 2014 (latest statistic) the annual electricity consumption of households in Jordan was 6,580 GWh
(MEMR, 2015) while the number of households in 2014 in Jordan was 1,590,762 (DoS, 2015) and thus
the average annual electricity consumption can be assumed to be around 4,100 Kilowatt Hour (kWh).
 To this extent, the generation of electricity through a renewable source will offset greenhouse gas
emissions as opposed to generating electricity from conventional thermal power plants – which is
PAGE | 28
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

currently utilized for producing electricity in Jordan through the burning of natural gas and/or heavy
fuel oil. According to the International Energy Association’s (IEA) “Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from
Fuel Combustion” (IEA, 2013) the CO2 emitted per kWh for electricity generation in Jordan in 2011 was
estimated at around 0.64kg (latest statistic). The Project is expected to provide around 174 GWh of
electricity per year; this will offset more than 111,000 ton of CO2 per year, apart from the reduction of
air pollutants emitted from conventional thermal power plants – such as ozone, sulphur dioxide (SO2),
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), particulate matter, and other gases which are the cause of some serious
environmental concerns such as smog, acid rain, health effects, and many others.
 The nature of operation of wind farms does not entail the use of significant amounts of water
resources during the construction and operation phase. Thus, the water requirements of the Project
are minimal and mainly required for the potable use by workers during the construction and operation
phase – which are also considered to be relatively small in number.

PAGE | 29
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

3. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The “Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation No. (37) of 2005” requires that the ESIA shall identify
and analyse alternatives, including but not limited to project site location, design, technology, no project
alternative (which assumes that the Project development does not take place), and present the main
reason for the preferred choice. In addition, the examination of alternatives is also considered to be a key
element of the ESIA process under good international practice, including the “IFC Performance Standard 1”
(IFC, 2012) and the associated “IFC Guidance Note 1” (IFC, 2012).

This chapter provides an analysis of certain alternatives to the Project development in relation to: (i) the
Project site selection alternatives, (ii) the Project design, (iii) the chosen technology, and finally investigates
(iv) the ‘no action alternative’ – which assumes that the Project development does not take place. Based
on such alternatives considered, the preferred choice for the Project was chosen and which was presented
in “Chapter 2”.

Throughout this chapter the application of the environmental and social mitigation hierarchy has been
presented (avoid; reduce; mitigate and manage, and compensate and offset), given that environmental
and social considerations have been part of the planning of the Project since its inception and a core
element of the decision-making process.

3.1 Site Selection Alternatives

MEMR has installed wind measurements stations throughout the Kingdom to undertake wind
measurement campaigns. In 2009, MEMR assigned an international consultant to identify priority locations
for wind farm developments based on the outcomes of such wind measurement stations. A wind map for
Jordan has been created (Figure 8) which presents the priority development areas for wind farms. In
general, such assigned areas are located in the south west of Jordan in Tafileh, Ma’an and Aqaba
Governorates, in the north east of Jordan in Mafraq Governorate, and in the north of Jordan in Irbid
Governorate.

Initially the Project site was chosen within a priority area for wind farm development projects and was
located in Ajloun Governorate in northern Jordan. Generally, MEMR allow developers to select their
proposed sites and bring land lease agreements from land owners. At the same time, criteria was followed
in order to make sure that MEMR are not liable for such selections. A certain buffer zone must be
maintained between wind farms to ensure that Project adverse impacts on power production. Projects that
have already signed agreements have precedence over proposed projects.

Preliminary mapping of the project site and several turbine layouts were drafted. A series of preliminary
ecological assessments were carried out in the proposed site. Based on the findings of the assessments
that paralleled consultations with environmental stakeholders, it was decided to move the project site
away from the proposed location. The main reasons for this decision could be summarized in the following:

 The project location was in natural forest area and it was expected that some forest cover could be lost
during the project development. Taking into consideration that Jordan is a forest-poor country that has
less than 1% of its surface area covered in forests, and through consultation with RSCN, the Developer
has taken the decision of moving the project away from that part of the country.
 The project location was close to sensitive receptors, especially human settlements. Taking into
consideration that the northern part of the country is a much more densely populated area in
comparison to the south, it was found while applying several turbine layouts that the issue of close
adjacency to human settlements will be a major challenge that will be facing the project at several
stages of its development.
Based on the above, an alternative land for the Project development was selected in Ma’an governorate –
in Shobak. In order to select the alternative land, the Developer took into account additional factors which
are discussed below.
PAGE | 30
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

1) Distance to Key Sensitive Receptors: priority was given for the selection of a site that is located at a
reasonable distance from any key potential sensitive receptors such as community settlements. The
closest villages to the Project site include Mdhaibie’ (also known as Al-Faisaliyeh and which is located
around 1km to south), Zaitooneh (located 1km to the west), Zobeiriyeh, (located around 1.3km to west)
and Mothallath Al-Shoubak (located around 1km to the west).
2) Proximity to Road Network: priority was given for the selection of a site that is close to a road network.
This substantially reduces the need for access roads to the Project site which in this case is kept to
minimum. Besides reduced costs, this would avoid environmental impacts associated with the
construction of roads.

Figure 8: Wind Map of Jordan with Promising Location for Wind Farm Developments

3.2 Design Alternatives

From the onset of the Project development, the Developer approached different turbine providers/EPC
contractors for the Project’s development. At that time, they provided preliminary designs for the layout of
the turbines and technologies selected in accordance with the Project’s specifications (available area,
Project size, etc.). The technologies that were considered are summarized in Table 6.
Table 6: Wind Turbine Alternatives Considered for the Project Development
Company Technology Project Number of Turbine Hub Rotor Tip
Size Turbines Size Height Diameter Height
(MW) (MW) (m) (m) (m)
GAMESA G114 55 22 2.5 120 114 174

Goldwind GW121 55 22 2.5 - 121 -

Vestas V-136 45 13 3.6 112 136 180

3.45MW

PAGE | 31
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

At this stage, the Developer has selected Vestas as an EPC Contractor for the Project. Throughout the ESIA,
assessment and modelling was conducted for the design and layout selected. Given that the Project site is
at a far distance from surrounding residential areas and is located in a vacant area with no key visual
receptors or particular structures in the Project site itself, there are no prevailing issues or impacts to be
taken into account during the design alternatives.

3.3 Technology Alternatives

This section discusses several alternatives besides the development of a wind farm project. This mainly
includes other renewable energy alternatives suitable for Jordan in general (mainly solar power projects),
as well as other technological alternatives for power generation such conventional thermal power plants.

3.3.1 Solar Power Projects

Similar to the wind map which was prepared for Jordan, MEMR has also prepared a solar map which also
presents the priority development areas for solar projects. Figure 9 below presents the location of the
Project site in relation to those areas.

As noted in the figure, in general Jordan has abundant solar energy which is evident from the total annual
solar irradiance – considered to be one of the highest in the world. Within Jordan, the southern region has
the highest solar isolation in the country and the lowest diffuse irradiance, making it an ideal location for
the development of solar projects. This is followed by other areas in the middle, northern and eastern
parts which are also considered to have huge potential for development of solar projects.

On the other hand, the white regions in the map are considered to be the lowest; although they still have
potential for development of solar projects, but the natural characteristics of those areas are likely to be
considered unsuitable for the development of solar projects on a commercial scale as feasible as those in
other areas denoted above. The Project site is located in the white areas as presented in the figure below.

In addition, another important point to mention is that the Government of Jordan’s “Updated Master
Strategy of the Energy Sector in Jordan for the period (2007-2020)”, advocates for the diversification of
energy resources and increasing the share of renewable energy to 7% in 2015 and 10% in 2020. The
Strategy advocates for the development of both solar and wind energy, and not just solar. Therefore, the
development of such a Project is in line with the Government of Jordan’s “Updated Master Strategy of the
Energy Sector in Jordan for the period (2007-2020)”.

PAGE | 32
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 9: Solar Map of Jordan with Location of Project site

3.3.2 Thermal Power Plants

Other energy generation alternatives suitable to be built in Jordan include conventional thermal power
plants which are fuelled with natural gas and/or heavy fuel oil, similar to others already existent in the
country.

Despite the advantages that a solution of this kind would entail ‐ such as a potential bigger energy
generation capacity or the creation of more jobs during both construction and operation ‐ the
disadvantages would be significant; especially those related to environmental impacts. Conventional
thermal power plans are well known for their environmental impacts when compared to this Project and
could include significantly higher water consumption, generation of air pollutants and greenhouse gas
emissions, etc. More importantly, as noted earlier such developments would not be in line with the
Government of Jordan’s “Updated Master Strategy of the Energy Sector in Jordan for the period (2007-
2020)”, which in broad terms advocates for the diversification of energy resources and increasing the share
of renewable energy to 7% in 2015 and 10% in 2020.

3.4 No Project Alternative

The ‘no project’ alternative assumes that the 45MW Project will not be developed. Should this be the case,
then the Project site area would remain the same. The land area would remain with its current
characteristics – an area that is heavily degraded with few rangeland patches of low vegetation cover.

PAGE | 33
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Should the Project not move forward, then the Project‐related negative environmental impacts discussed
throughout this ESIA would be averted. However, as noted throughout the ESIA, generally such impacts do
not pose any key issues of concern and can be adequately controlled and mitigated through the
implementation of the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) discussed in “Chapter 22”.
Nevertheless, should the Project not move forward, then the significant and crucial positive economic and
environmental benefits would not be realized. Such benefits include the following:

 Contribute to increasing energy security through development of local energy resources and reducing
dependency on external energy sources;
 Producing clean energy contributes to lowering electricity generation costs compared to the current
costs associated with liquid fuels and thus leads to a decrease in the Government of Jordan’s fiscal
deficit;
 This development allows for more sustainable development and shows the commitment of the
Government of Jordan to realizing the energy strategy;
 The clean energy produced from renewable energy resources is expected to reduce consumption of
alternative liquid fuels for electricity generation in Jordan, and will thus help in reducing greenhouse
gas emissions, as well as air pollutant emissions; and
 Project is expected during the construction and operation phase to generate local employment and
commit to other social responsibilities. As such, this is expected, to a certain extent, to subsequently
enhance the socio‐economic conditions and standards of living of the local communities.

In conclusion, an ESIA must investigate all potential positive and negative impacts from a project
development. In the case of this Project, it is important to weigh the significant positive economic and
environmental impacts incurred from the Project development, against the negative environment impacts
anticipated at the site specific level – in which generally this ESIA concludes to be minor in nature and can
be adequately controlled. The comparison in this chapter clearly concludes that the ‘no project’ alternative
is not a preferable option.

PAGE | 34
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

4. REGULATORY AND POLICY FRAMEWORK

This chapter first provides an overview of the environmental clearance process for the Project as governed
by the Ministry of Environment (MoEnv). The Chapter then discusses the regulatory context, which is
directly related to environmental compliance, which must be adhered to by all parties involved in the
Project throughout the planning and construction, operation, and decommissioning. The Chapter goes on
to summarize the relevant international agreements and conventions to which Jordan is a signatory.
Finally, as the Project is seeking financing from prospective lenders, the chapter highlights the
environmental and social policies and requirements of the EBRD and IFC, which must be adhered to by the
Developer.

4.1 Jordanian Environmental Clearance Process

The process for environmental clearance and obtaining the environmental permit for this Project as
required by the MoEnv is stipulated by the “Environmental Protection Law No. (6) of 2017”,
“Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation No. (37) of 2005”, and the “Instructions for Site Selection of
Development Projects for the year 2016”.

Generally, the environmental clearance process, as governed by the MoEnv, is a two (2) step process. First,
the developer of the Project, and prior to commencement of the ESIA study, must apply for a site approval
permit in accordance with the “Instructions for Site Selection of Development Projects of 2016”. The
second step involves undertaking the ESIA study for the Project in accordance with the “Environmental
Impact Assessment Regulation No. (37) of 2005”.

Both steps are discussed in additional details below.

4.1.1 Location/Site Approval Permit and Environmental Assessment Requirements

 Location/Site Approval Permit Application: The Project Owner/Developer applies to the ‘Central
Licensing Committee’ within the MoEnv of the intention to undertake a development project using the
application form available at the MoEnv. The ‘Central Licensing Committee’ includes representatives
from the MoEnv as well as other governmental authorities to include: Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry
of Health, Ministry of Water and Irrigation, Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Greater Amman Municipality,
Energy and Minerals Regulatory Commission, and the Jordan Food and Drug Administration. The
application lists the information required by the ‘Central Licensing Committee’ and which includes:
- General information on the location of the project supported by a site map;
- A brief description of the planned project, purpose and nature, capacity, major components, etc.;
- Implementation schedule for the proposed project at different phases and other.
 Location/Site Approval Permit Decision: The ‘Central Licensing Committee’, upon receipt of the
application, evaluates the data submitted and undertakes a site visit to determine the appropriateness
of the site for the proposed development. Generally, this is decided based on requirements from the
MoEnv stipulated within the “Instructions for Site Selection of Development Projects for the year
2016” stipulated in accordance to Article No. 4 of the “Environmental Protection Law No. 6 for the Year
2017”. The 2016 instruction identifies requirements on the setting of development projects and
minimum distances that must be respected in relation to nearby sensitive receptors (including
renewable energy projects). Based on the findings of the site visit, the Committee either approves the
site of the project or rejects the site for the development.
The Central Licensing Committee approved the site for the development of the Project on the condition
that a comprehensive ESIA study is undertaken.
 Screening Decision/ESIA Requirement: As part of the same decision process, the ‘Central Licensing
Committee’ determines whether or not the proposed development project is subject to a formal
Environmental Assessment procedure. The EIA Regulation lists the projects that require a full EIA or a
PAGE | 35
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment study. Any project which may have a significant impact
on the environment is classified into Category 1 which refers to projects in Annex 2 of this regulation.
Category 1 projects require the preparation of a comprehensive EIA before permission to operate (or
license to begin construction) can be given. Annex 2 of the Regulation requires that any project
generating energy/electricity is requested a comprehensive EIA study.
In accordance with the above, the MoEnv has officially requested that the Developer undertake a
comprehensive ESIA study for the Project.

4.1.2 EIA Study & Environmental Permit

 EIA Technical Committee: in the case of a Project where the ‘Central Licensing Committee’ rule that
EIA is required, then the matter is transferred from the ‘Central Licensing Committee’ at MoEnv to the
‘EIA Technical Committee’ within the same Ministry and the ESIA Study procedures are officially
started. The ‘EIA Technical Committee’ also includes representatives from the MoEnv as well as other
governmental authorities to include: Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Water and
Irrigation, Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Ministry of Public Works and Housing, Ministry of Planning and
International Cooperation, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, Ministry of Industry and Trade,
and the Environmental Societies Association (which forms the umbrella for the all environmental
NGO’s in Jordan).

 EIA Study Phases: In summary, two successive phases of activities are involved in the completion of a
comprehensive EIA study in Jordan:
- Scoping Phase: which includes the submission of a Pre-Scoping Report, undertaking a scoping
session, and submission of a Scoping Report/Terms of Reference (ToR) approved by MoEnv for the
Study; and

- Assessment Phase: which includes undertaking the baseline studies, evaluation and assessment of
impacts, and the development of an environmental management plan.

 Scoping Phase: The scoping phase proceeds with the submission of a Pre-scoping report to the
Ministry. This provides the MoEnv with all available information about the Project as well as the nature
of impacts expected to result from the project and the relevant persons affected in order to initiate the
EIA process by calling for a Scoping and Consultation Session. Then a scoping session is undertaken
and following this a Scoping Report/ToR is submitted to the MoEnv which will include the issues
addressed in the Pre-scoping Report in addition to other valid comments raised by the stakeholders
during the scoping session. The report will also include a detailed Terms of Reference (ToR) that will
present the methodology that will be adopted for the ESIA study. This report must be approved by
MoEnv, prior to undertaking the ESIA study.
In accordance with the above, the scoping session for the Project was held on 10 January 2017 and the
ToR was submitted and approved on 15 February 2017.

 Assessment Phase: The assessment phase is carried out in accordance with the approved ToR by the
MoEnv and involves undertaking the baseline studies, impact assessment and development of
management plans for various components that are expected to be impacted by the project and its
activities. The ESIA document is the output of the assessment, prepared in accordance with the ToR.

 Approval of ESIA: Upon submission of the ESIA document, the EIA Technical Committee reviews the
report and either approves the study and grants the environmental clearance for the Project or rejects
the Project if the study indicates that the implementation of the Project would cause significant
impacts on the environment and/or the ESIA fails to identify plans for reducing adverse impacts. In
order to issue the environmental permit for the Project environmental clearance is required.

PAGE | 36
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

In accordance with the above, this report is the final ESIA report that is to be submitted to the MoEnv
for review.

4.2 Summary of Jordanian Environmental and Social Regulatory Context

This section lists those legislations that are directly related to environmental and social compliance that
must be adhered to by all parties involved in the Project throughout the planning and construction,
operation, and decommissioning phase. These legislations include: (i) those issued by MoEnv (laws,
regulations and instruction), and (ii) the relevant national legislations issued by other line ministries (laws,
regulations, instructions, standards).

Table 7 below lists the key legislation and regulator/entity relevant to each of the environmental and social
parameter being studied and assessed within this ESIA. Throughout the following Chapters, reference to
the requirements set out within legislation is provided under each relevant parameter.
Table 7: Legislative Context for each E&S Parameter being Studied and Assessed within this ESIA
Parameter Responsible Regulator/Entity and Relevant Legislations
Pre-ESIA Compliance Requirements
Site Selection  Ministry of Environment (MoEnv):
Process - Environmental Protection Law No. 6 of 2017
- Instruction for Site Selection of Development Projects for the year 2016
ESIA and Post ESIA Requirements
Landscape and  Ministry of Environment (MoEnv):
Visual - Environmental Protection Law No. 6 of 2017
Land Use  Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MoMA)
- Municipalities Law No. Law No. 41 for the year 2015
- Land Use Planning Regulation no. (6) for the Year 2007
 Ministry of Environment (MoEnv):
- Environmental Protection Law No. 6 for the year 2017
 Ministry of Agriculture (MoA):
- Agriculture Law No. 13 for the year 2015
Geology and  Ministry of Environment (MoEnv)
Hydrology (soil and - Environmental Protection Law No. 6of 2017
groundwater) - Solid Waste Management Regulation No. (27) of 2005
- Management, Transportation, & Handling of Harmful & Hazardous Substances Regulation No. (24) of
2005,
- Instruction for Management and Handling of Consumed Oils for 2003,
- Instruction for Hazardous Waste Management for the year 2003
 Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI)
- Water Authority Law No. 18 for 1988 and it’s amendments thereof
- Groundwater Control Regulation No. 85 for 2002 and its amendments thereof
- Instructions for the Protection of Water Resources Allocated for Drinking Purposes for 2006
 Ministry of Health (MoH)
- Public Health Law No. 47 for 2008
 Jordan Institution for Standards and Metrology (JISM)
- Jordanian Standard 431/1985 – General Precautionary Requirements for Storage of Hazardous
Materials
 Ministry of Environment (MoEnv)
- Environmental Protection Law No. 6 of 2017
Biodiversity  Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)
- Agriculture Law No. 13 of 2015
- Regulation for Categorizing Wild Birds and Animals Banded from Hunting No.43 of 2008
 Ministry of Environment (MoEnv)
- Environmental Protection Law No. 6 of 2017
Avi-Fauna (Birds and
 Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)
Bats)
- Agriculture Law No. 13 of 2015
- Regulation for Categorizing Wild Birds and Animals Banded from Hunting No.43 of 2008
Archaeology  Department of Antiquities (DoA)
- Antiquities Law No. 21 of 1988 and its amendments No. 23 for 2004
Air Quality  Ministry of Environment (MoEnv)
- Environmental Protection Law No. 6 for the year 2017
PAGE | 37
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Parameter Responsible Regulator/Entity and Relevant Legislations

- Air Protection Regulation No. 28 for 2005
 Jordan Institution for Standards and Metrology (JISM)
- JS 1140-2006 Ambient Air Quality
 Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI)
- Water Authority Law No. 18 for the year 1988 and it’s amendments thereof
- Groundwater Control Regulation No. 85 for 2002 and its amendments thereof
- Instructions for the Protection of Water Resources Allocated for Drinking Purposes for 2006
 Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MoMA)
- Municipalities Law No. Law No. 13 for the year 2011
 Ministry of Environment:
- Environmental Protection Law No. 6 for the year 2017
- Instruction for Hazardous Waste Management for the year 2003
Infrastructure and  Civil Aviation Regulatory Commission
Utilities - Civil Aviation Law No. 41 for the year 2007
 Telecommunication Regulatory Commission
- Telecommunications Law No.21 for the year 2011
 Jordan Radio and Television Corporation
- Jordan Radio and Television Corporation Law No. 35 for the year 2000
 Ministry of Interior
- Traffic Law No. 49 for the year 2008
- Regulations for the Registration and Licensing of Vehicles No. 104 for 2008
- Regulation for Maximum Dimensions, Weights and Total Engine Power for Vehicles No. 42 of 2002
- Instructions for Allowable Speed Limits for 2002
Occupational Health  Ministry of Labor (MoL)
and Safety - Labor Law No. 8 for the year 1996 and its amendments
- Regulation of Protection and Safety from Industrial Tools and Machines and Work Sites No. 43 for
1998 and its amendment thereof
- Formation of Committees and Supervisors of Occupational Health and Safety Regulation No. 7 for
1998
- Instructions for the Protection of Workers against the Risks of the Work Environment
- Regulation for Preventive and Curative Health Care for Workers in Establishments No. 42 for 1998 and
its amendments thereof
- Regulation for the Fees of Work Permits for Non-Jordanians No. 67 for 2014 and its amendments
thereof
- Regulation for Labour Inspectors No. 56 of 1996
- Decision for the Works and Times prohibiting the employment of Women 2010
- Decision for the Hazardous or Exhaustive or Harmful Works on Health for under 18 years of age 2011
 Ministry of Health (MoH)
- Public Health Law No. 47 for 2008
- Crafts and industries Law No.16 for the year 1953 and its amendments thereof
- Instructions for Prevention of Health Nuisances from Workers Accommodation No. (1) for the year
2013
- Health General Conditions for Crafts and Industries for the Year 2013
Community Health,  Ministry of Environment (MoEnv)
Safety, and Security - Environmental Protection Law No. 6 for the year 2017
- Instruction for Reduction and Prevention of Noise for 2003
 Ministry of Health
- Public Health Law No. 47 for the year 2008
 National Building Council – Ministry of Public Works and Housing (MPWH)
Socio-economic - Regulation for Obligatory Employment of Jordanian Workforce from Surrounding Communities in
Development Projects No. (131) for the year 2016

4.3 International Agreements

The Government of Jordan is signatory to a number of important international agreements which relate to
the topics addressed in this ESIA, and has already incorporated many of the provisions in national
legislation, often indicating that where the national law is inconsistent with international agreements to
which Jordan is a signatory, the requirements of the international agreement will prevail. Accordingly, the
terms of international agreements to which Jordan is a party are an important part of the legal framework
within which the Project operates. Key Treaties and obligations are described below.

PAGE | 38
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

4.3.1 International Agreements on Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

These include the following:

 Convention on Biological Diversity (1993) – signed by Jordan in 1993. Under this agreement, signatories
are required to develop plans and policies for the protection and monitoring of biodiversity and to
integrate these into national plans for development;
 Convention on Migratory Species (1979) – signed by Jordan in 2000. Signatories are required to protect
migratory species throughout the migration range by coordinated efforts and research;
 Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Water birds (1995) – came into force in
1999 when ratified by a number of at least fourteen Range States, comprising seven from Africa and
seven from Eurasia. The Agreement covers 255 species of birds ecologically dependent on wetlands for
at least part of their annual cycle;
 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (1973) –
objective of this convention is to save many and varied forms of wild fauna and flora by regulating
trade in specimens of species of wild fauna and flora;
 International Plant Protection Convention (1970) – the objective of this convention is to prevent the
international spread of pests and plant diseases;
 UN Convention to Combat Desertification – the objective is to combat desertification and mitigate the
effects of drought in countries experiencing serious drought and/or desertification through effective
action at all levels; and
 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP) (2004) – the objective of this Convention
is to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants.

4.3.2 International Agreements on Energy and Climate Change

These include the following:

 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 1992 – the UNFCCC was established so as to
begin to consider what can be done to reduce global warming and to cope with whatever temperature
increases are inevitable, aiming to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level
that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system;
 Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1997) – establishes a legally
binding commitment for the reduction of four greenhouse gases produced by industrialized nations, as
well as general commitments for all member countries; and
 UNEP Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987) – an international treaty
designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of a number of substances believed
to be responsible for ozone depletion.

4.3.3 International Agreements on Cultural Heritage

These include the following:

 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, (World Heritage
Convention, 1972) – the primary mission of the Convention is to identify and protect the world’s
natural and cultural heritage considered to be of outstanding universal value.

4.3.4 Other International Agreements Relating to Environmental Protection

This mainly includes the following:

 Basel Convention on the Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal –
designed to reduce the movements of hazardous waste between nations, and specifically to prevent
transfer of hazardous waste from developed to less developed countries.
PAGE | 39
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

4.3.5 Obligations Relating to Membership of the International Labor Organization (ILO)

The International Labor Organization sets guidelines and requirements relating to labour relations and
workers’ rights. Jordan has ratified a range of ILO Conventions that are relevant to the Project. These are
set out in the Box below.

List of ILO Conventions ratified by Jordan and relevant to the Project

 C 29 Forced Labor Convention, 1930 (No.29) ratified 06:06:1966
 C 81 Labor Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) ratified 27:03:1969
 C 98 Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No.98) ratified 12:12:1968
 C100 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No.100) ratified 22:091966
 C105 Abolition of Forced Labor Convention, 1957 (No.105) ratified 31:03:1958
 C 106 Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 (No.106) ratified 23:07:1979
 C 116 Final Articles Revision Convention, 1961 (No.116) ratified 04:07:1963
 C 117 Social Policy (Basic Aims and Standards) Convention, 1962 (No. 117) ratified 07:03:1963
 C 118 Equality of Treatment (Social Security) Convention, 1962 (No. 118) ratified 07:03:1963
 C 119 Guarding of Machinery Convention, 1963 (No.119) ratified 04:05:1964
 C 120 Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1964 (No. 120) ratified 11:03:1965
 C 122 Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122) ratified 10:03:1966
 C 124 Medical Examination of Young Persons Convention, 1965 (No.124) ratified 06:06:1966
 C135 Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971 (No.135) ratified 23:07:1979
 C 142 Human Resources Development Convention, 1975 (No.142) ratified 23:07:1979
 C 144 Tripartite Consultation (International Labor Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) ratified 05:08:2003
 C 147 Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147) ratified 01:04:2004
 C 150 Labor Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150) ratified 10:07:2003
 C 159 Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (Disabled Persons) Convention, 1983 (No. 159) ratified
13:05:2003
 C 185 Seafarers Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185) ratified 09:08:2004
 C 111 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) ratified 04:07:1963
 C 138 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) species at 16 years ratified 23:03:1998
 C182 Worst Forms of Child Labor Convention, 1999 (No.182) ratified 20:04:2000

4.4 Requirements for Project Financing

In addition to Jordanian requirements, the international standards which are applicable to the Project
include the “International Finance Corporation Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability” (IFC,
2012) including the IFC Performance Standards (PS) and the Environmental, Health & Safety (EHS)
Guidelines.

The “IFC Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability” (IFC, 2012) sets out the environmental, health
& safety and community requirements for projects financed by IFC. Through the implementation of the
Equator Principles, IFC requirements have become the de facto international environmental and social
performance benchmark for project financing. IFC requirements are set out in its Performance Standards
(PSs) of Social and Environmental Sustainability, which are summarized in Table 8 below. In addition the

PAGE | 40
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

table also summarizes the EBRD Environmental and Social Policy (2014) and Performance Requirements
(PR).
Table 8: Overview of EBRD PR and IFC PS of Social and Environmental Sustainability
EBRD Key Points Relevant to the Project
Performance
Requirements
PR 1: This PR outlines the process of appraising, managing and monitoring environmental and social issues
Environmental associated with a project consistent with the European Union environmental impact assessment directive
and Social (85/337/EEC as amended). This Project is likely to be categorized by EBRD as a Category A Project.
Appraisal and
Management
PR 2: Labour and This PR assures that human resources policies, procedures and standards will meet the following minimum
Working requirements during the life of the Project with regards to labour and working conditions:
Conditions  Establish and maintain a sound worker-management relationship and promote the fair treatment,
non-discrimination and equal opportunity of workers;
 Promote compliance with any collective agreements to which the client is a party, national labour and
employment laws, and the fundamental principles and key regulatory standards embodied in the
applicable ILO conventions; and
 Protect and promote the health of workers, especially by promoting safe and healthy working
conditions.
In addition, EBRD requires compliance with applicable EU Occupational Health and Safety requirements
and, where such requirements do not exist, applicable IFC Occupational Health and Safety guidelines (IFC
PS2).
PR 3: Pollution Pollution prevention and abatement are key ingredients of a sustainable development agenda and EBRD –
Prevention and financed projects must meet good international practice in this regard. The impacts and issues associated
Abatement with polluting activities need to be considered in all economic activities, and from effluents and emissions
at the facility level, to impacts at a regional and global level where appropriate. This performance
requirement assures that all aspects of the Project will meet the following objectives:
 To avoid or, where avoidance is not possible, to minimise adverse impacts on human health and the
environment by avoiding or minimizing pollution directly arising from projects;
 To assist clients in identifying project-related opportunities for energy and resource efficiency
improvements and waste reduction; and
 To promote the reduction of project-related greenhouse gas emissions.
PR 4: Health & While bringing many positive benefits to local communities, projects can also increase the potential for
Safety community exposure to risks and impacts arising from temporary or permanent changes in population;
transport of raw and finished materials; construction, operations and decommissioning; accidents,
structural failures, and releases of hazardous materials. This performance requirement addresses the
project proponent’s responsibility to identify and to avoid or minimise the risks and adverse impacts to
community health, safety and security.
PR 5: Land Involuntary resettlement refers both to physical and economic displacement as a result of project-related
Acquisition, land acquisition. Where involuntary resettlement is unavoidable, appropriate measures to mitigate
Involuntary adverse impacts on displaced persons and host communities should be carefully planned and
Resettlement and implemented.
Economic
Displacement
PR 6: Biodiversity EBRD recognises the need for the protection and conservation of biodiversity in the context of projects in
Conservation and which it invests. In pursuing these aims, EBRD is guided by and supports the implementation of applicable
Sustainable international law and conventions and applicable EU Directives:
Management of  To protect and conserve biodiversity;
Living Natural  To avoid, minimise and mitigate impacts on biodiversity and offset significant residual impacts, where
Resources appropriate, with the aim of achieving no net loss or a net gain of biodiversity;
 To promote the sustainable management and use of natural resources;
 To provide for fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from project development and arising out of
the utilisation of genetic resources;
 To strengthen companies’ licence to operate, reputation and competitive advantage through best
practice management of biodiversity as a business risk and opportunity; and
 To foster the development of pro-biodiversity business that offers alternative livelihoods in place of
PAGE | 41
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

EBRD Key Points Relevant to the Project

Performance
Requirements
unsustainable exploitation of the natural environment.
PR 8: Cultural Cultural heritage is important as a source of valuable historical and scientific information, as an asset for
Heritage economic and social development, and as an integral part of a people’s cultural identity, practices, and
continuity. EBRD requires the protection of cultural heritage from project activities.
PR 10: EBRD considers stakeholder engagement as an essential part of good business practice and corporate
Information citizenship. In particular, effective community engagement is central to the successful management of
Disclosure and risks and impacts on communities, as well as central to achieving enhanced community benefits. The
Stakeholder specific objectives of this PR are:
Engagement  To identify people or communities that are or could be affected by the Project, as well as other
interested parties;
 To ensure that such stakeholders are appropriately engaged on environmental and social issues that
could potentially affect them through a process of information disclosure and meaningful
consultation; and
 To maintain a constructive relationship with stake holders on an ongoing basis through meaningful
engagement during project implementation.
IFC Performance Key Points Relevant to the Project
Standard
PS1: Assessment PS1 underscores the importance of managing social and environmental performance throughout the life of
and Management a project by using a dynamic social and environmental management system. Specific objectives of this
of Environmental Performance Standard are:
 To identify and assess social and environment impacts, both adverse and beneficial, in the project’s
and Social Risks
area of influence;
and Impacts  To avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts
on workers, affected communities, and the environment;
 To ensure that affected communities are appropriately engaged on issues that could potentially affect
them; and
 To promote improved social and environment performance of companies through the effective use of
management systems.
PS2: Labor and The requirements set out in this PS have been in part guided by a number of international conventions
Working negotiated through the International Labor Organization (ILO) and the United Nations (UN). Specific
Conditions objectives of this Performance Standard are:
 To establish, maintain and improve the worker-management relationship;
 To promote the fair treatment, non-discrimination and equal opportunity of workers and compliance
with national labour and employment laws;
 To protect the workforce by addressing child labour and forced labour; and
 To promote safe and healthy working conditions, and to protect and promote the health of workers.
PS 3: Resource This Performance Standard outlines a project approach to pollution prevention and abatement in line with
Efficiency and international available technologies and practices. It promotes the private sector’s ability to integrate such
Pollution technologies and practices as far as their use is technically and financially feasible and cost-effective in the
Prevention context of a project that relies on commercially available skills and resources. Specific objectives of this
Performance Standard are:
 To avoid or minimize adverse impacts on human health and the environment by avoiding or
minimizing pollution from project activities; and
 To promote the reduction of emissions that contribute to climate change.
PS 4: Community This PS recognizes that project activities, equipment, and infrastructure often bring benefits to
Health, Safety communities including employment, services, and opportunities for economic development. However,
and Security projects can also increase risks arising from accidents, releases of hazardous materials, exposure to
diseases, and the use of security personnel. While acknowledging the public authorities’ role in promoting
the health, safety and security of the public, this PS addresses the project sponsor’s responsibility in
respect of community health, safety and security.
PS 5: Land Involuntary resettlement refers both to physical and economic displacement as a result of project-related
Acquisition and land acquisition. Where involuntary resettlement is unavoidable, appropriate measures to mitigate
Involuntary adverse impacts on displaced persons and host communities should be carefully planned and
Resettlement implemented.

PAGE | 42
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

EBRD Key Points Relevant to the Project

Performance
Requirements
PS 6: Biodiversity This Performance Standard reflects the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity to conserve
Conservation and biological diversity and promote the use of renewable natural resources in a sustainable manner. This
Sustainable Performance Standard addresses how project sponsors can avoid or mitigate threats to biodiversity arising
Management of from their operations as well as sustainably manage renewable natural resources. Specific objectives of
Living Natural this Performance Standard are:
Resources  To protect and conserve biodiversity; and
 To promote the sustainable management and use of natural resources through the adoption of
practices that integrate conservation needs and development priorities.
PS 7: Indigenous Performance Standard 7 recognizes that Indigenous Peoples, as social groups with identities that are
Peoples distinct from dominant groups in national societies.
PS 8: Cultural Consistent with the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, this
Heritage Performance Standard aims to protect irreplaceable cultural heritage and to guide project sponsors on
protecting cultural heritage in the course of their business operations.

In addition, there are also sector-specific EHS guideline document for Wind Energy produced by IFC and
followed by EBRD. This EHS guidance document provides detailed management and technical
recommendations with regards to Industry-

PAGE | 43
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

5. ESIA APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

This chapter of describes the approach and methodology that was adopted for the ESIA study including the
following:

 Approach to screening and scoping phases;

 Approach for the analysis of alternatives;
 Approach to stakeholder engagement;
 Approach to determining the spatial and temporal study area;
 Methodology for assessment of the baseline environmental and social conditions;
 Methodology used to assess the potential environmental and social impacts of the Project – including
the approach to determining significance, development of mitigation measures and the assessment of
residual effects;
 Approach used for the assessment of cumulative and trans-boundary effects; and
 Approach for development of an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP).

5.1 Screening, Scoping & Assessment

The ESIA process for the Project has followed the environmental clearance process outlined in ‘Section 4.1’
earlier, as summarized below:
 Location/Site Approval Permit & Screening Decision: the Central Licensing Committee approved the
site for the development of the Project conditional that a comprehensive ESIA study is undertaken
before commencement of any construction or operational activities. The Site Approval Permit has been
granted on 14 December, 2016
 Scoping Phase: the scoping session for the Project was held on 10 January 2017. In addition, the
Scoping Report/ToR was submitted to the MoEnv and was approved 15 February 2017.
 Assessment Phase: The assessment phase has been carried out in accordance with the approved ToR
by the MoEnv. This ESIA report is the output of this assessment for submission to the MoEnv for
approval.

5.2 Analysis of Alternatives

The “Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation No. (37) of 2005” requires that the ESIA shall identify
and analyse alternatives, including but not limited to project site location, process and technological
alternatives, no project alternative (which assumes that the Project development does not take place), and
present the main reason for the preferred choice. The examination of alternatives is also considered to be
a key element of the ESIA process under good international practice, including the “IFC Performance
Standard 1” (IFC, 2012) and the associated “IFC Guidance Note 1” (IFC, 2012). Environmental and social
considerations have been part of the planning of the Project and a core element of the decision-making
process.

The analysis of alternatives has already been presented in “Chapter 3”. The chapter discussed and
compared several alternatives to the Project development in relation to: (i) the Project site, (ii) the chosen
technology, (iii) the Project design, and finally investigated the ‘no action alternative’ – which assumes that
the Project development does not take place.

PAGE | 44
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

5.3 Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder consultation and engagement is an essential part of the ESIA process, and has been carried out
in accordance with the regulatory requirements in Jordan and international best practice – to include
requirements identified within the “EIA Regulation No. (37) of 2005” as well as “IFC Performance Standard
1” (IFC, 2012) and “EBRD Performance Requirement 10. The previous and future stakeholder consultation
and engagement for the Project are summarized below and discussed in detail in “Chapter 6”.

The stakeholder consultation and engagement for the Project to date has included both and which are
discussed in further details in “Chapter 6”: (i) high level consultations and (ii) detailed engagement and
consultations. The high level consultation mainly includes the undertaking of a scoping session, and which
is considered high level as various stakeholder groups representing various entities are consulted at once.
The scoping session that was undertaken included stakeholder groups such as national governmental
entities, local governmental entities, non-governmental organizations, academic and research institutions,
etc. The detailed engagement and consultation focused on a single stakeholder group at a time in order to
take their specific concerns into account throughout the ESIA study. This included: (i) local community and
nomads through onsite consultations and/or local community consultation session; (ii) other stakeholders
to include governmental and non-governmental organizations consulted and engaged through bi-lateral
meetings, e-mail communication, phone communication, and formal letters.

“Chapter 6”also discusses future stakeholder engagement and consultations which are to take place once
the ESIA has been approved by the MoEnv. This includes (i) the disclosure of the ESIA to stakeholders with
regards to the findings and recommendations proposed within the ESIA study as well as the disclosure of
the Non-Technical Summary (NTS) and Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP); and (ii) implementation of the
Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) by the Developer describes the planned stakeholder consultation
activities and engagement process.

5.4 Delineation of Study Boundaries and Scope of Assessment

5.4.1 Definition of Spatial Study Area
The overall Study Area for the ESIA represents the potential area of influence of the Project. This is ‘the
area over which significant effects of the Project could reasonably occur, either on their own, or in
combination with those of other developments and projects’.

In general terms, the Study Area for the Project ESIA includes the footprint of Project disturbance as
demarcated in black in Figure 10 below. However, for the assessment of the individual environmental and
social parameters (infrastructure and utilities, socio-economic, etc.), an appropriate thematic Study Area is
determined for each theme on a case by case basis. Such a thematic Study Area is clearly identified within
the relevant section it relates to throughout this ESIA. In identifying these thematic Study Areas, the type
and degree of the potential direct and indirect effects were taken into consideration.

In identifying these thematic study areas, the type and degree of the potential direct and indirect effects
were taken into consideration. The core area where direct effects are likely to occur was determined, as
well as the wider area of influence where indirect, combined and cumulative effects are likely to occur on
the surrounding areas and communities.

PAGE | 45
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 10: Study Area

5.4.2 Temporal Scope of the Assessment

The Project will be developed in a three phase sequence, as follows:

 Planning & Construction Phase

 Operation Phase
 Decommissioning Phase
It is important to note that the ESIA study does not cover the associated interconnection facilities and the
activities that will be undertaken for their construction and operation. Such associated interconnection
facilities include the NEPCO receiving substation and the high voltage overhead transmission line. Such
activities will be undertaken by NEPCO.
(i) Planning and Construction Phase

This includes construction activities which will be undertaken by the EPC Contractor. This mainly includes
preparing the detailed design and layout of the Project, transportation of Project components onsite, as
well as site preparation and construction activities for installation of wind turbines, foundations, internal
access roads, buildings, etc.

(ii) Operation Phase

This includes activities to be undertaken by the Project Operator. Activities expected to take place mainly
include the normal daily operation of the wind turbines and the routine maintenance activities.

(iii) Decommissioning Phase

It has not been determined yet, whether at the end of the PPA term (which is set for 20 years) MEMR
would take ownership of the Project and continue operating it, or whether the Project will be completely
decommissioned by the Developer.

Nevertheless, should the Project be completely decommissioned, then generally the anticipated impacts
throughout the decommissioning phase are similar in nature to impacts assessed during the construction
phase – and specifically in impacts related to soil and groundwater (from improper management of waste
streams), air quality, and occupational health and safety. Therefore, the assessment of impacts for those
PAGE | 46
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

receptors and mitigation identified during the construction phase is assumed to apply to this phase in
particular without the need to reiterate or emphasize this throughout this chapter.

5.5 Environment & Social Baseline Conditions

As part of the ESIA process, the baseline environmental and social conditions of the study area were
established. Describing the baseline includes identifying and defining the importance and sensitivity of the
various environmental and social resources and receptors likely to be impacted, i.e. within the study area.
Understanding the value or sensitivity of the resources and receptors to impacts and changes is an
important consideration when determining the significance of effects, and allows for better identification
of the most appropriate measures that could be employed to avoid impacts, and to mitigate any adverse
impacts.

The description of environmental and social baseline conditions has considered a wide range of data and
information gathered from various sources, including:

 Desk-based studies and literature reviews;

 Data from statutory and non-statutory stakeholders; and
 Field surveys and site investigations.

These studies have covered all the environmental and social aspects related to the Project. The baseline
conditions are treated as those conditions which would prevail in the absence of the Project. Studies of
the environment and social baseline are described under each chapter respectively and include the
following: landscape and visual; land use; geology and hydrology (soil & groundwater); biodiversity; birds
(avi-fauna); bats; archaeology and cultural heritage; infrastructure and utilities; community health, safety
and security (to include noise and shadow flicker); and socio-economic conditions. Within each chapter,
the methodology which was undertaken for assessment of the each of those baseline conditions is
described in detail.

5.6 Impact Assessment Methodology

Given the scale and type of the Project, the ESIA commences with an assessment of the positive
environmental and economic impacts on the strategic and national level given the current challenges the
energy sector in Jordan faces- as highlighted in “Chapter 7”.

It then moves forward and within each chapter (from Chapter 8 - 19) the assessment of impacts on
environmental and social parameters is undertaken as required under the ToR. The following section
provides a description of the approach, methodology and process adopted for the impact assessment
presented within this ESIA.

5.6.1 Approach to Assessment of Impacts

The adverse and beneficial environmental and social impacts of the Project have been identified and
assessed against the established baseline. A consistent approach to the assessment of impacts was
followed to enable environmental and social impacts to be broadly compared across the ESIA. A set of
generic criteria were used to determine significance (see below) which were applied across the various
social and environmental parameters.

As far as possible, environmental and social impacts were quantified. Where it was not possible to quantify
impacts, a qualitative assessment was conducted using professional experience, judgment and available
knowledge, and including the consideration of stakeholder views. Where there were limitations to the
PAGE | 47
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

data, and/or uncertainties, these have been recorded in the relevant chapters, along with any assumptions
that were taken during the assessment.

In order to determine the significance of each impact, two overall factors are considered:

 The importance and/or sensitivity of the environmental and social receiving parameter, as determined
during the assessment of baseline conditions; and
 Magnitude and Nature of the impact.

5.6.2 Sensitivity of the Receiving Parameter

Receiving parameter sensitivity was determined using information taken from the baseline description on
the importance, significance or value of the social or environmental component under examination. It is
important to understand the sensitivity of the receiving parameter, as this is a measure of the adaptability
and resilience of an environmental parameter to an identified impact. The following categories of
sensitivity were applied to the assessment:

 High: The environmental parameter/receptor is fragile and an impact is likely to leave it in an altered
state from which recovery would be difficult or impossible.
 Medium: The parameter/receptor has a degree of adaptability and resilience and is likely to cope with
the changes caused by an impact, although there may be some residual modification as a result; and
 Low: The parameter/receptor is adaptable and is resilient to change.

5.6.3 Magnitude and Nature of the Impact

The magnitude of the impact is the scale of change which the impact may cause compared to the baseline
and how this change relates to accepted thresholds and standards. The following categories were applied
to the assessment:

 High: a large change compared to variations in the baseline. Potentially a clear breach of accepted
limits;
 Medium: change which may be noticeable and may breach accepted limits; and
 Low: when compared with the baseline, change which may only just be noticeable. Existing thresholds
would not be exceeded.
Furthermore, in determining the magnitude of the impact it is important to take into account and consider
several other factors which define the nature of the impact. This includes the following:

Type of Impact

 Positive: applies to impacts that have a beneficial environmental or social result, such as enhancement
of the existing environmental conditions; and
 Negative: applies to impacts that have a harmful aspect associated with them such as loss or
degradation of environmental resources.
Type of Effect

 Direct: applies to impacts which can be clearly and directly attributed to a particular environmental or
social parameter (e.g. generation of dust directly impacts air quality); and
 Indirect: applies to impacts which may be associated with or are subsequent to a particular impact on a
certain environmental or social parameter (e.g. high levels of dust could entail nuisance and health
affects to construction workers onsite).
PAGE | 48
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Duration (how long the stressor or its effect last)

 Short Term: applies to impacts whose effects on the environment will disappear within a 1 year period,
or once construction activities are completed;
 Medium Term: applies to impacts whose effects on the environment will disappear within a 5 year
period; and
 Long Term: applies to impacts whose effects on the environment will disappear in a period greater than
5 years.
Reversibility

 Reversible: applies to impacts whose significance will be reduced and disappeared over time (either
naturally or artificially), once the impacting activity ceases; and
 Irreversible: applies to impacts whose significance will not be reduced nor disappeared over time (either
naturally or artificially), once the impacting activity ceases.

5.6.4 Assessing the Significance of the Impacts

The concept of ‘significance’ is central to the ESIA process and aids the identification and categorization of
environmental and social effects. As noted, in order to determine impact significance, the sensitivity of
each environmental and social parameter/receptor is considered in combination with the magnitude of the
impact. Table 9 below demonstrates how these parameters are considered in the assessment of
significance.
Table 9: Determination of Significance
Magnitude and Nature of
Impact
Low Medium High
Sensitivity of Receiving
Parameter/Receptor
Low Not significant Minor Minor
Medium Minor Minor Moderate
High Minor Moderate Major

While the above matrix provides a framework for the determination of significance, and enables
comparison across environmental and social parameters, a degree of professional judgement must be used
and some parameter-specific factors to be considered in making the determination of significance. Below
provides additional guidance to the degrees of significance used in this ESIA. Note that positive impacts
are defined, but are not rated for significance.

 Major significance: requires thorough investigation in the ESIA. These impacts have been studied
extensively by consulting expertise in the areas of the identified impacts to design needed mitigation
and environmental management measures. Moreover, conducting specific studies and assessments to
some of the key issues identified;
 Moderate significance: requires reasonable investigation in the ESIA. These impacts have been studied
by expertise in the areas of the identified impacts to design needed mitigation and environmental
management measures.
 Minor significance: must be listed, and addressed in some way, but which did not require detailed
assessment in the ESIA.
 Not significant: for completeness, impacts which have been included in the assessment but determined
not to be significant, are rated formally as ‘not significant’.

PAGE | 49
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

5.6.5 Management Measures

Based on the impact assessment undertaken a set of management measures are identified for each impact
which aims to address it. Management measures include the following:

 Additional Requirements: those are generally regulatory requirements which have been identified and
which must be taken into account at a later stage.
 Additional Studies: for certain environmental/social receptors additional studies must be undertaken
at a later stage. Such studies and their scope, timing, etc. have been highlighted were relevant.
 Mitigation Measures: a vital step in the ESIA process is the identification of measures that can be taken
to ensure that impacts are mitigated or reduced to acceptable levels. The ESIA will firstly consider the
significance of any impacts caused by the Project and then assigned mitigation options through
applying the following hierarchy:
- Avoiding or ‘designing out’ impacts wherever possible;
- Considering alternatives or modifications to the design to reduce the impacts wherever possible;
- Applying measures to minimize and manage impacts on the receptor; then
- As a last resort, identifying fair compensation, remediation and offsetting measures to address
any potentially significant residual effects.
Some negative impacts can be easily mitigated, whilst others cannot or are too difficult and costly to
mitigate. The various potential impacts are described in this ESIA, along with the provision of ‘feasible
mitigation measures’ that can be implemented.
 Recommendations: for positive impacts, it is not possible to identify mitigation measures, but rather
recommendations have been identified which aim to enhance the positive impact.

5.6.6 Assessment of Residual Effects

If there are mitigation measures it is then necessary to make an assessment of the ‘residual significance’
after mitigation has been taken account. A re-assessment of Project impacts is then made, taking into
account the effect of the proposed mitigation measures in order to determine the significance of the
residual effects. Residual effects are discussed for each environmental and social theme in the ESIA
chapters.

5.7 Assessment of Cumulative Impacts

For each of the impacts assessed, the ESIA investigates the cumulative impacts which could result from
incremental impacts from other known existing and/or planned developments in the area, and based on
currently available information on such existing/planned developments. Assessment of cumulative impacts
is presented in ‘Chapter 21’.

5.8 Development of an Environmental and Social Management (ESMP) Plan

Based on the results of the impact assessment, development of mitigation measures, and development of
monitoring plan, an ESMP was compiled into a single table that details all of the above. The ESMP will be a
key document and will list the environmental/social requirements and detail the procedures necessary for
managing the significant environmental/social issues connected to proposed Project activities. The ESMP
will be developed specifically to provide flexibility in the nature and exact location of operations, while
ensuring all potential impacts are identified and properly mitigated and monitored throughout the later
stages of the Project. This ESMP can be used as a stand-alone document during the different phases of the
Project by Developer, EPC Contractor, Project Operator, MoEnv, and other responsible parties. The ESMP is
presented in ‘Chapter 22’.
PAGE | 50
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

6. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT

This Chapter discusses in detail the stakeholder consultation and engagement plans which were
undertaken as part of the ESIA process for the Project and provides an overview of the findings. In addition,
this Chapter also discusses the future stakeholder consultation and engagement plans which are to take
place at a later stage of the ESIA process as well the Project development.

6.1 Introduction
Stakeholder engagement is an integral part of ESIA good practice and is a statutory requirement of the
national EIA legal framework in Jordan and within the IFC Performance Standards and EBRD Performance
Requirements. The Developer is committed to a technically and culturally-appropriate approach to
consultation and engagement with all stakeholders affected either directly or indirectly by the Project. The
consultation program for the Project is based on informed consultation and participation in line with IFC
and EBRD requirements with affected people, and is designed to be both fair and inclusive. Consultation
activities have been an ongoing process since the commencement of the ESIA study in August 2016.
A stakeholder is defined as any individual or group who is potentially affected by the proposed Project or
can themselves affect the proposed Project directly or indirectly. Stakeholder consultation is an inclusive
process for sharing information that enables stakeholders to understand the risks, impacts, and
opportunities of a development or Project, allowing them to express their views and articulate their
perceptions towards it.

6.2 Objectives
The objective of stakeholder consultation is to ensure that a participatory approach takes place, which in
turn, documents concerns of all stakeholder groups and makes sure that such concerns are considered,
responded to, and incorporated into the decision making process of the development. Stakeholder
consultation needs to be a two‐way communication process that imparts information to stakeholders, but
also obtains additional and on‐the‐ground information from them. Stakeholder consultation and
engagement must take place at the inception phase of the ESIA process and implemented all through the
study period.
The specific objectives of this chapter are to:
 Summarize national and international legal & policy requirements for stakeholder engagement;
 Describe and identify the stakeholders affected and/or with an interest in the Project;
 Summarize stakeholder engagement and consultation conducted to date. In addition, describe how the
views and issues raised have informed and influenced the development of the Project; and
 Outline the future and approach to stakeholder engagement.

6.3 Requirements and Policy Requirements for Stakeholder Engagement

6.3.1 Jordanian Legal & Policy Standards

The Jordanian legal requirements for consultation and engagement are mainly included within the “EIA
Regulation No. (37) of 2005”. The requirements of the Regulation are summarized below.

The Regulation requires that for those projects which the MoEnv requires a comprehensive ESIA study (as
the case for this Project), a scoping session must be held from the onset of the ESIA for all stakeholders
whom may be potentially affected by the Project. The objective of the session is to provide the stakeholder
groups with all available information on the Project and the surrounding environment, in order to allow

PAGE | 51
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

them to participate in investigating and identifying the potential impacts which may arise from the Project
so that their concerns are taken into account throughout the ESIA study.

To this extent, the MoEnv generally requires that the following stakeholder groups be invited to participate
in the scoping session: (i) national governmental entities, (ii) local governmental agencies, (iii) Non-
Governmental Organizations, (iv) academic and research institutions, and (v) local community
representatives.

In addition, the Regulation specifies that the outcomes of the ESIA study is to be announced to
stakeholders and the public in a manner that the Ministry deems appropriate, and this is dealt with on a
case by case basis – considering the type and nature of the project development. This is usually determined
by the MoEnv once the ESIA study is reviewed and approved.

6.3.2 Requirements in IFC Performance Standards on Environmental & Social Sustainability (2012)

The IFC Performance Standards form part of their Sustainability Framework, where the “IFC Performance
Standard 1” (IFC, 2012) sets out the following recommendations for stakeholder engagement:

 Stakeholder Engagement is an on-going process that may involve: stakeholder analysis & planning,
disclosure & dissemination of information, consultation & participation, grievance mechanism, and on-
going reporting to Affected Communities.
 A Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) must be developed and implemented that is scaled to the
project risks and impacts and development stage, and be tailored to the characteristics and interests of
the Affected Communities.
 Affected Communities will be provided with access to relevant information on: (i) the purpose, nature,
and scale of the project; (ii) the duration of proposed project activities; (iii) any risks to and potential
impacts on such communities and relevant mitigation measures; (iv) the envisaged stakeholder
engagement process; and (v) the grievance mechanism.
 When Affected Communities are subject to identified risks and adverse impacts from a project, a
process of consultation will be undertaken in a manner that provides the Affected Communities with
opportunities to express their views on project risks, impacts and mitigation measures, and allows the
client to consider and respond to them.
 The extent and degree of engagement should be commensurate with the project’s risks and adverse
impacts and concerns raised by Affected Communities.
 The consultation process will be tailored to language preferences of Affected Communities, their
decision-making process, and the needs of disadvantaged or vulnerable groups.
 For projects with potentially significant adverse impacts, the client will conduct an informed
consultation and participation.
 A grievance mechanism will be established to receive and facilitate resolution of Affected
Communities’ concerns and grievances about the client’s environmental and social performance.
 As it is considered that the Shobak Wind Power project is likely to be categorized as a Category A
project under the IFC requirements, it will be disclosed for a minimum of 60 days.

6.3.3 EBRD Requirements

The Developer will be seeking financing for the Project from International Financial Institutions (IFIs) – to
include mainly the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), Islamic Bank (ICB) and
Europe Arab Bank (EAB). Therefore, the Developer wishes to design and manage the project in accordance
with good international industry practice and standards.
PAGE | 52
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

The EBRD 2014 Environmental and Social Policy includes a comprehensive set of Performance
Requirements (PRs) covering key areas of environmental and social impacts and issues. EBRD’s PR10 sets
out the following requirements of stakeholder engagement during project preparation:

 The first step in successful stakeholder engagement is for the client to identify the various individuals
or groups who (i) are affected of likely to be affected (directly or indirectly) by the project (“affected
parties”), or (ii) may have an interest in the project (“other interested parties”). Resources for public
information and consultation should focus on affected parties, in the first instance.
 As part of the stakeholder identification process, the client will identify individuals and groups that may
be differentially or disproportionately affected by the project because of their disadvantaged or
vulnerable status. The client will also identify how stakeholders may be affected and the extent of the
potential (actual or perceived) impacts. Where impacts are perceived, additional communication may
be required to provide information and reassurance of the assessed level of impacts. An adequate
level of detail must be included in the stakeholder identification and analysis so as to enable the Bank
to determine the level of communication that is appropriate for the project under consideration.
Employees are always considered stakeholders.
 The Client will inform the EBRD how communication with the identified stakeholders will be handled
throughout project preparation and implementation, including the type of grievance procedure
envisaged.

6.4 Stakeholder Identification and Analysis

The Project has been identifying potential stakeholders since it began the development of the ESIA
program in August 2016. The Project has a wide range of stakeholders ranging from national government
and other bodies involved in the permitting and ESIA process, in addition to communities within the area of
influence of the Project. As such stakeholders have been identified at all geographic levels, including
national, regional and local levels.
The two principal categories of stakeholders are as follows:
 Affected Communities, defined as the local community as well as other people directly affected by the
Project and/or those who have been identified as most vulnerable to change and who need to be
engaged in identifying impacts and their significance, as well as in decision-making on mitigation and
management measures.
In specific, within the affected communities, vulnerable groups must be identified. Vulnerable groups
include those expected to be disproportionally affected by the Project, and therefore require special
consideration throughout the consultation process. Vulnerable groups are project specific and depend
on a range of issues which must be understood such as project location, socio-economic and
demographic context, as well as the nature of the development and type of impacts anticipated. The
vulnerable groups within this context were identified by the ‘ESIA Team’. Such vulnerable groups
include the following:
- Women groups: due to cultural norms in Jordan (and specifically within the context and setting of
the Project area), the participation of women groups in the decision-making process is limited
which could result in overlooking any specific concerns they might have.
- Nomadic tribes: those are people that travel in different areas on a seasonal basis with no fixed
residence. As they could not be present in an area year round, this could limit their participation
in the decision-making process which could result in overlooking any specific concerns they might
have.
Other Interested Parties, defined as people and organizations that are interested in the Project and/or
could affect the Project in some way. Those generally include governmental and non-governmental
organizations.

PAGE | 53
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

6.4.1 Affected Communities

The affected communities have been identified based on: (i) detailed understanding of the Project site
location, its nature, administrative setup and the nearby surrounding receptors, and (ii) the nature of the
anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its various phases. Based on the above, the affected
communities include the local communities of the Project area and nomads.

(i) Local Communities

As discussed earlier, the Project site is located within Ma’an Governorate and specifically within Shobak
District which host several community settlements. The community settlements that are likely to be
affected by the Project development logically includes those located within the vicinity of the Project site
and which are therefore anticipated to be impacted the most from the Project’s activities (during
construction and operation).

This in turn was determined based on the detailed understanding of the nature and extent of the Project’s
impacts. The main anticipated impacts which could affect the nearby communities (which are discussed in
further details in each of the relevant chapter) include: (i) land use impacts from Project development, (ii)
visual impacts from the presence of the turbines and, (iii) noise and shadow flicker generated from the
operating turbines. In addition, the socio-economic conditions of these local communities are also
anticipated to be impacted (mainly in a positive matter) from such a development.

Such communities were determined to include: (i) Mdhaibie’ (also known as Al-Faisaliyeh and which is
located around 1km to the south), (ii) Zaitooneh (located 1km to the south-west), (iii) Zobeiriyeh, (located
around 1.3km to west) and (iv) Mothallath Al-Shobak (located around 1km to the north-west). Those local
communities are presented in Figure 11 below.

Figure 11: Affected Communities

PAGE | 54
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(ii) Nomads

Based on the understanding of the area in general, it is known that there is some nomadic activity within
the Project site and its surrounding areas. Similarly, the main anticipated impacts which could affect the
nomads (which are discussed in further details in each of the relevant chapter) include: (i) land use impacts
from Project development, (ii) visual impacts from the presence of the turbines and, (iii) noise and shadow
flicker generated from the operating turbines.

6.4.2 Other Interested Parties/Stakeholders

Other interested parties and stakeholder groups were identified based on the understanding of the Project
location, nature of activities which are to take place, type of development, and the potential
environmental and social impacts and how they could potentially affect certain stakeholder groups.

(i) Jordanian Governmental Stakeholders (National and Local)

National and local government stakeholders include Ministries, Directorates, and other agencies that
generally have a regulatory role in ensuring the implementation and compliance of projects with the
various applicable legislations under the mandate of the relevant legislations. In addition, such entities are
involved in the permitting and ESIA process. Thus, such stakeholders have the potential to influence the
authorization of the Project and assist in its delivery.

More specifically, it is important to note that most of these governmental entities (mainly ministries) are
part of the ‘EIA Technical Committee’ which will review this ESIA study for approval and granting of
environmental clearance.
Table 10 below provides a list of the key national and regional level government stakeholders along with a
summary as far as possible of their key areas of interest.
Table 10: List of Key Governmental Stakeholders
Governmental Entity Interest in/Influence on the Project
National Governmental Entities
Ministry of The governmental body responsible for protection of the environment in Jordan. In
Environment addition, the MoEnv is responsible for approval of the ESIA and making sure it complies
(MoEnv) with the “EIA Regulation No. (37) of 2005” and granting the environmental clearance for the
Project.
Ministry of Energy and The governmental body responsible for the development of the private sector renewable
Mineral Resources energy projects in Jordan to include this Project in specific.
(MEMR)
The governmental body responsible for managing rangelands and forest as well as
Ministry of Agriculture
protecting and managing wildlife. For this Project, this includes land use issues related to
(MoA)
grazing reserves and forest lands as well as potential impacts related to biodiversity.
The governmental body responsible for setting and designating land uses in Jordan which
Ministry of Municipal
identifies certain activities and projects which are to be allowed. For this Project, this mainly
Affairs (MoMA)
includes issues related to designated land use of the Project site.
The governmental body responsible for the health sector in Jordan, including public health
Ministry of Health and safety. For this Project, this mainly includes issues related to the public health of the
(MoH) nearby communities and nuisance prevention from the Project (from issues such as noise,
shadow flicker, waste management, wastewater management, etc.).
Ministry of Tourism The governmental body responsible for tourism development and protection of antiquities
and Antiquities (MoTA) in Jordan. For this Project, this mainly includes potential impacts related to archaeology and
/ Department of cultural heritage related to the Project.
Antiquities (DoA)
The governmental body responsible for regulating and monitoring the road transport sector
Ministry of Transport and services. For this Project, this mainly includes potential impacts related to
(MoT) infrastructure and utilities – mainly transportation of Project components to the Project site
and any impacts on roads capacity and safety.

PAGE | 55
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Ministry of Water and The governmental body responsible for the overall monitoring of the water sector and
Irrigation (MWI) / water supply. For the Project, this mainly includes issues related to the water requirements
Water Authority of and supply to the Project.
Jordan (WAJ)
Ministry of Labor (MoL) The governmental body responsible for health and safety of workers and labour in Jordan.
For this Project, this mainly includes issues related to occupational health and safety.
Civil Aviation Governmental body responsible for civil aviation safety, security and regulatory compliance.
Regulatory Commission For this Project, this includes issues related to civil aviation safety from wind turbines.
(CARC)
Royal Jordanian Air Governmental body responsible for military aviation safety and security. For this Project,
Force (RJAF) this includes issues related to military aviation safety from wind turbines.
Telecommunication TRC is the official entity for regulating the telecommunications and information technology
Regulatory Commission services in the Kingdom. For this Project in specific, this includes any potential impacts from
(TRC) the wind turbines on telecommunication transmission networks in the area.
Jordan Radio and JRTV is the state broadcaster of Jordan for radio and television transmission networks. For
Television Corporation this Project in specific, this includes any potential impacts from the wind turbines on the
(JRTV) radio/television transmission networks in the area.
National Electric Power Responsible for designing and building the substation, together with high voltage overhead
Company (NEPCO) lines and the connection to the existing grid.
Local Governmental Entities
The official governmental body responsible for key government services (health, education,
security, etc.) as well as coordination for socio-economic development in the region. For
Ma’an Governorate
this project this mainly includes issues related to socio-economic development on the area
from the Project.
Jordan has 93 local municipalities, providing local government services such as waste
collection, street cleaning, street and road maintenance, public lighting, culture and sports.
Local Municipalities – Municipalities are run by a mayor who answers to a locally elected municipal council.
Shobak Municipality Municipalities vary greatly in size from populations of less than 5,000 people, to greater
than 100,000 people, and also vary greatly in capacity. Municipalities report to the central
Ministry of Municipal Affairs. The Project site is located within the Shobak Municipality.

(i) Non-Governmental Organizations and Academic Institutions

Other interested parties considered during the ESIA related consultation include those who have the
potential to influence the authorization of the Project and assist in its delivery. This mainly includes Non-
Government Organizations (NGOs), see Table 11.
Table 11: List of Key NGO and Academic Institutional Stakeholders
Stakeholder Interest in/influence on the Project
Environmental The Association forms the umbrella for the all environmental NGO’s in Jordan and is
Societies Association also a member of the ‘EIA Technical Committee’ which will review this ESIA study for
approval and granting of environmental clearance.

The Royal Society for The RSCN is an environmental NGO having a mandate for the conservation of Jordan’s
the Conservation of biodiversity and natural resources. In addition, it is empowered to establish and
Nature (RSCN) manage protected environmental reserves as well as Important Bird areas under the
supervision of the MoEnv. For this project this includes land use issues related to
environmental reserves and important birds areas as well as potential impacts from the
project on biodiversity and birds.
BirdLife International – The organization is widely involved in ensuring bird conservation and protection. For
Middle East Regional this project in specific this includes potential impacts from the project on birds.
Office, Jordan

PAGE | 56
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

6.5 Stakeholder Consultation and Engagement To-Date

Table 12 below highlights the stakeholder groups as identified earlier, and the consultation/engagement
method which has been undertaken for each group. As noted in the table below this mainly includes high
level consultations as well as detailed engagement and consultations.

The high level consultations mainly include the scoping session representing various entities which are
consulted at once (such as national governmental entities, local governmental entities, non-governmental
organizations, etc.). The detailed engagement and consultation tends to focus on a single entity within a
stakeholder group at a given time, whose concerns need to be taken into account throughout the ESIA
study.
Table 12: Methodology for Stakeholder Engagement
No. Stakeholder Group Consultations/Engagement to Date Future
Consultations/Engagement
1 Affected Communities
a Local community  Local Community Consultation Session  Disclosure Session
 Detailed engagement – Onsite  Stakeholder Engagement
consultation Plan (SEP)
b Nomads  Detailed engagement – Onsite  Stakeholder Engagement
consultation Plan (SEP)
2 Other Interested  High level consultation – Scoping Session  Disclosure Session
Parties/Stakeholders  Detailed Engagement – meetings, e-mail  Stakeholder Engagement
communication, official letters, etc. Plan (SEP)

6.5.1 High Level Consultation – Scoping Session

In accordance with MoEnv’s “EIA Regulation No. (37) of 2005”, a scoping session must be held for those
projects which require a comprehensive EIA study; as the case with this Project. In coordination with the
MoEnv, the Scoping Session for the Project was held on 10 January 2017 at the Grand Millennium Hotel in
Amman. The list of invitees was identified jointly by the MoEnv and the ESIA team.

The list of invitees mainly included the following stakeholders: (i) national governmental entities (various
ministries and other governmental entities), (ii) Local Governmental Agencies (e.g. Ma’an Governorate,
Shobak Mutasarrifate), (iii) Non-Governmental Organizations (Environmental Societies Association
representing all environmental NGO’s in Jordan), and (iv) Academic and Research Institutions.

The ESIA Team documented all records of the scoping session to include transcripts, minutes of meetings,
list of participants and attendees, comments and so on. This was presented in detail in the ToR report
submitted to the MoEnv. Selected photos from the session are shown in Figure 12 below.

In general, the objectives of the scoping session include the following:

 Introduce the Project and its various components to the stakeholders and provide them with all
available information about the Project;
 Present the various anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its various phases and allow
stakeholders to participate in the process of scoping environmental impacts of the Project;
 Early consideration of stakeholders concerns and fears regarding the nature, scale and impacts of the
Project; and
 Present the suggested methodology for the ESIA and allow stakeholders to comment on the scope of
work and methodology.

Throughout the scoping session, the following presentations were given:

 Welcoming Speech by Eng. Izzat Abu Hamra, Director of the Licensing Directorate in the MoEnv.

PAGE | 57
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 A presentation of the Project components by Mr. Samer Bulos from Alcazar Energy Ltd., in which he
presented the following topics: (i) introduction to Alcazar Energy Ltd and its line of business, (ii) Shobak
Wind Farm background and history, (iii) entities involved in the Project, (iv) Project location and layout,
(v) explained the various components and the initial layout for the Shobak Wind Farm Project, (vi)
explained the activities to take place during the different Project phases, (iv) project schedule and
duration (vii) anticipated job opportunities for the Project and other planned corporate social
responsibilities. There was time for questions and answers following this presentation as well as a
facilitated discussion, moderated by ECO Consult.
 A presentation by the ESIA Team (ECO Consult) in which the ESIA process was explained as well as the
anticipated negative environmental impacts during the various Project phases and the methodology
that will be adopted throughout the ESIA study for assessing those impacts on those key sensitive
receptors. There was time for questions and answers following this presentation as well as a facilitated
discussion, moderated by ECO Consult.

Figure 12: Selected Photos from the Scoping Session of 10 January, 2017

Table 13 below presents the main issues raised by the stakeholders throughout the scoping session and
highlights how those comments were taken into account and incorporated throughout the ESIA study.
Table 13: Summary of Comments Raised during Scoping Session and Response
Attribute Comment Response
Land Use A stakeholder inquired whether It was explained that impacts from wind farms on actual
land use activities onsite would be land use activities are generally minor given that the
affected or whether they could footprint of such projects is generally very limited (usually
continue to take place onsite around 5% from the total project area) and activities can
during the Project development. usually continue to take place in other areas within the
Project site. In addition, it was also explained that potential
impacts on land use will be studied as part of the ESIA and
any actual land use onsite will be assessed (e.g. use of area
by local communities for grazing or agriculture) and
potential impacts from the Project will be studied and
appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures will be
identified.
Birds A question was raised by a Turbine shutdown will only occur if the birds passing
PAGE | 58
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

stakeholder regarding the collision through belong to a pre-defined list of priority species.
of birds with the wind turbines and Furthermore, according to IFC guidelines, it is
whether a turbine shut down recommended that all operational monitoring should be
would occur if any carried out by qualified observers rather than
radars/sensors since radars/sensors are only capable of
detecting birds presence regardless of their species, while
qualified observers
Community Several stakeholders asked about It was clarified that noise level generated from one turbine
Health, Safety the cumulative noise levels of the is 106 Decibels. The ESIA study will include a noise impact
and Security wind farm and whether it will build assessment, and a detailed noise study. The manufacturing
up since there are many wind companies of the wind turbines have brochures for the
projects in the area. sound power level of the wind turbines as well as a sound
pressure level which measures the noise level at receptor
areas.
Noise – several stakeholders asked The noise levels generated from the turbines differ
about the noise levels that will be according to the manufacturing company of the turbine. In
generated from the wind turbines. general, the noise level generated from one turbine is 106
decibels, and which will be dispersed at a distance and
absorbed by the surrounding vegetation and topography,
thus the noise levels will be minimal. The methodology for
assessment of noise impacts from the turbines was
explained in detail throughout the session. It was explained
that the assessment will be undertaken through computer
modelling program which will be based on a worst-case
scenario. The program takes into account several factors
such as the topography of the area, location of turbines,
baseline conditions (in which noise will be monitored
onsite), etc. Noise sensors will be located at the adjacent
communities of the wind farm.
Occupational A question was raised whether It was explained that the Developer and the EPC Contractor
Health and there will be any guidance and/or will be developing a detailed safety plan. The ESIA study
Safety instructions for the onsite safety of will assess which will take into account the noise impacts
workers. on the workers and will identify mitigation and
management measures to prevent/reduce such potential
impacts.

6.5.2 Detailed Engagement – Affected Community

This section presents the detailed engagements that were undertaken with the affected communities and
which include onsite consultations with local communities and nomads as well as a local community
consultation session both of which are discussed in further details below.

(i) Local Community Consultation Session

The ‘ESIA Team’ has undertaken additional consultations with the local community through a consultation
session which was held on the 10 May 2017 at Shobak city, headed by Head of Shobak Mutasarrifate. Such
consultation session focused on the local community which includes the closest community settlement to
the Project site as discussed earlier and who are likely to be affected by the Project development, to
include Mdhaibie’, Zaitooneh, Zobeiriyeh and Mothallath Al-Shobak.
The representatives were identified jointly by the ‘ESIA Team’ and Shobak Mutasarrifate to include the
following groups:
 Representatives of local community members;
 Community Based Organizations (CBO);
 Elder representatives of tribal groups;
 Local enterprises and businesses;

PAGE | 59
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Woman Groups; and

 Youth and unemployed.
Generally, such consultations aimed to take into account their thoughts and concerns on the Project
development, while allowing the discussion to focus on slightly different angles from more of a first-hand
experience/practical, less technical perspective. The ‘ESIA Team’ documented all records of the
consultation session to include transcripts, minutes of meeting, list of participants and attendees,
comments and so on. Selected photos from the session are shown in Figure 13 below. In addition, all
attendees were provided with a Project handout in Arabic which provides information on the Project, its
location and sitting, components, anticipated environmental and social impacts and other as appropriate.

Figure 13: Selected Photos from the Local Community Consultation Session 10th May 2017
In accordance with the above, the consultation session focused on five (5) main themes, each of which is
discussed below.
 Introduction to the Project
The ‘ESIA Team’ started the session by first introducing the Project, its location, the various project
components and provided the local community with all available information. The objective was to discuss
and allow the local community to raise any questions or concerns they might have regarding the Project in
general.
Several questions were raised and which are mainly related to issues such as: (i) land selection process for
the Project; (ii) investment required to develop such a Project, (iii) amount of electricity produced from the
Project and whom will it supply, (iv) Number of job opportunities that will be targeted at the local
community, and (v) expected noise levels from the operation of the wind farm.
 Discussion on Environmental and Social Impacts
The ‘ESIA Team’ then discussed the anticipated environmental and social impacts from the Project
throughout its various phases in order to address any concerns or fears regarding the nature, scale, and
significance of the impacts. In addition, the objective was also to allow the local community to identify any
additional impacts which must be taken into account throughout the ESIA study. Generally, the local
community inquired about the nature of several of the identified impacts, but did not identify any
additional impacts to be considered throughout the ESIA study.
 Discussion on Land-Use Patterns within the Project Area
The land use activities for the area in general were discussed in order to understand whether the area
surrounding the Project is considered of any value to the local community. This included discussions on
agricultural and grazing activities as well nomadic populations which could inhabit the surrounding area.
This issue is discussed in further details in ‘Section 9.1.3’.

PAGE | 60
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Discussion on Socio-economic Conditions

Within the ESIA, the socio-economic conditions of Ma’an Governorate were established based on review of
secondary data available mainly from the Department of Statistics (DoS) and the Local Development Unit
(LDU) of Ma’an Governorate. However, statistical data often does not fully represent the situation in
reality.
Therefore, one of the objectives of the local community consultation session was to verify/understand the
socio-economic conditions of the local communities and the main challenges they face. Such discussions
would allow a better understanding and characterization of the current socio-economic conditions – the
outcome of such discussions are summarized below and presented in detail in ‘Chapter 18’.
 Discussion on Socio-economic Development from the Project
At the end of the consultation session, the focus of the discussions was to allow the local community to
express their expectations in terms of socio-economic development by the Project, as well as
understanding their views on the proposed development and ensure that those views are considered and
taken into account throughout the Project development. The main points raised by the local community in
relation to their expectations in terms of socio-economic development are discussed in detail in
‘Chapter 18.

(ii) Onsite Consultations

Onsite consultations and discussions were undertaken within the Project area based on a site visit carried
out on the 11th April 2017 as it is considered the phase which entails the highest onsite land activities by
the local community members as well as the period in which nomadic activity is known in the area. Such
consultations and discussion entailed visiting each area where activity was noticed, to the greatest extent
possible, starting from south to the north of the Project area.

The objective of the consultations included:

 Introduce the Project and its various components;

 Understand, characterize and assess the activities undertaken onsite (the outcomes of such discussions
is presented in details in ‘Section 9.1.3’);
 Understand, characterize and assess their socio-economic conditions and patterns (the outcomes of
such discussions are presented in detail in ‘Chapter 18); and
 Present and discuss the potential impacts of the Project which could affect their activities onsite in
order to take into account their thoughts and concerns on such issues. This mainly includes impacts on
land use and impacts from shadow flicker and noise. The outcomes of such consultations are discussed
in further details in ‘Section 9.1.3’ and ‘Chapter 18’.

Figure 14 below presents selected photos for onsite consultations undertaken with local communities and
nomads. It is important to note that consultations were gender specific – therefore specific consultations
were undertaken with women onsite by a female specialist of the ‘ESIA Team’. In addition, through the
consultations, a handout in Arabic was distributed and explained and which provides information on the
Project, its location and sitting, components, anticipated environmental and social impacts and other as
appropriate. It is important to note that targeted consultations with women did not identify any specific
concerns or requirements other than those undertaken with men. Generally the output of such
consultations was similar and is included under the relevant section as identified above.

PAGE | 61
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 14: Selected Photos for Onsite Consultations with Nomads and Local Communities

6.5.3 Detailed Engagement – Other Stakeholder Engagement Activities

Throughout the ESIA process various stakeholders were engaged and consulted. From the onset of the ESIA
study, and in accordance with the issues and impacts anticipated from the Project throughout its various
phases, the key stakeholder groups that needed to be consulted, involved, and collaborated with on a
detailed level were identified.

Such engagement was intended for various purposes and which included to: (i) introduce the project and
its overall concept and components, (ii) understand thoughts, views, and concerns from the Project
development, (iii) collection of relevant data for assessment of baseline conditions and anticipated impacts
from the Project, (iii) discussion on anticipated impacts, (iv) discussion on proposed mitigation measures,
etc.

Such stakeholder groups were engaged and consulted through one or more of the following
communication protocols: (i) bi-lateral meetings, (ii) e-mail communication, (iii) phone communication,
and (iv) formal letters.

Table 14 below presents the entities which were engaged and consulted and the purpose of such
engagement. Generally, the outcomes of such consultations are presented and included within the Section
that the attribute relates to.
Table 14: List of Other Consultations during the ESIA
Entity Attribute Objective of Consultation
Ministry of Environment General Ongoing discussions on the ESIA process as well as general
(MoEnv) concerns and impacts from Project development.
Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) Land Use Collection of secondary data on grazing reserves as well as
current and future land use planning in relation to agriculture.
Ministry of Municipal Affairs Land Use Current and future land use planning in Project area as set by

PAGE | 62
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Entity Attribute Objective of Consultation

(MoMA) MoMA.
Ministry of Water and Geology and Collection of secondary data on site geology and hydrology
Irrigation (MWI) Hydrology
Infrastructure Collection of secondary data on infrastructure and utilities
and Utilities related to water resources and networks, wastewater networks
and treatment plants, etc.
Department of Antiquities Archaeology and Collection of any available secondary on archaeological
(DoA) Cultural Heritage resources on the area. In addition, coordinate with them to
undertake archaeological survey and assessment for the Project
site.
The Royal Society for the Land Use Current and future land use planning in relation to areas of
Conservation of Nature critical environmental concern.
(RSCN)
Civil Aviation Regulatory Infrastructure Discussion on potential impacts from the Project on civil aviation
Commission (CARC) and Utilities safety and incorporating their requirements into account as part
of the ESIA.
Royal Jordanian Air Force Infrastructure Discussion on potential impacts from the Project on military
(RJAF) and Utilities aviation safety and incorporating their requirements into
account as part of the ESIA.
Telecommunication Infrastructure Collection of existing telecommunication networks in the area
Regulatory Commission (TRC) and Utilities and discussion on potential impacts from the Project.
Telecommunication company Infrastructure Collection of existing telecommunication networks in the area
providers (Orange, Zain & and Utilities and discussion on potential impacts from the Project.
Umniah)
Jordan Radio and Television Infrastructure Collection of existing radio and television networks in the areas
Corporation (JRTV) and Utilities and discussion on potential impacts from the Project.
Ma’an Governorate and Socio-economic Understand thoughts, views, and concerns from the Project
Shobak Mutasarrifate development.
Collection of secondary data on socio-economic indicators. In
addition, meetings were undertaken to characterize and
understand the socio-economic conditions in reality of those
local communities.
Socio-economic development and plans for local community
engagement.
Shobak District – Joint Service Infrastructure Collection of information on existing infrastructure element in
Council and Utilities the area such as municipal approved landfills.

6.6 Future Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation

Future stakeholder engagement and consultations will mainly include the following, each of which is
discussed in further details below: (i) disclosure session, (ii) disclosure of the ESIA document and (iii)
implementation of the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) by the Developer.

6.6.1 Disclosure Session

Once the Final ESIA has been approved by the MoEnv, a disclosure session will be undertaken in Amman.
All stakeholders invited to the scoping session will be invited again to attend the disclosure session, this will
include the following groups: (i) national governmental entities (e.g. various Ministries, Civil Aviation
Regulatory Commission, etc.), (ii) Local Governmental Agencies (e.g. Ma’an Governorate, Shobak
Mutasarrifate, etc.), (iii) Non-Governmental Organizations (environmental and social development), (iv)
Academic and Research Institutions. In addition, another session will be held for the local community
representatives within the Project area.

In general, the objective of the disclosure session is to present the results and outputs of the ESIA study
and which will include the following:

PAGE | 63
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Discuss in detail the anticipated environmental and social impacts from the Project;
 Discuss in detail the Environmental and Social Management Plan and the identified mitigation and
monitoring measures; and
Obtain their thoughts and feedback on any issues of concern they might have. Those will be thoroughly
addressed in the Final ESIA study to be submitted.

6.6.2 Disclosure of the ESIA document

The final ESIA, Non-Technical Summary (NTS) and the SEP will be disclosed on the Developer’s website. In
addition, hard copies of these documents will be available at the following locations:

 Ministry of Environment;
 Ma’an Governorate – Local Development Unit; and
 Shobak Mutasarrifate.
The ESIA will be disclosed for a minimum 60 day disclosure period.

6.6.3 Stakeholder Engagement Plan

Stakeholder Engagement is an on-going process that involves: stakeholder analysis & planning, disclosure
& dissemination of information, consultation & participation, grievance mechanism, and on-going
reporting to Affected Communities. A Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) is developed and implemented
that is scaled to the Project risks and impacts and development stage, and be tailored to the characteristics
and interests of the Affected Communities and key stakeholders.
The SEP for the Project describes the planned stakeholder consultation activities and engagement process
and includes the following:

 Define the Project’s approach to future stakeholder engagement;

 Identify stakeholders within the area influenced by the Project;
 Profile identified stakeholders to understand their priorities;
 Propose an action plan for future engagement with identified stakeholders; and
 Set out the grievance/project complaints mechanism.

PAGE | 64
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

7. OVERVIEW OF STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMICAL IMPACTS

It is understood that the Project will results in several site specific environmental and social impacts on
various receptors throughout the Project phases to include planning and construction phase and operation
phase. Such impacts are discussed in the subsequent chapters for each environmental receptor
respectively and which include the following:

 Landscape and Visual;

 Land Use;
 Geology and Hydrology (Soil and Groundwater);
 Biodiversity;
 Birds (Avi-Fauna);
 Bats;
 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage;
 Air Quality;
 Infrastructure and Utilities;
 Occupational Health and Safety;
 Community Health, Safety and Security;
 Socio-economic conditions; and

 Occupational Health and Safety.

Nevertheless, the Project will result in significant and crucial positive environmental and economic impacts
on the strategic and national level given the current challenges the energy sector in Jordan is facing which
have serious implications on Jordan’s energy security as well as major economic burdens to the Jordanian
economy.

Such positive impacts are important to highlight, consider, and take into account before investigating the
potential negative environmental impacts anticipated from the Project, as discussed in the following
sections.

The anticipated positive environmental and economic impacts on the strategic level are discussed and
highlighted below.

7.1 Master Strategy of Energy Sector in Jordan

The energy demand in Jordan is characterized by a rapid increase to cope with the development. The
expected demand for primary energy in 2020 will amount to 15 million tons of oil equivalent, compared to
7.6 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007. Similarly, electricity demand in 2020 is 5,770 MW compared to
2,100 MW in 2007; and average increase of 300MW per year (MEMR, 2007).

To meet the energy demand and the challenges of the energy sector a comprehensive energy strategy was
approved by the Cabinet in December 2004 revised in 2007 – “Master Strategy of Energy Sector in Jordan”.
The Strategy is to provide a vision for development of the energy sector over the next ten years. The
Strategy studied all options and alternatives for securing all types of energy from the following points of
views: (i) the optimal options to cope with the energy demands and its investment cost, (ii) reforming and
restructuring the energy sector to open the market for competition, and (iii) expanding on renewable
energy projects and implementing energy conservation programs.

To this extent, the future goals of the Strategy can be summarized as follows:

PAGE | 65
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Reduce the dependence on foreign energy sources (energy independence);

 Security of supply with energy production based on a variety of sources;
 The target for 2015 is for domestic resources to cover 25% of demand reducing imports to 75%;
 The target for 2020 is for domestic resources to cover 39% of demand reducing imports to 61% and
achieving energy production from additional energy sources; and
 Promote renewable energy sources to share to 7% in the primary energy mix in 2015, and 10% in 2020.
This is to be met through 600-1000 MW from wind energy and 300-600 MW from solar energy.

To promote renewable energy sources and in order to open the way for private sector to effectively
participate in the implementation of renewable energy project, the Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency Law was issued and officially entered into force in April 2012. With this law, and for the first time
in Jordan, investors had the opportunity to identify and develop renewable grid‐connected electricity
production through the Direct Proposal Submission as discussed earlier in “Chapter 1”.

In line with the above, this development allows for more sustainable development and shows the
commitment of the Government of Jordan to realizing its energy strategy and meeting the set targets for
renewable energy sources.

7.2 Energy Security

Recently, most policy makers around the world are grappling with issues related to energy security, energy
poverty, and an expected increase in future demand for all energy sources – and Jordan is no exception.
Almost certainly, the most spoken words by policy makers and government bodies in Jordan in the last
couple of years revolved around ‘energy security’, which is one of the key goals of the Master Strategy of
Energy Sector in Jordan discussed above.

Currently, the Jordanian local energy resources are very limited commercially and Jordan is highly
dependent on imported energy, as the total imported energy amounted to 97% of Jordan's total energy
needs.

In line with the above, the Project will contribute to increasing energy security through reliance on an
indigenous, inexhaustible and mostly import-independent energy resource. The estimated electricity
generation from the Project is 174 GWh per year, on average; which will serve the annual electricity
needs of around 18,000 local households.

This has been based on taking into account that in 2014 (latest statistic) the annual electricity consumption
of households in Jordan was 6,580 GWh (MEMR, 2015) while the number of households in 2014 in Jordan
was 1,590,762 (DoS, 2015) and thus the average annual electricity consumption can be assumed to be
around 4,100 Kilowatt Hour (kWh).

7.3 Economic Benefits

The reliance on imported energy as discussed earlier above has led to major economic burdens to the
Jordanian economy. Over the past couple of years, Egyptian gas supplies through the Jordan Gas
Transmission Pipeline (JGTP) have been severely interrupted. To substitute the shortfall in Egyptian gas
supply, Jordan had to rely to more expensive alternative fuels (imported fuel oil, diesel, gasoline) for power
generation resulting in significant economic implications to the Government of Jordan’s energy bill. In
2012, the cost of imported energy amounted to 20% of Jordan’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

PAGE | 66
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

In line with the above, the Project will produce clean energy which will contribute to lowering electricity
generation costs compared to the current costs associated with liquid fuels and thus leads to a
substantial decrease in the Government of Jordan’s fiscal deficit.

7.4 Environmental Benefits

The negative environmental impacts from generating electricity through conventional fossil fuel burning at
thermal power plants are very well known. This most importantly includes air pollutant emissions such as
ozone, Sulphur Dioxide (SO2), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), particulate matter, and other gases which are the
cause of some serious environmental concerns such as smog, acid rain, health effects, and many others.

In addition, the burning of fossil fuels results in carbon dioxide emissions; a primary greenhouse gas
emitted through human activities which contributes to global warming. The main human activity that emits
CO2 is the combustion of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation. Concurrently, global
climate change has become an issue of concern and so reducing greenhouse gas emissions have also
emerged as primary issues to be addressed as the world searches for a sustainable energy future.

Generating electricity through wind power is rather pollution-free during operation. Compared with the
current conventional way of producing electricity in Jordan through thermal power plants using heavy
fuel oil and/or natural gas, the clean energy produced from renewable energy resources is expected to
reduce consumption of fossil fuels, and will thus help in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well as air
pollutant emissions. The Project will on average displace more than 111,000 metric tons of CO2 annually.
In addition, the project will save more than 1 million m³ of water per year in comparison to an oil-
burning power plant which utilizes water for cooling.

PAGE | 67
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

8. LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL

This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the Project site and surroundings in
relation to landscape and visual and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its
various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures,
additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels.

8.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to
landscape and visual receptors and presents the outcomes and results.

8.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

A site inspection was conducted on 4 July 2017. Most of the surrounding villages and visual receptors were
determined by using ZTV and geographical imagery before the site inspection. All surrounding villages and
possible visual receptors were also visited to determine the topography and possible significance on each
of the visual receptors. A photo was taken from each of the receptors towards the site and then visual
representations of the wind farm from each of these receptors were created using ‘SketchUp’ and ‘Google
Earth Pro’, to give an indication of what the landscape would look like pre- and post-construction of the
wind farm.

Baseline Assessment Significance Rating

Impact assessment must take account of the nature, scale and duration of impacts on the visual receptors
whether such impacts are positive or negative. Each impact is also assessed according to the visual
receptors, which were determined by using ZTV, and the following project phases:

 Construction;
 Operation; and
 Decommissioning.
 The rating system is applied to the potential impacts on the receiving visual receptors and includes an
objective evaluation of the mitigation of the impact. In assessing the significance of each impact, Table
15 below, will be utilised as the baseline impact assessment for each visual receptor and phases of the
project.

Table 15: Impact Significance Rating

Nature
Include a brief description of the impact of environmental parameter being assessed in the context of the
project. This criterion includes a brief written statement of the environmental aspect being impacted
upon by a particular action or activity.
Geographic Extent
This is defined as the area over which the impact will be experienced.
1 Site The impact will only affect the site.
2 Local/district Will affect the local area or district.
3 Province/region Will affect the entire province or region.
4 International and National Will affect the entire country.
Probability
This describes the chance of occurrence of an impact.
1 Unlikely The chance of the impact occurring is extremely low (Less
than a 25% chance of occurrence).
2 Possible The impact may occur (Between a 25% to 50% chance of
occurrence).
PAGE | 68
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

3 Probable The impact will likely occur (Between a 50% to 75% chance of
occurrence).
4 Definite Impact will certainly occur (Greater than a 75% chance of
occurrence).
Duration
This describes the duration of the impacts. Duration indicates the lifetime of the impact as a result of the
proposed activity.
1 Short term The impact will either disappear with mitigation or will be
mitigated through natural processes in a span shorter than
the construction phase (0 – 1 years), or the impact will last
for the period of a relatively short construction period and a
limited recovery time after construction, thereafter it will be
entirely negated (0 – 2 years).
2 Medium term The impact will continue or last for some time after the
construction phase but will be mitigated by direct human
action or by natural processes thereafter (2 – 10 years).
3 Long term The impact and its effects will continue or last for the entire
operational life of the development, but will be mitigated by
direct human action or by natural processes thereafter (10 –
30 years).
4 Permanent The only class of impact that will be non-transitory.
Mitigation either by man or natural process will not occur in
such a way or such a time span that the impact can be
considered indefinite.
Intensity / Magnitude
Describes the severity of an impact.
1 Low Impact affects the quality, use and integrity of the
system/component in a way that is barely perceptible.
2 Medium Impact alters the quality, use and integrity of the
system/component but system/component continues to
function in a moderately modified way and maintains
general integrity (some impact on integrity).
3 High Impact affects the continued LVIAbility of the system/
component and the quality, use, integrity and functionality
of the system or component is severely impaired and may
temporarily cease. High costs of rehabilitation and
remediation.
4 Very high Impact affects the continued LVIAbility of the
system/component and the quality, use, integrity and
functionality of the system or component permanently
ceases and is irreversibly impaired. Rehabilitation and
remediation often impossible. If possible rehabilitation and
remediation often unfeasible due to extremely high costs of
rehabilitation and remediation.
Reversibility
This describes the degree to which an impact can be successfully reversed upon completion of the
proposed activity.
1 Completely reversible The impact is reversible with implementation of minor
mitigation measures.
2 Partly reversible The impact is partly reversible but more intense mitigation
measures are required.
3 Barely reversible The impact is unlikely to be reversed even with intense
mitigation measures.
4 Irreversible The impact is irreversible and no mitigation measures exist.
Irreplaceable Loos of Resources
This describes the degree to which resources will be irreplaceably lost as a result of a proposed activity.

PAGE | 69
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

1 No loss of resource The impact will not result in the loss of any resources.
2 Marginal loss of resource The impact will result in marginal loss of resources.
3 Significant loss of resources The impact will result in significant loss of resources.
4 Complete loss of resources The impact is result in a complete loss of all resources.
Cumulative Effect
This describes the cumulative effect of the impacts. A cumulative impact is an effect which may not be
significant but may become significant if added to other existing or potential impacts emanating from
other similar or diverse activities as a result of the project activity in question.
1 Negligible cumulative impact The impact would result in negligible to no cumulative
effects.
2 Low cumulative impact The impact would result in insignificant cumulative effects.
3 Medium cumulative impact The impact would result in minor cumulative effects.
4 High cumulative impact The impact would result in significant cumulative effects
Significance
Significance is determined through a synthesis of impact characteristics. Significance is an indication of the
importance of the impact in terms of both physical extent and time scale, and therefore indicates the
level of mitigation required. The calculation of the significance of an impact uses the following formula:
(Extent + probability + reversibility + irreplaceability + duration + cumulative effect) x magnitude/intensity.
The summation of the different criteria will produce a non-weighted value. By multiplying this value with
the magnitude/intensity, the resultant value acquires a weighted characteristic which can be measured
and assigned a significance rating.
Points Impact significance rating Description
6 to 28 Negative low impact The anticipated impact will have negligible negative effects
and will require little to no mitigation.
6 to 28 Positive low impact The anticipated impact will have minor positive effects.
29 to 50 Negative medium impact The anticipated impact will have moderate negative effects
and will require moderate mitigation measures.
29 to 50 Positive medium impact The anticipated impact will have moderate positive effects.
51 to 73 Negative high impact The anticipated impact will have significant effects and will
require significant mitigation measures to achieve an
acceptable level of impact.
51 to 73 Positive high impact The anticipated impact will have significant positive effects.
74 to 96 Negative very high impact The anticipated impact will have highly significant effects and
are unlikely to be able to be mitigated adequately. These
impacts could be considered "fatal flaws".
74 to 96 Positive very high impact The anticipated impact will have highly significant positive
effects.

Visibility Rating in terms of Proximity by using the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) model

The ZTV reflects the visibility rating in terms of proximity of viewers to the wind farm, see Table 16. The
distances were calculated using satellite imagery but the impact magnitude was determined by using
previous experiences, assumptions and opinions, it is therefore theoretical. The ZTV maps will give a
clearer understanding of areas susceptible to line of sight which means; an imaginary line from the eye to a
perceived object, in this case the wind turbines. The ZTV assessment did not take into account existing
screening such as buildings and vegetation cover but rather the terrain’s above mean sea level (AMSL)
which indicates line of sight. The receptors which were identified were subject to an impact assessment.
The following table was utilised to determine the ZTV Visibility Rating in terms of proximity:

Table 16: ZTV Visibility Rating in terms of proximity

Radius Visibility rating in terms of proximity
0-5km Very High
5-10km High
10-15km Medium-High
15-20km Medium
20-25km Medium-Low
PAGE | 70
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

25-30km Low
30-35km Very Low

Identified Visual Receptors

This section is intended to highlight possible visual receptors within the landscape which, due to use, could
be sensitive to landscape change, see Figure 15. They include:

 Area Receptors includes the Dana Biosphere Reserve.

 Linear Receptors which include:
o Route 35 / King’s Highway;
o Route 15 / Highway 15; and
o Route 814.
 Point Receptors which include:
o Shobak Castle;
o Dawsaq Castle;
o Villages within the Shobak Municipality;
o The town of Al-Qadissyeh;
o Wadi Musa & Petra; and
o Ma’an.

Figure 15: Visual Receptor Map

8.1.2 Results
The proposed wind farm site is located within a moderately hilly terrain area with altitudes ranging from
around 1,195m to 1,350m AMSL. The Project area slopes down to the east, towards Highway 15.
Surrounding the Project site, mountains, valleys and canyons can be found towards the north, west and
south west where as to the east hilly terrain and flat planes dominates the landscape, see Figure 20 and
Figure 21.

The landform and drainage described above is unlikely to limit visibility. Certain areas within 35km from
the proposed activity might have a clear view without taking existing screening and air quality into account.
PAGE | 71
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 16-19 below were taken from the middle of the site toward the four main directions namely north,
east, south and west.

Figure 16: View from site towards the North

Figure 17: View from site towards the east

PAGE | 72
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 18: View from site towards the south

Figure 19: View from site towards the west

PAGE | 73
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 20: Cross Section Profile taken from north to south

Figure 21: Cross Section Profile taken from west to east

8.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on landscape and
visual during the various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation phase. For each
impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional
requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to
acceptable levels.

8.2.1 Potential Impacts during the Construction Phase

Site preparation activities which are to take place onsite by the EPC Contractor for installation of the wind
turbines and the various project components to include transmission cables, access roads and internal road
network, buildings, etc. are expected to include land clearing activities, levelling, excavation, grading, etc.

Construction activities would create a temporary effect on the visual quality of the site and its
surroundings. The visual environment during the construction phase would include the presence of
elements typical of a construction site such as equipment and machinery to include cranes, excavators,
trucks, front end loaders, compactors and other.

PAGE | 74
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

However, as discussed in “Section 8.1”, the project site itself is considered an area with no particular
structures of interest or any key visual receptors – such as recreational activities, environmental reserves,
remarkable/unique historical or cultural sites, or other natural structures normally seen as valuable by the
human perception. In addition, any visual impacts to the surrounding landscapes are unlikely, and if so
then they will be only temporary affected and will definitely not exceed the impacts anticipated during the
operation phase as discussed in “Section 8.2.2” below.

The visual environment created during the construction period would be temporary, of a short-term
duration, limited to the construction phase only. For the duration of construction, the visual impacts will
be of a negative nature and will be noticeable within the Project site, and therefore of a medium
magnitude. As there are no key sensitive visual receptors which would be affected the receiving
environmental is determined to be of a low sensitivity. Given all the above, such an impact is considered to
be of minor significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the EPC Contractor during the
construction phase and which include:

 Ensure proper general housekeeping and personnel management measures are implemented which
could include:
- Ensure the construction site is left in an orderly state at the end of each work day.
- To the greatest extent possible construction machinery, equipment, and vehicles that are not in use
should be removed in a timely manner and kept in locations to reduce visual impacts to the area.
- Ensure proper storage, collection, and disposal of waste streams generated as discussed in detail in
“Section 10.2”.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact is
categorized as not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor and which include:

 Inspections of the works should be carried out always to ensure the above measures are implemented.

8.2.2 Potential Impacts during the Operation Phase

Visual impacts associated with wind energy projects typically concern the turbines themselves (e.g. colour,
height, and number of turbines) and impacts relating to their interaction with the character of the
surrounding landscape and the visual receptor which might be present. Turbines are tall structures that can
be seen from several kilometres away and impose a change on the landscape of the area where they are
installed. However, visual impacts depend on several factors such as distance, size, visibility, landscape and
geography, and the presence of potential sensitive visual receptors.

Discussed below is the methodology that was adopted for the assessment of impacts of the wind turbines
on the landscape and visual character of the Project site and its surrounding, and the results and outcomes
of the assessment.

(i) Impact Assessment Methodology

Visual Receptors can be defined as: “Individuals, groups or communities who are subject to the visual
influence of a particular project.”

PAGE | 75
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

A Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) is a Geographic Information System (GIS)-generated tool to identify
the likely (or theoretical) extent of visibility of a development. The tool used in this model does not take
existing screening in account but only the above mean sea level of the landscape.

Table 17 reflects the visibility rating in terms of proximity on viewers of the wind farm. The distances were
calculated according to experience, assumptions and opinion. The ZTV maps will give a clearer
understanding of areas susceptible to line of sight.

Table 17: ZTV Visibility Rating in terms of Proximity for the different receptors of the project site
Radius Visual Receptors Visibility rating in terms of
proximity
0-5km • Villages within the Shobak Municipality Very High
• Shobak Castle
• Dawsaq Castle
• Route 814
• King’s Highway
5-10km • Southern villages within the Shobak High
Municipality
10-15km • Highway 15 Medium-High
• Al-Qadissyeh
15-20km • Dana Biosphere Reserve No line of sight
20-25km • Wadi Musa & Petra No line of sight
25-30km None N/A
30-35km • Ma’an Very Low

The ZTV assessment did not take into account existing screening such as buildings and vegetation cover but
rather the terrain’s above mean sea level (AMSL) which indicates line of sight. Visibility during spring and
summer can be restricted to approximately 12km.

a. Visibility Analysis

The theoretical visibility analysis describes the area over which the planned turbine installations might
have an influence or an effect upon the visual environment, i.e. the wind turbines can be noticed as
elements of the landscape.

The visibility analysis for this Project was conducted by the means of a calculation with WindPRO software
(version 2.9; Sep 2014, Module ZVI), based on a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) (SRTM) (USGS, 2000). The
SRTM DEM provides elevation information with a spatial resolution of 25m and a vertical accuracy of
<16 m.

The view shed calculation was conducted by calculating the view lines from observation points at defined
elevation for each turbine (e.g. hub height, rotor tip maximum) looking towards the ground. Visibility was
calculated for ground level grid cells with a size of 25x25 m. Where the view line hits a ground cell, visibility
between this cell and the respective turbine was counted. As this visible relationship is bi-directional, the
result also represents the visibility of the turbine from the subject grid cell. The view shed calculation was
conducted for each turbine location. As a result, each grid cell contains the information on which turbines
are visible from that cell. The number of turbines in the view from each cell is counted for an impact
magnitude classification.

The following assumptions have been made prior to the calculation:

 View shed calculations were limited to an area of 25kmx25km around the planned turbines given that
beyond this distance, a visual impact can be considered to be negligible;
 The observation point of the turbine was anticipated at an elevation of 137m above the ground (hub
height plus rotor blade length); and

PAGE | 76
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Screening objects such as trees, buildings or small changes in topography (e.g. road cuttings) reducing
the visibility of the Project have not been taken into account.

Given the assumptions and simplifications of the visibility analysis, the results should be regarded as
indicative. In general, partly seen objects are accounted for as being completely visible, since the modelling
does not differentiate between a partly and a completely seen object; only the general entire object height
is the calculation reference for the visibility analysis. Having only a small part of the turbine (e.g. rotor tip
or only the uppermost part of the tower) viewable will be a lesser change than the entire turbine. Both,
however, are counted equally in the visibility analysis. The assessment of selected viewpoints described in
the next section accounts for such effects for the selected views, but on the other side cannot cover all
areas where visibility may occur.

The hub at a height can be seen as the major reference for a turbine’s visibility. In order to also consider
the rotor blade above the hub, the maximum tip height can be taken as a worst case. However, in this case
a turbine will be counted even if nothing else but its tip can be seen beyond a ridge. Therefore, it should be
noted that the results may show some overestimate in the counts of visible turbines.

b. Photomontage Methodology (Photorealistic Simulation)

Photomontages are used to illustrate the likely view of the visible structures of a proposed project as they
would be seen when a photograph is taken from a selected viewpoint. Hence, the photomontage focuses
on a singular view and how it will be influenced by a project.

For the Project, several viewpoints were selected in the course of a visit to the area in June 2017.
Viewpoints were selected at locations assumed to be highly disadvantageous in terms of the visual impact
due to presence of receptors (villages or dwellings). Viewpoints were selected in order to provide
exemplary photographic views which show the degree of visual impacts at these viewpoints by means of
photomontage – such viewpoints selected are presented in the figure below in red. Thereby an impression
can be provided on the wind turbines’ visual presence. Moreover, it can be shown, whether the turbines
can be seen in total or only partially.

Photographs were taken with a digital single lens reflex (SLR) camera and a 28mm digital lens (35mm
equivalent). For each viewpoint, a computer rendered image was generated from a digital model of the
wind farm by using WindPRO (Module VISUAL).

For the simulation, the horizontal viewing angle of 60° was chosen, which displays existing objects more
realistically than a wide panorama field (in which objects further than 500m from the viewer appear
understated).

PAGE | 77
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 22: Identified Visual Receptors Map

c. Assessment of the Impacts

As discussed earlier, to assess an impact entails assessing two main criteria – the sensitivity of the receiving
parameter of the impact and the magnitude of the impact itself. Throughout this section, the impacts have
been assessed for each of the landscape types identified and discussed in “Section 8.1.2” – which also
identifies the sensitivity of each of those landscape types which are likely to be impacted. In addition, the
magnitude of each impact is determined according to the rationale discussed in Table 14 above.

It is important to note that the impacts discussed throughout this section are not necessarily considered
negative. For wind farm projects, the aesthetic perception by viewers is quite different; it can be positive or
negative, depending on the individual’s attitude to the principle and presence of wind generation.
Aesthetic issues are by their nature highly subjective. For some viewers, such turbines could be regarded as
manmade structures with visual burdens while to others it represents a positive impact in the sense that
they introduce a break in the otherwise dull and monotonous view. Such views could be perceived
positively by adding a new interesting scenic feature for the viewer (e.g. ‘arid landscape with high-tech’) or
implementing modern power generation industries by renewable ‘clean’ energy in the area.

(ii) Results

Figures 22-25 below is a summary of the wind farm zone of theoretical visibility from different buffer
distances, from 5km up to 35km.

PAGE | 78
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 23: Wind Farm ZTV – 5km buffer

Figure 24: Wind Farm ZTV – 15km buffer

PAGE | 79
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 25: Wind Farm ZTV – 25km buffer

Figure 26: Wind Farm ZTV – 35km buffer

PAGE | 80
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

During the visit, it was clear that Wadi Musa and Petra and Dana Biosphere Reserve are completely
screened by mountains and landscape features. They will not form part of significance assessment
although photos are available on request.

The rating system reflected in Table 15 of this LVIA report will be utilised to determine the significance of
the impacts. A photo was taken from each visual receptor towards the proposed development. Visual
presentations of the wind farm were created for only eight, and the more significant, receptors. The only
cumulative factor that contributed to the cumulative assessment of the wind farm is the Tafila wind farm
located 19.8km north from the proposed development.
Table 18: Shobak Castle Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil ble Loss Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact
cal Extent ity on de ity of ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual
Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 2 2 34
Impact
on
on
Post-
employ
Mitigati 2 3 3 2 4 2 2 32
ees
on

Figure 27: View from Shobak Castle towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1367m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 4.5 km South East

Shobak Castle is one of the main tourist attractions around Shobak. Shobak Castle is located on top of a hill
with a clear view of the proposed development, see Figure 26, however the Lafarge cement factory and
existing Tafila wind farm are also visible, except on windy days when dust in the air influences visibility, see
Table 18 and Figure 27.
PAGE | 81
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

A tour guide was consulted at Shobak Castle and he indicated that the tourists visiting the castle do not
have problem with the existing Tafila wind farm project, also visible from Shobak Castle, as it shows local
prosperity, by making use of renewable energy sources. The local community is looking forward to the job
opportunities that will be created.

Figure 28: Visual Presentation from Shobak Castle

Table 19: Dawsaq Castle Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil ble Loss Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact
cal Extent ity on de ity of ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 3 4 3 2 54
Impact on
on
employ Post-
ees Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 36
on

PAGE | 82
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 29: View from Dawsaq Castle towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1283m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 1.4 km South-south east

Dawsaq Castle is the closest of all the visual receptors but due to the fact that the caste is in complete
ruins, very few tourists go through the trouble of stopping at the site, see Figure 28. The site can however
become more popular with tourists, as this would be the best vantage point to view the turbines from, see
Table 19 and Figure 29.

Figure 30: Visual Presentation from Dawsaq Castle

PAGE | 83
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 20: Al-Qadissyeh Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 3 3 1 2 2 2 14
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 2 3 1 2 1 1 11
on

Figure 31: View from Al-Qadissyeh towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1431m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 14.5 km South

Al-Qadissyeh is a town located on the King’s Highway, see Figure 30. When driving towards Shobak Village,
some of the turbines will be visible in the distance, depending on the turns and topography of the road.
The wind farm will be visible to some of the houses in the village which are located on higher ground, but a
large majority will be screened by existing buildings in the town, see Table 20 and Figure 31. When driving
north on the route, the Lafarge cement factory and existing Tafila wind farm are visible.

PAGE | 84
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 32: Visual Presentation from Al-Qadissyeh

Table 21: Zaitooneh Village Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources

Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 57
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 3 3 38
on

Figure 33: View from Zaitooneh Village towards site

PAGE | 85
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Notes

Elevation: 1380m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 2.3 km North East

Zaitooneh is a very small village located south west of the project site, see Figure 32. The town is not
located on one of the major routes and the residents of the village would most likely be the only people
visual receptors. The village has very few buildings that act as screening, and due to the elevation of the
village and distance from the turbines, most of the turbines will be visible, see Table 21 and Figure 33.

Figure 34: Visual Presentation from Zaitooneh Village

Table 22: Faisaliyeh Village Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 57
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 3 3 38
on

PAGE | 86
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 35: View from Faisaliyeh Village towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1261m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 2.2 km North

Faisaliyeh will have a clear view of all the turbines, with no existing screening present, see Table 22 and
Figures 34 and 35. During the late afternoon, the turbines located to the north west of the village will be
even more visible as the sky is illuminated by the setting sun and the silhouette of the turbines become
visible.

Figure 36: Visual Presentation from Faisaliyeh Village

PAGE | 87
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 23: Mothallath Al-Shobak Town Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 2 2 34
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 30
on

Figure 37: View from Shobak Town towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1350m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 3.3 km south east

The turbines will be visible to a large portion of the town, some sections will be shielded from the wind
farm due to the topography and existing infrastructure, however houses that are located on the north
western hillside, will have a clear view of the turbines towards the south east, see Figures 36, 37 and Table
23.

PAGE | 88
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 38: Visual Presentation from Shobak Town

Table 24: Al-Jaya Village Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 2 2 34
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 4 2 2 32
on

Figure 39: View from Al-Jaya Village towards site

PAGE | 89
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Notes

Elevation: 1324m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 2.6 km South East

Large sections of the village, and road that runs through the village is screened by trees located adjacent to
the road, buildings and topography (hills), see Figure 38. Some turbines might be visible on higher lying
areas in the village and were there are dales that expose the turbines whilst driving on Route 35, see Table
24.
Table 25: Nejel Village Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 2 4 2 2 34
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 4 2 2 32
on

Figure 40: View from Nejel Village towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1426m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 5.8 km South East

A large portion of the village and the King’s Highway that runs through the village is screened by buildings,
trees and topography, see Figure 39. The turbines can be visible from higher lying areas within Nejel.
Telecommunication towers are also visible from the town, see Table 25.

PAGE | 90
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 26: Shamakh Village Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 2 3 2 2 32
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 30
on

Figure 41: View from Shamakh Village towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1437m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 6.1 km East

A large portion of the village and the King’s Highway that runs through the village is screened by buildings,
trees and topography, see Figure 40. The turbines can be visible from higher lying areas within Shamakh.
Telecommunication towers are also visible from the town, see Table 26.
Table 27: Bi’r Khidad Village Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 2 3 2 2 32
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 30
on
PAGE | 91
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 42: View from Bi’r Khidad Village towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1557m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 8.2 km North East

Bi’r Khidad is a small village located south west of the project. The village has a high elevation and the
turbines will be visible from the village, see Figure 41. The village is not located on a main route and
therefore the residents will be the main visual receptor. No screening exists on site, see Table 27.
Table 28: Shobak Village 1 Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 4 3 2 3 2 2 32
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 30
on

PAGE | 92
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 43: View from Shobak Village 1 towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1385m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 2.5 km South East

Very little screening exists for Shobak Village 1, as this part of the village is quite elevated and located
within close proximity to the turbine, see Figure 42 and Table 28. The residents will most likely be the only
visual receptor for the village.
Table 29: Shobak Village 2 Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 30
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 28
on

PAGE | 93
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 44: View from Shobak Village 2 towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1592m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 12.2 km North East

Shobak Village 2 is elevated, but the topography of the surrounding area will partially screen the turbines,
see Figure 43 and Table 29. The village is also very sparsely populated and would therefore have very few
receptors.
Table 30: Shobak Village 3 Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 30
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 28
on

PAGE | 94
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 45: View from Shobak Village 3 towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1512m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 9.3 km South East

Shobak Village 3 only has a few homesteads located adjacent to the road, which is partially screened from
the wind farm by the surrounding topography, see Figure 44 and Table 30.
Table 31: Shobak Village 4 Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Geographi Probabil Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
Nature of Impact ble Loss of
cal Extent ity on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Pre-
Visual Mitigati 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 30
Impact on
on
residen Post-
ts Mitigati 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 28
on

PAGE | 95
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 46: View from Shobak Village 4 towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1481m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 7.1 km South East

The topography offers very little screening of the wind farm from Shobak Village 4, see Table 31. A section
of the road that runs through Shobak Village 4 has trees adjacent to the road, which acts as some form of
screening, see Figure 45.
Table 32: King’s Highway Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Nature of Geographi Probabili Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
ble Loss of
Impact cal Extent ty on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources

Visua Pre-
l Mitigati 2 4 1 2 4 2 2 30
Impa on
ct on Post-
road Mitigati 2 4 1 1 4 2 2 15
users on

PAGE | 96
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 47: View form King’s Highway towards site

Notes

Elevation: N/A

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: N/A

The wind farm will periodically be visible to road users using the King’s Highway, especially the section
between Al-Qadissyeh and Shobak Village 3. Screening exists on some sections of road due to
infrastructure, vegetation and topography, see Figure 46 and Table 32.
Table 33: Route 814 Significance Rating
Irreplacea
Nature of Geographi Probabili Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
ble Loss of
Impact cal Extent ty on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Visua Pre-
l Mitigati 2 4 1 2 4 2 2 30
Impa on
ct on Post-
road Mitigati 2 3 1 2 4 2 2 28
users on

PAGE | 97
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 48: View form Route 814 towards site

Notes

Elevation: ~1220m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: N/A

Route 814 will have a clear view of the turbines while traveling west, however, the route is only ~14km
long, and so travellers will only be exposed to the turbines for a short period of time, see Figures 47, 48
and Table 33. During the late afternoon, the turbines located to the west and south west of the route will
be even more visible as the sky is illuminated by the setting sun and the silhouette of the turbines become
visible.

Figure 49: Visual Presentation from Route 814

PAGE | 98
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 34: Highway 15 Significance Rating

Irreplacea
Nature of Geographi Probabili Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
ble Loss of
Impact cal Extent ty on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Visua Pre-
l Mitigati 2 3 1 2 3 2 1 24
Impa on
ct on Post-
road Mitigati 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 12
users on

Figure 50: View form Highway 15 towards site

Notes

Elevation: 1048m

Distance and direction from nearest turbine: 13.5 km East

Road users travelling on Highway 15 will have a view of the turbines in the distance, the Tafila wind farm
however, is on a higher elevation than the proposed Shobak wind farm and will be visible during a longer
duration whilst traveling on Highway 15, see Figures 49, 50 and Table 34.

PAGE | 99
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 51: Visual Presentation from Highway 15

Table 35 below presents the visual impact on tourists using nearby roads and visiting tourists sites,
including Shobak Castle during the operation phase whereas the Table 36 presents the average significance
rating on all visual receptors during the operation phase.
Table 35: Tourists Significance Rating (during operations)
Irreplacea
Nature of Geographi Probabili Durati Magnitu Reversibil Cumulati SIGNIFICA
ble Loss of
Impact cal Extent ty on de ity ve Effect NCE
Resources
Visual Pre-
impac Mitigati 2 4 1 2 4 2 3 32
t on on
touris
ts
using
nearb
y Post-
roads Mitigati 2 4 1 1 4 2 3 16
and on
visitin
g
touris
t sites

Table 36: Average Significance Rating on Visual Receptors (during operations)

Visual Receptor Pre-Mitigation Post-Mitigation

Shobak Castle 34 32

Dawsaq Castle 54 36

Al-Qadissyeh 14 11

Zaitooneh Village 57 38

PAGE | 100
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Visual Receptor Pre-Mitigation Post-Mitigation

Faisaliyeh Village 57 38

Shobak Town 34 30

Al-Jaya Village 34 32

Nejel Village 34 32

Shamakh Village 32 30

Bi’r Khidad Village 32 30

Shobak Village 1 32 30

Shobak Village 2 30 28

Shobak Village 3 30 28

Shobak Village 4 30 28

King’s Highway (35) 30 15

Route 814 30 28

Highway 15 24 12

Tourists 32 16

Average 34 27

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the Developer/EPC Contractor:

 Due to the height of the turbines and extent of the Project, no viable mitigation measures can be
implemented to eliminate the visual impact of the turbines, but the subjectivity towards the turbines
can be influenced by creating a “Green Energy” awareness campaign. This could be implemented by
constructing a visitor’s centre on the property allocated for the proposed wind farm which should be
open to school fieldtrips, the local community and tourists.

 Avoid including lettering, company insignia, advertising or graphics on the turbines.

As noted throughout the assessment, the majority of the visual impacts are considered minor. There are no
mitigation measures per se that can be implemented to eliminate the visual impacts from the turbines. The
visual impact, as expected will be higher on the human settlements that are closer to the project. During
the consultation process, this is issue was brought up and discussed and the local community has shown a
wide acceptance of the Project and none has expressed concern regarding the visual impact of the project.
On the contrary, the presence of the turbines was looked at positively but the measures discussed above

PAGE | 101
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

are expected to lessen the visual burden – therefore the residual significance is expected to remain minor.
However, it is important to note again that there are no key issues of concern in terms of the visual
impacts.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase:

 Inspection of the works to ensure the above measures are implemented.

PAGE | 102
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

9. LAND USE
This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the Project site and surroundings in
relation to land use (to include both formal and informal) and then assesses the anticipated impacts from
the Project throughout its various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could
include mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified
to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

9.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to land
use (to include both formal and actual) and presents the outcomes and results.

9.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

The baseline assessment of the ‘formal’ land use was based on collection of secondary data and land use
plans set by the relevant governmental authorities – to include Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MoMA),
Ministry of Environment (MoEnv), and the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) etc.

Understanding and characterizing the informal or ‘actual’ land use of the Project site was mainly based on
several site visits undertaken by the ‘ESIA Team’ to the project site, as well as consultation sessions with
the local communities. The objective of such site visits and the consultation sessions was to investigate the
actual land use of the site, and determine if it provides any certain value to the affected communities in
the areas (e.g. agricultural activities, grazing, etc.).

The site visits were undertaken during May 2017 as it is considered the phase which entails the highest
onsite land activities by the local community members. The site visits entailed visiting each area where
activity was noticed, to the greatest extent possible, starting from south to the north of the Project area. At
each area, detailed discussions were undertaken with members onsite with the objective of (amongst
other as stated previously in ‘Section 6.5’: (i) introduce the project and its various components; (ii)
understand, characterize and assess the activities undertaken onsite; (iii) present the potential impacts
which could affect their activities onsite and take into account their thoughts and concerns regarding the
project development. It is important to note that consultations were gender specific – therefore specific
consultations were undertaken with women by a female specialist of the ‘ESIA Team’.

In addition, to the above a consultation session was undertaken with local community representatives in
May 2017. The objective of the session included (amongst other as stated previously in ‘Section 6.5’: (i)
introduce the project and its various components; (ii) understand, characterize and assess the activities
undertaken onsite and verify the outcomes of the site visits undertaken; (iii) present the potential impacts
which could affect their activities onsite and take into account their thoughts and concern on the Project
development.

9.1.2 Formal Land Use

The formal land use of the Project site was investigated based on available plans set by the relevant
governmental authorities. This includes the following: (i) land use planning by MoMA, (ii) planning for areas
of critical environmental concern by MoEnv, and (iii) grazing reserves and forest lands planning by MoA.

(i) Land Use Planning by MoMA

The Project might conflict with the allowed land use set for the area by MoMA which designates specific
land uses in Jordan where only certain activities are allowed. This issue has been investigated and the
results are presented below.

PAGE | 103
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

In accordance with the “Law for the Organization of Cities, Villages and Buildings No. 79 for 1966”, MoMA
designated specific land uses for areas in the Kingdom that are within organized boundaries (urban areas).
However, at that time, no land use plans were developed for areas that lay outside of the organizational
boundaries and therefore, in 2006 a project to prepare a land use map for such areas began. The output
was the National Land Use Master Plan of 2007; which is a recent attempt to produce a harmonized land
use plan for those areas that are outside of organized boundaries. Accordingly, the “Land Use Planning
Regulation No. 6 of 2007” was issued to regulate land use for those areas outside of organized boundaries
and to divide territories by using zoning cryptography as follows:

 Agricultural areas sector, identified by the symbol (A);

 Rural areas sector, identified by the symbol (B);
 Marginal areas sector, identified by the symbol(C);
 Desert areas sector, identified by the symbol (D); and
 Forest areas.

Table 37 below presents the location of the project site and the land use plan set within the National Land
Use Master Plan of 2007. The project site is located outside of the regularised boundaries where the
closest are Mdhaibie’, Zaitooneh, Zobeiriyeh and Mothallath Al-Shobak which are represented in pink in
the figure below; where such regularised boundaries have assigned land use categories in the “Law for the
Organization of Cities, Villages and Buildings No. 79 for 1966”. However, as the Project site is located
outside the regularised boundaries of these settlements, it is considered as areas outside planning zones
with assigned land use categories set in accordance with the Regulation No. 6 of 2007. According to Figure
51 below and the “Regulation No. 6 of 2007”, the Project site is classified as the following:
Table 37: Land Use Classification of the Project Area by MOMA
Classification Description
Agricultural Area of Roughly 60% of the project site is within this classification, covering the whole
rd
the 3 Degree western part of the project site and parts of the central part. Article 6[A-3]
describes the area as suitable for agro-forestry. Article 6[B] of the Regulation
specifically states “In those areas the following land use are allowed: electric
power generation facilities, transmission, and distribution networks”.
nd
Desert Area of the 2 Covering the remaining of the project site including the eastern part of the
Degree project site and a smaller part of the central part. Article 9[A-2] defines the area
as arid and it can be used for seasonal farming depending on the availability of
water.

To this extent, it is evident that the Project site does not conflict with MOMA’s land use plan; in fact, the
designated land use for the area allows for the development of such a Project.

PAGE | 104
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 52: MoMA Land Use Master Plan of the Project Site

(ii) Areas of Critical Environmental Concern Planning by MoEnv

The project could potentially conflict with the use of current or planned nearby specially designated areas
such as wilderness areas, areas of critical environmental concern, and/or special recreation management
areas. The Ministry of Environment (MoEnv) has the responsibility of establishing nature reserves, national
parks, and any site of special environmental significance for protection and management.

However, the MoEnv delegates such responsibilities to the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature
(RSCN). In accordance with the above, the RSCN has designated four (4) categories for areas of
environmental concern as highlighted below. Those have been assigned based on detailed reviews
prepared by the RSCN and which include: (i) National Network of Protected Areas in Jordan and (ii)
Important Bird Areas of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

 Established Reserves: in accordance with the “National Network of Protected Areas in Jordan” the
RSCN has established several reserves which have been announced as protected areas and are
currently managed and operated by the RSCN;
 Proposed Reserves: areas proposed within the “National Network of Protected Areas in Jordan” as
protected areas but have not been announced as reserves yet and currently are not managed or
operated by the RSCN;
 Reserves Under Establishment: areas proposed within the “National Network of Protected Areas in
Jordan” as protected areas and are announced as so, but are still underway to be established,
operated, and managed by the RSCN; and
 Important Bird Areas (IBAs): areas proposed within “Important Bird Areas of the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan”.

PAGE | 105
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Taking the above into account, the RSCN prepared a comprehensive plan that identifies the location of the
reserves and IBAs discussed above. The figure below presents the closest areas in relation to the project
site. As noted in the figure, there are no areas of critical environment concern within the project site or its
immediate surroundings; there are no established, under establishment, proposed reserves or IBAs. A
number of preservation areas exist further away from the project site with the closest delineation being
around 5km away which includes the Jerba IBA, which, according to BirdLife International, is an IBA of
national significance but not global significance, see Figure 52 and Table 38.
Table 38: Areas of Critical Environmental Concern by MoEnv
Classification Description
Dana Biosphere Located approximately 11km north of the project site, the reserve is the largest
Reserve nature reserve in the country and is declared by UNESCO as a Man and Biosphere
Reserve
Dana IBA Located approximately 7km north of the project site, the IBA is acknowledged by
BirdLife International as an IBA of global significance
Shobak Proposed Located approximately 11km west of the project site, the reserve was proposed
Protected Area by RSCN in 2012 but there are no plans to establish the reserve in the near future
Jerba IBA Located approximately 5km southwest of the project site, the IBA is classified by
RSCN as an IBA of national importance but is not acknowledged by BirdLife
International as an IBA of global significance
Petra IBA Located approximately 16km southwest of the project site, the IBA is
acknowledged by BirdLife International as an IBA of global significance

To this extent, it can be concluded that no conflict exists between the Project site and the MoEnv/RSCN
planning context. The Project site is not located within established/planned reserves or important bird
areas.

Figure 53: Areas of Critical Environmental Concern in Relation to Project Site

PAGE | 106
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(iii) Grazing Reserves and Forest Area Planning by MoA

The Project might conflict with current or proposed planning policies of the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)
for the general area. The most important planning issues that must be investigated include potential
conflict with grazing reserves of the MoA and forest lands.

Grazing Reserves

The MoA is entitled to planning grazing reserves in the Kingdom on rangelands. According to discussions
with the Rangeland Directorate, there are currently 34 grazing reserves distributed throughout the
Kingdom that cover an area of around 80, 000 Dunums. Such reserves are planned and established for
sustainable grazing and prevention of overgrazing which generally reduce the usefulness, productivity, and
biodiversity of the land and is one cause of desertification and erosion.

The Project site is not located within any grazing reserves. The closest grazing reserves to the project site
are Al Faisaliyeh grazing reserve, which is located in close proximity to the east of the project site, while
Fujeij grazing reserve is located approximately 4km north of the project site. Figure 53 below presents the
location of the grazing reserves in relation to the Project site.

Figure 54: Grazing Reserves in Relation to Project Site

Forest Area Planning

According to the “Agriculture Law No. 13 for the year 2015” Forest Lands are lands of the State that are
registered as forests and the lands of the State that are allocated for forestry purposes. The Law states that
it shall be prohibited to abuse forest lands whether by erecting permanent or temporary residences,
buildings or structures thereon, or digging wells or caves, or installing water, electricity or telephone lines,
or opening sewage lines or canals therein, or by cultivation or ploughing, or by grazing therein, without a
license.

PAGE | 107
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 54 below shows that there are no forest areas inside the project site. To this extent, it can be
concluded that no conflict exists between the Project Site and the Ministry of Agriculture’s planning
context, specifically for grazing reserves and forest lands.

Figure 55: Forest Areas in Relation to Project Site

9.1.3 Actual Land Use

This section presents in detail the actual land use of the project site by the local community and the
nomads each of which is discussed in further details below.

(i) Local Community

All project activities are going to take place on governmentally-owned lands and along public access routes
that are not privately-owned, see Figure 56.

Summarized below are the main land use patterns for the Project area in general. This has been based on
onsite consultations with local communities as well as a local community consultation session (as discussed
in detail in Section 6.5.2). Based on such consultations, it was understood that the activities detailed below
are restricted to the local community members of the nearby villages.

 Grazing Activities (March – May): throughout this season grazing activities take place within the area
including the project site. This mainly involves day trips to the area where afterwards the local
communities return to their villages. Generally, anyone is allowed to enter the lands for grazing except
areas that are seasonally planted. Livestock raising activities are generally undertaken by the local
communities for self-sufficiency purposes and less so as a source of income. The project site and its
surroundings are not considered of prime value for livestock owners since they have other areas to the
west of the project that are considered of higher value for grazing. This is mainly due to the fact that
the project site is generally arid and has a relatively low vegetation cover in comparison to richer areas
PAGE | 108
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

to the west. During this period of the year, and depending on rainfall amounts, fields that are planted
with barley during autumn could be open for grazing for livestock based on predefined arrangements
between the members of the local community. For instance, if the rainfall was poor and the barley
growth was weak, grazing could be allowed in these fields. In seasons of higher rainfall, barley could be
harvested in order to be used later in the year during the dry season of summer (June-August).

 Harvesting Activities (June – August): Since there are no farms for perennial crops in the project site,
this season is limited to harvesting barley. As mentioned earlier, this highly depends on the rainfall and
the availability of options. During poor rainfall years, harvesting of barley does not take place and
livestock is allowed to graze directly from the fields, as was the case this year. Harvesting could only
take place if the rainfall was good during winter, which would produce good yield that could be
harvested to be used during the dry seasons.

 Planting Season (September – November): During this period of the year, the area is completely empty
from any land users as most of livestock owners would be located east to find warmer areas to protect
their livestock from cold wind and rain. Similar to the other seasons, no one inhabits the area in
general and livestock owners would depend more on fodder to feed their livestock throughout this
period. Some livestock owners would plant barley and wheat for livestock during this period, which
would afterwards be either harvested or grazed as mentioned earlier.
 Dormant Season (December – February): The area becomes completely empty of any land users during
this period. Most of the livestock owners would keep their livestock indoors and would depend on
fodder.

Figure 56: Leased Land Parcels within Project Area

PAGE | 109
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(ii) Nomads

Nomadic groups move around on a seasonal basis. They move to the project site and its surroundings
during spring/summer (between May and September), depending on the availability of rangeland in the
area itself and other areas in the country. Very limited numbers of nomads inhabit the project site and its
surroundings on seasonal basis, see Figure 56. This is mainly due to the fact that the area is too open and
windy and the landscape does not provide enough refuge from any extreme weather conditions.
Additionally, and as mentioned earlier, the project site has a relatively poor vegetation cover which results
in considering the area as a stopover station rather than a seasonal residential area for nomads. By the end
of September, as the weather becomes colder, they move back to warmer areas, such as Wadi Araba to
the west or Al-Jafr to the east.

Figure 57: Location of nomad Bedouin tents during the spring of 2017 (ECO Consult, 2017)

9.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the project activities on the formal land
use and actual land use. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation
measures, additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or
reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

Given that the impacts from the Project on land use are similar in nature throughout the various project
phases, those have been discussed collectively throughout this section.

9.2.1 Impacts on Formal Land Use during the Planning and Construction Phase
This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on the formal land
use. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional
requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to
acceptable levels.

As discussed earlier the Project site does not conflict with any of the relevant governmental entities’ formal
planning context and which includes the following:

PAGE | 110
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 MOMA: the Project site does not conflict with MOMA’s land use plan, in fact the designated land use
for the area allows for the development of such a Project.
 MoEnv/RSCN: the Project site does not conflict with the MoEnv’s/RSCN’s planning context as it is not
located within established/planned reserves or important bird areas.
 MoA: The Project site does not conflict with the MoA’s planning context, specifically for gazing reserves
and forest lands.

To this extent, there are no anticipated impacts from the Project on the formal land use plans set for the
area.

9.2.2 Impacts on Actual Land Use during the Construction and Operation Phase
Besides potential impacts on the formal land use context set for the area, there are other potential impacts
on the actual (or informal) land use of the Project site. Inappropriate selection of a Project site could entail
certain impacts on the local community and nomads given that such lands could provide certain value such
as agricultural activities, grazing, etc. Taking all of the above into account, the potential impacts on the
formal land use , on the potentially affected communities, local community grazers and farmers, as well as
the nomads, are discussed in detail below.

 Local Community Grazers: grazing activities are not expected to be affected during construction and
operation due to the following: (i) Project footprint areas are very small and have been calculated to be
less than 1% of the entire Project site boundary area; (ii) There is no key habitat for grazing that is
restricted within the leased lands or the Project site only. The habitat utilized for livestock grazing in
the Project area is widespread and can be found extensively throughout the region.
 Local Community Farmers: this includes local community members whom harvest the land. Such
activities are unlikely to be affected during construction and operation. This is due to the fact that the
Project footprint areas are very small and have been calculated to be less than 1% of the entire Project
site boundary area.
 Nomadic groups are unlikely to be affected by the construction and operation activities of the Project,
whether it is in terms of settlement or the agricultural and grazing activities that are undertaken during
their settlement in the area. This is due to the following: (i) Project footprint areas are very small and
have been calculated to be less than 1% of the entire Project site boundary area; (ii) Generally nomadic
groups do not settle in the exact specific area each year. Therefore, even if some of the Project
components (which as discussed earlier are of a minimal footprint) are within an area in which a
nomad is currently settling, in later years (during construction and operation) nomads could simply
settle in other nearby areas.
Given all of the above, the potential impacts on actual land use would of a short-term duration during the
construction phase and of long term duration during the operation phase. Given that there are grazing and
agricultural activities taking place by the local community and nomadic settlers in the area, the receiving
environment is considered of medium sensitivity. However, the impacts will be of a negative nature, and
low magnitude given the small limited footprint of land use that will be affected from the Project
development. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be of minor significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by all involved entities to include the
Developer and EPC Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the
operational phase unless stated otherwise:

Land Users – Agricultural Activities

 Prior to construction, consultations will be undertaken with local community land users to develop a
baseline in terms of agricultural activities undertaken on leased government lands by the users. The
PAGE | 111
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

mapping exercise should aim to identify who undertakes agricultural activities in each leased land,
their number, patterns, and type of agricultural crops. The Developer in coordination with the EPC
Contractor will assign in detail the exact areas within the leased lands that are expected to be affected
by the Project construction and operation – this will include the areas for the project footprint (to
include but limited to the turbines, foundations, substation, roads, cables, etc.) and any additional
areas required for construction activities such as areas for movement of vehicles and machinery,
laydown areas, etc. Developer and EPC Contractor will ensure that such assigned areas are reduced to
the greatest extent possible. It is recommended that the Developer allows land users to practice their
activities within leased lands outside of construction and operation areas.
 Although highly unlikely, but should any of the agriculture users require assistance in allocating
additional lands to undertake agriculture activities, the Developer will help such users to the greatest
extent possible through coordination with other land owners in the area and/or on other available
public lands.
 Prior to commencement of construction activities, the Developer will disclose to the local communities
the information provided below. This will be undertaken through focus group discussions and
information sheets in Arabic language at key local platforms where appropriate. This will include (i) the
baseline mapping exercise for agricultural activities to verify its outcomes; (ii) announce construction
and operation areas and emphasize that agriculture and/or grazing activities cannot take place in such
assigned construction and operation areas; (iii) provide construction schedule and duration for which
such construction activities will take place; (iv) emphasize that grazing and/or agriculture activities may
take place outside of construction and operation areas at all times; (v) provide details on the relocation
assistance if required by any agricultural user; and (vi) provide details on the grievance mechanism.

Nomads

 If required (although unlikely) the Developer should provide assistance to nomadic groups in assigning
suitable areas outside of construction and operation areas for settlement through coordination with
other land owners in the area and/or on other public lands.
 During the period in which nomads begin to settle in the area (April, May and June), Developer will
undertake regular site visits to meet with nomadic groups whom arrive onsite. The objective will be to:
(i) Announce construction and operation areas and emphasize that settlements as well as agriculture
and/or grazing activities cannot take place in such assigned construction and operation areas; (ii)
Provide construction schedule and duration for which such construction activities will take place;
(iii)Emphasize that settlements as well as grazing and/or agriculture activities may take place outside of
construction and operation areas at all times; (iv) Provide details on the relocation assistance if
required by any agricultural user; and (v) Provide details on the grievance mechanism.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements which are to be implemented by the
Developer and EPC Contractor accordingly.

Land Users – Agricultural Activities

 Produce a comprehensive map which identifies who undertakes agriculture activities, pattern and type
for each land parcel and which also assigns construction and operation areas
 If applicable, documentation of relocation assistance with photographs as appropriate to include
number of farmers, identified relocated area, etc.
 Prepare disclosure report which includes information on focus group (venue, list of attendees, minutes
of meeting, summary of outcomes) and areas where information sheets were posted with photographs
as appropriate

PAGE | 112
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Nomads

 Documentation of relocation assistance with photographs as appropriate to include number of

nomads, identified relocated area, etc.
 Prepare disclosure report which includes names of nomads met, minutes of meeting, summary of
outcomes.

PAGE | 113
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

10. GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY (SOIL & GROUNDWATER)

This chapter presents the baseline assessment of the Project site in relation geology and hydrology as well
as an assessment of potential impacts during the various Project phases. For each impact, a set of
mitigation measures and monitoring requirements were identified.

10.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of baseline conditions in relation to geology
and hydrology and presents the outcomes and results of the assessment.

10.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

Assessment of baseline conditions in relation to geology and hydrology was based on collection of
secondary data from the relevant governmental entities – this mainly includes the Ministry of Water and
Irrigation (MWI), Water Authority of Jordan (WAJ), Natural Resources Authority (NRA) and Department of
Meteorology (DoM) for the relevant parameters to include climatic data, precipitation, geological and
hydrogeological settings, etc.

It should be highlighted that the geology, hydrology (soul and groundwater) assessments were carried out
for an older version of the project boundaries, which is wider than the current project boundaries, see
Figure 57.

Figure 58: Older boundaries covered by the geology and hydrology assessment (black) and the final project
boundaries (red)

10.1.2 Results
Presented below are the outcomes and results in details for geology, hydrology, and hydrogeology.

(i) Geology

The figure below presents the main geological formation in the area. As noted in Figure 58 below, the
project site is mainly located with Umm Rijam Formation which consists of limestone (partly phosphatic),

PAGE | 114
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

chalky limestone chalk with beds and nodules of brown to black chert. The thickness of this formation is
around 40 meters and it outcrops in the south western parts.

In addition, other parts of the site consist of the Fluviatill and Lacustrine Gravels from the quaternary
geologic age. This unit is composed due to weathering activities and is dominant along wadi system in the
form of unconsolidated material generated from the rocks in the area.

Figure 59: Geological Formations of the Area

(ii) Hydrology

The study area is located within the Jafr surface water basin as noted in Figure 59 below which has a total
area of 11,800 km². Average rainfall over the Jafr basin is less than 50 mm/year, the basin is almost flat
over big parts and runoff coefficient is very low and the distribution of rainy events as small event does not
trigger runoff in most of the cases. The total discharge of the basin is around 15 MCM/year, of which 10
MCM/year flow as floods into the Jafr depression, where they either evaporate or infiltrate into the
ground.

Figure 60 that follows also presents the catchment area within which the Project is located (as part of the
Jafr Basin). The catchment has an area of around 100km2 and is considered one of the highest areas of the
basin where rainfall is higher and topography is steeper. As noted below, the catchment area includes
several interconnected wadi systems. As noted in figure below, a number of wadi systems run within the
Project site.

PAGE | 115
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 60: Surface Water Basins of the area

Figure 61: Catchment area for the Project site

(iii) Hydrogeology

The Project site is located within the Jafr groundwater basin, which occupies an area of 12,500 km2 with a
boundary similar to the surface water basin discussed earlier. The groundwater flow of the basin is
PAGE | 116
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

triggered by high rainfalls on the mountainous areas of Ma’an and Shobak where groundwater flows from
high rainfall and recharge areas to the central parts of the basin. According to MWI records there are 2,100
groundwater wells in the basin (but none are located within the Project site) pumping more than 32
MCM/year for both domestic and agricultural supply. The main productive unit in the basin is the upper
limestone aquifer which is considered to be moderate to relatively high salinity. The safe yield of the
aquifer as calculated by MWI was 25 MCM/year giving a deficit of 7 MCM/year.

10.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies the anticipated impacts on/from geology and hydrology (soil and groundwater)
from/on the Project activities during the planning and construction phase as well as the operation phase.
In addition, for each impact a set of mitigation measures and monitoring requirements have been
identified.

10.2.1 Potential Impacts from Local Flood Hazards during the Planning and Construction Phase
The most important aspect to geology, hydrology and hydrogeology is that of flood risks within the Project
site. As discussed earlier several wadi systems run within the Project area and therefore, there is a
potential risk of local flood hazard within the site during rainy season and especially during flash flood
events. Such risks must be taken into consideration throughout the planning phase of the Project as they
could inflict damage to the project and its various components.

To this extent, ECO Consult has undertaken a preliminary flood risk assessment to investigate such risks.
The flood risk assessment was based on the study of the catchment area’s rainfall, runoff and flood flow.
Results are as discussed below.

a. Rainfall

The rainfall in the area was calculated based on data from five climatic stations found within the Project
area – this includes DA0001, DA0002, DA0003, DA0004 and DA0005 (Figure 61). These stations were used
to obtain the needed data to generate precipitation contours around the Project site. Four stations are
located west of the Project site (DA0001, DA0002, DA0003, DA0004) while the fifth is located to the east
(Sation DA0005 located 18 km east of the project site with an average rainfall of 95 mm/year and is the
closest station to the Project site to the east).

The spatial distribution of rainfall in the area was modelled based on the data from these rainfall stations.
The daily rainfall was converted into annual rates. Figure 61 below represents the spatial distribution of
annual rainfall in the area. As noted in the figure below, rainfall starts at 120 mm/year in the southeast, the
precipitation rates increase towards the northwest to reach about 240 mm/year. The Project site is located
in an area where precipitation ranges from 200-230 mm/year.

PAGE | 117
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 62: Rainfall Stations around the project site

a. Runoff and Flood Flow

The available information was analysed to study the characteristics of rainfall runoff and derive the flood
hydrograph of the area with a 50 year return period. The estimation of the flow was calculated using the
United States Soil Conservation Service method (SCS) or the Curve Number method (CN) for the available
rainfall data.

The methodology of this approach mainly includes calculating the time of flow from the farthest point on
the catchments to the outlet [time of concentration (Tc)], and the time of rise of the unit hydrograph [time
to peak (Tp)]. Then, using the values of the synthetic unit hydrograph (in which the discharge is expressed
by the ratio of discharge to peak discharge (Q/Qp) and the ratio of time to the time of rise of the unit
hydrograph T/Tp), the time lag of unit hydrograph is recalculated along with the peak discharge (Q).
Furthermore, the obtained values of new unit hydrograph must be corrected to ensure mass balance of the
unit depth of rainfall - which must equal one inch.

Moreover, the effective rainfall for a 50 year return period is calculated from Intensity Duration Curves
(IDF) in order to derive the appropriate flood hydrographs for the same periods, depending on the hourly
peak discharges values of the corrected unit hydrograph. The frequency floods were also determined by
using the storm rainfalls of 50 years return period in the SCS-curvilinear synthetic unit hydrograph method.

The Curve Number (CN) method is used to estimate the hydrologic parameters of the water cycle in the
catchments area. This approach is called the Water Budget Method. This method can be estimated by
determining the maximum moisture content of the soil (the potential abstraction). The value of the
potential abstraction depends on the value of the selected curve number, then, the potential abstraction
leads to calculate the value of initial abstraction which is defined as the rainfall value prior to the beginning
of direct runoff, to be used in the formula of estimating the discharge flows for each rainfall storm.

The hydrologic characteristics of the drainage area such as; the area of the basin (A), hydraulic length (L)
and the elevation difference (H) between the highest point of the main stream and the outlet are
calculated from the topographic maps related to the catchment. The calculation of the unit hydrograph
(UH) and the derivation of the flood hydrographs of 50 years return period for the catchment were
performed and are presented in the table and figure below.
PAGE | 118
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

As noted in Figure 62 and Table 39 below the maximum flood flow for the main wadi system outlet (point A
in Figure 63) was calculated at 2.4, 4.2 and 5.7 m3/s for average annual flood, 20 and 50 years return
period.

Flood m3/s
6

5 Q 50 ( m3/s ) Q 20 ( m3/s ) Q Avg ( m3/s )

4
m3/s

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
hrs

Figure 63: Calculated Unit Hydrograph

Table 39: Calculated Tc, Tp and Qp values

Tc (hours) Tp (hours) Qp (m3/s) Qp20 years (m3/s) Qp50 years (m3/s)

4.018 0.74 2.35 4.21 5.68

Figure 64: Catchment Area and Drainage System Discharging through the Project Area

PAGE | 119
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Taking the above into account, the preliminary flood risk assessment concludes the following:

 The maximum calculated flood for point A shown on the map (Figure 6) was 2.35, 4.21 and 5.68 m3/s
for average annual flood, 20 years and 50 years.
 The wadi section at point B is expected to discharge more than 95% of the calculated flood. Point B
receives flood water from two main wadis marked with red and brown and they are expected to have
similar flows (Figure 6). Buffer distance of 20 m is required from wadi B (red and brown).
 Points C represent a low flood risk area with limited base flow less than 5% of the total flood along the
wadi section marked with green (Figure 6). Buffer distance of 10 m is needed for wadi C.
Such buffer distance requirements can be easily taken into account as part of the detailed design to be
prepared. Taking the above into account, it is evident that there is flood risks within the Project site. Should
such risks not be considered, they would result in impacts which are of long-term duration throughout the
operation phase of the Project. For the duration of operation, such flood risks will be of a negative nature
and of medium magnitude. However, this is considered of high sensitivity given that it could entail damage
to the Project. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be of moderate significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures that must be taken into account by the EPC Contractor at
a later stage:

 It is recommended that the EPC Contractor, as part of the detailed design prepared for the Project,
avoid sitting any of the Project components within the buffer distances specified from the wadi
systems to eliminate any risks for flood. Such buffer distance requirements can be easily taken into
account.
 Should the Project require sitting any of its infrastructure elements (such as roads) within the wadi
system then a detailed hydrological study must be undertaken to identify and determine the required
engineering structures to be considered as part of the detailed design for such infrastructure elements
(e.g. culverts). It is recommended that the engineering design consider the 50 years return period
which was calculated at 5.7m3/s.
Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact is
categorized as not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the planning phase and which include:

 Review of final detailed design to ensure all flood risk mitigations are considered (e.g. buffer zone from
Wadi systems, culvert designs, etc.)

10.2.2 Potential Impacts from Improper Management of Waste Streams during Construction and
Operation
Given the generic nature of the impacts for both phases of the Project (construction and operation) those
have been identified collectively throughout this section. Generally, this includes potential impacts from
improper housekeeping practices (e.g. improper management of waste streams, improper storage of
construction material and of hazardous material, etc.).

Improper housekeeping practices during construction and operation (such as illegal disposal of waste to
land) could contaminate and pollute soil which in turn could pollute groundwater resources. This could also
indirectly affect flora/fauna and the general health and safety of workers (from being exposed to such
waste streams). Generally, such impacts can be adequately controlled through the implementation of

PAGE | 120
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

general best practice housekeeping measures as highlighted throughout this section, and which are
expected to be implemented by the EPC Contractor throughout construction phase and Project Operator
during the operation phase.

The potential impacts from improper management of waste streams could be of a long-term duration
throughout the construction and operation phase. Such impacts are negative in nature, and are considered
of low magnitude they are generally controlled through the implementation of general best practice
housekeeping measures. The receiving environment is considered of medium sensitivity. Given all of the
above, such an impact is considered to be of minor significance.

Following the implementation of the mitigation measures highlighted throughout this Section, the residual
significance can be reduced to not significant.

(i) Solid Waste Generation

Solid waste is expected to be generated from construction and operational activities. Solid waste
generated will likely include construction waste (such as debris) and municipal solid waste (during
construction and operation such as cardboard, plastic, food waste, etc.). Municipal and construction waste
generated will likely be collected and stored onsite and then disposed to the closest municipal approved
area for disposal (Shobak Transfer Station).

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by all involved entities to include the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the operational phase unless
stated otherwise:

 Coordinate with New Shobak Municipality or hire a competent private contractor for the collection of
solid waste from the site to the municipal approved disposal area (Shobak transfer station);
 Prohibit fly-dumping of any solid waste to the land;
 Distribute appropriate number of properly contained litter bins and containers properly marked as
"Municipal Waste";
 EPC Contractor only - during construction, distribute a sufficient number of properly contained
containers clearly marked as "Construction Waste" for the dumping and disposal of construction waste.
Where possible, the EPC Contractor must seek ways to reduce construction waste by reusing materials
(for example through recycling of concrete for road base coarse);
 Implement proper housekeeping practices on the construction site at all times; and
 Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of waste generated onsite, collected by
contractor, and disposed of at the landfill. The numbers within the records are to be consistent to
ensure no illegal dumping at the site or other areas.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by all involved
entities to include the EPC Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the
operational phase unless stated otherwise:

 Inspection of waste management practices onsite;

 Review of records and manifests for volume of waste generated to ensure consistency; and
 Regular environmental reporting on implementation of the waste management practices onsite.

PAGE | 121
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(ii) Wastewater Generation

Wastewater is mainly expected to include black water (sewage water from toilets and sanitation facilities),
as well as grey water (from sinks, showers, etc.) generated from workers during the construction and
operation phase. Wastewater quantities are expected to be minimal. It is expected that wastewater will be
collected and stored in fully contained septic tanks and then collected and transported by transportation
tankers to be disposed at either Shobak Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) or Mansoorah WWTP.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by all involved entities, to include the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the operational phase, unless
stated otherwise:

 Coordinate with Ma’an Water Directorate to hire a private contractor for the collection of wastewater
from the site to Shobak or Mansoorah WWTP;
 Prohibit illegal disposal of wastewater to the land;
 Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of wastewater generated onsite, collected by
contractor, and disposed of at the WWTP. The numbers within the records are to be consistent to
ensure no illegal discharge at the site or other areas;
 EPC Contractor only - ensure that constructed septic tanks during construction and those to be used
during operation are well contained and impermeable to prevent leakage of wastewater into soil; and
 Ensure that septic tanks are emptied and collected by wastewater contractor at appropriate intervals to
avoid overflowing.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by all involved
entities to include the EPC Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the
operational phase, unless stated otherwise:

 Inspection of wastewater management practices onsite;

 Review of records and manifests for volume of wastewater generated to ensure consistency; and
 Regular environmental reporting on implementation of the wastewater management practices
discussed above.

(iii) Hazardous Waste Generation

Hazardous waste is expected to be generated throughout both the construction and operation phase and
this could include simple materials such as consumed oil, chemicals, paint cans, etc. Given the nature of
the Project, hazardous waste quantities are expected to be relatively low. Nevertheless, hazardous waste
generated will likely be collected and stored onsite and then disposed at the ‘Swaqa Hazardous Waste
Treatment Facility’ which is managed by the MoEnv.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by all involved entities to include the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase the Project Operator during the operational phase, unless stated
otherwise.

 Coordinate with the MoEnv and hire a private contractor for the collection of hazardous waste from the
site to the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility;
 Follow the requirements for management and storage as per the ‘Instructions for Hazardous Waste
Management and Handling of the Year 2003’ of the MoEnv;
PAGE | 122
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Prohibit illegal disposal of hazardous waste to the land;

 Ensure that containers are emptied and collected by the contractor at appropriate intervals to prevent
overflowing; and
 Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of hazardous waste generated onsite, collected by
contractor, and disposed of at the Swaqa Facility. The numbers within the records are to be consistent
to ensure no illegal discharge at the site or other areas.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by all involved
entities to include the EPC Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the
operational phase, unless stated otherwise:

 Inspection of hazardous waste management practices onsite;

 Review of records and manifests for volume of hazardous waste generated to ensure consistency; and
 Regular environmental reporting on implementation of the hazardous waste management practices
onsite.

(iv) Hazardous Material

The nature of construction and operational activities entail the use of various hazardous materials such as
oil, chemicals, and fuel for the various equipment and machinery. Improper management of hazardous
material entails a risk of leakage into the surrounding environment either from storage areas or
throughout the use of equipment and machinery.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by all involved entities to include the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase the Project Operator during the operational phase, unless stated
otherwise.

 Ensure that hazardous materials are stored in proper areas and in a location where they cannot reach
the land in case of accidental spillage. This includes storage facilities that are of hard impermeable
surface, flame-proof, accessible to authorized personnel only, locked when not in use, and prevents
incompatible materials from coming in contact with one another. The provisions of the Jordanian
Standard (JS) 431/1985 – General Precautionary Requirements for Storage of Hazardous Materials must
be adhered to;
 Maintain a register of all hazardous materials used and accompanying Material Safety Data Sheet
(MSDS) must present at all times. Spilled material should be tracked and accounted for;
 Incorporate dripping pans at machinery, equipment, and areas that are prone to contamination by
leakage of hazardous materials (such as oil, fuel, etc.);
 Regular maintenance of all equipment and machinery used onsite. Maintenance activities and other
activities that pose a risk for hazardous material spillage (such as refuelling) must take place at a
suitable location (hard surface) with appropriate measures for trapping spilled material;
 Ensure that a minimum of 1,000 litres of general purpose spill absorbent is available at hazardous
material storage facility. Appropriate absorbents include elite, clay, peat and other products
manufactured for this purpose; and
 If spillage on soil occurs, spill must be immediately contained, cleaned-up, and contaminated soil
disposed as hazardous waste.

PAGE | 123
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by all involved
entities to include the EPC Contractor during the construction phase and the Project Operator during the
operational phase, unless stated otherwise.

 Inspection for storage of hazardous materials to include inspections for potential spillages or leakages;
and
 Report any spills and the measures taken to minimize the impact and prevent from occurring again.

PAGE | 124
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

11. BIODIVERSITY Comment [IM1]: Chapter 11, 12 and

13 I do not know what you added to
This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the Project site and its surroundings this version but please review and
in relation to biodiversity and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its translate accordingly

various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures,
additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels.

It is important to note that biodiversity assessed in this Chapter excludes birds (avi-fauna) and bats, which
are discussed separately in “Chapter 12” and “Chapter 13” respectively.

11.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to
biodiversity and presents the outcomes and results.

11.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

The baseline assessment of the Project site was based on a literature review and a field survey, each of
which is discussed in detail below.

(i) Literature Review

This was based on previous studies, data, surveys, and records available in published scientific papers,
books, and journals on flora and fauna species recorded within the study region in general.

(ii) Field Survey

A field survey was undertaken at the Project site during the spring of 2017, since the season is the best
time for flora and fauna. The biodiversity of the site is considered to be the highest during this period and
thus would provide the best representation of the site. The field survey mainly included the following
methods:

 Field observations: the site was examined carefully for the presence of active animals, animal signs and
tracts, active burrows, remains or any other vital signs that indicate the activity of animals. In addition,
the site was surveyed for occurring plant species which were noted and recorded to include number of
species, coverage interception per species, etc.;
 Trapping: Sherman rodent traps were used to trap small mammals. The distribution of the traps was
opportunistic and were placed in areas where a high activity for small mammals was either observed or
predicted.
 Line transects: transects in many areas of the project site of over 100m long were undertaken for the
detailed assessment of flora and fauna species. Observed species were recorded and photographed as
possible; and
 Interviews with local people: local people of the area were interviewed and asked questions regarding
well known fauna species that are likely to be present within the site. A book with illustrations and
images of fauna species were shown throughout the process in order to accurately confirm their
presence.

(iii) Fauna & Flora Species’ status

Floral species recorded onsite generally had no international conservation status as they were not assessed
by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Therefore, the relevant reference in
Jordan is the National Red List of Plants of Jordan Vol. 1 (Tafiour et al, 2014), which was produced
according the to the IUCN regional criteria for threatened species.

PAGE | 125
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

The fauna species status was assigned based on their conservation status in the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and also based on the regional assessment of threatened species for the
Mediterranean region (IUCN, 2016). In Jordan, currently there are no official assigned conservation status
for faunal species (to include mammals, reptiles and amphibians).

11.1.2 Results
In accordance with the methodology discussed above, the results below discuss the findings and outcomes
for flora and fauna based on the literature review and field survey.

(i) Flora

According to the biogeographical map of Jordan (Albert et al., 2003), the project site is located in the
Mediterranean biogeographical region, see Figure 64.

Figure 65: Biogeographical Regions in the Project Site (Albert et al., 2003).

According to EIsawi (1996), the Mediterranean Biogeographical region is characterized by having the
highest rainfall in the country, which ranges from 400-600mm/year. It is also known for having the most
fertile soil, the highest altitude the least summer temperature and the highest vegetation cover. The region
includes almost all mountain ranges in the country along with their directly adjacent plains to the east.

According to vegetation classification types proposed by Albert et al. (2005), the project site is located in
the Artemisia herba-alba Steppe vegetation type. As the name implies, this vegetation type is dominated
by the perennial species Artemisia herba-alba, which is a dwarf shrub species that is most dominant along
the eastern plains of the southern highlands of the country. Most importantly, the vegetation type is
devoid of any arboreal species and therefore it represents one of the Mediterranean non-forest vegetation
types in the country, see Figure 65.
PAGE | 126
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 66: Vegetation type in the project Site (Albert et al., 2003).

Typically, in areas such as the project site, the land is composed of a mosaic of natural vegetation, mainly
dominated by shrub vegetation, and transformed agricultural lands. These agricultural lands are seasonally
planted by wheat and barley which can be used as fodder for livestock. The coverage of such agricultural
lands varies from, year to year and from season to season, depending on the local meteorological
conditions and most importantly rainfall.

A total of 71 plant species were recorded on the project site, see Table 40. According to the National Red
List of Plants Vol. 1 (Taifour et al, 2014), 58 species have a conservation status on the national level, based
on the IUCN Regional Criteria of Threatened Species. 57 of the species are evaluated as Least Concern
while one species is evaluated as threatened (Vulnerable). The remaining 13 species have not yet been
evaluated on the national level, see Table 40. The nationally threatened species is Cousinia moabitica,
which is a species that is restricted to the southern parts of Jordan, see Figure 66. Although it has a
relatively limited distribution and its main threat is intensive uncontrolled grazing, the species is protected
in several nature reserves in the country including Dana Biosphere Reserve and Mujib Biosphere Reserve.

PAGE | 127
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 67: Cousinia moabitica, a nationally threatened species that was recorded in the main wadi by the western
part of the project site.

Table 40: Floral Species within the Site

Family Species Status in the National Red List of Jordan
Boraginaceae Heliotropium rotundifolium Not Evaluated
Capparaceae Capparis zoharyi Not Evaluated
Caryophillaceae Paronychia argentea Least Concern
Silene villosa Not Evaluated
Chenopodiaceae Anabasis articulata Least Concern
Anabasis syriaca Least Concern
Noaea mucronata Least Concern
Salsola vermiculata Least Concern
Cistaceae Helianthemum lippii Least Concern
Compositae Achillea fragrantissima Least Concern
Achillea santolina Not Evaluated
Anthemis pseudocotula Least Concern
Artemisia herba-alba Least Concern
Atractylis cancellata Least Concern
Centaurea hyalolepis Least Concern
Chiliadenus iphionoides Least Concern
Cousinia moabitica Vulnerable
Crepis sancta Least Concern
Echinops polyceras Least Concern

PAGE | 128
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Family Species Status in the National Red List of Jordan

Launaea mucronata Least Concern
Notobasis syriaca Least Concern
Filago pyramidata Least Concern
Onopordum ambiguum Least Concern
Ifloga spicata Least Concern
Picnomon acarna Least Concern
Rhagadiolus stellatus Least Concern
Scorzonera papposa Least Concern
Senecio flavus Least Concern
Cruciferae Biscutella didyma Least Concern
Diplotaxis erucoides Least Concern
Eruca sativa Least Concern
Erucaria hispanica Least Concern
Matthiola aspera Not Evaluated
Sisymbrium erysimoides Least Concern
Geraniaceae Erodium acaule Least Concern
Erodium gruinum Least Concern
Graminae Aegilops biuncialis Least Concern
Avena sterilis Least Concern
Bromus rigidus Not Evaluated
Bromus tectorum Least Concern
Dactylis glomerata Least Concern
Hordeum bulbosum Least Concern
Hordeum glaucum Not Evaluated
Hordeum spontaneum Least Concern
Poa bulbosa Least Concern
Stipa capensis Least Concern
Iridaceae Iris petrana Not Evaluated
Lamiaceae Phlomis viscosa Least Concern
Teucrium polium Least Concern
Liliaceae Allium truncatum Not Evaluated
Malvaceae Alcea acaulis Least Concern
Malva parviflora Least Concern
Papaveraceae Glaucium aleppicum Least Concern
Papilionaceae Astragalus spinosus Least Concern
Astragalus hamosus Least Concern
Astragalus tribuloides Least Concern
Colutea istria Not Evaluated
Onobrychis crista-galli Least Concern
Ononis natrix Least Concern
Retama raetam Least Concern
Plantaginaceae Plantago afra Least Concern
Plantago cylindrica Not Evaluated

PAGE | 129
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Family Species Status in the National Red List of Jordan

Ranunculaceae Adonis aestivalis Least Concern
Adonis dentata Least Concern
Resedaceae Reseda lutea Least Concern
Rutaceae Haplophyllum poorei Not Evaluated
Scrophulariaceae Kickxia aegyptiaca Least Concern
Verbascum sinaiticum Not Evaluated
Urticaceae Urtica pilulifera Least Concern
Zygophyllaceae Fagonia mollis Least Concern
Peganum harmala Least Concern

(ii) Fauna

The specific outcomes of the field survey in relation to faunal species are discussed below and which
includes mammals and reptiles & amphibians.

a. Mammals

The study site in particular was not studied in detail in previous faunal studies. However, scattered records
from the area are scanty, see Table 41. Small mammals and carnivores were recorded from the vicinity of
the project site (Amr, 2012).
Table 41: Terrestrial Mammals recorded from the Vicinity of the Study Area
Family Scientific name Common name Global IUCN Mediterranean
status IUCN status
Erinaceidae Erinaceus concolor Eastern European Hedgehog Least Concern Least Concern
Leporidae Lepus capensis Cape Hare Least Concern Least Concern
Muridae Gerbillus dasyurus Wagner's Gerbil Least Concern Least Concern
Meriones tristrami Tristram’s jird Least Concern Least Concern
Meriones libycus Libyan jird Least Concern Least Concern
Canidae Vulpes vulpes Red fox Least Concern Least Concern
Canis lupus Gray Wolf Least Concern Least Concern
Hyaena hyaena Striped Hyena Near Vulnerable
Threatened

Trapping yielded only one species of rodents, namely Wagner’s Gerbil Gerbillus dasyurus, which is one of
the most widespread species in the country where it can be found almost in all habitats of the kingdom
except pure deserts. Additionally, Red Fox Vulpes vulpes was observed on several occasions during
the various surveys that were carried out in the project site.
b. Reptiles and Amphibians

Virtually no previous studies on the reptiles and amphibians were conducted within the boundaries of the
project site, see Table 42. However, scattered records of snakes and other reptiles can give an idea on the
herpetology of the area (El-Oran et al., 1994; Disi et al., 2001; Amr & Disi, 2011). Apart from the IUCN Red
List of Threatened Species, there are no relevant conservation assessments that were available for the
reptile species. During the surveys, the globally threatened (Vulnerable) Spur-thighed Tortoise Testudo
graeca was recorded in several locations in the project site.
Table 42: Reptilian Species Known to Occur within the Study Area
Family Scientific name Common name Global IUCN
status
Testudinidae Testudo graeca Spur-thighed Tortoise Vulnerable
PAGE | 130
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Gekkonidae Ptyodactylus guttatus Spotted Fan-footed gecko Not

Evaluated
Agamidae Stellagama stellio Starred agama Least
Concern
Lacertidae Acanthodactylus boskianus Bosk’s fringe-toad lizard Not
Evaluated
Colubridae Dolichophis jugularis Large whip snake Least
Concern
Hemorrhois nummifer Coin snake Not
Evaluated
Eirenis rothi Roth’s dwarf snake Least
Concern
Eirenis coronella Crowned dwarf snake Least
Concern
Malpolon insignitus Montpellier snake Not
Evaluated
Telescopus nigriceps Black-headed cat snake Least
Concern

Two lizard species were observed in the study site, see Table 43. The Small spotted desert racer Mesalina
guttulata was observed in gravelly areas in the eastern section of the study site, while Ophisops elegans
was found more into the western section in milder habitats close to agricultural ploughed fields. The
Starred Agama Stellagama stellio was confined to rocky areas around wadi beds.
Table 43: Reptiles Observed in the Study Area
Family Scientific name Common name IUCN status
Agamidae Stellagama stellio Starred agama Least Concern
Lacertidae Acanthodactylus boskianus Bosk’s fringe-toad lizard Not Evaluated

11.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on biodiversity
during the various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation phase. For each
impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional
requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to
acceptable levels.

11.2.1 Potential Impacts during the Construction Phase

Site preparation activities which are to take place onsite by the EPC Contractor for installation of the wind
turbines and the various Project components to include transmission cables, access roads and internal road
network, buildings, etc. are expected to include land clearing activities, levelling, excavation, grading, etc.

Such activities are limited to the relatively small individual footprints of these facilities and the actual area
of disturbance is relatively minimal. Nevertheless, such activities would likely result in the alteration of the
site’s habitat and thus potentially disturb existing habitats. Other impacts on the biodiversity of the site are
mainly from improper management of the site, which could include improper conduct and housekeeping
practices by workers (i.e. hunting of animals, discharge of hazardous waste to land, etc.).

As discussed earlier, the site is generally considered of low ecological significance due to its natural setting;
characterized by having low vegetation cover in an arid environment with a low level of diversity. However,
a single nationally threatened plant species was recorded in the project site and this species requires
special attention in order to avoid any negative impact on its distribution and presence in the project site.
Cousinia moabitica (nationally Vulnerable) was recorded on several occasions along the main wadi that
PAGE | 131
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

passes by the north-western part of the project site, Figure 67. The species was not recorded anywhere
else in the project site.

Figure 68: The wadi (in green) by the western part of the project site along which the nationally threatened
Cousinia moabitica was recorded

Given all of the above, the potential impacts on biodiversity created during the construction phase would
of a long‐term duration as they would result in a permanent change in the natural biodiversity of the site.
Such impacts are considered of negative nature and of a medium magnitude given that the change in the
natural biodiversity of the site will be noticeable in limited individual footprints. However, as the site is
considered of low ecological significance, the receiving environmental is determined to be of a low
sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be of low significance.

Additional Studies/Surveys and Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the additional studies and mitigation measures to be applied by the EPC Contractor
during the construction phase and which include:

 Based on the final detailed design of the project, all areas where construction activities will take place
and that will be disturbed will be identified. Before construction activities commence, the EPC
Contractor must undertake a detailed survey (through an ecological expert) to identify the presence of
any active tortoises as well as potential hibernation/aestivation sites (during summer and winter) within
all assigned areas to be disturbed by construction. Should any tortoises be located, they should be
relocated outside of the direct construction active areas. Additionally, the detailed survey should
provide a detailed mapping of the main areas where the species is concentrated, so that it can be
avoided. Relocation for long distances away from the original location where the individuals were
recorded is not encouraged since this could lead to disturbance for breeding and/or disturbance to the
species in the receiving location.
 Carry out a survey to identify any locations in the project where the nationally threatened species is
located in order to provide instructions during the construction phase to avoid any damage to these
threatened species. Spring season from March onwards, would be suitable to locate the species in the
project site. A qualified ecologist/botanist who is familiar with the species should carry out the survey.
In case of identification of locations of the species, the plants could be either marked and/or fenced so
that construction activities would avoid their locations. It is not advised to carry out any relocation of
the species since this would lead to damage to the plants, specifically its root system.
 Should any fencing be erected as part of the Project, it must be ensured that it allows for the natural
movement of small faunal species within the area. This could include for example a fence with an
appropriate gap between the ground level and the first rail or strand (around 30cm);
PAGE | 132
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Implement proper management measures to prevent damage to the biodiversity of the site. This could
include establishing a proper code of conduct and awareness raising / training of personnel and good
housekeeping which include the following:
- Prohibit hunting of any wildlife at any time and under any condition by construction workers onsite;
- Ensure proper storage, collection, and disposal of waste streams generated as discussed in detail in
“Chapter 10”;
- Restrict activities to allocated construction areas only, including movement of workers and vehicles
to allocated roads within the site and prohibit off‐roading to minimize disturbances; and
- Avoid unnecessary elevated noise levels at all times. In addition, apply adequate general noise
suppressing measures as detailed in “Chapter 18”.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact is
categorized as not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and which include:

 A pre-construction flora survey report to be presented prior to construction activities.

 Reporting on outcomes of fauna survey and actions undertaken (e.g. relocation measures to areas
outside of construction activities).
 Inspection of the works should be carried out at all times, specifically to ensure that no damage is
caused to the threatened plant species.

11.2.2 Potential Impacts during the Operation Phase

The only impacts anticipated during the operation phase are related to improper management of the site
as discussed earlier. This could include improper conduct and housekeeping practices by workers (i.e.
hunting of animals, discharge of hazardous waste to land, etc.).

The potential impacts on biodiversity would of a long-term duration throughout the operation phase of the
Project. Such impacts are of negative nature and of a medium magnitude. However, as the site is
considered of medium ecological significance, the receiving environmental is determined to be of medium
sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be of moderate significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the Project Operator during the
operation phase and which include:

 Monitoring of the distribution and abundance of the threatened plant species should be carried out for
at least five years during the operational phase in order to assess the impact of the project on the
three threatened species that were recorded in the project site.

 Implement proper management measures to prevent damage to the biodiversity of the site. This could
include establishing a proper code of conduct and awareness raising / training of personnel and good
housekeeping which include the following:

- Prohibit hunting of any wildlife at any time and under any condition by workers onsite;

- Ensure proper storage, collection, and disposal of waste streams generated as discussed in detail in
“Chapter 10 “; and
PAGE | 133
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

- Restrict activities to allocated areas only, including movement of workers and vehicles to allocated
roads within the site and prohibit off-roading to minimize disturbances.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact is
categorized as not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the Project
Operator during the operation phase and which include:

 Annual report to include the distribution and abundance of the globally and nationally threatened
species present at the project site.

 Inspection of the works should be carried out at all times.

PAGE | 134
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

12. BIRDS (AVI-FAUNA)

This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the Project site and surroundings in
relation to birds (avi-fauna) and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its
various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation and
monitoring measures, additional requirements, etc.) have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels.

Before discussing the outcomes of the above, it is important to state that the potential impact of wind
turbines on birds is considered one of the key issues related to wind farm developments which must be
thoroughly addressed within the ESIA.

12.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to birds
and presents the outcomes and results.

12.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

Baseline Assessment for in-flight movement of soaring birds

This section is based on the results and findings of the in-flight monitoring that was carried out in over four
seasons; autumn, winter, spring and summer which spanned from September 2016 until August 2017.
These surveys aimed to observe the numbers and behaviour of migratory and resident soaring birds using
the wind farm. These surveys targeted a list of species that are known to use the wind farm and its
surroundings, and are presented in Table 44 below.
Table 44: Target Species to be recorded by Flight Activity Surveys
Category A Primary Species Category B Primary Species Secondary Species
Egyptian Vulture Barbary Falcon Brown-necked Raven
Griffon Vulture Black Kite Common Kestrel
Bonelli's Eagle Black Stork Eurasian Sparrowhawk
Booted Eagle Common Crane Fan-tailed Raven
Eastern Imperial Eagle Common Raven Marsh Harrier
Golden Eagle Crested Honey-buzzard Rock Dove
Lesser Spotted Eagle Steppe Buzzard All bee-eater species
Short-toed Snake-eagle Eleonora's Falcon All sandgrouse species
Spotted Eagle Hen Harrier All swift species
Steppe Eagle Hobby All wader species
Verreaux's Eagle European Honey-buzzard All waterbird species
Long-legged Buzzard Lanner
Lesser Kestrel
Levant Sparrowhawk
Montagu's Harrier
Osprey
Pallid Harrier
Peregrine
Red-footed Falcon
Saker Falcon
Sooty Falcon
White Stork

Observations from fixed vantage points were used to record the number and behavior of diurnal soaring
birds over the site, mainly of migratory soaring birds as well as resident soaring birds. Equipment required
for this method includes binoculars, telescope, stop watch, GPS and thermometer.

In-flight monitoring assessment were carried out from September 2016 until August 2017. The first
assessment was carried out from September 2016 until mid-November 2016 covering the autumn
PAGE | 135
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

migration season. It was followed by the winter assessment from mid-November 2016 until February 2017.
The spring monitoring assessment was from early March until mid-May while the summer monitoring
assessment was from June until mid-August 2017. The level of effort in each assessment varied due to the
predicted activity of avifauna during the relevant season, see Table 45.
Table 45: Level of effort of in-flight monitoring assessments per season
Total number of
Number of hours per hours covered during
Season
vantage point season (3 vantage
points)
Autumn 108 324
Winter 48 144
Spring 144 432
Summer 48 144

Additionally, the autumn migration season was divided into three periods; low activity period from 1
September until 15 September, a high activity period from 16 September until 15 October and low another
low activity period from 16 October until 15 November. In winter, the level of effort was divided evenly
throughout the season with a total of 16 hours being covered in each month per vantage point. In spring,
the season was divided into two periods; low activity period from 1 March until 21 March, a high activity
period from 22 March until 15 May. In summer, the level of effort was the same as winter where a total of
16 hours were covered on monthly basis for each vantage point.

In order to identify the vantage points that were going to be used for the assessments, a few assumptions
had to be set in order to be able to cover all rotor-swept areas of all turbines that are planned to be
erected on the project site. These assumptions are as follows:

 Range of coverage: it was assumed that the range of coverage for birds recorded is 2km, since it is
believed that this is probably the maximum period from which a qualified ornithologist would be able
to identify the bird observed and would also be able to map its line of movement, and
 Field of coverage: it was assumed that the field of coverage for the three vantage points is 180°, while
the aspect of coverage was defined to cover the maximum possible number of turbines. Such an
assumption is made given that a 360° field of coverage could entail an observer to cover areas
unequally since there would be a tendency to watch areas where it is believed the birds would be
passing by more than others. For instance, if the survey is carried out in spring, the observer would
normally tend to be watching the southern part of the vantage point’s circle much more than the
northern part – which could result in missed records in the northern part.

Taking the above assumptions into account and based on the turbine layout that was provided prior to the
autumn migration assessment, undertaking a view shed mapping revealed that there is a need to set three
vantage points in order to cover all rotor-swept area of all turbines, see Figure 68. These vantage points
were used during the autumn assessment until 7 October, 2016. After that, a new turbine layout was
provided, based on which, the locations of vantage points had to be reviewed to ensure that the rotor-
swept area of all turbines based on the new layout was covered.

PAGE | 136
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 69: Locations of vantage points and turbine coverage based on the turbine layout provided prior to autumn
migration assessment (ECO Consult, 2017)
As a result of this review, VP1 was dropped and was replaced by VP4, which is located in the eastern part
of the project site. VP2 and VP3 were kept in the same locations while VP3 view was modified to become
centred northeast instead of north, see Figure 69

Figure 70: Locations of vantage points and turbine coverage based on the final turbine layout provided during
autumn migration assessment (ECO Consult, 2017)

Moreover, the methodology takes into account the target species to be recorded and assigns primary and
secondary target species. Observers at VPs positioned themselves to minimize their effects on bird
behaviour. A viewing arc not exceeding 180 degrees was scanned using a combination of naked eye and
10x binoculars. A spotting scope was used when required to aid species identification.

For Category A and B primary species flights, focal sampling data are recorded for all flights seen as follows:
PAGE | 137
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 The search area is scanned until a primary target species is detected at which point it is followed until it
ceases flying or is lost from view.

 The time the target bird was detected and the flight duration are recorded to the nearest second.

 The flight route is plotted in the field onto 1:25,000 scale maps.

 The bird’s flight height above ground level is estimated at the point of first detection and thereafter at
15-second intervals, with the aid of a count-down interval timer with an audible alarm.

 Flight heights are classified as <20m, 20-140m, or >140m above ground level taking into account the
turbines specifications of the EPC Contractor.

 The flight lines of Primary target species are recorded in the field on specially designed blank field
maps. Each mapped flight line is given a reference number that cross-references to the information
recorded for that flight on the corresponding recording form

 Focal observations of primary target species take priority over other species, secondary or other.

If during the course of recording the flight activity for a Category B primary species a Category A primary
species (i.e. any vulture or eagle species) is seen, the observer should note the time, cease watching the
Category B primary species and immediately switch to observing the Category A primary species. This is
because information on Category A primary species is considered to have greater importance for the
Project’s impact survey.

The observer also separately records if any perched primary or secondary target species are seen. Perched
birds are recorded only for the time in which they are first noted, i.e. if the bird remains perched, it is not
recorded until it becomes airborne again.

Avifaunal Breeding Survey

The survey was conducted along the four routes during the bird breeding season from March until May
2017. These routes follow four main tracks within the project site. A point count was carried out every
250m along each survey route resulting in between 6 and 12 point counts per route, see Figure 70. Point
counts were conducted at each point count location once a month. A total of 31 points were covered along
the four routes. The counts were all performed in the morning and each point count lasted for 5 minutes
preceded by 2 minutes during which habitat variables were noted and birds were allowed to become
accustomed to the presence of the observer. During each 5 minute point count, all birds detected, either
visually and/or acoustically were recorded as either within a 50m radius around the point of observation or
beyond this 50m radius (sections A and B on Sample Recording Form below). Point counts were carried out
in the morning hours between 06:59 and 10:27. Generally, it is preferred to finish point counts before 10 to
avoid any warm weather in which birds become less active.

PAGE | 138
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 71: Location of routes and point counts for the breeding bird survey

12.1.2 Results

Baseline Assessment for in-flight movement of soaring birds

Autumn 2016

During the autumn monitoring of 2016, 16 species were recorded, fifteen belonged to primary target
species; twelve migratory and three resident species. Five of these fifteen species are globally threatened;
Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus (Endangered), Saker Falcon Falco cherrug (Endangered), Steppe
Eagle Aquila nipalensis (Endangered) and Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca (Vulnerable) and Greater
Spotted Eagle Clanga clanga (Vulnerable), while one species; Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus, is Near
Threatened (IUCN, 2017).

On the regional level, according to the IUCN regional red list of the breeding of birds of Arabia (Symes et al,
2015) which also covers Jordan, the breeding populations of four species that were recorded in the project
site are evaluated as threatened regionally; Saker Falcon Falco cherrug (Critically Endangered), Griffon
Vulture Gyps fulvus (Endangered), Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus (Vulnerable) and Short-toed
Sanek-eagle Circaetus gallicus (Vulnerable), while the breeding population of the Western Marsh-harrier
Circus aeruginosus is evaluated as “Near Threatened”, refer to Table 46.

Table 46: Species records and numbers during autumn monitoring, and their status according to IUCN Red List of
threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia (Symes et al, 2015).
Red List of
Threatened
IUCN Red List of
Species Total observations Total birds Species of the
Threatened Species
Breeding Birds of
Arabia
Egyptian Vulture
Neophron 2 2 Endangered Vulnerable
percnopterus
Griffon Vulture Gyps
1 1 Least Concern Endangered
fulvus
European Honey-
2 18 Least Concern Not Evaluated
buzzard Pernis

PAGE | 139
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Red List of
Threatened
IUCN Red List of
Species Total observations Total birds Species of the
Threatened Species
Breeding Birds of
Arabia
apivorus
Short-toed Snake-
eagle Circaetus 7 7 Least Concern Vulnerable
gallicus
Eastern Imperial Eagle
5 5 Vulnerable Not Evaluated
Aquila heliaca
Steppe Eagle Aquila
14 16 Endangered Not Evaluated
nipalensis
Bonelli’s Eagle Aquila
1 1 Least Concern Least Concern
fasciata
Greater Spotted Eagle
1 1 Vulnerable Not Evaluated
Clanga clanga
Western Marsh-
harrier Circus 5 5 Least Concern Near Threatened
aeruginosus
Montagu’s Harrier
2 2 Least Concern Not Evaluated
Circus pygargus
Pallid Harrier Circus
5 5 Near Threatened Not Evaluated
macrourus
Hen Harrier Circus
4 4 Least Concern Not Evaluated
cyaneus
Black Kite Milvus
9 17 Least Concern Least Concern
migrans
Steppe Buzzard Buteo
8 46 Least Concern Not Evaluated
buteo vulpinus
Long-legged Buzzard
63 68 Least Concern Least Concern
Buteo rufinus
Saker Falcon Falco Critically
1 1 Endangered
cherrug Endangered
Unidentified Eagle
1 1 Not Applicable Not Applicable
species Aquila sp.
Unidentified Buzzard
5 8 Not Applicable Not Applicable
species Buteo sp.
Unidentified Harrier
1 1 Not Applicable Not Applicable
species Circus sp.

In total, 209 birds were recorded through 137 observations. The highest recorded species in the survey was
the resident Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus with 68 birds in 63 observations. The highest number of
birds in a single observation was of 30 Steppe Buzzards Buteo buteo vulpinus on October 10.

The time spent by all birds recorded of all target species (209 birds) reached a total of 34785 seconds
(09h:39m:45s). 7845 seconds (02h:10m:45s) of this time was spent at the band of high collision risk of
turbines, which is almost 22.6% of the total time spent by birds in the project site. Out of the total of 209
birds recorded, 160 birds (76.6%) were recorded at risk height even if partially through their presence at
the project site. Out of the 16 species recorded, 14 species had more than 50% of the birds flying at risk
height even partially during their in-flight passage in the project site. These species include most
importantly the globally threatened Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus (50%), Eastern Imperial Eagle
Aquila heliaca (60%), Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis (75%) and Greater Spotted Eagle Clanga clanga
(100%), refer to Table 47.

PAGE | 140
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 47: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different vantage points
in autumn monitoring.
VP1 VP2 VP3 VP4 Total

Species At risk At risk At risk At risk At risk

Total Total Total Total Species
height height height height height
Birds Birds Birds Birds Totals
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

Egyptian Vulture 1 1
Neophron 2 2
percnopterus (50) (50)

Griffon Vulture 0 0
1 1
Gyps fulvus (0) (0)

European Honey- 15 15
buzzard Pernis 18 18
apivorus (83.3) (83.3)

Short-toed 2 4 6
Snake-eagle 2 5 7
Circaetus gallicus (100) (80) (85.7)

Eastern Imperial 1 1 1 3
Eagle Aquila 1 2 2 5
heliaca (100) (50) (50) (60)

Steppe Eagle 0 4 7 1 12
2 5 7 2 16
Aquila nipalensis (0) (80) (100) (50) (75)

Bonelli’s Eagle 1 1
1 1
Aquila fasciata (100) (100

Greater Spotted 1 1
Eagle Clanga 1 1
clanga (100) (100)

Western Marsh- 2 0 2
harrier Circus 4 1 5
aeruginosus (50) (0) (40)

Montagu’s 1 1 2
Harrier Circus 1 1 2
pygargus (100) (100) (100)

Pallid Harrier 2 0 1 3
3 1 1 5
Circus macrourus (66.7) (0) (100) (60)

Hen Harrier 1 1 0 2
2 1 1 4
Circus cyaneus (50) (100) (0) (50)

PAGE | 141
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

VP1 VP2 VP3 VP4 Total

Species At risk At risk At risk At risk At risk

Total Total Total Total Species
height height height height height
Birds Birds Birds Birds Totals
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

Black Kite Milvus 7 4 6 17

7 4 6 17
migrans (100) (100) (100) (100)

Steppe Buzzard 2 30 8 1 41
Buteo buteo 2 30 8 6 46
vulpinus (100) (100) (100) (16.7) (89.1)

Long-legged 13 10 23 5 51
Buzzard Buteo 16 13 34 5 68
rufinus (81.3) (76.9) (67.6) (100) (75.0)

Saker Falcon 1 1
1 1
Falco cherrug
(100) (100)

Unidentified 1 1
Eagle species 1 1
Aquila sp. (100) (100)

Unidentified 0 0 1 1
Buzzard species 4 1 3 8
Buteo sp. (0) (0) (33.3) (12.5)

Unidentified 0 0
Harrier species 1 1
Circus sp. (0) (0)

40 59 52 9 160
Total 53 70 69 17 209
(75.5) (84.3) (75.4) (52.9) (76.6)

Winter 2016-2017

During the winter monitoring of 2016/2017, two species were recorded where both are primary species.
Most of the observations belonged to a single species; Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus, which is a
resident species that is known to be breeding along the rift valley margins, refer to Table 48.
Table 48: Species records and numbers during the winter monitoring, and their status according to IUCN Red List of
threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia (Symes et al, 2015).
Red List of
Threatened
IUCN Red List of
Species Total observations Total birds Species of the
Threatened Species
Breeding Birds of
Arabia
Steppe Eagle Aquila
1 1 Endangered Not Evaluated
niaplensis
Long-legged Buzzard
45 50 Least Concern Least Concern
Buteo rufinus
PAGE | 142
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Unidentified Falco
1 1 Not Applicable Not Applicable
Falco sp.

Fifty-two birds were recorded in 47 records. The observation was spread out across the period of the
survey. Seventeen birds were recorded flying at risk height even if partially through their presence at the
wind farm, see Table 49.

Table 49: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different vantage points
in winter monitoring.
VP2 VP3 VP4 Total
Species
Total At risk Total At risk Total At risk Species At risk
Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Totals height (%)

Steppe Eagle Aquila 1 1

1 1
nipalensis
(100) (100)

Long-legged Buzzard 6 2 7 15
12 11 27 50
Buteo rufinus
(50) (18.2) (25.9) (30)

Unidentified Falcon 1 1
1 1
species Falco sp. (100) (100)

7 2 8 17
Total 13 11 28 52
(53.8) (18.2) (28.6) (32.7)

Spring 2016

During the spring season assessment, 16 species were recorded, of which 14 belonged to primary target
species; 13 migratory and one resident species, see Table 50. One species recorded is globally threatened;
Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis (Endangered) (IUCN, 2016) while another species is Near Threatened; Pallid
Harrier Circus macrourus.
On the regional level, according to the IUCN regional red list of the breeding of birds of Arabia (Symes et al,
2015) which also covers Jordan, the breeding populations of two species that were recorded in the project
site are evaluated as threatened regionally; Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus (Endangered) and Short-toed
Sanek-eagle Circaetus gallicus (Vulnerable), while the breeding population of three species are evaluated
as Near Threatened; White Stork Ciconia ciconia, Western Marsh-harrier Circus aeruginosus and Lesser
Kestrel Falco naumanni, refer to Table 50.

Table 50: Species records and numbers during the spring monitoring, and their status according to IUCN Red List of
threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia (Symes et al, 2015).
Red List of
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
Species Total observations Total birds
Threatened Species of the Breeding Birds
of Arabia
White Stork Ciconia
1 1 Least Concern Near Threatened
ciconia
Black Stork Ciconia nigra 1 7 Least Concern Not Evaluated
European Honey-buzzard
17 308 Least Concern Not Evaluated
Pernis apivorus
Short-toed Snake-eagle 8 8 Least Concern Vulnerable

PAGE | 143
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Circaetus gallicus
Steppe Eagle Aquila
19 133 Endangered Not Evaluated
nipalensis
Booted Eagle Hieraaetus
3 3 Least Concern Not Applicable
pennatus
Western Marsh-harrier
3 4 Least Concern Near Threatened
Circus aeruginosus
Pallid Harrier Circus
3 3 Near Threatened Not Evaluated
macrourus
Hen Harrier Circus
1 1 Least Concern Not Evaluated
cyaneus
Black Kite Milvus
53 283 Least Concern Least Concern
migrans
Steppe Buzzard Buteo
93 2150 Least Concern Not Evaluated
buteo vulpinus
Long-legged Buzzard
97 108 Least Concern Least Concern
Buteo rufinus
Eurasian Sparrowhawk
2 2 Least Concern Not Evaluated
Accipiter nisus
Lesser Kestrel Falco
4 12 Least Concern Near Threatened
naumanni
Peregrine Falcon Falco
1 1 Least Concern Endangered
peregrinus
Eurasian Hobby Falco
4 4 Least Concern Not Evaluated
subbuteo
Unidentified Buzzard
5 5 Not Applicable Not Applicable
Buteo sp.

The highest recorded species in the survey was the migratory Steppe Buzzard Buteo buteo vulpinus, with
2150 birds in 93 records. The highest number of birds in a single record was of 230 Steppe buzzards on
March 23.

The time spent by all birds recorded of all target species (3033 birds) reached a total of 300810 seconds
(83h:33m:30s), almost ten times the time spent during autumn season. 80580 seconds (22h:23m:00s) of
this time was spent at the band of high collision risk of turbines, which is almost 26.8% of the total time
spent by birds in the project site. Out of the total of 3033 birds recorded, 812 birds (26.8%) were recorded
at risk height even if partially through their presence at the project site. Out of the 16 species recorded, 14
species had more than 50% of the birds flying at risk height even partially during their in-flight passage in
the project site. These species include most importantly the globally threatened Egyptian Vulture
Neophron percnopterus (50%), Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca (60%), Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis
(75%) and Greater Spotted Eagle Clanga clanga (100%), refer to Table 51.

Table 51: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different vantage points
during spring monitoring.
VP2 VP3 VP4 Total
Species
Total At risk Total At risk Total At risk Species At risk
Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Totals height (%)

1 1
White Stork Ciconia
1 1
ciconia
(100) (100)

7 7
Black Stork Ciconia
7 7
nigra
(100) (100)

European Honey-
57 3 243 206 8 3 308 212
buzzard Pernis apivorus

PAGE | 144
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

VP2 VP3 VP4 Total

Species
Total At risk Total At risk Total At risk Species At risk
Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Totals height (%)

(5.3) (84.8) 37.5) (68.8)

2 3 5
Short-toed Snake-eagle
5 3 8
Circaetus gallicus
(40.0) (100) (62.5)

9 0 2 11
Steppe Eagle Aquila
124 1 8 133
nipalensis
(7.3) (0) (25.0) (8.3)

2 1 3
Booted Eagle
2 1 3
Hieraaetus pennatus
(100) (100) (100)

1 0 1
Western Marsh-harrier
1 3 4
Circus aeruginosus
(100) (0) (25.0)

0 0 0
Pallid Harrier Circus
2 1 3
macrourus
(0) (0) (0)

1 0
Hen Harrier Circus
1 1
cyaneus
(0) (0)

34 108 51 193
Black Kite Milvus
41 127 115 283
migrans
(82.9) (85.0) (44.3) (68.2)

29 110 128 267

Steppe Buzzard Buteo
92 319 1739 2150
buteo vulpinus
(31.5) (34.5) (7.4) (12.4)

17 46 33 96
Long-legged Buzzard
22 50 36 108
Buteo rufinus
(77.3) (92) (91.7) (88.9)

1 0 1
Eurasian Sparrowhawk
1 1 2
Accipiter nisus
(100) (0) (50.0)

6 6 12
Lesser Kestrel Falco
6 6 12
naumanni
(100) (100) (100)

0 0
Peregrine Falcon Falco
1 1
peregrinus
(0) (0)

0 0 0
Eurasian Hobby Falco
3 1 4
subbuteo
(0) (0) (0)

PAGE | 145
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

VP2 VP3 VP4 Total

Species
Total At risk Total At risk Total At risk Species At risk
Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Totals height (%)

2 1 0 3
Unidentified Buzzard
3 1 1 5
Buteo sp.
(66.7) (100) (0) (60.0)

97 483 232 812

Total 349 756 1928 3033
(27.8 (63.9) (12.0) (26.8)

Summer 2017

During the summer monitoring of 2017, two species were recorded. Both species belonged to primary
target species; Short-toed Snake-eagle CIrcaetus gallicus and Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus, see Table
52. The former has a summer-breeding population that is known to breed in the forested areas along the
rift valley margins while the latter is a resident species that is also known to breed in the rocky areas of the
rift valley margins. Neither of the species is globally threatened.

On the regional level, according to the IUCN regional red list of the breeding of birds of Arabia (Symes et al,
2015) which also covers Jordan, the breeding population of Short-toed Sanek-eagle Circaetus gallicus was
evaluated as regionally threatened (Vulnerable), see Table 52.

Table 52: Species records and numbers during summer monitoring, and their status according to IUCN Red List of
threatened Species (IUCN, 2016) and the regional Red List of the breeding birds of Arabia (Symes et al, 2015).
Red List of
Threatened
IUCN Red List of
Species Total observations Total birds Species of the
Threatened Species
Breeding Birds of
Arabia
Short-toed Snake-
eagle Circaetus 3 4 Least Concern Vulnerable
gallicus
Long-legged Buzzard
1 1 Least Concern Least Concern
Buteo rufinus

The highest recorded species in the summer monitoring was Short-toed Snake-eagle Circaetus gallicus,
with 4 birds in 3 records. The highest number of birds in a single record was of 2 birds on July 23.

The time spent by all birds recorded of all target species (4 birds) reached a total of 1110 seconds
(0h:18m:30s). 705 seconds (0h:11m:45s) of this time was spent at the band of high collision risk of
turbines, which is almost 63.5% of the total time spent by birds in the project site. see Table 53.

Table 53: Species numbers and percentages of total numbers at collision risk height at the different vantage points
during summer monitoring.
VP2 VP3 VP4 Total
Species
Total At risk Total At risk Total At risk Species At risk
Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Totals height (%)

Short-toed Snake- 4 4 4 4
eagle Circaetus

PAGE | 146
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

VP2 VP3 VP4 Total

Species
Total At risk Total At risk Total At risk Species At risk
Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Birds height (%) Totals height (%)

gallicus (100) (100)

1 1
Long-legged Buzzard
1 0 1
Buteo rufinus
(100) (100)

Taking a general look at the data over the various seasons while taking into consideration the locations of
the observations and their height in relation to collision risk, see Figure 71, the spring season had the
highest number of bird observations making up 92.1% of total bird observations throughout the year. On
the other hand, the autumn season, although having only 6.3% of total bird observations, had the highest
percentage of birds flying at collision risk height even if partially (76.6%), see Table 51.

Figure 72: Division of the project site based on coverage of in-flight monitoring (ECO Consult, 2017)

Over all the data collected for the whole year, the eastern part of the project site had the highest number
of bird observations (1973 birds) while the western side having the lowest number of observations (483
birds). Over the seasons, the eastern part of the project site had the highest number of observations in
winter and spring (28 out of 52 birds and 1928 out of 3033 birds respectively), while the western part had
the highest number of observations in autumn (128 birds out of 209).
Regarding bird numbers at flight at collision risk height, the central part of the project site had the highest
overall number of birds flying at collision risk height where 537 birds out of 836 birds observed at the
central part were recorded flying at collision risk, even if partially. On the seasonal level, in autumn, the
western part of the project site had the highest number of birds flying at collision risk height, even if
partially. During winter, the western and eastern parts had almost the same number of birds flying at
collision risk height, while in spring, the central part of the project had the highest number of bird
observations flying at risk height with 483 bird observations in the central part were recorded flying at risk
height making up 63.9% of the total birds observed during that season in the central part of the project
site., see Table 54.

PAGE | 147
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 54: Number of birds flying at risk height in the different seasons of monitoring in the different parts of the
project site
Season Autumn Winter Spring Summer Total

Location At risk At risk At risk At risk At risk

Total Total Total Total Total
height height height height height
Birds Birds Birds Birds Birds
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

99 7 97 0 203
West 123 13 349 0 485
(80.5) (53.8) (27.8) (0) (41.9)

52 2 483 5 542
Centre 69 11 756 5 841
(75.4) (18.2) (63.9) (100) (64.4)

9 8 232 0 249
East 17 28 1928 0 1973
(52.9) (28.6) (12.0) (0) (12.6)

160 17 812 5 989

Total 209 52 3033 5 3294
(76.6) (32.7) (26.8) (100) (30.0)

Regarding the total time of birds recorded at collision risk height, the central part of the project site had
the highest total time of birds flying at collision risk height where 41.2% of the total time of flight in this
part was recorded at collision risk height. On the seasonal level, in autumn and winter, the western part of
the project site had the highest total time of birds flying at risk height, while in spring, the central part of
the project had the highest total time of flight at collision risk height, see Table 55.
Table 55: Total flight time at collision risk height in the different seasons in the different parts of the project site.
Season Autumn Winter Spring Summer Total

Time of Time of Time of Time of Time of

flight at flight at flight at flight at flight at
Total Total Total Total Total
risk risk risk risk risk
flight flight flight flight flight
Location

height height height height height

time in time in time in time in time in
in in in in in
seconds seconds seconds seconds seconds
seconds seconds seconds seconds seconds
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

4,275 1,680 8,535 0 14,490

West 21,915 3,225 26,100 0 51,240
(19.5) (52.1) (32.7 (0) (28.3)

2,805 375 48,810 705 52,695

Centre 11,370 2,010 112,935 1110 127,425
(24.7) (18.7) (43.2) (63.5) (41.4)

765 285 23,235 0 24,285

East 1,500 1,770 161,775 0 165,045
(51.0%) (16.1) (14.4) (0) (14.7)

Total 34,785 7,845 7,005 2,340 300,810 80,580 1110 705 343,710 91,470

PAGE | 148
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Season Autumn Winter Spring Summer Total

Time of Time of Time of Time of Time of

flight at flight at flight at flight at flight at
Total Total Total Total Total
risk risk risk risk risk
flight flight flight flight flight
Location

height height height height height

time in time in time in time in time in
in in in in in
seconds seconds seconds seconds seconds
seconds seconds seconds seconds seconds
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

(22.6) (33.4) (26.8) (63.5) (26.6)

In conclusion regarding the flight at collision risk height, the western part of the project site is the critical
site for collision risk during autumn and winter where it is followed in both season by the central part of
the project site while the collision risk shifts to the central part in spring season where it is followed by the
eastern part while the western part becomes the least part of the project site in regard to collision risk
during this season.

Avifaunal Breeding Survey

Throughout the breeding survey from March until May, 2016, 34 species were recorded. Fourteen of the
species recorded in the survey are considered as passage migrants and/or winter visitors and are not
known to breed in the project area and its vicinity, or even in southern Jordan. Out of the remaining 20
species, nine are confirmed breeding species in the project site while the other 12 species are not
confirmed breeders and/or breeding in the vicinity of the project site, see Table 56.
Table 56: Species recorded in the survey
IUCN Red List of
IUCN Red List of
Breeding Birds of
Species Status during survey Local status Threatened Species
Arabia (Symes et
(IUCN, 2016)
al, 2015)
Steppe Eagle Aquila Passage migrant, the Passage migrant, Endangered Not Evaluated
nipalensis most common eagle winter visitor
species that passes
over Jordan. It is also
one of the most
common species that
spends winter in
Jordan and mostly in
the eastern parts of
the country. It was
recorded as a flyover
species during the
survey.
European Honey- Passage migrant, the Passage migrant Least Concern Not Evaluated
buzzard Pernis second most common
apivorus species that passes
over Jordan. It was
recorded as a flyover
species during the
survey
Steppe Buzzard Buteo Passage migrant, Passage migrant Least Concern Least Concern
buteo vulpinus considered to be the
most common

PAGE | 149
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

IUCN Red List of

IUCN Red List of
Breeding Birds of
Species Status during survey Local status Threatened Species
Arabia (Symes et
(IUCN, 2016)
al, 2015)
migratory soaring bird
species that passes
over Jordan. It was
recorded as a flyover
species during the
survey.
Long-legged Buzzard No breeding recorded Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Buteo rufinus in the project site but
it would be breeding in
adjacent areas since it
was recorded on
regular basis foraging
in the project site.
Black Kite Milvus Passage migrant, one Passage migrant Least Concern Not Evaluated
migrans of the most common
migratory soaring bird
species in the country.
It was recorded mainly
as a flyover species
during the survey
except for a single
record of a single bird
that was foraging close
by a Bedouin tent
Common Kestrel Falco Mainly a resident Resident Least Concern Least Concern
tinnunculus species. It was not
confirmed as a
breeder in the project
site but it is definitely
breeding in the vicinity
of the project site by
the western side. Most
of the records in the
survey were of birds
foraging briefly in the
area, which is an
indication that these
birds are probably
nesting close by.
Lesser Kestrel Falco A passage migrant that Passage migrant, Least Concern Near Threatened
naumanni is known to breed summer breeder
along the rift margins
in Jordan. No breeding
was confirmed in the
project site but a
single record of a
female foraging briefly
in the western part of
the project site could
imply that the species
breeds outside the
project site by the
western cliffs. It is
known to breed in
PAGE | 150
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

IUCN Red List of

IUCN Red List of
Breeding Birds of
Species Status during survey Local status Threatened Species
Arabia (Symes et
(IUCN, 2016)
al, 2015)
Shobak Castle in a few
numbers with larger
colonies further north
in Dana Biosphere
Reserve and Mujib
Biosphere Reserve
Collared Dove No breeding Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Streptopelia decaocto confirmed at project
site but is believed to
be breeding in
adjacent farms
Rock Dove / Feral No breeding Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Pigeons Columba livia confirmed at project
but is believed to be
breeding in adjacent
farms and villages
Little Owl Athene No breeding Resident Least Concern Least Concern
noctua confirmed but is
probably a rare
breeder at project site.
The species was only
recorded once along
the road to Faisaliyyeh
in the southeastern
part of the project site
European Bee-eater No breeding Passage migrant, Least Concern Least Concern
Merops apiaster confirmed with only a summer breeder
single record of a flock
flying over the project
site
Pallid Swift Apus No breeding, only Passage migrant, Least Concern Least Concern
pallidus recorded flying over summer breeder
regularly on passage
Hoopoe Upupa epops Breeding confirmed in Resident, summer Least Concern Least Concern
project site breeder
Calandra Lark Breeding in small Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Melanocorypha numbers in the central
calandra part of the of the
project site close to
agricultural fields
Crested Lark Galerida Breeding all across the Resident Least Concern Least Concern
cristata project area, where it
was regularly recorded
singing
Greater Short-toed No confirmed Passage migrant, Least Concern Least Concern
Lark Calandrella breeding. Recorded summer breeder
brachydactyla regularly in barley
fields across the
project site
Lesser Sort-toed Lark No confirmed Summer breeder, Least Concern Least Concern
Calandrella rufescens breeding. Very few passage migrant
records of small flocks

PAGE | 151
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

IUCN Red List of

IUCN Red List of
Breeding Birds of
Species Status during survey Local status Threatened Species
Arabia (Symes et
(IUCN, 2016)
al, 2015)
in barley fields by the
central part of the
project stie
Desert Lark Breeding, where it was Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Ammomanes deserti recorded singing on a
few occasions
Bar-tailed Lark No confirmed Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Ammomanes cincture breeding, a single
record. Most probably
breeding to the east of
the project site
Temminck’s Lark Breeding, where it was Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Eremophila bilopha recorded singing and
in display in several
occasions, specifically
in the eastern part of
the project site
Red-throated Pipit Passage migrant that Passage migrant Least Concern Not Evaluated
Anthus cervinus was recorded only
twice in the western
part of the project site
Northern House Recorded on passage Passage migrant Least Concern Least Concern
Martin Delichon
urbicum
Barn Swallow Hirundo Recorded regularly on Passage migrant Least Concern Least Concern
rustica passage
Collared Sand Martin Recorded occasionally Passage migrant Least Concern Least Concern
Riparia riparia on passage
Northern Wheatear No breeding, only Passage migrant Least Concern Least Concern
Oenanthe oenanthe recorded on passage
Isabelline Wheatear Breeding all across the Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Oenanthe isabellina project site where it
was recorded singing
from perch and
showing territorial
behaviour
Black-eared Wheatear A very rare breeder Passage migrant, Least Concern Least Concern
Oenanthe hispanica with a single record of summer breeder
a single male in the
western part of the
project site.
Red(Buff)-rumped Confirmed breeding – Resident Least Concern Endangered
Wheatear Oenanthe singing and in display.
moesta A single record of
three individuals (one
male and two females)
in the southeastern
part of the project site
Willow Warbler A single record of a Passage migrant Least Concern Least Concern
Phylloscopus trochilus passage migrant
Brown-necked Raven No breeding Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Corvus ruficollis confirmed with a
PAGE | 152
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

IUCN Red List of

IUCN Red List of
Breeding Birds of
Species Status during survey Local status Threatened Species
Arabia (Symes et
(IUCN, 2016)
al, 2015)
single record of a
flyover bird. The
species is known to be
breeding along the rift
valley margins
House Sparrow Passer No breeding Resident Least Concern Least Concern
domesticus confirmed and was
only recorded calling
locally in the western
part of the project
Desert Finch No breeding Summer breeder Least Concern Least Concern
Rhodospiza obsoleta confirmed. Only
occasional records of a
small flocks and
individuals flying over
Eurasian Linnet Breeding, recorded Resident Least Concern Least Concern
Carduelis cannabina regularly but with very
few singing birds in the
western part of the
project site

The most frequently recorded species in the project area was Isabelline Wheatear Oenanthe isabellina,
followed by two lark species, Crested Lark Galerida cristata and Temminck’s Lark Eremophila bilopha, see
Table 57.
Table 57: Total number of observations, relative density (per hectare) and frequency of occurrence as percent of
point counts in each block of breeding species.
Species Total No. of Observations Total No. of birds recorded Frequency
Isabelline Wheatear 72 75 55.91
Crested Lark 83 90 53.76
Temminck's Lark 75 99 43.01
Linnet 21 44 20.43
Swallow 21 54 17.20
Short-toed Lark 14 42 12.90
Black Kite 13 28 12.90
Desert Lark 15 25 11.83
Calandra Lark 11 22 10.75
Pallid Swift 9 79 9.68
Hoopoe 12 12 8.60
Steppe Buzzard 8 17 8.60
Rock Dove 6 42 6.45
Kestrel 5 5 5.38
House Sparrow 4 7 3.23
Collared Dove 2 4 2.15
Desert Finch 2 3 2.15
Lesser Short-toed Lark 2 2 2.15
Long-legged Buzzard 3 3 2.15
Northern Wheatear 3 3 2.15

PAGE | 153
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Species Total No. of Observations Total No. of birds recorded Frequency

Steppe Eagle 2 2 2.15
Willow Warbler 2 2 2.15
Bar-tailed Lark 1 1 1.08
Bee-eater 1 16 1.08
Black-eared Wheatear 1 1 1.08
Brown-necked Raven 1 1 1.08
Honey Buzzard 1 1 1.08
House Martin 1 1 1.08
Lesser Kestrel 1 1 1.08
Little Owl 1 1 1.08
Red-rumped Wheatear 1 3 1.08
Red-throated Pipit 2 2 1.08
Sand Martin 1 1 1.08

Apart from Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis, which was recorded flying over on two occasions while carrying
out the point counts, none of the species recorded are globally threatened. However, according to the
threatened list of breeding birds of Arabia, which covers Jordan (Symes et al, 2015), one species is assessed
as Endangered; Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe moesta. The species was recorded in the south-eastern
part of the project site along the main road to Faisaliyyeh, see Figure 72.

Additionally, Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni, which is assessed as Near Threatened on the regional level,
was recorded using the site on one occasions. However, no breeding was confirmed for the species in the
project site but it is believed that the species breeds outside the project to the west since it is documented
that this species is known to breed in Shobak around the Montreal Castle (pers. obs.).

Figure 73: Location of the breeding of the regionally Endangered Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe moesta

12.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on birds during the
various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation phase. For each impact, a set of
management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and
monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

PAGE | 154
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

12.2.1 Potential Impacts during the Construction Phase

Site preparation activities which are to take place onsite by the EPC Contractor for installation of the wind
turbines and the various project components to include transmission cables, access roads and internal road
network, buildings, etc. are expected to include land clearing activities, leveling, excavation, grading, etc.

Such activities in particular could impact avi-fauna which use the site for foraging and as a breeding
ground– to include soaring and non-soaring resident and migratory species. As discussed throughout the
baseline section, several species of resident and visiting birds were recorded foraging within the site some
of which are considered important at the national and regional levels, most specifically Red-rumped
Wheatear Oenanthe moesta, which is a regionally Endangered species that was confirmed to be breeding
inside the project site, and Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni, which is a regionally Near Threatened species
that was recorded foraging in the project site.

Nevertheless, such construction activities would not result in any major alteration of the site’s habitats and
thus would not affect the foraging and feeding area of such species, given that such activities are limited to
the relatively small individual footprint of these facilities and where the actual area of disturbance is
relatively minimal. In addition, except for Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe moesta, which was recorded
breeding in the south-eastern part of the project site, the project site does not hold any specific or
significant value as a feeding habitat for birds. The project site is considered of low ecological significance
due to its natural setting; characterized by being heavily degraded.

On the other hand, there are additional potential impacts during the construction phase on breeding birds
within the site. Construction activities could disturb existing habitats of birds breeding and within the
project site. Such potential impacts are created during the construction phase only and thus are of short‐
term duration. However, such impacts are considered of negative nature and of a low magnitude given
that the construction activities’ actual area of disturbance is relatively minimal. In addition, given that
breeding activities are likely within the Project site, the receiving environmental is determined to be of a
medium sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be minor significance.

Additional Studies/Survey and Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the EPC Contractor during the
construction phase and which include:

 To minimize impacts on the recorded regionally Endangered species (Red-Rumped Wheatear), a

breeding survey must be undertaken at the project site during the breeding season (which lasts from
March till mid-May) and before commencement of any construction activities. The survey must be
undertaken by a qualified ornithologist and must be based on point counts that are spread over the
entire project site. At each point count all breeding activities must be recorded. The survey must aim to
identify any breeding areas of importance within the project site. Based on the outcomes of the survey,
should any areas of importance be identified then construction activities must be properly planned to
avoid any disturbance to such areas during the breeding season.
 Implementation of proper housekeeping measures to reduce impacts including:
- Avoid any activities in the sensitive areas for Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe moesta, mainly in the
south-eastern part of the project site, during the breeding season of the species from March until
May.
- Restrict activities to allocated construction areas only with no breeding activities, including movement
of workers and vehicles to allocated roads within the site and prohibit off-roading to minimize
disturbances.
- Prohibit hunting of birds at any time and under any condition by construction workers onsite.

PAGE | 155
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

- Implement proper measures, which would prevent attraction of birds to the site. This includes
measures such as prohibiting illiterate dumping and ensuring waste streams are disposed
appropriately in accordance with the measures identified in “Section 9.2”.
- Avoid unnecessary elevated noise levels at all times. In addition, apply adequate general noise
suppressing measures. This could include the use of well‐maintained mufflers and noise suppressants
for high noise generating equipment and machinery, developing a regular maintenance schedule of all
vehicles, machinery, and equipment for early detection of issues to avoid unnecessary elevated noise
level, etc.
Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirement

The following summarizes the monitoring requirements for the Projects which must be undertaken and
which include:

 Submission of breeding survey report identifying any breeding areas of importance within the project
site.
 EPC Contractor to submit construction schedule and plan and demonstrate that construction is planned
to avoid areas of concern during breeding season.

12.2.2 Potential Impacts during the Operation Phase

Wind turbines are associated with impacts on birds from risks of collision and electrocution for both
migratory soaring birds (which could pass over the site during the spring and autumn migration seasons)
and resident soaring birds in the area. This section provides a qualitative assessment of such impacts. As
discussed previously, to determine the significance of an impact it is important to understand the
sensitivity of the receiving environment and the magnitude of the impact both of which are discussed in
further details below.

(i) Sensitivity of the Project Site

The baseline assessment has recorded relatively low numbers of migratory soaring birds over the Project
site. Some of those recorded species have an important status on the international and/or
regional/national levels. Comparing these results to other areas reveals that the Project site is not
considered to be within an intensive migration route nor within high resident bird activity – especially
when compared to areas closer to the rift valley and its margins. Taking all the above into account, the
receiving environment is considered of low sensitivity.

(ii) Magnitude of the Impact

Collision of migratory and resident soaring birds with wind turbines is expected. Based on the assessments
that were carried for in-flight monitoring of soaring birds, certain species have shown a higher probability
of flying at collision-risk height during certain periods of the year. Generally, to determine the magnitude
of the impact, three main factors are considered, which are:

1. The numbers of birds of different species recorded within the Project site and the numbers of these
species flying at collision risk height;

2. The conservation status of the species (international IUCN status and local status and importance);

3. The avoidance behavior and collision risk of recorded species. There is no data in Jordan on avoidance
behavior and collision risks of birds with wind turbines. Therefore, such information was based on
experiences from Europe – mainly from Spain. The analysis was a comparative one in order to identify
PAGE | 156
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

species that were recorded to have a higher number of collisions and electrocutions and compare
them with the species recorded in the project site.

Out of all the species recorded, there are ten species with a high impact magnitude. These include four
migratory soaring bird species; Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus, Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis,
Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca and Booted Eagle Hieraaetus pennatus, five resident and/or summer
breeding species; Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus, Short-toed Snake-eagle Circaetus gallicus, Bonelli’s Eagle
Aquila faciata, Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus and Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni, and one breeding
passerine species; Red-rumped Weatear Oenanthe moesta.

Taking a deeper look at the species mentioned above, below is more detailed interpretation of the
observations of these species:
 Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus is a globally threatened species (Endangered), which also a
regionally threatened breeding population (Vulnerable). On the national level, the species is currently a
regular passage migrant but with scattered low numbers of passage birds. It is also a former breeder in
the country but is still known to breed in Arabia and Israel. Two bird observations were recorded during
the assessments, only during the autumn migration season. One of the two observations was at
collision risk height. The total duration of the observation in the project site was for 720 seconds where
75 seconds were at collision risk height (10.4%). Both of the observations were in the western part of
the project site.
 Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis, which is an Endangered species and is the most common eagle species
migrating over Jordan, had the highest number of birds passing over the project site of all the globally
threatened species; 133 birds in spring and 16 birds in autumn. In autumn, 12 of the bird observations
were recorded flying, even if partially, at collision risk height (75.0%). The total duration of the species
observation in the project site in autumn was for 3570 seconds where 495 seconds were at collision risk
height (13.9%). In winter, a single individual was recorded foraging for 540 seconds at collision risk
height. In spring, out of the 124 bird observations, 8 birds were flying at collision risk height, even if
partially. The total duration of the species observations in the project site in spring was 4485 seconds
where 675 seconds were at collision risk height (15.1%). The difference in the species presence and
duration of observations is related to the species behaviour in different seasons. The species is known
to fly over at higher altitudes and at relatively high speeds above collision risk height during spring
migration (133 birds flew for a duration of 4485 seconds), while it is known to be migrating at lower
altitudes during autumn migration while foraging for longer periods (16 birds flew for a duration of
3570 seconds). Regarding its distribution, the species was recorded in all parts of the project site. Still,
the distribution was different during the different seasons. In autumn, the species was distributed
equally in both the western and central parts of the project site (7 birds each). while in spring, most of
the observations were in the western part of the project site (124 out of 132 bird observations).
 Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca, is a globally threatened species (Vulnerable). The species was only
recorded during the autumn season. Out of the five bird observations of the species, three were
recorded at collision risk height, even if partially. The total duration of the species observation in the
project site was for 2070 seconds where 195 seconds were at collision risk height (9.4%). Regarding its
distribution, the species was only recorded in the western and central parts of the project site 3 and 3
observations respectively while it was not recorded in the eastern part.
 Booted Eagle Hieraaetus pennatus, is a regular passage migrant that is known to pass over Jordan in
small numbers. The species was only recorded in the spring where only three bird observations were
recorded. All birds were recorded flying at collision risk height, even if partially. The total duration of
the species observation in the project was 810 seconds where 390 seconds were at collision risk height
(48.1%). Regarding its distribution, the species was only recorded in the central and eastern parts of the
project site.
 Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus is resident species that is known to breed in the southern highlands of
Jordan along the higher parts of the rift valley margins. The regional breeding population of the species,
of which the species population is part, is regionally threatened (Endangered). The species breeding
PAGE | 157
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

population in the country has been facing continuous decline over the past 50 years and currently the
only records of breeding in the country are in Dana Biosphere Reserve. Recent observations have even
indicated that the species does not breed their regularly and it has failed to breed for the past two
years. During the assessments at the project site, a single observation was recorded of one bird flying
above collision risk height for a total of 900 seconds. The record was in the western part of the project
site.
 Short-toed Snake-eagle Circaetus gallicus is a passage migrant species that has a breeding population in
the country, which is part of the regionally threatened breeding population of Arabia, including Jordan.
The species was recorded in autumn and spring but was absent throughout winter. In autumn, seven
birds were recorded where 6 of them were recorded at collision risk height (85.7%). The total duration
of the observations of the species in the project site was for 1200 seconds where 225 seconds were at
collision risk height (18.8%). In spring, a total of eight bird observations were recorded at the project
site, out of which 5 were recorded at collision risk height (62.5%). The total duration of the observations
of the species in the project site was for 990 seconds out of which 495 seconds were at collision risk
height (50%). Taking the scope of the in-flight monitoring assessments into consideration, it is
impossible to decide which of these individuals were part of the regionally threatened breeding
population, but it is highly probable that some of the individuals that were recorded in spring are part of
this population especially that they had a higher percentage of individuals flying at collision risk height
while foraging which is an indication for breeding individuals. Regarding its distribution, all individuals of
the species recorded throughout the assessments were in the central and western parts of the project
site while the species was completely absent from the eastern part of the project. In spring, the highest
number of individuals was recorded in the western part of the project site, unlike autumn where the
highest numbers were recorded in the central part of the project site. This again supports the theory
that a portion of the individuals recorded in the spring season were part of the regionally breeding
population since they are located closer to their breeding territories to the west of the project along the
rift valley margins.
 Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus is a resident species that breeds along the rift valley margins and
uses the project for site for foraging. The species was recorded in the project site in autumn, winter and
spring seasons. In autumn, the species had the highest number of observations among all species
recorded at the project site, including migratory species, making up 32.5% of all birds observed. Out of
the 68 bird observations of the species during autumn, 51 of them were recorded at collision risk height
(75.0%). The total duration of the species observations in the project site was for 9555 seconds where
3540 seconds were at collision risk height (37.0%). In winter, the species was the most commonly
recorded species making up 96.2% of the birds recorded. Out of the 50 bird observations recorded in
winter, 15 of them were recorded at collision risk height (30%). The total duration of the species
observations in the project site was for 6420 seconds where 1755 seconds were at collision risk height
(27.3%). In spring, the species was the most commonly recorded resident species having the fifth
highest number of observations among all species recorded at the project site in spring. Out of the 108
birds recorded in spring, 96 of them were recorded flying at collision risk height (88.9%). The total
duration of the species observations in the project site as for 21345 seconds where 16725 seconds were
at collision risk height (78.4%). Regarding its distribution, the species was recorded from all vantage
points at the project site with a marginally higher presence in the central and eastern parts of the
project site.
 Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni, which is a migratory summer breeding species that also breeds in the rift
valley margins and around Shobak Castle but was also recorded foraging in the project site. The regional
breeding population in Arabia, including Jordan, is evaluated as a Near Threatened population. The
species was only recorded during the spring assessment, which indicates that the individuals recorded
are part of the regional breeding population, especially all species recorded were foraging in the project
site and were not on migration. All 12 bird observations of the species were recorded flying, even if
partially, at collision risk height. The total duration of the observations of the species in the project site
was for 16470 seconds where 4050 seconds were at collision risk height (24.6%). One observation that
is worth highlighting is that the remaining duration of the observations for the species (12420 seconds)
PAGE | 158
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

was recorded below collision risk height and the species was never recorded above collision risk height.
In other words, since all observed were flying at collision risk height, even if partially, and then were
only recorded below collision risk height, this indicates that all these individuals are part of the regional
breeding population and they were using the project site for foraging. Regarding its distribution, the
species was recorded equally in the central and eastern part of the project site where the species was
foraging in the flatter parts of the project site.
 Bonelli’s Eagle Aquila fasciata, is a resident eagle species that has a very small restricted national
population along the rift valley margins in Jordan. There was only once record of the species in autumn,
The total duration of the observation was for 75 seconds out of which 45 seconds were recorded at
collision risk height. The observation was in the western part of the project site.
 Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe moesta, which is the only regionally threatened species recorded
breeding inside the project site. Although there are no studies that could indicate the impact of wind
turbines on the species but any direct impacts on the habitat of the breeding area of the species is
believed to impact the presence and the breeding success of the species, especially during its breeding
season.
In addition, there are additional 6 species with a medium impact magnitude. These are Black Kite Milvus
migrans, European Honey-buzzard Pernis apivorus, Steppe Buzzard Buteo buteo vulpinus, Hen Harrier
Circus cyaneus, Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus and Montagu’s Harrier circus pygargus.

The remainder of the species are considered of low impact magnitude, as that they have no important
international or local conservation status, have high avoidance rates, and were recorded in low numbers
within the Project site.

In addition to the above, the International Financing Corporation (IFC) has recently publishe the Tafila
Region Wind Power Projects Cumulative Effect Assessment. The overall objective of the CEA was to identify
the potential cumulative effects of the Wind Power Projects on biodiversity in the study area of Tafila
Region and propose mitigation, monitoring and other management measures to address the highest risks.
Risks were identified with respect to Valued Social and Environmental Components (VECs). The CEA’s scope
was on three major biodiversity elements with the major focus being on birds.

Although the project site is outside the area of scope of the CEA, it is only located less than 3km to the
south of it, making the CEA highly relevant to the project. The results of the CEA started with an initial list
of 171 species populations that were identified as potentially at risk. This list was reduced through the CEA
process to 13 species which were defined as priority bird VECs that were assessed to be at highest risk
through the CEA process. Out of these 13 species populations, nine were recorded in the project site.

Based on the above, including the IFC’s CEA, the species populations that have a potential high magnitude
of impact in the project is nine species. Therefore, the magnitude of the impact in general ranges between
low – high depending on the species of concern as noted in the Table 58 below.
Table 58: Magnitude of Impacts on Bird Species (ECO Consult, 2017)
Species Magnitude of Impact Justification
 Egyptian Vulture High  High collision rates of such species with wind
 Steppe Eagle turbines
 Eastern Imperial Eagle  Globally threatened
 Booted Eagle  Listed as one of the VECs of the IFC’s CEA
 Griffon Vulture High  High collision rates of such species with wind
 Short-Toed Snake Eagle turbines
 Bonelli’s Eagle  Biological significance of a loss is very high due to its
 Long-Legged Buzzard important local, national and/or regional status
 Lesser Kestrel  Listed as one of the VECs of the IFC’s CEA
 Red-rumped Wheatear High  Unknown collision rate
 A high concentration of a breeding population of a
regionally threatened species (Endangered)

PAGE | 159
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Black kite Medium  Migrants in flocks with frequent passes.

 Steppe Buzzard  Observed collision rates of this species is medium-
 European Honey-buzzard low
 Montagu’s Harrier  May cause high number of fatalities in a single event
 Hen Harrier
 Pallid Harrier Medium  Observed collision rates of this species is medium-
low
 Globally Near Threatened
 Remaining species Low  All other species are considered of low impact
magnitude, as that they have no important
international or local conservation status, have high
avoidance rates, and were recorded in low numbers
within the Project site.

Given all the above, the potential impacts on birds created during the operation phase would be of a long‐
term duration as they are as long as the wind turbines are operating. Such impacts are considered of
negative nature and range from a low magnitude to a high magnitude (high magnitude has been taken into
account as a worst case scenario). However, the receiving environmental is determined to be of a medium
sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be of moderate significance.

Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

The following identifies the mitigation and monitoring measures to be applied during operation phase. This
mainly includes the undertaking of: (i) annual breeding survey, (ii) avi-fauna monitoring and turbine
shutdown; (iii) onsite avi-fauna carcass search; (iv) onsite carcass search (other than birds); and (v)
monitoring of the breeding population of the regionally Endangered Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe
moesta.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

(i) Annual Breeding Survey

During the first 3 years of operation a follow-up breeding bird survey must be undertaken (one each year)
with the objective of comparing and determining the impacts of the construction phase on the Red-
Rumped Wheatear. The breeding survey must be undertaken at the Project site during the breeding season
(which lasts from March till mid-May). The survey must be undertaken by a qualified ornithologist and
must be based on point counts that are spread over the entire Project site. At each point count all breeding
activities must be recorded. Based on that an annual report must be prepared during the first 3 years.

(ii) Avi-Fauna Monitoring and On-Demand Turbine Shutdown

Monitoring during the operation of the wind farm must be completed in order to inform the actual impact
caused by the wind farm on resident and migratory birds. The monitoring must be undertaken with the
primary objective of collision avoidance but also secondary for migration monitoring behavior.

Monitoring must take place during the spring migration season (from early March until mid May) and
autumn migration season (from early September till mid-November). Throughout these periods,
monitoring must take place continuously on a daily basis. As for the summer and winter seasons, the level
of effort of monitoring should be decreased and a single observer could be located in a central vantage
point in the wind farm, to be identified later after the construction phase.

Monitoring must be undertaken onsite by qualified ornithologists to observe all migrating and resident
birds. It is anticipated that a minimum of 3 vantage points will be required to undertake such monitoring

PAGE | 160
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(however this can be determined and confirmed at a later stage based on onsite conditions when the
turbines are in place).

Monitoring must take place to prevent potential collision of birds with the wind turbines, through
individual shutdown of turbine(s) which pose an imminent collision risk to birds. Imminent risk is identified
as (a) bird(s) flying at risk height and within a buffer distance of 500m from the turbine(s). However, this
should be verified and confirmed during the actual operation of the project taking into account the actual
turbine shutdown time as well as other onsite conditions.

Individual temporary turbine(s) shut-down will be enacted by the observers calling through to the control
room once an imminent risk is identified and until the birds are out of the risk area. This should take place
based on two main conditions and which include the following:

a. Condition 1: the passage of an individual bird species of global or national significance will require the
individual temporary shutdown of the concerned turbine(s). Species under these conditions were
previously highlighted in Table 55.
b. Condition 2: the passage of ten or more individuals of the species provided below will require the
individual temporary shutdown of the concerned turbine(s). Species under these conditions were
previously highlighted in Table 55.
Although some of the species listed above were not recorded during the bird monitoring that was carried
as part of the ESIA, such as Levant Sparrowhawk Accipiter brevipes, but all the species listed above could
occur in the project site even if rarely. The objective of the monitoring should be to avoid any potential
collision that could occur to any individual of these species with a threshold of zero fatality as highlighted
in the CEA of Tafila Region.

Observers must record in a log sheet in details the following: species involved, number/ID of turbines
ordered for shutdown, time of dispatch of shutdown call, time of actual shutdown. After the risk situation
is over the observer must also record the following: time of dispatch of operation resumption, time of
actual operation resumption, outcome of event (collision or avoidance), and the avoidance behavior of
bird(s).

In addition, to the above monitoring must also take place during summer and winter (mainly for resident
bird activity) through the same methodology discussed above. However, during this time it is likely that a
single vantage point will be required to cover the site – however this can be determined and confirmed at a
later stage based on onsite conditions when the turbines are in place.

Taking the above into account, a semi-annual report must be prepared with all the findings and outcomes
based on all records for that year and shut-down events and their effectiveness. In addition, the report
must also determine whether any changes on the frequency of the monitoring are required – to include
effectiveness of the vantage points and observation hours.

Moreover, as discussed earlier, the monitoring is also intended for migration monitoring behavior.
Therefore, the report must also detail all migratory and resident bird activity and patterns, numbers, etc.,
similar to pre-construction monitoring.

The above monitoring plan must be undertaken during the first 3 years of operation. After the third year
the monitoring plan will be reviewed and re-evaluated. For example, based on the results it could be
decided that summer and winter monitoring should be discontinued or its frequency reduced due to low
risk of collisions onsite and good avoidance behavior by bird species or it could be recommended to extend
the monitoring further during the operation phase.

PAGE | 161
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(iii) Avi-Fauna Carcass Search during Operation

During the operation phase, mortality rate surveys must be undertaken through carcass search surveys
covering the entire wind farm. The carcass search will demonstrate the effectiveness of mitigation
measures such as turbine shut down and allow an estimation of the annual number of bird deaths caused
by the turbine.

a. Carcass Search Surveys

Carcass search surveys shall be carried out by the beginning of the operation phase on a weekly basis
during the spring and autumn migration season and twice per month during the summer and winter
season. A plot area of 100mX100m would be set around each turbine to search for carcasses. The plot will
be covered with search transects 10 m apart, with the searcher looking 5 m on either side.

All found carcasses must be recorded in a log sheet with information to include the following: species, sex,
age, condition, cause of death (to the greatest extent possible), coordinates, date, and photos as
appropriate, condition (intact, scavenged, feather spots, etc.)

An annual report must be prepared with the results and outcomes to complement the report prepared for
the migration monitoring as discussed earlier.

The above carcass search surveys must be undertaken during the first 3 years of operation. After the third
year, the carcass search survey will be reviewed and re-evaluated. For example, based on the results it
could be decided that autumn surveys should be discontinued or its frequency reduced due to absence of
carcasses recorded.

b. Carcass Removal and Searcher Efficiency Bias Trials

Before commencement of the avi-fauna carcass search during the operation phase, a carcass removal and
searcher efficiency trial test must be undertaken. The objective of this test is to factor and adjust for
carcasses that are removed from the Project site from external factors (such as animals that might feed on
such carcasses) as well as for searcher efficiency in locating carcasses.

Also, a carcass removal and searcher efficiency bias trial shall be undertaken for the Wind Farm in order to
assess the efficiency of the carcass search team. This trial shall also cover the OHTL route in order to factor
and adjust for carcasses that are removed from the Project site from external factors (such as animals that
might feed on such carcasses) as well as for searcher efficiency in locating carcasses.

Carcasses will be placed and dispersed over the Wind Farm area as well as the OHTL route, avoiding
saturation, which could attract animals to the site. They should be checked every day over fifteen days or
until the entire carcasses have been removed if earlier.

At the same time, searchers should not be familiar with carcass location and will perform the carcass
search annotating how many of the placed carcasses they find. After the trial of each searcher, the
carcasses will be checked again to see if they are still there (and were not recorded by the searcher) or
have been removed (by animals). Based on the above, the carcass removal and searcher efficiency rates
can be calculated.

(iv) Onsite Carcass Search (other than birds)

The Project Operator must implement a carcass search plan (other than birds) for any carrion which could
be present onsite to prevent attraction of birds to the site (such as the Griffon vulture, Egyptian vulture
and Steppe Eagle which rely on livestock and medium-large size mammals to feed on). The plan should
PAGE | 162
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

cover the entire Project site and surrounding areas and must commence with the operation of the Project.
This should be undertaken on a monthly basis but particular attention should be paid during the season
when nomads are in the area (from April till September). Nomads raise livestock and carcasses could be in
the area throughout such times. Such a plan should be implemented throughout the first 2 years of
operation of the Project after which it could be reviewed and revaluated (e.g. if not carcasses are recorded
during the first 2 years it can be discontinued).

(v) Monitoring of the breeding population of the regionally Endangered Red-rumped Wheatear Oenanthe
moesta

According to IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN, 2016), Red-rumped Wheatear is assessed as Least
Concern. On the regional level however, and according to the Conservation Status and Distribution of the
Breeding Birds of the Arabian Peninsula (Symes et al, 2015), the species is assessed as Endangered. Based
on this, the status of the breeding population of the species in the project site needs to be monitored for
the first three years at least to assess its status and the potential impact that the project might have on the
species. A breeding survey needs to be carried out in the spring season for the first three years, from
March until May of each year.

PAGE | 163
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

13. BATS
This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the wind farm and its surroundings
in relation to bats and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its various
phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures,
additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels.

13.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to bats
and presents the outcomes and results.

13.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

The baseline assessment of the Project site was based on a literature review and a field survey, each of
which is discussed in detail below.

(i) Literature Review

This was based on previous studies, data, surveys, and records available in published scientific papers,
books, and journals on bats of Jordan. All available data known in the study area and adjacent regions were
tabulated.

(ii) Field Survey

Field survey was undertaken at the Project site using bat detectors. The survey is still ongoing as it started
in April and is planned to last until August. This is regarded as the most suitable period of the year to assess
bat activity as bats become active after the period of hibernation which may last from December to March
after which they are active from April till late November. During this period, bats feed and reproduce giving
birth in June and thereafter. In addition, the survey was undertaken during night-time as bats usually rest
and sleep during the day and are active during night as they search for prey to feed on.

The survey was undertaken using a Titley Scientific ANABAT SD2 Active Bat Detector and recording stations
were set along routes in the project site, see Figure 73. Upon detecting bat activity, coordinates would be
recorded using Garmin (GPSMAP 62S) global positioning device. In addition, careful inspections were
undertaken during the day throughout the Project site to identify potential roosting sites which might be
inhabited by bats during the day for rest and sleep and such areas were inspected for bat signs and
remains or any other vital signs that indicate bat activity (e.g. faecal remains).

PAGE | 164
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 74: Location of Routes and Point Counts for the Bats and Breeding Bird Assessment

(iii) Bats Species’ status

Bats species status was assigned based on their conservation status within the Mediterranean region
according to the IUCN Red Data Books: “The Status and Distribution of Mediterranean Mammals” (Temple
& Cuttelod, 2009). In addition, their local status was based on an assessment undertaken by the bats
expert in collaboration with RSCN – where such an assessment was undertaken in accordance with IUCN
criteria. However, the results for this assessment have not been published yet.

13.1.2 Results
A single bat species was recorded during the survey so far. The species was recorded in the western part of
the project site near the village of Zaitooneh, see Table 59.

Table 59: Bat Species

Family Scientific name Common name IUCN Red List Mediterranean
IUCN Regional
Status
Vespertilionidae Pipistrellus kuhlii Kuhls’ Pipistrelle Least Concern Least Concern

13.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on bats during the
various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation phase. For each impact, a set of
management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and
monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

13.2.1 Potential Impacts during the Construction Phase

Site preparation activities which are to take place onsite by the EPC Contractor for installation of the wind
turbines and the various Project components to include transmission cables, access roads and internal road
network, buildings, etc. are expected to include land clearing activities, levelling, excavation, grading, etc.

PAGE | 165
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Such activities are limited to the relatively small individual footprints of these facilities and the actual area
of disturbance is relatively minimal. Nevertheless, such activities would likely result in the alteration of the
site’s habitat and thus potentially impacts bats; particularly through loss of hunting habitats for bats as well
as roosting sites.

The bat species recorded in the project site is evaluated as Least Concern conservation status according to
both IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and the IUCN Mediterranean Regional Assessment. The species is
also a common species in Jordan and is not known to face any specific threats. Also, based on the CEA for
Tafileh Region, the species recorded in the project site is not identified as a priority species.

Given all the above, the potential impacts on bats created during the construction phase would of a long‐
term duration as they would result in a permanent change in the natural biodiversity of the site. However,
such impacts are considered of negative nature and of a low magnitude given that the site is not used by
bats as a feeding ground and no roosting sites were recorded. In addition, given the very limited bat
activity, the receiving environmental is determined to be of a low sensitivity. Given all of the above, such
an impact is considered to be not significant. To this extent, no mitigation measures have been identified.

13.2.2 Potential Impacts during the Operation Phase

The potential impacts from the Project during operation are mainly related to risk of bat strikes and
collisions with rotors of the operating wind turbines.

Many reports have corroborated the findings of bat collisions with wind turbines; this includes reports in
Germany (Dürr 2001; Trapp et al. 2002; Dürr & Bach 2004), Sweden (Ahlén, 2002) and Spain (Alcalde,
2003). Evidences that turbines do not only kill bats from local populations but also from populations at far
distance were established (Voigt et al., 2012). Moreover, there are reports with findings on collisions of bat
species similar to that recorded onsite (Kuhl's Pipistrelle) from a wind farm project in Spain (Alcalde, 2003).

The bat species recorded in the project is evaluated globally as Least Concern according to both IUCN Red
List of Threatened Species and the IUCN Mediterranean Regional Assessment. The species is also a
common species in Jordan and is not known to face any specific threats. Also, based on the CEA for Tafileh
Region, the species recorded in the project site is not identified as a priority species.

Given all the above, the potential impacts on bats created during the operation phase would have a long‐
term duration. Such impacts are considered of negative nature and of a low magnitude given that a risk of
collision of the species recorded does not entail any significant impacts (species recorded is very common
and considered of least concern). In addition, given the very limited bat activity the receiving
environmental is determined to be of a low sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered
to be not significant.

Additional Studies/Surveys and Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

Before commencement of operational activities, Project Operator is required to implement proper and
adequate management measures for those sources which could attract bats to the Project site to the
greatest extent possible. These sources could include strong white sources of light water ponds, where
both sources could attract insects that are the main component of the diet of bats.
In addition, implement a bat mortality monitoring plan. The plan should include bat collision fatality
‘carcass search’ surveys informed by bat ecology, and calibration tests for searcher efficiency and bat
carcass removal by scavengers. The monitoring program for bats should follow recommendations in the
ESIA and the Tafila Wind Power Projects CEA MMP. The program must be undertaken by an expert and
must include the following components:
- Bats mortality monitoring program would be carried out as part of the carcass search surveys that
will be undertaken for birds, during the first 3 years of operation. After the third year, the carcass
search survey, as a whole for birds and bats, will be reviewed and re-evaluated. For example, based
PAGE | 166
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

on the results it could be decided that autumn surveys should be discontinued or its frequency
reduced due to absence of carcasses recorded. No bat-specific carcass removal and searcher
efficiency trials will be carried out and it will be done as part of the birds trials, and
- Based on the outcomes of the mortality monitoring program, should no issues of concern be
identified then the mortality monitoring program can be discontinued (this is the most likely
scenario to occur). In the highly unlikely event that any issues of concern are identified (high bats
mortality recorded) then additional investigations must take place on the sources of attraction of
bats to the site (which will most likely be from external sources) and based on that appropriate
mitigation measures must be identified.

PAGE | 167
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

14. ARCHEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE

This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the project site and its surroundings
in relation to archaeology and cultural heritage and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the project
throughout its various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include
mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to
eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

14.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to
archaeology and cultural heritage and presents the outcomes and results.

14.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

The baseline assessment of the Project site was based on a literature review and a field survey, each of
which is discussed below.

(i) Literature Review

Literature review included a comprehensive review of archives, publications, and studies on previous
archaeological work and surveys undertaken in the area, and which are available at the Department of
Antiquities’ (DoA) database. This also includes the search of the official register and database of all
archaeological/cultural sites of Jordan known as the Middle Eastern Geodatabase for Antiquities – Jordan
(MEGA Jordan).

(ii) Field Survey

A field survey was undertaken by the DoA – the official governmental entity in Jordan responsible for the
protection, conservation, and preservation of antiquities in accordance with the “Antiquities Law No. 21 for
1988 and its amendments No. 23 for 2004”.

The objective of the field survey was to ascertain the presence of any archaeological remains within the
Project site. The survey was undertaken from 01 September – 08 September 2016 for the entire Project
site boundary with a total area of approximately 24 km2. It should be mentioned that the project
boundaries that were covered in the survey, from here onwards is referred to as the survey area, were
earlier boundaries, which were modified at a later stage to become with a surface area of 20km2, see
Figure 74.

PAGE | 0
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 75: Older boundaries covered by the archaeology and cultural assessment (black) and the final project
boundaries (red)
The survey area is, in general, characterized with being mountainous with several wadis that vary in size
and depth. In addition, the survey area is approximately 1300 m above sea level. A technical team from
DoA has walked along the boundary of the survey area given the exact coordinates provided by ECO
Consult in order to inspect the entire ground surface. The ground was divided into 4 parcels, approximately
with a surface area of 5 km2 each, see Figure 75 below), which covered the entire survey area. Any sites of
interest were recorded by sketch plans and /or a photograph as appropriate. Whilst walking these parcels,
GPS coordinates were taken. The results of the survey were analysed by categorizing the sites and making
an assessment of their significance. The result of the survey was a full listing of the archaeological sites,
archaeological features, and survey results of the Project area using maps and photographs where
appropriate.

14.1.2 Results
In accordance with the methodology discussed above, the results first provide the outcomes of the
literature review and the outcomes of the DoA survey in addition to an extended analysis by ECO Consult
based on the modifications in the project boundaries.

(i) Literature Review

This section summarizes some of the data collected from previous archaeological surveys and studies
undertaken in Jordan, which are registered in the Middle Eastern Geodatabase for Antiquities (MEGA) –
Jordan. MEGA-Jordan is a database, prepared by the Getty Conservation Institute in collaboration with
Department of Antiquities (DoA) that encompasses and registers all the known archaeological sites in
Jordan. Results collected from the MEGA Jordan returned no recorded archaeological sites within the
projects’ sites area or the area in general.

(ii) Overview of the Archaeological History of the Region

The area, in general, is believed to be rich in archaeological remains and is considered one of the oldest
civilizations over the centuries – from the Stone Age up to modern times (this includes Edomite,
Nabataean, Roman, Byzantine and Islamic periods). Fujeij, for instance, which is located around 8Km north
of the project site, is a living evidence of an old civilization that dates back to the Old Stone Age – the
second phase, in which double-sided axes of flint were explored.

PAGE | 1
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

In Shobak, specifically in Um Twairat area, Dolmens1 are the clearest archaeological footprint that
prevailed from the Bronze Age to the present. In addition, Shobak played a major role in the Edomite
Empire given its proximity to the ancient Bsaira, the capital city of the Edomite Empire.

Shobak has been distinguished all over the centuries with its historical Montreal Castle (also known as
Shobak Castle). It was constructed in 1115 by King Baldwin I of Jerusalem to secure the trade links between
Syria and Egypt, and was the first of a series of similar strongholds in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.
Saladin attacked the castle several times, finally capturing it in 1189 after Hittin battle (only 75 years after
it was raised), when the Crusaders were losing their grip over the Holy Land. In 1260, it passed on to the
Mamluks who restored it in the following century. Since then it was left largely unattended, gradually
falling into greater dilapidation.

Moreover, Shobak is situated on Montreal, about 23 km north of Petra. Rebuilt several times, its walls and
towers, as seen today, date to the Islamic period, 13th century and later. Earlier this century, the castle
itself was occupied by a few local families, and there was a market within its walls which served all the
villages, after which the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities (MoTA) in Jordan represented by DoA
designated the site as a preserved archaeological site.

(iii) Archaeological Assessment of the Project Site

Based on the results of the baseline assessment conducted as part of the archaeological survey undertaken
by DoA, eleven (11) archaeological sites were identified, all of which – except for Site 1 - lie within the
survey area of the Project agreed upon in June 2016 which is shown in Figure 76. However, as mentioned
earlier, according to some recent adjustments made by the developer to the project boundaries, sites 4, 5
and 11 have become to be located outside the final boundaries of the project site. Moreover, the change in
the boundaries has resulted in producing an area that was not covered by the original survey, see Figure
76. This area was later covered by the DoA and no archaeological sites were found in it.

Regarding all sites recorded in the survey, such sites include settlement sites with features such as
watchtowers, remains of pottery pieces, archaeological debris, khirbet (old settlements), building
structures, architectural elements, caverns, etc. which generally date back to several periods from the 2nd
Stone Age into Roman and then Nabatean periods. Table 60 lists all these sites along with a brief
description for each one of them while the Figures 77, 78 and 79 show the photographs that were taken for
those archaeological sites during the survey.

1 https://www.britannica.com/topic/dolmen

PAGE | 2
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 76: Archaeological Sites Recorded within the survey area (DoA, 2016)

Figure 77: The survey area and the final project boundaries, showing the archaeological sites and the area that was
not covered in the first survey of DoA (ECO Consult & DoA, 2017)

PAGE | 3
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 60: List of Archaeological Sites Recorded during the DoA survey and their location in relation to the final project boundaries
Location in
relation to
Area
Site Period* Brief Description 2 the final
(m )
project
boundaries
1 Nabatean, Late A square building structure (4x4) m, which is completely damaged except for the northern and western facets which are one course in height.
484 Outside
Roman
2 Nabatean, Late Remains of a one meter high circular mound 8m in diameter which consists of small-medium sized flint stones, in addition to large scattered
Roman stone blocks that exist as an indicator of disturbance to the mound caused by ploughing activities within the vicinity of the site. 958 Inside
nd
3 2 Stone Age/ Remains of a 2-courses high elliptical building (14x8) m built from Calcite stones, where the northern side of it seems to be disturbed. The
Roman building is thought to be used as a watchtower during the Roman Empire due to its unique elevated location overlooking surrounding area. 1,029 Inside
nd
4 2 Stone Age/ A large archaeological site featuring remains of completely damaged huge building structures - different in shapes – built from large flint
Roman/ Nabatean stones in addition to a few number of caverns. It is thought that most of the site’s stones were hauled off to other places to be utilized for 22,574 Outside
different purposes (i.e. construction).
nd
5 2 Stone Age/ Remains of a large archaeological site spread over an area of approximately three Dunums, consisting of indistinguishable remains of
Roman/ Nabatean completely-damaged building structures as well as a circular mound built from medium-large flint stones. In addition, the site features 11 2,538 Outside
graves, all of which most likely belong to the Hithban tribe, dating back to 3-4 decades ago.
nd
6 2 Stone Age/ Remains of completely-damaged and indistinguishable building structures built from flint stones spread over an area of approximately 5
Roman/ Nabatean Dunums. 2,803 Inside
nd
7 2 Stone Age Remains of completely-damaged and indistinguishable building structures spread over an area of approximately 2 Dunums which dates back
to the Edomite period. 1,217 Inside
nd
8 2 Stone Age/ A large archaeological site spread over an area of more than 25 Dunums featuring remains of large completely-damaged building structures –
Roman/ different in shapes – in addition to few caverns and a circular pond that Is 20m in diameter with a rocky foundation. Above all, the site is
Nabatean/Byzantine/ mainly distinguished through a 3-courses rectangular-shaped building (5x7)m built from trimmed medium-sized calcite stone blocks (70cm 16,136 Inside
Ottoman each) with a 1m wide opening. The rectangular building most likely dates back to the Nabatean period.
nd
9 2 Stone Age Two elliptical-shaped graves facing (east-to-west) with few randomly scattered Basalt and flint stones, all of which are untrimmed, in addition
309 Inside
to very minimal number of archaeological finds.
nd
10 2 Stone Age A large graveyard with an area of over 100 Dunums spread over a huge foothill descending towards the north and the east, consisting of tens
of graves 1-3m in diameter - similar in shape to circular mounds - which are built from small-medium flint stones and most likely date back to 113,516 Inside
the Edomite period.
nd
11 2 Stone Age/ A large archaeological site (8 Dunums) featuring remains of completely-damaged building structures and interconnecting walls surrounding
Roman/ Nabatean the majority of the site. The site is mainly distinguished by a square building structure (10x10)m built from large trimmed calcite stone 4,256 Outside
located over a hilly ridge (6m above the surroundings). In addition, It is believed that this square building was used as a Nabatean temple.

PAGE | 4
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 78: Sites 1 – 4

Figure 79: Sites 5 - 8

PAGE | 5
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 80: Sites 9 - 11

14.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the project activities on archaeology and
cultural heritage during the various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation
phase. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures,
additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels.

14.2.1 Potential Impacts during the Construction Phase

Site preparation activities which are to take place onsite by the EPC Contractor for installation of the wind
turbines and the various project components to include transmission cables, access roads and internal road
network, buildings, etc. are expected to include land clearing activities, levelling, excavation, grading, etc.

Although such activities are limited to the relatively small individual footprints of these facilities and the
actual area of disturbance is relatively minimal, if such activities are improperly managed they could
damage or disturb archaeological remains present on the surface of the Project site. As discussed in the
baseline section (refer to “Section 14.1”), there were 7 archaeological sites recorded within the project
site.

Such sites recorded are considered important given their archaeological and cultural value, and should be
protected from potential damage or destruction throughout the various project activities. According to the
survey of the DoA, one of the sites (Site 10) is considered of high importance. The other sites are not
considered unique nor distinctive archaeological features.

Based on the final layout of the turbines and the other project components, it was found that two of the
archaeological sites (Site 3 and site 8), are located in close proximity to planned construction activities, see
Figure 80.
PAGE | 6
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 81: Sites located in close proximity to planned construction activities

In addition, there is a chance that throughout such construction activities, archaeological remains buried in
the ground are discovered. Improper management (if such sites are discovered) could potentially disturb or
damage such sites which could potentially be of archaeological importance.

Given all of the above, the potential impacts on archaeology created during the construction period would
of a short-term duration as they are limited to the construction phase only. The impacts will be of a
negative nature, and medium magnitude if improperly managed as it is possible once a site is damaged or
disturbed it cannot be restored. In addition, given the presence of archaeological remains in the Project
area, the receiving environment is considered of medium sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact
is considered to be of moderate significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the EPC Contractor during the
construction phase for all archaeological sites, and which include:

 As part of the disclosure session for the ESIA results with the local communities (as discussed in
Section 6.6.1), present the results and outcomes of the archaeology assessment. In particular, this
should focus on the identified sites of importance by the DoA and whether the local community require
access to such sites (such as the graveyard). Should this be applicable, then appropriate mitigation
measures must be identified and implemented to ensure access to such sites is maintained for the local
communities.
 The final detailed design prepared by the EPC Contractor should avoid sitting any of the Project
components (to include the turbines, roads, transmission lines, warehouses, etc.) within such
delineated areas of archaeological importance which takes into account a 70m buffer area from each
site as required by the DoA. Exact coordinates of such areas along with the buffer area to be provided in
AUTOCAD format for the EPC Contractor to take into account during the detailed design of the Project.
 Submission of final detailed design to the Department of Antiquities to demonstrate that such sites
have been avoided.
 Before commencement of any construction activities, the identified sites must be properly demarcated
(with fences or flag poles or other as appropriate) with appropriate signage so that the sites are clearly
visible to all workers during construction.

PAGE | 7
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Properly plan construction activities to take into account the identified archaeological locations to
ensure they are protected from any potential damage. This could include for example proper
movement of vehicles and machinery into/out of the site to avoid those areas, ensure that all vehicles
are on established roads and prohibit off-roading, prohibit movement of vehicles near those areas
during the various construction activities, etc.
 Ensure that the Code of Conduct, awareness raising, and training developed for construction workers
and personnel involved in the construction phase of the Project to emphasizes the presence of
archaeological locations in the area - this would include providing information on their locations,
prohibit any improper conduct which could disturb/ damage those locations, etc.
 Implement appropriate chance find procedures. Throughout the construction phase and as the case
with any project development that entails such construction activities there is a chance that potential
archaeological remains in the ground are discovered. It is expected that appropriate measures for such
chance find procedures are implemented which are standard requirements by the DoA as required by
the “Antiquities Law No. 21 for 1988 and its amendments No. 23 for 2004”. Those mainly require that
construction activities be halted in the specified area of findings and the area fenced, while immediately
notifying the DoA. No additional work will be allowed before the Department assesses the found
potential archaeological site and grants a clearance to resume the work. Construction activities can
continue at other parts of the site if no potential archaeological remains were found. If found, same
procedures above apply.

Regarding the three archaeological sites mentioned earlier (sites, 3, 8 and 10), specific mitigation measures
have been agreed with DoA in order to ensure the conservation of these sites, which are:

 Fencing around the archaeological sites 8 and 10 including a 100 metre buffer,
 Provide timeline and movement corridors for machinery in the vicinity of these three archaeological
sites,

 Add fence around WTG 2 and site 3 after finishing construction of the turbine,
 The EPC Contractor shall inform DoA of the works to be done around sites 3 and 8; so that DoA can
allocate a person to be on-site to observe these works and ensure all is well managed

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and which include:

 Submission of proof of coordination for submission of final detailed design to the DoA.
 Inspections of construction activities to ensure that archaeological locations are avoided throughout the
construction activities and proper code of conduct is enforced.
 Inspection of actions taken in case of new discoveries, including fencing, limiting access to site, and
contacting the DoA. Report should be prepared and submitted to the DoA in such a case which details
the above.

14.2.2 Potential Impacts during the Operation Phase

Potential impacts during the operation phase are limited to improper management of operation activities
which could potentially disturb or damage the archaeological locations identified as discussed earlier. This
could include for example improper movement of vehicles and machinery into/out of the site, improper
conduct by operation workers, etc.
PAGE | 8
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Given all of the above, the potential impacts on archaeology are of a long -term duration throughout the
Project operation phase. The impacts will be of a negative nature, and medium magnitude if improperly
managed as it is possible once a site is damaged or disturbed it cannot be restored. However, operation
and maintenance activities are expected to occur at designated areas only (turbine locations, substation,
etc.) using access roads established during the construction phase, therefore the receiving environment is
considered of low sensitivity. Given all of the above, such an impact is considered to be of minor
significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the Project Operator during the
operation phase and which include:

 Properly plan operation and maintenance activities to take into account the identified archaeological
locations to ensure they are protected from any potential damage. This could include for example
proper movement of vehicles and machinery into/out of the site to avoid those areas, ensure that all
vehicles are on established roads and prohibit off-roading, prohibit movement of vehicles near those
areas during the various operation and maintenance activities, etc.
 Ensure that the Code of Conduct, awareness raising, and training developed for workers and personnel
involved in the operation phase of the Project to emphasizes the presence of archaeological locations in
the area – this could include providing information on their locations, prohibit any improper conduct
which could disturb/ damage those locations, etc.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the Project
Operator during the operation phase and which include:

 Continuous monitoring of operation activities to ensure that a proper code of conduct is enforced.

PAGE | 9
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

15. AIR QUALITY

This Chapter provides an assessment of anticipated impacts on air quality from the Project throughout its
various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures,
additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels.

15.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

Assessment of baseline conditions is considered unnecessary (i.e. measurements of air pollutants), due to
the nature of anticipated impacts from the Project – which are mainly related to dust generation. Such
impacts can be adequately controlled through appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures as
discussed in further details below.

15.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on air quality during
the various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation phase. For each impact, a set
of management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and
monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

15.2.1 Potential Impacts on Air Quality during the Construction Phase

Site preparation activities which are to take place onsite by the EPC Contractor for installation of the wind
turbines and the various Project components to include transmission cables, access roads and internal road
network, buildings, etc. are expected to include land clearing activities, levelling, excavation, grading, etc.

Although such activities are limited to the relatively small individual footprints of these facilities and the
actual area of disturbance is relatively minimal. Nevertheless, such activities will likely result in an
increased level of dust and particulate matter emissions, which in turn will directly and temporarily impact
ambient air quality. If improperly managed, there is a risk of nuisance and health effects to construction
workers onsite and to a lesser extent to the nearby surrounding receptors from windblown dust (such as
grazing reserve facility to the west, highway to the north and south, etc.). In addition, construction
activities will likely entail the use of vehicles, machinery and equipment (such as generators, compressors,
etc.) which are expected to be a source of other pollutant emissions (such as SO2, NO2, CO, etc.) which
would also have minimal direct impacts on ambient air quality.

The above impacts are anticipated to be temporary and of short‐term nature as they are limited to the
construction period only. Such impacts are of a negative nature, and will be noticeable and therefore of
medium magnitude. However, the impacts will be dispersed and are reversible as air quality would revert
back to baseline conditions after construction works is completed and thus the receiving environment is
considered of low sensitivity. Given the above such an impact is considered of minor significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the EPC Contractor during the
construction phase:

 Based on inspections and visual monitoring undertaken, if dust or pollutant emissions were found to be
excessive due to construction activities, the source of such emissions should be identified and adequate
control measures must be implemented;
 Comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements and the
Jordanian Codes to ensure that for activities associated with high dust and noise levels, workers are

PAGE | 10
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

equipped with proper Personal Protective Equipment (e.g. masks, eye goggles, breathing masks, ear
muffs, etc.);
 Apply basic dust control and suppression measures which could include:
- Regular watering of roads for dust suppression;
- Proper planning of dust causing activities to take place simultaneously to reduce the dust incidents
over the construction period.
- Proper management of stockpiles and excavated material (e.g. watering, containment, covering,
bundling).
- Proper covering of trucks transporting aggregates and fine materials (e.g. by tarpaulin).
- Adhering to a speed limit of 15km/h for trucks on the construction site.
 Develop a regular inspection and scheduled maintenance program for vehicles, machinery, and
equipment to be used throughout the construction phase for early detection of issue to avoid
unnecessary pollutant emissions.
Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact is
categorized as not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and which include:

 Inspection and visual monitoring of the works should be carried out at all times. In addition, periodic
inspections should be conducted at nearby sites (e.g. villages) to determine whether harmful levels of
dust from construction activities exist; and
 Reporting of any excessive levels of pollutants/dust or noise and the measures taken to minimize the
impact and prevent it from occurring again.

PAGE | 11
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

16. INFRASTRUCUTRE AND UTILITIES

This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the Project site and surrounds in
relation to infrastructure and utilities and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project
throughout its various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include
mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to
eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

16.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to
infrastructure and utilities as well as the outcomes and results.

The components discussed in relation to infrastructure and utilities include the following: (i) water
resources; (ii) wastewater services; (iii) solid waste services; (iv) hazardous waste services; (v) aviation,
telecommunication and television & radio link; (vi) road safety each of which is discussed separately below.

16.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

The baseline assessment was based on collection of secondary data and plans available as well as
discussions and consultations mainly with representatives from various governmental authorities and
utility service providers as discussed in detail throughout this section.

16.1.2 Water Resources

The water sector in Jordan is generally governed by the Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI) and the
Water Authority of Jordan (WAJ). MWI is the official body responsible for the overall monitoring of the
water sector, water supply and wastewater system, and the formulation of national water strategies and
policies. WAJ assumes all responsibilities related to water and wastewater structures including design,
construction, operation, maintenance and administration. Within Shobak District, Shobak Water
Directorate is the responsible entity representing WAJ.

According to the “Strategic Master Plan for Municipal Water Infrastructure” (ISSP, 2015), water system
within Ma’an Governorate is divided into nine main systems;

1. Ma’an Main Water System: is the main water system that covers the sub district of Ma’an.
2. Wadi Mousa Water System: medium sized water system that covers the Wadi Mousa sub district
3. Shobak Water System: medium sized water system that covers the Shobak district.
4. Al-Manshiyya Water System: small water system that covers the Manshiyya locality
5. Al-Muraygha and Wahida Water System: small water system that covers Al-Muraygha locality
6. Al-Muhamadiyya Water System: small water system that covers al-Muhamadiyya locality
7. Al-Husayniyya Water System: water system that covers al-Hussayniyya district
8. Al-Jafr Water System: small water that covers three localities in the al-Jafr sub-district
9. Al-Mudawwara Water System: small water system that covers the al-Mudawwaral locality in the Jafr
sub-district
10. The Project area in general is supplied through the Shobak water system which is divided into three
separate sub-systems; Nijil, Hamza, and Ad-Dabbaghat. The overview of Shobak water system is
presented in Figure 81 below.

PAGE | 12
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

The Shobak water system is comprised of 7 operating wells with a maximum combined pumping capacity
of 380 m3/hour as presented in Table 61 below. Such wells are divided between the 3 sub-systems
discussed above as follows: the Nijil sub-system receives water from Shobak wells 1, 3A, and 4 and the
Hamza sub-system receives water from Shobak wells 6 and 6A while Ad-Dabbaghat sub-system receives
water from Shobak wells 8 and 10. The Nijil sub-system received the most water, as its supply wells
produced 0.64 MCM whereas the Hamza and Ad-Dabbaghat sub-systems produced 0.37 and 0.38 MCM,
respectively.

Finally, Figure 82 also presents the water supply network of the Shobak water system. As noted in the
figure below, some parts of the water network run within the eastern parts of the Project site. The water
network is underground and the water line is around 100mm in diameter.
Table 61: Shobak Well Fields
Groundwater well Pumpage annual (m3/yr)
Nijil Sub-water System
Shobak well 1 94,734
Shobak well 3A 168,770
Shobak well 4 381,179
Hamza Sub-water System
Shobak well 6 122,134
Shobak well 6A 243,035
Ad-Dabbaghat Sub-water System
Shobak well 8 243,121
Shobak well 10 136,737
Total 1,389,710

Shobak Water System

D=250 Emergency Line

Shobak Nijil D=250

Wells 1, 500m3
3A, and 4 D=100 E=1450m
Shobak District

Shobak D=100 Hamza D=100

Wells 6 60m3
and 6A E=1360m

Shobak D=100 Ad-Dabbaghat

Wells 8 and 50m3 + 50m3
D=100
10 E=1480m

Legend Reservoir name D= Diameter

Water Volume m3 Ground
Elevation m
reservoir in mm
Source Distribution
Internal External Color for line
Distribution
Pumping Hydraulic
area
station assessment Area

Figure 82: Schematic of Shobak Water System

PAGE | 13
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 83: Water Network of Shobak Water System in relation to the Project site.

16.1.3 Wastewater Services

The same entities that govern the water sector are responsible for the wastewater as well. MWI is the
official body responsible for the overall monitoring of the water sector, water supply and wastewater
system, and the formulation of national water strategies and policies. WAJ assumes all responsibilities
related to wastewater structures and within Shobak District, Shobak Water Directorate is the responsible
entity representing WAJ.

Within the Shobak District, there are 2 Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTP) known as Shobak WWTP
and Mansoorah WWTP, see Figure 83. Shobak WWTP was constructed in 2010 as a natural treatment plant
with a design capacity of 350m3/d and a current load of about 19% of its design capacity. Mansoorah
WWTP was constructed in 2010 as a natural treatment plant and has a design capacity of 50m3/d and
receives 13 m3/d.

The location of the WWTP in relation to the Project site is presented in the figure below.

It is important to note that the villages within Shobak District are not served with a wastewater network.
Wastewater is mostly disposed through septic pits which are emptied by tankers on a regular basis to
Shobak and Mansoorah WWTP.

PAGE | 14
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 84: Location of Closest WWTP in Relation to Project Site

16.1.4 Solid Waste Services

In Jordan, solid waste management is undertaken primarily by the public sector. Solid waste is managed
through the operation of landfills (or dumpsites). In accordance with the “Municipalities Law Mo.13 of
2007”, solid waste management is the responsibility of local municipalities under the umbrella of the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs (MoMA) – this includes the collection of municipal solid waste, transportation,
and final disposal to landfills.

Within Shobak District, solid waste is collected from relevant municipalities and is transported to the
Shobak Transfer Station which was developed in 2005 and was put in operation in 2008. Solid waste is then
transferred to Ma’an Landfill located around 60km to the south of the Transfer Station. The Transfer
station receives on average around 20-25 tons of solid waste per day and is located at an area of around 10
Dunums. The location of the transfer station in relation to the Project site is presented in Figure 84 below.

As for construction waste, there is only one authorized landfill which can utilized for disposal of
construction waste – known as Ma’an Central Landfill site. The landfill is located around 39km to the
southeast of the Project site, see Figure 85. The landfill has an area of approximately 500 Dunums and
receives around 80 tons of solid waste per day. There are is no specific number on the total capacity which
the landfill can handle, however it is expected to remain operational till the year 2045 taking into account
the population growth and various developments within the Ma’an area. According to discussions with
Greater Ma’an Municipality the landfill can accept construction waste and debris, whereas current practice
within Ma’an is disposal through illegal dumping in wadis.

PAGE | 15
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 85: Shobak Transfer Station in Relation to the Project Site

Figure 86: Location of Ma’an Central Landfill in relation to the Project Site

16.1.5 Hazardous Waste Services

In accordance with the “Environmental Protection Law No.(52) of the year 2006” and the “Instruction for
Management and Handling of Hazardous Waste of 2003”, hazardous waste must be transported and
disposed at landfills which are approved by the MoEnv.

PAGE | 16
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

In Jordan, there is currently one landfill for disposal of hazardous waste – the Swaqa Hazardous Waste
Treatment Facility. The facility is operated and managed by the MoEnv. The facility is located in Al-Karak
Governorate, around 70km south of the capital city of Amman and approximately 102km to the northeast
of the Project site. Figure 86 below presents the location of Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility in
relation to the Project site.

According to discussion with the ‘’Hazardous Substances and Waste Management Directorate” of the
MoEnv, the facility is located on an area of around 8,500 Dunums and receives around 8-10 tons per day of
hazardous waste. Currently disposal of hazardous waste is undertaken through either land-filling of
stabilized and inert hazardous waste in specially lined cells, while for other types of waste which require
physical-chemical treatment or incineration they are stored in safe storage spaces. Such storage spaces are
temporarily until the second phase of the facility construction is implemented. The second phase mainly
involves physical-chemical treatment and incineration facilities which mainly aim to improve handling and
management of hazardous waste which requires treatment or incineration. Currently, there are no
additional plans by the MoEnv for hazardous waste management in Jordan.

Figure 87: Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility in Relation to the Project Site

16.1.6 Aviation, Telecommunication and Television & Radio Links

Official communications were established with the relevant governmental entities that govern the subject
matter as presented below.

The objective of such communication was to collect information and understand what infrastructure
elements are within the Project area in general, and identify requirements that should be taken into
account for the Project development.

PAGE | 17
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Civil Aviation Regulatory Commission (CARC)/ Royal Jordanian Air Force (RJAF): CARC is the official
governmental authority responsible for the development of civil aviation safety and security and
environmental regulatory compliance, whereas RJAF is responsible for all military air bases in Jordan;
 Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (TRC): the TRC is the official entity for regulating the
telecommunications and information technology services in the Kingdom to guarantee the provision of
high-standard information and communications technology services to end users; and
 Jordan Radio and Television Corporation (JRTV): JRTV is the state broadcaster of Jordan for radio and
television transmission.

Presented below are the infrastructure elements in the Project area in relation to aviation,
telecommunication, and television and radio links respectively.

(i) Aviation (Civil and Military)

The closest civil airport in the area is the King Hussein International Airport located in Aqaba and around
110km southwest of the Project site as presented in Figure 87. Other civil airports in Jordan are located
within Amman Governorate and include the Queen Alia International Airport located 135km from the
Project site, and the Marka International Airport located 160km from the Project site.

In addition, with regards to military air bases, in the south of Jordan there is only one military airport
located within Ma’an Governorate at Al-Jafr area, known as King Feisal Airbase. This air base is located
around 50km to the east of the Project site. For security reasons, information on radars in the area was not
provided neither by CARC nor RJAF.

Figure 88: Location of project site in relation to nearby civil and military air bases

(ii) Telecommunication Links

Official communication was established by ECO Consult with TRC. ECO Consult provided TRC with all
information required for the Project to include Project location, coordinates, location and specifications of
turbines and other as appropriate. ECO Consult required the TRC to contact telecommunication companies
in Jordan (Zain, Orange and Umniah) and provide information on location of telecommunication towers in
the area and line of sight connections.

PAGE | 18
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

An official letter was provided by the TRC stating that all three telecommunication companies have
responded stating that the Project will have no impact on any of their telecommunication towers or line of
sight connections. Official letter provided in Annex I.

(iii) Television and Radio Links

Official communication was established with JRTV by ECO Consult. ECO Consult provided JRTV with all
information required for the Project to include Project location, coordinates, location and specifications of
turbines and other as appropriate. ECO Consult required the JRTV to provide information on its
broadcasting towers in the area.

JRTV responded and indicated that the closest tower is located around 2.2km north of the Project site as
indicated in Figure 88 below. The tower is a radio broadcasting tower at 612 kHz. JRTV indicated that in
order for the tower not to be impacted, a distance of 490m should be taken into account, and given that
the Project is not located within such a distance they have no objection on the development of the Project
(letter provided in Annex I).

Figure 89: Location of JRTV Broadcasting Tower

16.1.7 Road Networks

The Ministry of Public Works and Housing (MPWH), operating under the “Regulation of Organization and
Management of the MPWH No. 55 of 1996”, is the governmental authority responsible for the
construction and development of the public road network in Jordan. The Ministry is also responsible for
connecting cities, villages, and communities together in addition to maintaining the network in good
technical conditions. Within Ma’an Governorate, the Ma’an Public Works Directorate assumes the
responsibilities of the MPWH.

The Project site can be accessed from Highway #15 (better known as the ‘Desert Highway’) which is the
major route in Jordan and connects the capital city of Amman with the southern Governorate of Jordan
(Aqaba, Ma’an, Karak, Tafileh). This highway is heavily travelled daily by large vehicles (trailers and trucks)
transporting materials to/from the capital city of Amman and the Port of Aqaba (as well as other industrial
establishments in the southern Governorates of Jordan). The Project site is located about 167 km road
distance from the Port of Aqaba northward.

Components for wind energy projects are usually transported by sea from the manufacturing country to
the country of installation and are then loaded in existing ports to trucks which manoeuvre their way
through existing roads to the installation site.
PAGE | 19
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

With regards to the Project, the wind turbine components will arrive to the Port of Aqaba in the south of
Jordan. Figure 89 and Figure 90 below presents the transportation route from the Port of Aqaba to the
Project site. The transport will follow Highway #15 around 134km after which an exit from Unayza
Intersection through road #818 for about 13km west which leads to the northern edge of the Project site.

Figure 90: Southern Section of the Transportation Route

Figure 91: Northern Section of the Transportation Route

16.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on infrastructure and
utilities during the various phases to include planning and construction phase and operation phase. For
each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional
requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to
acceptable levels.

PAGE | 20
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

16.2.1 Potential Impacts on Water Resources during the Construction and Operation Phase

It is expected that the Project throughout the construction and operation phase will require water for
potable usage (drinking, personal cleaning, etc.) and non-potable usage (e.g. cleaning of turbines).

During the construction phase, the potable water requirements for around 60 workers onsite is not
expected to exceed 50 litres per capita per day for a duration of 16 months. Thus, the daily water
consumption is likely to be around 3,000 litres per day – or 3m3 per day. In addition, during the
construction phase water for non-potable usage will be required which has been estimated to be around
1.5m3/ day. Therefore, the total water requirements during the construction phase are likely to be around
5m3/ day. The water requirements throughout the construction phase will be required temporary (for
construction period only) and are considered minimal and not significant.

In addition, water will be required during the operation phase and mainly for drinking and other personal
use of onsite staff (around 3 personnel). Similarly, potable water requirements for the onsite workers is
not expected to exceed 50 litres per capita per day – thus a daily water consumption is likely to be around
150 litres per day – or 0.15m3 per day.

During operation, water will also be required for the cleaning of the blades. Based on previous experiences
for wind farms in Jordan, it is expected that the cleaning will take place once every 3 – 5 years, thus
amounting to 4 – 6 times during the lifetime of the Project. The amount of water required per wash is
around 15m3 (equivalent to around 1m3 per turbine); thus the maximum amount of water required during
the lifetime of the Project is around 100m3 (assuming 6 washes are undertaken) – amounting to around
0.01m3 per day.

Therefore, the total water consumption during operation is likely to be around 0.15m3/day for a duration
of 20 years (equivalent to around 55m3 per year).

Putting things into perspective, the total annual water supplied by the Shobak Water Supply System is 1.39
MCM. Comparing the numbers above clearly reveals that the water requirements of the Project are rather
considered to be negligible and are expected to be easily met by the Shobak Water Directorate. In
addition, such water requirements will most likely be met through licensed tankers from the Shobak Water
Directorate which are likely to provide water with a quality that meets the relevant Jordanian Standards.
Table 62: Anticipated Water Requirements for the Project
3
Phase Amount (m per day)
Construction 5
Potable 3
Non-Potable 1.5
Operation 0.15
Potable 0.15
Non-potable 0.01

Taking all of the above into account, the anticipated impacts on the local water resources and utilities are
considered of short‐term duration during the Project construction phase and of long-term duration during
the operation phase. Such impacts are of a negative nature, and are expected to be of low magnitude and
of low sensitivity given the minimal water requirements of the Project. To this extent, the impact is
considered not significant.

To this extent, there are no mitigation measures to be applied. However, there are additional requirements
that must be taken into account as detailed below.

Additional Requirements

The following identifies additional requirements to be taken into account by the EPC Contractor and
Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

PAGE | 21
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Coordinate with the Shobak Water Directorate to secure the water requirements of the Project. such
water requirements will most likely be met through licensed tankers

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements to be applied by the EPC Contractor
and the Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Submit report with proof of coordination with authorities discussed above.

 Submit monthly water consumption reports.

16.2.2 Potential Impacts on Wastewater Disposal Utilities during the Construction and Operation Phase

The Project is expected to generate wastewater during both the construction and operation phases to
include black water (sewage water from toilets and sanitation facilities) and grey water (from sinks,
showers, etc.). Wastewater quantities generated are expected to be minimal and not significant at all
during both phases of the Project and are likely to be easily handled by either Shobak WWTP or Mansoorah
WWTP.

Generally, the approximate estimated wastewater to be generated from the Project can be accounted as
follows. Throughout the construction phase, 60 construction workers are anticipated, whereas during the
operation phase 3 workers are anticipated. The water requirements per capita during the construction and
operation is not expected to exceed 50 litres per day; and taking into account an 80% wastewater
generation factor per capita – then the anticipated wastewater to be generated during construction and
operation is around 2,400l/d and 120 l/d (2.4m3/d and 0.12m3/d) respectively.

The wastewater generated will most likely be collected by tankers from the Project and disposed at either
Shobak WWTP or Mansoorah WWTP. Such wastewater generated from the Project during the construction
and operation phase reveals that such quantities are negligible.

Taking all of the above into account, the anticipated impacts on wastewater utilities are considered of
short‐term duration during the Project construction phase and of long-term duration during the Operation
phase. Such impacts are of a negative nature, and are expected to be of low magnitude given the minimal
wastewater quantities generated, and of low sensitivity as they will be easily handled. Given the above
impact is considered not significant.

To this extent, there are no mitigation measures to be applied. However, there are additional requirements
that must be taken into account as detailed below.

Additional Requirements

The following identifies the mitigation measures to be applied by the EPC Contractor and Project Operator
during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Coordinate with the Shobak Water Directorate to obtain list of authorized contractors for disposal of
wastewater at either Shobak WWTP or Mansoorah WWTP.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements to be applied by the EPC Contractor
and the Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Submit report with proof of coordination with authorities discussed above.

 Submit monthly report of wastewater disposal.

PAGE | 22
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

16.2.3 Potential Impacts on Solid Waste Disposal Utilities during the Construction and Operation Phase

The Project is expected to generate solid waste during both the construction and operation phases to
include construction waste (i.e. dirt, rocks, debris, etc.) as well as general municipal waste (such as food,
paper, glass, bottles, plastic, etc.). Solid waste quantities generated are expected to be minimal and not
significant at all during both phases of the Project and are likely to be easily handled by Shobak Transfer
Station (for municipal waste) and Ma’an Central Landfill (for construction debris).

The approximate estimated municipal solid waste to be generated from the Project can be accounted as
follows; throughout the construction phase, 60 construction workers are anticipated. The average
theoretical municipal solid waste generation in Jordan is 0.85kg/capita/day (SWEEPNET, 2010) (this
number is rather high but can be assumed as a worst case scenario). Thus, the anticipated municipal solid
waste is estimated to be around 51kg/day. In addition, construction waste is likely to be around 100kg/day
to include waste such as cables, metal, wood, etc.

Similarly, during operation solid waste will mainly include municipal waste. Around 3 workers are
anticipated and based on the average theoretical municipal solid waste generation in Jordan
(0.85kg/capita/day) (SWEEPNET, 2010) the estimated municipal solid waste is 2.5kg/day for duration of 20
years.

Comparing those numbers to the daily amount of solid waste currently handled by Shobak Transfer Station
reveals that such quantities are negligible and are expected to be easily handled which receives around 25
tons of solid waste per day. In addition, according to discussions with Greater Ma’an Municipality Ma’an
Central Landfill has sufficient capacity to easily handle construction debris generated from the Project.

Taking all of the above into account, the anticipated impacts on solid waste utilities are considered of
short‐term duration during the Project construction phase and of long-term duration during the Operation
phase. Such impacts are of a negative nature, and are expected to be of low magnitude given the minimal
solid waste quantities generated, and of low sensitivity as they will be easily handled by the landfill. Given
the above impact is considered not significant.

To this extent, there are no mitigation measures to be applied. However, there are additional requirements
that must be taken into account as detailed below.

Additional Requirements

The following identifies additional requirements to be taken into account by the EPC Contractor and
Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Coordinate with Greater Ma’an Municipality or hire a competent private contractor for the collection
of construction waste from the site to the approved landfill (Ma’an Central Landfill).

 Coordinate with Shobak Municipality or hire a competent private contractor for the collection of solid
waste from the site to the municipal approved landfill (Shobak Transfer Station).

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements to be applied by the EPC Contractor
and the Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Submit report with proof of coordination with authorities discussed above.

 Submit monthly report of amounts of water disposed.

PAGE | 23
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

16.2.4 Potential Impacts on Hazardous Waste Disposal Utilities during the Construction and Operation

The exact quantities of hazardous waste that will be generated from the Project are not determined, but
given the nature of construction and operation they are expected to be minimal and not significant at all
during both Project phases. Such hazardous waste streams include simple types of waste such as oil,
chemicals, and fuel for the various equipment and machinery. Hazardous waste quantities are likely to be
easily handled by the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility; which is the major and only hazardous
waste landfill in Jordan.

Taking all of the above into account, the anticipated impacts on hazardous waste utilities are considered of
short‐term duration during the Project construction phase and of long-term duration during the Operation
phase. Such impacts are of a negative nature, and are expected to be of low magnitude given the minimal
hazardous waste quantities generated, and of low sensitivity as they will be easily handled by the landfill.
Given the above impact is considered not significant.

To this extent, there are no mitigation measures to be applied. However, there are additional requirements
that must be taken into account as detailed below.

Additional Requirements

The following identifies additional requirements to be taken into account by the EPC Contractor and
Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Coordinate with MoEnv to hire a competent private contractor for the collection of hazardous waste
from the site to the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements to be applied by the EPC Contractor
and the Project Operator during the construction and operation phase respectively and which include:

 Submit report with proof of coordination with authorities discussed above.

 Submit monthly report of amounts of hazardous waste produced on site.

16.2.5 Potential Impacts on Aviation, Telecommunication and Television & Radio Links during the
Planning and Construction Phase

Improper planning and site selection of the Project could impact and affect infrastructure elements related
to aviation, telecommunication and television & radio links in the surrounding area. Those are discussed in
further details below.

(i) Aviation

Any tall structure could impact aircraft safety if located near airports or known flight paths. In addition,
such structures could potentially interfere with certain electromagnetic transmissions associated with air
transport, for example primary radar and secondary surveillance radar. Wind turbines have the potential to
impact the surveillance systems used to detect and identify aircraft approaching, overlying or leaving
Jordanian airspace and for which a Recognized Air Picture (RAP) is produced.

In accordance with the “Civil Aviation Law No. 41 of the year 2007”, Article 27(e) requires that any entity
which intends to construct a facility of a height greater than 40m obtain the approval of CARC.

With regards to wind farms in specific, the usual process with CARC is that an application should be
submitted with the following information:

 Project coordinates to be obtained from the Royal Jordanian Geographic Centre (RJGC);

PAGE | 24
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Specifications for the navigational lights which is required by CARC to include 1 medium intensity light
on the nacelle only; and
 Blade painting specifications for the turbines.

Upon submission of the application, CARC reviews and provides a no objection letter for the Project
development. ECO Consult is currently submitting the application to CARC and the no objection permit is
expected to be issued in September 2017. A similar process to that discussed above is also followed with
RJAF. ECO Consult is also submitting the application to RJAF and the no objection permit is expected to be
issued in September 2017.

To this extent, there are no impacts anticipated from the Project on aviation safety. However, there are
additional requirements which must be taken into account as highlighted below.

Additional Requirements

Provide official no objection permits by CARC and RJAF (expected in September 2017).

(ii) Telecommunication Links

As discussed earlier, ECO Consult contacted the TRC to obtain information on location of
telecommunication towers and line of sigh connections for Zain, Orange and Umniah. An official letter was
provided by the TRC stating that all three telecommunication companies have responded stating that the
Project will have no impact on any of their telecommunication towers or line of sight connections Official
letter provided in Annex I.

To this extent, there are no impacts anticipated from the Project on telecommunication links. There are no
additional requirements to be considered.

(iii) Television and Radio Links

As discussed earlier, JRTV has already provided ECO Consult with a no objection letter on the Project
development indicating that the Project would not affect its broadcasting tower in the area. To this extent,
there are no impacts anticipated from the Project on television and radio links. There are no additional
requirements to be taken into account.

16.2.6 Potential Impacts on Road Networks during the Planning and Construction Phase

Wind turbines are manufactured in factories and transported to the installation site where they are
assembled. Wind turbine components have big dimensions and weight and their transport poses a
challenge to the existing roads and infrastructure. The Project’s wind turbine blades have a length of
around 70m and are usually transported in one piece. Tower components can have a transport height of up
to 5m. Nacelles are also usually transported in one piece and can have a weight of more than 70 tones.

Components for wind energy projects are usually transported by sea from the manufacturing country to
the country of installation and are then loaded in existing ports to trucks which manoeuvre their way
through existing roads to the installation site.

As discussed earlier in the baseline section, with regards to the Project, the wind turbine components will
arrive to the Port of Aqaba in the south of Jordan. Transportation route will follow Highway #15 a distance
for around 134km after which an exit from Unayza Intersection through road #818 for about 13km west
which leads directly to the northern edge of the Project site.

PAGE | 25
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Given the increasing size, weight, and length of components of the wind turbines, proper transportation
and logistical solutions could be required for managing the heavy-load long-haul requirements. If
improperly planned and managed, the trucks hauling the various heavy Project components may damage
the existing roads, highways and bridges, utility lines (e.g. electricity lines), and could also be a public safety
concern for other vehicles on the road.

Taking all of the above into account, the anticipated impacts on road networks are considered of short‐
term duration during the Project construction phase. Such impacts are of a negative nature, and if such
impacts are improperly managed, then they are expected to be of high magnitude and medium sensitivity.
Given the above impact is considered of moderate significance.

Mitigation Measures

It is recommended that EPC Contractor develop a Traffic and Transport Plan before commencement of any
transportation activities to ensure that the transportation process is properly and adequately managed and
does not pose a risk of damage to the existing roads, highways, overpasses whilst ensuring public safety.
The Plan must analyse and study the entire route for transportation of the Project components from the
port of Aqaba till the Project site. The assessment must take into account worst case scenarios for
transportation of Project components for blade lengths, tower sections, etc. The study must investigate
any constraints which need to be considered along the highways leading to the Project site such as bridges,
overhead utility cables, slants in roads, etc. and identify accommodations which need to be taken into
account (bypasses, adjustments to roads, etc.)

The Plan must take into account the following:

 The Plan must be developed in accordance with the following: (i) Traffic Law No. 49 for 2008 (ii)
Regulations for the Registration and Licensing of Vehicles No. 104 for 2008 (iii) Regulation for
Maximum Dimensions, Weights and Total Engine Power for Vehicles No. 42 of 2002, and (iv)
Instructions for Allowable Speed Limits for 2002;
 The plan must consider, to the extent possible, the proper planning of generated trips of trucks to
ensure they are spread over the course of a work day and hours of day, and which also take into
account peak and non-peak commute hours on the highway;
 As part of the Plan, the EPC Contractor must coordinate with the Traffic Department and the Ministry
of Public Works and Housing to: (i) notify them on the timing and schedule of transportation activities,
(ii) identify the peak and non-peak commute hours to help avoid congested zones (and times of the
day) if required, and (iii) coordinate in advance for any works which will be required as part of the
study which could include bypasses required (if any), traffic diversion, etc.
 The Plan must also cover all other onsite and offsite activities. Related to offsite activities, the plan
must cover transportation requirements of project components other than turbines (e.g. other
materials and components) as well as labour (if relevant). The plan must identify proposed delivery
routes to the project site, planning of generated trips of trucks to site, speed limits, number of vehicles
movement. Related to onsite activities, the plan must cover the day to day movements of vehicles and
machinery and must include measures for proper onsite traffic management, assigned speed limits,
allowed movement routes within the site amongst others.
Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and which include:

 Submission of Traffic and Transport Plan with proof of coordination with the authorities discussed
above for works required as part of the Study.
PAGE | 26
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

17. COMMUNITY HEALTH, SAFETY AND SECURITY

This Chapter assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its various phases on
community health, safety and security. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could
include mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified
to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

This chapter discusses impacts from the Project on health, safety and security of local communities. Other
impacts on local communities are discussed in other chapters, such as socio-economic development
(discussed later in Chapter 18) and land use activities (previously discussed in Chapter 9).

17.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

Assessment of baseline conditions related to community health, safety and security focused on the local
communities surrounding the Project site and which are anticipated to be impacted from the Project
development. Those mainly include Mothallath Al-Shobak, Zobeiriyeh, Zaitooneh and Mdhaibie’ as noted
in the figure below.

Figure 92: Local Communities Surrounding the Project Site

It is important to reiterate that baseline conditions of such local communities is discussed in other chapters
were relevant – this includes socio-economic conditions of such local communities and which is discussed
later in Chapter 18 and land use which was previously discussed in Chapter 9.

17.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities on community
health, safety and security during the construction and operation phase. For each impact, a set of
management measures (which could include mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and
monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

In particular, the potential impacts on community health and safety which are discussed throughout this
section include the following:

 Potential impacts from noise from construction activities during the construction phase;
 Potential impacts from noise of wind turbines during operation;
 Potential impacts from tonal noise, low frequency noise, infrasound and vibration of wind turbines
during operation;

PAGE | 27
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Potential impacts from shadow flicker of wind turbines during operation;

 Potential Impacts from blade and tower glint of wind turbines during operation;
 Potential impacts from blade/ice throws during operation;
 Potential impacts from public access to Projects components during operation;
 Potential impacts from presence of security personnel during construction and operation; and
 Potential impacts from workforce influx during construction.

17.2.1 Potential Impacts from Noise from Construction Activities during the Construction Phase
The construction programme has the following main construction phases:

 Road preparation / construction for transport of turbine to specific sites;

 Transportation of turbine to the Project site;
 Site Preparation for turbine foundation construction, include excavations and land clearing;
 Foundation construction; and,
 Turbine erection and assembly, which includes tower assembly, hub, rotor and nacelle lift and rotor
assembly
The above activities are expected to be a source of noise and vibration generation within the Project site
and its surroundings. If improperly managed, there is risk of nuisance and health affects to the nearby
surrounding receptors (such as the local communities).

The main noise generating activities during the construction phases will be the site excavation and
foundation construction. Since the Project site expands over a 14km2 area most of the turbines are located
within remote areas where the construction noise will not be audible at any nearby domestic dwellings due
to the distance of the sites from the dwellings (since distance from source is the most influential to noise
propagation attenuation).

It is unlikely that all 13 WTG sites would be constructed on simultaneously as this would-be construction
resource heavy in terms of equipment and manpower. However, since no construction programme has
been issued, the assumption for this noise study is that all the sites will be constructed simultaneously,
which is the overly conservative approach and would result in maximum noise levels from the construction
activities.

(i) Relevant Legislations and Requirements for Noise Impact Assessment

a. Jordanian Requirements for Noise

The only relevant Jordanian requirement related to noise includes the “Instruction for Reduction and
Prevention of Noise for the year 2003”. The articles within the Instruction which are relevant for the
Project include the following:

 Article (5) states that all construction activities which use noise producing plants and equipment which
may cause nuisances may not occur between 20h00 and 06h00 unless a permit is granted by the
Minister of Environment.

 Article (6) of the Instruction specifies the maximum allowable noise level for specific times and areas.
As per MoEnv classifications, the villages near the Project site are considered to be a ‘Residential area
in (rural) village’ and therefore the development is limited to the following permissible noise limits for
day-time and night-time:
PAGE | 28
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

- Day-time (07h00 – 18h00): 50 dBA

- Night-time (18h00 – 07h00): 40 dBA
There are no specific International standardised criteria for assessing construction noise impacts; therefore
the chosen standard must meet international best practice for working standards.

b. British Standard BS 5228:2009 Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and
Open Sites – Part 1: Noise

British Standard BS 5228:2009 Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open
Sites – Part 1: Noise (BS 5228-1) is considered in this regard. Noise levels generated by construction and
plant equipment experienced at nearby receptors depend on a several variables, the most significant are as
follows:

 The sound power level of the noise generated by the equipment on site;
 The period and duration of equipment operation – known as “on-time”;
 The distance between the noise source and the receptor – known as “stand-off”;
 The attenuation due to the presence of hard vertical faces such as walls.
BS 5228-1 contains an up-to-date database of noise emissions from individual items of plant / construction
equipment and their associated activities and methods of working. Unless provided with specific
manufacturer’s noise level data the BS 5228-1 database is used when predicting the noise levels associated
with construction activities. Due to the nature of construction works, any noise disturbance that may arise
from construction of the proposed development, although it may be significant for a temporary since the
period of construction is limited.

Calculation of noise levels are performed using tables of typical noise sound power sources for the
construction equipment and plant items operating on site. The activities and associated output level along
with applicable work duration is summed, with the resultant sound pressure level calculated at the
receiver according to ISO 9671 outdoor propagation standard. The resultant sound pressure level is
compared to set noise limits in order to judge whether or not the construction activity will significantly
impact nearby communities.

The methodology for assessment is based on not exceeding specified limits as per the “ABC” method. The
“ABC” method defines in Table E.1 (of BS 5228-1) ‘threshold of potential significant effect at dwellings”.
The table is shown below.
Table 63: Table E.1, BS 5228-1 ‘ABC’ Method Thresholds
Assessment category and threshold value Threshold value in decibels (dB) LAeq,T
period
Category Category Category
A B C
A B C

Night-time (23h00 – 07h00) 45 50 55

Evenings and weekends 55 60 65

Daytime (07h00 – 19h00) 65 70 75

Saturdays (07h00 – 13h00) 65 70 75

NOTE 1 A potential significant effect is indicated if the LAeq,T noise level arising from the site exceeds threshold level
for the category appropriate to the ambient noise level.
NOTE 2 If the ambient noise level exceeds the Category C threshold values given in the table (i.e. the ambient noise
level is higher than the above values), then a potential significant effect is indicated if the total LAeq,T noise level for the
period increases by more than 3 dB due to site noise.

PAGE | 29
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

NOTE 3 Applied to residential receptors only.

Category A: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB)
are less than these values.
Category B: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are the
same as category A values.
Category C: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are higher
than category A values.

19.00–23.00 weekdays, 13.00–23.00 Saturdays and 07.00–23.00 Sundays.

Where ambient noise is defined as:

“the noise in a given situation at a given time, usually composed of sound from many sources near and far, but
excluding site noise.”
Ambient noise plus site noise gives the total noise.

The table above can be used such that for the appropriate period the ambient noise level is determined
and rounded to the nearest 5 dB. This is then compared with the site noise level. If the site level exceeds
the appropriate category value, then a potential significant effect is indicated.

The assessment is based on either the Category A, Category B or Category C threshold values. The decision
as to which threshold values is based on the following criteria:

 Category A: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are
less than these values.
 Category B: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are
the same as category A values.
 Category C: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5 dB) are
higher than category A values.

Based on the ambient noise levels taken at measurement locations R1, R2 and R3 surrounding the wind
farm (discussed in further details below) , the Category A threshold is to be used as defined in the table
below.
Table 64: Noise Limits for Construction Noise

Time Duration Noise Limit at Receptor Category A Threshold

06h00 – 07h00 55 dBA (Category C) Night-time (23h00 – 07h00)
07h00 – 19h00 65 dBA (Category A) Day-time (07h00 – 19h00)
19h00 – 20h00 55 dBA (Category B) Evening (19h00 – 23h00)

c. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 9613-2 Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during
Propagation Outdoors

ISO 9613 Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors’(ISO 9613-2) specifies an
engineering method for calculating the attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors in order to
predict the levels of environmental noise at a distance from a variety of sources. The method predicts the
equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (LAeq) under meteorological conditions favourable
to propagation from sources of known sound emission.

PAGE | 30
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

(ii) Impact Assessment Methodology

British Standard BS5228:2009:2014 ‘Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites’ provides
a calculation method, practical information on noise reduction measures, and promotes ‘Best Practice
Means’ approach to control noise emissions during construction. It does not however provide noise limits
for construction periods. The noise emission data presented in BS 5228-1 does not reflect the latest
advancements in plant noise emissions control. Therefore, whilst the calculations in this assessment have
been carried out according to the BS5228 methodology, several of the input data for construction plant
noise levels have been taken from the United Kingdom’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs (DEFRA) report ‘Update of Noise Database for Prediction of Noise on Construction and Open Sites’.

a. Noise Baseline Assessment

A noise baseline survey was undertaken at the identified receptors R1 – R3 (see figure below) for a
duration of 24hours at each receptor location. The db 307 Noise Meter was used for the measurement
survey. The selected sound level meter automatically logs environmental noise measurement parameters.
The methodology followed is summarised in the table below.
Table 65: Summary of Noise Measurements
Item Specification
Parameters LAeq,
Equipment db 307 Noise Level Meter
Field Calibrator
Wind shield
Heavy Duty Tripod
Reference Method ISO 1996-1:2003
No. Locations 3
Measurement 15 minutes
interval
Duration (per 24 hours
location)

The average day-time and night-time noise levels for each site are given as per the day-time and night-time
rating periods, in the table below. The detailed noise results are presented in Annex II.
Table 66: Summary of Baseline Noise Levels
Measurement Site Coordinates Village Ld, Day-time Ln, Night-time
Average Average
Closest Domestic Dwelling to Project 747761.82 Mothallath 44.6 dBA 42.9 dBA
3378702.81 Al-Shobak
Closest Domestic Dwelling to Project 747123.53 Zobeiriyeh 48.1 dBA 46.8 dBA
3375099.33
Could not be places at closest 752580.94 Mdhaibie’ 55.4 dBA 44.9 dBA
dwelling due to security and 3375288.30
logistical reasons. Device was
installed at

PAGE | 31
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 93: Location of Noise Baseline Survey Receptors (R1, R2 and R3)

b. Modelling the Propagation of Sound

All noise prediction modelling for the construction and road noise has been completed using the
international recognised and certified software program SoundPLAN (version 7.4). SoundPLAN is developed
by SoundPLAN Gmbh in Germany. The program allows for the calculation of sound pressure levels due to
various sources using empirical calculation algorithms of the applicable international standards and
regulations.

The propagation methodology adopted for this noise study, and the equations used within the SoundPLAN
model are based on the British Standard BS 5228:2009:2014 ‘Noise and Vibration Control on Construction
and Open Sites’. BS 5228-1 is representative of the International Organisation for Standardisation noise
propagation standard (ISO) 9613 ‘Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Propagation Outdoors’ – Part 2:
General Calculation Method (ISO, 1996). The following is a concise summary of the standard and applicable
details.

The ISO 9613-2 is a general-purpose standard for outdoor noise propagation, the standard specifies a
method for calculating the attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors in order to predict the levels
of environmental noise at a distance from a variety of sources. The method predicts the equivalent
continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (LAeq) under meteorological conditions favourable to
propagation from sources of known sound emission. The standard takes into account the following physical
effects on sound:

 Geometrical divergence;
 Atmospheric absorption;
 Ground effect;
 Reflection from surfaces; and,
 Screening by obstacles.

PAGE | 32
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 67: SoundPLAN Model Settings

Model Parameter Parameter Setting / Standard
Calculation Standard BS 5228-1+A1:2014
Ground Absorption Coefficient Set according to ground cover type (override of default)
Maximum Order of Reflection 3
Reflection Loss by Obstacles and Barriers Default: 1 dB
Meteorological Data Humidity 70%
Air Pressure 1013.3 mbar
T = 27ºC
Calculation Grid Size Unit wide calculations: 1 m resolution
Site-wide calculations: 15 m resolution

c. Noise Modelling Source Parameters – Noise Inventory

The construction equipment which is to be used for the construction and erection of the turbines has been
estimated based on the usual construction equipment configuration which has been used for the noise
prediction calculations. The following noise sources were used for the prediction calculations for the
various stages of the construction process for each of the turbine sites.
Table 68: Excavation and Foundation Construction Equipment
Equipment Description Quantity on Turbine Site BS 5228:2009 Reference
D10 Bulldozer 1 C5.4
H160 Grader 1 C6.31
Dump Truck 3 C9.21
980 Loader 2 C10.6
Dumper 2 C4.6
Vibratory Compactor 1 C5.22
Water Truck 1 C11.2

Table 69: Turbine Assembly Construction Equipment

Equipment Description Quantity on WTG Site BS 5228:2009 Reference
Main Crane 2 C4.38
Auxiliary Crane 2 C4.38
Unload Crane (90t) 2 C4.38
Nacelle Unload Crane (300t) 1 C4.38
Forklift 1 -
Truck Crane 1 -

Since no site-specific works programme has been issued, all sites are being constructed simultaneously.
This is considered to be overly conservative, usually one to three sites would be worked on simultaneously
with varying work occurring per site.

(iii) Results

The construction of the turbines requires various construction phases, the maximum noise levels for each
construction phase is investigated as a worst-case scenario. The following assumptions are therefore made
for each of the assessed construction phases and the worst-case scenario:

Excavation and Foundation Construction Phase:

 All equipment is working on site simultaneously at peak power output / maximum load.

PAGE | 33
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Equipment is located within site construction boundary closest to the nearest receptor to each of the
turbine construction sites.
 All construction equipment is running at peak power output and all sites have simultaneous
construction at the peak power output.
Turbine Assembly Construction Phase:

 All equipment is working on site at simultaneously at peak power output / maximum load.

Noise contour maps for both the site preparation and turbine assembly have been calculated and are
presented in the figures below. The map shows contour lines and noise propagation level areas or ‘zones’
between the contour lines. The significance of the noise contour map is to allow for an overview of noise
levels over a geographic area and therefore allows a quick basic analysis of the noise propagation for
identification of specific areas of negative impact. The modelling specification for the noise contour map
modelling is as per the table below.
Table 70: Noise Contour Map Setup Specification – ISO 9613-2
Parameter Description Noise Map Parameter
Turbine Operation Worst Case
Mapping Grid Resolution 10 x 10 m
Mapping Result Range 25 - 100 dB(A)

Shobak Project Boundary

Wind Turbine Site

Noise Sensitive Receiver

Noise Receiver 01 WTG 13

WTG 09 WTG 12
WTG 08
WTG 07
WTG 10 WTG 11
WTG 06

WTG 03
WTG 05
WTG 02
WTG 04
WTG 01

Noise Receiver 03

Noise Receiver 02

Figure 94: Noise Prediction Map for Site Preparation and Foundation Construction of all Turbines

PAGE | 34
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 95: Noise Prediction Map for WTG Construction and Assembly

The following table gives contribution noise levels at the receptors for the site preparation and foundation
construction and assembly and construction of the turbines.
Table 71: Predicted Contribution Noise Levels for Construction Activities
Noise Sensitive Receiver Predicted Contribution Noise Level– Predicted Contribution Noise Level–
dB(A) from site preparation and dB(A) from assembly and
foundation construction construction of the turbines
R1 28.5 23.4
R2 20.7 15.8
R3 24.7 19.9

Road construction and WTG haulage has not been calculated in this study, as no haulage routes have been
given at this stage, however the calculated output for the haulage would be low with minimal impact as
the volume of construction vehicles is low and travelling at low speeds, therefore there would be little or
no average effect on existing background noise due to both the low noise power output and the distance
of the nearest receptor from the turbine construction sites and therefor associated haulage roads.

The assessment of predicted noise emissions from construction activities at the receptors associated with
the various Project construction sites was carried out in accordance with BS 5228-1 according to the
following predefined noise limits as shown in the table below.
Table 72: Assessment Periods and Noise Limits
Limit Limit Limit
Night-time Day-time Evening
06h00 – 07h00 07h00 – 19h00 19h00 – 20h00
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
55 (Category C) 65 (Category A) 55 (Category A)
PAGE | 35
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Noise emissions from calculated for construction activities are given in the tables below in accordance with
the methodology presented in BS 5228-2. The levels given are contribution noise limits and therefore the
total noise level (as per the equation below) which the construction noise is to be comparted to the noise
limits as per BS 5228-2.

 Total Noise [dB] = Predicted Construction Noise Level [dB] + Background Noise Level [dB]
The noise contribution due to construction activity of the worst-case scenario has been added to the
baseline noise levels to calculate total noise. The construction noise levels have been assessed against the
construction noise thresholds as per the table above.

As noted in the table below there is no exceedance of noise limits at any of the receptors for day-time,
evening and nigh-time periods.
Table 73: Assessment of Day-time / Evening Excavation and Foundation Construction Noise
Noise Day-time Total Noise Limit Limit Exceedance of
Sensitive Contribution Baseline Level Day-time Evening Day-time
Receiver Noise Level Noise Level at NSR 07h00 – 19h00 – construction
(dBA) 19h00 20h00 Noise Limit?
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
R1 28.5 44.6 44.7 65 55 No
R2 20.7 48.1 48.1 65 55 No
R3 24.7 55.4 55.4 65 55 No
.

Table 74: Assessment of Night-time Excavation and Foundation Construction Noise

Noise Night-time Total Noise Limit Exceedance of
Sensitive Contribution Baseline Level Night-time Day-time
Receiver Noise Level Noise Level at NSR 06h00 – 07h00 construction
(dBA) Noise Limit?
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
R1 28.5 42.9 43.1 55 No
R2 20.7 46.8 46.8 55 No
R3 24.7 44.9 44.9 55 No

Table 75: Assessment of Day-time / Evening WTG Assembly

Noise Day-time Total Noise Limit Limit Exceedance of
Sensitive Contribution Baseline Level Day-time Evening Day-time
Receiver Noise Level Noise Level at NSR 07h00 – 19h00 – construction
(dBA) 19h00 20h00 Noise Limit?
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
R1 23.4 44.6 44.6 65 55 No
R2 15.8 48.1 48.1 65 55 No
R3 19.9 55.4 55.4 65 55 No

Table 76: Assessment of Night-time WTG Assembly

Noise Night-time Total Noise Limit Exceedance of
Sensitive Contribution Baseline Level Night-time Day-time
Receiver Noise Level Noise Level at NSR 06h00 – 07h00 construction
(dBA) Noise Limit?
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
R1 23.4 42.9 42.9 55 No
R2 15.8 46.8 46.8 55 No
R3 19.9 44.9 44.9 55 No

PAGE | 36
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Taking the above into account, the assessment concludes that there are no issues of concern in terms of
noise impacts from the Project during construction on the surrounding receptors.

Impacts from construction noise from wind turbines during construction are considered of short-term
duration as they are limited to the construction phase of the Project and of a negative nature. The noise
impact assessments concluded that noise levels from will not affect the surrounding nearby receptors and
will not exceed acceptable limits during daytime and night-time, such an impact is considered of low
magnitude and low sensitivity. Given the above, such an impact is considered to be not significant

Mitigation Measures

The EPC Contractor is expected to implement general best practice measures to control sources of noise
onsite during the construction phase this include measures including but not limited to the following:

 As per the “Instruction for Reduction and Prevention of Noise for the year 2003” highest noise level
construction activities should not be undertaken between 8pm and 6am
 Apply adequate general noise suppressing measures. This could include the use of well‐maintained
mufflers and noise suppressants for high noise generating equipment and machinery, developing a
regular maintenance schedule of all vehicles, machinery, and equipment for early detection of issues to
avoid unnecessary elevated noise level, etc.
 Site inductions should cover the importance of noise control and available noise reduction measures
 Maximising the offset distance between noisy equipment items and residential receptors
 Avoiding the coincidence of noisy equipment working simultaneously close together when adjacent to
sensitive receptors
 Minimising consecutive works in the same locality
 Orienting equipment away from sensitive receptors
 Carrying out loading and unloading away from noise sensitive areas
 Construction site and haul-road speed limits shall be established and enforced during the construction
period
 The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells shall be for safety
warning purposes only
Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor during the construction phase and which include:

 Inspection and visual monitoring of the works should be carried out at all times to ensure above
practices are implemented.
 Reporting of any excessive levels of noise and the measures taken to minimize the impact and prevent
it from occurring again.

PAGE | 37
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

17.2.2 Potential Impacts from Noise of Wind Turbines during Operation

Perception of noise can result from sound emissions generated from operation of the wind turbines. The
sound originates from mechanical and aerodynamic effects, where mechanical sound is generated by the
machinery of the nacelle (e.g. generator, gear box) and aerodynamic sound emanates from the movement
of air around the turbine blades and tower.

Such sound emissions could potentially be a source of disturbance and nuisance to the receptors and
residents of the nearby villages and could create a disturbing indoor environment. Therefore, to assess the
anticipated impacts, a noise prediction model was employed.

The section below discusses the methodology that was adopted for the modelling and also presents the
outcomes and results.

(i) Relevant Legislations and Requirements for Noise Impact Assessment

a. Jordanian Requirements for Noise

The only relevant Jordanian requirement related to noise includes the “Instruction for Reduction and
Prevention of Noise for the year 2003”. The articles within the Instruction which are relevant for the
Project include the following:

 Article (5) states that all construction activities which use noise producing plants and equipment which
may cause nuisances may not occur between 20h00 and 06h00 unless a permit is granted by the
Minister of Environment.

 Article (6) of the Instruction specifies the maximum allowable noise level for specific times and areas.
As per MoEnv classifications, the villages near the Project site are considered to be a ‘Residential area
in (rural) village’ and therefore the development is limited to the following permissible noise limits for
day-time and night-time:

- Day-time (07h00 – 18h00): 50 dBA

- Night-time (18h00 – 07h00): 40 dBA

b. World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines for Community Noise (WHO 2002)

This document, which is an update to a 1999 version of the same name, is the outcome of the WHO expert
task force’s endeavours to derive guidelines for community noise by consolidating actual scientific
knowledge on the health impacts of community noise, and providing guidance to environmental health
authorities and professionals. The WHO, 2002 provides a summary of the thresholds for noise nuisance in
terms of outdoor daytime LAeq in residential districts. It states the following:

 At 55-60 dBA noise creates annoyance

 At 60-65 dBA annoyance increases considerably
 At above 65 dBA constrained behaviour patterns, symptomatic of serious damage caused by noise,
arise.
The WHO therefore recommends a maximum outdoor daytime LEeq of 55 dBA in residential areas and
schools so as to prevent significant interference with the normal activities of the local community/ies. For
night-time, it recommends a maximum of 45 dBA outside dwellings. The WHO 2002 makes no distinction
between the sources of noise, i.e. whether it originates from road traffic, production plants or the local
restaurant.

PAGE | 38
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

c. IFC EHS Guidelines

It is important to note that the EBRD does not include specific requirements for assessment of noise impact
levels from wind energy projects, and therefore the IFC requirements have been taken into account.
Discussed below are the IFC EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy and the General IFC EHS Guidelines
requirements for noise assessment that are relevant for the Project.

The IFC EHS Guidelines on Wind Energy describes the main noise producing mechanism for operating
turbines along with a general methodology for conducting a noise impact assessment for the turbines with
the following principles:

 Receptors should be chosen according to their environmental sensitivity (human, livestock, or wildlife).
 Preliminary modelling should be carried out to determine whether more detailed investigation is
warranted. The preliminary modelling can be as simple as assuming hemispherical propagation (i.e.,
the radiation of sound, in all directions, from a source point). Preliminary modelling should focus on
sensitive receptors within 2,000 meters (m) of any of the turbines in a wind energy facility
 If the preliminary model suggests that turbine noise at all sensitive receptors is likely to be below an
LA90 of 35 decibels (dBA) at a wind speed of 10 meters/second (wind speed measured at 10 m height)
during day and night times, then this preliminary modelling is likely to be sufficient to assess noise
impact; otherwise it is recommended that more detailed modelling be carried out, which may include
background ambient noise measurements.
 All modelling should take account of the cumulative noise from all wind energy facilities in the vicinity
having the potential to increase noise levels.
 If noise criteria based on ambient noise are to be used, it is necessary to measure the background noise
in the absence of any wind turbines. This should be done at one or more noise-sensitive receptors. Often
the critical receptors will be those closest to the wind energy facility, but if the nearest receptor is also
close to other significant noise sources, an alternative receptor may need to be chosen.
 The background noise should be measured at 10m height over a series of 10-minute intervals, using
appropriate wind screens. At least five of these 10-minute measurements should be taken for each
integer wind speed from cut-in speed to 12 m/s.
The above principles are referenced from the following key documents: (i) ETSU, Report ETSU-R-97, “The
Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms” (1997); and (ii) Institute of Acoustics (IOA), “A Good
Practice Guide to the Application of ETSU-R-97 for the Assessment and Rating of Wind Turbine Noise”,
2013.

On the other hand, the IFC EHS General Guideline provides guidance on acceptable noise levels and
comprises paragraphs on prevention and control, noise level guidelines and monitoring. For the noise level
guidelines, the guidelines refer to those stipulated by the WHO, i.e. for residential areas:

 Day-time (07h00 to 22h00): 55 dBA

 Night-time (22h00 to 07h00): 45 dBA

The guidelines also add another criterion in that the existing background ambient noise level should not
rise by more than 3 dBA, presumably also when determined over the period of an hour. It is considered
that this criterion was probably introduced in order to address cases where the existing ambient noise level
is already at or in excess of the recommended limits.

d. ISO 9613-2:1996 Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Propagation Outdoors – Part 2: General
Method of Calculation

ETSU-R-97 discussed above, and which is referenced within the IFC EHS Guideline for Wind Energy, states
that ISO 9613 is to be used for Wind Turbine noise predictions, with particular stipulations and limitations.
PAGE | 39
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

ISO 9613-2:1996 Part 2 describes a method for calculating the attenuation of sound during propagation
outdoors in order to predict the levels of environmental noise at a distance from a variety of sources. The
method predicts the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (as described in ISO 1996)
under meteorological conditions.

(i) Impact Assessment Methodology

This section presents the impact assessment methodology in relation to the noise prediction model.

a. Wind turbine Generator

The Vestas V136 3.45 MW wind turbine generator is an IEC IIIA and IEC IIB Wind Turbine which delivers
high and efficient energy production in low and medium wind conditions, rated capacity of 3.45 megawatts
(MW) and 136 m rotor diameter. The turbine operates at variable rotational speeds and resulting power
output dependent on the wind speed acting on the turbine rotor and operational settings.

The project specific specifications for the Wind Turbines to be used are presented in Table 62 below.
Table 77: VESTAS V136 3.45 MW Specification
Item Specification
Rated Power 3,450 kW
Wind Class IIIA / IIB
Rotor Diameter 136 m
2
Swept Area 14,527 m
Control Independent Pitch and Variable Speed
Gearbox 3 Stages – two planetary stages & one helical
Frequency 50 Hz / 60 Hz
Blades
Length 66.7 m
Physical Dimensions
Tower Height Site Specific
Hub Height 112 m
Tower Type Steel

Sound power levels have been provided by Vestas in accordance with IEC 61400-11 Wind Turbine
Generator Systems – Part 11: Acoustic noise measurement techniques. Modern Wind Turbines such as the
V136 have various operations including Noise Reduced Operation (NRO) modes. The data used for this
study is aimed to be primarily conservative with NRO modes deemed to be potential mitigation methods
where necessary. Therefore, the preferred data for prediction calculations is NRO = 0 which means no
NRO is active during operation and the WTG is at maximum noise levels.

The sound power levels during standard operation mode ranges from 93.0 dBA at low revolutions per
minute (rpm) to 108.2 dBA at full rated power output (high rpm). In accordance with IEC 61400-14 ‘Wind
Turbines – Part 14: Declaration of apparent sound power level and tonality values’, Vestas provides a
performance guarantee that the maximum sound power output will be 108.2 dBA. The sound power level
data presented is sound power level per wind speed as presented in Figure 91 below.

PAGE | 40
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 96: Sound Power Levels for Vestas V136 3.45 MW

Third octave frequency data was provided by Vestas for the noise study. Sound octave data is required for
the application of the ISO 9613-2:1996 Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors –
Part 2: General method of calculation (ISO 9613-2).

b. Noise Modelling Methodology

Sound is a sequence of pressure waves which propagate through fluid medium. In the case of all outdoor
propagation of sound in air the following factors affect the propagation and resultant sound levels from
the source: (i) type of source (point, line or area); (ii) distance from the source; (iii) atmospheric absorption;
(iv) wind; (v) temperature and temperature gradient; (vi) obstacles such as barriers and buildings (barrier
effects); (vii) ground absorption; (viii) reflections; and (ix) humidity and precipitation

The noise model that was used for this noise impact study was SoundPLAN 7.4 software. The program
allows for the calculation of sound pressure levels due to various sources using empirical calculation
algorithms of the applicable International Standards and Regulations.

The propagation methodology adopted for this noise study, and the equations used within the SoundPLAN
model are based on the ISO 9613:1996 ‘Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Propagation Outdoors’ –
Part 2: General Calculation Method (ISO 9613-2) as per the modelling requires of IOA GPG.

The method predicts the equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (LAeq) under
meteorological conditions favourable to propagation from sources of known sound emission. The standard
takes into account the following physical effects on sound:

 Geometrical divergence;
 Atmospheric absorption;
 Ground effect;
 Reflection from surfaces; and,
 Screening by obstacles.

PAGE | 41
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Noise from WTGs is reduced by distance, atmospheric losses, screening effects and other ‘miscellaneous’
losses. ISO 9613-2 empirical formula calculates the predicted sound pressure level at a specified distance
by taking into account the sound power level in octave frequency bands and subtracting a number of
attenuating factors as described generally above.

The predicted noise level for each octave band is calculated by the following equation (1) within the
modelling software.

The applied equation for the Standard computed is as follows:

𝐿𝑠 = [𝐿𝑊 + 𝐷1 + 𝐾0 ] − [𝐷 𝑆 + ∑ 𝐷] (1)

where 𝐿𝑠 sound pressure level for a single frequency

𝐿𝑊 sound power

𝐷1 directivity of the source

4𝜋
𝐾0 spherical model (𝐾0 = 10 log � � where 𝜎 is the spatial angle)
𝜎

𝐷𝑆 geometrical spreading (𝐷 𝑆 = 10 log(𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑. 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠, 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟) +

11 𝑑𝑑(𝐴))
∑𝐷 contributing factors – air absorption, ground absorption, meteorological effects, volume
type absorption and screening

Summary of the calculation settings and standards are detailed in Table 63 below.

Table 78: Model Calculation and Parameter Settings for ISO 9613-2
Model Parameter Parameter Setting / Standard
Calculation Standard (ISO) 9613 ‘Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Propagation
Outdoors – Part 2: General Calculation Method’ (ISO, 1996)
Application as per IOA GPG
Wind Speed 10.0 m/s
Ground Absorption Coefficient 0.0
Valley Factor Penalty 1.5 dB

Topographic Screening 2.0 dB

Reduction
Meteorological Coefficient 0.0 dB

Receiver Height 1.5 m

Meteorological Data Humidity 70%

Air Pressure 1013.3 mbar
T = 21ºC
Atmospheric Attenuation 63 125 250 500 1 2 4 8 kHz
Coefficients Hz Hz Hz Hz kHz kHz kHz
(dB / km) 0.1 0.4 1.0 1.9 3.7 9.7 32.8 117.0

The following assumptions have been made for the modelling assessment, and wherever possible, a
conservative approach has been taken. As noted below and as required by the IFC EHS Guideline for Wind
Energy the assumptions assume a worst case scenario:

 The modelling was undertaken on the final layout of the wind turbines as provided by the Developer;
PAGE | 42
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 ISO 9613-2 calculates predicted noise levels with the major assumption that sensitive receptors are
located downwind of the turbine noise as this is considered to be the most conservative. Therefore,
directivity and attenuation due to metrological factors such as wind speed and wind direction upwind
from a source are not taken into account;
 Shielding effects from building structures were not taken into account;
 Attenuation effects by vegetation were not taken into account; and
 A single modelling scenario is to be assessed for this study, namely, worst-case scenario of wind speed
of 10m/s, which gives the maximum sound power output for the V136. Since the V136 3.45 MW under
normal operating conditions (NRO Mode = 0) operates at a constant maximum sound power output of
108.2 dBA between 9.0 m/s and 20.0 m/s, worst-case would be defined as operation within wind
speeds which exceed 9.0 m/s.

c. Noise-sensitive Receptors

The noise sensitive receptors which were considered for the assessment, as discussed earlier, mainly
include the villages surrounding the Project site (Mothallath Al-Shobak, Zobeiriyeh and Mdhaibie’) as
presented in Figure 92 and Table 64 below.
Table 79: Receptor details and coordinates
No. Receptor Coordinates Distance from
Nearest WTG
E N m (WTG)
R1 Closest Domestic Dwelling 747761.82 3378702.81 1790 (WTG 3)
to Project
R2 Closest Domestic Dwelling 747123.53 3375099.33 2321 (WTG 1)
to Project
R3 Centre of Village 752580.94 3375288.30 2902 (WTG 6)

Figure 97: Noise Sensitive Receptors for the Project

(ii) Results

Presented below are the outcomes of the noise impact assessment in accordance with the methodology
discussed earlier, to include an assessment without noise baseline conditions and another assessment that
takes into account noise baseline levels.

PAGE | 43
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

a. Assessment without Noise Baseline Conditions

As discussed earlier, the IFC EHS Guideline for Wind Energy states: “If the preliminary model suggests that
turbine noise at all sensitive receptors is likely to be below an LA90 of 35 decibels dB(A) at a wind speed of
10meters/second (m/s) at 10m height during day and night times, then this preliminary modelling is likely
to be sufficient to assess noise impact; otherwise it is recommended that more detailed modelling to be
carried out, which may include background ambient noise measurements”.

The figure below presents the 35 dBA limit line from noise prediction calculations for all WTGs operating
with peak sound power level (Ws > 9 m/s). As noted in the figure below, no sensitive receptors including
nearby villages or domestic dwellings fall within the 35 dBA limit line.

In addition, a noise contour map for the worst-case noise scenario has been calculated and is presented in
the figure below. The map shows contour lines and noise propagation level areas or ‘zones’ between the
contour lines. The significance of the noise contour map is to allow for an overview of noise levels over a
geographic area and therefore allows a quick basic analysis of the noise propagation for identification of
specific noise sensitive receptors. The modelling specification for the noise contour map modelling is as
per Table 65 below.
Table 80: Noise contour map setup specification – ISO 9613-2
Parameter Description Noise Map Parameter
WTG Operation Worst Case – All WTGs operating
Mapping Grid Resolution 10 x 10 m
Mapping Result Range 25 - 100 dB(A)

Based on the results of the noise contour map and the identification of noise sensitive receptors, Table 66
below shows contribution noise levels at ‘R1’ to ‘R3’ for the worst-case scenario for a Ws of 10 m/s.
Table 81: Predicted Contribution Noise Levels (W10)
Noise Sensitive Receiver Predicted Contribution Noise Level per
Wind Speed (Ws) of 10 m/s – dB(A)
R1 32.0
R2 29.5
R3 31.2

Taking the above into account, the assessment concludes that there are no issues of concern in terms of
noise impacts from the Project on the surrounding receptors, see Figures 93 and 94. The assessment is
considered sufficient to assess impacts in accordance with the IFC EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy. There is
no requirement for an additional assessment which takes into account background noise levels.

PAGE | 44
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 98: Noise Propagation with the 35 dBA Limit

Figure 99: Noise Contour Map for Wind Farm – Worst-case, 10 m/s wind speed with All WTGs operating

b. Assessment with Noise Baseline Conditions

As discussed earlier, the assessment undertaken without a noise baseline conditions is considered
sufficient to assess impacts from noise from the turbines on surrounding receptors. Nevertheless, the
MoEnv requires that a noise baseline survey is undertaken at the surrounding receptors to be taken into
account as part of the assessment. Therefore, in order to comply with the MoEnv requirements a noise
baseline survey was undertaken. The noise baseline survey has been previously discussed in Section 17.2.2

Assessment of noise levels per noise limits are presented in Table 84 below.

PAGE | 45
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 82: Proposed Noise Limits for WTG Noise Assessment

Item Worst-case, 10 m/s
Jordanian Regulations Noise Limits, LA90 dB
Day-time (07h00 – 18h00) 50.0
Night-time Period (18h00 – 07h00) 40.0
IFC EHS Limits – Table 1.7.1 Noise Level Guidelines
Day-time (07h00 – 22h00) 55.0
Night-time (22h00 – 07h00) 45.0
IFC EHS Limits – Background Level Limit Increase + 3dB
Noise Sensitive Receiver 1
Day-time (07h00 – 22h00) 48.0
Night-time (22h00 – 07h00) 48.0
IFC EHS Limits – Background Level Limit Increase + 3dB
Noise Sensitive Receiver 2
Day-time (07h00 – 22h00) 51.0
Night-time (22h00 – 07h00) 50.0
IFC EHS Limits – Background Level Limit Increase + 3dB
Noise Sensitive Receiver 3
Day-time (07h00 – 22h00) 58.0
Night-time (22h00 – 07h00) 46.0

Tables 70 and 71 below show the assessments for day-time and night-time periods for wind speed of 10
m/s, the worst-case scenario. This assessment compares the calculated noise levels for the worst-case
scenario with the Jordanian Limits where the total noise has been calculated assuming the background
noise is equal to the Jordanian limit level.
Table; 83: Jordan Regulation Noise Impact Assessment for Day-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario
Noise Predicted Noise Total Noise Jordanian Day-time Limit Maximum Exceedance
Sensitive Contribution (Contribution + Level Value
Receptor Background) (Rural Areas)
dBA Ld dBA Ld dBA Ld dB
R1 32.0 50.0 50.0 -
R2 29.5 50.0 50.0 -
R3 31.2 50.0 50.0 -

Table 84: Jordan Regulation Noise Impact Assessment for Night-Time Period, Worst-Case Scenario
Noise Predicted Noise Total Noise Jordanian Night-time Limit Maximum Exceedance
Sensitive Contribution (Contribution Level Value
Receptor + Background) (Rural Areas)
dBA Ln dBA Ln dBA Ln dB
R1 32.0 40.6 40.0 0.6*
R2 29.5 40.4 40.0 0.4*
R3 31.2 40.5 40.0 0.5*
* Exceedance of the night-time limit at all receptors is below 1 dBA and within a 1 dB error tolerance. In order for an
increase in noise to be noticeable to a human receiver it should exceed the background level by more than 3 dB.
Therefore, though there is a numerical increase from the addition of background and contribution noise levels, the
predicted noise levels are significantly lower at the receptors such that they would not be audible or change in
background noise levels noticeable.

Tables 72 and 73 below show the assessments for day-time and night-time periods for wind speed of 10
m/s, the worst-case scenario. This assessment compares the calculated noise levels for the worst-case
scenario with the IFC Limits where the total noise has been calculated assuming the background noise is
equal to the IFC limit levels.
Table 85: IFC Limit Level Noise Impact Assessment for Day-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario
Noise Predicted Noise Total Noise IFC Day-time Limit Maximum Exceedance
Sensitive Contribution (Contribution + Table 1.7.1 Residential Value
PAGE | 46
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Receptor Background)
dBA Ld dBA Ld dBA Ld dB
R1 34.0 55.0 55.0 -
R2 29.5 55.0 55.0 -
R3 31.2 55.0 55.0 -

Table 86: IFC Limit Level Noise Impact Assessment for Night-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario
Noise Predicted Noise Total Noise IFC Night-time Limit Maximum Exceedance
Sensitive Contribution (Contribution Table 1.7.1 Residential Value
Receptor + Background)
dBA Ln dBA Ln dBA Ln dB
R1 34.0 45.2 45.0 0.2*
R2 29.5 45.1 45.0 0.1*
R3 31.2 45.2 45.0 0.2*
* Exceedance of the night-time limit at all receptors is below 1 dBA and within a 1 dB error tolerance. In order for an
increase in noise to be noticeable to a human receiver it should exceed the background level by more than 3 dB.
Therefore, though there is a numerical increase from the addition of background and contribution noise levels, the
predicted noise levels are significantly lower at the NSRs such that they would not be audible or change in background
noise levels noticeable.

Tables 74 and 75 show the assessments for day-time and night-time periods for wind speed of 10 m/s, the
worst-case scenario. This assessment compares the calculated noise levels for the worst-case scenario with
the IFC assessment of background noise level + 3 dB where the total noise has been calculated with the
addition of background noise with the predicted contribution noise levels.
Table 87: IFC Background Level + 3dB Noise Impact Assessment for Day-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario
Noise Predicted Noise Total Noise IFC Day-time Limit Maximum Exceedance
Sensitive Contribution (Contribution + Background + 3dB Value
Receptor Background)
dBA Ld dBA Ld dBA Ld dB
R1 34.0 45.2 48.0 -
R2 29.5 48.1 51.0 -
R3 31.2 55.0 58.0 -

Table 88: IFC Background Level + 3dB Noise Impact Assessment for Night-Time Periods, Worst-Case Scenario
Noise Predicted Noise Total Noise IFC Night-time Limit Maximum Exceedance
Sensitive Contribution (Contribution Background + 3dB Value
Receptor + Background)
dBA Ln dBA Ln dBA Ln dB
R1 34.0 45.2 48.0 -
R2 29.5 47.1 50.0 -
R3 31.2 43.3 46.0 -

Taking the above into account, the assessment with noise baseline concludes that there are no issues of
concern in terms of noise impacts from the Project on the surrounding receptors.

Impacts from noise from wind turbines during operation are considered of long-term duration as they will
occur throughout the operation phase of the Project and of a negative nature. However, the noise impact
assessments concluded that noise levels from the wind turbines will not affect the surrounding nearby
receptors and will not exceed acceptable limits during daytime and night-time, such an impact is
considered of low magnitude and low sensitivity. Given the above, such an impact is considered to be not
significant.

PAGE | 47
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Additional requirements

Based on the results of this noise study no mitigation or curtailment for noise is required. However, there
are additional requirements which must be taken into account as discussed below.

Upon completion of the construction of the wind farm, during the commissioning period a detailed long-
term noise monitoring programme should be implemented to verify the outcomes and results of the noise
assessment undertaken (as presented above). The monitoring programme should be carefully designed
with specific planning of equipment, measurement locations and periods.

In addition, a detailed grievance mechanism for the local community must be prepared and implemented
(currently being prepared as part of the SEP). The local community must be made aware of the grievance
mechanism available to submit complaints regarding nuisances related to noise from the turbines
(although unlikely based on the outcomes of the assessment and as to be verified during commissioning
monitoring). Should, for any reason, such grievances be submitted, they must be verified and appropriate
mitigations should be implemented (such as curtailment of turbines during specific situations or
compensation such as provision of noise shielding at receptor locations such as sound reducing windows
(double glazed) and planting of trees and shrubs, etc.).

Other Affected Communities

In addition to the villages discussed above, there are other affected communities which could be impacted
by the noise generated from the turbines during operation. This mainly includes local communities who
undertake agricultural and grazing activities during specific seasons of the year. However, noise from the
turbines would not affect their grazing and agricultural activities. In addition, potential impacts and
nuisances from the turbines on those local communities undertaking such activities are considered
temporary and not significant, given that those local communities do not reside in the area; once they
undertake such activities they return to their villages.

In addition to the above, there are some nomads that occupy the area and whom also undertake
agriculture and grazing activities. Noise from the turbines would not affect their grazing and agricultural
activities. In addition, potential impacts and nuisances from the turbines on the nomads are considered not
significant. Nomads in general occupy the area on a yearly basis, but do not settle in the exact specific area
each year. Therefore, in areas where high noise levels are expected from the turbines, the nomads could
simply set up their tents on other nearby less affected areas.

Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Requirements

The Developer must develop informative maps in Arabic of noise propagations from the turbines in
accordance with results highlighted throughout this chapter. In addition, the Developer should visit the
Project area on a regular basis throughout the active period of nomads (at least once per month during
their arrival period) to explain such informative maps and allow nomads to build up their tents in less
affected areas.

17.2.3 Potential Impacts from Tonal Noise, Low Frequency Noise, Infrasound and Vibration of Wind
Turbines during Operation
In general, modern wind turbines have been designed to keep tonality to a minimum and can be
considered in most cases broadband noise sources. No tonal correction for components was added to the
predicted noise levels. The standard methodology to determine the presence of tones is to check the level
difference between the one-third octave band that contains the tone frequency and the two adjacent one-
third octave bands, and determine if the difference exceeds the prescribed limits as per (ISO 1996 – 2).
Based on that, calculations with the use of the predicted noise levels indicate that no tonality is present
except when it is in exceedance at 1600 Hz and 2000 Hz. However, the resultant A-weighted noise levels at
these frequency bands are 16.1 dBA and 8.9 dBA, which would be inaudible and therefore of no concern.
PAGE | 48
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Comprehensive research on low frequency noise (frequency below160 Hz) and infrasound (below 20 Hz)
has been published by the UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and which concludes that
there are no direct health effects at the levels of low frequency noise generated by wind turbines (DEFRA,
2003). It has been repeatedly shown from measurements of low frequency noise and infrasound from wind
turbines undertaken over the past decade (in the UK, Denmark, Germany, and the USA), and as agreed by
experienced acoustics professionals, that the levels of infrasound emitted from modern wind turbines even
within the wind farm sites are at very low levels below the threshold of perception (DELTA, 2010).

A basic assessment of low frequency noise for the closest noise sensitive receptor (R1) was completed
using the general Low Frequency Rating Noise (LFNR) Assessment as per ISO 1996 – 2. The assessment
indicates that there is as exceedance at 16 Hz. However, this is not the case as the A-weighted level at this
receptor is -9.35 dBA, which would be inaudible

Wind turbines are not typically a source of high level vibration. Vibration levels are reduced rapidly with
distance to the source. A comprehensive study of vibration measurements in the vicinity of a wind farm
undertaken in 1997 found that vibration levels were already at distances of 100 m below 10% of the value
recommended as exposure limit for critical buildings such as laboratories housing precision measurement
instruments (UK Department of Trade and Industry, 1997). Therefore, no vibration impacts are expected
during operation beyond 100m. It can be anticipated that vibration from the Project’s wind turbines will
not be perceivable at any of the nearby sensitive receptors.

Taking all of the above into account, such impacts are considered of long-term duration as they will occur
throughout the operation phase of the Project and of a negative nature. However, the impact is considered
to be of low magnitude and low sensitivity. Given the above, such an impact is considered to be not
significant. To this extent, no mitigation measures are required and no additional requirements have been
identified.

17.2.4 Potential Impacts from Shadow Flicker of Wind Turbines during Operation
Shadow flicker occurs when the sun passes behind the wind turbine and casts a shadow several hundred
meters away from the turbines location. As the rotor blades rotate, shadows pass over the same point
causing an effect known as ‘shadow flicker’. Of course, shadow length can change depending on the angle
of the sun in the sky, but even if the object is large and the sun is low in the sky, the shadow will only
stretch a certain distance – after that, the light bends around the object and the shadow becomes diffuse
(weak).

Four conditions must occur simultaneously for a wind turbine to cause shadow flicker:

 The sun must be shining and there is no cloud cover;

 The moving object must be between the observer and the sun;
 The observer has to be close enough to the object to be in its shadow; and
 The blades have to be facing directly toward or away from the sun (so they are moving across the
source of the light relative to the observer).

Shadow flicker could potentially be a source of disturbance and nuisance to the receptors and residents of
the nearby villages and could create a disturbing indoor environment, see Figure 95. Therefore, to assess
the anticipated impacts, a shadow flicker prediction model was employed.

The section below discusses the methodology that was adopted for the modelling and also presents the
outcomes and results.

PAGE | 49
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 100: Relation between Position of Sun, Wind Direction and Occurrence of Shadows

(i) Relevant Legislations and Requirements for Shadow Flicker Assessment

There are no specific requirements in Jordan for shadow flicker. The relevant international guideline and
best practice for shadow flicker would be the IFC EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy. In specific, with regards
to shadow flicker the IFC EHS Guideline for Wind Energy specifies the following:

 Where there are nearby receptors, commercially available software can be used to model shadow
flicker in order to identify the distance to which potential shadow flicker effects may extend. The same
software can typically also be used to predict the duration and timing of shadow flicker occurrence
under real weather conditions at specific receptors located within the zone of potential shadow flicker
impact.
 If it is not possible to locate the wind energy facility/turbines such that neighbouring receptors
experience no shadow flicker effects, it is recommended that the predicted duration of shadow flicker
effects experienced at a sensitive receptor not exceed 30 hours per year and 30 minutes per day on the
worst affected day, based on a worst-case scenario.
 In order to assess compliance with the recommended limits, shadow flicker should be modelled and
predicted based on an astronomical worst-case scenario, which is defined as follows: (i) there is
continual sunshine and permanently cloudless skies from sunrise to sunset; (ii) there is sufficient wind
for continually rotating turbine blades; (iii) rotor is perpendicular to the incident direction of the
sunlight; (iv) sun angles less than 3 degrees above the horizon level are disregarded (due to likelihood
for vegetation and building screening); (v) distances between the rotor plane and the tower axis are
negligible and (vi) light refraction in the atmosphere is not considered.

(ii) Impact Assessment Methodology

a. Shadow Flicker Modelling Methodology

Shadow flicker for the Project was modelled in WindPRO Version 3.1. WindPRO is considered to be an
industry standard software program for WTG calculations. The software incorporates the WTG sites and
surrounds and simulates the path of the sun over the course of the year and assesses at intervals the
potential shadow flicker at a given receptor (domestic dwelling).

The software gives a conservative estimate of the number of hours per year that shadows could be cast by
the rotation of the turbine blades. The assessment provides a shadow flicker calculation method which
considers the following parameters:

 The position of the WTGs – x, y, z coordinates;

 The hub height and rotor diameter;
 The position of the shadow receptor object – x, y, z coordinates;
PAGE | 50
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 The size of the window and its orientation, both directional (relative to South) and tilt (angle of plane
to the horizontal);
 The geographic position (latitude and longitude);
 Time zone and daylight-saving time information; and,
 A simulation model, which holds information about the Earth’s orbit and rotation relative to the Sun.
The sun is modelled by a single-point source of light, whereas in reality the sun is not defined by a point
source and is instead a sphere. Due to the spherical shape of the sun, there are shading areas in which the
sunbeams or part of the sunbeams are covered by object. The model further assumes clear sky during
100% of the year (which is not the case in reality). Therefore, the model produces the worst-case scenario
in line with a conservative assessment methodology.

The calculation model used within WindPRO uses the following parameters define the shadow propagation
angle behind the rotor disk:

 The diameter of the Sun, D: 1,390,000 km;

 The distance to the Sun, d: 150,000,000 km;

 Angle of attack: 0.531 degrees.

The following calculations and assumptions were used for WindPRO calculations:

 Calculations only when more than 20% of the sun is covered by the blade;

 Minimum sun height over the horizon of influence: 3o;

 Day step for calculation: 1 day;

 Time step for calculation: 1 minute;

 A ZVI (Zones of Visual Influence) calculation is performed before flicker calculation so non-visible WTG
do not contribute to calculated flicker values;

 A WTG will be visible if it is visible from any part of the receiver window;

 The ZVI calculation is based on the following assumptions:

- Height contours are used;

- Eye height: 1.5m;

- Grid Resolution: 10.0 m;

 The calculated times are “worst-case” given by the following assumptions:

- The sun is shining continuously during the day, from sunrise to sunset;

- The rotor plane is always perpendicular to the line from the WTG to the sun; and,

- The WTG is always operating.

b. Sensitive Receptors

The sensitive receptors which were considered for the assessment, as discussed earlier, mainly include the
villages surrounding the Project site as presented in Figure 96 and Table 76 below. The sensitive receptors
included the closest dwellings to the Project site.

PAGE | 51
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 89: Sensitive Receiver Locations fort Shadow Flicker Assessment

Receptor Village Description Latitude Longitude (UTM Closest
(UTM Easting) Northing) Distance to
WTG
(m)
R1 Closest domestic Domestic Dwelling 747761.82 3378702.81 1790 (WTG 3)
dwelling to Project
R2 Closest domestic Domestic Dwelling 747123.53 3375099.33 2321 (WTG 1)
dwelling to Project
R3 Centre of the Modaabie 752580.94 3375288.30 2902 (WTG 6)
village Knowledge Station

Figure 101: Shadow Flicker Sensitive Receptors for the Project

(ii) Results

Table 77 below shows the calculated astronomical maximum shadow flicker for hours per year and
minutes per day for the wind farm. Figure 97 below confirms the results below visually showing the extent
of shadow flicker as per the total hours per year.
Table 90: Worst Case Shadow Flicker Values for Identified Sensitive Receivers
Receptor UTM East UTM North Astronomical Astronomical
maximum possible maximum possible
shadow flickering shadow flickering
[Hours per year] [Minutes per day]
R1 747761.82 3378702.81 00:00 00:00
R2 747123.53 3375099.33 00:00 00:00
R3 752580.94 3375288.30 00:00 00:00

PAGE | 52
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 102: Shadow Flicker Map for Worst Case Shadow for all WTGs Operating

As noted in the table and figure above, all nearby receptors (including nearby villages and closest
residential dwellings) will not experience any shadow flicker impacts and therefore results are within
allowable limits set within the IFC EHS Guideline for Win Energy of 30 minutes per day and 30 hours per
year.

Impacts from shadow flicker from wind turbines during operation are considered of long-term duration as
they will occur throughout the operation phase of the Project and of a negative nature. However, the
shadow flicker impact assessments concluded that shadow flicker levels from the wind turbines will not
affect the surrounding nearby receptors and will not exceed acceptable limits, such an impact is considered
of low magnitude and low sensitivity. Given the above, such an impact is considered to be not significant.

Additional Requirements

Based on the results of this shadow flicker assessment, no mitigation or curtailment is required. However,
there are additional requirements which must be taken into account as discussed below.

A detailed grievance mechanism for the local community must be prepared and implemented (currently
being prepared as part of the SEP). The local community must be made aware of the grievance mechanism
available to submit complaints regarding nuisances related to shadow flicker from the turbines (although
unlikely based on the outcomes of the assessment). Should, for any reason, such grievances be submitted,
they must be verified and appropriate mitigation should be implemented (such as curtailment of turbines
during specific situations or compensation such introduction of vegetative buffers as a barrier for shadow
flicker and/or providing window blinds).

PAGE | 53
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Other Affected Communities

In addition to the villages discussed above, there are other affected communities which could be impacted
by the shadow flicker generated from the turbines during operation. This mainly includes local
communities undertake agricultural and grazing activities during specific seasons of the year. However,
shadow flicker from the turbines would not affect their grazing and agricultural activities. In addition,
potential impacts and nuisances from the turbines on those local communities undertaking such activities
are considered temporary and not significant, given that those local communities do not reside in the area;
once they undertake such activities they return to their villages.

In addition to the above, there are some nomads that occupy the area and whom also undertake
agriculture and grazing activities. Shadow flicker from the turbines would not affect their grazing and
agricultural activities. In addition, potential impacts and nuisances from the turbines on the nomads are
considered not significant. Nomads in general occupy the area on a yearly basis, but do not settle in the
exact specific area each year. Therefore, in areas where high shadow flicker levels are expected from the
turbines, the nomads could simply set up their tents on other nearby less affected areas.

Mitigations Measures and Monitoring Requirements

The Developer must develop informative maps in Arabic of shadow flicker propagations from the turbines
in accordance with results highlighted throughout this chapter. In addition, the Developer should visit the
Project area on a regular basis throughout the active period of nomads (at least once per month during
their arrival period) to explain such informative maps and allow nomads to build up their tents in less
affected areas.

17.2.5 Potential Impacts from Blade and Tower Glint of Wind Turbines during Operation
Blade or tower glint occurs when the sun strikes a rotor blade or the tower at a particular orientation. This
can impact a community, as the reflection of sunlight off the rotor blade may be angled toward nearby
residences. According to the IFC EHS Guidelines on Wind Energy “previously, blade or tower glint, was
considered to have a potential impact on communities. However, provided that wind turbines are painted
with a matt, non-reflective finish, as is typical with modern wind turbines, blade or tower glint is no longer
considered to be a significant issue”.

Taking all of the above into account, such impacts are considered of long-term duration as they will occur
only throughout the operation phase of the Project and of a negative nature. However, based on the
location of the turbines in relation to nearby receptors such an impact is considered of medium magnitude
and low sensitivity. Given the above, such an impact is considered of minor significance.

Mitigation Measures

 EPC Contractor to ensure that turbines are painted with a matt, non-reflective finish.

With the implementation of the above mitigation, the residual significance is considered to be not
significant.

Monitoring Requirements

 Review of detailed design to ensure such mitigations are taken into account.

17.2.6 Potential Impacts from Blade/Ice Throws during Operation

There are potential impacts from blade throws and ice throws from the wind turbines, where if such
incidents occur they could affect the public safety – for example vehicles passing on the highway within the

PAGE | 54
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Project area where some turbines are located, grazers from the local community passing next to turbines,
etc.

According to the IFC EHS Guidelines on Wind Energy, a failure in the rotor blade can result in the ‘throwing’
of a rotor blade – however the overall risk of such an event is extremely low. In addition, if ice accretion
occurs in blades, which can happen in certain weather conditions in cold climates, then pieces of ice can be
thrown from the rotor during operation, or dropped if the turbine is idling. In the Project site, icing is
expected to be a very low frequency occurrence based on the review of the climatic data for the region,
and thus overall risk of such incidents is extremely low.

Taking all of the above into account, such impacts are considered of long-term duration as they will occur
throughout the operation phase of the Project and of a negative nature. However, given that the overall
risk of such events is extremely low such an impact is considered of low magnitude. However, the receiving
environment is considered of high sensitivity given that it entails potential public safety. Given the above,
such an impact is considered to be of minor significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following presents the mitigation measures that are to be implemented by the Project Operator during
the operation phase of the Project and which include:

 Ensure that regular maintenance of the wind turbines takes place according to set schedule to prevent
any unforeseen events from occurring such as blade throws; and
 Install post signs at least 200 meters from the wind turbine which provide informative in English and
Arabic language about risks from such events.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following presents the mitigation measures that are to be implemented by the Project Operator during
the operation phase of the Project and which include:

 Inspections and visual monitoring to ensure that maintenance activities of turbines take place
according to set schedule, and to ensure that warning signs and posts are installed on the ground.

17.2.7 Potential Impacts from Public Access during Operation

The final impact related to community health, safety and security is mainly related to public access of
unauthorized personnel to the various Project components. Such access could results in safety issues such
as unauthorized climbing of the turbine, safety hazards from substations (electric shock, thermal burn
hazards, exposure to chemicals and hazardous materials, etc.) and others.

Such impacts are considered of long‐term duration throughout the Project operation phase, of a negative
nature, and are expected to be of medium magnitude and high sensitivity given that it entails potential
public safety concerns which in extreme cases they could entail permanent impacts (e.g. death or
permanent disability). Given the above such an impact is considered of moderate significance.

Mitigation Measures

The following presents the mitigation measures that are to be implemented by the Project Operator during
the operation phase of the Project and which include:

 Each turbine is fitted with locked doors to prevent unauthorized access to the turbines;
 Substation area to be completely fenced with concrete walls to prevent unauthorized access;
PAGE | 55
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Onsite guards within the entire Project site at all times to ensure the safety and security of the Project
as well a preventing unauthorized access to any of the Project components. However, it must be
ensured that all onsite guards are adequately trained to deal with unauthorized trespassing incidents.
In addition, guards must refrain from using excessive force, unless situation extremely requires so.
 Post informative signs on the turbines and other Project components (substation) about public safety
hazards and emergency contact information.
Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following presents the mitigation measures that are to be implemented by the Project Operator during
the operation phase of the Project and which include:

 Inspections and visual monitoring to ensure above measures are in place; and
Reporting of any trespassing incidents and the measures undertaken in such cases to control the situation
and prevent it from occurring again.

17.2.8 Potential Impacts from Presence of Security Personnel during Construction and Operation
Onsite security guards will be required for the Project during the construction and operation phase.
Inappropriate management and conduct of security personnel towards the local communities could result
in potential conflicts, hostilities and resentments.
Taking the above into account, it is specifically important to adhere to EBRD PR4 – Labour and Working
Conditions in relation to the security guards employed. PR4 requires that that the standard or practice and
behaviour for the security personnel is guided by the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights in
terms of hiring, rules of conduct, training, equipping and monitoring of such personnel. It also requires that
the Developer to make reasonable inquiries to satisfy itself that those providing security measures are not
implicated in past abuses, will ensure they are trained adequately in the use of force (and firearms if
applicable) and appropriate conduct towards the workers and the local community. Force should only be
used when strictly necessary, and to an extent proportional to the threat.
Such impacts are considered of long‐term duration throughout the Project duration, of a negative nature,
and are expected to be of low magnitude and high sensitivity as they are generally controlled through the
implementation of best practice requirements. Given the above such an impact is considered of minor
significance.
Mitigation Measures

Developer is required to submit a security employment plan to be guided by international best practice
requirements (such as the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights). The plan must identify
number of security workers required for the Project, how they will be recruited and hired (to include
measures to ensure they are not implicated in past abuses), training requirements and implementation (to
include in particular the use of force and if applicable firearms), equipping and monitoring, and code of
conduct to be implemented (towards workers and local communities).
Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

 Submission of security employment plan

 Reporting of any trespassing incidents and the measures undertaken in such cases to control the
situation and prevent it from occurring again.

PAGE | 56
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Reporting of any allegations of unlawful or abusive acts of security personnel along with action
undertaken to prevent reoccurrence.

17.2.9 Potential Impacts from Workforce Influx during Construction

During construction there will a peak of 60 construction workers for a duration of 16 months. It is expected
that such a workforce will include expatriates, locals and Jordanians as well as migrant workers. No
breakdown is available at this stage for the workforce in terms of workers from local communities,
Jordanians, migrants and expatriates.

Nevertheless, taking the above into account, the construction phase will result in a small population influx
to the local Project area. Such population influx (if inappropriately managed) could result in potential
impacts towards the local communities such as nuisances, inappropriate conduct, disrespect of local
cultures and norms, increased risk of exposure to communicable diseases, and other.

Such impacts are considered of short‐term duration as they are limited to the construction phase, of a
negative nature, and are expected to be of low magnitude and high sensitivity given the relatively small
number of construction workers required. Given the above such an impact is considered of minor
significance.
Mitigation Measures

Developer/EPC Contractor is required to prepare submit a community health and safety management plan
that addressed impacts from influx of construction workers. The plan should detail proper management
measures related to potential impacts on community health and safety to include a proper code of conduct
to ensure appropriate management of worker interaction with the local communities and which takes into
account local cultures and norms, mitigation measures to avoid/reduce risks of exposure to communicable
disease such as proper screening, vaccination, awareness/, and other as appropriate.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

 Submission of community health and safety management plan

 Reporting of any incidents with local communities and the measures undertaken in such cases to
control the situation and prevent it from occurring again.

PAGE | 57
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

18. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

This Chapter first provides an assessment of baseline conditions within the Project site and surrounds in
relation to the socio-economic conditions and then assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project
throughout its various phases. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include
mitigation measures, additional requirements, recommendations, etc.) and monitoring measures have
been identified to eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

It is important to note that this chapter investigates impacts related to socio-economic development.
Other impacts on local communities are discussed in other chapters, such as impacts on community health
and safety and security (Chapter 17) and land use activities (Chapter 9).

18.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

This section discusses the methodology for the assessment of the baseline conditions in relation to socio-
economic conditions as well as the outcomes and results.

18.1.1 Baseline Assessment Methodology

The socio-economic conditions have been established based on the review of secondary data available
mainly from the Department of Statistics (DoS) and the Local Development Unit (LDU) of the Ma’an
Governorate – mainly the “Economic and Social Situation of Ma’an Governorate Report of 2015” and
“National Development Plan of 2016-2018”. Available data from DoS and LDU was collected and reviewed
for certain indicators in order to characterize and describe the socio-economic situation.

Available data was collected and reviewed for certain indicators in order to characterize and describe the
socio-economic conditions. However, it is important to note that the majority of the socio-economic data
from DoS is only available at the Governorate level; no data is available at the District level or specifically
for the local communities near the Project area. Therefore, where available and relevant, data from DoS
was complemented with additional statistical data from the LDU of Ma’an Governorate and a local
community consultation session (as discussed previously in 6.5.2) to provide additional insights for the
socio-economic situation within Shobak district in general and that of the nearby local communities to the
greatest extent possible.

18.1.2 Results
Table 78 below presents relevant socio-economic conditions of the local communities which are closest to
the Project site – which includes Mothallath Al-Shobak , Zaitooneh, Zobeiriyeh, and Mdeibie’ as presented
in Figure 98 below. Those are referred collectively as the local communities.

PAGE | 58
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 103: Local Communities to the Project Area

Table 91: Socio-economic Assessment of the Local Communities

Socio-economic Local Communities
Indicator Mothallath Al-Shobak Mdaibie’ Zaitooneh Zobeiriyeh
Governorate Ma’an
District Shobak District
Population 4,275 880 125 1563
Syrian Refugees 663 0 14 103
Distance to Project 1km west of the Project
1km to the South 1km to the west 1.3km to the west
Site (km) site
Gender Ratio 1:1 (as per Shobak District)
Household Size 5.9 (as per Ma’an Governorate)
Tribal Affiliation Tribal affiliation in those local communities is represented by several tribes and sub-groups.
Namely; ALHabahbeh, AlHedban, AlSaudis, AlRawashdeh, AlRafay’a, AlAzazmeh,
AlMalaheem, AlAmareen and AlJbour.
% of working For Ma'an Governorate this was estimated at around 58.6%. However, based on
population in public consultations with local community representatives, the percentage is much higher within
services these communities, as the majority of the working population are in the public sector – the
majority of which are in the Jordanian Armed Forces and minority of which are in public
administration offices and civilian central government (39.4%) as well as education (19.2%)
of the working population (mostly in schools operated and managed by the Ministry of
Education) and health centres (operated and managed by the Ministry of Health).
% of working For Ma'an Governorate this was estimated at 39.4% with an estimated 1482 active
population in economic establishments where the majority engage in retail trade of commodities such as
private sector food, beverage, clothing, and household appliances, etc. However, based on consultations
with local community representatives, job opportunities in the private sector are very
limited and mainly include small scale establishments such as supermarkets, bakeries,
restaurants, etc. However, within Shobak city in particular, opportunities in the private
sector and especially in such small scale establishments are considered higher when
PAGE | 59
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Socio-economic Local Communities

Indicator Mothallath Al-Shobak Mdaibie’ Zaitooneh Zobeiriyeh
compared to the rest of the nearby villages.
% of working For Ma'an Governorate this was estimated at 2%. Based on consultations with local
population in community representatives, agriculture and livestock/grazing activities are considered very
Agriculture and limited practices by the local communities – in general, such activities are mainly
Livestock undertaken for self-sufficiency purposes and/or as an additional source of income but they
do not completely depend them as they are considered unfeasible.
Annual Income per For Ma’an Governorate 7,513 JOD, where the main source of income was from employment
household (JOD) followed by transfers and income from rental.
Unemployment For Ma’an Governorate was estimated at 15.4%.
rate
Poverty Rate For Ma’an Governorate was estimated at 26.6%. It is important to note that poverty in
Ma’an recorded the highest rate across Jordan.
# of Schools For Ma’an Governorate was estimated of 193 schools
Universities and Within Ma’an Governorate this includes AlHussein Bin Talal University, Ma’an College, and
Colleges AlShobak College.
Health Services Within Ma’an Governorate this include 2 hospitals, 38 health centres, 19 dentistry centres, 1
communicable diseases centre, 19 maternity and child care centre, and 18 pharmacies

In addition to the above, based on consultations with the local community representatives as part of local
consultation for this ESIA, one of the main socio-economic challenges facing the communities is the
relatively high unemployment and poverty levels. This is mainly attributed to the following:

 Local communities mainly work in the public sector and specifically in military jobs which are
considered low income professions;
 The investment and development projects/programmes in the area failed to employ local communities
and thus positively impact poverty and unemployment levels. The major economic establishments in
the area include poultry and agricultural farms as well as industrial establishments. Poultry and
agricultural farms mainly employ foreign labour (such as Syrians or Egyptians) whereas industrial
establishments mostly employ people from outside of the local communities, although there are
limited job opportunities provided for the local communities mainly in unskilled labour;
 Another important factor is the scarcity of economic establishments which triggers the migration of
the working population to other governorates seeking better job opportunities;
 Based on such consultations, the local communities were supportive of such wind farm projects.
Nevertheless, their expectations from such development projects mainly include providing job
opportunities and social development as detailed below.
- Priority for all job opportunities (skilled and unskilled) should be for the local communities.
- The local community has several expectations from the Developer in implementing additional
social responsibility actions. Generally, it was agreed that such actions should be based on the
priority needs of the local communities and must also be coordinated with the relevant
municipalities as well as Community Based Organisations (CBOs).
- There must be a transparent and well-advertised recruitment procedure for the local community
members which provides an equal opportunity for all and it was suggested that this is coordinated
with the Governorate or municipalities.
- The Developer must consider additional areas where local community members can benefit or be
involved besides job opportunities provided they have the required skills and expertise needed to
meet the development standards. For example, during construction the Project shall consider the
appointment of local contractors, local sourcing of materials and supplies, etc.

PAGE | 60
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

18.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

Given the generic nature of the impacts on socio-economic development for both phases of the Project
(construction and operation) those have been identified collectively throughout this section. During the
construction and operation phases, the Project is expected at a minimum to provide job opportunities for
local communities. The Project will create the following job opportunities:

 As provided earlier, a maximum of 60 job opportunities will be provided during the construction phase
for duration of 16 months. This will include job opportunities for unskilled labour, and professionals for
management (to include engineers, technicians, surveyors, etc.). Based on preliminary information, the
Developer at this stage has prioritised all job opportunities to the local communities. All unskilled job
opportunities will be for local communities, while skilled opportunities will be prioritised to the local
communities (with required qualifications and skills) and/or Jordanian residents.

 3 job opportunities will be provided during the operation phase for duration of 20 years. This will
include jobs for skilled labours (electricians and technicians). Based on preliminary information, the
Developer at this stage has prioritised all job opportunities to the local communities. Majority of
skilled job opportunities will be prioritised to the local communities (with required qualifications and
skills) and/or Jordanian residents.

The above could also entail other indirect positive benefits to the local community from increase in
demand for local services, supplies, and businesses. This could include for example possible engagements
for supplies and services (accommodation services, food, household products, etc.). Such demands could
improve the existing local economic activities and impact certain sectors, such as wholesale/retail trade.

Taking all of the above into account, this to some extent could contribute to enhancing the living
environment for its inhabitants. The creation of job opportunities in specific is of crucial importance
especially because, as discussed earlier, the local community in general suffers from high unemployment
rates and lacks governmental and private sector investment projects which can employ labour and thus
positively impact unemployment levels.

Proper planning and local community engagement from the start is crucial to understand issues and
opportunities which in turn would enable the Project build true sustainable links which will bring maximum
benefits to the local communities. Given the above, such impacts are anticipated to be positive.

Recommendations

As the impacts discussed are mainly positive, no mitigation measures have been identified. This section
provides recommendations which aim to enhance such positive impacts anticipated from the Project
throughout the construction and operation phases to the greatest extent possible.

From the onset of the Project, it is recommended that the Developer adopt and implement a community
integration plan. The community integration plan must demonstrate how the local communities will be
involved and integrated in the Project in terms of job opportunities and other indirect socio-economic
benefits (e.g. accommodation services). The plan must conform to the requirements of the recently issued
“Regulation for Obligatory Employment of Jordanian Workforce from Surrounding Communities in
Development Projects No. (131) for the year 2016”. The Regulation requires the obligatory employment of
local communities within development projects to include fresh graduate engineers, technicians, labourers,
etc. and specifies requirements for training as well as giving priority for local contractors. The number of
job opportunities is specified based on the investment amount of the development projects. In addition,
the plan must follow EBRD’s Environmental & Social Policy which includes requirements for supply chain
management. The Plan must also demonstrate providing priorities to local communities starting at the
municipal level, district level, and finally at the Governorate level.

Taking the above into account, it is recommended that the plan include the following:

 Manage expectations so that local communities are realistic about opportunities from the Project;
PAGE | 61
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Identify the number of skilled and unskilled job opportunities targeted to the local community
throughout the construction and operation phases. The Developer is expected to provide in detail the
qualifications and skills required for each job opportunities as well as the limitations and constraints of
local community members and how and to which extent those could be addressed through training
and capacity building;

 Present transparent recruitment procedures for the local community, to be adopted and implemented
in the various construction and operation contracting arrangements. Such procedures must provide
equal opportunities for all, including females;

 Detail additional areas where local community members can benefit or be involved besides job
opportunities provided they have the required skills and expertise needed to meet the development
standards. For example, during construction the Project shall consider local sourcing of materials and
supplies (if available);

 Ensure timely and continuous communication and dissemination of information between the
Developer and the local community members to alleviate potential sense of social marginalization and
improve their understanding and perception of the benefits associated with development.
Communication should also include information and updates on the projects development, number of
employment opportunities, the bidding process for project components, construction plans, etc.

 The plan should also consider allocating funds for social responsibility programs to be implemented for
the local communities. The program must be structured and based on the priority needs for the
villages along with a structured approach for selection of projects and programs (e.g. through a
committee with representatives from local communities, local governmental agencies, CBO’s, etc.).

PAGE | 62
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

19. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

This Chapter assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project throughout its various phases on
occupational health and safety. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include
mitigation measures, additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to
eliminate or reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

19.1 Assessment of Baseline Conditions

Assessment of baseline conditions related to occupational health and safety is considered irrelevant.

19.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts

This section identifies and assesses the anticipated impacts from the Project activities occupational health
and safety. For each impact, a set of management measures (which could include mitigation measures,
additional requirements, etc.) and monitoring measures have been identified to eliminate or reduce the
impact to acceptable levels. Throughout this section, the impacts during the construction and operation
phase have been discussed collectively due to the similarity in nature of the impacts.

Throughout the construction phase there will be generic occupational health and safety risks to workers, as
working on construction sites increases the risk of injury or death due to accidents. The following risks are
generally associated to construction sites and apply for the construction of the Project and could include:

 Slips and falls;

 Working at heights;
 Struck-by objects;
 Moving machineries;
 Working in confined spaces and excavations;
 Exposure to chemicals, hazardous or flammable materials;
 Air pollutants and dust generation;
 Noise;
 Particularly for wind power projects, workers are potentially exposed to electric shocks and burns when
touching live components; and
 Taking into account the Project site, construction workers are expected to work relatively hot weather
conditions (and thus are exposed to certain risks such as dehydration, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke)
and very cold weather conditions (and thus are exposed to certain risks such cold stress, slippery roads
during frost days, etc.).
Similarly, throughout the operation phase, there are occupational health and safety risks to workers from
the various operation and maintenance activities expected to take place for the Project. The following risks
are generally associated to such a Project and which could include:

 Working at heights during maintenance activities

 Exposure to a variety of hazards such as electric shock, and thermal burn hazards;
 Exposure to chemicals, hazardous or flammable materials; and
 Taking into account the Project site, maintenance activities are expected to take place in relatively hot
weather conditions (and thus workers are exposed to certain risks such as dehydration, heat

PAGE | 63
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

exhaustion, and heat stroke) and very cold weather conditions (and thus workers are exposed to certain
risks such cold stress, slippery roads during frost days, etc.).

In addition to the above, the nature of construction and operation activities could entail incidents,
accidents and emergency situations (such as fire, lightning, earthquakes, OHS risks, etc.) which could result
in adverse impacts on workers. Specific incidents related to the Project site include dust/sandstorms, OHS
incidents (bites from poisonous fauna such as snakes or scorpions).

Such impacts are considered of short-term duration during the construction phase and of long‐term
duration throughout the Project operation phase, of a negative nature. A wind farm construction site is
associated with an inherently high occupational health and safety risks some of which have considerable
consequences (fatality through fall from heights) – but such impacts are generally controlled through the
implementation of general best practices; to this extent such impacts are considered of medium
magnitude and high sensitivity. Given the above such an impact is considered of moderate significance.

Mitigation Measures

 The EPC Contractor is required to prepare an Occupational Health and Safety Plan (OHSP) regarding the
Project’s construction and commissioning activities while the Project Operator is required to prepare
an OHSP for the operation and maintenance works. The objective of the Plan is to ensure the health
and safety of all personnel in order to concur and maintain a smooth and proper progress of work at
the site and prevent accident which may injure personnel or damage property of the EPC Contractor,
O&M Contractor and all involved sub-contractors.

The OHSP for the construction and operation phase should be Project and site specific and must take
into account the national requirements mainly the “Labour Law No.(8) for the year 1996 and its
amendments”, including Chapter IX, Occupational Safety & Health. In addition, it must also be
compliant with EBRD PR4 – Health and Safety, which recognizes the importance of avoiding or
mitigating adverse health and safety impacts on workers and requires the development of a project-
specific health and safety plan that in accordance with the relevant EU Occupational Health and Safety
(OHS) Standards and Good International Practice (GIP).

In summary, the OHSP should provide details on the following components.

- Identification of roles and responsibilities of the personnel involved within the Project to include
the EHS manager, Project manager, site manager, health and safety manager, EHS coordinator,
subcontractors, workers, etc.;
- Identifies in details information in relation to communication protocols, first aid instructions and
facilities, training programs, occupational health and safety culture, inspection programs,
monitoring and reporting requirements, incident management, etc.
- Identifies in details the activities that are expected for the Project (e.g. civil works, electrical wiring,
material transport and unloading, wind turbine mechanical assembly, wind turbine electrical
installation, commissioning, maintenance, etc.) and lists the specific jobs which are to be
undertaken under each activity and the hazards which may be associated for each (electric
hazards, working with machinery, vertical works, etc.);
- For each of the activities above, the OHSP must identify the preventive equipment and systems
that must be in place to eliminate or reduce such risks. This includes: (i) collective protective
equipment (safety signs, traffic signs, hand signs, marking and signalling of work in progress, etc.);
(ii) personal protective equipment (this includes the compulsory equipment for any worker or
visitor onsite and obligatory equipment based on the tasks being carried out) (iii) detailed safety
measures on how the task should be implemented in a safe manner to reduce any occupational
health and safety risks.
The EPC Contractor and the Project Operator are expected to adopt and implement the
recommendations/provisions of the OHSP throughout the Project construction and operation phase.
PAGE | 64
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 The EPC Contractor and Project Operator are also expected to prepare a project and site specific
Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan.

Following the implementation of these mitigation measures, the significance of the residual impact can be
reduced to not significant.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

The following identifies the monitoring and reporting requirements that must be adhered to by the EPC
Contractor and Project Operator during the construction and operation phase:

 Inspection to ensure the implementation of the provisions of the Occupational Health and Safety Plan
and assess compliance with its requirements;
 Submission of an emergency preparedness and response plan; and
 Regular Reporting on the health and safety performance onsite in addition to reporting of any
accidents, incidents and/or emergencies and the measures undertaken in such cases to control the
situation and prevent it from occurring again.

It is important to note that the contract between the Developer and EPC Contractor and Developer and
Project Operator requires that both entities adhere to the requirements of EBRD PR 2 – in relation to
preparation of an HR policy, requirements for working conditions and terms of employment, child labour,
forced labour, non-discrimination and a labour grievance mechanism.

PAGE | 65
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

20. SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS

Tables 79, 80 and 81 below present a summary of the anticipated impacts during the planning and
construction, operation, and decommissioning phase of the Project, respectively. The information in the
tables includes:

 Key and generic environmental attributes (e.g. air quality, noise);

 Impact (textual description);
 Nature of impact (negative or positive);
 Duration (long-term or short-term);
 Reversibility (reversible or irreversible);
 Magnitude (high, medium, or low);
 Sensitivity (high, medium, or low);
 Significance (major, moderate, minor, or not significant);
 Management action – generally management actions describe whether an impact can be mitigated or
not. Management actions include: (i) mitigation measures; (ii) compensation measures; (iii) additional
requirements which must be implemented at a later stage and which could be required by a
governmental entity; (iv) for positive impacts recommendations have been provided which aim to
enhance the impact; and

 Residual significance after management actions are implemented (major, moderate, minor, or not
significant).

PAGE | 66
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 92: Summary of Anticipated Impacts during the Planning and Construction Phase
Impact Assessment
Environmental
Likely Impact – Planning and Construction Phase Residual
Attribute Nature Duration Reversibility Magnitude Sensitivity Significance Management Action
Significance
Landscape and Construction activities would create a temporary effect on the visual quality of the site and its Negative Short-Term Reversible Medium Low Minor Mitigation available Not significant
Visual surroundings. The visual environment during the construction phase would include the presence of
elements typical of a construction site such as equipment and machinery to include cranes,
excavators, trucks, front end loaders, compactors and other
Land Use Project could conflict the formal assigned land uses set by the various governmental entities. There are no anticipated impacts. No action Not relevant
Construction activities could disturb and affect the actual land use of the site as it could provide value Negative Short– Term Reversible Low Medium Minor Mitigation available Not Significant
to local stakeholders such as local communities and nomads (for agriculture, grazing, etc.).
Geology and There are various wadi systems which run within the Project site. If not taken into account there could Negative Long – Term Could be Medium High Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
Hydrology be potential for flood risks which could affect the various Project components. irreversible
Risk of soil and groundwater contamination during the various operational activities from improper Negative Long – Term Could be Low Medium Minor Mitigation available Not significant
housekeeping activities, spillage of hazardous material, random discharge of waste and wastewater irreversible
Biodiversity Construction activities would disturb existing habitats (flora and fauna). In addition, other impacts Negative Long – Term Could be Medium Low Minor Mitigation Available/ Not Significant
could be from improper management of the site (e.g. improper conduct and housekeeping practices). irreversible Additional Studies
Birds (Avi-Fauna) Construction activities could disturb existing habitats of birds breeding and/or nesting within the Negative Short – Term Could be Low Medium Minor Mitigation Available/ Not Significant
Project site. irreversible Additional Studies
Bats Construction activities would alter the site’s habitat and potentially affects bats particularly through Negative Long – Term Could be Low Low Not No Mitigation Not Significant
loss of hunting habitats as well as removal of roosting sites. irreversible Significant Required
Archaeology and Improper management of construction activities could disturb/damage the archaeological locations Negative Short – Term Could be Medium Medium Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
Culture Heritage recorded within the area as well as potential archaeological remains which could be buried in the irreversible
ground (if any).
Air Quality Construction activities will likely result in an increased level of dust, particulate matter and pollutant Negative Short - Term Reversible Medium Low Minor Mitigation Available Not Significant
emissions which in turn will directly impact ambient air quality.
Infrastructure and Water Resources – water requirements of the Project could entail constraints on the existing Negative Short - Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Not Significant
Utilities resources users such as the local communities. Requirements
Wastewater Utilities – it is important to ensure that existing utilities would be able to handle the Negative Short - Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Not Significant
amount of wastewater generated from the Project during the construction phase. Requirements
Solid Waste Utilities – it is important to ensure that existing utilities would be able to handle the Negative Short - Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Not Significant
amount of solid waste generated from the Project during the construction phase. Requirements
Hazardous Waste Utilities – it is important to ensure that existing utilities would be able to handle the Negative Short - Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Not Significant
amount of hazardous waste generated from the Project during the construction phase. Requirements
Aviation, Telecommunication, and TV & Radio Links – Improper planning and site selection of the There are no anticipated impacts. Additional Not Significant
Project could impact aircraft safety and/or could potentially interfere with certain electromagnetic Requirements
transmissions associated with air transport, telecommunications, and radio/television systems
Road Networks – if transportation activities of the various project components to the site are not Negative Short-Term Reversible High Medium Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
properly managed beforehand, they could entail risk of damage to the existing roads and could be of
public safety concerns to other users on the road.
Community Health, Various construction activities expected to be a source of noise and vibration generation within the Negative Short-Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Mitigation available Not Significant
Safety and Security Project site and its surroundings. If improperly managed, there is risk of nuisance and health affects to
the nearby surrounding receptors (such as the local communities).
Potential Impacts from presence of security personnel relate to inappropriate management and Negative Long-Term Reversible Low High Minor Mitigation available Not Significant
conduct of security personnel towards the local communities.
Potential Impacts from Workforce Influx during Construction Negative Short-Term Reversible Low High Minor Mitigation available Not Significant
Socio-Economic The Project is expected at a minimum to provide job opportunities for local communities. This, to Positive Not applicable Recommendations Not applicable
Conditions some extent, could contribute to enhancing the living environment for its inhabitants, elevate their provided
standards of living, and bring social and economic prosperity to local communities.
Occupational There will be some risks to workers health and safety during the operation and maintenance activities Negative Short – Term Could be Medium High Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
Health and Safety of the Project. irreversible

PAGE | 67
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 93: Summary of Anticipated Impacts during the Operation Phase

Environmental Impact Assessment
Attribute / Likely Impact – Operation Phase Residual
Nature Duration Reversibility Magnitude Sensitivity Significance Management Action
Issue Significance
Landscape and Visual impacts concern the turbines themselves (e.g. colour, height, and number of turbines) and impacts Could be Long – Term Reversible Low Medium Minor Mitigation Available Minor
Visual relating to their interaction with the character of the surrounding landscape. There were various impacts Negative or
assessed on various landscape types. Positive
Land Use Operational activities could disturb and affect the actual land use of the site as it is used by the local Negative Long –Term Reversible Low Medium Minor Mitigation Available Not Significant
community for agriculture and grazing. In addition, nomads settle in the area and undertaken agricultural
and grazing activities.
Geology and Risk of soil and groundwater contamination during the various operational activities from improper Negative Long – Term Could be Low Medium Minor Mitigation available Not significant
Hydrology housekeeping activities, spillage of hazardous material, random discharge of waste and wastewater. irreversible
Biodiversity Improper management of the site could disturb existing habitats (e.g. improper conduct and Negative Long –Term Could be Medium Low Minor Mitigation Available Not Significant
housekeeping practices). irreversible
Avi-Fauna Wind turbines are associated with impacts on birds from risks of strikes and collision on both migratory Negative Long – Term Could be Low – High Medium Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
(Birds) and resident soaring birds. Such impacts depend on several factors but could affect the population levels irreversible
of certain species especially those with international/national critical conservation status.
Bats The potential impacts from the Project during operation are mainly related to risk of bat strikes and Negative Long –Term Could be Low Low Not Significant Mitigation Available / Not Significant
collisions with rotors of the operating wind turbines. irreversible Additional Studies
Archaeology Improper management of operational activities could disturb/damage the archaeological locations Negative Long - Term Could be Medium Low Minor Mitigation available Not Significant
recorded within the Project area. irreversible
Infrastructure Water Resources – water requirements of the Project could entail constraints on the existing resources Negative Short - Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Requirements Not Significant
and Utilities users such as the local communities.
Wastewater Utilities – it is important to ensure that existing utilities would be able to handle the amount Negative Long –Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Requirements Not Significant
of wastewater generated from the Project during the operation phase.
Solid Waste Utilities – it is important to ensure that existing utilities would be able to handle the amount Negative Long –Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Requirements Not Significant
of solid waste generated from the Project during the operation phase
Hazardous Waste Utilities – it is important to ensure that existing utilities would be able to handle the Negative Long –Term Reversible Low Low Not significant Additional Requirements Not Significant
amount of hazardous waste generated from the Project during the operation phase.

Community Operating wind turbines will produce noise from mechanical and aerodynamic effects. This could be a Negative Long – Term Reversible Low Low Not Significant Mitigation Available Not Significant
Health , Safety source of disturbance and nuisance to the receptors and residents of the nearby villages and could create
and Security a disturbing indoor environment.
Operating wind turbines could produce low frequency noise, infrasound and vibration which could be a Negative Long –Term Reversible Low Low Not Significant No additional Not Significant
source of nuisance to the receptors and residents of the nearby villages. requirements
Shadow flicker from the rotating turbines could potentially be a source of disturbance and nuisance to the Negative Long – Term Reversible Low Low Not Significant Mitigation Available Not Significant
receptors and residents of the nearby villages and could create a disturbing indoor environment.
Blade or tower glint can impact a community, as the reflection of sunlight off the rotor blade may be Negative Long – Term Reversible Medium Low Minor Mitigation Available Not Significant
angled toward nearby residences.
Failure in rotor blade or ice accretion can result in the ‘throwing’ of the blade. Although overall risk of Negative Long – term Could be Low High Minor Mitigation Available Not Significant
such events is extremely low, it could affect the public safety of the residents of nearby villages. Irreversible
Public access of unauthorized personnel to the various Project components (turbines, substation) could Negative Long – term Could be Medium High Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
results in various public safety hazards to local communities. Irreversible
Potential Impacts from presence of security personnel relate to inappropriate management and conduct Negative Long-term Reversible Low High Minor Mitigation available Not Significant
of security personnel towards the local communities.
Socio-economic The Project is expected at a minimum to provide job opportunities for local communities. This, to some Positive Not applicable Recommendations Not applicable
Development extent, could contribute to enhancing the living environment for its inhabitants, elevate their standards of provided
living, and bring social and economic prosperity to local communities.
Occupational There will be some risks to workers health and safety during the operation and maintenance activities of Negative Long – Term Could be Medium High Moderate Mitigation Available Not Significant
Health and the Project. irreversible
Safety

PAGE | 68
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 94: Summary of Anticipated Impacts during the Decommissioning Phase

Environmental Impact Assessment
Attribute / Likely Impact – Operation Phase Residual
Nature Duration Reversibility Magnitude Sensitivity Significance Management Action
Issue Significance
Geology and Risk of soil and groundwater contamination during the various decommissioning activities from improper Negative Long – Could be Medium Low Minor Mitigation available Not significant
Hydrology housekeeping activities, spillage of hazardous material, random discharge of waste and wastewater Term irreversible
Air Quality Decommissioning activities will likely result in an increased level of dust and particulate matter emissions Negative Short term Reversible Medium Low Minor Mitigation available Not significant
which in turn will directly impact ambient air quality.
Community Possible noise emissions to the environment from the decommissioning activities which will likely include Negative Short term Reversible Medium Low Minor Mitigation available Not significant
Health and the use of machinery and equipment such as generators, hammers, and compressors and other activities
Safety
Occupational There will be some generic risks to workers health and safety from working on decommissioning sites, as Negative Short Term Could be Medium High Moderate Mitigation Available Not significant
Health and it increases the risk of injury or death due to accidents. irreversible
Safety

PAGE | 69
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

21. ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

This section investigates the cumulative impacts which could results from incremental impacts from other
known existing and/or planned developments in the area based on currently available information.

Based on currently available information, there are no existing and/or planned development projects
which could in result in any cumulative impacts, apart from existing and planned wind farm development
project as discussed in further details below.

Within the Project area and its surrounding there are two existing wind farms and six planned wind farm
development projects, which are at different stages of development. These projects are the following and
which are presented in Figure 99 below.

1. Tafileh Wind Farm Project: a 117MW project that is located around 21km north of the Project site.
Project is owned by Jordan Wind Power Company (JWPC) and started commercial operation in third
quarter of 2015. The wind farm was part of the IFC’s CEA;
2. Xenel Wind Farm Project: a 50MW project that is located around 30km north of the Project site.
Project is owned by Xenel. This Project is part of the Direct Proposal Projects that have been shortlisted
by MEMR, and has been recently approved by the government but it is yet unclear at this stage what is
the timeframe for the project development. The wind farm was part of the IFC’s CEA;

3. MASS Wind Farm Project: a 100MW project that is located around 28km northeast of the Project site.
Project is owned by Mass Group Holding and its construction is expected in late 2017 while operation
is not expected before the beginning of 2019;
4. LAMSA Wind Farm Project: a 99MW project that is located around 18km north of the Project site. The
project is owned by LAMSA Investments LLC but the status of the project is unknown at this moment. It
should be mentioned though that this project was included in the Cumulative Effect Assessment that
was carried out by IFC (IFC, 2017), mentioned earlier;

5. Fujeij Wind Farm Project: a 90MW project that is located around 2km north of the Project site. Project
is owned by MEMR. Project started construction activities in second quarter of 2017 and operation is
expected in late 2018. The wind farm was part of the IFC’s CEA;
6. KOSPO Wind Farm Project: a 50MW project that is located around 24km north of the Project site.
Project is owned by Korea Southern Power Company and is construction is expected in late 2017 while
operation is not expected before the beginning of 2019. The wind farm was part of the IFC’s CEA;
7. Ma’an Wind Farm Project: a 75MW project that is located around 26km to the south of the Project
site. Project is owned by MEMR and started commercial operation in third quarter of 2015;
8. Rajif Wind Farm Project: an 82MW project that is located around 35km to the south of the Project site.
Project is owned by Alcazar Energy. The project is at the construction phase and it is expected to
commence operation by the second half of 2018.
The key cumulative impacts that are relevant include: (i) biodiversity, bats and avi-fauna; (ii) shadow
flicker; (iii) noise and (iv) landscape and visual. The only impact that is presented below is biodiversity, bats
and avi-fauna since it is currently the only impact that has been studied cumulatively and there is available
data. As for the other impacts, there is no data available from all adjacent projects and therefore and
cumulatie studies would need a approval by the relevant parties to provide data for such analysis.

PAGE | 70
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 104: Wind Farm Projects in the Area

(i) Biodiversity, Bats and Avi-Fauna

The International Financing Corporation (IFC) has published recently the Tafila Region Wind Power Projects
Cumulative Effect Assessment, covering five projects in the Tafila Region, namely, JWPC, KOSPO, Xenel,
LAMSA, and Fujeij.

The overall objective of the CEA was to identify the potential cumulative effects of the Wind Power
Projects on birds, bats and habitats in the study area of Tafila Region and propose mitigation, monitoring
and other management measures to address the highest risks. Risks were identified with respect to Valued
Social and Environmental Components (VECs). The CEA’s scope was on three major biodiversity elements;
birds, bats and habitats.

The focus of IFC’s CEA was on five wind farm projects in the Tafila Region as mentioned earlier. The Project
site is located inside the IFC’s CEA area and the findings of the assessment are applicable to the Project.

Of particular importance would be the potential cumulative impacts on avi-fauna during the operation
phase. The general area of the Project site along with the other adjacent wind farm projects is known to be
part of the Red Sea/Rift Valley Migration Flyway, which is known to be the second most important bird
migration flyway in the world. The cumulative impacts could occur mainly from strikes and collision of birds
with operating wind farms. For example, given the migration route of birds during spring there could be
impacts on migratory birds from the Project which could result in fatalities on certain priority species
identified in the CEA. As birds continue with their migration route north or south, depending on the
migration season, there could be impacts from other projects (such as the existing Tafileh Project and any
other project that could be operational in the future).

The results of the CEA started with an initial list of 171 species populations that were identified as
potentially at risk. This list was reduced through the CEA process to 13 species which were defined as
priority bird VECs that were assessed to be at highest risk through the CEA process. Out of these 13 species
populations, nine were recorded in the Project site. Four of these are migratory soaring bird populations;
Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus, Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis, Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila
heliaca and Booted Eagle Aquila fasciata, while the remaining five are resident or summer-breeding bird
PAGE | 71
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

populations; Short-toed Snake-eagle Circaetus gallicus, Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus, Golden Eagle Aquila
chrysaetos, Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus and Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni. Additionally, it would be
impossible at this stage to confirm that additional priority species, other than the ones that were
previously recorded in the Project site, will not be recorded during the operational phase of the project.

Regarding bats, the results of the CEA started with an initial list of 18 species populations that were
identified as potentially at risk. This list was reduced through the CEA process to 2 species which were
defined as priority bat VECs that were assessed to be at highest risk through the CEA process. In the project
site, three bat species were recorded but none of them is a priority species, according to the CEA.

It is believed that cumulatively along with the other adjacent projects, avian in-flight monitoring during the
operational phase is needed, in order to avoid any negative impacts on the priority species highlighted by
the CEA, which has highlighted that the bird-fatality threshold of these species populations is zero. In other
words, the projects should work collectively to avoid any fatalities for any individual of the thirteen species
populations identified by the CEA. Based on the location of the Project, the results and recommendations
of the IFC’s CEA should be adopted during the operational phase of the project.

The main outcome of the CEA was management measures to be implemented throughout the construction
and operation phase for the area. Such management measures were reflected and included within the
impact assessment sections in this ESIA for biodiversity, bats and avi-fauna as well as the ESMP that
follows.

The same level of assessment undertaken for the 5 projects covered in the CEA could not be undertaken
for remaining wind farm projects (which mainly include Mass, Ma’an and Rajef) due to the following: (i)
inconsistent level of data between the other sites; (ii) assessment will require a huge and extensive level of
analysis over a long period of time; (iii) unavailable data for some of the sites. Nevertheless, a detailed and
project specific baseline and impact assessment has been undertaken for each of the remaining projects
not covered in the CEA as part of the project specific ESIA studies and a project specific ESMP has been
developed. It is expected that as part of the ESMP a bird monitoring plan for observer-led turbine(s)
shutdown on both migratory and resident birds will be required. With the implementation of such
measures, the cumulative impacts on avi-fauna are anticipated to be not significant.

PAGE | 72
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

22. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (ESMP)

22.1 Institutional Framework and Procedural Arrangement for ESMP Implementation

Generally, two main pillars govern the successful implementation of any Environmental and Social
Management Plan (ESMP):

1. Proper identification of roles and responsibilities for the entities involved; and
2. Effective control of the process.

All management practices are interlinked, and this section describes how these two pillar criteria could be
fulfilled, which in turn helps ensure that the overall objectives of the ESMP are met.

Defining roles and responsibilities of the involved entities in any ESMP identifies where and when each
entity should be engaged, their degree of involvement, and the tasks expected of the entity. This in turn
eliminates any overlap of jurisdiction or authority and ensures proper communication and effective
management of ESMP components. Control processes mainly include training and awareness for entities
involved and control of non-conformances that might occur throughout the process.

The objective is to ensure that the ESMP recommendations are implemented in practice, during
construction and operation, and assess how environmental resources are affected. Table 82 below
summarizes the overall proposed institutional and procedural arrangement for the implementation of the
ESMP, while Table 83 discussed in details the roles and responsibilities of each of the entities involved in
implementation of the ESMP.

Generally, a self‐compliance approach is advocated, whereby the body responsible for the causative action
should ensure that the objectives and requirements stipulated within the ESMP are met – this mainly
includes the appointment of a competent HSE Officer by the EPC Contractor during the Construction Phase,
while during the Operation Phase this is to be undertaken through the appointment of a competent staff
member of the Project Operator Team – there is no need to appoint a separate HSE Officer during
operation due to the limited and simple mitigation/monitoring measures detailed within the ESMP (with
the exception of the avi-fauna management and monitoring measures which must be undertaken by an
expert in this field).

In addition, the Developer is required to review the reporting requirements as per the ESMP and undertake
auditing exercises to ensure that the EPC Contractor and Project Operator meets the requirements
stipulated within the ESMP. This could be undertaken through the appointment of a competent HSE Officer
as part of the Developer Team or through a third party Employer Representative. It is recommended to
undertake the auditing exercises on a monthly basis during the construction phase and on a quarterly basis
during the operation phase. Finally, in accordance with the “EIA Regulation No. (37) of 2005”, the
Regulator (being MoEnv), will be responsible for undertaking compliance monitoring to ensure that the
responsible entity is adhering to the ESMP requirements.
Table 95: Overall proposed institutional and procedural arrangement for ESMP Implementation
Issue Self-Compliance Review/Checks Compliance
Monitoring/
Inspection
Construction Phase
Compliance with EPC Contractor – Project Developer – HSE Officer or third party MoEnv
ESMP HSE Officer Employer Representative (monthly basis)
Requirements
Compliance with EPC Contractor – Project Developer – HSE Officer or third party MoEnv
environmental HSE Officer Employer Representative (monthly basis)
legislations
Operation Phase
Compliance with Project Operator – Project Developer – HSE Officer or third party MoEnv
ESMP Project Staff Employer Representative (on a quarterly basis)
PAGE | 73
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Requirements Member
Compliance with Project Operator - Project Developer – HSE Officer or third party MoEnv
environmental Project Staff Employer Representative (on a quarterly basis)
legislations Member

Table 96: Roles and Responsibilities of Entities Involved in ESMP

Designation Entity Project Role Environmental and Social Responsibilities
Project Shobak Project Owner  Selection of EPC Contractor and Project Operator;
Developer Wind and Developer  Implement mitigation and monitoring requirements as detailed in the
Power ESMP; and
Company  Appoint a competent HSE Officer or Third Party Employer representative
to review the reporting requirements as per the ESMP and undertake
auditing exercises to ensure that the EPC Contractor and Project Operator
conform to the requirements of the ESMP. Auditing is to be undertaken on
a monthly basis during the construction phase and on a quarterly basis
during the operation phase.
 Appoint a Community Liason Officer (CLO) to implmenet all community
related management meausres identified within the ESIA/ESMP as well as
Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP), grievance mechanism and other as
appropriate.
 Appoint HR Manager (or delegate responsibilities to appropriate team
staff member) to implmenet all labour and worker related management
measures identified within the ESIA/ESMP as well as ensuring EBRD PR 2
requirements are met
Engineering, Vestas Undertake  Appoint a competent HSE officer responsible for implementing the ESMP.
Procuremen detailed design  Implement mitigation and monitoring requirements as detailed in the
t, and and ESMP;
Constructio construction of  Prepare and submit reporting requirements to Project Developer as
n (EPC) the project detailed in the ESMP;
Contractor  Implement corrective action measures in case of non-compliance incidents
and submit non-conformance report to Project Developer whom in turn
will submit to MoEnv.
Project Vestas Operation and  Due to the limited and simple mitigation/monitoring measures detailed
Operator maintenance within the ESMP for the Operation Phase, a staff member of the Project
of the Project Operator Team must be appointed to implement the requirements
detailed within the ESMP;
 Appoint avi-fauna expert to implement the management and monitoring
measures required as per the ESMP.
 Prepare and submit reporting requirements to Project Developer as
detailed in the ESMP; and
 Implement corrective action measures in case of non-compliance incidents
and submit non-conformance report to Project Developer whom in turn
will submit to MoEnv.
Env. MoEnv Granting  Undertake compliance monitoring
Regulator environmental
clearance to
the Project

22.2 Training and Awareness Raising

Effective and efficient implementation of any ESMP requires that all personnel involved in the Project
(construction/operation staff across all levels) understand its objectives and requirements. A proper
training and awareness program ensures that applying mitigation measures is more of a sense of
responsibility rather than an enforcing protocol.

PAGE | 74
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Training and awareness is an ongoing process, but most importantly must take place before the
commencement of any activity in any phase of the Project. The EPC Contractor and Project Operator are
responsible, each for his own staff, for conducting inductions, training requirements and awareness raising
which should include at a minimum the following:

 Ensure that staff understand all requirements, measures, and protocols stipulated within the ESMP;
 Ensuring that all personnel engaged in activities that may have an impact on the environment are
competent to carry out their duties, or, where necessary, arrange for suitable training to be
undertaken;
 Cultural change towards environmental perception;
 Waste, wastewater, and hazardous waste management practices as identified throughout the ESMP;
 Occupational health and safety; and
 Emergency response procedures.

22.3 Control of Non‐Compliances

In case any incidents of non‐compliance with the ESMP or relevant environmental legislations were noted
by MoEnv, as part of their compliance monitoring, then the responsible entity (EPC Contractor or Project
Operator) is responsible for issuing a Non‐Compliance Report to be submitted to the MoEnv. The report
would identify the nature of the problem, the proposed corrective action, action taken to prevent
recurrence of the problem and verification that the agreed actions have been carried out. Normally, a Non‐
Compliance Report should be submitted within 24 hours of the identification of the non‐compliance.
However, in cases that demand an immediate response to address the non‐compliance incident, the
MoEnv should verbally notify the Contractor of the non‐compliance. The Contractor should then take all
necessary measures to address the non‐compliance.

22.4 Compilation of Environmental and Social Management Plan

Tables 84 and 85 below present the ESMP for the planning/construction and operation phase respectively
and which include the following:

 The environmental and/or social attribute (e.g. air quality) that is likely to be impacted;
 A summary of the potential impact and/or likely issue;
 The identified management measures that aim to eliminate and/or reduce the potential impact to
acceptable levels. Management measures include mitigation actions, further requirements, additional
studies, and compensation measures;
 Monitoring actions to ensure that the identified mitigation measures are implemented. Monitoring
actions include: inspections, review of reports/plans, reporting, etc.;
 The frequency for implementing the monitoring actions, which include: once , continuously throughout
the construction/operation period (depending on the mitigation measure identified this could include
daily, weekly, or monthly), or upon occurrence of a certain issue;
 The responsible entity for implementing the mitigation measures and monitoring actions identified;
and
 The relevant legislation that must be adhered to and which govern the environmental attribute or
likely issue identified.

PAGE | 75
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 97: ESMP for the Planning and Construction Phase

Environmental Attribute Potential Impact Management Action (mitigations, additional requirements, additional studies, compensation Type of Monitoring Action Frequency Responsible Legal Requirements
measures, etc.) Action Entity
Landscape and Visual Construction activities would Ensure proper general housekeeping and personnel management measures are implemented such as: Mitigation Inspections Continuous EPC Contractor Environmental
create a temporary effect on (i) ensure the construction site is left in an orderly state (ii) construction machinery, equipment, and Protection Law No. 6
the visual quality of the site and vehicles that are not in use should be removed in a timely manner and kept in locations to reduce visual of 2017
its surroundings from presence impacts (iii) ensure proper storage, collection, and disposal of waste streams generated
of elements typical of a
construction site such as
equipment and machinery.
Land Use Construction activities could Land Users – Agriculture. Prior to construction, consultations to be undertaken with local community Mitigation Produce Once; before Developer and Environmental
disturb actual land use of the land users to develop a baseline in terms of agricultural activities undertaken within the Project site. In comprehensive map construction EPC Contractor Protection Law No. 6
site as it is used by the local addition, assign in details the exact areas that are expected to be affected by the Project construction which identifies commences of 2017
community or nomads. and operation. Ensure that such assigned areas are reduced to the greatest extent possible. It is agriculture activities
recommended that the Developer allows land users to practice their activities within leased lands and which also
outside of construction and operation areas. assigns construction
and operation areas
Land Users – Agriculture. Although highly unlikely, but should any of the agriculture users require Mitigation Documentation of Upon Developer or EPC
assistance in allocating additional lands to undertake agriculture activities, assist such users to the relocation occurrence Contractor
greatest extent possible through coordination with other land owners in the area and/or on other assistance with
available public lands. photographs as
appropriate
Land Users – Agriculture. Prior to commencement of construction activities, the Developer will disclose Mitigation Prepare and submit Once; before Developer and
to the local communities the following through focus group discussions and information sheets : (i) the disclosure report construction EPC Contractor
baseline mapping exercise for agricultural activities; (ii) announce construction areas and emphasize with outcomes commences
that agriculture and/or grazing activities cannot take place in such assigned construction areas; (iii)
provide construction schedule and duration for which such construction activities will take place; (iv)
emphasize that grazing and/or agriculture activities may take place outside of construction areas at all
times; (v) provide details on the relocation assistance if required by any agricultural user; and (vi)
provide details on the grievance mechanism.
Nomads. If required (although unlikely) provide assistance to nomadic groups in assigning suitable areas Mitigation Documentation of Upon Developer or EPC
outside of construction areas for settlement through coordination with other land owners in the area relocation occurrence Contractor
and/or on other public lands. assistance with
photographs as
appropriate
During the period in which nomads begin to settle in the area (April, May and June), undertake regular Mitigation Prepare and submit Continuously Developer and
site visits to meet with nomadic groups whom arrive onsite. The objective will be to: (i) Announce disclosure report EPC Contractor
construction areas and emphasize that settlements as well as agriculture and/or grazing activities with outcomes
cannot take place in such assigned areas; (ii) Provide construction schedule and duration for which such
construction activities will take place; (iii)Emphasize that settlements as well as grazing and/or
agriculture activities may take place outside of construction areas at all times; (iv) Provide details on the
relocation assistance if required by any agricultural user; and (v) Provide details on the grievance
mechanism.
Geology and Hydrology Wadi systems within the Project It is recommended that the EPC Contractor, as part of the design prepared for the Project, avoid sitting Mitigation Review final Once – as Developer and Environmental
site could entail flood risks any of the Project components within the identified buffer distance from the wadi systems within the detailed design part of EPC Contractor Protection Law No. 6
which could affect the Project Project site. detailed of 2017
components. design phase
Should the Project require sitting any of its infrastructure elements (such as roads) within the wadi Mitigation Submission of Once – as Developer and
system then a detailed hydrological study must be undertaken which should determine the required detailed hydrology part of EPC Contractor
engineering flood discharge structures to be considered as part of the detailed design (e.g. culverts) as study detailed
per the expected flood . design phase
Improper management of solid Coordinate with Shobak Municipality or hire a competent private contractor for the collection of solid Mitigation Review contract Once; before EPC Contractor Environmental
waste waste from the site to municipal approved landfill with contractor construction Protection Law No. 6
commences of 2017
Prohibit fly-dumping of any solid waste to the land. Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
Distribute appropriate number of properly contained litter bins and containers properly marked as Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Solid Waste
"Municipal Waste". Management
Distribute sufficient number of properly contained containers clearly marked as "Construction Waste" Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Regulation No. (27) of

PAGE | 76
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

for the dumping and disposal of construction waste. Where possible, the EPC Contractor must seek 2005
ways to reduce construction waste by reusing materials (for example through recycling of concrete for
road base coarse).
Implement proper housekeeping practices on the construction site at all times. Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of waste generated onsite, collected by Mitigation Review manifests to Continuous EPC Contractor
contractor, and disposed of at the landfill. The numbers within the records are to be consistent to ensure consistency
ensure no illegal dumping at the site or other areas
Improper management of Coordinate with Shobak Water Directorate to hire a private contractor for the collection of wastewater Mitigation Review contract Once; before EPC Contractor Environmental
wastewater from the site to Shobak or Mansoorah WWTP with contractor construction Protection Law No. 6
commences of 2017
Prohibit illegal disposal of wastewater to the land Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
Ensure that constructed septic tanks during construction and those to be used during operation are well Mitigation Inspection Once EPC Contractor Public Health Law No.
contained and impermeable to prevent leakage of wastewater into soil 47 for 2008
Ensure that septic tanks are emptied and collected by wastewater contractor at appropriate intervals to Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
avoid overflowing
Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of wastewater generated onsite, collected by Mitigation Review manifests to Continuous EPC Contractor
contractor, and disposed of at the Shobak WWTP or Ma’an Central landfill. The numbers within the ensure consistency
records are to be consistent to ensure no illegal discharge at the site or other areas
Improper management of Coordinate with the MoEnv and hire a private contractor for the collection of hazardous waste from the Mitigation Review contract Once; before EPC Contractor Environmental
hazardous waste site to the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility with contractor construction Protection Law No. 6
commences of 2017
Follow the requirements for management and storage as per the ‘Instructions for Hazardous Waste Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Management,
Management and Handling of the Year 2003’ of the MoEnv Transportation, &
Prohibit illegal disposal of hazardous waste to the land Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Handling of Harmful &
Ensure that containers are emptied and collected by the contractor at appropriate intervals to prevent Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Hazardous Substances
overflowing Regulation No. (24) of
Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of hazardous waste generated onsite, collected by Mitigation Review manifests to Continuous EPC Contractor 2005,
contractor, and disposed of at the Swaqa Facility. The numbers within the records are to be consistent ensure consistency Instruction for
to ensure no illegal discharge at the site or other areas Management and
Handling of Consumed
Oils for 2003,
Instruction for
Hazardous Waste
Management for the
year 2003
Improper management of Ensure hazardous materials are stored in proper areas and in a location where they cannot reach the Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Environmental
hazardous material land in case of accidental spillage. This includes storage facilities that are of impermeable surface, Protection Law No. 6
accessible to authorized personnel only, prevent incompatible materials from coming in contact, etc. of 2017
Maintain a register of all hazardous materials used and accompanying MSDS must present at all times. Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
Spilled material should be tracked and accounted for. Jordanian Standard
Incorporate dripping pans at machinery, equipment, and areas that are prone to contamination by Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor 431/1985 – General
leakage of hazardous materials (such as oil, fuel, etc.). Precautionary
Regular maintenance of all equipment and machinery used onsite. Maintenance activities and other Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor Requirements for
activities that pose a risk for hazardous material spillage must take place at a suitable location (hard Storage of Hazardous
surface) with appropriate measures for trapping spilled material. Materials
Ensure that a minimum of 1,000 litres of general purpose spill absorbent is available at hazardous Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
material storage facility.
If spillage occurs, spill must be immediately contained, cleaned-up, and contaminated soil disposed as Mitigation Inspection Upon EPC Contractor
hazardous waste. occurrence
Reporting of
incident and
measures taken to
minimize impact
Biodiversity Construction activities would Undertake a detailed survey to identify the presence of any active tortoises as well as potential Additional Submit survey Once; before EPC Contractor Environmental
disturb existing habitats (flora hibernation/aestivation sites within all assigned areas to be disturbed by construction. Should any Requirement report construction Protection Law No. 6
and fauna). In addition, other tortoises be located, they should be relocated to distant areas with similar habitat characteristics to the commences of 2017
impacts could be from improper species to ensure that they would not return to the Project site, taking into account the home range for
management of the site (e.g. the species. Agriculture Law No. 13
PAGE | 77
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

improper conduct and Undertake a survey to identify any locations in the project where the various threatened floral species Additional Submit survey Once; before EPC Contractor of 2015
housekeeping practices). are located in order to provide instructions during the construction phase to avoid any damage to these Requirement report construction
threatened species. In case of identification of locations of any of the species, the plants could be either commences Regulation for
marked and/or fenced so that construction activities would avoid their locations or relocated Categorizing Wild
Birds and Animals
Should as part of the Project any fencing be erected, it must be ensured that it allows for the natural Mitigation Inspection Once EPC Contractor Banded from Hunting
movement of small faunal species within the area. This could include for example a fence with an No.43 of 2008.
appropriate gap between the ground level and the first rail or strand (around 30cm).
Implement proper management measures to prevent damage to the biodiversity of the site. This could Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
include establishing a proper code of conduct and awareness raising / training of personnel (e.g. with
respect to prohibiting hunting) and good housekeeping (e.g. keeping the site orderly and clean).
Birds (avi-fauna) Construction activities could A breeding bird survey should be carried out before construction. If active breeding attempts of CEA Additional Submit breeding Once; before EPC Contractor Environmental
disturb existing habitats of birds priority birds or any other IUCN globally or regionally threatened species are confirmed, construction Requirement survey report construction Protection Law No. 6
breeding and/or nesting within activities that could affect their breeding success must be delayed until these have either failed or commences of 2017
the Project site. young birds have fledged. Further annual breeding surveys are recommended if these categories of
species are recorded using the site during the pre-construction phase, to inform a bird sensitive Agriculture Law No. 13
approach to operational phase activities. of 2015
Implementation of proper housekeeping measures to reduce impacts including avoiding any activities in Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
the sensitive areas for breeding birds, restrict activities to allocated construction areas only, prohibit Regulation for
hunting of birds at any time and avoid unnecessary elevated noise levels at all times. Categorizing Wild
Birds and Animals
Banded from Hunting
No.43 of 2008.
Archaeology and Cultural Improper management of As part of the disclosure session for the ESIA results with the local communities present the results and Mitigation Submission of Once; before Developer / Antiquities Law No. 21
Heritage construction activities could outcomes of the archaeology assessment. In particular, this should focus on the identified sites of disclosure outcomes construction Environmental of 1988 and its
disturb/damage the importance by the DoA and whether the local community require access to such sites (such as the commences Consultant amendments No. 23
archaeological locations graveyard). Should this be applicable, then appropriate mitigation measures must be identified and for 2004
recorded in the Project area as implemented to ensure access to such sites is maintained for the local communities
well as potential archaeological Ensure that the final prepared detailed design avoids sitting any of the Project components (to include Mitigation Inspection on Final Once; before EPC Contractor
remains which could be buried the turbines, roads, transmission lines, warehouses, etc.) within such delineated areas of archaeological Detailed Design construction
in the ground (if any). importance which takes into account a 70m buffer area from each site as required by the DoA. commences
Provide Department of Antiquities with final detailed design demonstrating that sites with Mitigation Submit final Once; before EPC Contractor
archaeological importance have been avoided. detailed design to construction
DoA commences
The identified sites must be properly demarcated (with fences or flag poles or other as appropriate) Mitigation Inspection Once; before EPC Contractor
with appropriate signage so that the sites are clearly visible to all workers during construction. construction
commences
Fencing around the archaeological sites 8 and 10 including a 100 metre buffer and add fence around Mitigation Inspection Before/Durin EPC Contractor
WTG 2 and site 3 after finishing construction of the turbine g
construction
Inform DoA of the works to be done around sites 3 and 8 so that DoA can allocate a person to be on-site Mitigation Official During EPC Contractor
to observe these works and ensure all is well managed communication construct ion
letter with DoA
Properly plan construction activities to take into account the identified archaeological locations to Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
ensure they are protected from any potential damage. This could include proper movement of vehicles
and machinery into/out of the site to avoid such areas, ensure that all vehicles are on established roads
and prohibit off-roading, prohibit movement of vehicles near those areas, etc.
Ensure that the Code of Conduct, awareness raising, and training developed for construction workers Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
and personnel to emphasize the presence of archaeological locations in the area.
Implement appropriate measures for chance find procedures which mainly require that construction Mitigation Inspection Upon EPC Contractor
activities be halted and the area fenced, while immediately notifying the DoA. No additional work will Occurrence
be allowed before the Department assesses the found archaeological site and grants a clearance to Report prepared Upon EPC Contractor
resume the work. Construction activities can continue at other parts of the site if no potential and submitted to occurrence
archaeological remains were found. If found, same procedures above apply. the DoA
Air Quality Construction activities will likely If dust or pollutant emissions are found to be excessive due to construction activities, the source of such Mitigation Inspection and Continuous EPC Contractor Environmental
result in an increased level of excessive emissions must be identified and adequate control measures must be implemented. visual monitoring to Protection Law No. 6
dust, particulate matter and include periodic of 2017
pollutant emissions which in inspections at
PAGE | 78
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

turn will directly impact nearby sites to Air Protection

ambient air quality. determine whether Regulation No. 28 for
harmful levels of 2005
dust from
construction JS 1140-2006 Ambient
activities exist. Air Quality
Reporting of any Upon EPC Contractor
excessive levels of occurrence
pollutants and
measures taken to
minimize impact.
Comply with the OSHA requirements and the Jordanian Codes to ensure that for activities associated Mitigation Inspection and Continuous EPC Contractor
with high dust levels, workers are equipped with proper protective equipment (e.g. masks, eye goggles, Visual Monitoring
etc.).
Apply basic dust control and suppression measures which could include: regular watering of roads, Mitigation Inspection and Continuous EPC Contractor
proper management of stockpiles/excavated material, proper covering of trucks transporting Visual Monitoring
aggregates and fine materials, adhering to a speed limit of 15 km/h for trucks on construction sites, etc.
Develop a regular inspection and scheduled maintenance program for vehicles, machinery, and Mitigation Inspection Continuous EPC Contractor
equipment to be used throughout the construction phase for early detection of issue to avoid
unnecessary pollutant emissions.
Infrastructure and Utilities Water Resources – it is Coordinate with the Shobak Water Directorate to secure the water requirements for the Project. Additional Submit report with Once; before EPC Contractor Environmental
important to ensure that the requirement proof of construction Protection Law No. 6
water requirements of the coordination commences of 2017
Predict would not affect the Submit monthly During Instruction for
existing users and resources in water consumption construction Hazardous Waste
the area. reports Management for the
Wastewater Utilities – it is Coordinate with the Shobak Water Directorate for disposal of wastewater at Shobak or Mansoorah Additional Submit report with Once; before EPC Contractor year 2003
important to ensure that WWTP requirement proof of construction Water Authority Law
existing utilities would be able coordination commences No. 18 for 1988 and
to handle the amount of Submit monthly During it's amendments
wastewater generated from the report of construction thereof
Project. wastewater disposal Groundwater Control
Solid Waste Utilities – it is Coordinate with Shobak Municipality for the collection of solid waste from the site to municipal Additional Submit report with Once; before EPC Contractor Regulation No. 85 for
important to ensure that approved landfill requirements proof of construction 2002 and its
existing utilities would be able coordination commences amendments thereof
to handle the amount of solid Municipalities Law No.
Submit monthly During
waste generated from the Law No. 13 of year
report of amounts construction
Project. 2011
of water disposed
Traffic Law No. 49 for
Hazardous Waste Utilities – it is Coordinate with MoEnv to hire a competent private contractor for the collection of hazardous waste Additional Submit report with Once; before EPC Contractor
2008
important to ensure that from the site to the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility. requirements proof of construction
Regulations for the
existing utilities would be able coordination commences
Registration and
to handle the amount of Submit monthly During
Licensing of Vehicles
hazardous waste generated report of amounts construction
No. 104 for 2008
from the Project. of hazardous waste
Instructions for
produced on site

PAGE | 79
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Road Networks – if Develop a Traffic and Transport Plan to ensure that the transportation process is properly and Additional Submission of Before EPC Contractor Allowable Speed
transportation activities are not adequately managed and does not pose a risk of damage to the existing roads, highways, overpasses Study Traffic and commencem Limits for 2002
properly managed, they could whilst ensuring public safety. The Plan must analyse and study the entire route for transportation of the Transport Plan ent of Civil Aviation Law No.
entail risk of damage to the Project components from the port of Aqaba till the Project site. The study must investigate any transportatio 41 of the year 2007
existing roads and could be of constraints which need to be considered along the highways leading to the Project site such as bridges, n activities Telecommunications
public safety concerns to other overhead utility cables, slants in roads, etc. and identify accommodations which need to be taken into Law No.21 for the
users on road. account (bypasses, adjustments to roads, etc.) The Plan must also cover all other onsite and offsite year 2011
activities. Related to offsite activities, the plan must cover transportation requirements of project
components other than turbines (e.g. other materials and components) as well as labour (if relevant).
The plan must identify proposed delivery routes to the project site, planning of generated trips of trucks
to site, speed limits, number of vehicles movement. Related to onsite activities, the plan must cover the
day to day movements of vehicles and machinery and must include measures for proper onsite traffic
management, assigned speed limits, allowed movement routes within the site amongst others.

Aviation, Telecommunication Follow up with RJAF and CARC to obtain approval letter for the Project Additional Submission of RJAF Once; before Developer or EPC
and Television & Radio Links - requirement and CARC approval construction Contractor
Improper sitting of the wind commences
farm could impact aviation,
telecommunication and radio
links in the area.
Community Health, Safety Various construction activities implement general best practice measures to control sources of noise onsite during the construction Mitigation Inspection and Continuous EPC Contractor Environmental
and Security expected to be a source of phase to include but not limited to the following: (i) highest noise level construction activities should visual monitoring Protection Law No. 6
noise and vibration generation not be undertaken between 8pm and 6am (ii) apply adequate general noise suppressing measures (iii) of 2017
within the Project site and its site inductions should cover the importance of noise control and available noise reduction measures (iv)
surroundings. maximising the offset distance between noisy equipment items and residential receptors (v) The use of Instruction for
noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells shall be for safety warning purposes Reduction and
only and other as appropriate. Prevention of Noise
Potential Impacts from Submit a security employment plan to be guided by international best practice requirements (such as Additional Submission of Before Developer for the year 2003
presence of security personnel the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights). The plan must identify number of security Study Security construction
relate to inappropriate workers required for the Project, how they will be recruited and hired (to include measures to ensure Employment Study commences
management and conduct of they are not implicated in past abuses), training requirements and implementation (to include in
security personnel towards the particular the use of force and if applicable firearms), equipping and monitoring, and code of conduct to
local communities. be implemented (towards workers and local communities).

Potential Impacts from Prepare and submit a community health and safety management plan that addressed impacts from Additional Submission of Before Developer / EPC
Workforce Influx during influx of construction workers. The plan should detail proper management measures related to Study community health construction Contractor
Construction potential impacts on community health and safety to include a proper code of conduct to ensure and safety commences
appropriate management of worker interaction with the local communities and which takes into management plan
account local cultures and norms, mitigation measures to avoid/reduce risks of exposure to
communicable disease such as proper screening, vaccination, awareness/, and other as appropriate.

Socio-economic The Project is expected at a It is recommended that the Developer adopt and implement a Community Integration Plan for working Recommenda Submission of Continuous Project Developer Regulation for
minimum to provide job with the local community members during the construction phase. The plan must aim to support the tion community and EPC Obligatory
opportunities for local local community stating its aims and objectives and should acknowledge the importance of building a integration plan Contractor Employment of
communities. This, to some strong socio‐economic relationship with the local community through a participatory planning program Jordanian Workforce
extent, could contribute to (in which the local community can express their concerns, strengths and limitations) even before the from Surrounding
enhancing the living development is in place. Communities in
environment for its inhabitants, Development Projects
elevate their standards of living, No.(131) for the year
and bring social and economic 2016
prosperity
Occupational Health and There will be some risks to Prepare an Occupational Health and Safety Plan for the construction works. Plan should be Project and Additional Submission of OHSP Before EPC Contractor Labour Law No.(8) for
Safety workers health and safety site specific and must take into account the national requirements mainly the “Labour Law No.(8) for Study construction the year 1996 and its
during the construction the year 1996 and its amendments”, including Chapter IX, Occupational Safety & Health. In addition, it commences amendments
activities of the Project. must also be compliant with EBRD PR4.
Prepare a project and site specific Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan. Additional Submission of
Study Emergency
Preparedness and

PAGE | 80
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Response Plan

Table 98: ESMP for the Operation Phase

Environmental Attribute Potential Impact Management Action (mitigations, additional requirements, additional studies, compensation Type of Action Monitoring Action Frequency Responsible Legal Requirements
measures, etc.) Entity
Landscape and Visual Visual impacts concern the Include a visitor’s centre on the property allocated for the proposed wind farm which should be open Mitigation Documentation of Upon Developer Environmental
turbines themselves and to school fieldtrips, the local community and tourists activities occurrence Protection Law No. 6 of
impacts relating to their Avoid including lettering, company insignia, advertising or graphics on the turbines Mitigation Visual inspection Once; EPC Contractor 2017
interaction with the character of before
the surrounding landscape. commence
ment of
operation
Land Use Operational activities could Land Users – Agriculture. Although highly unlikely, but should any of the agriculture users require Mitigation Documentation of Upon Developer or Environmental
disturb and conflict with actual assistance in allocating additional lands to undertake agriculture activities, assist such users to the relocation occurrence Operator Protection Law No. 6 of
land use as it could provide greatest extent possible through coordination with other land owners in the area and/or on other assistance with 2017
value to locals. available public lands. photographs as
appropriate
Land Users – Agriculture. Prior to commencement of operational activities, the Developer will disclose Mitigation Prepare and submit Once; Developer or
to the local communities the following through focus group discussions and information sheets : (i) the disclosure report before Operator
baseline mapping exercise for agricultural activities; (ii) announce operational areas and emphasize with outcomes operation
that agriculture and/or grazing activities cannot take place in such assigned areas; (iii) emphasize that commences
grazing and/or agriculture activities may take place outside of operational areas at all times; (iv)
provide details on the relocation assistance if required by any agricultural user; and (v) provide details
on the grievance mechanism.
Nomads. If required (although unlikely) provide assistance to nomadic groups in assigning suitable Mitigation Documentation of Upon Developer or
areas outside of operational areas for settlement through coordination with other land owners in the relocation occurrence Operator
area and/or on other public lands. assistance with
photographs as
appropriate
During the period in which nomads begin to settle in the area (April, May and June), undertake regular Mitigation Prepare and submit Continuousl Developer or
site visits to meet with nomadic groups whom arrive onsite. The objective will be to: (i) announce disclosure report y Operator
operational areas and emphasize that settlements as well as agriculture and/or grazing activities with outcomes
cannot take place in such assigned areas; (ii) emphasize that settlements as well as grazing and/or
agriculture activities may take place outside of operational areas at all times; (iv) provide details on the
relocation assistance if required by any agricultural user; and (v) provide details on the grievance
mechanism.
Geology and Hydrology Improper management of solid Coordinate with Shobak Municipality or hire a competent private contractor for the collection of solid Mitigation Review contract Once; Project Operator Environmental
waste waste from the site to the municipal approved landfill with contractor before Protection Law No. 6 of
operation 2017
commences
Prohibit fly-dumping of any solid waste to the land. Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Solid Waste
Distribute appropriate number of properly contained litter bins and containers properly marked as Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Management
"Municipal Waste". Regulation No. (27) of
Implement proper housekeeping practices on the construction site at all times. Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator 2005

Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of waste generated onsite, collected by Mitigation Review manifests to Continuous Project Operator
contractor, and disposed of at the landfill. The numbers within the records are to be consistent to ensure consistency
ensure no illegal dumping at the site or other areas
Improper management of Coordinate with Shobak Water Directorate to hire a private contractor for the collection of wastewater Mitigation Review contract Once; Project Operator Environmental
wastewater from the site to the Shobak or Mansoorah WWTP with contractor before Protection Law No. 6 of
operation 2017
commences
Prohibit illegal disposal of wastewater to the land Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Public Health Law No.
Ensure that septic tanks are emptied and collected by wastewater contractor at appropriate intervals Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator 47 for 2008
to avoid overflowing
Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of wastewater generated onsite, collected by Mitigation Review manifests to Continuous Project Operator
PAGE | 81
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

contractor, and disposed of at the Shobak WWTP or Jurf Al Darwish landfill. The numbers within the ensure consistency
records are to be consistent to ensure no illegal discharge at the site or other areas
Improper management of Coordinate with the MoEnv and hire a private contractor for the collection of hazardous waste from Mitigation Review contract Once; Project Operator Environmental
hazardous waste the site to the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility with contractor before Protection Law No. 6 of
operation 2017
commences Management,
Follow the requirements for management and storage as per the ‘Instructions for Hazardous Waste Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Transportation, &
Management and Handling of the Year 2003’ of the MoEnv Handling of Harmful &
Prohibit illegal disposal of hazardous waste to the land Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Hazardous Substances
Ensure that containers are emptied and collected by the contractor at appropriate intervals to prevent Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Regulation No. (24) of
overflowing 2005,
Maintain records and manifests that indicate volume of hazardous waste generated onsite, collected Mitigation Review manifests to Continuous Project Operator Instruction for
by contractor, and disposed of at the Swaqa Facility. The numbers within the records are to be ensure consistency Management and
consistent to ensure no illegal discharge at the site or other areas Handling of Consumed
Oils of 2003,
Instruction for
Hazardous Waste
Management of2003
Improper management of Ensure hazardous materials are stored in proper areas and in a location where they cannot reach the Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Environmental
hazardous material land in case of accidental spillage. This includes storage facilities that are of impermeable surface, Protection Law No. 6 of
accessible to authorized personnel only, prevent incompatible materials from coming in contact, etc. 2017
Maintain a register of all hazardous materials used and accompanying MSDS must present at all times. Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator
Spilled material should be tracked and accounted for. JS 431/1985 – General
Incorporate dripping pans at machinery, equipment, and areas that are prone to contamination by Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Precautionary
leakage of hazardous materials (such as oil, fuel, etc.). Requirements for
Regular maintenance of all equipment and machinery used onsite. Maintenance activities and other Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Storage of Hazardous
activities that pose a risk for hazardous material spillage must take place at a suitable location (hard Materials
surface) with appropriate measures for trapping spilled material.
Ensure that a minimum of 1,000 litres of general purpose spill absorbent is available at hazardous Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator
material storage facility.
If spillage occurs, spill must be immediately contained, cleaned-up, and contaminated soil disposed as Mitigation Inspection Upon Project Operator
hazardous waste. Reporting of occurrence
incident and
measures taken to
minimize impact
Biodiversity Improper management of the Monitoring of the distribution and abundance of the threatened plant species should be carried out for Additional Submit annual Annually Project Operator Environmental
site could disturb existing at least five years of the operational phase in order to assess the impact of the project on the three Requirement report Protection Law No. 6 of
habitats (e.g. improper conduct threatened species that were recorded in the project site. 2017
and housekeeping practices). Agriculture Law No. 44
of 2002
Implement proper management measures to prevent damage to the biodiversity of the site. This could Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator
Regulation for
include establishing a proper code of conduct and awareness raising / training of personnel (e.g. with
Categorizing Wild Birds
respect to prohibiting hunting) and good housekeeping (e.g. keeping the site orderly and clean).
and Animals Banded
from Hunting No.43 of
2008.
Birds (avi-fauna) Wind turbines are associated Implement a bird monitoring and mitigation plan focused on avoiding CEA priority birds colliding with turbine rotors. The plan should include methods/protocols for (i) in-flight Environmental
with impacts on birds from risks priority bird monitoring, (ii) observer-led turbine shutdown on demand for priority birds, (iii) bird collision fatality ‘carcass search’ surveys for all bird species, (iv) calibration tests for Protection Law No. 6 of
of strikes and collision on both carcass search surveys and (v) livestock movement monitoring. The monitoring and mitigation plan should follow recommendations in the ESIA and the Tafila Wind Power Projects 2017
migratory soaring birds and CEA MMP. Agriculture Law No. 44
resident soaring birds in the of 2002
area. Generally, such impacts Regulation for
depend on several factors but Categorizing Wild Birds
could affect the population and Animals Banded
levels of certain species from Hunting No.43 of
especially those with 2008.
international/national critical
conservation status.

PAGE | 82
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Bats The potential impacts from the Implement a bat mortality monitoring plan. The plan should include bat collision fatality ‘carcass search’ surveys informed by bat ecology, and calibration tests for searcher Environmental
Project during operation are efficiency and bat carcass removal by scavengers. The monitoring program for bats should follow recommendations in the ESIA and the Tafila Wind Power Projects CEA MMP Protection Law No. 6 of
mainly related to risk of bat 2017
strikes and collisions with rotors
of the operating wind turbines.
Archaeology Improper management of Properly plan operation and maintenance activities to take into account the identified archaeological Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator Antiquities Law No. 21
operational activities could locations to ensure they are protected from any potential damage. This could include for example of 1988 and its
disturb/damage archaeological proper movement of vehicles and machinery into/out of the site to avoid those areas, ensure that all amendments No. 23 for
locations recorded in the Project vehicles are on established roads and prohibit off-roading, prohibit movement of vehicles near those 2004
area areas during the various operation and maintenance activities, etc.
Ensure that the Code of Conduct, awareness raising, and training developed for operation workers and Mitigation Inspection Continuous Project Operator
personnel to emphasize the presence of archaeological locations in the area.

Infrastructure and Water Resources – it is Coordinate with the Shobak Water Directorate to secure the water requirements for the Project. Additional Submit report with Once; Project Operator Environmental
Utilities important to ensure that the requirement proof of before Protection Law No. 6 of
water requirements of the coordination operation 2017
Predict would not affect the commences
existing users and resources in Submit monthly During Instruction for
the area. water consumption operation Hazardous Waste
reports Management of2003
Wastewater Utilities – it is Coordinate with the Shobak Water Directorate for disposal of wastewater at Shobak or Mansoorah Additional Submit report with Once; Project Operator
important to ensure that WWTP requirements proof of before Water Authority Law
existing utilities would be able coordination operation No. 18 for 1988 and it's
to handle the amount of commences amendments
wastewater generated from the Submit monthly During
Project. report of operation Groundwater Control
wastewater disposal Regulation No. 85 for
Solid Waste Utilities – it is Coordinate with Shobak Municipality for the collection of solid waste from the site to the municipal Additional Submit report with Once; Project Operator 2002 and its
important to ensure that approved landfill requirements proof of before amendments
existing utilities would be able coordination operation
to handle the amount of solid commences Municipalities Law No.
waste generated from the Submit monthly During Law No. 13 of year
Project. report of solid operation 2011
waste disposal
Hazardous Waste Utilities – it is Coordinate with MoEnv to hire a competent private contractor for the collection of hazardous waste Additional Submit report with Once; Project Operator
important to ensure that from the site to the Swaqa Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility. requirements proof of before
existing utilities would be able coordination operation
to handle the amount of commences
hazardous waste generated Submit monthly During
from the Project. report of hazardous operation
waste disposal
Community Health, Operating wind turbines will Upon completion of the construction of the wind farm, during the commissioning period a detailed Additional Submission of noise Before Developer Environmental
Safety and Security produce noise which could be a long-term noise monitoring programme should be implemented to verify the outcomes and results of Study monitoring report operation Protection Law No. 6 of
source of disturbance and the noise assessment undertaken. The monitoring programme should be carefully designed with commences 2017
nuisance to the receptors and specific planning of equipment, measurement locations and periods.
residents of the nearby villages Grievance mechanism for the local community must be prepared and implemented. The local Mitigation Submission of Upon Developer Instruction for
community must be made aware of the grievance mechanism available to submit complaints regarding grievances and occurrence Reduction and
nuisances related to noise from the turbines (although unlikely based on the outcomes of the measures Prevention of Noise for
assessment and as to be verified during commissioning monitoring). Should, for any reason, such implemented to the year 2003
grievances be submitted, they must be verified and appropriate mitigations should be implemented solve the issue
(such as curtailment of turbines during specific situations or compensation such as provision of noise
shielding at receptor locations such as sound reducing windows (double glazed) and planting of trees
and shrubs, etc.).
Develop informative maps in Arabic of noise propagations from the turbines in accordance with Mitigation Submission of At least Developer
modelling results. In addition, visit the Project area on a regular basis throughout the active period of consultation report once per
nomads to explain such informative maps and allow nomads to build up their tents in less affected with photo month
areas. documentation during
PAGE | 83
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

arrival
period of
nomads
Shadow flicker from the rotating Grievance mechanism for the local community must be prepared and implemented. The local Mitigation Submission of Upon Developer
turbines could potentially be a community must be made aware of the grievance mechanism available to submit complaints regarding grievances and occurrence
source of disturbance and nuisances related to shadow flicker from the turbines (although unlikely based on the outcomes of the measures
nuisance to the receptors and assessment). Should, for any reason, such grievances be submitted, they must be verified and implemented to
residents of the nearby villages appropriate mitigation should be implemented (such as curtailment of turbines during specific solve the issue
situations or compensation such introduction of vegetative buffers as a barrier for shadow flicker
and/or providing window blinds).

Develop informative maps in Arabic of shadow flicker propagations from the turbines in accordance Mitigation Submission of At least Developer
with modelling results. In addition, visit the Project area on a regular basis throughout the active period consultation report once per
of nomads to explain such informative maps and allow nomads to build up their tents in less affected with photo month
areas. documentation during
arrival
period of
nomads
Blade or tower glint can impact Ensure that turbines are painted with a matt, non-reflective finish Mitigation Inspection Before EPC Contractor
a community, as the reflection operation
of sunlight off the rotor blade commences
may be angled toward nearby
residences.
Failure in rotor blade or ice Ensure that regular maintenance of the wind turbines takes place according to set schedule to prevent Mitigation Inspection Continuousl Project Operator
accretion can result in the any unforeseen events from occurring such as blade throws y
‘throwing’ of the blade. Install post signs at least 200 meters from the wind turbine which provide informative in English and Mitigation Visual observations Before Project Operator
Although overall risk of such Arabic language about risks from such events operation
events is extremely low, it could commences
affect the public safety
Public access of unauthorized Each turbine is fitted with locked doors to prevent unauthorized access to the turbines Mitigation Inspection Continuousl Project Operator
personnel to the various Project y
components (turbines, Substation area to be completely fenced with concrete walls to prevent unauthorized access Mitigation Inspection Continuousl Project Operator
substation) could results in y
various public safety hazards to Onsite guards within the entire Project site at all times to ensure the safety and security of the Project Mitigation Inspection Continuousl Project Operator
local communities. as well a preventing unauthorized access to any of the Project components. However, it must be y
ensured that all onsite guards are adequately trained to deal with unauthorized trespassing incidents.
In addition, guards must refrain from using excessive force, unless situation extremely requires so
Post informative signs on the turbines and other Project components (substation) about public safety Mitigation Visual observations Before Project Operator
hazards and emergency contact information operation
commences
Potential Impacts from presence Submit a security employment plan to be guided by international best practice requirements (such as Additional Submission of Before Developer
of security personnel relate to the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights). The plan must identify number of security Study Security operation
inappropriate management and workers required for the Project, how they will be recruited and hired (to include measures to ensure Employment Study commences
conduct of security personnel they are not implicated in past abuses), training requirements and implementation (to include in
towards the local communities. particular the use of force and if applicable firearms), equipping and monitoring, and code of conduct
to be implemented (towards workers and local communities).

Socio-economic The Project is expected at a It is recommended that the Developer adopt and implement a Community Integration Plan for working Recommendat Submission of Continuous Project Developer Regulation for
minimum to provide job with the local community members during the operation phase. The plan must aim to support the local ion Community and Operator Obligatory Employment
opportunities for local community stating its aims and objectives and should acknowledge the importance of building a strong Integration Plan of Jordanian Workforce
communities. This, to some socio‐economic relationship with the local community through a participatory planning program (in from Surrounding
extent, could contribute to which the local community can express their concerns, strengths and limitations) even before the Communities in
enhancing the living development is in place. Development Projects
environment for its inhabitants, No.(131) for the year
elevate their standards of living, 2016
and bring social and economic
prosperity

PAGE | 84
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Occupational Health and There will be some risks to Prepare an Occupational Health and Safety Plan for the operation and maintenance works. Plan should Additional Submission of OHSP Before Project Operator Labour Law No.(8) for
Safety workers health and safety be Project and site specific and must take into account the national requirements mainly the “Labour Study operation the year 1996 and its
during the operation and Law No.(8) for the year 1996 and its amendments”, including Chapter IX, Occupational Safety & Health. commences amendments
maintenance activities of the In addition, it must also be compliant with EBRD PR4.
Project. Prepare a project and site specific Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan. Additional Submission of
Study Emergency
Preparedness and
Response Plan

PAGE | 85
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

23. ASEESSMENT OF IMPACTS FROM ASSOCIATED FACILITIES

As discussed earlier in ‘Section 2.2’, the Project will connect with the existing Fujeij substation
(33kV/132kV). For this Wind Farm NEPCO is planning to establish the connection through an Overhead
Transmission Line (OHTL) of approximately 5km length, which will run from the wind farm Project site to
the Fujeij substation. The route of the OHTL is shown in Figure 100 below.

Figure 105: Route for the Overhead Transmission Line

Table 86 below provides a rapid assessment of the anticipated impacts from the associated facilities to the
Project and which mainly include the OHTL. It is important to note that the table below will only provide a
rapid assessment based on secondary data and desk studies, a detailed assessment of potential impacts
and respective mitigation measures and monitoring requirements will be provided in a Preliminary
Enviornmental Assessment (PEA) currently being undertaken by ECO Consult for the OHTL.

PAGE | 86
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Table 99: Summary of Anticipated Impacts from Associated Facilities

Attribute Baseline Information Potential Impact Discussion Further studies in the detailed PEA
Landscape Issues related to Given that the Project site itself is considered an area with Site visits will be undertaken before
and Visual visibility in relation to no particular structures of interest or any key visual assessing the impacts of visibility of the
nearby sensitive receptors – such as recreational activities, environmental OHTL on the neighbouring area.
receptors. reserves, remarkable/unique historical or cultural sites, or
other natural structures normally seen as valuable by the
human perception. Hence, there are no potential impacts
on the visibility from developing the OHTL
Land Use The OHTL passes through lands that are OHTL could conflict 1. The formal land use planning is summarized Include detailed description of the formal
mainly governmental and only a small with formal land use below to include: land use set by different governmental
portion of the Project site passes planning set for the entities. In addition to assessing
2. Land Use Planning by MoMA: according to the
through private land parcels. area potential impacts.
National Land Use Master Plan, the OHTL runs within an
area designated as “Agricultural Area of the Third
Degree (A3)” and only a small parcel passes through an
area designated as “Desert of the Second Degree (D2)”
in which electric power generation facilities,
transmission, and distribution networks are allowed, see
Figure 105.
3. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern planning
by MoEnv: the OHTL does not run within or near areas
of critical environmental concern.
4. Grazing Reserve planning by MoA: the OHTL does
not run within any established or planned grazing
reserve. However, The OHTL is approximately 1 km east
of Al Fujeij grazing reserve, see Figure 103.
Issues related to NEPCO has a compensation process for landowners that is Further studies on the actual land use of
informal use of the set within the “Electricity Law No. 64 for the year 2002” the OHTL route will be investigated to
site. and “Instructions for Electrical Safe Distances No.1 of indicate whether the lands are of any
2003”. However, the cable runs within the KHBTDA area specific value or utilized for any specific
over lands that are owned by the MDC. Therefore, in this purpose by the local community (to
case this issue is considered not applicable, see Figure 101. include agricultural activities, grazing
activities) or by nomadic populations. In
addition, the PEA will assess the
potential impacts and suggest the
mitigation measures and monitoring
actions accordingly.
PAGE | 87
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Geology, Issue related to The nature of construction activities is considered minimal The PEA must identify proper and
Hydrology improper and small scale and thus unlikely to raise any issues of adequate management practices (to
and housekeeping concern. In addition, for construction works NEPCO and/or include mitigation and monitoring
Hydrogeology activities for the OHTL EPC Contractor is expected to implement best requirements) that would ensure
management of waste management practices for management of solid waste, management measures expected to be
streams onsite during wastewater, solid waste and hazardous waste where implemented.
construction. applicable.
Biodiversity Construction activities The OHTL (similar to the Project site) is located within an Flora, fauna and avifauna field
could disturb existing area that is barren and of ecological significance with no assessments in order to assess the value
habitats. sensitive habitats. Human land alterations have impacted of the habitats along the line especially in
most of the area thus greatly affecting the biodiversity and regard to breeding birds. Survey would
natural habitat of the site. To the extent, there are no be recommended to be carried out in
issues of concern related to biodiversity, see Figure 104. spring season
Archaeology Construction activities could damage or Construction activities Desk review of available secondary data included the Coordinate with DoA to determine the
and Cultural disturb potential archaeological remains could disturb any search of the official register and database of all importance of the preliminary sites
Heritage which might be present on the surface archaeological remains archaeological/cultural sites of Jordan known as the found on MEGA Jordan and undertake an
along the OHTL Project site and which within the Project site. Middle Eastern Geodatabase for Antiquities – Jordan extensive archaeological survey for the
could potentially be of archaeological (MEGA Jordan). Search of MEGA Jordan database returned route of the OHTL. The ESIA will assess
importance. 8 archaeological sites within the Project area and its potential impacts and suggest the
surroundings as presented in Figure 102 below. appropriate mitigation measures
accordingly.
Air Quality Considering the extent of construction Construction activities The nature of construction activities is considered minimal The PEA must identify proper and
and Noise activities, associated magnitude of could result in and small scale; thus, is unlikely to raise any issues of adequate management practices (to
excavations, and the best practice increased level of concern. In addition, the trench has already been include mitigation and monitoring
mitigation measures, an air quality dust and noise levels. excavated. However, for remaining works NEPCO and/or requirements) that would ensure dust
assessment is deemed unnecessary. A the cable EPC Contractor is expected to implement best and noise suppression during the
noise assessment will mainly be based practices for dust and noise control. construction activities adhere to the
on secondary data collected as part of maximum allowable limits of ambient air
the Shobak Windfarm ESIA. However, if pollutants stipulated within the
it is seen that one or more source Jordanian Standards 1140/2006 –
emissions/activities were identified in Ambient Air Quality and the Instruction
parallel to the establishment of the for Reduction and Prevention of Noise
Shobak OHL, such as construction for 2003
activities of the neighbouring windfarm
project (Fujeij), then there is a potential
need for an exclusive Air Quality and
Noise Baseline Assessment.
Infrastructure A desk study shows that within the OHTL Ensure existing As discussed throughout the ESIA, utilities related to Identify the entities to be coordinated
and Utilities vicinity, several Infrastructure and Utility utilities would be able water, wastewater, solid waste and hazardous waste with in relation to the respective
PAGE | 88
 Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

features exist; including water, to support the OHL facilities are expected to easily provide such service infrastructure and utilities; and in
wastewater, solid waste and hazardous Project in terms of related to the Project. In addition, the nature of accordance, the PEA will highlight the
waste facilities. Figure, Figure 5-8, water supply, construction activities is considered minimal and small legal compliances to be considered in
Figure 5-9 illustrate the exact locations wastewater, solid scale and thus unlikely to raise any issues of concern and relation to each identified infrastructure
of said facilities in relation to the OHTL. waste and hazardous the trench has already been excavated. Finally, for and utility.
An existing water network will intersect waste during the remaining works NEPCO and/or the cable EPC Contractor is
with the OHTL where it extends from the construction phase. expected to coordinate with the relevant utilities for such
Project site. services, see Figures 106, 107 and 108.

Health and Assessment of baseline conditions Trespassing of Standard practice undertaken by NEPCO is to install It is expected that as part of the detail
Safety related to Community Health, Safety and unauthorized warning tapes about public safety hazards along the route design, security measures to prevent
Security is considered irrelevant. personnel into the of the trench and emergency contact information. unauthorized access to the Project site
OHTL site which could will be identified which in turn will
result in potential control any such impacts.
risks from several
hazards of various
project components.
The Occupational health and safety Generic risks to Normal practice undertaken by NEPCO is to require as part An Occupational Health and Safety Plan
baseline will be based on anticipated workers’ health and of the selection process for the EPC Contractor to provide must be developed for the construction
impacts during the construction and safety from working an Occupational Health and Safety Plan (OHSP) regarding and operation phase in accordance with
operation phases of the OHTL. During on construction sites the Project’s construction activities and NEPCO has its own the provisions of the “Labor Law No. 8
construction, the risks are generally and from OHSP which is implemented for all their maintenance for the Year 1996 and its amendments”,
associated with construction sites which maintenance activities during the operation phase. including Chapter IX, Occupational Safety
include: Slips and falls, working at activities. & Health. The Plan must address the
heights, struck-by objects, moving likely hazards and identify adequate
machineries; working in confined spaces prevention and control measures to
and excavations, exposure to chemicals reduce occupational health and safety
or hazardous material, and exposure to risks to the greatest extent possible.
electric shocks or burns. During
operation, these risks are mainly
associated with working at heights
throughout maintenance activities, and
exposure to a variety of hazards such as
electric shock and thermal burns.

PAGE | 89
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 106: Land Ownership in relation to the OHTL

Figure 107: MEGA Jordan Search Results

PAGE | 90
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 108: Project Site in Relation to Grazing Reserves

Figure 109: Project Site in Relation to Areas of Critical Environmental Concern

PAGE | 91
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 110: MoMA National Land Use Master Plan for the Project Site and its Surroundings

Figure 111: Shobak Water Supply Systems in Relation to the Project Site

PAGE | 92
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Figure 112: Location of WWTP in relation to Project Site

Figure 113: Location of Swaqa Hazardous Dumpsite in relation to the Project Site

PAGE | 93
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

24. REFERENCES
 Al-Eisawi, D. 1996. Vegetation of Jordan. UNESCO-Cairo Office, Regional Office for Science and
Technology for Arab States, Cairo.
 Anderson, R. Morrison, M., Sinclair, K. & Trickland, D. 1999. Studying wind energy/birds interactions: A
guidance document. National Wind Coordinating committee/Resolve, Washington DC.
 Andrews, I.J. 1995. The Birds of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Burns and Harris Limited, Dundee.
 Bibby, C.J. & Burgess, N.D. 1992. Bird Census Techniques. Academic Press Limited, London.
 BirdLife International. 1995. Important Bird Areas In The Middle East. Page Bros. Norwich, UK.
 BirdLife International and RSCN. 2000. Important Bird Areas of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Dar
Amman Publishing Ltd. Amman.
 Country Report on the Solid Waste Management in Jordan, SWEEPNET, 2010
 del Hoyo, J. & Collar, N.J. 2014. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the
World. Volume I: Non-passerines. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
 De Lucas, M. Janss, G. & Ferrer, M. 2007. Wind Farm Effects on Birds in the Strait of Gibraltar. In: de
Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E. & Ferrer,M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Farms: Risk Assessment and Mitigation, pp.
259‐275.Quercus, Madrid.
 Forsman, D. 2012. The Raptors Of Europe And The Middle East. Bloomsbury Publishing PLC. London,
UK.
 International Finance Corporation – IFC. Tafila Region Wind Power Projects Cumulative Effects
Assessment. 2017. Washington DC, USA.
 Johnson, G.D., Strickland, M.D., Erickson, W.P. &Young Jr., D.P. 2007. Use Of Data To Develop
Mitigation Measures for Wind Power Development Impacts to Birds. In: de Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E. &
Ferrer,M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Farms: Risk Assessment and Mitigation, pp. 259‐275.Quercus, Madrid.
 Lekuona, J.M. & Ursua, C. 2007. Avian Mortality in Wind Power Plants of Navarra (Northern Spain). In:
de Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E. & Ferrer,M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Farms: Risk Assessment and Mitigation,
pp. 259‐275.Quercus, Madrid.
 Madders, M. & Whitfield, D.P. 2006. Upland raptors and the assessment of wind farm effects. Ibis
(2006), 148, 43–56
 Morrison, M.L., Sinclair, K.C. & Thelander, C.G. 2007. A sampling framework for conducting studies of
the influence of wind energy developments on birds and other animals. In: de Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E. &
Ferrer, M. (eds.) Birds and Wind Farms: Risk Assessment and Mitigation, pp. 259‐275.Quercus, Madrid.
 Porter, R. Aspinall, S. 2010. Birds of the Middle East. Second Edition. Christopher Helm, London.
 Poverty Situation in Jordan, Department of Statistics, 2010
 Poverty Situation in Jordan, Department of Statistics, 2012
 Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature. 2000. Important Bird Areas in the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan. Dar Amman Publishing, Amman.
 Scottish Natural Heritage. 2010. Survey Methods For Use In Assessing The Impacts Of Onshore Wind
farms On Bird Communities - SNH Avoidance Rate Information & Guidance Note. September 2010
 Strategic Master Plan for Municipal Water Infrastructure, USAID ISSP, 2015
 Svensson, L. 2009. Collins Bird Guide. The Most Complete Guide to the Birds of Britain and Europe.
Second Edition. HarperCollins Publishers, London.
 Symes, A., Taylor, J., Mallon, D., Porter, R., Simms, C. & Budd. K. 2015. The Conservation Status and
Distribution of the Breeding Birds of the Arabian Peninsula. Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland:
IUCN, and Sharjah, UAE: Environment and Protected Areas Authority.

PAGE | 94
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

 Taifour, H. & El-Oqlah A. 2014. Jordan Plant Red List Vol. I. Royal Botanic Garden, Amman, Jordan.
 Thelander, C.G. & Smallwood, K.S. 2007. The Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area’s Effects on Birds: A
Case Study. In de Lucas, M., Janss, G.F.E, and Ferrer, M. (eds). Birds & Wind Farms. Quercus
 Thiollay, J.M. 1994. Family Accipitridae (Hawks and Eagles). Pp 52-205 in: del Hoyo, J. Elliott, A. &
Sargatal, J. eds. 1994. Handbook of the Birds of the World. Vol. 2. New World Vultures to Guineafowl.
Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
 van Duivendeijk, Nils. 2011. Advanced Bird ID Handbook The Western Palearctic. NewHolland
Publishing. London. UK.

PAGE | 95
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

25. ANNEXES

PAGE | 96
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Annex I – Regulatory Approvals

Telecommunication Regulatory Commission

PAGE | 97
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Jordan Radio and Television Corporation

PAGE | 98
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Department of Antiquities

PAGE | 99
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

PAGE | 100
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Annex II – Detailed Noise Baseline Results

Noise Measurement Site 1 Results: Al-Shobak

20/06/17 to SLP 20/06/17 SLP 20/06/17 SLP 20/06/17 SLP

21/06/17 (Av+) to (Av+) to (Av+) to (Av+)
21/06/17 21/06/17 21/06/17
(dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)

11:15 am 40.0 17:30 pm 42.2 23:45 pm 40.2 06:00 am 39.6

11:30 am 40.0 17:45 pm 41.3 24:00 pm 41.7 06:15 am 37.8

11:45 am 40.0 18:00 pm 40 00:15 am 43.6 06:30 am 49.2

12:00 am 47.3 18:15 pm 39.2 00:30 am 43.2 06:45 am 39.2

12:15 pm 45.2 18:30 pm 42.3 00:45: am 41.7 07:00 am 40.1

12:30 pm 43.6 18:45 pm 46.6 01:00 am 42 07:15 am 40.7

12:45pm 44.2 19:00 pm 42.3 01:15 am 42.6 07:30 am 41.6

13:00pm 43.5 19:15 pm 43.2 01:30 am 42.3 07:45 am 43.6

13:15 pm 48.3 19:30 pm 43.1 01:45 am 45.2 08:00 am 41.2

13:30 pm 49.6 19:45 pm 44.3 02:00 am 40.6 08:15 am 43.2

13:45 pm 46.4 20:00 pm 42.2 02:15 am 41.2 08:30 am 40.5

14:00 pm 44.3 20:15 pm 41.3 02:30 am 43.2 08:45 am 41.2

14:15 pm 41.2 20:30 pm 42.3 02:45 am 44.3 09:00 am 38.3

14:30 pm 40.5 20:45 pm 38.6 03:00 am 46.6 09:15 am 39.9

14:45pm 41.3 21:00 pm 40.6 03:15 am 47.8 09:30 am 42.3

15:00 pm 42.6 21:15 pm 41.4 03:30 am 44.8 09:45 am 41.2

15:15 pm 44.6 21:30 pm 42.3 03:45 am 43.6 10:00 am 40.3

15:30 pm 46.9 21:45 pm 43.9 04:00 am 42.3 10:15 am 42.2

15:45 pm 47.4 22:00 pm 42.3 04:15 am 38.3 10:30 am 44.5

16:00pm 53.5 22:15 pm 41.3 04:30 am 39.5 10:45 am 42.9

16:15 pm 48.6 22:30 pm 40.5 04:45 am 40.3 11:00 am 44.6

16:30 pm 49.2 22:45 pm 41.2 05:00 am 42.5

16:45 pm 48.2 23:00 pm 39.6 05:15 am 41.6

17:00pm 48.6 23:15 pm 38.5 05:30 am 40.7

17:15 pm 46.5 23:30 pm 39.3 05:45 am 40.8

PAGE | 101
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Noise Measurement Site 2 Results: Al-Zaitouna

20/06/17 to SLP 20/06/17 SLP 20/06/17 SLP 20/06/17 SLP

21/06/17 (Av+) to (Av+) to (Av+) to (Av+)
21/06/17 21/06/17 21/06/17
(dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)

11:15 am 40.0 17:30 pm 41.7 23:45 pm 43.2 06:00 am 47.6

11:30 am 40.0 17:45 pm 42.3 24:00 pm 44.6 06:15 am 45.6

11:45 am 48.6 18:00 pm 40.3 00:15 am 42.3 06:30 am 44.6

12:00 am 44.5 18:15 pm 42.3 00:30 am 41.3 06:45 am 43.6

12:15 pm 43.3 18:30 pm 41.3 00:45: am 42.5 07:00 am 44.6

12:30 pm 55.2 18:45 pm 40.3 01:00 am 41.3 07:15 am 42.5

12:45pm 44.6 19:00 pm 44.6 01:15 am 40.6 07:30 am 47.8

13:00pm 47.6 19:15 pm 48.9 01:30 am 39 07:45 am 48.6

13:15 pm 48.5 19:30 pm 51.2 01:45 am 40.5 08:00 am 47.4

13:30 pm 49.3 19:45 pm 55.3 02:00 am 38 08:15 am 46.8

13:45 pm 50.2 20:00 pm 52.3 02:15 am 39.8 08:30 am 48.6

14:00 pm 47.2 20:15 pm 48.3 02:30 am 42.1 08:45 am 46.5

14:15 pm 48.3 20:30 pm 46.3 02:45 am 41.6 09:00 am 44.8

14:30 pm 48.6 20:45 pm 45.8 03:00 am 41.8 09:15 am 51.5

14:45pm 47.4 21:00 pm 52.3 03:15 am 44.6 09:30 am 50.1

15:00 pm 48.3 21:15 pm 49.2 03:30 am 54.3 09:45 am 49

15:15 pm 49.6 21:30 pm 48.8 03:45 am 51.9 10:00 am 48.5

15:30 pm 46.6 21:45 pm 44.5 04:00 am 50.2 10:15 am 49.8

15:45 pm 45.6 22:00 pm 43.5 04:15 am 49.6 10:30 am 48.7

16:00pm 44.7 22:15 pm 42.3 04:30 am 48.6 10:45 am 49.2

16:15 pm 46.2 22:30 pm 42.5 04:45 am 48 11:00 am 47.5

16:30 pm 45.7 22:45 pm 41.7 05:00 am 49.9

16:45 pm 44.2 23:00 pm 40 05:15 am 51.2

17:00pm 43.3 23:15 pm 42.2 05:30 am 52.6

17:15 pm 42.1 23:30 pm 41.6 05:45 am 48.8

PAGE | 102
Shobak Wind Power Project – Final ESIA

Noise Measurement Site 3 Results: Al-Faisaliah

20/06/17 to SLP 20/06/17 SLP 20/06/17 SLP 20/06/17 SLP

21/06/17 (Av+) to (Av+) to (Av+) to (Av+)
21/06/17 21/06/17 21/06/17
(dBA) (dBA) (dBA) (dBA)

11:15 am 40.0 17:30 pm 42.2 23:45 pm 40.2 06:00 am 39.6

11:30 am 40.0 17:45 pm 41.3 24:00 pm 41.7 06:15 am 37.8

11:45 am 40.0 18:00 pm 40 00:15 am 43.6 06:30 am 49.2

12:00 am 47.3 18:15 pm 39.2 00:30 am 43.2 06:45 am 39.2

12:15 pm 45.2 18:30 pm 42.3 00:45: am 41.7 07:00 am 40.1

12:30 pm 43.6 18:45 pm 46.6 01:00 am 42 07:15 am 40.7

12:45pm 44.2 19:00 pm 42.3 01:15 am 42.6 07:30 am 41.6

13:00pm 43.5 19:15 pm 43.2 01:30 am 42.3 07:45 am 43.6

13:15 pm 48.3 19:30 pm 43.1 01:45 am 45.2 08:00 am 41.2

13:30 pm 49.6 19:45 pm 44.3 02:00 am 40.6 08:15 am 43.2

13:45 pm 46.4 20:00 pm 42.2 02:15 am 41.2 08:30 am 40.5

14:00 pm 44.3 20:15 pm 41.3 02:30 am 43.2 08:45 am 41.2

14:15 pm 41.2 20:30 pm 42.3 02:45 am 44.3 09:00 am 38.3

14:30 pm 40.5 20:45 pm 38.6 03:00 am 46.6 09:15 am 39.9

14:45pm 41.3 21:00 pm 40.6 03:15 am 47.8 09:30 am 42.3

15:00 pm 42.6 21:15 pm 41.4 03:30 am 44.8 09:45 am 41.2

15:15 pm 44.6 21:30 pm 42.3 03:45 am 43.6 10:00 am 40.3

15:30 pm 46.9 21:45 pm 43.9 04:00 am 42.3 10:15 am 42.2

15:45 pm 47.4 22:00 pm 42.3 04:15 am 38.3 10:30 am 44.5

16:00pm 53.5 22:15 pm 41.3 04:30 am 39.5 10:45 am 42.9

16:15 pm 48.6 22:30 pm 40.5 04:45 am 40.3 11:00 am 44.6

16:30 pm 49.2 22:45 pm 41.2 05:00 am 42.5

16:45 pm 48.2 23:00 pm 39.6 05:15 am 41.6

17:00pm 48.6 23:15 pm 38.5 05:30 am 40.7

17:15 pm 46.5 23:30 pm 39.3 05:45 am 40.8

PAGE | 103