1. Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline &
Water Treatment Plant
17 January 2012

2. Project Summary
• Current piped water supply of 14,000 l/sec is inadequate
for current demand
• Demand predicted to double by 2023 to 30,000 l/sec
• Water security and pollution from West Tarum Canal
(WTC) is a concern
• Scheme to provide 15,000 l/sec of treated bulk water
over 15 years and 3 stages
• 5,000 l/sec through 78km, 1.8m diameter pipe per stage
• Piped supply offers security and quality improvements
2

3. Project Scale
• Hampton WTP – London. UK’s Biggest WTP @ 9.2 m3/s
• Jatiluhur is 60% Bigger @ 15 m3/s
3

4. Overview of Project
N
Muara Karang
Offtake
Rawalumba
Offtake
Tambun
Offtake
Jakarta
(Cawang)
Puser Jaya
Buaran Offtake
Offtake
Water Treatment
Plant Near Curug
Key
Jatiluhur to Jakarta Pipeline:
River
Additional Delivery Pipeline Intakes
Required:
Water Treatment Plant Site:
River Intake Site:
Jatiluhur
Not to Scale Reservoir
The Conveyance of Treated Water from Jatiluhur Reservoir to Jakarta
4

5. Quantitative Route Comparison
Toll
WTC
Road
Major 11 4
Significant 9 6
Over Bridge 30 7
40% Price
Difference
Comparison of Engineering Obstacles on Toll Road and West Tarum Canal Route Options
5

6. Qualitative Options Comparison
 = Advantage
Toll
West
 = Disadvantage Road
Tarum
Canal
Comments
Existing Land Corridor
  Equal
Single Land Administrator
  PJT2 also supply water and power
Hydraulic Profile
  High point in TR may increase pumping costs
Construction Access
  Toll junction work access problematic
Disruption (During Construction)
  Extensive traffic disruption likely
Disruption (Post Construction)
 - May impact TR widening plans
Known Other Services
  WTC know to have extensive buried services
Social Impact
  Illegal development on WTC right of way sections
Environmental Impact
  Equal
Damage Risk (Accidental)   Vehicle accident with pipe is significant risk
Damage Risk (Deliberate)  - Illegal connections more likely on WTC route
Comparison of Toll Road and West Tarum Canal Route Options
6

7. Toll Road – Other Constraints
• BPJT field Survey on 4th April 2011 from Bekasi to Cawang concluded it would be
impossible to install proposed pipeline
• Kep Men Kimpraswil Nr 353/2001 Chp V “Utilities in the Toll Road”
7

8. Route Comparison Conclusion
• Strong technical case in favour of Canal
• Toll Road option appears very attractive to start
with however it is;
– Most Obstructed
– Least Practical (and in places impossible)
– At least 40% more expensive
• PJT II Operation of West Tarum Canal
8

9. Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline & Water
Treatment Plant
Water Supply Sustainability
Jatiluhur Reservoir Water Balance

10. Projected Level-Storage Curves

11. Reservoir Water Balance Model
• Monthly reservoir inflows
• Irrigation demands for wet, normal, dry years
• Municipal and industrial demands
• Future reduction in irrigation demand
• Evaporation
• Abstraction for Bandung water supply
• Additional supply for Jatiluhur Pipeline
• Minimum operating level is 75m
• Target Min Operating Level is 87.5m
11

12. Reservoir Levels over 20 year Period
assuming 2040 Conditions
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Years
12

13. Reservoir Levels in 2040 with
supplies to Bandung & Jakarta
• Planned supplies of 5m3/sec to Bandung
and 15m3/sec to W Java & DKI
• By 2040 supply failures every 2 in 3 years
• Below 87.5m level 40% of months
• Max period below 87.5m level is 10
months
13

14. Measures to improve reliability
of supply to 95%
• Reduction in irrigation supplies of 30% by
2025
• Reservoir releases limited to agreed
demands
• Reservoir operating rules to be reviewed
• PJT II - additional sedimentation
monitoring
• Only minor impact expected from climate
change
14

15. Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline & Water
Treatment Plant
Water Treatment Process

16. Water Treatment Process Principles
 Based on results from Mott
MacDonald testing regime
 A robust treatment process to
cover foreseeable quality
envelope
 Easy to operate using, where
possible, local sourced
chemicals and materials
 Safe access and maintenance
 Allow for future upgrades to meet future legislation
16

17. Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline & Water
Treatment Plant
Pipeline Design & Route

18. Overview of Pipeline Route
N
Muara Karang
Offtake
Rawalumba
Offtake
Tambun
Offtake
Jakarta
(Cawang)
Puser Jaya
Buaran Offtake
Offtake
Water Treatment
Plant Near Curug
Key
Jatiluhur to Jakarta Pipeline:
River
Additional Delivery Pipeline Intakes
Required:
Water Treatment Plant Site:
River Intake Site:
Jatiluhur
Not to Scale Reservoir
Route follows Citarum River to Curug, then
follows West Tarum Canal to Cawang 18

19. Pipeline Route Placement Options
Design factors along the West Tarum Canal:
 The presence of other utilities, particularly gas mains
 The need to minimise social impact;
 PJT II’s need for access to the canal edge for maintenance;
 The impact on houses immediately adjacent to the pipeline route;
 The avoidance of engineering obstacles where possible;
 Minimising disruption to existing roads during construction;
 The avoidance of permanent obstruction to existing roads.
NORTH BANK SOUTH BANK
Main Road Along Canal Secondary Access Road
19

20. Above Ground Pipes –
A. Buried Pipe Impact Reduction
28 m Corridor of Impact
17 m Working Corridor
3.5 m 8m 3m 3.5 m 4m 3m 3m
Stockpile
Access
Clear Area Clear Area Unmade Verge
Trench Trench Road
Safety Stage 3 Stage 2 Stage 1 Safety
Canal
4-5m
12 m Corridor of Impact
9 m Working Corridor
B. Elevated Pipe
1m
2m 3m 3m
Access Grass
Access Verge Unmade Verge
Road
Canal
Working corridor for buried pipe installation compared
to working corridor for above ground installation 20

21. Pipeline Route
Social & Environmental Impact
 Preliminary estimate, with buried pipes approx
2,400 structure needing demolition
 Iterative design has reduced working room from
15m to 9m
 Pipe route switched from side to side of canal
 Final estimate of structures to be demolished: 36
Houses; 46 Shops; 72 Kiosks
 Approximately 180 people to be re-housed
 Minimal environmental impact over existing
21

22. Route – Common Position
Route on wide
north embankment
Gas Mains
8.0m 6.0m
3 2
Houses
1 Minimum clearance
under pipe when
access needed
2.0m
Existing Road
Canal
A common position for pipeline is on wide
embankment on north side 22

23. Visual Impact
Artists Impression of all three
phases of 2m pipes;
West Tarum Canal; +40.000 km
23

24. Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline & Water
Treatment Plant
Bulk Water Supply
Delivery Locations
PDAM Kab Karawang
PDAM Kab Bekasi
PDAM Tirta Patriot Bekasi
Aetra
PALYJA
24

25. Delivery Principles
• The supply from the Jatiluhur – Jakarta pipeline should
be at a constant flow rate 24 hours a day;
• There should be a single, clearly identified, offtake and
delivery location for each water company;
• The investor should construct a ground reservoir of
sufficient capacity for each water company to store
surplus water during periods of low daily demand;
• The supply from Jatiluhur should have a free discharge
so that it cannot be influenced by downstream
conditions, except that it should have a valve to prevent
further delivery when the delivery reservoir is full;
• If sufficient pressure head available delivery could be
into an elevated tank constructed by the water
company;
• The water company responsible for distribution from the
delivery reservoir.
25

26. WTP
Muara
Karang
CDC
Pulogadung
WTP
Pejompongan Delivery Pipeline
DCR 4 WTP
to Aetra
Cawang
Pump
Station
DCR 5 Buaran
WTP
Jakarta Existing Water Storage and Required
Scheme Delivery Points

27. Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline & Water
Treatment Plant
Indicative Project Costs

28. Indicative Project Costs
Element Capex
Transmission System from Jatiluhur to Buaran US $ 229m
Transmission System from Buaran to PALYJA at Muara Karang US $ 57m
Transmission System from Buaran to Aetra (provisional sum) US $ 43m
Raw Water Intakes (2nr) US $ 24m
Water Treatment Plant (WTP) - Process US $ 85m
WTP - Waste Treatment and Disposal US $ 6m
WTP - General Site Requirement US $ 6m
Minor Items US $ 1m
SUB TOTAL Base Construction Costs US $ 451m
Engineering Contingencies US $ 68m
Construction Preliminaries US $ 89m
Detailed Design Fee US $ 23m
Construction Management Contractor Fee US $ 32m
SUB TOTAL Project Oncosts US $ 212m
TOTAL Project Costs US $ 663m
EXCLUSIONS: Taxes/Fees/Permits; Investors Costs; Scheme Risk &
Project Contingencies; Land Acquisition; Resettlement Compensation;
Outturn Cost Factor; Phases 2 and 3. 28