Case story

  • Georgia

Parties

CAO Case - Georgia / BTC Pipeline-12 / Tba, Tsemi, Sadgeri

Residents Complaint Regarding BTC Pipeline, Tba, Tsemi, and Sadgeri, Georgia 2004

This case story originates from BASESwiki.org, a platform based on wiki style contributions from a virtual network or individuals, companies and organizations with relevant expertise. Though some of the information may be outdated or inaccurate due to the wiki-nature of the BASESwiki platform, they still present a valuable resource. ACCESS is reviewing and updating all BASESwiki case stories. 

Story

The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil and gas pipeline is a 1,768 km long crude oil pipeline stretching from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean Sea. It is the second longest oil pipeline in the world and passes through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. IFC has invested $250 million since 2003 and the total project cost is approximately $3.6 billion. The project is operated by BTC Co., which comprises a consortium of 11 partners. To date, CAO has received 33 complaints in relation to the project ranging from individuals to communities to local organizations. On May 28, 2004, the CAO received a complaint from residents of the villages of Tba, Tsemi, and Sadgeri expressing concerns about the negative impacts of pipeline construction and oil transport on village water supplies, agriculture, and tourism. The complainants raised specific concerns about pipeline sabotage and also alleged that BTC Co. was not communicating with them sufficiently.

CAO Action

The complaint was accepted and an assessment report was released on October 18, 2004. Ten days later, on Oct. 28, the local administration of Tba village – on behalf of the all the complainants – sent a letter to CAO explaining that BTC had responded to the complaint by constructing a water pipeline through which the villages would be supplied drinking water, and that the villagers were satisfied with this outcome.

Outcome

Case Status: Closed

CAO closed the complaint in January 2005.

References

CAO case story page: http://www.cao-ombudsman.org/cases/case_detail.aspx?id=55

Contributor(s): This article was modified by Nicolaclayre (3), Pic1 (1), and Kyle (1).