Joint Environment Programme II
Republic of Belarus
Proposed Post-Chernobyl Recovery Project
Environmental Review
August 2005
Document control sheet Form IP180/B
Client: / World BankProject: / Post-Chernobyl Recovery Project / Job No: J23089AO/317
Title: / Environmental Review
Prepared by / Reviewed by / Approved by
ORIGINAL / NAME / NAME / NAME
R MADAMS
DATE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE
August 2005
REVISION / NAME / NAME / NAME
DATE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE
REVISION / NAME / NAME / NAME
DATE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE
REVISION / NAME / NAME / NAME
DATE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE / SIGNATURE
This report, and information or advice which it contains, is provided by JacobsGIBB Ltd solely for internal use and reliance by its Client in performance of JacobsGIBB Ltd’s duties and liabilities under its contract with the Client. Any advice, opinions, or recommendations within this report should be read and relied upon only in the context of the report as a whole. The advice and opinions in this report are based upon the information made available to JacobsGIBB Ltd at the date of this report and on current UK standards, codes, technology and construction practices as at the date of this report. Following final delivery of this report to the Client, JacobsGIBB Ltd will have no further obligations or duty to advise the Client on any matters, including development affecting the information or advice provided in this report. This report has been prepared by JacobsGIBB Ltd in their professional capacity as Consulting Engineers. The contents of the report do not, in any way, purport to include any manner of legal advice or opinion. This report is prepared in accordance with the terms and conditions of JacobsGIBB Ltd‘s contract with the Client. Regard should be had to those terms and conditions when considering and/or placing any reliance on this report. Should the Client wish to release this report to a Third Party for that party's reliance, JacobsGIBB Ltd may, at its discretion, agree to such release provided that:
(a) JacobsGIBB Ltd's written agreement is obtained prior to such release, and
(b) By release of the report to the Third Party, that Third Party does not acquire any rights, contractual or otherwise, whatsoever against JacobsGIBB Ltd, and JacobsGIBB Ltd accordingly assume no duties, liabilities or obligations to that Third Party, and
(c) JacobsGIBB Ltd accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage incurred by the Client or for any conflict of JacobsGIBB Ltd's interests arising out of the Client's release of this report to the Third Party.
Executive summary
In July 2005 an environmental review was undertaken for the proposed Post Chernobyl Recovery Project. The purpose of this review was to identify and assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and develop an environmental management plan for the project.
The environmental review team visited a number of proposed project sites in the Mogilev and Gomel Oblasts, as well as examples of similar interventions implemented under other programmes. In addition the review team met with a range of implementing bodies, as well as members of the public and other interested and affected parties.
Key findings of the environmental review were:
· The proposed project is assessed to be a ‘Category B’ project in terms of World Bank guidelines;
· Environmental impacts are foreseen to be overwhelmingly positive, in terms of the objectives of the overall project. Those negative impacts that are identified are generally of ‘moderate’ significance;
· The implementation of mitigation measures should result in most residual impacts being reduced to ‘negligible’ or ‘minor’ significance;
· The majority of the impacts of the project relate to health and safety issues rather than to disturbance to the natural environment.
Contents
1 Background 1-1
1.1 Introduction to the Environmental Review 1-1
1.2 Objectives of the Post Chernobyl Recovery Project 1-1
1.3 Project Components and Activities 1-1
1.4 Institutional Framework 1-3
1.4.1 Legislation 1-4
2 Potential Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project 2-1
2.1 Direct 2-1
2.1.1 Handling and Use of Asbestos Containing Materials 2-1
2.2 Indirect 2-1
2.3 Cumulative 2-2
3 Predicted Significance and Probability of Impacts 3-1
4 Proposed Mitigation Measures 4-1
4.1 Introduction 4-1
4.2 Mitigation Measures 4-1
5 Consultation Programme 5-1
5.1 Activities 5-1
5.2 Inputs from Interested and Affected Parties 5-1
6 Environmental Management Plan 6-1
7 Conclusions 7-1
7-3
Appendix A - Environmental Management Plans
Appendix B - List of Persons Consulted
Appendix C - Public Meeting Briefing Documents
Appendix D - Terms of Reference of Environmental Review
1 Background
1.1 Introduction to the Environmental Review
The purpose of this document is to provide an Environmental Review of proposed interventions to be implemented under the Post-Chernobyl Recovery Project (PCRP). An outline of the Project is given in the WB Project Information Document (Concept Stage, February 2005) and Project Appraisal Document (First Draft, June 2005).
One international expert assisted by one local counterpart environmental consultant carried out the assignment, as follows:
· Dr. Robert Madams, Team Leader (Environmental, EIA, Energy, Institutional Development);
· Mr. Igor Tchoulba, Counterpart Environmental Expert (SEA, Legislation).
The team reported to Ms Maha Armaly, Task Team Leader WB, and the work was undertaken during two in-country missions that took place in July 2005.
The Environmental Review work was financed from the Joint Environment Programme (JEP) with EU grant funds (the Tacis Program).
1.2 Objectives of the Post Chernobyl Recovery Project
The stated objective of the Post Chernobyl Recovery Project (World Bank 2005) is to improve the living standards of the people of Belarus that were affected by the Chernobyl Accident. The project aims to achieve this by providing them with upgraded heating and hot water services: basic needs that will directly contribute to their daily well being. Indirect improvements in the health of beneficiaries are predicted to be achieved by reducing their use of contaminated wood, reducing levels of indoor air pollution often associated with the use of indoor wood stoves, and reducing the production of contaminated wood ash (that is then used as fertiliser, resulting in increased contamination of agricultural land).
In addition the project aims to reduce energy use (and therefore costs) by improving energy efficiency in public institutions such as schools and hospitals. Measures envisaged for schools also aim to improve the general comfort level of students: helping to create a more effective learning environment.
1.3 Project Components and Activities
The project has three components, two of which were addressed by this environmental review:
· Energy Efficiency Improvements: various measures to improve energy efficiency through the upgrading or replacement of heat production and distribution equipment, as well as improving the insulation and lighting of public buildings (such as schools and hospitals);
· Gas Connections: connecting households to the gas pipeline in order to improve heat supply and replace utilization of dirty fuels, including fuelwood that may be contaminated with radioactive material.
The third project component, focused on technical assistance for programme implementation, and improvements in public information on radiation safety. Further assistance on radiation monitoring and safety issues are provided by the International Atomic Energy Agency and is the subject of separate reports.
In very simple terms, the project activities can be summed up as follows:
Energy Efficiency Improvements:
· Installation of new windows
· Improvement of roof and wall thermal insulation
· Installation of energy efficient lighting fixtures
· Replacing inefficient boilers and substations
· Improvements in heat and hot water distribution systems
Gas Connections:
· Gas connections to households in selected towns/villages
· Provision of equipment including meters and household boilers
1.4 Institutional Framework
The proposed institutional framework for the project is shown below (World Bank 2005):
1.4.1 Legislation
(a) Brief Review of Environmental Assessment Legislation and Procedures
The Belarusian legal basis for environmental assessment comprises four enactments. These are the ‘Law on Environmental Protection’ (1992, amended in 2002), the ‘Law on State Environmental Review’ (1993, amended in 2000), the ‘Regulation on Implementation Procedure of State Environmental Review (SER) in Belarus’ (2001), and the ‘Regulation on Implementation Procedure of Environmental Impact Assessment of Economic and Other Activities’ (2001).
The legislation states that economic activities should be based on sustainable use and reproduction of natural resources (Law on Environmental Protection 1992, amended in 2002). It also stipulates that economic activities that can detrimentally affect the environment, human health and/or the property of citizens have to undergo environmental impact assessment (EIA) and/or state environmental review (Law on Environmental Protection 1992, amended in 2002 and Law on State Environmental Review 1993, amended in 2000).
Environmental assessment in Belarus consists of two interrelated but separate procedures: environmental impact assessment (called OVOS) and state environmental review (also called ‘Ecological Expertise’). EIA is initiated and funded by the proponent of the proposed development and is carried out by an engineering or scientific-and-research institute (Articles 4 and 14.1, Regulation on EIA 2001). The Regulation presents a list of types of developments that are subject to mandatory EIA. For those developments not included in the list, but that can still result in adverse environmental consequences, a decision on whether or not EIA is required is left to the local environmental authorities. The outcome of EIA is an environmental impact statement (EIS), which becomes an integral part of the project design document and is submitted to national, regional or local authorities for SER. In cases where EIA is not required, a proponent or an engineering institution (on their behalf) is obliged to prepare a separate section devoted to environmental protection (Article 5, Regulation on EIA 2001). This section is also submitted for SER.
SER is organized and carried out by the Belarusian environmental authorities and is funded from the state budget (Articles 5, 9 and 17, Law on State Environmental Review 1993, amended in 2000). There is a list of types of developments and activities for which SER is obligatory. However, in contrast to the EIA process, the regulation on SER presents a list of activities for which SER is not required. Based on the outcomes of the SER, a final determination is made, which has to be adhered to during implementation by the proponent. The Law on State Environmental Review (1993, amended 2000) prohibits implementation of any activity requiring an SER without a positive SER decision (Article 14).
In terms of public participation: project proponents are obliged to organize and facilitate participation of interested public in the EIA process, and have to provide the public with pertinent information (Articles 12 and 19, Law on State Environmental Review 1993, amended in 2000). Articles 12 and 19 oblige the proponent to organize public hearings on the finding of an EIA (Law on State Environmental Review 1993, amended in 2000). Public hearings are not conducted in cases where documentation on proposed developments contains secret information (Article 14.1, Regulation on Implementation Procedure of Environmental Impact Assessment of Economic and Other activities (2001).
In terms of SER: the Belarusian citizens and NGOs have the right to organize and conduct an independent public environmental review (at their own expense). The findings of a public environmental review are nonbinding and should be considered in the SER process.
It is the responsibility of the local authorities to inform the general public and NGOs about the likely impact of the proposed developments on the environment (Article 10, Law on State Environmental Review 1993, amended in 2000).
(b) Conclusions in terms of the proposed project activities
From analyzing the proposed Post Chernobyl Recovery Project developments, the following should be noted:
· The proposed interventions are not included in the list of types of developments for which EIA is mandatory, and hence they will not be subject for mandatory EIA (EIA is only mandatory for gas pipe-line construction works in which the pipes have a diameter of 600 mm or more, and in this project the pipelines will only have a diameter of 60 mm). However, the local environmental authorities are entitled to select, for environmental assessment, some types of the proposed activities on a case-by-case basis. The criteria for such a selection are not stated in the abovementioned enactments.
· For the proposed activities not subject to EIA (i.e. the heat supply optimization and gasification activities), the proponent (or an engineering or scientific institution on their behalf) will have to develop a section of the project design documentation devoted to environmental protection. This documentation will have to be submitted for SER on the regional and/or local level.
· The proposed energy efficiency activities relating to the installation of energy-efficient lightening fixtures, double glazing windows, and roof thermal innovations, require neither EIA not SER.
Belarus Draft Environmental Review ALS 3.8.5.doc
7-1
2 Potential Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project
The project has been placed in environmental screening category ‘B’ under the provisions of the World Bank Operational Policy 4.01, ‘Environmental Assessment’. This category signifies that the projects impacts are less adverse than those of Category A projects (i.e. those likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts) and those that are likely are ‘site specific; few if any of them are irreversible; and in most cases mitigatory measures can be designed more readily than for Category A projects’.
The environmental review team agree that this proposed project should be designated as a Category B project. In fact, the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project are expected to be overwhelmingly positive since it will contribute to achieving a range of important environmental objectives (see 1.2 above).
In the following sections the adverse impacts of the proposed project are described in summary form.
2.1 Direct
Potential direct adverse environmental impacts of project activities will be predominantly related to construction activities and be limited in scope. Most of the project supported activities will take place in urban areas, and construction works will mainly be rehabilitation of existing structures rather than ‘green field’ operations.
However, if not properly addressed, direct impacts may include the following:
· Damage to ecosystems, habitats or endangered plant species as a result of pipeline trenching