E-431

The World Bank -SYR DARYA CONTROL AND NORTHERN

ARAL SEA PROJECT: ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

NOVEMBER 2000

Government of the Republic of KazakhstanMinistry of Natural Resources and Environmental A Dr nlProtection ?if ARCAD.ISJ EUROCONSULT

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

ERATA

Revised Table 4 - page 28:

Table 4 - Implementation Schedule, Cost Breakdown and Funding for ProposedEnvironmental Mitigation Measures; costs in USD

Mitigatory measures Implementation Investment Operational Total Funding from ProjectSchedule Costs Costs Costs Component

1. Hydro-ecological inventory of Syr DP - 18 m 200,000 50,000 250,000 EDarya Delta

2. Integrated land use management DP - 12 m 275,000 75,000 350,000 Eplan for Delta

3. (Re)construction of Dikes DP/CP -24 m B4. Design of fish ladders DP/CP - 12 m PPF5. Ichthyological surveys DP - 12 m 25,000 25,000 D6. Planning of borrow pits (clearance CP- 2-4 m B

by Dep.of Arch.)7. Waste Collection and constr. Of CP - cont. B

disposal sites8. Archaeological assessment CP -36 m 50,000 15,000 65,000 E9.Eval. of actual water inflow and CP/OP - cont. 100,000 75,000 175,000 E

water quality in NAS (3 years)10. Rehab. of fisheries in lakes and OP- 3 years 80,000 75,000 155,000 D

NAS, sustainable fisheriesManagement

II. Eval. of health situation OP- 4 years 80,000 80,000 E12. Restoration of wetiands and lakes CP- years 1-3 400,000 400,000 B

in Delta (36 m)13. Management Plan for Protected CP/OP - 18 m 150,000 50,000 200,000 E

Areas in the Delta14. Institutional Strengthening CP - cont. 300,000 200,000 500,000 E 100,000

F 400,00015. Strict adherence to env. code of CP - con. B&F

conduct of

16. Review of hunting laws HS&E DP - 3m 5,000 5,000 Esafety procedures by contractors.

DP: design Phase; CP: Construction Phase; OP: Operational Phase

The World Bank Ministry of Natural ResourcesWashington, D.C. and Environmental Protection,USA Republic of Kazakhstan

SYR DARYA CONTROL AND NORTHERN ARAL SEA PROJECT:ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

November 2000

ARCADIS EuroconsultArnhem, the Netherlands

I

CONTENTS

Page

GLOSSARY/LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 2

1 INTRODUCTION 3

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 6

3 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK 10

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT 11

5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 16

6 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 23

7 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 26

8 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 31

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summarized Average Consumptive Water UseTable 2: Impacts in the "No Project" CaseTable 3: Summary of Environmental Mitigation MeasuresTable 4: Implementation Schedule, Cost Breakdown and Funding for Proposed

Environmental Mitigation MeasuresTable 5: Important Indicators to be Monitored

ANNEXES

Annex 1: Summary Impact TablesAnnex 2: Lists of participants in Consultation Meetings held at Aralsk and Kyzl OrdaAnnex 3: Photographic Summary

2

GLOSSARY/LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ASBP Aral Sea Basin Programme KazNIIRH Kazakh Scientific Research InstituteAsl above sea level (Baltic Sea) for FisheryASPERA Aral Sea Project for Enviromnental and KDI Kazgiprovodhoz Design Institute

Regional Assistance KZT Kazakh Tenge (USD 1 = KZT 143)BCG Basin Consultative Group LAS Large Aral SeaBCM Billion cubic meters MCM million cubic metersBVO Basin Water Authority M&E Monitoring and EvaluationCES Consulting Engineers Salzgitter MET Ministry of Energy and TradeCITES Convention on the Intemational Trade in MNREP Ministry of Natural Resources and

Endangered Species Environmental ProtectionCWR Commnittee for Water Resources MoA Ministry of AgricultureDANIDA Danish Organization for Intemational MoH Ministry of Health

Development Assistance NAS Northem Aral Sea (section north of BergDDT Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloro-ethane Strait)EA Environmental Assessment NEAP/SD National Environmental Action Plan forEC Electrical Conductivity Sustainable DevelopmentEIA Environmental Impact Assessment NEC/SD National Environmental Center forEMIS Environmental Management Information Sustainable Development

System NGO Non-governmental organizationEMP Environmental Management Plan OD Operational Directive (of the World Bank)ERM Environmental Resource Management OECF Organization for Economic Cooperation

(Consultancy), UK and FinanceESU Environmental Sub-Unit ON Operational Note (of the World Bank)EU European Union PCB Poly-Chlorinated BiphenylGEF Global Environmental Facility PCD Project Concept DocumentGIS Geographic Information System PSC Project Steering CommitteeG/l grams/liter PMU Project Management UnitGoK Govemment of Kazakhstan PPF Project Preparation FacilityGPS Global Positioning System SOGREAH SOGREAH Ingenierie, FranceGTZ Gezellschaft fir Technische SYNAS Syr Darya Control and Northem Aral Sea

Zusammnenarbeit Project(Organization for Technical Co- TACIS Technical Assistance Programme for theoperation, Commonwealth of Independent States

Germany) UNCED United Nations Commission onHS&E Health, Safety and Environment Environment and Development

(Department) UNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeHCCH Hexa-Chloor-Cyclo-Hexane UNECE United Nations Economic Commission forHIID Harvard Institute for Intemational Europe

Development UNEP United Nations Environmental ProgrammeIBRD Intemational Bank for Reconstruction and UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and

Development Cultural OrganizationICC Inter-ministerial Coordination Committee USAID United States Agency for IntemationalICWC Interstate Commission on Water Development

Coordination USD United States DollarIDIP Irrigation and Drainage Improvement VAT Value-added tax

Project WARMAP Water Resources Management andIFAS Intemational Fund for the Aral Sea Agricultural Production ProjectJEP Joint Environment Programme WRC Water Resources CommitteeJICA Japanese Intemational Cooperation AgencyKazgidromet Kazakh National Department for

Hydro-Meteorology

3

1 INTRODUCTION

Background

1.1 Located in the heart of Central Asia, the Aral Sea Basin extends over an area of 2.2 millionkm2 mainly in Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and is home tosome 40 million people. The basin comprises the drainage area of two large rivers, the Amu Daryaand the Syr Darya, the Aral Sea, and the Sea's surrounding natural region. Water is the most preciousresource in arid Central Asia. Rainfall is in the order of 100 mm/year in the lower desert countries andrises to 400 mm/year in upper mountainous countries. The waters of the two rivers and the Aral Seahave supported the development of economically and culturally rich civilizations in and around theoases and gave rise to a highly diversified flora and fauna.

1.2 Decline of the Aral Sea started in the 1960s as increasing amounts of water were divertedfrom Amu Darya and Syr Darya mainly for irrigation. Between 1960 and 1996 the surface area of thesea declined by some 50% (from 67,000 km2 to 30,000 km2') and the sea level dropped by 16 meters.In 1990 the Aral sea split into a small Northern Aral Sea (NAS) and a Large Southern Aral Sea(LAS) as the waters receded. Derelict fishing boats and salt landscape caught world's attention ofenvironmental crisis the Aral Sea has been facing. The mismanagement of land and water resourceshas caused degradation actually extending beyond the Sea to the total basin.

1.3 Severe environmental and socio-economic impacts have affected the delta areas of the Amuand Syr Darya. Large sections of delta wetlands and agricultural lands dried up as a consequence ofreduced river flow, absence of annual floods, and falling groundwater levels near the seabed. One ofthe most important migratory bird feeding grounds in Asia is now less than one fifth its former size.The climate around the Sea has become more continental, with greater annual fluctuations intemperature and humidity. With environmental degradation and decline in drinking water qualityhuman health problems have increased sharply. As a result, life expectancies in the districts near thesea are significantly lower than in surrounding areas. Moreover, approximately 4 million peopleliving in the vicinity of Aral Sea have become economically impoverished. Tens of thousands of jobswere lost in the former fishing, agriculture and service sectors. Huge tracts of agriculture lands weredegraded by wind and water-borne salt from the rivers, soil, groundwater, the desiccated seabed, anddried up wetlands. Surrounding areas like the marshy river delta's and flood plains were stronglyaffected and subjected to strong drainage, lowering of groundwater levels and salinization. This hascaused widespread environmental degradation, adversely affecting riparian communities, valuableecosystems and related flora and fauna.

1.4 After independence, the five Aral Sea Basin countries recognized the urgency of the Aral Seacrisis and sought assistance from international donors. The basin states prepared a comprehensiveAral Sea Basin Program (ASBP) with the support of the international community. ASBP wasconceived as a broad program comprising of 8 programs and 20 projects; it was approved by the basinstates and launched in 1994. The proposed Syr Darya Control and Northern Aral Sea Project is a highpriority project of ASBP, for which the Government of Kazakhstan (GoK) has requested World Banksupport.

1.5 It is widely recognized that the goal of restoring the whole Aral Sea to previous levels is notachievable in the foreseeable future. However, the NAS, which is fed by the Syr Darya river can berehabilitated and its further desiccation into small water bodies can be prevented by controlling waterlevels in the sea. The surrounding delta areas can also be rehabilitated and their environment can be

4

greatly improved with higher levels in the NAS by increasing the carrying capacity of the Syr Daryato the delta and the sea and improving the water management in Syr Darya basin in Kazakhstan. Thisapproach, which forms the basis for the proposed project, has already been tested by the creation of atemporary dike in the Berg Strait, close to where the Syr Darya enters the sea. This was firstattempted in 1992 using limited local resources and then again in 1996. It did demonstrate that astable NAS, receiving the full inflow of the Syr Darya, will have a much lower salinity than the LAS,thereby raising the prospect of improved environmental conditions, and in particular, the enhancementof socio-economic conditions.

1.6 This report summarizes the environmental assessment (EA) of the proposed project andcovers the following (i) a brief description of the project; (ii) the existing environmental conditions inthe project area: (iii) the policy, legal and administrative framework; (iv) the anticipatedenvironmental impacts; (v) an analysis of alternatives for the project; (vi) a description of theenvironmental development plan (including mitigation measures, monitoring and institutionalstrengthening); and (vii) a summary of the main findings and recommendations.

Environmental Review Process

1.7. The present study complies with EA-procedures adopted by the World Bank and theregulations of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The World Bank requires Environmental Assessment (EA)for all projects proposed for Bank financing, in order to ensure that these projects are environmentallysound and sustainable. The report is in conformity with World Bank procedures (OperationalDirective OD 4.01 on "EA") and with the guidelines for Environmental Assessment laid down in theEnvironmental Assessment Source Books, Vol. 2 and 3. Even though the proposed project has apositive environmental impact, it has been placed in environmental screening category "A" and hasbeen the subject of a full EA in view of the unprecedented nature of the crisis of the Aral Sea, thecomplex hydrological systems; the ongoing degradation of wetlands and natural habitats; and the poorsocio-economic and health situation in the area. Project preparation has included the participation ofhighly experienced international environmental consultants as integral members of theinterdisciplinary team. The environmental specialists participated in the preparation, and appraisal ofthe project. Provisions of OD 7.50 "International Waters", and Operational Policy Note 11.03,"Cultural Property" were followed in the preparation of the proposed project. The concerned riparianstates were notified about the project and extensive public consultations were undertaken.

1.8. The Government of Kazakhstan (GoK) environmental legislation stipulates that the Ministryof Natural Resources and Environmental Protection (MNREP) reviews and approves projectproposals. MNREP issues its clearance through the State Ecological Expertise after the proposal isapproved by the regional branch of MNREP (in the Oblast), and after obtaining advice from theEnvironmental Action Center for Sustainable Development, an organization responsible forenvironmental conventions and monitoring of projects. With regard to the proposed project, approvalhas been granted by the local environmental authority in Kzyl-Orda Oblast.

Consultations

1.9 The consultation process with the population in the project area goes back many years whenthe Aral Sea crisis was studied with active involvement and support of international organizations,and possible solutions were identified. In fact, there is a feeling among the local population that thereare too many studies and consultations and too little action on the ground. A more structured public

Elsisleg NAS D-s vAklva C,A...tSa_ bvtK h 1992 heaud away In 1993 D.aWn favh-ge 60 n3/sRevonstrtoitiono e 199116 CooSIoo Sr-t- y aA section oP 6 An washed ayIn 0990 doe nt work,ur isuffIcIen CoveyOed caacty%am defcIencIe Po soila.Y E...Ion of th. rIv-bed Id.wnorea.1W. d.,r .... I. .. o.p.yaY ___ rOSotlOh^FrdwSyrdarya Control and

eIg Ia lS\o3fOtkOl ovfrflow don North Aral Sea Project

_ > > / \ 1*~~~~~~~I does not oOrk as the dOte Anthe rIv doag -aa-<> )l \ / Structvre los lnSoFFlclent orr°ybg tCagavty. nS Project Area -

K-1aliok h.adeokltCarryin eapac..iy- 1600s37s\ _ >) ]>_ _ xw <>/ | CterYln~~~~~~~~~ 1-gt- ICPnt.zk. (85s IDD-303/ )

\o eeriousy dasaCed Figure 4 - Location and Type ot Major Project Interventions

vrns. ecOl 43.7 - vs Design d,nvhvr~e vrllfle lieson R. tvOo--9.

Syrdaryc River ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~K,Ir.H.d.ksolo Ooadg Mayor hydroullo Otroytones ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~.. .. .. l' .P.'"t9o~/

- - - State border OvA reOOOgItvAIcr.N VOK SKn-OO-h--u-o--e-o

LARGE -I- r[ Rf eion

MISayr h / da,FiY tr hyd .. r

Sorce k CS S / n K O A iRUL

of ~ ~ A-t S. \ i '9-''..

Source: CES Sogea Ineiei an Kazpovoh

-;v- 'L-r = ,/S; L- X, ,Q,\ _ , SIc<esstwE_ _ARA -S EUROCONSU '

6

participation and consultation process was followed during project preparation, which included (i)consultation meetings held by the engineering consultants, the Committee of Water Resources(CWR), and the Kzyl Orda Oblast administration during the initial phases of the project design. Twoworkshops were conducted in Kzylorda and Novokazalinsk during March 3-6, 1998, and during May4-7 1998 to discuss and agree on various design options proposed to be undertaken; (ii) in May 2000,two scooping sessions in Aralsk and Kzyl Orda, respectively, were conducted by the environmentalassessment consultants; and (iii) expert consultations at the MNREP were held in May 2000 to discussthe findings of the EA. The scooping sessions were organized by the national Committee for WaterResources and their consultants. During these sessions, some 30-35 representatives of localorganizations participated, including representatives of environmental NGOs. A briefing in theRussian and Kazakh languages was given of the main project interventions and the expected impactson the environment. During the discussions, the participants strongly expressed their support for theproject and stressed the urgent need to start as soon as possible with the construction of the NAS dike,if the NAS, as a hydrological entity, is to be saved. They stressed that after the collapse of thetemporary dike across the Berg Strait there is serious risk that the NAS would split into several highlysaline water bodies. Full details of the sessions, including minutes are given in Annex A of EA report.The list of participants is given in Annex 2. A summary of the EA of both the preliminary andrevised versions was translated into Russian and has been sent to the regional and nationalorganizations involved or affected by the project. During the EA study several meetings were heldwith representatives of the national and regional offices of MNREP and their advisors. Meetings werealso arranged with knowledgeable resource persons and with NGOs involved in socio-economic andenvironmental activities in the Syr Darya basin, the delta and the Aral Sea basin. The EA study andthe Summary EA report, in English and Russian, are being placed in the World Bank InfoShop, madeavailable at the Resident Mission and are widely disseminated within Kazakhstan. Copies of thesereports will also be provided to other countries participating in the ASBP.

2 DESCRIPTION OF THIE PROJECT

Project Objectives

2.1 The Syr Darya Control and Northem Aral Sea Phase-I (SYNAS-I) Project was identified asthe first phase of an overall Syr Darya river development program in the context of the Aral Sea BasinProgram initiated in 1993. Based on the river basin management concept the Syr Darya RiverDevelopment program aimed at: (i) sustaining and increasing agriculture (including livestock) andfish production in the Syr Darya basin; and (ii) securing the existence of the Northern Aral Sea (NAS)and improving the ecological/environmental conditions in the delta and around Aral Sea. Theimmediate project objectives are:

(a) securing and sustaining NAS, thereby improving: (i) fish production; (ii) human andanimal health; (iii) the socio-economic situation in the area, including a reduction inemigration from the area; and (iv) the ecology and bio-diversity of the area; and

(b) improving the hydraulic control of the Syr Darya and increasing river carryingcapacity and the water flow to the delta and to the NAS through rehabilitation of themajor hydraulic infrastructure, thereby sustaining and improving agriculturalproduction and fisheries;

7

(c) strengthening institutional capacity of the national and oblast level Committee forWater Resources (CWR) and other agencies to: (i) manage, operate and maintainmajor hydraulic infrastructure; and (ii) manage the investment project, carry outmonitoring and evaluation activities and undertake project related studies.

Project Components

2.2 The main project components would consist of: (i) rehabilitation of the Northern Aral Sea; (ii)improving the hydraulic control of the Syr Darya and its flow carrying capacity; (iii) rehabilitation ofChardara Dam; (iv) restoration of the aquatic resources in the delta area and NAS and fisheriesdevelopment; (v) monitoring and evaluation of the project impact; and (vi) project management,institutional strengthening for improving management of the water resources and projectimplementation, and preparation of a Phase-fl project. The project will contribute to improving theliving conditions and provide poverty alleviation in Aralsk and Kazalinsk rayons of the Kzyl OrdaOblast - an internationally recognized area affected by the environmental catastrophe and with apopulation of 150,000 to 200,000 people.

2.3 Rehabilitation of Northern Aral Sea (Component A). The falling water level of the AralSea led to the separation into two water bodies in 1989/1990, with the northern one (NAS), receivingthe Syr Darya discharge. As the water level in the LAS continued to drop, the length of the connectingchannel became about 25 km. With local resources, a dike was constructed across the Berg Stait, thechannel connecting the two parts of the Aral Sea, to control the water levels in the NAS. This resultedin an increase in the water levels of the NAS, hence halting its further separation into smaller waterbodies. The dike was improperly designed and poorly constructed. Under the project a proper dikewould be constructed at the same location, provided with a spillway for regular use, and anemergency spillway with an earthen fuse plug. These measures would create a stable level of theNAS, allow for flushing to maintain desirable salinity levels and pass flows during high flow periods.

2.4 Improving the Hydraulic Control of the Syr Darya (Component B). The rehabilitationand construction of hydraulic structures will contribute to regulating and improving watermanagement, controlling allocations to various water users, including an increased inflow to the NAS.Works in the delta include: (i) replacement of Aklak weir (and related works) restoring water suppliesto 6,000 ha of lakes and 6,000 ha of grazing lands; and (ii) repair of Kazalinsk headworks ensuringwater supply to irrigated areas and lake systems (37,000 ha). In the Syr Darya river plain, the projectwill focus on (i) reconstruction of the Aitek and Karaozek water control structures thereby alsosecuring water supply to 20,000 ha of irrigated lands, 20, 000 ha of grazing lands and 600 ha offishing lakes; (ii) repair of Kzyl Orda barrage supplying water to 98,000 ha of irrigated areas; and(iii) rehabilitation and construction of low height dikes along the river to protect urban areas/ruralsettlements from flooding and for increasing the flow capacity of the river.

2.5 Rehabilitation of Chardara Dam (Component C). The rehabilitation of Chardara Damwould cover priority works such as rehabilitation of the Kzylkum irrigation outlet, the drainagesystem, spillway gates, and repairs of spillway outlets, chutes, stilling basins and related works, andinstallation of dam instrumentation. These works comprise a first phase of the program forrehabilitation of Chardara dam in order to ensure its safety in the immediate future.

2.6 Aquatic Resources Restoration and Fisheries Development (Component D). Thiscomponent aims to ensure the maximization of benefits from additional fisheries in the NAS and inthe lakes created as a result of the stabilization of the NAS level and lowering its salinity, as well as

8

the improvement of the flow of water to the delta lakes. The fisheries component will providenecessary assistance in (i) increasing the value of freshwater and marine fisheries through improvedmarket opportunities for fishery products; and (ii) establishing sustainable fishery for sturgeon in theNAS.

2.7 Monitoring and Evaluation (Component E). The objective of the monitoring andevaluation component is to evaluate the success in project implementation in terms of meeting theproject goals, and to assess its physical, environmental/ecological, social, agricultural, and economicimpacts. The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities would provide independent and continuousfeedback to the implementing agencies on the project's performance and impact of its variouscomponents, so that corrective actions could be undertaken in a timely manner. Particularly, theimplementation of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) would be monitored carefully. TheM&E activities are likely to cover surface water flows and their quality, impact on groundwaterquality, salinity levels of NAS and delta lakes; air quality; soil salinity levels; inflow to the NAS andthe LAS; impact on bio-diversity; fisheries catch in the NAS and delta lakes; human and animalhealth indicators; land use, yield and livestock; the impact on the level of unemployment andhousehold incomes in the project area; estimation of the project's overall benefits and economic rateof return; etc.

2.8 Project Management and Institutional Development (Component F). This componentwould enable the Government to implement the project. It would support the operation of a ProjectManagement Unit (PMU), and finance overall project management, as well as technical assistance insuch areas as construction supervision, procurement, and accounting.

2.9 In addition to project management, the objective of the institutional component is to increasethe capacity of national authorities and agencies (for example the National Committee for WaterResources, the District Water Resources Committees, and the Kazakh Sub-basin Authority) in riverbasin management and in preparing and implementing the EMP. The project also proposes to set up aBasin Consultative Group (BCG) as a forum of key water users and interest groups to ensure effectivepublic participation in the water allocation and management process in the Kazakh part of the basin.

Strategic Context

2.10 The objectives of the ASBP launched in 1994 are to: (i) stabilize the environment of the AralSea Basin; (ii) rehabilitate the disaster area around the sea; (ii) improve management of land andwater resources in the basin; and (iv) build capacity of institutions at all levels to plan and implementthese programs. The project supports these objectives by rehabilitating the NAS and delta areas andproviding/rehabilitating necessary infrastructure and institutional capacity to improve overall watermanagement in the Syr Darya basin. Due to increasing conflicts in water use for irrigation andhydropower, a large volume of water is presently wasted in the desert areas because of insufficientcarrying capacity of the Syr Darya. The river's flow capacity is particularly limited during winterbecause of inadequate capacity of the existing infrastructure, as well as its deterioration due to lack ofmaintenance. The project includes priority works required for improving the carrying capacity of theriver, delivering water where it could be used beneficially, and hence creating an enablingenvironment for improving water management in the basin.

2.11 Implementation of ASBP is still at an early stage. Meanwhile a number of complementaryinterventions have been funded that contribute to the project's objectives through increased efficiencyin the use of water resources, improved living conditions of the population, and promotion of public

9

participation. Several GoKtWorld Bank projects are either operating or are being developed in theagriculture and water sectors that are very relevant to the project. This includes the World Bank pilotproject on water supply and sanitation in Kazalinsk rayon, and ongoing efforts in forming andstrengthening water user associations in irrigation and in improving irrigation efficiencies (USAID,UNDP, OECF activities and in the World Bank-supported Irrigation & Drainage Improvement Project(IDIP). The World Bank is also providing financial support for the ASBP through the establishmentof a Regional Strategy for Water Resources Management. A National Environmental Action Plan forSustainable Development (NEAP/SD) has been prepared with World Bank support.

2.12 Of importance to the project are the UNDP-funded "Aral Seashore Capacity andRehabilitation Program" and "The Aral Sea Region Development and Humanitarian AssistanceProgram". The later is being carried out under the aegis of UNDP, with contributions from theInternational Fund for the Aral Sea (IFAS) and from the World Bank. Its main purpose is to assist themost affected riparian communities of the Aral Sea in capacity building and poverty alleviation.

2.13 The present project could eventually build on the experience of this UNDP-activity inpromoting water saving and bio-diversity friendly farmers' irrigation methods. A project mostrelevant to the project is the UNDP/GEF funded "Integrated Conservation of Globally SignificantMigratory Bird Wetland Habitats" initiative. The European Union, through its TACIS program issupporting the "Water Resources Management and Agricultural Production Project" (WARMAP).Since February 1996, seven subprojects of WARMAP have started. Finally, the UNICEF fundedASPERA "Aral Sea Project for Environmental and Regional Assistance Program", aims at improvinghealth care and education in the Kazakhstan part of the region.

Development Options

2.14 Restoration of the entire Aral Sea. The restoration of the entire Aral Sea to its original state(to the past water level of 53 m) in the territories of both Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan is not feasible inthe foreseeable future. It is estimated that to restore the sea in 25 years would require 75 billion cubicmeters (BCM) of water annually - which would be an unrealistic expectation-the upstream areas witha large population depend on water use for agriculture, industries and power generation. Thetopographic conditions and the location where the Syr Darya enters the sea, allows that NAS to berestored by increasing the water level and reducing the salinity, using the Syr Darya flows. Thiswould also have a large positive impact on the areas surrounding the sea, including the Syr Daryadelta.

2.15 The "no project" alternative in Kazakhstan. Given the consequences of the ecological andsocial disaster in the project area in Kazakhstan, the "no project" alternative is not a feasibledevelopment option for the area as it is the poorest region in Kazakhstan. A proposal on large-scaleresettlement of population was considered but a massive relocation of the population appeared to beimpossible as it was resisted by the local population. In 1998, over 75% of the people were not infavor of leaving the area, despite the high rate of unemployment. Moreover, the costs of massresettlement would be extremely high.

2.16 If no action is undertaken, there will be further desiccation and salinization of the NAS andthe delta lakes. This would also break up the NAS into the four separate bodies that, consequently,would lead to declining water-tables, a strong increase in salinity and a depletion of fisheries, which isstill an important source of income for the local population. The "no project" alternative would alsolead to substantial negative socio-economic and environmental consequences due to the eventual

10

failure of the Aklak structure at the mouth of the Syr Darya, and the Aitek weir near Kzylorda. Withfailure of the Aklak structure, water diversions to some 12,000 ha of grazing lands and lakes wouldstop and river bed erosion would continue upstream resulting in drying up of more lake area upstream.Similarly, about 40,000 of irrigated areas, grazing lands and lakes presently served by Aitek weir

would loose its water supply. The implementation of the project, in contrary, would improve theagricultural, livestock and fishery production in the river basin and the delta area, and result inimprovements in the environmental conditions in the delta area and around the NAS. The mainenvironmental benefits of the project include the restoration of the ecosystem and improvements inthe fishery reproduction conditions in the sea and in the river. In addition, the restored NAS wouldhave a positive impact on the microclimate and air quality in the delta, which would eventually reducesalinity and improve soil fertility, and would also positively impact human and animal health,vegetation and wildlife. The main agricultural benefits would relate to improved irrigation watersupply and the increase in the production of fodder and hay, which, in turn, would benefit thelivestock production in the project area. It is also expected that project implementation will stopemigration from the region and increase employment.

3 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

Policy and Legal Framework

3.1 The present study complies with EA procedures adopted by the World Bank and the EAregulations of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Management of natural resources in Kazakhstan isregulated by several laws including "On Environment Conservation in the Republic of Kazakhstan"(July 15, 1997) and "On Ecological Expertise" (March 18, 1997). The first law defines the legal,economic and social basis for nature conservation, the second pertains to avoiding negative effects onpeople's lives and on the environment that could result from administrative decisions, economicactivities and projects. In total, the relevant project environmental legislation in Kazakhstan includesabout 20 decrees and regulations dealing with the management and conservation of water, soil andbiological resources.

3.2 Kazakhstan has signed a number of important conventions and agreements, including somethat resulted from the UN Conference on Environmental Conservation and Economic Development(UNCED, Rio de Janeiro, 1992). In 1995, the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan signed the jointNukus declaration of five Central Asian Countries pertaining to the stable development of the AralSea region. The Nukus declaration acknowledged the formulation of the Aral Sea Basin SustainableDevelopment Conventions as a high priority. A long-term water and energy agreement for the SyrDarya basin was signed in February 1998 between Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and the Kyrgyz Republic.Also in 1998, an "Agreement for Cooperation in the Field of Environment and Rational Use ofNatural Resources " was signed by the governments of the central Asian republics. In 1996,Kazakhstan became involved in a global network of environmental information exchange, under theaegis of the UNEP. Some of the more recent national legislation reflect provisions listed inintemational conventions that have been ratified by Kazakhstan. These laws also define nationalstandards and norms, as well as regulations and instructions relating to pollution control. Animportant provision in these laws is that the technical design of development projects should complywith intemational standards relating to environmental protection and monitoring.

ii

Administrative Setting

3.3. The parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan defines the key objectives of and approaches toenvironmental policy, passes environmental laws, and oversees the activities of the stateenvironmental agency (i.e., the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection). ThePresident of the Republic of Kazakhstan is in charge of the strategic issues in addressingenvironmental concems and intemational cooperation in the environmental area.

3.4. Presently, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection (MNREP) is thecentral executive body in the area of environmental protection and management. Within MNREP,there are several agencies responsible for executive management functions in different areas of theenvironment and natural resources management. These include, the Agency on Land ResourceManagement , the Committee for Water Resources, and the Committee for Geology and MineralResources Conservation. MNREP is a primary regulatory environmental agency. The Ministry'sresponsibilities include enforcement of environmental law, development of environmental actionplans and regulatory programs, environmental assessment, the issuance and revocation of permits foremissions, discharges and waste disposal. At the local level, the environmental managementfunctions are performed by oblast departmnents of MNREP.

3.5. The Committee for Water Resources (CWR) has been recently transferred to the MNREP andhas been delegated the responsibility for project implementation on behalf of MNERP. This providesa unique opportunity to fully integrate environmental considerations in the process of projectpreparation and implementation. In addition, there are a number of other agencies that have beeninvolved in environmental studies and monitoring activities in the project area such as the Pre-AralEcological Center at Kazalinsk Kazgidromet (climate/hydrology), KazNIIRH (fisheries), Institute ofBotanics (grazing, wetland research), and the Departments of Fisheries, Forestry, and Hunting of theMinistry of Agriculture. It is expected that these institutions will also be involved in projectimplementation and monitoring.

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Project Area and Area of Influence

4.1 The project area comprises the Syr Darya basin from the Chardara Reservoir on theUzbekistan border to and including NAS. A few areas with independent water management systemswere excluded from the study. Administratively, the project includes the parts of Kzyl Orda and SouthKazakhstan Oblasts within the drainage basin of the Syr Darya. The Syr Darya is considered tooriginate with the confluence of the Naryn and Kara Darya, in the Fergana Valley of Kyrgyzstan. Theproject area is estimated at 230,000 km 2 with a population of about 800,000. After passing throughparts of Uzbekistan (where much of its waters are being used for irrigation) the river flows into theChardara Reservoir just inside Kazakhstan.

Physical Resources

4.2 Water resources. The project area has an arid climate characterized by a long hotsummer and cold winter. The average annual precipitation varies from 110 mm near the Aral Sea to244 mm near Chardara dam. Syr Darya is the main source of water. There are several natural water

12

bodies in the project area, including several in the Syr Darya delta and the NAS - all depend oninflows from the Syr Darya. Up to the 1960s, when its surface elevation began to decline and itssalinity to increase, the Aral Sea was relatively stable in elevation and salinity. In fact, like mostclosed inland water bodies, it probably was undergoing gradual changes that would have led to itsdisappearance as a water body in some thousands or tens of thousands of years. That process wasaccelerated, however, by the development of intensive irrigated agriculture in the basin during the1960s. Soviet planners foresaw the impact on the Aral Sea resulting from the water diversions fromthe Syr Darya and the larger Amu Darya but considered that the sea was not an important enoughresource to allow it to impede agricultural development. Although the surface elevation has varied byas much as six meters in recent centuries and by about three meters in the last 200 years, periods ofrelative stability have been observed.

4.3 From 1961 through 1997, the surface of the Aral Sea dropped at an average rate of 45 cm/yr,reaching a level of 36 m asl by 1997. There were also changes in the behavior of the surface, in termsof elevation and -wave action, as determined by wind direction and velocity, local bathymetricconditions, and the topography of the coast. As the surface dropped below 39 m, the Aral becamedivided into two water bodies, a small Northem Aral Sea (NAS) and a Large Aral Sea (LAS).

4.4 The reduced inflow of rivers into the Aral Sea has been accompanied by an increase insalinity, because the inflow into the sea could not offset the losses due to evaporation. The naturalsalinity of the sea during the early half of the 20th Century was 9.8 to 10.3 g/l, slightly less than one-third the salinity of the major oceans. After 1970, salinity in the LAS increased gradually with theshrinking volume and by 1991 was 32-34 g/l. During the period 1960-1990 the salinity of the NASincreased faster than that of the LAS and by 1990 reached 34 g/l , with some areas at 40g/l. When theBerg Strait dried out, the discharge of the Syr Darya into the NAS began reducing the salinity, whichdecreased further to 19 g/l in 1997 after construction of a temporary dike in the Berg Strait.

4.5 Upstream of Chardara Reservoir there are several reservoirs, the largest being Toktugul, onthe Naryn River, which feeds a cascade of hydroelectric projects. With an active storage of 14,000MCM, Toktugul is the only reservoir capable of smoothing out the year-to-year variations in thedischarge of the Syr Darya. Chardara reservoir, with storage of only 4,230 MCM, can not containenough water to control the flows in the Syr Darya to a significant degree. Moreover, the condition ofChardara dam has considerably deteriorated and is currently considered unsafe by intemationalstandards. In recent years the operation of Toktugul reservoir has shifted more towards the generationof hydropower during winter. As a result, inflows into Chardara reservoir have increased duringwinter and reduced during summer. With limited river flow capacity during winter large quantities ofwater are diverted to the Arnasai depression located in Uzbekistan. Average diversions during lastseven years (1992-93 to 1998-99) are about 3 BCM and they were as high as 9.3 BCM in 1993-94.This water is wasted and does to return back to the river system. This also causes flooding problemsaround the Arnasai area and in some years flood damages are substantial.

4.6 The water of the Syr Darya is subject to intensive and repeated use, with each usecontributing its own form of degradation. The effects of this multiple use fall particularly severely onthe 'tail-end' users, the residents of the delta. The long term average consumptive use, which affectsthe delta and Aral Sea most strongly, may be summarized as presented in Table I below.

4.7 Air quality. Air quality in rural areas is generally good, there being few sources that causeserious problems in Kzyl Orda and other urban centers. A serious regional problem is airborne dustand salt particles eroded from the exposed soils of the former sea bottom and carried away by windsas far as 500 km. The total amount of soil and salt transported in this manner has been estimated at

13

15-75 million tons per year. The deposition of this salt is blamed for part of the decline in human andlivestock health in the region.

Table 1 - Summarized Average Consumptive Water Use

8,540 ~ 54.4

~DY1ta, _ 1,050 6.7

2,850 18.2

tIsfi;ljL =l 680 4.3

AMU, 1000 5.1

o'w4ol AS 1,780 11.3

15,900 100.0

Ecological Resources

4.8. Vegetation. The vegetation of the newly exposed Aral Sea areas is in a stage of ecologicalsuccession towards a halophytic (salt-tolerant) climax vegetation. Xerophitic and halophytic herbs andsmall shrubs dominate. A gradual replacement of annuals by perennials is noticeable, forming a lowbrush association. Adjacent to lake shores and in depressions near the sea shore, extensive reed fieldsoccur. Along the Syr Darya five principal vegetation formations are found: (i) desert-woody shrub;(ii) desert-bush; (iii) semi-bush and semi-bush desert; (iv) desert and meadow tugai-like community;and (v) stenotopic annual plants in the dry lands.

4.9. Fauna. The Aral Sea region is internationally recognized as a priority area for wetlandconservation. The Aral Sea lies within one of the most important North-South flyways of Palaearcticmigrants with the Central Asian - Indian Flyway and East African Flyway converging over thisregion. The delta lakes and shorelines provided significant foraging and breeding habitats for largenumbers of waterfowl (ducks, geese) and other water birds (pelicans, cormorants, herons, plovers,tems, gulls). Thirty bird species are listed to the Red Book. However, avifauna in and around the AralSea and in the delta is still spectacular.

4.10. Drastic changes in the fauna spectrum of the Aral Sea have occurred since the 1960s. So far,very few species have permanently occupied the new, exposed lands. Some 67 mammal species havebeen recorded along the Syr Darya (including 30 near the NAS). Sixteen species are listed in the RedData. Book. Besides, many animals are economically or commercially significant. Most species aretypical of the desert environments.

4.11. The fish fauna of the NAS is formed by two ecologically different fish groups: (i) introducedflounder; and (ii) small-sized species of salt-tolerant freshwater fish species, that are no longer ofcommercial importance because of increased salinity levels. Some 14 species have been introduced inthe Aral Sea after it salinity levels started rising, only the flounder survives. At present, three fishspecies are included in the Red Book. The delta lakes and river flood plain play an important role asspawning and nurturing sites for many original river and sea species. Lake fisheries, however,declined for a number of well-known reasons: increasing salinity, lack of replenishment of freshwater,

14

blocked access to the lakes and floodplains (catfish) and drying up of lakes. It is known that, beforethe construction of water regulatory works in the Syr Darya , many of the indigenous fish speciesmigrated up to 600 km upstream. The present spawning area is limited by the Kazalinsk hydraulicsystem (200 kIn upstream) and fish also use for spawning the area bordered by the temporary Aklakdike some 30 km from the sea. The potential impacts of the proposed Aklak hydraulic structure onfish migration have been carefully taken into account in the design and location of this structure.

Protected Areas

4.12. There are no protected areas inside the project area, and no existing protected area outside theproject area will be affected by the project. The Barsa-Kelmes reserve is situated southwest of the SyrDarya mouth, south of the proposed dike in the Berg Strait and will therefore not benefit from theproject. It is home to the endangered Asian Wild Ass and Goitered Gazelle. This protected area is atrisk due to decreasing water level and increasing salinity in the LAS. In addition there are five huntingareas, but little is known of the present status of wildlife in these reserves. They are situated in the SyrDarya floodplain and delta. All but one are downstream of Kzyl Orda, one reserve is only a fewkilometers upstream of the city. An expected positive effect is the rehabilitation of wetlands andgrazing lands in the Syr Darya delta, that would greatly improve food supply to wildlife and livestock.

Human and Economic Resources

4.13. Southem Kazakhstan and the Syr Darya valley have played a dominant role as a trade routebetween the Far East and the countries of the Levant. The Great Silk Route is one of the most famouscaravan-ways and trading routes in the history of world civilization. Since the 5h century, settlementswere established in the Syr Darya valley with farming communities. Large tracts of the lands alongthe Syr Darya , the Inkar Darya (now dry), the Zhana Darya (now dry) and the Kuvan Darya wereirrigated. Traces of these civilizations and the irrigation schemes they build can still be found in theSouthern part of the project area.

4.14. The total population around the NAS is estimated between 150,000 to 200,000 people. Thesettlement pattem ranges from villages of a few houses to the cities of Novokazalinsk, Aralsk, andKzyl Orda. The population was essentially stable and the birth rate (1995) of 26 per 1000 slightlyabove the national average of 24. Migration out of the region began to increase in 1970 with decliningenvironmental conditions and reached a peak between 1975 and 1985. Literacy is high, since mostchildren complete primary school. More than 80% of households have more than one income source.Considerable work time is devoted to subsistence activities (livestock tending, vegetable growing,fuel wood gathering), some of which provide ancillary income. Average 1997 households income wasabout USD 920 or per capita about USD 178.

4.15. Domestic water is supplied in various ways. In the major cities about 30-35% of the residentsreceive piped treated water; in Kazalinsk and the smaller towns there are water points on the streets.Even the treated water cannot be considered "pure", since chlorination levels used have been shownineffective against the high levels of coliform bacteria, and the dissolved minerals remain.

4.16. The general health of the people in Aralsk and Kazalinsk Rayons has always been below thenational average, but has declined further in the last 30 years. The most prominent problems arenutritional, serious deficiencies. The cumulative result of this is an increase, in the last ten years, inmiscarriages (from 21 to 35 per 1000 pregnancies), congenital anomalies (4.5 to 10.2), premature

15

births (4.1 to 6.5), and stillborn babies (8.5 to 9.7). The infant mortality rate of 28.3 per 1000 exceedsthe national average of 26.4. Other health problems have been blamed on the high level of nitrates inthe water of the river and canals, consumed untreated by 17% of the rural population. The nitrates,residues of fertilizer applications in the upstream agricultural massifs, are reported to cause birth andgrowth defects, and oral and intestinal sores. The rate of infection of numerous diseases includingparasitic infections is well above national averages in the Aralsk and Kazalinsk Rayons. Examplesinclude respiratory, gastrointestinal, typhoid and paratyphoid fevers, viral hepatitis, and internalparasites. Many of these increased by 10 to 30 times during the 1970s. The central government andthe oblast health department have upgraded health services in the last 20 years with the constructionof several new hospitals and clinics. Unfortunately, the general economic situation in the country andthe lack of local funds has left these facilities badly understaffed and lacking in essential supplies.

4.17. The total land area of the Syr Darya basin within Kzyl Orda and South Kazakhstan Oblasts is27.7 million ha. About 60% of this (15.7 million ha) is occupied by farmlands, the remainder isuncultivated natural land, some of which is used for extensive livestock grazing. Of these farmlands,the largest part is used as desert pastures (15.2 million ha), with low productivity. The irrigated landsin the project area comprise (official statistics) 370,000 ha (2.3%) used for the cultivation of rice,wheat and maize. This used to be a large-scale mechanized type of irrigated agriculture, withcultivation in relatively large basins (2 ha). Since the large-scale mechanized agricultural systemvirtually collapsed in the early nineties, the actual cropped area decreased considerably. Existing co-operatives struggle with financial constraints, lack of inputs, lack of spare parts and shortage oflabour. Yields per hectare have decreased, but accurate data of the actual output and cultivated areaare lacking. The total irrigated area in the project area is estimated to be about 250,000 ha.

4.18 First traces of human occupancy in Kazakhstan date from about I million years ago. This isevident from numerous findings done on the slopes of the Karatau range, which runs some distanceparallel to the Syr Darya valley. The civilizations of the Bronze Age and early Iron Age living inthese areas were already very advanced. Traces can be found of numerous settlements, burialgrounds, mounds, mining work places and petroglyphs dating from these periods, but many of themhave as yet not been properly investigated. Since the first millennium B.C., Southern Kazakhstanand the Syr Darya valley have played a dominant role as a trade route between the Far East and thecountries of the Levant. The Great Silk Route is one of the most famous caravan-ways and tradingroutes in the history of world civilization. It connected the Mediterranean Coast, including the largeempires of Egypt, Byzantium and Mesopotamia with China. The trade highway led through vasttracts of hazardous and deserted country in Central Asia and passed rich settlements such as Bukhara,Samarkand, Turkestan, Otrar, Chimkent and other towns, following the Syr Darya river and otherstreams. The Silk Route in fact consisted of a number of tracks, some of them running South of theAral Sea, others following a more northerly route through the project area and along the Syr Daryariver towards Aralsk, the Caspian Sea and Samara. Not only were goods traded, but scientists, priestsand craftsmen also joined the caravans. The Great Silk Route thus facilitated the exchange of ancientart, scientific and technological achievements, religious creeds and ideas.

4.19 Since the 5th century, settlements were established in the Syr Darya valley with farmingcommunities. These people practiced irrigation and used watermills and windmills for lifting waterand for milling grain. Earthfill dams were built to store water and they developed extensive systemsof irrigation canals and feeders. Large tracts of the lands along the Syr Darya river, the Inkar Darya(now dry), the Zhana Darya (now dry) and the Kuvan Darya were irrigated. Traces of thesecivilizations and the irrigation schemes they build could be found in the Southern part of the Projectarea.

16

5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

5.1. Potential environmental impacts were screened by taking into account environmentalproblems caused by location, design, construction and project operation. Screening of environmentalimpacts of the project indicated that most interventions result in positive or insignificantly adversesocio-economic or environmental impacts (for summary for the impacts see Annex 1).

5.2. For clarity reasons, the project area has been subdivided in five sub-areas, and for each sub-area, expected impacts are summarized on separate maps. The following subproject areas and areasinfluenced by the project are identified:* North Aral Sea (NAS);* Large Aral Sea (LAS) - area influenced by the project;* Syr Darya Delta with Delta Lakes;* Syr Darya Basin between Chardara and the Aral Sea;* Arnasai depression (Uzbekistan) - area influenced by the project.

Environmental Impact from Project Location

5.3. The project components will be executed in an area which is considered to be ecologicallysensitive, having suffered from uncontrolled discharge of industrial pollutants and agro-chemicalresidues. From about 1960 the Aral Sea's water level was systematically and drastically reduced dueto river water diversions for purposes of agricultural irrigation. The drying up of the sea, the delta andthe extensive backswamps along the river made the local climate harsher with more extreme winterand summer temperatures.

5.4. The project is not expected to lead to increased stress on the ecologically sensitive areas; onthe contrary, restoring the NAS will have a myriad of positive ramifications including the restorationof the eco-hydrological functions of the wetlands associated with the Syr Darya. There are noprotected areas located in the project area; the effect on wildlife is considered to be minimal.

Environmental Impact from Project Design

5.5. Rehabilitation and construction of hydraulic structures could lead to hindrance of fishmigration, both upstream and downstream of the proposed structures. Of particular importance is theAklak hydraulic structure in the delta some 25 km from the NAS, that could have an impact on thereproductive capacity of introduced and indigenous fish species in the NAS. According to a ERM/UKstudy related to this project, the increase in the sea's water levels and the decrease in salinity that willresult after the completion of the engineering works, makes it likely that the NAS' fisheriesproduction will be dominated by species that at present are largely confined to delta lakes and the SyrDarya. The productivity of these fishes is maintained through seasonal treks from the NAS to thespawning and nurturing grounds in the delta and its wetlands and lakes. ERM/UK (op cit.) estimatesthat approximately 80% of the existing species will continue to utilize the delta and its wetlands forspawning. The design of water-regulatory structures at Aklak is currently being revised to allow forfish passage devices that would avoid a detrimental impact on NAS' capture fishery yields, and onfishery productivity of the delta lakes. The suitability of designs of such structures for bottom-dwelling migratory fish will be reviewed by fisheries experts.

17

Environmental Impact from Project Construction

5.6. Direct employment may be provided to a large number of skilled and unskilled workersduring construction work. Indirect employment will be generated temporarily in supply industriesproviding construction materials. However, indirect employment opportunities as a result of theproject are difficult to establish since these are not expected to occur immediately but take time tomanifest themselves. In any case it is likely that these will be of a magnitude similar to or greater thanthat created by direct employment.

5.7. The possible introduction of a workforce from outside the project areas in case of non-availability of sufficient local labor is not expected to pose major cultural and health problems for theindigenous population or the workers themselves. Simple health facilities, provided by the contractorsas part of their health, safety and environmental obligations, are expected to be sufficient to mitigatepotential health problems.

5.8. Rehabilitation and construction activities will require sites where plant, equipment andconstruction material can be safely stored. In addition, employees engaged during construction workfrom outside the project area may need accommodation. If, however a sufficient number of unskilledlabor is recruited locally, no accommodation sites would be required. Also, a single contractor wouldprobably try to unify his operations round a single site, if practical, with minimal laboraccommodation at various points. Impacts emanating from these sites are considered to be potentiallysignificant, unless strictly regulated during design and controlled during construction. Especially thefollowing are deemed to be significant issues: (i) spillage of fuels and contamination of water; and (ii)poor sanitation in camps.

* Spillage offuels and contamination of water: Maintenance of vehicles and construction plantsmay result in spillage of fuels, which will impair the usefulness of these sites. Materials, oils andlubricants washed away from storage sites has the potential to contaminate water. Inorganic solidwaste will be generated at both storage sites and accommodation camps, which could reduce theaesthetic appeal of these areas, and contaminates water bodies. Spillage of fuels must be strictlyavoided, as it would otherwise constitute a major impact.

* Poor sanitation: Sanitation facilities for the labor force are not normally made available by thecontractors and their subcontractors. Poor sanitation at camps accommodating construction crewsmay lead to the contamination of local water bodies. In addition, poor sanitation and solid wastemanagement in construction camps and sites may pose a problem for human health.

5.9. Another issue related to project construction concems the establishment of quarry sites andborrow pits. Unless properly monitored, the following impacts may possibly create conflicts amongowners and executing agency

* Conflicts among owners and executing agency: The establishment of quarries and borrow pitsmay cause conflicts between executing agency and owners of properties on which these pits are tobe developed. Owners have the right to demand and receive reasonable rentals/royalties for the useof their land. An additional issue of concern could be untitled occupants on government land;however, this does not appear to be a problem at present.

5.10. Earthwork operations may lead to the following impacts: (i) denuding of landscape due touncontrolled tipping of surplus/spoil materials; and (ii) soil erosion and silting up of rivulets andstreams and back swamps; and (iii) unearthing of archaeological sites. Impacts emanating from earth

18

works are considered to be potentially significant unless regulated during design and controlled duringthe construction period. Impacts emanating from earth works, quarries and borrow pits will beidentified and preventive and mitigating measures will be included as clauses in contracts withconstruction firms. Siting and re-shaping (filling, landscaping) of such sites will be adapted in order tominimize impacts during construction and operation. As to 'archaeological chance find" procedures,arrangements have been made with the Department of Archaeology for timely application of siteclearance procedures. The Law on the Protection and use of Cultural Heritage (1992) requirescontractors to stop excavation works and to notify, the antiquities inspector in the local authorities. Asa first step, a team of knowledgeable national archaeologists will carry out a rapid reconnaissancesurvey of the Syr Darya valley between Kzyl Orda and the mouth of the river. A proposal prepared forthis purpose by the Institute of Archaeology refers to a survey of two months by a team of 24specialists and field assistants

Environmental Impact from Project Operation

5.11. Impacts on the NAS. The project is expected to generate a multitude of positive impacts,that will affect all project sub-areas. As far as the NAS is concerned seven positive impacts have beenidentified:

Water level stabilization: Project implementation will thus stabilize the water level in the NAS.The allocated average annual inflow of fresh water in NAS will be 3,000 MCM. This inflow, incombination with the Berg Strait dike, would result in a rise of water levels ranging between 38.7and 42 m asl (the latter being the elevation of the dike's spillway). This would prevent thebreaking up of the NAS in four separate water bodies. The calculated maximum water surface ofNAS will be 3,288 km2 with a maximum water storage of 27,070 MCM (CES et al., 1999). Astabilized sea, together with sea water quality improvement, would allow a restart of economicactivities and infrastructure development along NAS' shores.

* Drop in salinity levels: With an annual average fresh water inflow in NAS of 3,000 MCM/year,salinity levels in the eastern part of the NAS are expected to drop to 4-10 g/l. These changes willhave positive effects on NAS fisheries and bio-diversity (see below). A maximum level of 17 g/l,which would permit hatching of valuable fish species, is expected.

* Drop in pollutioni levels: The recent improvements in water quality of the Syr Darya will have afurther diluting effect on pollutants remaining in the NAS. Due to economic stagnation and supplyconstraints, present use of agro-chemicals in the middle and lower Syr Darya basin, and in theDelta, are very low indeed, hence no pollution of NAS water with residual pesticides can beexpected. However, this situation could take a turn for the worse after rekindling of economicactivities. In particular, in the eastern part of the NAS where the fresh water discharge from the SyrDarya fans out into the sea, the effects on fisheries, flora and fauna bio-diversity, will be positive.

* Fisheries: The project is expected to have very significant positive impacts on the restoration offish fauna and fisheries in the NAS, provided the proposed Aklak structure provides for themigration of bottom-feeding fish to and fro their spawning and nurturing grounds in the deltawetlands and the river floodplain. Both the construction of the Berg Strait dike and the increasedinflow of fresh water from the Syr Darya will lead to further declining salinity levels and willeventually stabilize and restore the NAS ecosystem. The present nature of the sea's benthossuggests that the food supply available to bottom-feeding fish is still significant (ERM/UK,op.cit.). Prospects of introducing Caspian sturgeon are promising, and a project proposal to this

19

end is being prepared. Trials with this species have demonstrated that annual weight gains of 1.5-2kg can be reached. According to the Kazakh Fisheries Research Institute, 10-12 years afterintroduction, and with further restoration of the food chain in NAS, sustainable annual catches ofup to 100 t of sturgeon can be expected. Such catches allow for a caviar production of 10 t/y.Freshwater fisheries that will develop in the zone influenced by the fresh water discharge from theSyr Darya into the NAS will eventually produce significant quantities of freshwater fish. Aconservative estimate predicts a sustainable harvest of 10 kg/ha, which means 600t/y for the entirezone of influence.

* Bio-diversity enhancement and bird habitat improvement: The project will improve water qualityand stabilize the NAS. It can be expected that part of the original food chain in the NAS will berestored, which would benefit not only fish and other aquatic organisms, but also resident andmigratory aquatic birds. It is also expected that, with declining salinity and the installation of lesssalt-tolerant plant species, the riparian vegetation will be restored, which will provide improvedbreeding and foraging habitat for many bird species.

* Micro-climate and air quality. The project will stabilize the NAS at levels between 38.5 and 42 masl, which implies re-inundation of a substantial surface of land now fallen dry. Where this formersea bottom was covered with salt and dust, it can no longer be lifted in the air and carried away bystorms. Hence, the project will have a (minor) positive effect on the control of menacing salt anddust storms.

* Socio-economic developments. The project seeks to improve the environmental and socio-economic conditions in the delta area and around the northern part of the Aral Sea. It willcontribute to improving living conditions and will provide poverty alleviation in Aralsk andKazalinsk Rayons of the Kzyl Orda Oblast, an internationally recognized area affected by theenvironmental catastrophe and with a total population of 150,000 people.

5.12. Impact on the LAS. No direct interventions are foreseen in the LAS and its peripheral zone.A temporary effect can be expected in this sea during the filling of the NAS, since the water used tofill the NAS up to a level of 42 m asl cannot benefit the LAS. This effect might lead to a temporarydecrease in the water level of the current LAS of about 0.3 m which is not considered serious, evenmore so if the LAS level is continuing to decline. The evaporation of the NAS will increase slightlywith an impact on the LAS of only a few centimeters, which is insignificant. During normal and wetyears, Syr Darya water will flow to the LAS through a spillway in the dike, once the NAS has beenfilled. A minor positive localized impact will emanate due to a drop in pollutant load of LAS water.

5.13 Anthrax on Vozrozdeniya Island in the LAS. Large quantities of anthrax are reportedlyburied on Vozrozdeniya island located in the LAS. About one third of the island belongs toKazakhstan and one third to Uzbekistan. The concern is that ultimately the island would be linked tothe main land, which would greatly increase the chance of spreading possible surviving anthraxbacteria. This is an already existing problem that needs to be addressed on a priority basis.However, the construction of a NAS dike across the Berg Strait will not cause the island to be linkedto the main land. This issue is beyond the scope of this project and is being addressed by theconcerned governments as part of their efforts to address the management of previous military sites.

5.14. Impacts on the Syr Darya delta. As regards the impacts of the project on Syr Darya deltaand delta lakes seven major positive impacts have been identified:

20

* Inproved water quality: The volume of Syr Darya water that will be available for the delta will beof improved quality. This will have positive effects on the quality of grazing lands (re-installationof more palatable plant species, higher biomass production), and on fisheries in the delta lakes.

* Improved water management: The project offers possibilities for significant improvement inbasin wide management. A large volume of water presently wasted in the desert areas couldprovided for more productive uses in the basin. Presently, about 3 BCM of water is diverted to theArnasai depression because of insufficient river capacity downstream of Chardara dam anddeteriorated hydraulic structures, which hampers the supply of water to irrigation canals, lakes andthe NAS. An improved supply of fresh water would have a number of positive effects on theecology of the delta: replenishment of delta lakes and improvement of fisheries and aquaculturepotential; soil desalinization and improved agriculture production; improved pasture production;bio-diversity conservation; and wetlands protection. Above all, the project, if it is timelyimplemented, would prevent loss of life and property that imminent collapse of present dikes andstructures could cause.

* Soil desalinization and improved agriculture production including improved pasture production:The project will provide more fresh water resources, part of which could be used for the flushingof salts and rehabilitation of slight to moderate saline soils. However, fresh water available forleaching of salts will probably be insufficient for treatment of severe saline soils (Salinas, takyrs)as only some 20 cm/y of water is available (compared to 200 cm/y for the command areas in thedesignated irrigation schemes). Once such soils have been flushed and relieved of most of their saltcontent, adequate disposal of drainage water and good quality irrigation water will be required, ifrepeated soil salinity is to be avoided. It is doubtful whether the available irrigation water in thedelta will be of sufficient quality for sustainable flood irrigation. The improved water supply to thedelta will also result in the re-installation of palatable species of plants, thereby improving thequality of grazing over some 18,700 ha. It will also result in higher plant biomass production perunit area. The desalinization of surface water in the delta will further improve the generalcondition of livestock in the delta. These effects will generate an appreciable increase in livestockproducts, and in farmers' income.

* Enhanced bio-diversity values: The effects on bio-diversity in the NAS will be mainly positive:desalinization, restoration of flora and habitat for resident and migratory birds and other species incombination with the restoration of the NAS as a staging area for migrating birds, will allcontribute to bio-diversity conservation. Recovery of fish population following the restoration ofthe food-chain in delta lake systems is a further effect of both ecological and economicimportance. The restoration of riparian vegetation (reinstallation of less salt-tolerant species) willbenefit the breeding, spawning and nesting of many species of bird and fish and other animals. Thepresent SYNAS project is expected to have mainly positive effects on wetland restoration, as itwill, in general, increase the influx of fresh water from the Syr Darya river. However, as exactsiting and design of projected flood prevention dikes in the Delta is currently being worked out, itis not possible to quantify these effects.

Bank stability: Rehabilitation of the Aklak structure will reduce erosion hazards, the risk of riverbed deformation, bank scouring and bank collapse, and eventually drastically lower the silt load ofriver water conveyed to the delta lake systems and to the NAS. The positive effect on erosion willbe the result of: (i) careful planning of the capacity of the rehabilitated structures, with dueattention given to the recharge requirements of the delta lakes and the NAS; (ii) river bedprotection downstream of hydraulic structures and of canal intakes; and (iii) provision of safetyspillways for evacuation of surplus water.

21

* Reduced incidence of salt and dust storms: Bare salt flats will be vegetated or covered with surfacewater, thus reducing the area covered with salt and dust layers and exposed to the eroding forces ofstrong winds. The existing villages in the delta will be less effected by frequent dust storms and theliving conditions in these settlements will improve.

* Improved employment and general socio-economic conditions: Potentials for fishery developmentand aquaculture will improve, including the growing conditions and irrigation for agriculturalcrops and pastures.

5.15 As regards cultural property and archaeological sites including grave yards and burials, nonegative impacts are foreseen. Detailed assessments at various locations have to be carried out by theState Archaeological Institute.

5.16 Impacts along the Syr Darya. In addition to impacts mentioned above for the Syr Daryadelta, project impacts along the Syr Darya between Chardara dam and the delta are as follows:

* Improved river discharge to the delta and the NAS: The hydraulic control structures at Aitek andAklak were originally constructed as "temporary structures" with a very low discharge capacity.They have to be replaced with an increase in their design capacities to be able to convey theincreased winter flows and spring floods (including the reductions in spills to Arnasai) to the deltaand the NAS. In addition, the Aitek structure is already on the verge of collapse, thus endangeringthe water supply for some 17,000 ha of irrigated crops. The Aklak structure is already out of useand the river bypasses it, which is currently causing severe erosion of the river bed, thus loweringriver water levels and reducing progressively the water supply to the delta lakes. If this erosion isallowed to continue it could eventually endanger all hydraulic infrastructure upstream, includingthe stability of the Kazalinsk barrage and thus all irrigation in the delta. Moreover, the Aklakstructure is required to raise the river water levels to refill the delta lakes. Except for the potentialnegative environmental impacts during construction, which can be mnitigated, the impact of theseinterventions will be positive.

* Flood protection measures: The implementation of flood protection measures will protectsettlements, which have been subject to regular inundation, and will avoid water losses byinundation of back swamps due to overflowing of embankments. These measures will save up to800 MCM/y which volume can be made available for the delta area and NAS, and as such help toreplenish the delta lakes with water. Some minor negative impacts are impeded floodplain accessof spawning fish; and disruption of fish migration.

* Agricultural development: Present irrigation water use is extremely inefficient (the estimatedproject irrigation efficiency is at present is about 30%) and large quantities of water are being lost.Current irrigation practices are not sustainable and should be improved. Moreover, the absence ofan adequate (open) drainage system in areas with poor natural drainage leads to the salinization ofsoils (and surface waters), signs of which are noticeable in many places. It is expected thatespecially the rehabilitation of the Kzyl Orda and Kazalinsk headworks, and the establishment ofthe Basin Consultative Group would contribute to improving the project irrigation efficiency toabout 40% and contribute to a more equitable and reliable water supply for irrigation in about131,000 ha. Further measures at secondary and tertiary level are needed to increase the efficiencyin irrigation. This should include massive extension programs to improve on-farm watermanagement and adequate drainage provisions in order to make agriculture sustainable.

22

* Fish production: It is expected that the rehabilitation of the Aitek and Karaozek weirs and canalstructures will improve the fresh water replenishment to the lakes, thereby enhancing fisheriesproduction. Location and design of the Aklak structure is being revised in order to allow formigration of bottom-feeding fish species from the NAS to the delta floodplains and lakes for

* spawning, and vice versa. This is an essential condition in support of the long-term maintenance ofthe NAS and delta wetlands' capture fishery. No quantified estimate of production increase can be

given. Provided the water quality of the Syr Darya river further improves, and regulationspertaining to sustained yield fisheries are effectively enforced, the effect on fisheries productioncan improve the nutritional status and family income of several thousand families.

5.17 As regards cultural property and archaeological sites, no negative impacts are foreseen, sincemost sites are located at some distance of the main river. Detailed assessments at various locationshave to be carried out by the State Archaeological Institute.

5.18 Impact on the Arnasai Depression. The Arnasai depression, which is situated on Uzbekterritory, has been historically used for the disposal of drainage water from irrigated areas. The waterspills from Chardara reservoir are also diverted to this depression during extreme flood periods.Water is spilled to this depression when inflows are so high that they can not be stored in thereservoir or released in the Syr Darya due its limited carrying capacity. Until 1991 these spills wererare and limited to small quantities only. Since 1992, spills to the Arnasai depression have increasedsignificantly mainly because the operation of the upper reservoirs, particularly Toktugul in the KyrgyzRepublic, has been changed by the Kyrgyz Republic to generate more electricity through hydropowerduring the winter months. These additional fresh water inflows into the Arnasai depression seem tohave had some positive impacts on the local environment, making the lake a recreation zone for thenearby city of Tashkent and leading to the development of some fisheries. At the other hand, theincrease in the flooded area in Arnasai depression has also caused substantial damage to property andarable land in Uzbekistan. Overall, the impact of the high spills in recent years has been negative asevidenced by the fact that the Government of Uzbekistan has formally requested the GoK to reducethe spilling of flood waters into the depression by releasing more of these waters in the Syr Daryadownstream of Chardarah reservoir. The impact of the project on Arnasai can therefore be consideredto be positive; the project works will enable the release of more water in the Syr Darya downstream sothat damages around Arnasai would be reduced. Spills into Arnasai would not be eliminatedcompletely. The quantities of water flow into the depression would be restored to the pre-1992 levelonly if operation of Toktugul reservoir would again give priority to irrigation. This scenario ispossible only if a full agreement is reached among the basin states on irrigation and hydropoweroperations.

5.19 Further analysis to resolve the issues of the Arnasai depression is being carried out under theGEF supported Water and Environmental Management Project. Regional and national salt and waterbalances are being prepared to enable basin states to revise water sharing agreements. During theproject implementation stage the impact on the Arnasai depression would be monitored.

5.20 Impact on Poverty alleviation. The long-term socio-economic benefits of the project maynot directly be perceived as alleviating poverty, but they play a significant role in enabling economicgrowth that would benefit the poor. However, they can only be fully realized in collaboration withother development initiatives (such as the UNDPlWorId Bank funded Aral Sea Region andHumanitarian Assistance Programme) to improve the livelihoods of the poor, such as improved healthand education services, access to electricity and clean drinking water, or capacity building activities.

23

5.21 Monitoring of social and economic impacts resulting from the project requires a fairlycomprehensive baseline study to establish adequate indicators before the start of the project, as well asmeasuring these over a long period of time of, say, at least 10 years since these socio-economicbenefits are not expected to occur immediately after completion of the project. Additionally, one hasto take into account that such a lengthy study may be further complicated by the simultaneousoccurrence of a multitude of developmental events, unrelated to the project, making it extremelydifficult to clearly attribute any of the (positive or negative) effects to the project. Sufficient resources(i.e. additional to the requirements in relation to the implementation of the EMP) would need to beallocated for this purpose.

6 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

6.1. Consistent with the procedures of the World Bank, the alternatives for the proposed projecthave been analyzed including the "no project" alternative, strategic alternatives and technicalalternatives for site specific structures. The analysis of alternatives was based on a detailed site-specific analysis and benefited from active consultations with local parties.

6.2 The proposed project aims at a guaranteed annual inflow of 3,000 MCM for the NAS which isconsidered an essential step in the right direction, as there is no better alternatives available. Withoutthe project, water surface levels of the NAS are expected to decline further as river inflows would notcompensate for evaporation levels. This would lead to a splitting up of the NAS into four separatelakes. With regard to the LAS, its surface elevation will continue to decline and its water quality willfurther deteriorate.

6.3 The "no project" alternative. Without the project, water levels of the NAS are expected todecline further as river inflows would not compensate for evaporation levels. This would lead to asplitting up of the NAS into four separate lakes. With regard to the LAS, the water level will continueto decline and its water quality will further deteriorate - see table 2.

Table 2 - Impacts in the "No Project" Case

Subproject Area Positive Impacts Negative ImpactsLarge Aral Sea (LAS) Cessation of inflow from NAS.

Further deterioration of water quality.Northern Aral Sea Splitting up of NAS into four separate lakes.(NAS) Deterioration of water quality with

concomitant impact on fisheries.Fluctuating sea levels impedingestablishment of infrastructure, fishingvillages and tourist resorts.

Syr Darya delta and Drying up of delta lakes with concomitantDelta Lakes impact on fisheries. Collapse of Aklak

structure and intensified river bed as well asbank erosion upstream.

24

Subproject Area Positive Impacts Negative ImpactsSyr Darya basin Collapse of Aitek weir halting water supplybetween Chardara and to 40,000 ha of irrigated lands, hayfield andNAS lakes.

Flooding and overflowing of river banksduring wet years, loss of water fordownstream users.

Arnasai depression Continuation of Continuation of excessive water spillagetemporary recreational into Arnasi depression from Chardarause, fisheries and natural reservoir against the wishes of Govemmenthabitats caused by of Uzbekistan in view of frequentperiodic spillage of water inundations and damage to property.into the Arnasaidepression due to watermanagement problems

Design Strategies and Options

6.4 Design strategies for the NAS. Given the general development framework, considerableefforts were undertaken to consider alternative design strategies for the NAS, including among others:(i) a number of alternatives for the NAS dike across the Berg Strait with the maximum water surfaceelevation in the NAS ranging from 41 m to 47 m asl; (ii) in case of a low NAS water level, linking thefour major water bodies within the NAS through channels but this was found to be costly while itwould also not allow for proper mixing of the waters already present with the flows of fresh watercarried into the NAS by the Syr Darya; and (iii) whether or not to supply water to the harbour ofAralsk by means of a canal or through the construction of a second dike in the NAS. The works under(i) and (ii) were found not to meet the environmental objectives or to be cost effective.

6.5 Design water level for NAS. A maximum normal operating water level in the NAS of 42 masl was determined to be the best solution considering the construction costs, benefits, and wateravailability in the near future. For example alternatives above 42 m asl are extremely costly(construction cost for maintaining the NAS water level at 43 m asl is three times more costly) withonly slightly increased benefits because increased water losses through evaporation and salinity offsetthe gains due to the increase in open water surface. A NAS level above 42 m asl also needs additionalwater to be made available through an increase in the irrigation efficiency, requiring huge investmentswhich can not be expected to be forthcoming in the near future. With maximum levels lower than 42m asl, there is a danger that the NAS would not stay a single water body during low flow periods andthis option is, therefore, rejected.

6.6 NAS dike. Design alternatives considered for the NAS dike concentrated mainly on thestrengthening of the existing structure. Selection of materials moreover is influenced by the fact thatstone and gravel are not available in the area. Three alternatives were considered:

- An earth-fill dam with a gentle "beach-type" upstream slope with a ratio of 1:45, consisting oflocal fine-grained sand. This would require no protection of the upstream face.

* An earth-fill dam (of local sand) with an upstream slope of 1:10, protected by rip rap.. An earth-fill dam (of local sand) with an upstream slope of 1:5 and rip rap protection.

25

6.7 The cost of a dam with a beach-type upstream face, is substantially lower as compared to theother two options. The second altemative (1:10) is more than four times as expensive and the third(1:5) is almost three times as expensive. In comparing the ecological characteristics of the threealternatives, the beach-type slope offers the best possibility of developing a viable littoral ecosystem.Four spillway designs were examined, comprising both gated and non-gated overflow structures andgated sluices. The selection of an eight-section controlled sluice structure was made on the basis ofthe need to control the discharge, to allow for flushing, and to facilitate operation during winter, andof costs involved.

6.8 Increasing the river's water flow capacity. For improving the carrying capacity of theriver, detailed river profile studies were carried out. The interventions included in the project areminimum investments required to remove major bottle necks and enable flow of water towards theNAS, the delta areas, irrigated areas, grazing lands and lake systems. These interventions include thereconstruction of the Aklak and Aitek structures; rehabilitation of the Kzyl Orda and Kazalinskbarrages; the construction of embankments along critical river sections in order to increase the river'sdischarge capacity without flooding the urban areas/rural settlements; and, the reconstruction of thewater supply systems (intakes and conveyance canals) for the lakes in the delta area.

6.9 The hydraulic control structure at Aitkek. For increasing the conveyance capacity at Aitektwo basic options were considered: (i) removal of the existing Aitek weir from the river channel, thusreturning to the natural free flow regime of the river, and providing a connecting canal from the KzylOrda barrage to the irrigated area under command of the existing Aitek headworks; and (ii) theconstruction of a new structure at the Aitek site. The second alternative was found to be a moreeconomic solution and would also be less disruptive to ongoing agricultural operations. For thesecond option, four technical variants were considered, which were about equal from theenvironmental point of view. The most economic alternative was therefore selected forimplementation.

6.10 Hydraulic control in the delta. Three alternatives for the location of hydraulic controlstructures in the Syr Darya delta and associated distribution networks for water supply to lakes,grazing lands and nature complexes were considered during project elaboration. From anenvironmental point of view the three options are essentially equal, as they make possible theimprovement of water supply to fishery lakes, natural areas and pastures. The option comprising theconstruction of new headworks at Aklak and Raim, each with off-takes for the supply of pastures,lakes and natural areas has been selected by the Consultant. However, the construction of Raim hasbeen postponed to a later stage.

6.11 The Aklak outfall structure. The final design and location of the Aklak hydraulic structurein the delta that would allow for spawning migrations of bottom-feeding fish species has now beennow finalized. The ERM/UK fishery study considers the "with Aklak" and "without Aklak" case. Thelatter option is not considered here as the structure is essential to halt the ongoing river bed erosion.The inclusion of suitable fish migration devices in the design of the structure is essential to theeconomic viability of the project.

26

7 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Mitigation Measures

7.1 Many of the potentially negative impacts can be prevented or minimized by takingappropriate measures. The main environmental impacts and proposed preventive and mitigatingmeasures are summarized below. These mainly require the civil works contractors to strictly abide bythe Govemment of Kazakhstan environmental regulations and by the World Bank environmentalprocedures. If these guidelines are properly followed, environmental impacts resulting from projectimplementation would be minimal. It requires the engineering consultant to incorporatecomprehensive environmental protection measures into the contract documents.

7.2 The project can clearly contribute to improved management of land systems which areparticularly vulnerable or characterized by a limited carrying capacity of the Syr Darya. The goalwould then be to restore the Delta lakes and the wetlands so that socio-economic activities can berestarted and to ensure protection and rehabilitation of wetlands (Delta lakes) that have been identifiedfor conservation. As part of the mitigating measures a hydro-ecological survey needs to beundertaken. The survey data would be used to prepare a zoning plan and integrated land usemanagement plan for the delta, to be used, inter alia, for the conservation of important habitats andsensitive species, including resident and migratory birds. The hydro-ecological survey would alsosupport the development of a fisheries management plan (included in Component D). The lattershould focus on the applied research needs, training of fishery wardens, outreach programs forfishermen, and investments for fish storage and marketing that may be required to implement thefisheries plan.

7.3 Costs for mitigation. All mitigation measures will be implemented as integral parts of theproject. Costs for construction and related activities are already included in Project Component B.Costs for fisheries activities (USD 180,000) are included in Project Component D. Costs forinstitutional strengthening (USD 400,000) are included in Component F. The costs of the mitigationmeasures included in Component E amount to USD 1,220,000 (see Tables 3 and 4).

Monitoring Program

7.4. Environmental Monitoring has a dual purpose. It is designed to monitor the contractors' workduring project implementation, to check contractual compliance with specified mitigation measures,and subsequently to make periodic checks on the actual environmental impacts of the project over theyears following completion of upgrading works, and compare these with the impacts anticipated at thetime of project appraisal. The Table below presents the key indicators which need monitoring.

7.5 Costs for monitoring. It is proposed to extend the monitoring period over a five-year period.The required funds (see Table 5), USD 60,000 in investment costs and USD 470,000 in operationalcosts, are included in Component E. Details on the implementation of the monitoring program will beworked out during the first phase of project implementation, as needs for monitoringfully depend onprogress of construction and rehabilitation works.

27

Table 3 - Summary of Environmental Mitigation Measures

Measure Responsibility Justification Cost (USD)I I I And financing

Desi PhaseI .Detailed hydro-ecological Pre-Aral Ecological Center, Basic inventory and study of impacts of USD 250,000inventory of Syr Darya Kazalinsk and Kazgidromet with detailed design of hydrological/flood Through M&EDelta assistance of intemational control measures on ecology of Delta and consultancy

consultants lakes (initiated in project studies) contract (Comp. E)2.1ntegrated land use Pre-Aral Ecological Center, Preparation of zoning plan, identification of USD 345,000management plan for Delta Kazalinsk and Kazgidromet with areas to be protected (inter alia, for Additional work

assistance of intemational conservation of important habitats and through M&Econsultants sensitive species, incl. resident and consultancy

migratory birds), preparation of land use contract (Comp. E)management plan integrating various landand water uses. Macro work to beundertaken in ASBP.

3.(Re)construction of dikes CWRJconsultant Study of loss in ecological values due to Included in projectflood control works. cost (Comp. B)

4. Design of fish ladders CWR/consultant Fisheries ecologist to advise on design of Included in projectl _____________________ ________________________ fish ladders cost (PPF)5. Jchthyological surveys CWR/consultant Fisheries ecologists to undertake surveys USD 25,000

_(Comp. D6 Review of hunting laws CWRlconsultant Often the creation of habitat creation is USD 5,000 (Comp.

negated because the animals are shot E)Construction Phase

7. Planning of new borrow CWR/consultant Proper planning and management of borrow Included in projectpits and quarries pits, including supervision. cost (Comp. F)(clearance by Dep.Arch.)8. Waste Collection & CWR/Consultant Proper collection and disposal of waste, Included in projectConstruction of proper including oil, fuel and lubricant residue costs (Comp. B)disposal sites9. Archaeological Dept of Archaeology a. Exploratory survey between Kzyl Orda - Investment: USDassessment Syr Darya mouth 50,000

b. Follow-up of chance find procedure Operational:5,000/y for 3 y

_(in Comp. E)Operational Phase

10. Evaluation of actual Kazgidromet Automatic water level recorders, salinity Investment: USDwater inflow and water surveys. 100,000quality in NAS (in Comp. F)

Operational:25,000/y(in Comp. E)

I1. Rehabilitation of KAZNIRH/Fisheries Institute a. Training of fishery wardens Investment:fisheries in lakes and NAS, /MoA Dept Fisheries b. Enforcement of fishing regulations USD 80,000and sustainable fisheries id. c. Catch registration and annual registration Operationalmanagement of Catch per Unit.Annual trial catch. 25,000/y

(in Comp. D12. Evaluation of health MoH Annual evaluation health situation. 20,000/y (in Comp.situation E)13. Restoration of wetlands WRC through contractor Water control measures, improvement of Investment:and lakes in Delta water distribution and conveyance for USD 400,000 (in

natural habitats. Comp. B)1 4.Management plan for MoA Dept forestry and protected Preparation of detailed plan for 100,000 ha Investment:protected area in Delta areas with UNDP/ GEF protected area. USD 200,000 (in

Comp. E)

28

Measure Responsibility Justification Cost (USD)I______________________ ____________________________ A nd financing

15. Institutional EMIS within PIU, with technical Environmental Management Information USD 500,000strengthening assistance System to support environmental planning (USD 100,000 in

and management Comp. E and USD400,000 in Comp.F)

16. Strict adherence to CWR/contractor avoiding health hazards and accidents In Comp. B&Fenvironmental code ofconduct of HS&E safetyprocedures by contractorTOTAL COSTS Investment costs

1,955,000+7 5,000/yoperational costs

Table 4 - Implementation Schedule, Cost Breakdown and Funding for ProposedEnvironmental Mitigation Measures; costs in USD

Mitigatory measures Implementation Investment Operational Total Funding from ProjectSchedule Costs Costs Costs Component

I. Hydro-ecological inventory of Syr DP - 18 m 200,000 50,000 250,000 EDarya Delta

2. Integrated land use managementplan for Delta DP - 12 m 275,000 75,000 350,000 E

3. (Re)construction of Dikes4. Design of fish ladders5. Ichthyological surveys DP/CP - 24 m B6. Planning of borrow pits (clearance

by Dep.of Arch.) DP/CP - 12 m PPF7. Waste Collection and constr. Of DP - 12 m 25,000 25,000 D

disposal sites CP- 2-4 m B8. Archaeological assessment9.Eval. of actual water inflow and

water quality in NAS CP - cont. BIO. Rehab. of fisheries in lakes and

NAS, sustainable fisheries CP - 36 m 50,000 15,000 65,000 EManagement

I I. Eval. of health situation CP/OP - cont. 100,000 75,000 175,000 E12. Restoration of wetlands and lakes (3 years)

in Delta13. Management Plan for Protected OP- 3 years 80,000 75,000 155,000 D

Areas in the Delta14. Institutional Strengthening

15. Strict adherence to env. code of OP- 4 years 80,000 80,000 Econduct of

16. Review of hunting laws HS&E CP- years 1-3 400,000 400,000 Bsafety procedures by contractors. (36 m)

CP/OP - 18 m 150,000 50,000 200,000 E

CP - cont. 300,000 200,000 500,000 E 100,000CP - cont. F 400,000DP-3m 5,000 B&F

EDP: Design Phase; CP: Construction Phase; OP: Operational Phase

29

Table 5 - Important Indicators to be Monitored

Impact Indicator Location Frequency Cost Responsible

Management

Monitoring and Management of M&E Kazalinsk Permanent 60,000 + PMU with technicalevaluation program (lead) 5,000/y assistance (international

(costs for consultants in associationTA with e.g. the Pre-Aralincluded Ecological Center)in Table5, item14)

During Construction and Operation

Water quality Salinity NAS Five locations Monthly 5000/y Kazgidromet

Salinity Delta lakes Major lakes (ten Monthly 5000/y Kazgidrometlocations)

Quality river water Syr Darya (four Quarterly 4000/y Kazgidrometlocations)

Inflow NAS MCM inflow into Aklak weir Permanent 3000 /y CWRlKazgidrometNAS ._.

Inflow LAS MCM inflow into Berg Strait spillway Permanent 3000/y CWR/KazgidrometLAS

Water use and Outcomes from Arnasai, Syr Darya Seasonal 50,000/y Appropriate nationalwaste and satellite sensing Valley and delta and instituteagricultural NASproductivity

Groundwater Groundwater-table Selected locations Seasonal 5000/y Kazgidrometlevel and quality and EC

Fisheries Trial catch NAS NAS Annual 1 000/y KazNIIRH/Fishery Institute

Trial catch lakes Delta lakes Annual I 000/y KazNIIRH/Fishery Institute

Health Medical statistics Kazalinsk/Aralsk Quarterly I 000/y MoH

Evaluation for Kazalinsk/Aralsk Annual 1000/y MoHremedial action

Agriculture/ Land use, yield and Syr Darya valley Annual 4000/y MoAlivestock livestock statistics

Tourism No. of tourists Kamyshlybash Annual I 000/y Aralsk RayonDuring Construction only

Quarries and Planning/management Project sites Continuous Project CWR/consultantborrow pits of borrow pits

Archaeology Follow-up chance Syr Darya valley Continuous 5000/y Dept of Archaeologychance finds finds

* summary of costs: Operational Costs: 470,000; Investment Costs 60,000

Environmental Management and Training

7.6. Present Government institutions in the environmental sector are weak. The newly createdMinistry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection (MNREP) would have overallresponsibility for project implementation. MNREP is involved in formulating and implementingpolicies, plans and programs. It formulates acts and regulations and creates guidelines on population

30

and the environment. The ministry is also mandated to work for the control of pollution,environmental conservation and regular and periodic monitoring and evaluation of programsimplemented by other agencies. However, it lacks the capacity to monitor project activities in thevarious districts.

7.7. Recently, the Committee for Water Resources (CWR) has been transferred from the Ministry ofAgriculture to MNREP. MNREP has delegated the responsibility for project implementation to CWR.This provides an unique opportunity to facilitate a project approach in which technical, environmentaland socio-econornic aspects are integrated. However, the CWR needs strengthening in terms ofmanpower, and training is required in the field of environmental planning, monitoring, andcommunication. Within the CWR, the management of the project would be undertaken by a ProjectManagement Unit (PMU) headed by the National Project Coordinator, who would carry overallresponsibility for project preparation and implementation and coordination on project related matterswith other agencies involved, such as the Ministry of Finance and its Department for Extemal Loans,the Ministry of Energy and Trade, and the local authorities in the South Kazakhstan and Kzyl Ordaoblasts.

7.8 'An Inter-ministerial Coordinating Committee (ICC) would be established for the project. Itsmain task would be to resolve problems of inter-agency coordination. The ICC would meet semi-annually or more frequently if required. It would be composed of representatives of MENR, MOF,MOA, MET, CWR, and the South Kazakhstan and Chimkent oblasts, and the chairpersons of theProject Steering Committee (PSC) and the Basin Consultative Group (BCG).

7.9 A Project Steering Committee (PSC) would be established (i) to keep the local populationinformed of project activities and progress, including but not limited to project studies, design,implementation; M&E results, activities/programs proposed or undertaken by donors; funding ofthese activities etc.; and (ii) to ensure that the project achieves its environmental and socialdevelopment outcomes; this would involve commenting on project issues and proposing revisions asnecessary in on-going project support activities. The PSC would meet quarterly in Kzyl Orda or morefrequently if required. The PSC would be chaired by the Vice-Minister of MENR and would includerepresentatives of South Kazakhstan and Kzyl Orda oblasts; MOA, MOH, CWR and METrepresentatives in these oblasts; at least five persons of the local population representing the interestsof the farming communities and the NAS and delta lake fisheries; a representative of the ChardarahPower Company; and the chairman of the Basin Consultative Group (BCG). The representatives ofthe local population may be the same persons representing the water users in the (BCG) when fullyestablished.

7.10 A small Basin Consultative Group (BCG) would be established under the project within theframework of existing laws and regulations, to facilitate a systematic process of consultation amongwater users and interests. The BCG would serve to ensure effective public participation in the waterallocation and management process in the Kazakh part of the basin. The BCG would includerepresentatives of the Kzyl Orda and South Kazakhstan oblasts; representatives of farmers, NAS andlake fishery, and livestock interests; and the Chardara Power Company. The BCG would discussinter alia: overall water allocation plans and particularly the required flows for the NAS and the delta.

7.11 The environmental management of the project would be undertaken by an EnvironmentalSub-Unit (ESU) in the PMU. The ESU would be mandated to (i) oversee and correct the timelyimplementation of the proposed mitigating measures and (ii) supervise the monitoring of the project'simpact. The ESU would be kept small and be comprised of three local environmental specialists (twoecologists and one hydrologist/system manager). However, the PMU would contract consultancy

31

services for (i) managing the environmental mitigation measures outlined in Table 4 and (ii)managing the monitoring program outlined in Table 6. It is expected that under this contract asubstantial part of this work would be delegated to national institutes. Training of national staff(including PMU staff, consultants and staff of participating institutes) would be an integral part of theassignment in order to ensure that these staff can implement the EMP efficiently and continue M&Efor at least five years after project completion. Training would be mostly undertaken through on thejob training; workshops and seminars. Details on implementation of the monitoring program will beworked out during the initial stages of project implementation, as needs for monitoringfully dependon progress of construction and rehabilitation works. It is recommended that the project, for land- andwater management, co-ordinates with the ASBP - Global Environmental Facility (GEF) component"Water and Environmental Management Project (USD 7 million, approved in 1998). This GEF-project includes a specific Salt & Water Management component covering the entire Syr Daryabasin, delta and Aral Sea.

7.12 Costs for environmental management and training are estimated at about USD 500,000 ofwhich USD 100,000 have been allocated to Component E and USD 400,000 to component F. Thelatter includes a training budget of about USD 100,000.

Cost Summary for Project Component E (Monitoring and Evaluation)

7.13 In summary the costs included in Component E include:

(i) Mitigation measures USD 1,220,000(ii) M&E 530,000(iii) Institution building 100.000

Total 1,850,000

8 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1. The short-term and long-term social and environmental impacts envisaged from this projectare positive. Construction of a dike across the Berg Strait will result in a stable level of NAS between39 - 42 m asl which will secure NAS as one hydrological entity, in stead of four separated lakes.Salinity level of the NAS will be reduced thereby creating a sustainable environment for developmentof fisheries and reintroduction of fish species which have disappeared due to strong salinization. Theconstruction of a dike will result in a substantial reduction in the surface area of bare saline flats(former sea bottom) which will create conditions for the development of fresh/brackish plantcommunities around the perimeter of the sea; and finally the strengthening of the function of the NASas an important bird habitat, situated on one of the major migration routes in Central Asia.

8.2. Construction/rehabilitation of weirs in the Syr Darya delta, improvement of intakes of watersupply canals to the lakes, local embankments to protect agricultural lands and villages from floodingwill have a number of positive impacts on the hydrology and ecology of the lake systems. This willenhance fisheries development and open possibilities for aquaculture; and improve grazing lands andagricultural fields used for fodder production; as well as increase the bio-diversity of the area.

8.3. Reconstruction of hydraulic structures in the area between the delta and Kzyl Orda will leadto positive impacts on irrigated agricultural production along the Syr Darya plain and increasing water

32

efficiency in main supply canals; provision of better quality water available for fodder production andgrazing lands along the river; as well as flood protection of parts of the town of Kzyl Orda and ofcommunities and agricultural lands in the Delta.

8.4. A number of environmental risks have been identified. Most impacts can be mitigated properlyto ensure that these risks are reduced to acceptable levels. A number of negative secondary (indirect)impacts have been noted, including deterioration of the water quality of drainage effluents. The sameapplies for the use of irrigation water. Present irrigation efficiencies belong to the lowest in the world(overall efficiency is around 25%), indicating a considerable waste of water. Strict discipline in watermanagement practices should be maintained, including improved water pricing and the safe disposalof polluted drainage water. Possibilities for re-use of drainage water should be investigated. Due toautonomous development, renewed industrial pollution could occur after revitalization of theindustries upstream, which could negatively affect the quality of river water. A number of significantissues have been discussed above with an outline of the proposed remedial measures and thesemeasures, such as institutional strengthening, should become integral parts of the loan and contractprovisions.

8.5 It is recommended that the project should receive the approval of the proponent (MNREP) andthe World Bank and that the Borrower (GoK) should proceed to implementation, subject to the inclusionof the mitigating measures outlined above; and issuance of a Notice of approval from MNNREP.

1

Annex 1Summary Impact Tables

Overview of Project Impacts on NAS

Description Positive Impacts Negative ImpactsWater Level Water levels guaranteed between 38.7 and 42 m asl. ._.Water Quality - Salinity Salinity levels will drop significantly to 4-10 g/l, thereby

enhancing prospects of a revival of sea fisheries.Water Quality - Pollution Current pollution levels will drop which will improve health

conditions of the riparian communities and enhance conditionsfor flora and fauna.

Fisheries Production and Significant positive impact on prospects for restoring seaPotential fishefies up to sustainable annual freshwater and marine

catches of 500 t/y fish and 10 t/y caviar leading to substantialincreased economic benefits for riparian communities (totalproject benefits from fisheries are estimated to be USD 10.32million/y in year 10).

Bio-diversity Enhancement and Variety of salinity levels (from freshwater conditions near toBird Habitat Improvement the mouth of Syr Darya) up to levels of 4-17 g/l will enhance

conditions for a variety of marine and terrestrial species. Astabilized coastline will create improved breeding conditionsfor birds.

Endangered Species Improved ecological conditions due to better water quality. -

Dike Stabilization No loss of lives or material.Tourism Development Stabilized coastline will induce tourism development. _Micro-Climate and Air Quality Reduced incidence of salt and dust storms.Socio-Economic Status Improved employment conditions and general socio-economic

____________________________ conditions.

Overview of Impacts of Project on LAS

Description Positive Impacts Negative ImpactsWater Level Minor negative impact due to a

maximum reduction in LASelevation level of 0.20 m.

Water Quality Minor positive localized impact dueto drop in pollutant load of LAS

________________ _____________________ __ water.

2

Summary Overview of Impacts of Project on Syr Darya River Delta and Delta Lakes

Description Positive Impacts Negative ImpactsWater Quality Lower salinity levels leading to

higher biomass production andimproved lake fisheries.

Improved Water Supply Improved fisheries andaquaculture potential.Soil desalinization andimproved agricultureproduction.Improved pasture production.Enhanced bio-diversity values.

Bank Stability and River Bed Erosion Reduced erosion hazards andriver bed deformation, bankscouring and collapse.

Micro-Climate and Air Quality Reduced incidence of salt anddust storms

Summary Overview of Impacts of Project on Syr Darya between Chardara and Delta

Description Positive Impacts NegaLtive ImpactsRiver Water Regulatory Structures Substantial water savings will

enhance agricultural productionpotential.

Water QualityFlood Protection Measures Increased water supplies for Without sufficient extension services and

downstream use. secondary/tertiary irrigation structures, on-Increased replenishments of lakes. farm water management, saving and pricing,

substantial water may be wasted at farm fieldlevel leading to salinization of soils.

Fish Production Enhancement of fisheries If regulations relating to sustained yieldproduction. fisheries are not adhered to, fisheries

production may be reduced.Erosion Control Reduced bank scouring and bank Reduced silt loads reaching back swamps

collapse. cause less biomass production.Cultural Property/Archaeological Most likely no negative impacts, but detailedsites location has to be verified by Archeological

InstituteMicro-Climate and Air Quality Reduced incidence of salt and dust

stormsSocio-Economic Status Improved employment conditions

and general socio-economicconditions.

Water Management Replace of Aklak and Aitekstructures safeguards water supplyto irrigated lands, hayfields andlakes.

3

Annex 2Lists of participants in Consultation Meetings held at Aralsk and Kyzl Orda

LIST OF PARTICIPANTSof the seminar of the regulation of the Syr-Darya and the North Aral Sea project

held in Aralsk on 18 May 2000

No Name Organization | Position |PresenceARALSK RAYON (=district)

1 Zhusup S.K. Aralsk rayon akimat Deputy akim v2 Yesetov K. Ecological rayon Head v

committee3 Doshniyazova G. Rayon sanitary Head physician v

epidemiologicalstation

4 Abishev C. Rayon agro Head vadministration

5 Madenov D. ASUEV Head v6 Tazhedinov D. rayon land use Chairman v

committee7 Otarbaev K. rayon healthcare Head v

department8 Abishev Zh. JSC "Ama" branch Head v

No. 139 Makhanbetova public society "Aral Representative v

Zh. tenizi"10 S. Sokolov UNDP in Aralsk Representative v11 Aryngaziev Zh. rayon akimat Public counselor v

on fisheries12 Yermakhanov Z. Aral branch of Director v

Kazakhstan fisheriesinstitute

13 Karatyubov A. "Karatyup" firm Director v(fishery)

14 Zhumashev A. "Karasai-Kazi Ltd." Director v(fishery)

15 Baktybaev K. JSC "Kyzmet" Director(fishery)

16 Kutmambetov M. Production Chairmancooperative"Dzhambul"

17 Dilmaganbetov village district Akim vN. Kambash

18 Abdikerov Zh. village district Raim Akim1 9 Abdraman Zh. rayon newspaper Editor

"Tolkyn"

4

No Name Organization Position Presence20 Abdualiev 0. oblast newspaper Correspondent in

"Kyzyl-Orda news" Aralsk rayon21 Zhakyp Zh. oblast newspaper Correspondent in

"Syr Boyi" Aralsk rayon22 Isaev A. "Kamystybas" Co. President v23 Isaev M. "Kosaral" Co. President _

24 Ytepov B. "Raim" Co. President25 Zhaimakhov T. "Sary Chaganak" President v

Co. I_IKAZALINSK RAYON

26 Aserbaev B. Kazalinsk veer Head v27 Yermekov N. Kazalinsk irrigation Head v

systemsadministration

28 Kabylov K. "Moldir su" Co. President v29 Kuppaeva K. "Sutam zhastary" President

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C o ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

30 Imashev N. Ecological public Vice-presidenteducation society"Arman"

Kvzyl-Orda city31 Dzhainov A. CES consulting firm Office-manager v32 Kemelbekov B. PIU of the Technical v

Committee of water consultantresources

NGO33 Klaus Reinholdt Danish-Kazakhstani Representatives v

project "FromKattegat to the Aralsea"

34 Henriette vHenriksen

35 Rud Dekker _v

36 Zhursinbaev M. v37 Zhubanov K. v

5

LIST OF PARTICIPANTSof the seminar of the regulation of the Syr-Darya and the North Aral sea project

held in Kyzyl-Orda on 20 May 2000

No Name Position Presence1 Zhusup S.K. Kyzyl-Orda oblast deputy akim2 Reitse Koopmans expert-ecologist of the World Bank, v

Holland3 Bart van Lavieren expert-ecologist of the World Bank, v

Holland4 Aurova L. chairman of "Eco terbie" Co. v5 Karlykhanov T. chairman of public society "Pri-Aral v

agroecology"6 Bayalimov D. national group on the realization of v

Component B of GEF project7 Utemuratov M. head of Kyzyl-Orda branch of the Aral v

Salvation International Fund8 Shapshanov K. head of oblast environmental protection v

administration9 Nogaev Sh. deputy head of oblast environmental

protection administration10 Baratov A. deputy head of oblast environmental v

protection administration11 Kutzhanov A. director of "Kyzylordavodkhoz" v12 Morozov V.S. president of JSC "Ama"13 Schek V.M. director of RGP ODSP "Arna"14 Kamishev A. chairman of oblast land-tenure regulations

committee15 Amirkhanov A. head of Aral-Syr-Darya water

administration16 Nurekeshov K.N. head of oblast energy, construction and v

utilities department17 Kuandykov Ye. head physician of oblast sanitary

epidemiological station18 Seitenov B.S. rector of Kyzyl-Orda university of

economics, ecology and law19 Almatov S. head of oblast hydro-meteorological service20 Bakirov K.B. deputy research director of Pri-Aral v

agroecological institute21 Zhamantikov Kh. head of agro-ecology and phytomelioration v

department22 Akhmenot Zh. head of Kyzyl-Orda barrage v23 Moldiraim A. chairman of "Nevada-Semei" Co.24 Zholdybaev B. chairman of "Soyuz-Chemobyl" Co.25 Darmenov Zh. deputy editor of oblast newspaper "Kyzyl- v

Orda news"26 Umbetov A. Correspondent of oblast newspaper "Syr

__________________ boyi"

6

No Name Position Presence27 TV representative28 Zhaksylykov 1. UNDP office manager v

29 Opabekov Zh. chairman of Environmental protection fund v30 Dzhainov A. CES office manager v

31 Kemelbekov B. technical consultant of the project v32 Kudaibergenov N. Agricultural college v33 Makhambetova R. KIEI v34 Sarbalakov Khalyktyk political party v35 Umbetbaev Kazakhstan Ecology v

7

Annex 3Photographic Summary

_.,,~~~ a;, -

Syr Darya River between Kzyl Orda and Aitek

-i~~~~-~~=e. AWLA.__0* _ _-

I _ _ -- - - . -.-- ~ -

4W -1

W

IApl19toldkithBrSrtbahdeuignlsoln

_ .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4

I Api_99teoddk nteBr tatbece eutn nls flv n qimn

Agriculture includes large-scale irrigated rice farmning

-A _ , 1 -- -'-- -

-X

Industrial pollution atKazaliskindustrialarea s '.

Industrial pollution at Kazalinsk industrial area

9

S P v -~~~~~~~~~~~-u

Rehabilitation will include the Kazalinsk head works

'ik ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~'

Re-introduction of the Caspian sturgeon is tested in fish ponds at Karateren village

10

Industry has completely collapsed in the area: Formner Rice mill in Kazalinsk

11

L~~ s

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A L-:;-; - ' -,

4 i '

76- - At 1%---V--%

Grave yards are very dominant in the project area

Bank erosion is very common downstream of Kazalinsk barrage

12

E " |~~~~arA - -. ,-~da

r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .

9 ..--- -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...

-. ,

LakuMapal chanes drie outpa and onltasmll hyperan soaliNeO lakis left,oted are isnnstil anes imortantm_ .e ..

. X *,_ - a- ,zX, ,- _4*,

'~-t E , .

SupMaply chanes toie Magpa are stiasmll there ansoalinGO hakis propose toeae conec these to imothet

main intake canal

13

_ ,, ,.,_7j! _

-1~~~~~~~ - -= --

- m_ t_ t-~~, ' *8sth;<f - ' I-'

Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 4

About 7 Ian of embankments near Kzyl Orda will be reconstructed to avoid flood damage in thetown

e ns fb sc

Regular monitoring of salinity of Lake Kamyshylybash should be carried out