Pripyat River Basin Management Plan in Belarus

European Union Water Initiative Plus for Eastern Partnership Countries (EUWI+)

PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN IN BELARUS

Draft report March 2020

Responsible EU member state consortium project leader

Mr Alexander Zinke; Umweltbundesamt GmbH (AT) EUWI+ country representative in Belarus

Mr Aliaksandr Stankevich Responsible international thematic lead expert

Mr Philippe Seguin; Office International de l’Eau (FR) Responsible Belarusian thematic lead expert

Ms Victoriya Voronova; Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Authors

Mr Vladimir Korneev; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Mr Kanstantsin Tsitou; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Mr Aliaksandr Pakhomau; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Mr Ivan Bulak; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Ms Sniazhana Dubianok; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Ms Anastasiya Rusina; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Ms Alena Hramadskaya; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Mr Vladimir Anufriev; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Ms Asya Penkovskaya; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Ms Volha Mikhan; Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources Ms Olga Berezko; branch “Institute of Geology” RUE “Research and Production Center for Geology” Ms Elena Cehervach; branch “Institute of Geology” RUE “Research and Production Centre for Geology” Mr Igor Vitsen; branch “Institute of Geology” RUE “Research and Production Centre for Geology”

The English translation was done by Ms Yuliya Shepeleva (translator at the scientific organisational department of the “Institute of Geology”).

Disclaimer: The EU-funded programme European Union Water Initiative Plus for Eastern Partnership Countries (EUWI+) is implemented by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), the Organisation for Eco- nomic Co-operation and Development (OECD), both responsible for the implementation of Result 1, and an EU Member States Consortium comprising the Environment Agency Austria (UBA, Austria), the lead coordi- nator, and the International Office for Water (IOW, France), both responsible for the implementation of Re- sults 2 and 3. The programme is co-funded by Austria and France through the Austrian Development Agency and the French Artois-Picardie Water Agency.

This document was produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Union or of the governments of the Eastern Partnership Countries.

This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of, or sovereignty over, any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries, and to the name of any territory, city or area.

Imprint

Owner and Editor: EU Member State Consortium Umweltbundesamt GmbH Office International de l’Eau (IOW) Spittelauer Lände 5 21/23 rue de Madrid 1090 Vienna, Austria 75008 Paris, France

Responsible IOW Communication officer: Ms Chloé Dechelette [email protected] March 2020

Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Foreword This document, the “draft Pripyat River Basin Management Plan 2020” has been developed in the framework of the European Union-funded programme “European Union Water Initiative Plus” (2016-2021). The draft Pri- pyat River Basin Management Plan 2020 is complete with 2 annexes (tables, maps) presented in separate documents. Belarusian experts, with the support of experts from the Environment Agency Austria and French International Office for Water, worked together with stakeholders of the water sector at national and basin levels to draft this RBMP, which is the first such Plan for this river basin district.. This RBMP contributes to the implementation of basin principles and integrated water resources management approaches in the country. However, it does not claim to meet all requirements of the EU WFD.

3 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 15 Chapter 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN ON THE TERRITORY OF BELARUS ...... 17 1.1 Physical and geographical characteristics...... 17 1.1.1 Climate ...... 18 1.1.2 Topography ...... 19 1.1.3 Geological and hydrogeological conditions ...... 21 1.1.4 Soils and vegetation ...... 22 1.1.5 Natural and disturbed swamps ...... 22 1.1.6 Information on protected areas ...... 23 1.2 Water resources ...... 27 1.2.1 Hydrographic network ...... 27 1.2.2 Surface water resource ...... 34 1.2.3 Groundwater ...... 45 1.3 Administrative territorial division and social and economic information ...... 49 1.3.1 Administrative territorial division and population ...... 49 1.3.2 Agriculture (plant production, animal husbandry) ...... 50 1.3.3 Fish breeding ...... 52 1.3.4 Forest husbandry ...... 53 1.3.5 Manufacturing ...... 54 1.3.6 Hydraulic power industry ...... 56 1.3.7 Accumulation of waste ...... 57 1.3.8 Shipping industry ...... 57 1.3.9 Tourism and recreational use of water bodies ...... 58 1.3.10 Linear infrastructure ...... 59 1.4 Risk (including climate change) ...... 59 1.4.1 Floods ...... 60 1.4.2 Low-water seasons ...... 60 1.4.3 Erosion processes ...... 60 1.4.4 Health issues ...... 61 1.4.5 Radionuclide pollution ...... 62 1.5 Stakeholders and programmes ...... 62 1.5.1 Administrative organisation ...... 62 1.5.2 Water user guidance ...... 63 1.5.3 Summary of water strategies, programmes, plans and projects ...... 63 1.6 Diagnosis: synthetic description ...... 64

4 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Chapter 2. PRESSURES AND IMPACT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES ON WATER RESOURCES ...... 65 2.1 Estimation of point source pollution ...... 65 2.2 Estimation of diffuse source pollutions ...... 67 2.3 Estimation of quantitative pressures on surface water and groundwater ...... 71 2.4 Analysis of other pressures and impacts of human activity on hydromorphological conditions ...... 76 2.5 Other pressures ...... 77 2.5.1 Climate change...... 77 2.5.2 Invasive alien species ...... 78 2.6 Synthesis ...... 78 2.6.1 Quantity of pollution affected by domain of origin and balance during low flows ...... 78 2.6.2 Quantitative balance between abstractions and resources ...... 78 2.6.3 Global synthesis of problems based on pressures and hot spot analysis ...... 79 2.6.4 Advantages and possible problems concerned with the possible prospective use of water resources in the Pripyat river basin ...... 80 2.6.5 Water balances...... 82 2.6.6 Brief SWOT analysis ...... 83 Chapter 3. IDENTIFICATION AND MAPPING OF PROTECTED AREAS ...... 85 3.1 Drinking water abstraction ...... 85 3.2 Economically significant species ...... 85 3.3 Bathing waters ...... 86 3.4 Vulnerable zones ...... 87 3.5 Sensitive areas ...... 88 3.6 Special conservation areas (habitats), special protection areas (birds) ...... 89 Chapter 4. MONITORING ...... 90 4.1 Monitoring networks ...... 90 4.1.1 Surface waters...... 90 4.1.2 Groundwater ...... 96 4.2 Results of the monitoring programmes ...... 101 4.2.1 Status of surface water (ecological, chemical) ...... 101 4.2.2 Status of groundwater ...... 105 Chapter 5. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (PART 1 RELATED TO BASIN CHARACTERISATION) ...... 108 5.1 Economic weights by relevant water use (results from chapter 2), socio-economic issues, main trends ...... 108 5.2 Water prices, tariffs for discharges by sector and by territory ...... 111 5.3 Description of recipients of the funds and management principles ...... 114 5.4 Funding (investment, maintenance) by sector of economy ...... 115 5.5 Preliminary cost-recovery assessment ...... 116 Chapter 6. OBJECTIVES ...... 120

5 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

6.1 Risk assessment ...... 120 6.2 Environmental objectives ...... 123 6.3 Water-related objectives related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Protocol for water and health, other international and national strategies and/or policies ..... 124 Chapter 7. PROGRAMME OF MEASURES ...... 128 7.1 Principles of measures ...... 128 7.2 Localised measures ...... 131 Chapter 8. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (PART 2 RELATED TO THE PROGRAMME OF MEASURES) ...... 134 Chapter 9: INFORMATION AND CONSULTATION ...... 136 1. River Basin Organisation ...... 136 2. Public consultation ...... 136 REFERENCES ...... 138 Annex A: TABLES RELATED TO THE PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN (presented in a separate document) ...... 140 Annex B: MAPS RELATED TO THE PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN (presented in a separate document) ...... 141

6 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

List of Tables Table 1.1: Protected natural territories of republican significance in the Pripyat River Basin (Republic of Belarus) ...... 24 Table 1.2: Monuments of nature of republican significance in the Pripyat River basin ...... 25 Table 1.3: The length and number of rivers in the Belarusian part of the Pripyat River Basin ...... 28 Table 1.4: Hydrographic characteristics of the main rivers of the Pripyat basin ...... 29 Table 1.5: Lakes with a surface area of more than 1 km², selected to identify surface water bodies in the basin of the Pripyat River ...... 30 Table 1.6: Reservoirs with a surface area of more than 1 km², selected to identify reservoir irrigating polders on the Pripyat river basin ...... 31 Table 1.7: Number of channels and their length in the Pripyat basin ...... 33 Table 1.8: General characteristics of the reclaimed land fund of the Belarusian part of the Pripyat basin ...... 33 Table 1.9: Indicative water levels for the rivers of the Pripyat basin (as of 1 January 2018) ...... 37 Table 1.10: Long-term characteristics of the annual flow of the rivers of the Pripyat basin ...... 38 Table 1.11: Correlation of flooded areas on the flood plain of the Pripyat by occurrence, % ...... 39 Table 1.12: Maximum discharges of spring flood water into the Pripyat river – Mazyr ...... 39 Table 1.13: The maximum dangerous water levels of floods on the rivers of the Pripyat basin during the observation period ...... 40 Table 1.14: Years of floods with different intensities ...... 41 Table 1.15: The estimated minimum flow of the rivers of the Pripyat basin and their statistical parameters ...... 42 Table 1.16: Population size in the Pripyat river basin on 1 January 2018 ...... 49 Table 1.17: Volumes of water use for fish farming in the Republic of Belarus and in the Pripyat river basin ...... 53 Table 2.1: The estimated level of application of mineral and organic fertilizers per 1 ha of the catchment area of the Pripyat river basin ...... 69 Table 2.2: General assessment of the importance of water resources for the economy and social sphere ...... 83 Table 2.3: Strengths and weaknesses of the Pripyat RBMP as a whole and its main directions ...... 84 Table 4.1: Amount of NEMS monitoring observation points ...... 91 Table 4.2: Proposed additional observation points for monitoring and control of watercourses ..... 93 Table 4.3: Proposed additional observation points for monitoring and control of reservoirs ...... 94 Table 4.4: Proposed additional sampling sites under the operational monitoring programme of water bodies ...... 95 Table 4.5: Ground water bodies in the Pripyat river basin to be included in the RBMP ...... 97 Table 4.6: Recommendations for improvement of GW monitoring network of wells in the Pripyat river basin ...... 98 Table 4.7: List of analysed substances and indicators for GW observational monitoring...... 100 Table 4.8: List of controlled parameters for GW operational monitoring ...... 100

7 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table 4.9: Estimated/proposed groundwater monitoring system ...... 101 Table 6.1: Sections of watercourses at risk of not achieving at least a good ecological status .... 121 Table 6.2: Parts of water bodies at risk of not achieving at least a good ecological status ...... 122 Table 6.3: Progress on indicator 6.3.1 “The share of safe wastewater” in the Republic of Belarus and the Pripyat river basin“ ...... 125 Table 6.4: Progress on indicator 6.4.2 “Intensity of use of fresh water reserves (water stress)” in the Republic of Belarus and in the Pripyat river basin for 2010-2018...... 126 Table 6.5: Indicators for the use and protection of water resources established in national strategic documents ...... 126 Table 7.1: Distribution of water bodies affected by different types of measure ...... 132 Table 8.1: General distribution of estimated cost of measures by different types of measure ...... 135

8 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

List of figures Figure 1: Global map of the Pripyat river basin ...... 17 Figure 2: Dynamics of the total overcharge of nutrient elements of nitrogen (N - blue) and phosphorus (P – red) from agricultural production for 2014 - 2018 in the Pripyat river basin ...... 70 Figure 3: General scheme of the Dnieper-Bug Channel ...... 71 Figure 4: Graphic presentation of the upper Pripyat water allocation rule (Belarus-Ukraine) ...... 72 Figure 5: Examples of practical implementation of the Upper Pripyat water allocation rule during dry and low-water periods in 2015 & 2016 ...... 72 Figure 6: The dynamics of annual water abstractions from groundwater and surface water bodies .... 73 Figure 7: Use of water from surface water for various needs ...... 73 Figure 8: Use of water from groundwater for various needs ...... 73 Figure 9: Water abstraction for different types of economic activity...... 74 Figure 10: Dynamics of wastewater discharges into surface water bodies ...... 75 Figure 11: Priority pollution intake into water bodies in the Pripyat river basin ...... 75 Figure 12: Priority pollution intake into water bodies in the Pripyat river basin ...... 76 Figure 13: Natural protection of groundwater in the Pripyat river basin ...... 87 Figure 14: - Identification of areas vulnerable to nitrate groundwater pollution ...... 88 Figure 15: Ecological status of surface water bodies in the Pripyat river basin ...... 103 Figure 16: number of the most important water users in the Pripyat river basin by industry ...... 109 Figure 17: The share of investments in fixed capital by type of economic activity...... 115 Figure 18: Current costs on environmental protection by type of economic activity for 2018 (thousand rubles) ...... 118 Figure 19: Ratio between total environmental protection running costs and volume of industrial production (VIP) in the Pripyat river basin based on data from 2018 ...... 119 Figure 20: Distribution of current environmental protection running costs (248.2 million rubles) in the Pripyat river basin based on data from 2018...... 119 Figure 21: General distribution of supplementary measures by different types of measure ...... 132 Figure 22: General distribution of estimated cost of measures by different types of measure ...... 134

9 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Abbreviations ADA ...... Austrian Development Agency AWO ...... Artificial water object BC ...... Bovine cattle Belarus...... the Republic of Belarus Belhydromet ...... State institution: “Republican centre for hydrometeorology, control of radioactive contamination and environmental monitoring” (MNREP, Belarus)

BOD5 ...... Biological oxygen demand BSCA ...... Belarusian State Centre for Accreditation COD……………….Chemical Oxygen Demands CRICUWR ...... Republican Unitary Enterprise “Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Wa- ter Resources” (MNREP, Belarus) DoA ...... Description of Action DG NEAR ...... Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations of the European Commission EaP ...... Eastern Partnership EC ...... European Commission EECCA ...... Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia EMBLAS ...... Environmental Monitoring in the Black Sea EPIRB ...... Environmental Protection of International River Basins ESCS ...... Ecological Status Classification Systems EU ...... European Union EU-MS ...... EU Member States EUWI+ ...... European Union Water Initiative Plus FD ...... Floods Directive GEF ...... Global Environmental Fund GW ...... Groundwater GWB ...... Groundwater body HMWB ...... Heavily modified water body ICPDR ...... International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River INBO ...... International Network of Basin Organisations Institute of Geology ... “Institute of Geology” branch at the Republican Unitary Enterprise “Research and Production Centre for Geology” IOWater/OiEau .... International Office for Water, France IWRM ...... Integrated Water Resources Management Minprirody ...... Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Protection (MNREP) of Belarus MPC ...... Maximum permitted concentration MSFD ...... Marine Strategy Framework Directive NCAM……………. The state institution “National Centre for Analytical Monitoring in the Area of Envi- ronmental Protection” NEMS……………..National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus NESB ...... National Executive Steering Board

10 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

NFP ...... National Focal Point NGOs ...... Non-Governmental Organisations NPD ...... National Policy Dialogue NSSD-2030 ...... National Strategy for Sustainable Development OECD ...... Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development PA ...... Plan of action PoM ...... Programme of Measures RBC ...... River Basin Council RBD ...... River Basin District RBMP ...... River Basin Management Plan RBO ...... River Basin Organisation ROM ...... Result Oriented Monitoring SCUWR ...... Scheme for complex use of water resources SDG ...... Sustainable Development Goals SCM ...... Steering Committee Meeting (of the EU Action EUWI+) SEIS ...... Shared environmental information system SPAs ...... Specially protected water areas SWB ...... Surface water body SWL ...... Solid waste landfill TA ...... Technical Assistance ToR ...... Terms of Reference UBA ...... Umweltbundesamt GmbH, Environment Agency Austria UNDP ...... United Nations Development Programme UNECE ...... United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Water Convention United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) - Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes WFD ...... Water Framework Directive WISE ...... Water Information System for Europe

11 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Term and Definitions Active well – a hydrogeological well in operation used to monitor the groundwater regime (water level, temperature and/or chemical composition). Channel – an artificial watercourse in a depression or embankment, intended for the transportation and discharge of water, the regulation of water flows, or navigation needs. Coastal strip – part of a water protection zone directly adjacent to a surface water body, where the implementation of economic and other activities is subject to stricter requirements than in the rest of the water protection zone. Conserved well – a well that is equipped and not used, but could be used in the future. Well preservation is performed to protect underground sources of drinking water from pollution and is carried out strictly in accordance with the technical regulatory legal act (TCH 17.04-21-2010 (02120). Efficient (sustainable) use of water resources – water use when a set of activities is carried out to ensure the preservation of water resources, reduction of water losses, prevention of pollution and water pollution. Flooding – the covering of a normally dry area of land with water during the high-water and runoff period, or due to the installation of a water-supply structure in the river bed, or the retention of local runoff in relief depressions. Groundwater body – a concentration of water underground that has the distinct boundaries, volume and characteristics of a groundwater regime and consists of one or several aquifers. Hydraulic engineering structures and devices – engineering structures and devices designed for abstractions, transportation, water treatment, wastewater discharge, regulation of water flows, navigation needs, water protection and prevention of harmful effects of water (water intake structures, canals, dikes, dams, gateways, waterworks, pumping stations, water pipelines, collectors and other similar engineering structures and devices). Hydrogeological post-a set of several observation wells set up on different aquifers and located in natural conditions. Hydrological regime – alterations in time and space of the status of a surface water body, including changes in depth, flow rate, volume and temperature of the water in a surface water body, e.g. caused by natural and climatic conditions, consequences of economic and other activities. Normal water level (NWL) – the highest specified retaining level of the headwater that can be main- tained in normal operating conditions of hydraulic structures. The NWL provides the specified full volume of the reservoir. The operation of its facilities (dams, dikes, water disposals, water intakes, etc.) is conducted in compliance with the normal reliability reserves provided for by the project. Objects that have an impact on water bodies – objects located on surface water bodies within the territory of their water protection zones and coastal strips. Observation point – a well-equipped to carry out instrumental observations of the groundwater status. Observation site – the same as the observation point, i.e. an observation well. Observation well – a hydrogeological well designed to monitor the regime of groundwater (level, temperature, chemical composition). Pond – an artificial reservoir with a water surface area no greater than 100 hectares, created for the purpose of accumulating and storing water. Reservoir - a surface water body in the depression of the earth's surface, characterised by a slow motion of water (flowing) or its complete absence (non-flowing). Restoration of a water body –a set of actions aimed at achieving standards for the water quality of surface water bodies and hygienic standards for the water safety of water bodies for household, drinking, cultural and community (recreational) use. River – a natural watercourse with a constant flow and a clearly defined course with a length of 5 kilo- metres or more.

12 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

River basin – part of the earth’s surface, including soils and aquifers, where the water flows into a separate river. Separate water use – a prerogative right of one legal entity for water use conducted on the basis of a state act on the right to separate water uses, or the right to use excavated tanks, located within the boundaries of land properties granted to: legal entities and citizens, including individual entrepreneurs, in the prescribed manner; and technological water bodies, justified by documents certifying land rights. Sewage water – water discharged from residential, public and industrial buildings and structures after usage for economic and other activities; water occurring during precipitation, snowmelt, washing of road surfaces within a territory featuring residential areas, industrial facilities, construction sites and other facilities and discharged into the environment, including through the sewage system. Surface water body – a natural or artificial reservoir, a watercourse, a permanent or temporary concentration of water featuring the distinct boundaries and characteristics of a hydrological regime. The probability of exceedance (provision of a hydrological quantity) – the probability that a particular value of hydrological quantity may be exceeded (or not exceeded) among the set of all of its possible values. Underflooding – Rise of the groundwater level when constructing reservoirs, filling ponds and building hydraulic structures, resulting from the saturation of soils when filtering water through the bottom and banks of canals, water losses from the water supply network, siltation of river beds, etc. Water body - the concentration of water in artificial or natural depressions of the earth’s surface or in its depths, which has the distinct boundaries, volume and characteristics of a hydrological or groundwater regime. Water consumption (m3/s) – the volume of water flowing through the water cross-section of flow per time unit. Water course – a surface water body, characterised by the motion of water in the direction of the slope. Water management system – a set of water bodies and hydraulic functionally interrelated structures and devices. Water pollution – result of harmful effects of substances, physical factors or microorganisms, the properties, location or amount of which lead to negative changes in physical, chemical, biological and other indicators of the status of water bodies, including non-conformity with standards in the field of water protection and use. Water protection – a system of measures aimed at preventing or eliminating pollution and water clogging, as well as the conservation and restoration of water. Water protection zone - a territory adjacent to surface water bodies where a regime of economic and other activities is established to prevent their pollution and impurity. Water resources – surface and groundwater which can be used in economic or other activities. Water use - the use of water resources and (or) the impact on water bodies in the implementation of economic and other activities.

13 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The European Union Eastern Partnership (EaP) is a policy initiative launched at the Prague Summit in May 2009. It aims to deepen and strengthen relations between the European Union and its six Eastern neighbours: Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Republic of Belarus, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine. In recent years, the countries of the Eastern Partnership have demonstrated a willingness to align their water policies and practices with the general principles and specific requirements of the EU Wa- ter Framework Directive (WFD), as well as other thematic and sectoral water directives and UN Multi- lateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs). Moreover, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine have made commitments to reform their water policies and implement the EU water acquis as part of Association Agreements signed with the EU in 2014. It is in this context that the European Union Water Initiative Plus for the Eastern Partnership (EUWI+) for Eastern Partnership Countries was initiated by the Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) of the European Commission. The European Union Water Initiative Plus for the Eastern Partnership (EUWI+) was launched in Sep- tember 2016 to assist the 6 Eastern Partner countries to approximate their legislation to the EU Wa- ter Framework Directive and its associated directives. Its objective is to improve the sustainable management of water resources with a focus on transboundary river basin management. EUWI+ focuses on five thematic areas: 1. Legislation, policy development and institutional strengthening 2. Laboratory and monitoring systems strengthening 3. River Basin Management Plan development 4. River Basin Management Plan implementation 5. Public awareness, communication, and data/information management The OECD and UNECE are implementing activities under thematic area 1. Thematic areas 2–5 are implemented by an EU Member States Consortium comprised of the Environment Agency Austria (UBA) and the International Office for Water (OiEau) of France. Experts from other EU Member States will also be involved in activities of the project. The budget for these thematic areas for all 6 countries amounts to 24.6 million euros in total, which is financed by the European Union (23.5 million euros grant) with contributions from the governments of Austria and France. Its planned period of implementation is from September 2016 until February 2021. The project has developed a website (http://euwipluseast.eu/en/) to publish and disseminate all data, information and services developed and used in the frame of this project.

14 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Pripyat River Basin Management Plan has been prepared by the CRICUWR in the frame of the contract between CRICUWR and OiEau “Development of a draft River Basin Management Plan for the PRIPYAT River Basin in Belarus” (Registration N° EUWI-EAST-BY-07). The current draft River Basin Management Plan will be endorsed by Belarusian authorities in accordance with the standard approval process. The water resources of the Republic of Belarus are one of the key aspects of sustainable development management in the country. Currently, the Republic of Belarus does not face any water-shortage challenges. Belarus possesses sufficient resources of renewable surface waters and groundwater to meet its current and future water needs. The management draft plan for the Pripyat River Basin was developed by RUE "CRICUWR" on the basis of Article 15 of the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus dated 30 April 2014, No.149-З [1] in order to preserve and restore water bodies and guarantee the integrated use of water resources in the Pripyat River Basin. The catchment area of the Pripyat River basin is located in five regions (12 administrative districts of Gomel region, 11 – Minsk region, 11 – Brest region, 3 - Mogilev region and one district of Grodno region), as well as 5 cities of regional subordination. In total, it includes the total land area of 38 administrative districts. The Pripyat River Basin Management Plan project was addressed at the first meeting of the Pripyat Basin Council on 29 June 2018 in Gomel. The minutes of the basin council meeting include a recom- mendation to finalise the Pripyat River Basin Management Plan taking into account the results of the inventory and the identification of water bodies, and specifying the proposed measures to improve the ecological status or potential of surface water bodies in the Pripyat River Basin. In 2019-2020, RUE “CRICUWR” finalised the Pripyat River Basin Management Plan in the framework of the international technical assistance project “European Union Water Initiative Plus for Eastern Partnership Countries (EUWI+)”. RBMP was developed taking into account the requirements of the Water Framework Directive of the European Union (WFD), and the requirements of the technical code of established practice of TCP 17.06-14-2017 (33140) “Environmental protection and nature management. Hydrosphere. Require- ments for the development, preparation and designing of drafts of river basin management plans”, which was approved and enforced by the Resolution of the Ministry of Natural Resources No.4-T of 26 April 2017 RBMP with consideration for amendment No.1 of 2019. The monitoring and status assessment of surface and groundwater bodies was carried out according to the applicable law of Belarus. Thus, the terms used in this chapter, such as water body, and the methods used for status assessment, have a different meaning that cannot in most cases be compared with the terminology and requirements of the WFD. Further alignment with the WFD is planned for the next planning cycles. This includes an evaluation of the status of the provisionally assigned heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) as well as a complete economic analysis. The RBMP consists of an explanatory note (this report), sets of tabular material presented in Annex A (21 main tables and 53 additional tables), as well as cartographic material presented in Annex B (An- nexes A and B are two separate documents). The RBMP has been developed taking into account data from the state water cadastre and the state cadastre of subsurface and surface water monitoring, including 2017–2018 data on surface water monitoring and local monitoring of sources impacting it, groundwater monitoring, the results of previous studies [2], and recommendations from the first meeting of the Pripyat Basin Council. In the framework of the RBMP, measures have been developed aimed at improving the status or potential of water bodies in the Pripyat River basin. The implementation of the RBMP is planned to take 10 years from 2021 to 2030.

15 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The measures developed should also be taken into account when adopting state programmes and regional measures concerning water protection or impacts on water resources.

16 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN ON THE TERRITORY OF BELARUS

1.1 Physical and geographical characteristics

The Pripyat River is the most water-abundant tributary of the Dnieper River. It originates near the city of Volodymyr-Volynskyi (Ukraine). Its headstream is located near the Gupolyto settlement southwest of the city of Shatsk at an altitude of 165 m above sea level. Over 200 km the river flows through the territory of Ukraine before reaching Belarus. The downstream of the river in Belarus is 70 km long, stretching from the Krasno settlement to the confluence of the Kiev reservoir (the DnieperRiver) in Ukraine. From the headstream to the city of Pinsk (Belarus), the river flows mainly from the southwest to the northeast. Near the city of Pinsk, Pripyat turns east and flows on an almost latitudinal path to the city of Mazyr, where it changes direction, following a southeast course up to the mouth. According to the latest data, the Pripyat basin area covers 114,300 km2, and the length of the river is 761 km (Figure 1, map B.1 of the Annex B). Within the territory of the Republic of Belarus, these values constitute, respectively, 50,900 km2 (24.6% of the area of the Republic of Belarus) and 495 km. The Belarusian part of the basin accounts for 44.5% of the catchment area, and the Ukrainian part comprises 55.5%. The shape of the Pripyat river basin is almost square with an irregular watershed line. The basin shares borders with the Berezina and Dnieper river basins in the northeast, with the Southern Bug and Dniester river basins in the south, and with the Western Bug and Neman river basins in the southwest, west and northwest.

Figure 1: Global map of the Pripyat river basin

17 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The Pripyat River (from Pinsk to the border with Ukraine) is part of the inland waterways of the Repub- lic of Belarus and is navigable. In accordance with the Decree of the President of the Republic of Bela- rus No.133 of 28 February 2008, the Republic of Belarus joined the European Agreement on the Main Inland Waterways of International Importance. The list of inland waterways of international importance includes the E40 inland waterway. Its Belarusian part from the city of Brest to the border with Ukraine includes the navigable stretch of the Pripyat River. The Pripyat river basin is located in the southwest of the East European Plain within zones of mixed forests and forest-steppe. The relief in the northern part of the catchment area of the Pripyat River (the territory of the Republic of Belarus) is characterised by moraine elevations interchanging with flat plains. In the northwest and north, the basin is surrounded by the Belarusian moraine ridge with altitudes up to 350 m above sea level. In the south and southeast, it descends to the Polesye lowland. The western, more elevated part of the lowland (Brest Polesye) has surface levels of 140–150 m. The central part of the lowland hollow decreases to the Dnieper at 110 m (further to the southeast up to 100 m) and has an altitude of 140 m only between the Ptich and Berezina rivers. In the west between the Pina and Yaselda rivers, a plateau-shaped terrace-like residual hill stands out among the lowlands with a surface level of up to 150–170 m. This relatively small, isolated elevated relief, part of a formerly higher area, was preserved from destruction, including erosion and denudation, to form a separate massif surrounded by younger rocks (see map B.5 of elevations in the Pripyat RB).

1.1.1 Climate

The climate of the Pripyat basin is moderate continental, characterised by warm, humid summers and fairly mild winters. The climate increases across the continent in a southeast direction. The annual amounts of radiation balance increase from southwest to east and southeast from 1,200 MJ/m2 to 1,735 MJ/m2. The radiation balance of the territory largely predetermines the temperature regime [3,4]. The spatiotemporal distribution of the average monthly air temperature depends on the radiation conditions, seasonal fluctuations of atmospheric circulation, and the physical-geographical features of the territory. The average annual temperature of air in the basin varies from +6.30C to +7.20C. The average temperature of the coldest month (January) varies from southwest to northeast from -4.60C to - 7.00C. The average temperature of the warmest month (July) increases from northwest to southeast from +18.30C to +19.20C. The absolute minimum air temperatures within the basin are recorded in January-February and reach - 320С – -380С. The highest air temperatures are typically in July-August and reach +330С – +380С.The duration of the frost-free period varies from 170 days in the southwest to 150 days in the east of the basin. The average dates of spring frosts on the soil are from April 25 - May 5. Autumn frosts begin in late September - early October. The main regularity of the spatial distribution of precipitation within the Pripyat basin, due to general circulation factors, is their decrease from the northwest and southwest to the west and east. Some precipitation increase can be traced with a transition to a higher absolute surface level. Monthly amounts of precipitation have a clearly defined annual variation, with a minimum in February – March and a maximum in June – July. Low-intensity precipitation prevails, although individual rain showers may drop several tens of millimetres of precipitation. According to different meteorological stations, the maximum daily precipitation in the basin ranges from 114 mm to 177 mm (map B.9 of the Annex B). The snow cover within the basin is characterised by considerable variability, with wide differences in the occurrence of snowfall. The average dates for the formation of sustainable snow cover vary from 20 December in the northeast of the basin to 30 December in the southwest. A similar situation con-

18 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

cerns the destruction of snow cover. The average dates of destruction of sustainable snow cover move in the opposite direction - from 5 March in the south-west to 15 March in the northeast of the Pripyat river basin. The average maximum height of snow cover ranges from 10–15 cm in the west to 20–25 cm in the east of the basin. The average depth of soil freezing is 30–50 cm. This depends not only on the temperature and height of the snow cover, but also on the nature of the soil [5]. The wind regime of the Pripyat basin is determined by macrocirculation processes in the atmosphere and the position of pressure centres over the Eurasia continent and the Atlantic Ocean [3]. The distribution of total evaporation shows a clear diminishing trend from the north and northwest of the basin to the south and southeast, from 590 mm to 525 mm. The winter in this area is mild and gloomy with thaws. Average monthly sub-zero temperatures persist from December to March inclusive, with the exception of the southwestern part of the basin, where average March temperatures are above 00C. A distinctive feature of winter is the frequent incursions of warm air, accompanied by thaws. This sometimes leads to the complete disappearance of snow cover, only to return after a few days. In some winters, when the spurs of a high pressure strip reach the basin, severe frosts are observed. Within the territory spring is lengthy and unstable, with frequent changes of cold and warm episodes. In the spring, the cyclonic activity weakens due to a decrease in the temperature contrast between the Atlantic and continental air. While the air temperature tends to rise rapidly, on some days it can nevertheless drop significantly. Summers on the basin summer are warm and rainy. The spurs of the maximum high pressure strip of the Azores enters the territory of the basin, which contributes to the transfer of moist air from the west. During the summer months more than 200 mm of precipitation falls on this territory, mostly as showers, which are associated with the passage of cyclones from the southwest. The average temperature of the summer months (June - August) is around +160С - +200С. With the arrival of tropical air, temperatures can reach absolute maxima (+ 380C). Sometimes in July the temperature falls sharply and can drop below 00C at night. The change from summer to autumn is gradual, with frequent returns of warm weather. Autumn is lengthy, often overcast, with drizzling rain, especially in November, when about 75% of the days are cloudy (of which 25% are rainy). Over the past decades, there have been some changes in the characteristics of the climate. The average annual temperature of the air in this region (as well as throughout the northern hemisphere) is on a rising trend. On the territory of the Pripyat basin, this increase has been +0.7°С – +0.9°С over the past century. This change is particularly notable in the cold season, where the rate of temperature rise is 2–3 times higher. Precipitation, however, is generally decreasing. The average height of snow cover is tending to decrease, mostly due to an increase in winter temperatures. These phenomena in particular affect the formation of river flow in the basin, especially its annual distribution. The share of spring runoff is decreasing and the share of summer and autumn runoff is increasing. The role of rainfall floods in the formation of runoff is also increasing [6].

1.1.2 Topography

The morphological features of the surface of the Pripyat River Basin (depth of dissection, altitude distribution, and step structure of the relief) are closely interrelated with the geological structure. The modern relief of the Pripyat River Basin is represented mainly by flat and sloping lowlands and plains, river valleys and individual massifs of glacial-moraine formations. The depth of dissection usually does not exceed 5 m, although some places in the elevated area it can reach 50 m or more.

19 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The main relief-forming factor of this area is the activity of the middle anthropogenic glaciers, such as the Dnieper and Sozh. The glacial relief initially created has been modified to different extents by the erosion activity of temporary and permanent watercourses, aeolian and gravitational karstic processes. Recently, anthropogenic activity has become an important relief-forming factor, leading to a change in the natural relief with the creation of a large number of artificial ponds, quarries, dams, canals, etc. Here, the relief-forming rocks are anthropogenic and Holocene sediments, which are represented by fluvioglacial, lacustrine-alluvial, alluvial, moraine, and marsh genetic types. The lithology of pre- anthropogenic rocks, especially the moraine-Cretaceous strata, which accompanied the formation of karst forms, had a significant impact on the relief. The main territory of the left bank of the Pripyat is Belarusian Polesye, which is largely characterised by tectonic structures, such as the Podlyassky- Brest depression, the Polesye saddle. In the north, there are spurs of the Orsha depression of the Central Belarusian Massif, most of the Bobruisk subsurface brow passing into the Pripyat graben, which in the south passes into the Ukrainian crystal shield. In the west, the Lukovo-Ratno horst of the Kola-Azov plate is being penetrated. Tectonic heterogeneity largely defines the large range of sedimentary cover. A complex tectonic structure within a limited area predetermined the formation of a large number of biogenic morphostructures of various sizes with large-amplitude neotectonic movements. Tectonic and neotectonic movements had an influence on the features of distribution, on the dynamics of the glacial cover and glacial morphogenesis, and the morphology of river valleys, etc. The raised position of the southern part of the territory prevented the penetration of glacial cover. The placement of margin ridges, glaciological dislocations, hollows of plucking and erosion is connected with fault zones. In the preglacial period, the relief was a subsurface plain with a relatively flat surface in the west and a more elevated and dissected surface in the northeast. The modern relief of the whole Polesye was formed under the influence of diverse geological processes of endogenous and exogenous natures. The main processes that influenced the formation of the modern relief are the activities of glaciers during the Quaternary period, glacier melt waters, precipitation waters and wind. In the glacial period of the Quaternary age, the left-bank territory of the basin was continually subjected to glaciation. Mov- ing glaciers destroyed rough areas, changed the relief and produced a large amount of detrital material rich in boulders and attritus, called moraines (basal, lateral and terminal), accumulated from the destroyed rocks under, along the edges, and at the end of glaciers. As the glacier melted, the material that it had brought and deposited was eroded by melt waters, especially the terminal moraines, and water-glacial deposits were formed with a smooth relief. A significant part of the water-glacial rocks was deposited down the valley beyond the ridge of the terminal moraines. During the glacial retreat, water flows entrenched into the previously deposited thickness of water- glacial rocks, which led to the creation of terrace benches. Under the conditions of the repeated spread of glaciers, new sediments overlaid previous ones, changing the previous relief and forming a new one. In the period of the last glaciation, the glacier boundary passed north of Polesye, and its present territory was a lowland preglacial zone. The processes of sediment deposition and relief formation were mainly carried out under the influence of water currents and wind. During the post-glacial era (Holo- cene), the relief of the region changed under the influence of precipitation and wind. This process is currently proceeding. The surface of the Belarusian part of the basin slightly rises above the river valleys. In the Pripyat flood plain, the banks of the river bed are only 0.5–1.0 m high almost everywhere. Less often, they rise to a greater extent above the water level in the river in summer. The flood plain of the river is wide and flat with a large number of potholes filled with water. The transition to the terrace above the floodplain is weak. Only in some places, over a small distance, there are areas where the valley side rises relatively high above the flood plain.

20 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The combination of a flat terrain with small, flat degradations, the proximity of groundwater to the surface, and weak runoff result in swampiness, including widespread peaty surfaces on lowland plains. These include peaty lacustrine-glacial and lacustrine-boggy plains, the vast majority of which are located in large massifs to the north of the Pripyat river basin, ranging from the eastern borders of the region to its western edge. To the south of the Pripyat, peaty plains of flood plain terraces are widespread [7, 8]. The influence of the geological structure on the general river network and the geomorphological structure of the river valleys in the Pripyat basin is very large. The valley of the same river abruptly changes morphology depending on the geostructural features. The present shape of the river network of the Pripyat basin is the result of its long development during the Neogene and Anthropogen periods. Especially major changes in the river network occurred during the Pleistocene period, when the latitudinal direction of the main river valleys changed to the meridian and gradually acquired its current format. The river valleys of the Pripyat basin, despite their diversity, have a number of common features. The main one is that almost all of them have the same number of terraces, which reflect the main stages of the development of river valleys. The river valleys feature a flood plain and two terraces above the flood plain. The main characteristics of the terraces are the height, width, and thickness of alluvial sediments which are associated with the geological structure of the territory and the size of the river including its length, width, and catchment area [5].

1.1.3 Geological and hydrogeological conditions

The Pripyat River basin features three artesian basins (Pripyat, Brest, Orsha). The Pripyat artesian basin is confined to the Pripyat Trough. In the west, it includes part of the Polesye Saddle. The foundation within its boundaries reaches depths of 200–500 m on the margins, sinking to a depth of 5–6 km in the most submerged zone. The thickness of sedimentary rocks within the basin is 6,200 m. The zone of active water exchange extends to a depth of 200-350 m. It is represented by fresh groundwater of bicarbonate composition with various combinations of calcium, magnesium, sodium, Quaternary, Palaeogene-Neogene, Cretaceous, Devonian and Upper Proterozoic sediments. The Brest artesian basin is confined to the Podlyassky-Brest depression and the western slope of the Polesye saddle. The foundation attains depths of 200 to 1900 m. Its immersion is noted in the southwest direction. The zone of active water exchange (up to 1,000 m) contains freshwater of hydrocarbonate composition with various combinations of cations of calcium, magnesium, sodium, etc., and covers horizons and complexes of the Quaternary system, Neogene, Palaeogene, Cretaceous, Juras- sic, and the upper part of the Proterozoic. The Orsha artesian basin occupies the north-eastern part of the Pripyat river basin. Structurally, it is confined to the Orsha Basin. The depth of the sedimentary cover reaches 1,800 m. The total immersion of the foundation is observed from west to east. The capacity of the active water exchange zone here is about 350 m. The basin waters feature a hydrocarbonate composition with various combinations of cations and with mineralisation of up to 0.4 g/dm3. Aquifers from Quaternary to Upper Middle Devonian and Upper Proterozoic sediments are widespread [9]. Aquifers and complexes. The following types of aquifer and complex can be distinguished according to their mode of occurrence, filtration properties of water-bearing rocks, their water content, and degree of protection from the penetration of pollutants: 1) Aquifers confined to Quaternary deposits (subsoil aquifer, Holocene swamp aquifer, Holocene lacustrine-alluvial aquifer and alluvial aquifer, Poozersky alluvial aquifer, Poozersky lacustrine-alluvial aquifer, Sozh super-moraine fluvioglacial aquifer, Dnieper super-moraine fluvioglacial aquifer, Dnieper-

21 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Sozh aqueoglacial water-bearing complex, Berezina-Dnieper aqueoglacial water-bearing complex, Narev-Berezina aqueoglacial water-bearing complex); 2) Aquifers confined to Pre-Quaternary deposits (water bearing complex of Palaeogene-Neogene sediments, Middle-Cenomanian Maastricht carbonate aquifer, Albian and Lower-Cenomanian terrigenous aquifer, locally water-bearing Bathonian and Lower-Callovian terrigenous complex, Visean terrigenous water-bearing complex, locally water-bearing Middle and Upper Famennian terrigenous- carbonate complex, Upper-Frasnian and Lower-Famennian carbonate aquifer, Sargayev and Semiluki carbonate water-bearing complex, Starooskolsky and Lansk terrigenous water-bearing complex,Vitebsk-Narov terrigenous-carbonate water-bearing complex, Vendian terrigenous water-bearing complex, Riphean terrigenous water-bearing complex, zone of fracture of the Archean-Lower Protero- zoic igneous and metamorphic rocks).

1.1.4 Soils and vegetation

Soils are diverse. Light-textured soils, such as sandy and sabulous soils, constitute more than 60%. Waterlogged degradations are occupied by peat bogs. The share of peaty-gley soils is 20%. Loamy soils prevail on the southern and northern raised periphery of the basin (see map B.11 in Annex B). A particular feature of the Pripyat basin is the occurrence of large forests. The Pripyat river basin forests on the territory of Belarus are part of the southern geobotanical subzone of broad-leaved pine forests. The subzone is characterised by hornbeam oak forests without spruce, with a mixture of broad-leaved and small-leaved species rich in underbrush. The formation of forests includes 27 local tree species, about 60 shrubs, over 40 subshrubs and low shrubs. Forest vegetation is represented by formations, including coniferous (61.1%), deciduous (7.9%), small-leaved (12.4%), and small-leaved indigenous forests in the swamps (18.6%). The most common forest formations are pine (58.7%), birch (15.3%), black alder (13.5%), oak (7.2%), spruce (2.4%), and aspen (1.2 %). The remaining formations occupy an insignificant specific proportion, with fragmentary maple, ash, linden, and elm forests [10]. The right-bank of the Pripyat river basin is mainly characterised by hornbeam oak forests without spruce, with a mixture of broad-leaved and small-leaved species rich in underbrush. Oak grows in the choice habitats in the first tier, along with pine. There is a mixture of hornbeam and elm in the forest stand. The undergrowth features common woodwaxen and Russian broom along with the usual types of vegetation. A significant amount of forest-steppe and steppe plants grow in the herbage of pine forests. A reduction in the volume of cut and reforestation has contributed to an increase in the forest cover of the Pripyat basin. The most valuable categories of plots (for the conservation of biological diversity) are areas in the forest.

1.1.5 Natural and disturbed swamps

The Pripyat basin is notable for its high number of bogs. About one-third of its surface is covered by swamps with a prevalence of herbal (eutrophic) swamps occupying wide river valley floodplains. Swamps are wet areas of the earth's surface that are overgrown with hygrophilous vegetation. They are characterised by the accumulation of undecomposed plant residues and the formation of peat (a layer of at least 0.3 m.). Swamps and swamp complexes are very specific natural ecosystems. Almost all species of plants and animals that live in swamps are rare or vulnerable, as they can only live in this type of environment; a

22 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

reduction in the area of swamps ultimately leads to a reduction in the number of many unique species and sometimes to their complete extinction. At present, as a result of hydrotechnical land reclamation and peat mining, swamps are preserved only as island sites. Therefore, the majority of swamp species live in isolated groups. The marshy floodplains of the Pripyat and tributaries, the largest eutrophic swamps in Europe, are rich in food resources for birds, providing an area for the birds to relax, feed and go on. Swamps and flooded areas of flood plains are not only rest areas, but also the most important nesting sites for many of Europe’s endangered birds. Swamp drainage causes the complete destruction of the habitats of marsh biodiversity, which has a very negative impact on the European and world populations of many species of migratory birds. One hectare of lowland swamp removes an annual average of 0.71 tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and preserves it in the form of peat. One hectare of upland swamp preserves 1.45 tonnes. Swamp drainage and peat deposits ultimately bring to a halt the purification of the atmosphere from carbon dioxide and result in large emissions of this gas into the atmosphere, since carbon dioxide is the end product of the mineralization of the organic matter of peat. On the Pripyat river basin, reclaimed peat soils annually release the following amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere: during the cultivation of tilled crops, 20.9 ± 3.4 t/ha; during the cultivation of cereal crops – 12.8 ± 2.3 t/ha; during the cultivation of perennial grasses – 7.5 ± 1.3 t/ha; during the cultivation of long-standing meadows – 4.26 ± 1.1 t/ha. One hectare of peat deposit produced in a dried state releases 21–23 tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Thus, as a result of drainage, peat bogs are turned from areas that clean the atmosphere from carbon dioxide into areas that pollute the atmosphere with this gas, which ultimately leads to climate warming. Almost all types of economic activity within the swamps and peatlands lead to the destruction of wetland ecosystems and destabilise the biospheric functions of swamps. Every year, in Belarus alone, between 2,500 and 8,000 fires take place in drained swamps, peatlands and soils, of which about 60% occur in the Pripyat basin. Due to the widespread hydrotechnical amelioration of wetlands and the functioning of a highly developed peat industry, the protection of the most ecologically significant wetlands and marsh landscapes is particularly important (map B.3 of the Annex B). At present, the area of swamps and peatlands subject to the environmental fund in the Pripyat basin is about 140,000 hectares, which includes wetlands belonging to reserves, and reserved forests for various purposes (botanical, biological, hydrological, berry, zoological, and others), on which a change of water regime is prohibited. Most of these wetlands are located in the flood plains of rivers and lakes, and their drainage can have negative impacts on the hydrological and hydrochemical regimes of natural water bodies and adjacent territories. The first Red List of the marshes of Belarus includes more than 200 items, including 69 in the Pripyat basin (see map B.31 in Annex B featuring swamps and peat bogs in the Pripyat river basin).

1.1.6 Information on protected areas

The Pripyat River basin is unique in Europe in terms of biological diversity. Polesye swamps are called the "lungs of Europe" for a reason. Many Red Book species of flora and fauna live in the river basin, including species such as bittern, black stork, aquatic warbler, avocet, stilt, marsh turtle, and the rare “Giant Noctule” bat. The first project to create a designated swamp-forest reserve in the Belarusian part of the Pripyat river basin was developed in the 1930s at the initiative of Polish environmental experts. The reserve was planned to be built between the Lva and Stviga rivers. This idea was implemented only in 1969, when the first “Pripyat” landscape-hydrological reserve was created in the territory of the USSR. Its area is

23 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

61,500 hectares on the lands of the Turov, Pietrikaw and Lyelchytsy forest enterprises. The creation of specially protected natural areas was particularly intense from the late 1960s to the second half of the 1990s. At the present time, the natural reserve fund in the Belarusian Polesye covers 7.8% of the area. The area of reserves is about 297,200 hectares and the area of reserved forests is 187,300 hectares. The total reserved and prohibited area is 484,500 hectares or 8% of the region (including the reserved area of 5%). Local reserved forests occupy 0.9% and are represented by 6 hydrological and 30 biological types. Republican reserved forests are represented by 4 landscapes, 2 hydrological types and 19 biological types. The “Pripyat” National State Park (which replaced the “Pripyat” Landscape and Hydrological Reserve) and the Polesye State Radiation and Ecological Reserve operate in the Pripyat river basin. A national park, a reserve, and 3 republican reserved forests, as well as a network of local specially protected natural areas (hereinafter – protected areas) have been created in the Pripyat flood plain (Tables 1.1, 1.2, Map B.4 of Annex B). Table 1.1: Protected natural territories of republican significance in the Pripyat River Basin (Republic of Belarus)

Year of founda- Name District Area, ha tion Nature reserves Polesye State Radiation and Ecological Brahin, 1988 215500 Reserve Naroulia, Khoiniki National parks Pripyat Zhytkavichy, 1996 82461 Lyelchytsy, Pietrykaw Natural reserved forests of republican significance Zhytkavichi, Zhytkavichy, 1978 15000 Radostovo Drahichyn 1978 7000 Biological Zvanets Drahichyn 10460 Lunino Luninets 1997 9283 Sporovo Byaroza, 1991 11280 Drahichyn, Ivanava, Ivatsevichy Hydrological Vygonoschi Hantsavichi, 1968 43000 Ivatsevichy, Lyakhavichy Stary Gaden Gytkovichy, 2015 17048,39 Lelchicy Cranberry bogs Babiniec Akciabrski 1979 850 Borsky Hantsavichi 1979 2805 Bukcha Lyelchytsy 1979 4915 Falicksky moh Staryya Darohi 1979 1700 Chirkovichi Svietlahorsk 1979 463 Yalovo Hantsavichi 1979 963 Landscape Mazyr ravins Mazyr 1986 1141 Olmansky swamps Stolin 1998 94219 Prostyr Pinsk 1994 3440 Srednaya Pripyat Pinsk, Luninets, Stolin, Zhytkavi- 1999 90447 chy Strelsky Kalinkavichy, Mazyr 1999 12161

24 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table 1.2: Monuments of nature of republican significance in the Pripyat River basin Name District Karelian birch in the ecosite "Osovka", forest stand Ivatsevichy Karelian birch in the ecosite "Terebezh", forest stand Ivatsevichy Oaks in Kozhan-Gorodok (2) Luninets Oval hickory in Broshevichi Drahichyn Park "Mankovichi" and caucasian fir Stolin Park "Porechie" ` Pinsk White fir in the "Duboy” Park, growing area Pinsk "Suvorov Oak" Kobryn Oak in the Galevichi Forestry Kalinkavichy Oak in Gorokhovishche forestry Akciabrski Oak in Danilevichi forestry Lyelchytsy Oak forest in Leninsky Forestry Zhytkavichy Oak forest in the Ludenevich forestry Zhytkavichy Oak forest in Leylchytsy forestry Lyelchytsy Spruce islands in the Klin and Gorbovichsky forest areas Kalinkavichy Geological outcrop near Doroshevic Pietrikaw “Lipovo” Park Kalinkavichy Crystal rocks near Glushkovichi, outcrop Lyelchytsy Yellow rhododendron in Vetchinsky forestry Zhytkavichy Oak "Tsyganski" in Sosnovsky forestry Lyuban Petiolar Oak in Lyuban forestry Lyuban Petiolar Oak в Yaminsky forestry Lyuban Larch, spruce and oak in Urechsky forestry Lyuban

The Polesye State Radiation and Ecological Reserve was created in 1988 on an area of 215,500 hectares in a 30-kilometer protected zone (in the Khoiniki, Brahin and Naroulia districts) formed after the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. The reserve is unique in the forest zone of Eu- rope. It was created to implement a set of measures to prevent the transportation of radionuclides outside the contaminated zones, study the state of natural plant complexes, conduct radiation and ecological monitoring, and conduct radiobiological research. The Red Book of Belarus registers 855 species of higher vascular plants, 29 protected plant species and 33 species of vertebrate animals. The reserve is included in the list of the most important plant areas of Europe [11]. A total stop to economic activity in the area coupled with the removal of disturb- ance factors and recurring water logging have led to the widespread renaturalisation of transformed ecosystems and a considerable increase in the number of wild animals. Belarus’s only outwash-dune ecosystems preserve features a rare zoocenosis species called a thick neep. The most numerous group of rare species in Belarus is the ortolan, which nests on dry meadows. Wintering of large preda- tory birds in Pripyat river basin is unique in Belarus. The “Pripyat” State National Park was created in 1996 on an area of 82,461 hectares in Zhitkavichi, Lyelchytsy and Pietrikaw districts. The largest upland and transition swamps, floodplain oak forests, black alpine forests, meadows, dune complexes, coniferous forests, as well as former riverbeds in the Pripyat ecosystems of Belarus and the estuaries of the right tributaries of this river remain the largest within the Belarusian Polesye. 827 species of higher vascular plants have been registered, 18 of which are included in the Red Book of Belarus. Among 246 species of birds and 49 species of mammals, 66 and 4 respectively are included in the National Red Book. Five species of birds are under threat of global extinction. The “Srednaya Pripyat” republican landscape reserve was created in 1999 on an area of 90,447 hectares along the Pripyat riverbed in the Pinsk, Lyninets, Stolin and Zhytkavichy districts. The reserve features Europe’s largest section of river flood plain, which has been preserved in its natural state. The longest flood plain complex of the large river, meadow and forest ecosystems, typical of Polesye, re-

25 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

main the most extensive in Belarus. Eleven protected species of flora are identified. Among 182 species of ornithofauna, 52 are included in the Red Book of Belarus. The reserve has an international importance because it preserves 6 globally endangered bird species and harbours a number of birds during the spring migration period [12]. The “Olmansky swamps” republican landscape reserve was created in 1998 on an area of 94,219 hectares in the Stolin district. It is the largest complex of upland, transition and lowland swamps in Europe, registering 687 species of higher vascular plants, 151 birds, and 26 mammals. Forty species of fauna and flora are included in the Red Book of Belarus. It is of international importance because it preserves the following endangered species: the greater spotted eagle, great snipe, and European mink. The “Zvanets” republican Biological Reserve was established in 1996 on an area of 10,460 hectares in the Drahichyn district, located on the Pripyat-Western Bug watershed. It is the largest massif of lowland bogs of mesotrophic type in Europe with numerous upland islands. This reserve is home to the largest population in the world of the globally endangered aquatic warbler. Ten rare plant communities flourish here and 44 species of fauna and flora are included in the Red Book of Belarus. It should be noted that in addition to the aquatic warbler, the reserve features nesting sites of the great spotted eagle and dupel, which are under the threat of extinction. In order to preserve wetlands in Belarus, on the territory of "Zvanets" and "Sporovsky" reserves, with the support of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Bela- rus, the UNDP-GEF project “Sustainable Management of Forest and Wetland Ecosystems to Achieve Multipurpose Benefits” is being implemented " (Wetlands). This project is aimed at restoring the habitats of endangered species: the aquatic warbler, the great spotted eagle, the dupel, the large spin- dleog, as well as the sustainable management of forest and wetland ecosystems. As part of the Wet- lands project, the plan is to clear large areas of reserve from shrubs and swamp vegetation. The resulting biomass will be used as fuel and bedding, and in the production of biofertilizers. It is expected that the measures taken will make it possible to increase the populations of the following species on the territory of wildlife sanctuaries: aquatic warbler, great spotted eagle, dupel, curlew, European otter, European turtle, and dwarf dragonfly. The living environment of the dytiscus latissimus will also improve. The “Vygonoschi” republican hydrological reserve was created in 1968 on an area of 43,000 hectares in the Ivatsevichy, Lyakhovichy and Hantsavichi districts. It is located on the watershed of the Pripyat and Neman basins. The largest complex of indigenous small-leaved forests, wetlands, and river and lake floodplains in Belarus is represented here. The largest Belarusian Polesye lake-floodplain ecosystems are preserved in their natural state. The reserve has an international importance for preserving 4 endangered species of ornithofauna. A significant part of the protected area on the left bank of the basin of Ramsar lands, the main ornitho- logical territories, and potential elements of the Pripyat ecological network, are of international and national importance for the conservation of landscape-biological diversity and resource potential (map B.53 of the Annex B). Management plans are being developed for the most important areas. Water protection zones and coastal strips In accordance with the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus, water protection zones are established to prevent pollution, the clogging and depletion of water bodies, and to preserve the habitat of wildlife fauna and the growth of plants in areas adjacent to water bodies. Within the water protection zones, some coastal zones are subject to a strict protection regime. In the water protection zone of rivers and reservoirs, a special regime for economic and other activities is established. Since the 1980s, the development of projects for water protection zones and coastal strips of small rivers, reservoirs, medium and large rivers in the territory of the Republic of Belarus has been conducted on the basis of various legal, methodological and organisational concepts. The development of

26 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

projects for small rivers was carried out on the basis of the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the BSSR "On strengthening the protection of small rivers from pollution, clogging and depletion and on the rational use of their water resources" of 11 December 1980, No.415 and "On improving of work organisation to protect small rivers from pollution, clogging and depletion “of 21 March 1986 ,No.86. The methodological basis for delineating the boundaries of water protection zones and coastal strips was “Regulation on water protection strips (zones) of small rivers of the Belarusian SSR” of 8 January 1983, No.18 (as amended by the Council of Ministers resolution No.189 of 14 June 1989). Maps of 1:10 000 scale were used as a topographical basis. Projects for water protection zones and coastal strips on the small rivers and streams flowing into them were developed and approved by the regional executive committees in 1990-1991 and by the “Belgiprozem” Institute and its regional branches in 1988-1991. For streams and springs, water protection zones are the same width as coastal strips, i.e. 50 metres; 500 metres for natural reservoirs, small rivers; and 600 metres for medium and large rivers from the coast of river for the average long-term low-water level. The width of the coastal strip has been established as from 30 m to 100 m. The total area of water protection zones in the Pripyat river basin is estimated as 20% to 40% of the catchment area of the basin. Projects for water protection zones and coastal strips on large and medium rivers in the Republic of Belarus were developed by RUE "CRICUWR" in 2002-2005 using maps of a 1:50 000 scale and approved by regional executive committees. At present, the following legal acts are the regulatory framework for project development: - Law of the Republic of Belarus “On Environmental Protection” dated 26 November 1992, No.1982-XII (as amended on 16 June 12014, No.161-3); - Water Code of the Republic of Belarus of 30 April 2014, No.149-З; - The Law of the Republic of Belarus "On the sanitary-epidemic welfare of the population" as amended by the laws of the Republic of Belarus of 7 January 2012, No.340-3; - National State Standard 17.1.3.13 - 86 "Nature conservation. Hydrosphere. General requirements for the protection of surface water from pollution”.

At present, in accordance with the requirements of the Water Code, the boundaries of water protection zones have been adjusted for water bodies in the Byaroza, Pinsk, Drahichyn, Ivanava and Pruzhany districts of the Brest region. By 2020, work to adjust the boundaries of water protection zones and coastal strips of all surface water bodies in the Pripyat basin should be completed. Typical sizes of water protection zones and coastal strips of surface water bodies are presented in table A.18 in Annex A. Information on water protection zones in the Pripyat river basin and the characteristics of potential pollution sources located in water protection zones and coastal zones of water bodies of the relevant areas are presented in tables A.20 in Annex A.

1.2 Water resources

1.2.1 Hydrographic network

The general plan of the hydrographic network of the Pripyat basin is determined by the relief, the geological structure of the territory, and the history of the development of the river network. The river Pri- pyat itself flows in a valley that has a latitudinal direction from west to east in the lower part of the Polesye lowland. The tributaries of the Pripyat follow a mainly submeridional direction, with a prevailing west to east direction in the eastern part of its basin only (Slovechna and Uzh rivers). the general plan of the hydrographic network is of the pinnate type.

27 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The modern hydrography of the Pripyat river basin is characterised by wandering, calm, overgrown rivers; numerous direct reclamation channels and straightened rivers; various reservoirs of natural and artificial origin; and swamps. In total, the Pripyat river basin has more than 14,900 watercourses, of which almost 92% are small rivers less than 10 km long (map B.7 of the Annex B). The total length of small rivers represents 55% of the length of the entire river network. The main characteristics of hydrographic network are presented in tables A.3, A.3.1, A.3.2 and A.4 of Annex A. The following 3 main criteria were used for the SWB delineation process: 1. Categorisation of SWB in accordance with WFD requirements (rivers, lakes, AWB and candidates for HMWB designation); 2. Typology of SWB in accordance with WFD System A (altitude, size and geology typology for river SWB; altitude, size, depth and geology typology for lakes SWB); 3. The existence of significant human pressures and surface water monitoring data (wastewater discharges, surface water intakes, hydromorphological alterations, non-achievement of good ecological/chemical status (hydrobiological/hydrochemical parameters)). According to the identification (delineation) [13,15], taking into account the stock data [14,16], the hydrographic network in the Pripyat River basin includes 715 surface water bodies, of which:  636 SWB on watercourses or their parts (rivers, streams, channels) with a catchment area of more than 30 km2 and an average length of 15.9 km;  79 water bodies (lakes, reservoirs, ponds) with a water surface area of more than 0.5 km2 and an average water surface area of 3.60 km2. For the identified SWB, 9 types of rivers and 13 types of lakes were determined. 85.5% of river SWB and 76% of lake SWB are candidates for HMWB designation. In the Pripyat river basin in Belarus, only 14.5% of river water bodies and 26 % of lake water bodies are close to their natural state. The remaining surface waters bodies have been changed by various engineering activities. The large number of artificial and heavily modified water bodies is due to the presence in the basin of 735 existing drainage systems for land reclamation, mainly for agricultural purposes. For this purpose, the prevailing hydromorphological changes are: straightening and deepening of channels and regulation of river flow using hydraulic structures, such as barrages, dams, locks and polder systems, including flood protection. The criteria used in the typification of watercourses and reservoirs in the Pripyat River basin are given in tables A.4.1 and A.4.2 of Annex A, respectively. A summary of the results of the identification (delineation) of SWB in the Pripyat River basin is given in Table A.4.3 of Annex A and on map B.8 of An- nex B.

Rivers The Belarusian part of the basin (these are all left-bank tributaries, the Pripyat itself for almost 500 km and the lower reaches of a number of right-bank tributaries) has 10,500 rivers and streams, including watercourses less than 10 km long. The total length of the river network in Belarus exceeds 47,000 km. More than 700 rivers are under 100 km long and 21 rivers are under 500 km. Only the Pripyat and Goryn are over 500 km long (Table 1.3). Table 1.3: The length and number of rivers in the Belarusian part of the Pripyat River Basin

Number of Categories of rivers by length Total rivers and Very small Small Medium Large their length <10 10-20 26-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 301-500 >500 Number of 4453 257 62 15 11 2 1 1 4802

28 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Number of Categories of rivers by length Total rivers and Very small Small Medium Large their length <10 10-20 26-50 51-100 101-200 201-300 301-500 >500 rivers Total length, 11924 4065 2156 863 1644 534 421 580 22087 km

The watershed line of the basin is prominent in the north, where it corresponds to the main watershed of the Baltic and Black Sea slopes, while in the south it runs along the elevations of the area. It is difficult to draw a watershed line in the west and east of the basin. This is due to flat watersheds, which create conditions for the artificial flow of water through reclamation and navigable canals not only in- side the Pripyat basin, but also in neighbouring basins. For example, it is difficult to determine the watershed of the Pina and Mukhavets rivers in the system of the Dnieper-Bug canal, the Yaselda and Shchara rivers in the Oginsky channel system, a flat marshy watershed in the headstream of the Pri- pyat and the valley of the Western Bug. The same situation is observed at the headstreams of the Yaselda and Narev rivers, which originate in the marshy plain. The Yaselda and Bobrik rivers are connected to the Shara river system by melioration channels. Part of the water from the river Ptich across the river Titovka enters the river Svisloch, while in the lower reaches of the Ptich River it connects with the Berezina river system. The Pripyat basin is characterised by hydraulic connections with neighbouring rivers, which can be either natural or artificial. Thus, according to the system of melioration channels of the river, the Lan is connected with the Sluch river, which, in turn, is connected with the tributaries of the Ptich river. In the lower reaches, the rivers Goryn and Stviga, Slovechna and Zhelon, etc. are interconnected. The hydrographic characteristics of the main catchments of the rivers in the Pripyat basin are given below in table 1.4 and in more detail in table A.4 of Annex A. The number of tributaries also determines the density of the river network in the Pripyat basin, which varies from 0.20–0.63 km/km2. On average, for the basin the density is 0.42 km/km2. The maximum parameters of the density of the river network are characteristic of the headstream of the Sluch River (Ukrainian) and reach 0.62–0.66 km/km2, which is due to the increased dissection of the territory in this part of its basin. The smallest values of the parameter of the density of the river network are appropriate to the marshy basins of Stokhod (0.28 km/km2), Vyzhevka (0.29 km/km2) and Bobrik (0.30 km/km2). In general, the density of the river network is higher within the left-bank tributaries of the Pri- pyat, which is due to the greater general moisture in the territory of their basins. An analysis of table 1.4 shows that the values of an average slope for the Pripyat tributaries vary in the range of 0.09–0.7‰. Such a significant difference is due to the nature of the relief and the geological and geomorphological structure of the territory [14]. The greatest values of the slopes are appropriate for the rivers draining the surface of the Ukrainian crystalline shield and the Volyn upland, where they can reach 1.2‰. The values of the average slope also depend on the size of the watercourse. For small rivers this indicator is usually larger and may exceed 2.0‰. The smallest river slopes are specific to the marshy areas of the Polesye lowland (the Pripyat river proper (0.09‰) and the Yaselda river (0.15‰). The mean height of their catchment areas generally correlates well with the average river slope values of the Pripyat basin (map B.6 of the Annex B). Table 1.4: Hydrographic characteristics of the main rivers of the Pripyat basin

оо

River station % % %

/кm

Average

height, m

Lake pe

area,km

slope,

Density of

catchment

Catchment

centage,%

Marshiness,

Ploughness,

Forest cover,

Average river

rivernetwork, Pripyat – settlement Lubyaz 6100 0.2 170 - <1 16 26 20 Vyzhevka – mouth (l) 1270 0.5 180 0.29 <1 15 26 20

29 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

оо

River station % % %

/кm

Average

height, m

Lake pe

area,km

slope,

Density of

catchment

Catchment

centage,%

Marshiness,

Ploughness,

Forest cover,

Average river

rivernetwork, Tyriya – mouth (r) 2800 0.7 170 0.29 <1 10 20 30 Stokhod – mouth (r) 3150 0.4 170 0.28 <1 6 34 20 Yaselda – mouth (l) 7790 0.15 154 0.47 1 32 32 25 Styr’ – state border (r) 12370 0.4 210 0.27 <1 5 24 - Bobrik – mouth (l) 1890 0.2 145 0.30 <1 29 53 15 Tsna – mouth (l) 1130 0.3 153 0.46 <1 15 59 15 Goryn – settlement Rechytsa (r) 27000 0.36 233 0.45 <1 6 21 - Lan – mouth (l) 2620 0.35 180 0.58 <1 16 50 25 Sluch – mouth (l) 7530 0.24 160 0.51 1 15 55 30 Stviga – state border (r) 2620 0.5 170 0.31 <1 - - - Ubort’ – mouth (r) 5820 0.3 171 0.38 <1 11 65 20 Ptich – mouth (l) 9470 0.4 160 0.48 <1 7 50 25 Vit’ – mouth (l) 991 0.4 131 0.42 <1 15 59 25 Slovechna – mouth (r) 3600 0.7 148 0.33 0 12 70 15 Uzh –mouth (r) 8080 0.5 170 0.31 <1 4 27 - Pripyat – mouth 121000 0.09 179 0.42 <1 16 26 25 Note: (l) – left tributary, (r) – right tributary

Lakes Lakes are natural water bodies with slow water exchange. The lake percentage of the main tributaries of the Pripyat does not exceed 1%, and in the whole basin it is 0.22%. On the right bank of the Pripyat, about 2,500 lakes with a total area of 165 km2 were taken into account. Lakes of Polesye have a different origin and therefore differ in shape and depth. The most distinctive are shallow overgrown reservoirs in the marshy and forested areas. These include the largest lakes of the Pripyat basin, which were formed on the site of the former periglacial sea. The valleys of large rivers feature many small shallow flood plain lakes, which are called former river beds. Lakes can also be found in swamp areas. Lakes of karst origin have developed in the west of Polesye, on the right bank of the Pripyat, in the Yaselda catchment area, between the Pripyat and the Dnieper-Bug canal. Most of them are deep, circular bodies of water. The largest lakes in the basin are Chervonoye (40.8 km2), Vygonovskoye (26 km2) and Chernoye (17.3 km2) (Table 1.5). Table 1.5: Lakes with a surface area of more than 1 km², selected to identify surface water bodies in the basin of the Pripyat River

Water Surface Maximum Medium № Name Sub-basin/district 2 volume, area, km 3 depth, m depth, m million. m 1 Beloye DBK/Drahichyn 5,39 12,22 12 5,4 2 Zavischovskoe Pina/Ivanava 1,32 7,05 10,7 5,3 3 Peschanoye Pina/Ivanava 2,09 5,64 5,7 2,7 4 Beloye Yaselda/Byaroza 5,69 45,02 13,2 7,9 5 Chernoye Yaselda/Byaroza 17,3 23,01 3 1,3 6 Sporovskoye Yaselda/Byaroza 11,1 10,78 1,5 0,9 7 Motolskoye Yaselda/Ivanava 1,15 1,15 1,7 1 8 Vygonovsckoye Yaselda/ Ivatsevichy 26 31,2 2,3 1,2 9 Beloye Sluch/ Zhytkavichy 1,56 7,41 9 4,75 10 Chervonoye Bobrik II / Zhytkavichy, 40,82 27.35 2,9 0,7 11 Vechera Oressa /Lyuban 3,24 3,51 1,6 1,1 12 Sergeevskoye Ptich /Pukhavichy 2,75 4,7 2,9 1,7

30 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The characteristics of the lakes of the Pripyat basin are given in more detail in Table A.3 of Annex A.

Reservoirs Reservoirs correspond to artificial reservoirs with a water surface area of more than 100 hectares, created in order to accumulate and store water and regulate flow. Such reservoirs with volumes less than 1 million m3 are called ponds. Reservoirs with a volume from 1 to 10 million m3 are called small reservoirs. The modern reservoir fund was formed in several stages. After World War II, reservoirs were created for energy purposes only. Inter-collective farms and district hydropower stations were built on the rivers. Several reservoirs were created on the basis of a lake or group of lakes. At the same time, the number of reservoirs increased due to their construction during drying and land reclamation (Kras- noslobodskoe, Lyubanskoe, Selets, and others). Besides lakes and river reservoirs, drainage reservoirs were built for two-sided regulation of the soil moisture of reclaimed land. Examples are: Bolshie Orly, Krasnaya Ploschad, Golovchitskoe, etc. reservoirs. Some of them were created from existing lakes (e.g. Pogost, Sporovskoe, Lukovskoe). In the Pripyat basin, ponds are the most common type. Water is supplied to them by the pumping station from canals or the intake channels of land-reclamation systems. Quarry ponds are located, as a rule, in the place of peat extraction or other quarries. Ponds can be used for fish farming, recreation and watering reclaimed agricultural lands. The most common types are ponds for cultural and fishery purposes. Ponds used as sources of irrigation and subsoil moistening of reclaimed land began to be constructed only after 1970. Besides these ponds, pond facilities are located in the basin. The largest fish farms are Lyuban, Krasnaya Sloboda, Loktyshi and Selets. There are many artificial reservoirs in the Pripyat basin. Their number has mostly increased due to widespread land-reclamation works and the need to regulate flow for the purposes of agriculture and developing industry. At present, large artificial reservoirs (Krasnaya Sloboda, Soligorsk, Luban, Selets) and small artificial reservoirs with complex purposes have been created in the basin. In the Polesye area, a number of reservoirs are formed on the basis of lakes, for example, Pogost in the Bobrik basin, and also Chernoye in the Yaselda basin. The total area of ponds and reservoirs in the Pripyat basin amounts to approximately 500 km2, and the volume is 1.00 km3.

Table 1.6: Reservoirs with a surface area of more than 1 km², selected to identify reservoir irrigating polders on the Pripyat river basin

Full volume / Sub-basin / Surface Medium Type of № Name 2 useful capacity, Type district area, km 3 depth, m regulation million m 1 Zhidche Pripyat / Pinsk 1.2 5.1/4.6 6.0 Pouring Seasonal 2 Liberpol’ Yaselda/ Pru- 2.9 4.2/3.1 1.4 Channel Seasonal zhany 3 Selets Yaselda / 20.7 56.3/41.5 2.7 Pouring Seasonal Byaroza 4 Koziki Yaselda / 2.1 10.0/9.2 4.7 Pouring Seasonal Ivatsevichy 5 Obrovo Yaselda / 1.6 7.1/5.9 4.4 Pouring Seasonal Ivatsevichy 6 Jidenye Yaselda / 2.52 6.9/4.3 2.7 Pouring Seasonal Ivanava 7 Morochno Stur/ Stolin 1.4 4.3/3.5 3 Pouring Seasonal 8 Razdyalovichi Bobrik I / 2.0 9.4/7.0 4.7 Pouring Seasonal Hantsavichy 9 Bobrik Bobrik I / 1.2 5.3/4.2 4.4 Pouring Seasonal Hantsavichy 10 Pogost Bobrik I / Pinsk 16.2 54.5/44.8 3.3 Lake Seasonal 11 Bolshie Orly Pripyat / Stolin 1 3.6/3.1 3.6 Pouring Seasonal

31 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Full volume / Sub-basin / Surface Medium Type of № Name 2 useful capacity, Type district area, km 3 depth, m regulation million m 12 Velyga Tsna / 7.6 31/23.8 4 Pouring Seasonal Luninets 13 Sobelskoye Smerd’/ 2.9 14.2/13.6 4.9 Pouring Seasonal Luninets 14 Loktyshi Lan’ / 15.9 50.2/29.8 3.1 Channel Seasonal Hantsavichy 15 Krasnaya- Sluch/ Kletsk 23.6 69.5/50.0 2.9 Channel Perennial Sloboda 16 Rudnya Sluch/ Slutsk 3.8 14.1/8.8 3.7 Channel Seasonal 17 Soligorsk Sluch / Sali- 21.3 55.9/38.0 2.6 Channel Seasonal horsk 18 Mlynok Skripitsa / 1.5 6.1/4.1 4 Pouring Seasonal Zhytkavichy 19 Svidnoe Ubort’ / Ly- 2.2 5.7/4.6 2.6 Pouring Seasonal elchytsy 20 Volchkovichskoe Ptich / Minsk 0.9 2.8/1.9 3.1 Channel Seasonal 21 Levki Ptich / Staryya 4.4 23.6/16.1 5.4 Pouring Seasonal Darohi 22 Luyban Ptich / Luyban 22.5 39.5/32.7 1.7 Channel Seasonal 23 Bobruikovskoye Mytva/ El’ 1.0 1.8/1.0 1.8 Channel Seasonal 24 Knyazheborskoe Mytva / El’ 1.4 2.3/1.9 1.6 Channel Seasonal 25 Velikoborskoe Vit’/ Khoiniki 2.7 9.0/6.9 3.3 Pouring Seasonal 26 Sydkovo Vit’ / Khoiniki 1.0 3.0/2.0 3.0 Pouring Seasonal

The characteristics of water bodies in the Pripyat basin are given in more detail in tables A.3.1, A.3.2 of Annex A. Swamps are specific and unusual water objects. The Pripyat basin is a typical swamp region. The largest marsh massifs are located here. In the interstream area of Pina and Pripyat, in the lower reaches of the Styr, the well-known Pinsk swamps are located. The small Grichin massif is located between the Tsna and Lani rivers. The huge Galo bog is located between the lower reaches of the Goryn and Stviga. Some swamps have been already reclaimed. Natural swamp massifs will soon be preserved only in protected areas.

Reclamation systems The Pripyat River basin is distinguished by a large degree of land wetness. The Polesye zone is particularly over moistened, where the share of over moistened agricultural land on average equals 75%. Belarusian Polesye has become a kind of testing area for the reliability and durability of various methods of land reclamation in the country. The latest scientific and design developments have all been tested here. A wide range of systems has been built in the region, such as drying with a network of open canals and closed drains, drainage and humidifying and irrigation systems, as well as polder systems, water circulation systems and objects with submerged drainage mouths, vertical drainage, etc (table 1.7).

32 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table 1.7: Number of channels and their length in the Pripyat basin

Length, km Indicators Total 5-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-50 >50 Number 657 151 60 28 14 15 1 926 Total length, 4559.4 1842.8 1040.8 651.0 393.6 556.1 52.0 9095.7 km

The general characteristics of the land fund, taking into account reclamation activities in the basin by administrative units, and using statistical records, are given in table 1.8.

Table 1.8: General characteristics of the reclaimed land fund of the Belarusian part of the Pripyat basin

Land area, Swamps Drained lands Irrigated lands Administrative area, dis- ha area, area, area, tricts % % % ha ha ha Brest region 1 662 300 13.28% 220 735 22.63% 376 208 1.06% 17 605 Byaroza 150 000 8.10% 12150 25.00% 37500 1.20% 1800 Hantsevichy 15300 9.50% 1454 18.20% 2784.6 1.30% 198.9 Drahichin 152000 12.80% 19456 41.90% 63688 1.30% 1976 Ivanava 150000 5.60% 8400 30.40% 45600 2.40% 3600 Ivatsevichy 165000 12.90% 21285 17.90% 29535 0.40% 660 Luninets 280000 14.10% 39480 22.80% 63840 0.90% 2520 Lyakhovichy 20000 7.50% 1500 32.00% 6400 1.70% 340 Pinsk 320000 13.70% 43840 22.90% 73280 1.50% 4800 Pryzhany 70000 3.50% 2450 13.40% 9380 0.50% 350 Stolin 340000 20.80% 70720 13.00% 44200 0.40% 1360 Gomel region 1 987 900 4.79% 95 134 16.54% 328 773 0.67% 13 281 Yelsk 140000 5.10% 7140 19.50% 27300 1.40% 1960 Zhytkavichy 290000 6.50% 18850 12.80% 37120 0.40% 1160 Kalinkovichy 260000 2.00% 5200 30.80% 80080 0.90% 2340 Lyelchitsy 320000 10.30% 32960 8.30% 26560 0.70% 2240 Mazyr 160000 2.70% 4320 6.70% 10720 1.10% 1760 Naroulia 160000 4.40% 7040 12.70% 20320 0.20% 320 Akciabrski 133000 2.20% 2926 21.80% 28994 0.70% 931 Pietrikaw 280000 3.50% 9800 18.20% 50960 0.70% 1960 Rechytsa 42900 1.80% 772 15.20% 6520.8 0.70% 300.3 Svetlogorsk 62000 1.30% 806 12.90% 7998 0.50% 310 Khoiniki 140000 3.80% 5320 23.00% 32200 1.10% 1540 Grondo region 7 000 5.80% 406 16.30% 1 141 0.50% 35 Svisloch 7000 5.80% 406 16.30% 1141 0.50% 35 Minsk region 1 099 000 2.46% 27 022 26.85% 295 110 0.87% 9 524 Dzyarzhynsk 4000 0.60% 24 35.40% 1416 0.30% 12 Kletsk 95000 0.30% 285 17.20% 16340 2.30% 2185 Kapyl 96000 0.30% 288 21.70% 20832 0.80% 768 Lyuban 190000 0.50% 950 37.50% 71250 0.70% 1330 Minsk 20000 0.60% 120 10.20% 2040 2.40% 480 Nyasvizh 5000 0.60% 30 8.80% 440 0.70% 35 Pykhavichy 112000 7.40% 8288 17.70% 19824 0.60% 672 Slutsk 175000 2.70% 4725 29.80% 52150 0.60% 1050 Salihorsk 250000 4.00% 10000 29.30% 73250 1.00% 2500 Staryya Darohi 140000 1.60% 2240 25.00% 35000 0.30% 420 Uzda 12000 0.60% 72 21.40% 2568 0.60% 72 Mogilev region 176 000 2.99% 5 260 15.45% 27 184 0.13% 222 Babruysk 8000 2.00% 160 2.20% 176 0.20% 16 Hlusk 130000 2.90% 3770 18.70% 24310 0.10% 130 Asipovichy 38000 3.50% 1330 7.10% 2698 0.20% 76 Total over the basin 4 932 200 7.07% 348 557 20.85% 1 028 415 0.82% 40 667

33 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Melioration systems with a total area of more than 600,000 hectares, which were built in Belarus more than 20 years ago, and especially those with organogenic soils, currently need reconstruction, restoration and technical improvement, including improving the reliability of their operation. In areas subject to the older systems, moreover, land productivity is 25–50% lower than in areas using modern technical systems. In total, more than 2,641,800 hectares of agricultural land have been drained, of which 1,140,000 hectares are arable land. This has caused the destruction of the natural ecosystems in this entire unique natural region. In the Polesye region of Belarus, over 40% of wetlands have been drained [8]. As well as the left bank tributaries of the Pripyat, its right tributaries are significantly subjected to drainage reclamation. At this time, the number of large drainage systems is about 550, and the total area of drained land is more than 1,060,000 hectares, Draining systems of various areas (from a hundred to tens of thousands of hectares) are confined mainly to flood plains of rivers, terraces and glacial-water plains. Drainable soils are mainly mineral and peatlands. The type of water supply is atmospheric subsurface everywhere. Depending on the structural features, combined-type drainage systems (open and closed network) regulate the water-air regime for large areas and create an optimal reclamation environment for growing crops. Drained lands are mainly used for tilled crops and pastures. Depending on the method of land drainage and regulation of the water-air regime of the soil, all of these systems can be roughly classified into five groups: 1) open systems, which operate only for the discharge of excess surface water in the spring and after prolonged rains in summer and autumn; 2) open, with a water-regulating system by which to lock channels in order to retain local runoff and use it for subsurface moistening; 3) closed systems (with tile drainage); 4) closed, using local runoff for soil moistening by means of preventative locking; 5) drainage-moistening systems with a constant source of water for sub-soil hydration.

1.2.2 Surface water resource

Main hydrological characteristics The main source of water resources in the Pripyat river basin is precipitation that forms surface runoff, fills lakes, and replenishes groundwater reserves. In an average year, 32.9 km3 of atmospheric precipitation falls in the catchment area of the Pripyat River (its Belarusian part), of which 5.6 km3 forms river flow, 3.3 km3 forms underground flow, 2.3 km3 forms surface water, and 27.3 km3 evaporates. The natural resources of river waters in the Pripyat river basin are given in Tables A.1, A1.1-A.1.7 of Annex A. A basic indicator of river water resources is the average long-term value (norm) of river flow. It is determined according to direct observations of the flow. Annually renewable resources of river flow are usually called surface runoff resources. At the same time, the river beds are drains along which flows an excess of surface and ground waters from their active interaction zone. Thus, renewable resources, which are rated according to the river flow data, simultaneously characterise resources not only of surface water, but also groundwater. The share of the underground component of the river flow is determined by the division of the annual flow into its genetic surface and underground components. Due to the unequal distribution of runoff throughout the year, and from year to year, only part of the average and annual runoff can be practically used. There- fore, data on average annual flow characterise only potential water resources and water availability. Relevant or operational water resources in different environmental conditions account for a different share of the average annual flow. Average long-term characteristics and quantitative values of water resources in the Pripyat river in the years of estimated frequency (P = 50%, 75% and 95%) are given in Table 1.4 of Annex A. The aver-

34 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

age annual runoff module in the territory of the basin varies slightly (from 3.98 l/s⋅km2 - the Styr river - the Mlynok settlement to 3.32 l/s⋅km2 – the Uzh river - settlement Polesskoe) except for rivers, which originate within the Slovechansko-Ovruchsky ridge, where in the upper reaches of the Lva and Ubort’ rivers the average annual runoff module reaches 4–5 l/s⋅km2. The water resources of the basin’s rivers are characterised by significant variability depending on the annual availability. This especially applies to small rivers in the basin. Thus, a 75% water occurrence (low-flow period) in medium-sized rivers which are the main tributaries of the Pripyat (the Stur, Goryn, Sluch) results in a 1.6–3.6 times decrease in the resources of the small rivers in the basin . If the volume of water resources of medium rivers is 73–82% of the average water level of the year, then this figure for small rivers equals only 28–63%. A more significant decrease in the basin’s water resources for the year results from a 95% water occurrence (i.e. very low-water). For medium rivers in the basin, this makes up 44–61% of the resources of the year with a 50% occurrence, while for small rivers this value is only 15–30%. Thus, the decrease of river flow resources for a very low-water year is from 1.6–2.2 times for medium rivers in the Pripyat basin to 3.3–6.5 times for small rivers in the Pripyat basin. The left bank tributaries of the Pri- pyat have less variable flows, thus the reduction of general water resources for the entire basin is not so significant in years with a 75% and 95% occurrence. Thus, for the section of the Pripyat River - Mazyr, the volume of runoff in low-water years is 80%, and the volume of runoff in very low-water years is 54% of the volume of the runoff of the average water content of the year. The size of the local runoff of the rivers of the Pripyat basin (which is formed within Ukraine) is 6.87 km3 in an average water content year. At the same time, within the territory of the Republic of Belarus in a year with a 50% occurrence, 5.78 km3 of flow is generated (or 46% of the flow volume of the entire Pripyat River). At the same time, due to the lower variability of the runoff of the left-bank tributaries of the Pripyat in low-water years with a 75% occurrence, the runoff from Ukraine is 3.1 km3. And in the territory of the Republic of Belarus, 3.72 km3 of runoff is generated (which makes up 55% of the flow volume of the entire Pripyat). The water regime of the rivers in the Pripyat basin is defined by what feeds them, which can be snow, rainfall or groundwater, depending on the season. Rivers are often recharged with a mix featuring a predominant value of one type or another. Thus, in the spring, the rivers of the basin are fed with a mix of snow, rainfall and groundwater. During the low-water season (summer-autumn and winter) groundwater supply is the biggest source. During the autumn floods, rainfall and groundwater provide most of the resource. During the summer-autumn and winter low-water periods, rivers are fed by groundwater drainage. A wide development of groundwater confined to different stratigraphic complexes of different ages (from Precambrian to modern Quaternary sediments) is typical in the basin. The aquifers of the Quaternary and sub-Quaternary sediments of the zone of active water exchange constitute a hydrau- lically connected system. Waters with Quaternary sediments feed into rivers due to the infiltration of precipitation, flood water in the spring and autumn periods, and groundwater inflow from the underlying aquifers. Water pressure discharge occurs within the Pripyat flood plain and its tributaries. The amount of groundwater recharge varies widely from 18.6 mm to 114.2 mm per year. The discharge of large amounts of groundwater into the Pripyat flood plain, with small river slopes and groundwater areas and a weak outflow, results in a constantly high groundwater level from 0 to 1.0 m, and sometimes up to 2.0 m. The low water season is periodically interrupted by rain floods. In these cases, the rain input increases the water content of the river. The water volumes of each type of recharge entering the river for short intervals of time are practically impossible to measure. Therefore they are determined by separating the runoff hydrograph into components corresponding to individual types of recharge. The rivers of the Pripyat basin have a retaining regime of underground flow into the river. During a retaining regime, namely in the presence of a hydraulic connection between groundwater and channel waters, the orientation of the phases is observed to be the opposite of the regime of river waters due to the formation of back slopes of groundwater in the channel zone. The maximum flow of the river

35 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

may reach the minimum of the underground flow into the river. For the right-bank tributaries of the Pripyat, the highest water phase of the year is during spring flooding, which accounts for an average of 61% of the annual flow. The share of annual summer-autumn runoff is about 23%. The share of winter runoff is about 16%. In order to determine the correlation of types of recharge for some water stations on the Pripyat basin, runoff hydrographs were constructed and analysed over several years with different water content. The following years were selected among the total number of observations for the hydrological posts of Rechytsa and Lyubyaz: very high-water year (5% of supply), moderately high-water year (25%), average water year (50%), moderately low-water year (75%), very low-water year (97%).For each year, the separation of the hydrograph was carried out with the definition of snowy, rainy and underground components. Then the percentage correlation between the components was calculated. For the upper reaches of the Pripyat there is a significant ratio of underground recharge, which is explained by the lowland relief, close groundwater occurrence, forestation and swampiness of the territory. All of the above-mentioned factors contribute to the transfer of surface runoff into the subsurface, with its subsequent flow into the rivers. In general, the average ratio between power recharge of rivers in the Pripyat basin is as follows. Snow accounts for 10–50%, underground 30%, and rainfall 20–30%. According to research data, in the upper reaches of Pripyat, the proportion of underground nourishment exceeds 40%, decreasing further downstream to 28.5%. And in general it constitutes 35%. The proportion of snow recharge increases downstream, which is connected with an increase in the catchment area and a decrease in dependence on the underground component of the runoff. As for the correlation between types of recharge in years with different water levels, it is difficult to trace the general factors, since the water content of the proximate supply years can be due to both spring floods and rain floods. However, there are some trends in this process. Thus, very high-water years in the upper Pripyat basin are usually caused by rainfall, so the share of rainy recharge ranges from 59% to 87%, against the background of very low snowfall which constitutes 4-4.5%.In regards to the latter, its largest proportion is observed in average water years (from 42% to 86%).During the transition to low- water and very low-water years, recharge from snow nourishment also decreases. Part of the rainy recharge is minimal in average water years and moderately dry years, increasing in very dry years. The share of underground recharge at the top station remains consistently high in all years (from 36% to 59%). At the bottom station, the share of underground recharge naturally increases as the water content of the year decreases (from 8% to 45%). Water level regime Water level measurements are carried out at all hydrological stations located in the Pripyat river basin. The annual change in the levels of the rivers in the specified territory, which belongs to the areas of high and sufficient water content in the hydrological zoning, is usually characterised by high spring floods and rather low water periods, interrupted by floods from rain or snowmelt. The highest spring flood levels are usually the highest in the year. The average height of the spring rise in water levels above the minimum summer level is 3.5–4.5 m on the Pripyat River, of which 1.5–3 m for left bank tributaries and 1–2.5 m for right bank tributaries. Most often (on average once every two years), spring floods are observed in the area of the Chernichi station on the Pripyat River. Once every 2-3 years, they are observed in the area of the Rechytsa stations on the Goryn River, and at the stations of the cities of Pinsk, Korobi and Pietrikaw on the Pripyat River, and Krasnoberezhie on the Ubort River. Spring floods are followed by summer-autumn low waters, characterised by significant variability. Summer low waters are usually lower than in winter. Rainfall floods in the summer-autumn period occur almost annually. Floods occurring in the autumn are characterised by the highest height and duration. The winter low water period is often interrupted by thaws, the consequences of which are winter floods, which in some years exceed the spring floods. Maximum water levels are observed at most stations during the flood period. Fluctuations of the water levels in different water content phases are given in table 1.9.

36 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The minimum levels are observed in general in the period of summer-autumn low waters, i.e. in the period with the lowest water content. Table 1.9: Indicative water levels for the rivers of the Pripyat basin (as of 1 January 2018)

Mark "0" Н , Maximum level Minimum level River-post medium post m BS cm cm date cm date Pripyat-Pinsk 133.18 112 302 21.04 13 -27 04.09.15 28- Pripyat-Chernitsy 119.23 356 637 21-22.03 1999 110 29.08.1992 Pripyat-Pietrikaw 112.55 562 933 03-04.04.1979 327 16.08.1961 Pripyat-Mazyr 110.93 224 742 22-24.04.1895 -22 19.09.15 Pina-Pinsk 132.29 169 366 01.04.1979 25 11.12.1995 Yaselda-Senin 134.39 126 247 27.03.1999 -16 03.09.15 Goryn-Malye 129.67 298 635 11.04.1956 126 15.0916 Viktorivochy 20.04- Sluch-Lenin 129.97 114 314 -32 31.08.15 21.04.1958 Ubort- 07- 126.26 157 390 11.04.1932 48 Krasnoberezhie 18.10.1939 Ptich-Daraganov 150,0 186 339 13.04.99 92 06.09.15

An important characteristic of the level mode is its wide-ranging fluctuations. For Pripyat itself, according to long-term observations, the amplitude of changes in water level varies from 2–3 m (in the upper reaches) to 5–7 m (in the middle and lower reaches). This is due to the considerable water content and the shape of the river valley. In general, for the rivers of the Pripyat basin, the highest water level fluctuation values occur in drainage areas by the water courses of the shield and the northern spurs of the Volyn-Podolsk Upland (4–5 m), due to the structure of their valleys and flood plains. The lowest indices of these values are typical of lowlands, wide-flood plains, and marshy areas in the Polesye Lowland (2–3 m). Annual flow distribution The seasonal and monthly distribution of river flow is due to regularities of annual changes in the main components of the water balance: precipitation and evaporation, the geomorphological structure of the basin, hydrographic and hydrogeological conditions, the nature of the soil, vegetation, and economic activity in the river basins. The most reliable way to calculate the annual distribution of runoff is to take the seasons during which the lowest consumption of water is observed as the limiting points. Within the Pripyat basin, five hydrological areas are distinguished due to the annual distribution of the flow. The regions are numbered according to the zoning of the identified territory, conducted in Belarus and Ukraine. For the Belarusian part of the Pripyat basin, according to the overregulating nature and, consequently, uniform distribution of the flow, two regions are distinguished (map B.35 of the Annex B), one of which comprises three subdistricts (VI). The rivers of subdistrict VIa are characterised by a relatively low natural flow discharge. On average, the limiting period runoff is 35%, while in the summer-autumn period it is 22%, and 13% in winter. The rivers of subdistrict VIb are noted for their greater runoff overregulation. According to the type of distribution of seasonal runoff, they approach the rivers of subdistrict Vb. The annual runoff share of the limiting period of the rivers is on average about 44% (summer-autumn - 28%, winter - 16%). The most levelled-off runoff is observed within rivers of subdistrict Viv. The average runoff of the limiting period is 54% (summer-autumn - 31%, winter - 23%).Some rivers have large deviations in the intra-annual distribution of runoff in this area. The largest monthly runoff within large and medium riv-

37 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

ers is in spring, in April, and on small rivers in March. On rivers with catchment areas of 900– 5,000 km2 during high water years, the largest runoff is usually observed in March, and in other years in May. The lowest runoff in a year is most often observed in September, less often in July or August. In autumn, the runoff in November is often greater than the runoff in October. In winter, on the contra- ry, runoff decreases by February. A general overview of the calculated distribution of runoff for years with different water contents for the specified areas is presented in Table 1.12. In total, with a decreasing water content for the year, the share of annual runoff, which falls on limiting periods and seasons, decreases and, consequently, the share of spring runoff increases [17]. A particular feature of the river regime in areas І and ІІІ is a significant proportion of autumn-winter runoff in high-water years (up to 42.4% and 38.3% of the annual amount) and average water years (up to 29.7% and 37.4% of the annual amount). This is due either to intense widespread rainfall (for example, in November 1974 and 1980), or intense thaws with rains and melting snow cover (January 1975, 1989, 1998), which leads to the formation of high rainfall or snowy rainfall. As for the second district, there is a tendency for an increase in the share of runoff during the limiting season (autumn) with a decrease in the annual water content and a degree of stability in runoff values in summer. This is explained by the fact that in low-water and very low-water years the input component of the water balance increases in this area. It should be noted that the data on the annual distribution of runoff of the ІІ district have a weak representativeness relative to the Ukrainian part of the Pripyat basin, since only the Uzh river basin is located within it. In this regard, to determine the limiting period, season and month, and to analyse the annual balance of the flow involves taking into account its transboundary transfer and its distribution for the І and ІІІ districts. Average annual runoff A factor that determines the potential water resources of the river basin, and also serves as the initial value when determining the annual flow of estimated provision, is the average long-term flow or flow rate. The largest right-bank tributaries of the Pripyat, which are the Styr, Goryn and Sluch, have the greatest water content. The flow rate of the rivers Styr and Goryn when they cross the border between Ukraine and the Republic of Belarus is 44.5 m3/s and 97.9 m3/s, respectively. The Pripyat within the border area has an average annual consumption of 26.4 m3/s. However, in accordance with the conditions of flow formation, there are certain regularities of its spatial distribution. These regularities are most clearly shown in the maps of the average multi-year runoff constructed in the runoff modules (l/s⋅km2). The possibility of geographical interpolation is due to a rather slow (gradual) change in the flat territory of the main landscape factors of flow formation. An analysis of changes in runoff modules shows that the rivers located in the upper reaches of the Styr and Goryn rivers (more than 5 l/s · km2) have the highest water density. The lowest values of these indicators (less than 3 l/s ⋅ km2) are typical for the rivers of the upper part of the Turya and the Uzh river basins. The values of runoff modules for the Belarusian part of Pripyat are given in Table 1.10. Table 1.10: Long-term characteristics of the annual flow of the rivers of the Pripyat basin

Flow rate River-site Water flow, m3/s Runoff modulus , l/s km2 Pripyat-Mazyr 390 3.86 Yaselda-Byaroza 4.80 5.24 Tsna-Dyatlovichy 4.59 4.74 Oressa-Andreevka 17.1 4.78

Maximum runoff Within the rivers of the Pripyat basin, the maximum flow is formed either from melt water or from heavy rains.

38 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

An indicative phase of the hydrological regime of the rivers of the described territory is the spring flood, which is formed annually in spring as a result of snowmelt and rainfall during snowmelt. Within the Pripyat, it usually begins in the first half of March but in some years it may change to February or April. The average annual duration of floodplain afflux is 80–110 days, and in some years it can be up to 150–180 days [18,19]. The width of the spring flood within the Pripyat varies from 5 to 15 km, in some areas (near the city of Pinsk) reaching 30 km. The depth of flooding is mainly 0.3–0.8 m, in some places reaching up to 2–2.5 m [20].The flooding width of 1% occurrence reaches 1.5–6.0 km within the area from the headstream to the mouth of the river Styrand, from the town of Mazyr to the mouth, while in the middle part it reaches 8–15 km, and in some areas 20–30 km. The correlation of flooded areas in the floodplain of the Pripyat River with floods of various supply levels is shown in Table 1.11 [21,22]. The duration of floods on small rivers ranges from 40 to 45 days. Table 1.11: Correlation of flooded areas on the flood plain of the Pripyat by occurrence, %

Occurrence, % 1 5 10 25 50 Area, thousand ha 579 550 487 404 197

Table 1.12 presents the flows of the 10 most significant floods.

Table 1.12: Maximum discharges of spring flood water into the Pripyat river – Mazyr

Year 1845 1877 1895 1888 1889 1940 1979 1932 1970 1958 Qm3/s 11000 7500 5670 5100 4700 4520 4310 4220 4140 4010

The flood peak on the majority of rivers runs from the end of March to the beginning of April. Within the tributaries, the floods start at different dates from the Pripyat. On the left bank floods occur later, while on the right bank floods occur earlier. However, during a long spring, the rivers in the basin may start to flood almost simultaneously, resulting in high floods on the Pripyat. The raising of water levels depends mainly on the water content, as well as on the structure of the river valley or its particular area. Thus, in the upper reaches of the Pripyat, in the context of a wide and marshy flood plain, along with a small increase in the catchment area, flattened, weakly expressed floods are formed. Their height exceeds the elevated level by an average of 0.5 m. The most flood-prone area is the basin in the middle and lower reaches of the Pripyat River. This is due to the narrowing of the flood plain to 6–8 km in the area of Turov and up to 1.5–2 km in the area of the city of Mazyr, as well as a sharp increase in intermediate inflow. Such large tributaries as the Goryn river (with a catchment area of 27,000 km2), the Sluch (5,350 km2), the Ubort (5,820 km2), and the Ptich (9,480 km2) flow into this area. The highest levels of the spring flood are usually the highest of the year. The average height of the spring flood above the minimum summer level is 3.5–4.5 m on the Pripyat River, comprising 1.5–3 m for left bank tributaries and 1–2.5 m for the right bank. Within small rivers, water stays on the floodplain lasts an average for 25–30 days. On medium and large rivers, it lasts for about 1.5–2 months. The maximum value of flow resulting from a spring flood on the Pripyat River was observed in 1845.That year, an extremely high spring flood was formed over a large area of Eastern Europe. In the Pripyat basin, it was so disastrous that it can probably be ranked within a group of possible maximums in our climatic era. At that time, the water consumption was estimated at 11,000 m3/s with a module runoff of 113 l/s⋅km2. Taking into account the height of the maximum level of 1845, the conditions for the formation of flood, as well as the data identified for that time, we can assume that at least from the end of the 14th century and up to the present day, the height of that flood has not been exceeded. The maximum level and consumption of Pripyat in the flood of 1845 can be considered an event than occurs no less than every 800 years. High floods on the Pripyat River and the associated significant flooding of the area are given in table A.1.6 of Annex A.

39 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The characteristics of the maximum and average runoff of the spring flood for the observation period on the rivers of the entire basin are given in table 1.7 of the Annex A. Data for some posts have been restored. Analysis of the data shows that the maximum modules of the spring flood flow vary from 34.6 (the Styr – the Mlynok) to 364 l/s · km2 (the Tnya – the Broniki). As a rule, with an increase in the catchment area, the maximum flow modules decrease. A similar trend is also characteristic of runoff-average flow modules. The earliest spring flood begins in the south-west (generally in early March) and a little later in the northeast (mid-March). The dates of the beginning of the spring flood can vary considerably. The earliest beginning of the spring flood can be observed in early February (1957, 1966, 1973, 1992), and, at the latest, early in April (1956, 1962, 1969, 1975, 1983, and 1996). There is a definite connection between the time of the beginning of the flood and its intensity and duration. As a rule, the highest, shortest floods with the highest maximums are formed in the late spring during snowmelt (1956, 1958, 1970, 1976, 1986, and 1996). In the early spring, a gradual melting of the snow cover occurs, and the loss of melt water due to infiltration and spring floods is usually low and prolonged (1961, 1973, 1977, and 1992). The duration of the seasonal flood also depends on the length of the river, forestation, swampiness and karstification of the catchment area. For small rivers with karst and swampy watersheds, the average duration is 40–45 days while for large rivers it is up to 80 days. For rivers with unkarst and slightly marshy watersheds, it is significantly less and equal to 36 and 55 days respectively. Flash floods, in contrast to seasonal floods, occur irregularly. In terms of the maximum flow rate and runoff layer, floods, as a rule, are significantly lower than the height of seasonal flood. However, the rainfall floods of 1952, 1960, 1974, 1993, and 1998 on many watercourses and areas on the Pripyat exceeded regular flood levels and caused considerable damage to the national economy (agricultural land and other developed territories were seriously affected). Even local floods of prominent intensity on the left-bank or right-bank tributaries can cause significant rises in the lower reach of the Pripyat due to the downward movement of the flood wave. The height of floods in the middle and lower reaches of the Pripyat reaches 2.0–3.5 m above the elevation level (Tables 1.13, 1.14). In the basins of the right-bank tributaries of the Pripyat, the maximum rainfall discharge may exceed the snow levels with catchment areas of up to 1,500–2,000 km2. The maximum is 2,210 km2 within the Pripyat River (the Rechitsa settlement). The maximum modules of rainfall runoff reach 364 l/s⋅km2 (the Tnya River – the Bronniki village) and are confined to the territory of the outcrop of rocks of the Ukrain- ian crystalline shield. The drainage factors for rain floods in the Pripyat basin are 0.50–0.52. The codes of rainfall floods runoff in the Pripyat basin are 0.50–0.52. The codes of variation of the maximum discharge of rainfall floods are quite high and reach 2.90 (the Ubort river – the Rudnya Ivanovskaya village). High summer-autumn floods cause the most significant damage to various branches of the national economy, such as agriculture. Table 1.13: The maximum dangerous water levels of floods on the rivers of the Pripyat basin during the observation period

Dangerously Maximum water level high level Winter flood Rainfall flood

River site

% date date

,% ,%

cm cm

el,cm

Water le

Probability Probability

water level,

occurrence,

Water level, Pripyat - Pinsk 250 42 284 15.01.1981 1 - - - Pripyat - Koroby 420 40 431 08.01.1975 2 439 19-23.11.1993 2 Pripyat - Pie- 800 45 826 12-13.01.1981 1 829 02,05.05.1975 2

40 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Dangerously Maximum water level high level Winter flood Rainfall flood

River site

% date date

,% ,%

cm cm

el,cm

Water le

Probability Probability

water level,

occurrence,

Water level, trikaw Pripyat - Mazyr 550 30 Yaselda - Senin 195 37 221 19.12.1980 2 203 30.11-17.12.1990, 1 1995 Goryn - Re- 530 52 550 29.01.1948 2 567 41.07.1993 3 chitsa

Table 1.14: Years of floods with different intensities

Flood characteristics Winter Summer River-site Outstanding Large Outstanding Large Р=3-10% Р=1-2% Р=3-10% Р=1-2% Pripyat - Pinsk 1980-1981 1979-1980, 1992-93, - - 1993-94,1997-98, 1998- 99 Pripyat - Koroby 1974-75 1947-48, 1980-81 1974 Pripyat - Pietrikaw 1980-81 1947-48,1974-75, 1981- 1974,1975 1993 82 Yaselda - Senin 1980-81,1998-99 1970-71,1974-75,1988- 1990 1974,1980,1988,19 89,1990-91,1997-98 98 Goryn - Rechitsa 1947-48, 1981-82, - 1948,1969,1974,19 1997-98 75,1977,1988,1993, 1998

Over the past 50 years, eight significant rainfall floods have been observed in the Pripyat basin caused by heavy rainfall (June – August 1948, June – July 1955 and 1965, June – August 1969, Oc- tober – November 1974, June –August 1980, June – July 1993 and 1998). Rain periods often lasted (intermittently) for 2–3 months. The capacity of flood plains significantly decreases in the warm season. If, in an overgrown riverbed, water discharge at the same levels is 1.3–1.5 times less than in a channel free from vegetation, then on the floodplain, it will be 2.0–2.5 times less. In some cases, the flood plain may be immersed, and there is no current within it (the upper reaches of the Pripyat, the Vyzhivka, Turya, Stokhod, Styr, Goryn).Thus, during floods, water in rivers is retained for 2–3 months or more at high levels, which are 1.5–4.5 m higher than ordinary low flows, immersing floodplains and preventing lowering of groundwater levels in the adjacent territory. Frequent annual thaw periods in the Pripyat basin often lead to winter floods, which are well defined on small rivers. As a rule, these floods do not exceed the spring flood in height, except for during years when snowmelt is accompanied by rain precipitation (1948, 1982, 1986, 1989, and 1998). Minimum runoff The formation conditions for low-flow runoff in the rivers on the territory considered (compared to rivers located to the south of the forest-steppe and steppe zones) can be regarded as generally favourable. The Pripyat basin is located in a zone of excessive moisture, where the outflow of groundwater into the river network is relatively long and permanent. Therefore, the recharging of surface watercourses with groundwater in this area is permanent. Minimum levels and runoff during the summer period feature high average daily air temperatures and prolonged periods of inadequate precipitation. Minimum levels and runoff during the summer period are observed at low temperatures. Within the territory considered, in dry years (1939, 1951, 1952, and others), watercourses with catchment areas over 1000 km2 have dried up. Freezing only takes place on small rivers and for short periods.

41 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The summer-autumn, the low-flow period usually occurs in late May - mid June and ends in October. In years when the spring flood occurs suddenly, the period of low runoff in rivers begins much earlier, at the end of April or beginning of May. In years of prolonged flooding or persistent rainfall, the period of low runoff in rivers begins at the end of June or mid July. In some years with an absence of autumn floods, the low-flow period may continue until the occurrence of ice formations in mid-November or early December. The average runoff for the period of summer-autumn low-flow on small and medium rivers ranges from 3 mm to 15 mm. The point at which waters are lowest in summer-autumn low-water periods is mainly observed in July- August, less often in September. For small- and medium-sized watercourses, this period can last up to 130 days, 85–90 days for Pripyat. The winter low-water period usually starts at the end of December. The earliest dates of the low-flow period occur at the end of October and the beginning of November. The latest are in January. The end of low-water period occurs with the beginning of the spring flood. The average duration of low water on small and medium rivers varies from 49 to 100 days. Within the Polesye territory, zero runoff is noted within 17 watercourses with catchment areas of 11– 1,280 km2.The average duration of one case of zero flow can reach 195 days in summer, and 75–100 days in winter. Table 1.15 shows the calculated minimum flow of the rivers of the Pripyat basin and their statistical parameters. Table 1.15: The estimated minimum flow of the rivers of the Pripyat basin and their statistical parameters

Flow rate River Site Сv Cs/Cv Discharge, m3/s Runoff modulus, l/s km2 Pripyat Mazyr 155 1.53 0.52 4.0 Yaselda Byaroza 1.25 1.36 0.82 2 Tsna Dyatlovichy 0.89 0.91 0.90 4 Sluch Novodvortsy 0.45 0.50 1.02 3.0 Ptich Lychitsy 14.3 1.63 0.49 2.5 Oressa Andreevka 5.68 1.59 0.53 2.5

The basin rivers are characterised by a low water period in summer-autumn, punctuated by swelling caused by rain floods, and a low-water period in winter, interrupted in some years by a rise in levels due to snowmelt during thaw periods. The earliest beginning of the summer-autumn low season is observed in the first ten days of May. The average duration of this low season is 120–140 days and the maximum is 180–220 days. The average duration of the driest period of the summer-autumn low-water period is 20–30 days, while the maximum is 60–140 days. The end of the summer-autumn low water period occurs during the last ten days of November and the first half of December. The beginning of winter low waters is mainly in the last ten days of November and the first half of December. The average duration of winter low waters is 60–80 days, with a maximum of 100–120 days. The end of the winter low water period is mainly in March, in some years February. An analysis of the observation data shows that the magnitudes of the lowest average monthly summer runoff naturally decrease throughout the basin from northwest and north to south and southeast, complied geographic zoning on large and medium rivers. However, on small rivers, an intra-horizontal character of changes is observed, depending on local hydrogeological features such as the occurrence and thickness of the groundwater horizons, the nature of the opening by river valleys, and the conditions of their discharge. The most water-abundant areas are aquifers in fractured and karsted carbonate-sulphate rocks of the Upper Cretaceous and Neogene. The outcrops of the Cretaceous waters are observed within the limits of the Polesye lowland in the form of artesian springs with discharges of up to 200 m3/h. These waters supply a number of lakes, numerous marsh massifs and some of the right-bank tributaries of the Pri-

42 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

pyat, such as the Turya, Stokhod, Goryn and Styr Rivers. The modulus of the minimum average daily runoff of these rivers for 97% occurrence varies from 0.07–0.18 l/s ⋅ km2.These rivers, which are supplied from aquifers of alluvial and fluvioglacial sediments, have low minimum flow modules. In dry years, their runoff completely stops for a period of 15 to 120 days. Interruption of runoff on these rivers is also possible during cold winters. The module of the minimum average daily runoff for 97% occurrence in this group of rivers varies from 0.00–0.02 l/s ⋅ km2 during the summer low-water period to 0.00–0.05 l/s ⋅ km2 during the winter-low water period. Based on research and analysis of the characteristics of the minimum flow using stream gauges located in the upper reaches of the Pripyat, human economic activity has a significant impact on the formation of low-flow rivers in this area. Here, an increase in the catchment area results in a decrease in the minimum flow rates and runoff modules. The main water objects influencing the formation of the minimum flow of the upper reaches of the Pri- pyat are the Upper Pripyat drainage and humidification system and the water intake of the Dnieper- Bug Canal, the functioning of which contributes to its reduction. As for the other rivers and tributaries of the Pripyat, according to long-term observations, most show a clear trend of increasing the modules of the minimum flow with the growth of the catchment area. This is due to the increase in the share of underground supply in the total runoff and the large number of groundwater aquifers that are drained by the river. Thus, the minimum flow modulus of the Goryn river varies from 1.29 l/s⋅km2 (Yampol station with a catchment area of 1400 km2) to 1.74 l/s⋅km2 (Dera- zhnoye station with a basin area of 9160 km2). The variation codes of the minimum flow along the rivers of the Pripyat basin vary from 0.54 (the Goryn river - the Deryzhnoe) to 1.41 (the Sluch – Gromada), and the Cs/Cv ratio ranges from 1.0 (Turya river, the Goryn) to 4.0 (Bobrik river, Tsna river). In most cases, the minimum flow of water in the right-bank tributaries of the Pripyat is recorded in the autumn season. In about 20–30% of cases, the minimum runoffs are recorded in the summer period, with a similar amount in the winter. Assessment of changes in the water content of rivers The analysis of changes in river runoff over a multi-year period of observations shows the presence of constant fluctuations. These fluctuations take the form of consequential changes in high-water and low-water groups of annual segments. These groups create cycles of varying duration and fluctuations in water content. The period of time during which an increase in water content can be traced is named the high-water phase of the cycle (high-water period), while the period of water content reduction is named the low-water phase [20]. An analysis of the calculations shows that for high-water (5%) and low-water (95%) years, the difference in percentage of runoff in the spring reaches a maximum, while the minimum discrepancies are observed in summer – autumn. Thus in dry years the formation of the main part of the total annual river flow takes place in spring (50–60%), while in high-water years it takes place in summer-autumn (40–50%). Based on this analysis, we can distinguish low-water and high-water periods in the fluctuations of the maximum and minimum flow. Two periods of water content are clearly identified in the fluctuations of maximum flows until the early 1980s (high-water period with significant maximum in 1953, 1955, 1956, 1958, 1966, 1967, 1974, 1977, 1979, 1980) and after 1982 (low-water period) except 1998, 1999. Taking into account that the maximum flow rates characterise the flow, mainly involving the spring flood, we can state with assurance that over the past 20 years, the share of spring flow in the annual distribution has been steadily decreasing.

43 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Hydrochemical characteristics of river water The specific features of the chemical composition of the Pripyat River waters are determined by the complex of landscape-geochemical conditions of its basin. Its main part is located in the zone of mixed forests within the Polesye lowland. Only the upper reaches of the rivers Styr, Sluch and Goryn, origi- nating in the Volyn-Podolsk upland, are situated in the zones of deciduous forests and forest steppes. Besides soils and water-bearing rocks, the chemical composition of the surface waters of the Pripyat River is significantly influenced by its orographic features determining the shallow erosional incision of the rivers and the small slopes of the groundwater flow. The surface of the basin is rich in negative landforms, covered with dense vegetation. In this regard, the capacity of the floodplain in the warm period of the year is notably reduced. Due to the difficult discharge, some water may remain on the flood plain before the next high-water season starts, which creates favourable conditions for the intake of soluble substances from the catchment area. Small slopes and the shallow depth of groundwater contribute to the natural swampiness of the Pripyat river basin. Swamps play a retaining role in relation to the water runoff. In the period of high water content they are able to release a significant part of the accumulated moisture, including a significant amount of organic substances, biogenic elements, iron and other metals. Most of the swamps in the river basin of the Pripyat River have been drained in the past. However, in the last 25 years, due to the degradation of land-reclamation systems, an intensive process of recurrent swampiness has been observed. The specific annual dynamics of the chemical components are closely related to the water flow of the river, which is formed due to atmospheric and underground factors. The predominant source of atmospheric supply of rivers is precipitation in the cold period. In dry years, the relative share of atmospheric supply is 50% of the water runoff volume, while in wet years it increases to 85%. There are 3 main periods for annual distribution of runoff: spring floods, summer-autumn and winter low-water periods, and rainfall floods. The hydrochemical regime of rivers is closely related to the annual distribution of the runoff. During the flood period, there is usually a significant decrease in the concentration of dissolved salts due to the dilution of the channel waters with atmospheric precipitation. After the beginning of the formation of soil-ground runoff, which reaches its maximum by the end of the flood, a significant amount of nutrients and organic substances washed from the soil layer flow into the channel. The right-bank tributaries are mostly fed by groundwater, which causes a low content of organic compounds and a large amount of water salinity. Regarding the latter, three hydrochemical regions are distinguished on the right bank:  Right-bank tributaries of the upper reaches of the Pripyat River (the Turya, Stokhod, lower and middle reach of the Styr, the Goryn, the Sluch rivers) with an average water mineralisation of about 280 mg/l;

 Right-bank tributaries of the lower reaches of the Pripyat River (the Uzh, the Ubort rivers), where water salinity decreases to 144 mg/l;

 Upper reaches of the Styr, Goryn, Sluch. Due to underground recharge, the mineralisation of their waters is greatest and reaches 352 mg/l. The left-bank tributaries of the Pripyat are mainly fed by wetlands, as a result of which their waters are rich in organic matter. Mineralisation is insignificant, reaching 116-325 mg/l. In the last 25 years, following the termination of improved systems maintenance, an increase in water salinity has been noted, both in the left-bank and right-bank tributaries of the Pripyat. In the downstream direction of the Pripyat River, the content of soluble salts is impure and varies periodically due to the inflow of tributaries with different mineralisation.

44 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

A close dependence on its debits is typical for the annual distribution of the salt composition and salinity of water. Maximum concentrations of the main ions are observed in winter, when the river is completely fed from underground. The average oxygen concentration in the water of rivers is 10.7 mg/l, with variations from 2 to 18 mg/l. The content of nitrogen and phosphorus mineral compounds is higher than in neighbouring regions. Swampiness of the basin territory also leads to an increase in the water colour in the river as a result of the washing-out of organic matter of humus origin from the surface of the catchment area. Pripyat waters contain a significant amount of organic matter. According to the water oxidation indicator, their content averages 17.3 mg O/dm3 for the permanganate index and 36.5 mg O/dm3. For waters that flow through the swamp massifs, an increased regional level is also noted for iron, aluminium and manganese. 1.2.3 Groundwater

Within the Pripyat river basin in Belarus, 11 groundwater bodies have been identified and delineated and will be included in the Pripyat river basin management plan (table A.4.9 of Annex A). The characterisation of the groundwater bodies in the Pripyat river basin within Belarus is presented in table A.4.10 of Annex A and each groundwater body is presented on a separate map in Annex B (maps B.18-B.28). Depending on the conditions of occurrence and formation, groundwater in the basin is subdivided into groundwater and interstratal, as well as sporadic water spread in sand lenses and interlayers of moraines and other water beds. Depending on the total salt content, groundwater is divided into fresh (up to 1.0 g/dm3) and mineralized (over 1.0 g/dm3) groundwater. The shallow groundwater is mainly characterised by the predominantly lowland nature of the Pripyat basin. Moreover, the smooth groundwater surface reflects the hypsometry of the terrain. In the lower areas (swamps and river floodplains), groundwater depth is 0–2 m, and during periods of high water groundwaters interact with surface waters. The depth of groundwater reaches 5 m or more in the watershed areas, and in the northern part of the Baranavichy district the depth of groundwater is 10 m or more. The filtration coefficients of water-containing sands depend on their size and vary widely from 0.2–2.8 m/day for silty sands to 10–15 m/day for medium and coarse sands. The values of water conductivity are 5–300 m2/day. The velocity of the groundwater flows varies from 1.0 to 10 m or more, reaching its maximum values in the valleys of large rivers. The level regime of groundwater depends on climatic factors, mainly the amount of precipitation, and coincides with seasonal changes in surface watercourse levels and reservoirs. The summer low-water period is observed in April - May, and the autumn and winter rise in November – December. The annual amplitude of groundwater levels depends on their distance from the rivers. The largest amplitude values (up to 1.5–2.5 m) are typical for river flood plains. The recharge of groundwater is mainly due to atmospheric precipitation. The area of their recharge coincides with the area of distribution. At the same time, the watershed areas supply hypsometrically lower aquifers and as such constitute areas of feeding. Groundwater flows are drained by surface watercourses, and their water table is linked to the river beds. Natural groundwaters comprise fresh hydrocarbonate calcium-magnesium with low mineralisation of 0.1–0.3 g/dm3. Depending on the content of their main components, they can be suitable for drinking. Exceptions are high concentrations of iron (up to 1.4–2.5 mg/l) and generally low concentrations of fluorine (up to 0–0.2 mg/l). Due to economic activity, which has been especially intense in recent decades, groundwater has been subjected to pollution. In most cases, they have a low degree of natural protection, determined by the thickness and filtration properties of the aeration zone rocks. There is no protected groundwater within the considered territory. Groundwater is considered to be conditionally protected if the aeration zone is composed of clay with a capacity of 3–10 m, and loam with a capacity

45 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

from 30 m to 100 m or more in the presence of clay layers with a capacity of more than 1.5 m. The protection of the first interstratal aquifers is determined by the capacity of the local aquiclude. If the thickness is more than 10 m, waters are considered protected, if the thickness is 3–10 m, waters are conditionally protected, and if the capacity is less than 3 m, waters are unprotected. The term “protected” does not mean that in a given area groundwater is protected from unlimited inflow and infiltration of polluted runoff. “Protected” defines a greater degree of security compared to areas where other, less favourable conditions exist. Thus, groundwater in this area is unprotected and poorly protected. Under these conditions, soluble substances from the earth's surface easily reach groundwater through infiltration waters, and the chemical composition deviates from its natural hydrochemical composition, formed during its geological history. This causes not only an increase in the concentration of individual chemicals, but also their total content. Waters of sporadic distribution occur in sand lenses and interlayers of the Narev, Berezina, Dnieper and Sozh moraines. In the Sozh and Dnieper moraines, they form the first aquifer. The depth of sporadic water occurrence depends on the hypsometric position of sand lenses and interlayers, as well as the moraines themselves. In the areas of their distribution, the depth of occurrence depends on the relief and varies from 1.0 m to 10–12 m or more. In the section of Quaternary sediments, as noted above, moraines alternate with layers of interglacial formations. At the same time, the top of the Dnie- per moraine (in the zone of the Sozh glaciation) opens at depths of 23–57 m, while in the south it opens at depths of 2.8–24.1 m. Berezina moraine lies at depths of 21.8–129.2 m, whereas Narev moraine is distributed only locally in the buried valleys. At great depths, waters of sporadic distribution approach interlayer formations everywhere. Their piezometric surfaces are comparable. The thickness of water-saturated interlayers and lenses, represented mainly by different-grain, often clay sands, varies from a few millimetres to 1.5–8.0 m or more. Auriferous lenses are often isolated from each other, which contributes to the local accumulation of surface contamination. The natural chemical composition of these waters is calcium-magnesium bicarbonate, and mineralisation does not exceed 0.1–0.3 g/dm3. The areas of the Sozh and Dnieper moraines have been subject to intense surface pollution, on farmland and especially on settled territories and in the influence zone of various pollution sources. Waters subject to sporadic distribution as a rule do not form a continuous aquifer, and in general have a low and very motley water abundance. In rural settlements and in individual construction sites in cities without a central water supply, these waters, when they occur first from the surface, are operated by mine wells. In areas of deep occurrence and in view of the considerable thickness of sand lenses, they are occasionally operated by water intake wells (for example, in the village of Krainovici in the suburb of Pinsk). Interstitial waters are widespread and occupy most of the hydrogeological section. The depth of the freshwater zone in the territory of the Pripyat basin varies from 180 m to 350 m, and in the Brest depression it reaches from 300 m to 800–1035 m. Within large areas, fresh water occupies the entire hydrogeological section. According to the stratigraphic factor, and to some extent to the lithological composition of rocks, fresh water is found in aquifers and complexes of Quaternary, Paleo- gene-Neogene, and Upper Cretaceous sediments. These deposits are common everywhere, in the Pripyat depression - in the Jurassic and Upper Devonian, in the Brest - Jurassic and Paleozoic, and within the Belarusian anteclise and the Polesye saddle - the Upper Proterozoic sediments. Quantita- tively, fresh groundwater resources in the basin are distributed unevenly. The most sustained in terms of capacity and extent are the Quaternary Berezina-Dnieper, the combined Paleogene-Neogene aquifers and the Lower Lenomanian aquifer. Within the corresponding geological structures, the Upper Jurassic, Paleozoic and Upper Proterozoic aquifers can be identified. In the zone of the Sozh glacier, the Dnieper-Sozh aquifer is widespread. Groundwater resources of the Belarusian part of the Pripyat River Basin Groundwater, surface waters and moisture from the atmosphere and aeration zones form the water resources of any land area; they are closely interrelated and part of the water cycle. There is a hydrau-

46 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

lic interconnection between groundwater and surface water. Groundwater is a unique mineral deposit that is found in nature, predominantly in liquid form; it is constantly renewable and fluid. Due to their different qualities and target uses, fresh and mineralised groundwater resources are determined separately. Natural and operational resources, as well as operational reserves, characterise their quality to the fullest extent possible. Natural resources means the total amount of groundwater recharge under natural conditions formed by precipitation, filtration from surface water bodies and watercourses, overflow from the upper and lower horizons, and inflow from adjacent territories. They represent the main feature of groundwater as a renewable mineral in the process general circulation in nature. They can be determined for each aquifer individually or for the entire freshwater zone. Quantitatively, natural groundwater resources are characterised by the volume of the module of underground runoff, which is the average groundwater discharge flow of a given occurrence per unit area of the aquifer (complex) or groundwater basin within which this flow is formed. In this case, the module of underground runoff refers to the entire zone of active water exchange and characterises the total underground runoff of fresh water. The runoff module is more accurately determined by the method of hydrological and hydrogeological separation of a river hydrograph. Natural conditions of the territory, in particular, its flat surface, do not contribute to the formation of underground runoff. The average weighted mean value is estimated at 1.52 l / s⋅km2 [23]. Within the Belarusian territory of the Pripyat basin, natural resources are estimated at 7,010,000 m3/day, and forecast resources are rated at 10,229,0000 m3/day [24]. The operational resources of groundwater are the flow of water that can be obtained from aquifers and complexes using a common underground runoff (both local river and transit), and partly, the drawdown capacity of reserves. They are defined without taking into account the specific location of the water intake structures and their technical and economic characteristics; therefore, the groundwater resources are estimated (Table 2 of Annex A). Operational resources, as a rule, are significantly greater than natural resources and may only be less significant than natural resources in the regional catchment areas of large artesian basins. To estimate the value of operational resources, their module (Me) is used, which represents the potential groundwater discharge of the zone of active water exchange, obtained from a unit of their distribution area. The mean long-term value of the module of operational resources, according to data from the Institute of Geological Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, is estimated at 2.0 l/s·km2. Operational groundwater resources are constituted by the amount of water that can be extracted by technically and economically efficient water intake facilities using a given operating mode and with water quality that meets requirements during the entire estimated water consumption period. They are determined by hydrogeological calculations (model investigation) as a result of hydrogeological exploration within particular sites of group water intakes and are approved by the Republican Commission on Mineral Reserves (RKZ) of the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Belarus. Within the Belarusian territory of the Pripyat basin, the total approved reserves at 40 fields of fresh groundwater are estimated at 982,700 m3/day. For category А+B their amount is 823,900 m3/day. Operational reserves of single water wells are their maximum flow rate, and these are not approved by the RKZ. As a rule, resources are not determined for saline waters, characterised by an increase in the amount of salt in proportion to the depth, and the variability of the chemical composition in the upper zone. The operational reserves of saline water are estimated by the actual flow rate of exploration wells under the condition of their constant quality. The drinking water requirements of the population can be met by both groundwater and surface water. Given the existing choice, priority is given to groundwater, which has several advantages over surface

47 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

water. The main one is that the distribution of groundwater is uniform (in terms of area), which means it can be extracted directly in the area of consumption or close by. In addition, groundwater has greater natural protection from surface contamination, and its migration is much slower, meaning that the accumulation of harmful substances occurs, as a rule, near the source of pollution. The chemical composition and organoleptic properties of groundwater provide a better taste than surface waters. Tables A.2, A.2.1 of Annex A reflect the resources and groundwater reserves within the Pripyat River Basin in the Republic of Belarus, as well as the groundwater resources and reserves for the administrative regions that are part of the Pripyat River Basin in Belarus. Springs In the Republic of Belarus, springs have been used by the population as a source of water supply since ancient times. In addition, springs play a significant role in the social and spiritual life of people: because of their healing properties, springs have always been objects of worship. At present, springs, among other things, are important in the development of tourism. The distribution of springs within the basin territory is connected with the surface structure and climatic conditions (map B.38 of Annex B). Due to the diversity of the geological structure and the relief, the distribution of springs throughout the territory is uneven. More than 100 springs have been identified in the basin. Many springs are situated within the territory of the Pinsk district, which lies within the limits of the Logishin water-glacial plain with marginal glacial formations, the eastern part of the Suburban area and the Luninets alluvial lowland. Here, springs are often associated with shallow groundwater and are located in marshy swamps. Groundwater sources in the Ivanava and Drahichyn districts are also confined to the marginal glacial formations with glaciological dislocations and peaty degradations of the water-glacial plains of the Suburban area. Due to the high swampiness of the territory and widespread land reclamation works, the upper aquifers are often opened by drainage channels, causing the formation of many springs in the region (Ko- brin, Drahichyn and Stolin districts). According to the morphology of the groundwater outcrop, they can be divided into three types: springs (reocrenes), feeders (limnokremy) and swamplands (geocrenes). Swamplands are the most widespread springs in the Pripyat basin, which are located in swampy degradations. From a closed marshy degradation, overgrown with alder and ivy, groundwater spurts onto the surface near the Vartytsk village of the Ivanava region, providing the source of the creek, lost among swamp vegetation. A source near the Hrishanovichi settlement of the Ivatsevichi district has the same origin. This spring is supplied with a concrete ring, has a silted bottom, and is surrounded by heavily over-moistened muddy soil. In the marshy degradation of Duboisk Park in the Pinsk district, the established water level is only 10 cm, below which is a layer of silt with a capacity of 80 cm. Locat- ed in the northwest of the village of Duboy in the forest and near the village of Nyanavichy in the Brest district, in the settlement of Kovnyatin in the Pinsk district, springs are also swamplands. Springs (reocrenes) are formed on uneven terrain and have a clearly defined groundwater outcrop. In a pine forest 5 km from Stolin, a spring emerges from the lower part of the eolian hill. Due to the dense hydrographic network, relatively flat terrain and intense swampiness, there are a significant number of submarine sources (limnokren). They represent the groundwater outcrop in the form of feeders at the bottom of reservoirs (rivers, lakes, melioration channels, etc.). Such sources at the bottom of melioration channels are located in the Zaprudy settlement in Kobrin district, the Zaelenie settlement in Drahichyn district, and the Psyschevo settlement in the Ivanovo district. The most common type of springs, along with soak and superficial springs, is erosion springs, resulting from active anthropogenic impacts on the river network systems and on the reclamation network that caused the opening of aquifers. Examples are the springs in Ostromichi village in the Kobrin district, the Zaverilie settlement in Drahichyn district, and the Loza ecosite near the settlement of Glinka in the Stolin district. The discharge of springs mainly comes from groundwater. The spring flow rate hydrograph represents a seasonal pattern. The spring waters are fresh with low mineralisation, which varies from 89 mg/l in the settlement of Lakhva up to 887 mg/l in a spring near the village of Botovo in the Pinsk district. Cur-

48 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

rently, waters from many springs are used for economic purposes. Springs located near settlements are used for drinking by local habitants and visitors. In a number of places (the settlement of Kov- nyatin, the settlement of Duboy and the settlement of Rudka in the Pinsk district, etc.) the territory around the springs is equipped for both water intake and recreation. Nevertheless such careful treatment is not observed everywhere. Springs outside settlements, for example in forests, meadows, and melioration canals, and along the banks of small rivers, are in their natural state or only partially land- scaped dammings (in the form of timber blocking). The irrigation and drainage constructions on the territory have significantly affected the state of the springs. A general decrease in the groundwater level has been one of the main reasons for water discharge from a number of springs. Springs have dried up in Ratkevichi village in Ivatsevichi district, on Krinichnaya farm in Drahichyn district, on the "Morochno" ecosite near Kolodnoe village in Stolin district, and other places. At the same time, while inserting melioration channels, aquifers have been opened, and new springs have appeared in Kobrin, Byaroza and other areas. Since they have specific, unique qualities, these springs have so far not been sufficiently studied and are not used appropri- ately.

1.3 Administrative territorial division and social and economic information

1.3.1 Administrative territorial division and population

The Pripyat river basin occupies a quarter of the entire territory of the Republic of Belarus.The Pripyat catchment area is located in the southern part of the country on the territory of five (of six) regions (11 administrative districts in the Gomel region, 11 districts in the Minsk region, 10 districts in the Brest region, 3 districts in the Mogilyov region and one district in the Grodno region), as well as 5 cities of regional subordination. In total, it fully covers the land of 38 administrative districts (map B.2 of Annex B). A population of 1,060,675 lives within the territory of the Pripyat river basin. This amount includes 602,490 urban inhabitants and 458,185 rural inhabitants (table 1.16). Table 1.16: Population size in the Pripyat river basin on 1 January 2018

Population District, Number of inhabitants Mid-year 2 density, Area, km region population people /km2 total urban rural Brest region Byaroza 62882 41745 21137 62882 1398 45 Hantsavichi 27297 13925 13372 27297 1693 16 Drahichyn 28346 11615 16731 28346 1020 28 Ivanava 38353 16417 21936 38353 1551 25 Ivatsevichy 16123 3950 12173 16123 1469 11 Luninets 1426 0 1426 1426 95 15 Lyakhavichy 46537 1932 44605 46537 3256 14 Pinsk 5912 493 5419 5912 850 7 Pryzhany 73101 25385 47716 73101 3342 22 Stolin 62882 41745 21137 62882 1398 45 Gomel region Yelsk 35510 18767 16743 35510 2916 12 Zhytkavichy 57543 34553 22990 57543 2205 26 Kalinkavichy 23833 11498 12335 23833 3221 7 Lyelchytsy 133437 111733 21704 133437 1603 83

49 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Population District, Number of inhabitants Mid-year 2 density, Area, km region population people /km2 total urban rural Mazyr 10427 8046 2381 10427 1589 7 Naroulia 13342 6594 6748 13342 1243 11 Akciabrski 27001 12976 14025 27001 2835 10 Pietrikaw 1866 0 1866 1866 543 3 Rechytsa 6200 0 6200 6200 950 7 Svietlahorsk 18552 11520 7032 18552 1419 13 Khoiniki 15128 9046 6082 15128 1363 11 Grodno region Svislach 585 0 585 585 42 14 Minsk region Dzyarzhynsk 317 0 317 317 14 23 Kletsk 255 0 255 255 963 0 Kapyl 23111 8062 15049 23111 976 24 Lyuban 31163 13878 17285 31163 1914 16 Minsk 17640 0 17640 17640 116 152 Nyasvizh 2962 0 2962 2962 95 31 Pykhavichy 12159 2455 9704 12159 1220 10 Slutsk 89889 61818 28071 89889 1670 54 Salihorsk 134309 116793 17516 134309 2499 54 Staryya Daro- 19166 10406 8760 19166 1370 14 hi Uzda 4488 0 4488 4488 129 35 Mogilev region Babruysk 2311 0 2311 2311 527 4 Hlusk 13341 7138 6203 13341 1336 10 Asipovichy 3281 0 3281 3281 681 5 Total 1060675 602490 458185 1060675 49511 21

On 1 January 2018, in the Pripyat river basin 362,859 people lived in the Brest region (including 152,207 people in cities and 205,652 people in rural areas). The Gomel region was home to 324,839 people (including 224,733 people urban inhabitants and 118,106 rural inhabitants). In the Minsk region, there were 335,459 inhabitants (213,412 urban inhabitants and 122,047 rural inhabitants). In the Mogilyov region there were 18,933 people (7,138 urban inhabitants and 11,795 rural inhabitants). In the Grodno region there were 585 people (all living in rural areas). Considering an average population density in the basin of 23 people per 1 km2, the highest density is in the Minsk, Mazyr, Slutsk and Salihorsk districts (more than 50 people per 1 km2).

1.3.2 Agriculture (plant production, animal husbandry)

The most geographically significant nature management in the basin as a whole is agricultural activity. The percentage of overbuilt areas within the Pripyat basin is 3.7%, which is slightly less than the average for Belarus (4.0%). The Pripyat floodplain has been quite extensively modified. According to various estimates, up to 24% of it is occupied by arable land and refined meadow lands. The Pripyat basin belongs to regions of intensive hydrotechnical land reclamation. Drained land covers about 1,115,000 hectares or 22% of its territory (16.4% on average in Belarus). Agricultural land accounts for 84% of drained land. Their share has decreased by 1–2% as a result of the transfer of part of the land contaminated with radionuclides into unused lands. Drained lands are tilled on 38% of the territory, that is, for the most part they are used as grasslands. In this region, most farming takes place on drained agricultural land. In some administrative districts, drained land occupies more than half of their total area. Thus, in the Hantsavichi and Luninets districts, 70% of lands have been drained. In the Elsk

50 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

district, 61% of lands have been drained. 56% of agricultural land has been drained in the Pinsk district. In agricultural organisations, on average, more than half of the agricultural area is situated on reclaimed land, and in some farms this figure reaches 95% or more. An important element in the creation of a modern land use system in the region is the specific nature of the soil, a third of which comprises peat-marsh soils, underlain mainly by sands (map B.10 of Annex B). About half of these soils are shallow peatlands with a peat capacity of up to 1 m, which is an objective asset for agriculture specialisation. The region is characterised by the rapid degradation of drained peatlands due to intensive and often unsustainable economic use, for example, for the cultivation of crops. These negative processes are associated with the expansion of an area of garden plots, which are traditionally used very intensively. At present, about 84,500 hectares of agricultural lands, contaminated with radionuclides as a result of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (1.6% of the basin’s area), have been withdrawn from economic use and are close to natural status. As a result, about 40% of the total land area in the country has not been subject to farming practices for a significant period. The area of wooded land has remained almost unchanged over the past 20 years (map B.15 of Annex B). The drainage of land in the Pripyat basin has led to an intensification of soil degradation processes. These processes primarily include the drying-up of soil and development of deflation (which did not previously exist in Polesye), quick “burning” of organic matter from dry peat soils, the depletion of nutrients in soils with light mechanical composition, and the development of recurrent gleying and swampiness due to their unconsidered drainage. According to some estimates, the soil fertility of most species of soddy podzolic soils in Polesye has decreased by 1.3–1.5 times. It is worth mentioning the potential for developing paludiculture as an alternative use of drained lands in the basin, involving re-swamping the drained territories and growing hygrophilous plants. All paludiculture outputs can be used to produce feed, generate renewable fuels, and produce environmentally friendly building materials. In addition, Belarus has already successfully experimented with paludiculture. Within the framework of the EU project “Swamp Energy”, on the basis of OJSC “Lida Peat Briquette Plant”, the production of innovative mini-briquettes from biomass obtained on swampy and re-swamped land plots was developed. In the forest-steppe part of the Pripyat basin the main factor of land degradation is excessively ploughed land, leading to plane and linear erosion, consolidation and compaction of soils, and their dehumification (map B.12 of the Annex B). Agriculture plays a leading role in the economy of most areas in the Pripyat basin. Agriculture is associated with many industries (food, chemicals, etc.), forming an agro-industrial complex, whose main task is to provide the country with reliable provisions and agricultural raw materials. The natural basis of agriculture is farmland, used for agricultural production. The Pripyat river basin has the lowest level of economic development compared to the basins of other major rivers in Belarus. In the land fund structure, the Pripyat basin is characterised by a high relative share of forest and swamp areas. The relative area of swamps in Polesye in the Pripyat basin (depending on the region) is 1.5–2 times more than the average for Belarus. In general, the percentage of “ecological framework” lands (forests, swamps, rivers and lakes, natural grassland lands, etc.) in the total land area is 50– 60%. The share of widely used land in the total area of agricultural lands in the Pripyat catchment area is 90%, although only 22% is ploughed, which is the lowest level. Numerous improved hayfields and pastures are still created by draining wetlands in order to provide food reserves for animal husbandry. The use of mineral fertilizers is an important characteristic of the intensification of agricultural production. Together with plant protection products, they account for about 70% of the improvement of crop yields over the past thirty years.

51 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Fertilizers have a priority role in the zone of radioactive contamination, where differentiated doses of potash and phosphate fertilizers in combination with the liming of acid soils make it possible to reduce by 2-3 times the intake of cesium-137 and strontium-90 radionuclides in crop production. Agriculture in the region specialises in meat and dairy husbandry. Grain crops predominate in crop production, such as wheat, triticale, barley, rye, potatoes, and fodder crops, along with considerable cultivation of flax. Animal livestock featuring pig breeding complexes on the administrative and territorial districts of the Pripyat River often exceeds recommended levels. As a result, manure discharges are mainly due to intensive pig breeding, including widespread water washout of animal excrement. The disposal of agricultural discharges is much more complicated than standard litter manure, due to their excessive dilution with water and low content of plant nutrients. For example, an increase in the moisture content of liquid manure from 92% to 98% has the effect of halving the content of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium.

1.3.3 Fish breeding

Fishery management in the republic is carried out in two main areas - fish farming (breeding and rearing of fish in artificial conditions) and fisheries in fishing areas. Fish breeding is carried out by specialised fish breeding organisations operating on property owned by the republic; organisations whose property is owned by the community, in which fish farming is not the main activity; and farms and individuals, including self-employed entrepreneurs. Fishery management is carried out by legal entities using water bodies provided for rent or for free (only ponds and flooded quarries are provided for rent for fish farming). Fisheries are managed through commercial fishing and the organisation of paid amateur fishing. The calculation of the volume of fish caught is carried out by all legal entities engaged in fishing and (or) fish farming. They fill out the state statistical reporting form 4-ci (fish) “Report on fish catch and sale” (approved by the resolution of the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus dated 09.07.2013 No.80 “On the approval of the state statistical reporting form 4-si (fish)“ Report on fish catch and sale” and instructions for its completion”). The legal framework for fishery activities is established in the rules for fisheries and the fishing industry, and issues related to the protection and use of wild animals that are not related to fishing facilities are regulated by legislation on the protection and use of wildlife. The main issues affecting fisheries are reflected in the following regulatory legal acts: - Decree by the President of the Republic of Belarus on 08.12.2005 No.580 “On Certain Measures to Improve the Efficiency of Fishery Activities, Improve the Public Administration” (the Decree approved the rules for fisheries and fishing industries); - Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus on 02.06.2015 No.459 “On the Concept for the Development of Fisheries in the Republic of Belarus”; - Decree by the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus on 25.04.2015 No.333 “On approval of the Regulation on the procedure for leasing surface water bodies for fish farming and recognition as invalid of the decisions of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus” (as amended by the resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus on 01.03.2017 No.169); - Decree of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food of the Republic of Belarus on 05.12.2017 No.58 “On the Establishment of a Republican Integrated Scheme for the Placement of Ponds and Flooded Quarries Adapted for Fish Farming”. The list of facilities provided in the Pripyat river basin for rent for fish farming is given in Table A.16 of Annex A.

52 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Fish farming is represented by the following types of production: pond fish farming, fish rearing in cag- es, pools and locked water supply areas. According to the SWC in 2013-2018, the use of water for fish farming is a priority in agriculture, including the Pripyat river basin (table 1.17). Table 1.17: Volumes of water use for fish farming in the Republic of Belarus and in the Pripyat river basin Million m3 per year Criteria 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Water used for agriculture - total 484 490 403 461 454 427 including for fish farming 372 378 293 344 335 307 of which in the Pripyat basin 288 266 187 223 215 201

The State Program for the Development of Agrarian Business in the Republic of Belarus for 2016– 2020 (subprogram 5 “Fishery Development”) provides for the technical re-equipment and modernisation of fish-breeding organizations; the stocking of sections of the Pripyat River with fish, such as cat- fish, pike perch and pike; fish-reclamation activities to restore natural breeding grounds; construction, including reconstruction; and modernisation of industrial fish-breeding complexes. Economically viable species of fish in the Pripyat basin are produced at specialised fish-farming enterprises, the main ones being: OAO “Opytny Rybhoz “Selets”, the section “Tsentralny Berezovsky Dis- trict”, OAO fish farm “Loktishi” of the Hantsavichy District, Branch Experimental fish farm “Lahva” of JSC “Pinskvodstroy”, OAO fish farm “Krasnaya Sloboda”, OAO “Opytny Rybhoz "Beloe", OAO fish farm "Polesye" of the Pinsk district, OAO fish farm "Tremlya", OAO fish farm "Krasnaya Zorka".

1.3.4 Forest husbandry

Within the Pripyat basin, as well as throughout Belarus, the Ministry of Forestry of the Republic of Belarus coordinates the activities of other republican government bodies, local executive and administrative bodies, and legal entities managing forestry, regardless of the form of ownership relating to the use, protection, forest fund and forest reproduction. The main legal entities are 38 ministerial forestry institutions corresponding to the number of administrative districts in the Pripyat basin. The main woodworking enterprises in the Pripyat basin are:  ZAO “Pinskdrev”, which is one of the oldest and largest enterprises of both the city of Pinsk and the industry as a whole. The integrated soft furnishings plant includes the joint company OOO “Pinskdrev-Adriana” and “Bel-Est-Mebel”, the PUE “Pinskdrev-Euro-Mebel”. The cabinet-making plant includes export furniture, Gorodische furniture, and a decorative veneer factories. The woodworking plant includes plywood factories and sawmills, a match factory, and a joint OOO “Pinskdrev-DSP”. The timber industry complex includes forestry from around the city of Pinsk, wood storage, the UE “Avtopark” and “Remstroymontazh”. The company has 33 independent branches. It produces more than 1,500 items, including soft furnishings (more than 500 items), cabinet furniture made of alder, oak, pine, beech, ash, etc.; furniture sets for living rooms, bed- rooms, hallways, kitchens and children's rooms; furniture for public spaces; plywood, curved laminated wood parts, matches, wood laminate, including laminated, construction and furniture mould- ings, decorative veneers, sawn timber and fuel pellets.  OAO “Mazyrdrev”, the main activities of which are the production and sale of furniture; production and sale of wood chipboard; production and sale of decorative veneer; wood procurement; implementation of foreign economic activity; provision of services for the community.

53 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

1.3.5 Manufacturing

Manufacturing is the most important sector of the national economy, with a decisive effect on society’s level of productive development. It consists of mining and manufacturing. Industrial companies in the Pripyat basin are located in cities and urban settlements. The manufacturing potential of the Minsk region determines the development of the most important economic activities, including metallurgical production and production of finished metal products (24%), food production (31.6%), production of rubber and plastic products (9.4%), and production of vehicles and equipment (12.7%). In recent years, the development of industrial production in the region has followed a steady upward trend, attaining a 20% share in the Minsk region. In Dzyarzhynsk district, 22 industrial enterprises produce textiles, furniture, power saws, overhead travelling cranes, paint and lacquer, medical products, agricultural machines, equipment for road construction, armoured concrete, etc. There are 20 industrial enterprises in Salihorsk district, employing 24,400 people, representing 43.8% of national jobs. The industrial complex in the district includes chemical companies, machine building and metalworking, and light industries, agri-business, fuel and building materials are being developed. The emblematic trademark in the district, region and the whole country is “Belaruskali”, one of the largest producers and suppliers of potash mineral fertilizers in the CIS and in the world. Its products are popular on the international market and are delivered to more than 50 countries in Europe, East Asia, the Mediterranean, South Africa, India, China, and the Americas. Since its beginnings, OAO “Belaruskali” has earned an international reputation. The company’s mines and concentrating mills quickly developed productive capacities, continuously and dynamically increased the volume of products, introduced new types of equipment and technological processes, and expanded the range of products. The main product of OAO “Belaruskali” is potash fertilizers including granulated potassium chloride and potassium chloride. In addition, the company produces technical salt and various types of cooking salt. In 2013, the production of NPK-complex fertilizers was developed using the steam-powered granulation method. The Pietrikaw deposit of potassium salt is the most significant raw material base for maintaining and increasing the production capacity of OAO “Belaruskali” and the Republic of Belarus. The OAO “Foundry-Mechanical Plant “Universal” is a privately owned enterprise. For its manufacture of industrial products, the company implements single, short-run production with frequent changes in terms of the names, material intensity and labour intensity of the product range. The company has developed the production and repair of a large range of mining, chemical and material handling equipment used by OAO “Belaruskali”. In addition, it now produces technological equipment and spare parts previously purchased abroad. The most important direction in the development strategy of OAO “Universal” is to fully meet the requirements of OAO “Belaruskali” for the repair and renewal of technological equipment. The ZAO “Soligorsk Plant of Technological Equipment” specialises in the design, production, repair and installation of equipment for the mining and chemical industry (lifting and transport equipment, processing equipment and other non-standard equipment). It is the main customer of OAO “Belarus- kali”, which previously purchased expensive equipment abroad. The unitary production enterprise "NIVA" of S. G. Romanovich was established in 1994 to conduct production activities associated with the repair, manufacture and servicing of hydraulic mechanized linings operated at OAO “Belaruskali”. The OAO “Starobinsky Peat Briquette Plant” is an enterprise in the fuel industry and the largest producer of briquettes not only in the Republic of Belarus, but also in Europe. Today, more than 60% of the briquettes are exported to Sweden and Poland.

54 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

There are four light industries in the area, the largest of which are OAO “Kupalinka” and ZAO “Kalin- ka”. The OAO "Kupalinka" is one of the largest companies in the “Bellegprom” concern, producing under- wear and knitwear for adults and children, with a full production cycle from the delivery of yarn of various raw materials to the confection, knitting, dyeing and finishing of knitted fabrics, cutting and sewing of knitwear and shipping to the consumer. The commercial collection of OAO “Kupalinka” features more than 1500 models and its products are sold throughout the Republic of Belarus, from the largest department stores to small stores. They are always in high demand from customers and have a good reputation among the markets of the Russian Federation. The main activity of the Closed ZAO "Kalinka" is the production of women's, men's and children's clothing. In order to meet consumer needs for high-quality clothing, the company constantly works on refreshing and expanding the range of its products. Three companies are involved in the distribution of food products in the district including the “Salihorsk bakery” branch of OAO “Borisovkhlebprom”, and the Salihorsk branch of OAO “Slutsk cheese-making combine”, an auxiliary facility of OAO “Belaruskali”. The Salihorsk branch of the OAO “Slutsk Cheese-Making Combine” is a high-technology enterprise for the production of dairy products, soft and whipped cheeses, butter, cottage cheese, and a whole milk substitute. Currently, the company processes more than 200 tonnes of milk per day, with a reputation extending beyond the borders of Belarus. To date, the COMPLIMILK brand catalogue contains all of the products essential for complete person- al nutrition. More than 100 items are subject to mandatory certification, and meet the requirements of customers in the Republic of Belarus and beyond, including milk and kefir, cream, buttermilk, whey, sour milk, fermented baked milk, baked milk, sour cream and bio sour cream, cottage cheese, curd paste, curd cheese, glazed curd cheese with fillers, soft cheeses, dessert cheeses, dried cheese with cumin, yogurt and butter. The “Salihorsk bakery” branch of OAO “Borisovhlebprom” produces bakery items, confectionery, baked and semi-prepared products, frozen products and bread crumbs. The average daily production of bakery products is about 23.0 tonnes per day. The average daily production of confectioneries is over 0.5 tonnes per day. The building materials industry in the district is represented by the Plant of Reinforced Concrete Struc- tures and the Department of Production and Technological Complex Management. They are branches of OAO “Stroytrest No.3” of the Order of the October Revolution. The plant of reinforced concrete structures of OAO “Stroytrest No.3” of the Order of the October Revo- lution produces precast reinforced concrete products and structures, concrete mortar, reinforcements and steel structures and road paving items. Today, the reinforced concrete structures plant produces more than 35,000 cubic metres of precast concrete, 90,000 cubic metres of concrete, 22,000 cubic metres of mortar, 9,000 cubic metres of wall blocks for basements, and 3,900 tonnes of weld- fabricated steel structures per year. In the Mazyr district, industrial companies in the region represent almost all sectors of the national economy, such as chemicals and petrochemicals, engineering and metalworking, forestry and woodworking, fuel, electric power, food, and light industries. GDP generating enterprises are:  OAO “Mazyr Oil Refinery”, which produces motor gasoline, diesel fuel, fuel oil, bitumen;  OAO “Mazyrsol, which carries out mining and produces edible and industrial salt;  OAO “Belaruskabel”, which produces and installs heatproof wires, power and control cables, control cables and data transmission of various modifications; radio frequency cables and wires for various special purposes with a copper and aluminium core;

55 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

 OAO “Mazyr Machine-Building Plant”, which produces timber-cutting and agricultural equipment;  Republican Production Unitary Enterprise "Mazyr Woodworking Industrial Plant";  Communal production unitary enterprise "Mazyr dairy products", which produces dairy products. In the Rechytsa district, manufacturing is one of the main sectors of the economy. Its activities provide stability and, above all, social development for the region. The main GDP-generating enterprises are: OAO “Rechytsa Hardware Plant”, OAO “Rechytsa Bread Products Plant”, OAO “Rechytsadrev”, and OAO “Rechytsa Textile”, representing over 62% of the industrial production in the region. In recent years, a number of major investment projects have been implemented. For example, 8 presses were put into operation at OAO “Mazyrsol”, which made it possible to increase the output of export-oriented products including pelleted salt. A new highly efficient line for the production of marshmallows with an enrobing line and packing machine was launched at OAO “Krasny Mozyryanin”. OAO “Mazyr Oil Refinery” has built a diesel hydrotreating unit, an isomerization unit, and a black oil vacuum distillation unit. The modernisation of woodworking enterprises was completed within OAO “Rechitsadrev” and the RUE “Mazyr DOK”), where the production of fibreboard and chipboard have been developed. A solar park has been constructed on the territory of the Brahin district to generate electricity based on natural solar radiation and a number of other projects. Companies located in the Luninets district are involved in the mining and manufacturing industries. In other areas, the development of the industrial complex is determined by the availability of raw materials.

1.3.6 Hydraulic power industry

Due to flat land and possible flooding, the construction of hydropower stations in the Pripyat River basin is challenging. In 2007, a technical-economic plan for the construction of five small hydropower plants on the Dnie- per-Bug Canal was developed. They are “Kachanovichi”, “Stakhovo”, “Zaluzie”, “Novosady” and “Kobryn”. All are now in operation, except for the small “Kachanovichi” hydropower plant in the Pinsk district. On the Dnieper-Bug Canal, four small hydropower plants now generate electricity. The electricity that they generate is used by the power system of the Republic of Belarus. When the small hydropower plant “Stakhovo” was introduced, the potential is significantly increased. This plant is the fifth on the Dnieper-Bug waterway and the first in Pripyat. It is the most powerful small hydropower station on the Dnieper-Bug channel. At the “Stakhovo” hydroelectric complex (the right bank of the Pripyat River near the Stakhovo settlement) there is a base which can automatically regulate the pressure and passage of the water flow, and control the degree of change in the riverbed. The small “Stakhovo” hydropower plant can also operate during the winter (freeze-up period). The “Stakhovo” was commissioned in De- cember 2015. The installed capacity of this small hydropower plant is 690 kW. The “Byaroza” regional power station is the largest power plant in the west of the Republic of Belarus. Its installed capacity of 1255.12 MW means it can provide electricity for the entire western region. It is one of the largest condensing power plants in the Republic of Belarus power system . The station has been designed to cover the loads of the power system, located near Brest on the shores of Lake Be- loe, which serves as a technical water supply for the power with and the lake as a circulating water cooler. In 2018, in the framework of the subprogram II of the State Scientific and Technical Program (SSTP) "Nature Management and Environmental Risks" of the RUE "CRICUWR" works were done to assess the hydropower potential of the medium and small rivers of the Pripyat basin, which have an average annual water discharge of 41.1 MW and 21.4 MW with a water discharge with a 95% water supply year. The total hydropower potential of the medium and small rivers of the Pripyat basin with average

56 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

annual water discharges is 1.73 and 1.55 times less than that of the Zapadnaya Dvina and Dnieper basins, respectively, and 1.83 and 1.95 times less with a 95% water availability in a dry year.

1.3.7 Accumulation of waste

Each year, more than 3 million tonnes of municipal waste are generated in Belarus. Despite a projected increase in the use of waste, the problem of their environmentally safe disposal will remain challenging for a long time. According to expert estimates, the volume of waste accumulated in existing solid waste landfills (SWL), exceeds 10 million m3. Currently in the Republic of Belarus there are 166 polygons and 1,700 mini polygons. Until recently, there was one (rarely two or three) solid waste landfills in each administrative district. Experience has demonstrated that for an area, regardless of the size of its territory and the size of the resident population, this number of landfills is not enough to ensure proper collection and disposal of waste. In 2017, the volume of waste production in the Republic of Belarus amounted to 55.5 million tonnes. In the total volume of waste production, the most significant part is large-capacity waste including halite waste and halite clay-salt sludge amounting to about 37.3 million tonnes, and phosphogypsum waste constituting 713,850 tonnes. The generation of waste in Belarus is irregular. Excluding halite waste, clay-salt sludge and phosphogypsum, 22.48% of the waste is generated at industries located in the Mogilyov region; 19.57% is generated in the city of Minsk; 17.94% is generated in the Minsk region;13.72% in the Gomel region; 13.41% in the Grodno region; 8.5% in the Brest region; and 4.38% in the Vitebsk region. The level of utilisation of waste production (excluding halite waste and clay-salt slime) is about 90%. It should be noted that in 2018, companies in the republic conducted more than 1,400 activities aimed at reducing the volume of production and (or) accumulation of industrial waste. The Ministry of Environment coordinates the implementation of the provisions of the Stockholm Con- vention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal in the Republic of Belarus. Landfills for the storage and disposal of solid municipal waste exist are located in the regional centres of the Pripyat basin (38 administrative districts) and are situated outside the water protection zones of water bodies (table A.6.2 of Annex A and map B.34 of Annex B).

1.3.8 Shipping industry

The section of the international waterway E-40, which connects the Black and Baltic Seas (the Visla River from Gdansk to Warsaw - Brest – Pinsk - the Dnieper River through Kiev to Kherson) passes through the territory of Belarus. Along the entire length from Pinsk to Mazyr, the Pripyat River is navigable and represents the main part of the Dnieper-Bug waterway. The Dnieper-Bug Channel (hereinafter DBC), built in 1848, with a set of hydraulic structures, connects the rivers Pripyat and the Western Bug and runs along the southern part of the territory of the Brest region. A branch of the Republican Unitary Enterprise “Belarusian River Shipping Company “Mazyr River Port” is situated on the Pripyat River. 405 km from the Pripyat River, is the 7-kilometre Sitnitsky (Mika- shevichsky) channel, which leads to the Republican Branch of the Belarusian River Shipping Compa- ny “Mikashevichi River Port”.

57 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Objects that are affected by the Dnieper-Bug Channel, which in turn affects them, include:  irrigation and drainage systems for agricultural land;  water courses, lakes, reservoirs for fishing farms and other purposes;  settlements and waterworks facilities. The Dnieper-Bug Channel is a multifunctional object of the transboundary territory of two states (Bela- rus - Ukraine) with many waterworks in its catchment area. In the western direction, 37 objects are directly associated with the DBC, and 123 objects in the eastern direction. In economic terms, the DBC is an integral part of the transport and road complex of shipping goods in the republic. As a water transport corridor, the DBC has the potential for further development and greater importance in the economy of the republic. Waterways in Belarus are open to navigation from March to November, due to climatic conditions. During the navigation period, navigation equipment is installed on waterways, fairway trawling is carried out, bottom-cleaning and dredging works are carried out, and the transport fleet is informed of the state of waterways. The list of surface water bodies related to inland waterways open to navigation is presented in tables A.17, A.17.1 of Annex A and on map B.16 of Annex B.

1.3.9 Tourism and recreational use of water bodies

In the Pripyat River basin, water bodies create favourable conditions for recreation, sport and tourism. However, at present, the share of water tourism remains insignificant in the structure of the national tourism product of Belarus (as an independent element, as well as complementing other areas - ecological, rural, educational, adventure tourism) (see map-scheme B.20 of Annex B on water recreation objects in the Pripyat river basin). Separate surface water bodies of Belarus could be used to develop transboundary tourist excursion routes. In the future, the “big water circle” project could be implemented including the Visla - the Au- gustow Channel – the Neman – the Shchara - the Oginsky Canal – the Yaselda – the Pina - the Dnie- per-Bug Channel – the Mukhavets - the Western Bug. A high-potential international project for Bela- rus, the Baltic countries, Ukraine, and Russia is the reconstruction of the medieval route “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, connecting the Baltic Sea with the Black Sea. At present, a well-defined and extensive network of long- and short-stay accommodation, located mainly in the suburbs of large cities and industrial centres, has formed along the valleys of large rivers. The most developed is a recreational network of medical, recreational, sports and educational centres. To implement the activities of the “National Programme for the Development of Tourism in the Repub- lic of Belarus”, activities aimed at assessing the natural recreational potential (hereinafter - NRP) of river areas and determining the profile of their tourist and recreational use (hereinafter - TRU) have been promoted and acquired a systemic nature. In accordance with the proposed methodology, sections of rivers are ranked into one of the four types of tourist and recreational structure, i.e. unsuitable for use, monofunctional, limited-polyfunctional, and polyfunctional. The designation of a water area as “unsuitable for use” indicates the presence of limiting factors for all types of TRUs that cannot be objectively overcome for technical, environmental or economic reasons. A monofunctional designation means that the water area could be used for one major type of tourism or recreation. A structure of a limited-polyfunctional type identifies conditions for achieving combinations of 2-3 profil- ing uses. A polyfunctional designation indicates the possibility of using the water area for organizing 4 or more main types of tourism and recreation [23].

58 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The following primary types of tourism and relaxation are considered: swimming, scuba diving, yacht- ing, rowing, amateur hunting and fishing.

1.3.10 Linear infrastructure

Transport and road network The transport complex of the territory includes the automobile, railway, air, river, pipeline and urban transport systems. The republican highway M-10 passes through the territory, connecting Gomel, Kobryn and the network of republican highways in various directions. The density of highways is the lowest in the republic amounting to 200-250 km per 1,000 km2. The main task of the republic’s roads is transporting goods and passengers over short and medium distances. In general, road transport carries more than 80% of all cargo and passengers. Urban transport includes a tram system (in the city of Mazyr), a trolleybus network, bus network and taxis. The railway network is undeveloped. The main railway line passes through Gomel, Kalinkovichi, Luninets, Pinsk, Kobryn, and Brest. The line is mainly one-track, with double tracks only near Brest and Luninets. Suburban transportation prevails. Air transport is used mainly for the transport of passengers, urgent and perishable cargoes, and mail. Numerous transit airlines pass through the territory of Belarus. About 95% of flights in the airspace of the republic are in transit and about 5% land at “Minsk-2” airport. Main oil pipelines and product pipelines In the unified transport system, pipeline transport in Belarus is represented by four main pipelines, one of which is partially located in the Pripyat basin:  The Druzhba “Unecha-Mazyr-Brody” oil pipeline is a main oil pipeline transporting Belarusian oil and transiting Russian and Kazakh oil to the countries of Central Europe and Ukraine. The length of the pipeline within the territory of Belarus is 215 km. The diameter of the Unecha-Mazyr branch is 1,200 mm. The diameter of the Mazyr-Brody branch is 800 mm. The throughput capacity of the Unecha-Mazyr branch is 90 million tonnes of oil per year. The throughput capacity of the Mazyr- Brody branch is 15 million tonnes of oil in year. The operating organisation is OAO “Gomeltrans- neft “Druzhba”. The pipeline is located on the territory of Rechytsa, Kalinkavichy, Mazyr, and Elsk districts of the Gomel region.

1.4 Risk (including climate change)

The problem of climate change in the Republic of Belarus is one of the priority areas of research at the state level. The impact of climate change on water resources within the Republic of Belarus primarily involves a risk analysis of immersion during floods, hydropower, water transport, and the development of wet industries for industrial production and agriculture. The completed estimation of climate change and run-off changes impacting the Pripyat basin for the period up to 2035 concludes an expected decrease in runoff in the Pripyat basin in all periods of the year with a maximum value in the summer period (up to 40% for individual tributaries) - table A.1.8 of Annex A, map B.29 of Annex B.

59 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

1.4.1 Floods

Flooding is one of the most essential and challenging problems in the basin of the Pripyat river. The problem is associated with immersion and flooding of settlements, agricultural and forestry lands with thawed and flood waters; deterioration of river beds and flood plains, causing changes in their hydrological regime, changes in hydrogeological conditions in river basins, and the distribution of the Pripyat River flow at the Upper Pripyat hydroelectric complex of the Beloozersk water system of the Dnieper- Bug channel. The following compound the effects of flooding:  extensive overgrowing and silting of river channels and overgrowing of flood plains, which causes an increase in the duration of standing water. Over the past 50 years, the duration of the passing of floods and river floods on the Pripyat River increased from 80 to 300 days;  decrease in the carrying capacity of the channels and their transformation from meandering into multipath branches;  decrease in current velocities and an increase in flood levels;  the unsatisfactory work of some ameliorative systems, which leads to an “expansion” of the time required for passing of floods and river floods. Detailed characteristics of floods are given in section 1.2.2.

1.4.2 Low-water seasons

The significant decrease in water levels in the rivers and reservoirs of the Pripyat basin involves serious challenges, both for agriculture and water transport. A reduction of levels to 80 centimetres above zero is considered dangerous for shipping. However, in 1992, a level of five centimetres below zero was noted within the Pripyat in the Mazyr region. Detailed characteristics of low-water periods are given in section 1.2.2.

1.4.3 Erosion processes

Erosion processes do not have a significant impact on the ecological condition of rivers in the Pripyat basin. Although the Pripyat river basin is relatively flat, erosion is limited to some areas. Natural processes of free and limited meandering prevail on the rivers. In some areas, incomplete meandering and secondary types occur. Due to erosion processes and channel deformations in the areas of the Pripyat, tributary changes in the coastal strip are more common on the right bank. When straightening the river bed, there is an increase in the slopes of the water surface, an increase in the flow rates and, as a consequence, an increase in the deformation of the channels. For example, on the Pina River, during low-flow periods, the river velocities increase 1.35 times due to the riverbed regulation. The river velocities on the Yaselda River increase 1.15 times, the Bobrik 1.4 times, the Tsna 1.4 times, the Lan 1.8 times, and the Sluch 1.2 times. The variable state of the river bed is characterised by erosion in some places and bed siltation and downhill creep in others. A great number of small- and medium-sized rivers flow through marshy lands, which are underlain mainly by sandy sediments with an overrepresentation of fine-grained and medium-grained sands (fraction d <0.25 ... 0.5 mm). Therefore, the most characteristic type of deformation is an increase in the river bed width and a decrease in its depth until a dynamic balance is established between the tangential forces of the flow and the erosion resistance of the bottom layer of the soil.

60 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

A typical example of this type of deformation of regulated rivers is the Lan and Oressa rivers. Over the 20 years of its operation, the river bed of the Oressa River below the Lyuban reservoir was silted by an average of 0.6-0.8 m. At the same time, on rivers of partial channels with overregulation below straightening, especially in the stretch areas, an accumulation and periodical rising of the bottom sediment occurs, i.e. the area of high pollution of river water. Various morphological formations of the river include reservoirs and areas with increased pollution of river waters by bottom sediment. The data obtained on the change of the state of regulated river can be used to make generalisations and conclusions. On many previously straightened rivers, water control structures (sluices) are added to maintain the necessary water levels at certain periods of the year. Examples are the Bobrik and Oressa rivers. As a rule, overgrowing of river beds causing a significant reduction of capacity occurs in sedimentation areas. Such overgrowing is most often observed on areas of rivers that have been selectively adjusted or that flow through lowland peat soils. Solving the problem involves assessing the conditions under which the selective regulation of river beds contributes to the formation of bottom sediments and their recurrent pollution of river waters, weakening these processes. In recent years, activities have been expanded to preserve and improve the state of rivers, especially small ones. In particular, their straightening is sharply limited and only allowed in exceptional cases with complete environmental justification. Measures are implemented extensively within the catchment areas, including the establishment of water protection zones and coastal strips to reduce the flow of pollutants into water courses and to preserve their coastal zones. In some cases, water regulation facilities (gateways, spurs, bottom walls) have been installed, and the regulations for economic activities on rivers have been made stricter. To date, on the initiative of the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Belarus, a number of programmes have been developed for implementing a set of measures to improve the ecological status of the catchment areas of small rivers. As a result of the actions conducted on a number of rivers, the water pressure is improving, but in general the situation is unfavourable. To achieve better results, recommendations have been developed for rivers subject to riverbed regulation.

1.4.4 Health issues

To improve the drinking water supply and the quality of water in the reservoirs, the state program “Comfortable housing and favourable environment for 2016-2020” is being implemented. Its subprogram 5 “Clean water” includes measures of an organisational, technical, economic and legal nature. The implementation of the subprogramme actions will contribute to the further development of centralised drinking water supply systems and improve the quality of drinking water for consumers. The state sanitary inspection constantly controls legal compliance in the field of sanitary and epidemic welfare of the population in recreation areas. Owners and assigned organizations are given recommendations and instructions on the preparation of recreation areas for the swimming season, and their implementation is monitored. When the bathing season begins, state sanitary inspection organises weekly monitoring of recreation zones, their sanitary condition and water compliance with established safety requirements. Thus, as a result of state sanitary inspection, in 2016, 68 prescriptions and 569 recommendations were made to eliminate violations of sanitary and epidemiological legislation in the Pripyat river basin, and 95 liable persons were subject to legal action. In addition, information on water bodies in which bathing is restricted, suspended or prohibited is posted weekly on the websites of the Republican Centre for Hygiene, the Epidemiology and Public Health

61 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

State Agency, and territorial sanitary inspection bodies.

1.4.5 Radionuclide pollution

The accident at the Chernobyl NPP occurred on 26 April 1986 at 1.23 am. As a result, 23% of the territory of the republic was subjected to radioactive contamination from cesium-137, strontium-90 (10%) and transuranium elements (plutonium-238, 239, 240, americium-241) - 2%. The Gomel and Mogilev regions, 10 districts of the Minsk region, 6 districts of the Brest region, and 6 districts of the Grodno region and 1 district of the Vitebsk region were completely contaminated. The release of radioactive substances affected the flora and fauna of Polesye and forests and swamps. The danger of the spread of radionuclides through the aquatic environment was of particular concern. Radioactive contamination of water bodies occurred as a result of both the direct release of radioactive substances on the water surface, and subsequent washouts from the surface of catchments, cross flows from more polluted watercourses and water bodies, mass exchange between bottom sediments and water masses, and unloading of polluted groundwater into surface water bodies. Immediately after the accident, the radioactive contamination of river ecosystems in the Pripyat basin was 10Kbq/l. About a month after the release of radioactive substances, their concentration in surface waters (rivers) significantly decreased due to the removal and deposition of bottom sediments. Over the next three years, the radionuclide content significantly decreased, even in the waters of the Pripyat River, which was the most polluted. At present, the probability of radioactive contamination of drinking water in the areas of resettlement is almost nil. When describing the behaviour of radionuclides in the environment, special focus is put on iodine-131, cesium-137 and strontium-90, since these radionuclides formed and form the main radiation dose of the affected population (see cesium-137 on map B.17 of Annex B and strontium-90 on map B.17.1 of Annex B). The Chernobyl disaster significantly changed the demographic structure of the region. From 1986- 2000 alone, the population of Gomel region decreased by 8%, while in the Khoiniki district it dropped by almost 43%. The number of rural inhabitants in the Gomel region decreased by 27%, while the urban population decreased by 3%. The birth rate has gone down considerably and the life expectan- cy of the population of the Gomel region has decreased by 5 years. To date, about 137,700 people have been resettled and about 200,000 have left the contaminated areas of their own accord.

1.5 Stakeholders and programmes

1.5.1 Administrative organisation

The Pripyat River and its main tributaries flow within the Republic of Belarus in the Brest, Gomel and Minsk regions. The operational control of Pripyat water resources is carried out by the Brest, Gomel and Minsk regional councils of deputies, the administrations of these regions, regional committees of natural resources and environmental protection, and other local government bodies. Regional committees of natural resources and environmental protection conduct the official policy of the Ministry in the region, including regular monitoring of quality indicators of water resources and control of water users through regional (district) inspections.

62 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The following research departments at the Ministry of Natural Resources specialise in the field of water resources protection and management:  The Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources (CRICUWR) is the leading institution in the field of scientific substantiation of the use and protection of water resources;  The “Institute of Geology” RUE “Research and Production Centre for Geology” branch specialises in assessing groundwater and other mineral resources.

1.5.2 Water user guidance

Water use refers to the use of water bodies to meet the requirements of the population and objects of economic activity. Water use is classified in accordance with the following criteria:  Purpose – drinking and domestic, municipal, industrial, agricultural, energy, fisheries, water transport and rafting, forging, and health resorts, etc.,  Water objects - surface, groundwater, internal and territorial sea waters;  Method - extraction of water and its return, extraction of water without return, without extraction of water;  Technical conditions - with the use of technical facilities, without the use of facilities.

1.5.3 Summary of water strategies, programmes, plans and projects

The management and protection of water resources in the Republic of Belarus is regulated by international legal norms and agreements, constitutional norms, laws adopted by the Chamber of Deputies, decrees by the President of the Republic of Belarus, and normative acts issued by executive bodies (Council of Ministers, ministries, committees, local authorities). The main international laws that regulate water use include:  Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Helsinki, 1992);  Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigable Uses of International Watercourses (New York, 1997);  Convention on the Transboundary Impact of Industrial Accidents (Helsinki, 1992);  Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea (Helsinki,1992);  Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 1991);  Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in the Adoption Process;  Solutions and access to justice in environmental issues (Aarhus, 1998);  Protocol on Water and Health Issues (hereinafter referred to as the WHI) to the Water Convention;  Agenda on Sustainable Development for the period 2016-2030, adopted by the UN General As- sembly on 25 September,2015 (hereinafter referred to as the 2030 Agenda), and approved by UN General Assembly resolution A/RES/70/1 on 25 September 2015. Legislation on the use and protection of water resources is developed on the basis of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, adopted on 24 November 1996. According to Paragraph 13 of the Constitu- tion, water is exclusive state property. The Water Code of the Republic of Belarus was adopted on30 April, 2014 №149-3. The Code regulates issues relating to the possession, use and disposal of water and water bodies. It is aimed at protecting and rational (sustainable) use of water resources, as well as protecting the rights and legitimate interests of water users.

63 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

1.6 Diagnosis: synthetic description

According to the identification carried out (delineation) [13], the hydrographic network in the Pripyat River basin includes 715 surface water bodies, such as: 636 SWB on waterways or their parts (rivers, streams, channels) with a catchment area of more than 30 km2 and an average length of 15.9 km; 79 water bodies (lakes, reservoirs, ponds) with a water surface area of more than 0.5 km2 and an average water surface area of 3.60 km2. A significant 95% decrease in the volume of the basin’s water resources is expected in very low-water years. For medium-sized rivers in the basin, the level is 44–61% of the average annual water resources, while for small rivers it is only 15–30%. Thus, the decrease in river flow resources for a very low-water year is from 1.6–2.2 times for medium rivers and up to 3.3–6.5 times for small rivers of the Pripyat basin. The left-bank tributaries of the Pripyat, in contrast with the right-bank tributaries (from Ukraine), have lower flow variability. Temperatures have risen since 1989 according to observations at meteorological stations located in the Pripyat river basin. Since the natural formation of runoff in the Pripyat River basin is disturbed by drainage amelioration, the explicit function with correlation dependence of the annual flow and annual precipitation has not been traced. The Pripyat River basin occupies a quarter of the entire territory of the country within the Republic of Belarus. The Pripyat catchment area is located in the southern part of the country on the territory of five (of six) regions (12 administrative districts of the Gomel region, 11 districts of the Minsk region, 11 districts of the Brest region, 3 districts of the Mogilyov region and one district of the Grodno region), as well as 5 cities of regional subordination. In total, it fully covers the land of 38 administrative districts. A population of 1.0647 million lives on the territory of the Pripyat river basin, including 598,300 urban inhabitants and 466,400 rural inhabitants In the Pripyat River Basin, as well as in Belarus as a whole, special importance is attached to reforestation and afforestation. Compared to 2010, the volume of this type of work increased by 22.5%. There has been a positive trend in the development of industrial production and agriculture:  The indices of industrial production compared to 2016 amount to 111.5% in general, agricultural production indices amount to 105.3% for crop production, and 103.3% for livestock production in the Minsk region (oblast) in 2017;  The indices of industrial production amount to 101.8% in general, agricultural production indices amount to 106.4% for crop production, and 102.4% for livestock production in the Gomel region;  The indices of industrial production amount to 105.8% in general, agricultural production indices amount to 106.6% for crop production, and 102.1% for livestock production in the Brest region;  The indices of industrial production amount to 105.7% in general, agricultural production indices amount to 105.5% for crop production, and 101.3% for livestock production in the Gomel region.

64 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 2. PRESSURES AND IMPACT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES ON WATER RESOURCES

Anthropogenic impacts on water bodies result from both point and diffuse sources of pollution. In the Pripyat basin, this human pressure originates on the territory of two states since the Pripyat River twice crosses the state border of two neighbouring countries - Ukraine and the Republic of Belarus - in its upper and lower reaches. The water bodies located in the Pripyat river basin on the territory of Belarus are in a favourable condition for the provision of water resources, contributing to the further development of the economy. En- terprises use surface and groundwater as sources of water supply.

2.1 Estimation of point source pollution

The assessment of point sources of pollution is based on an analysis of the characteristics of water use for each water user in terms of abstraction from groundwater bodies, withdrawal from surface water bodies, and wastewater discharges and their characteristics, as well as the impact of these discharges on receiving water bodies. In total, according to the statistical reporting of water use for 2018, 596 water users are located in the Pripyat basin in the framework of the State Water Cadastre in the territory of Belarus. 91 water users discharge wastewater. The number of wastewater discharges into natural water bodies is 194. Among the water users that discharge wastewater into natural water bodies, 21 companies contribute more than 95% of the total volume of wastewater discharged into the basin, including the following water users:

 "RUME 'Granit' in Mikashevichi of the Luninets District";  "PJSC 'Fish Farm 'Selets', section 'Tsentralniy' of the Byaroza District";  "PJSC "Krasnaya Sloboda Fish Farm "";  "PJSC 'FISH FACTORY 'LYUBAN'";  "PJSC 'FishFarm 'Loktyshi' of the Hantsavichy District";  "PJSC 'Mozyr Oil Refinery";  "PJSC 'FishFarmPolesie' of the Pinsk District";  "CPUIE 'Pinskvodokanal ' Pinsk";  "Subsidiary Production Unitary Enterprise "Slutskvodokanal"";  "PJSCFish Farm "Tremlya"";  "Communal Unitary Enterprise 'Soligorskvodokanal', Soligorsk";  "BranchFishFarm 'Lahva'  “PJSC” 'Pinskvodstroy' of the Luninets District";  "PJSC "Fish Farm "Beloe"";  "Main Directorate of Industrial Enterprise "ByarozaHousing and Communal Services" of the Bya- roza District";  "LuninetsCommunal Unitary Enterpris, Wastewater Disposal Organisation 'Vodokanal' Luninets";  "CommunalUnitaryEnterprise 'IvanavaHousing and Communal Services' (Ivanava and Ivanava District)";  "UEPietrikaw Enterprise of Melioration System";  "Soligorsk City Unitary Production Enterprise 'Housing and Communal Services” Complex' ";  "HousingandCommunalServices 'Hantsavichy' (Hantsavichy and Hantsavichy District)";

65 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

 "Communal Unitary Enterprise “Pietrikaw Disctrict Housing and Utilities Infrastructure”". During the assessment of the impact of point sources, the dilution capacity of surface water bodies was calculated based on the number of pollutants in the wastewater, the wastewater discharge and water discharge into receiving water bodies. When the limit value, which indicates good chemical status, is exceeded in the calculations made for a particular body, this indicates a possible significant impact of point source pollution in the water body. To carry out the final assessment of the degree risk for wastewater discharge related to local monitoring bodies, we used the local monitoring data for 2017-2018 provided by the National Centre for Ana- lytical Monitoring in the Area of Environmental Protection. A compilation of the results of the analysis of loads and impacts from point sources of pollution by their wastewater discharges is given in table A.6 of Annex A. 26 sections of watercourses and 1 reservoir are affected by the most significant impact of point sources. The areas of surface water bodies which are at risk of significant impact of point source pollution (in the area of wastewater discharges of water user enterprises) are the following:  the Krechet river (SUE “Berezovskoye housing and communal services”);  Yaselda River (State Unitary Enterprise “Berezovskoye Housing and Public Utilities”);  the Lan River (Fish Farm OJSC Loktyshy);  Tsna river (CUMME housing and communal services "Gantsevichi", a section of Gantsevichi and the Gantsevichi district);  Lake Chernoe (branch of RUE Brestenergo Berezovskaya TPP);  Struga reclamation canal (CUMME housing and communal services "Ivanovskoye housing and communal services", a section of Ivanovo and the Ivanovo district);  the Nesluha river (CUMME housing and communal services "Ivanovo housing and communal services", a section of the city of Ivanovo and Ivanovo district);  Volokhva river (Luninetsk CUE WDO (wastewater disposal organization) “Vodokanal of Luninets”);  Sluch river (Luninetsk CUE WDO “Vodokanal of Luninets”);  Luninetsk channel (CUMEhousing and communal services “Luninetsk housing and communal services”);  Radolsky channel (State enterprise Narovlyansk enterprise of reclamation systems);  Serebryansky Canal (OJSC “Oktyabrsky Skimmed Milk Powder Plant”);  Mikhedovo-Grabovsky channel (CUE "Petrikovskoye enterprise of reclamation systems", Petrikov");  Pripyat river (CUE Petrikovsky Rayzhilkomkhoz, Petrikov);  the Vit river (Makanovichsky neuropsychiatric boarding house for the elderly and disabled people of speech, Rechitsa district, Makanovichi);  the Braginka river (CUE “Khoiniki communal”, Khoiniki);  the Tsna river (Military unit No.03522, Ozerechye, Kletsky district);  the Tsepra river (CUE Kletsk housing and communal services in the area of Rassvet settlement);  the Mazha river (CUE Kopyl housing and communal services in the area of Kovyl);  the Sluch river (CUME “Slutsk Housing and Public Utilities”, Slutsk);  Moroch River (OJSC Fish Farm Krasnaya Sloboda);  the Solyanka river (State Unitary Enterprise "Starodorozhskoye Housing and Public Utilities", Starye Dorogi);  the Oressa river (CUE “Soligorskvodokanal”, Soligorsk);  the Naut River (State Unitary Enterprise "Zhitkovichsky Communal", Zhitkovichi);  Krivichsky channel (CUE “Soligorskvodokanal” (Soligorsk);  river Shat (regional unitary enterprise “Uzdenskoye housing and communal services”).

66 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table A.7 of Annex A features a compilation of the results of the analysis of loads and impacts from point sources of pollution by their discharge levels, which have a significant impact on the hydrochemical indicators of the status of water bodies, taking into account the water content of the receiving water body (its dilution capacity) and local monitoring data above and below the discharge. Map B.37 of Annex B shows the location of the main point sources of pollution due to wastewater discharges, taking into account the discharge of wastewater from treatment facilities in settlements and from treatment facilities of other companies. The main loads on groundwater bodies in the Pripyat river basin are given in Table A.4.10 of Annex A. A significant number of pollutants flow into the water bodies of the Pripyat river basin in surface wastewater from the territories of settlements within the basin. The lack of biological treatment plants in many urban settlements presents a challenge. Problematic issues include wastewater from the meat and dairy industries, which is discharged without treatment into public sewers and onto filtration fields. The list of filtration fields that have the most significant impact on surface and groundwater, and measures for their elimination (reclamation) are presented, respectively, in tables A.4.11 and A.21 of Annex A. It should be noted that the filtration fields are point sources, and to a greater extent, diffuse sources of pollution due to their negative impact on groundwater. In total, there are 421 treatment facilities in the Pripyat basin with an estimated power of 267.3 million m3 per year, discharging wastewater into the environment with a load of up to 38% (according to data for 2018). Among these, 34 use biological treatment, 29 mechanical treatment, 27 physico-chemical treatment, and 270 use filtration fields, while 61 are equipped with a runoff water system (table A.6.1 of Annex A). Local groundwater monitoring is carried out by nature resource users in the places where negative impact facilities are located: landfills for municipal and industrial waste, silt areas of treatment plants, agricultural irrigation fields, filtration fields, industrial sites, petroleum product storage areas, unusable pesticide burials, etc. These facilities are both point and diffuse sources of groundwater pollution. Landfills for storage and disposal of municipal solid waste can be either point sources or diffuse sources of pollution of surface and groundwater (table A.6.2 of Annex A and map B.34 of Annex B).

2.2 Estimation of diffuse source pollutions

Dispersed (diffuse) pollution is caused by the inputs of pollutants into water courses from sources distributed in the catchment area in the absence of organised wastewater discharges. The process of formation of such pollution is mainly unsteady and variable, associated with seasonal, climatic and anthropogenic factors (time of the year, frequency of atmospheric phenomena, technology and volumes of fertilizer use, population density and number of cattle, etc.). In case of diffuse pollution, it is difficult to organise and carry out environmental control and monitoring, and, as a result, take measures to regulate sources of impact. A significant contribution to the pollution of surface water is also made by atmospheric fall-out caused by emissions from industry and transboundary transfers, as well as by the removal of pollutants from the road network, landfills, dumps, etc. In the Pripyat basin, more than three-quarters of the atmospheric emissions come from motor vehicles, especially those with faulty, worn-out engines, and one-eighth come from heat power industries. Almost all large cities have heating and power plants such as Pinskaya, Luninetskaya, etc. In addition, the largest electricity company, a branch of RUE “Brestenergo” Berezovskaya regional hydroelectric power plant, operates in the Brest region. The main negative environmental aspects of the operation of petrol filling stations (hereinafter - petrol stations) are: air pollution introduced due to the evaporation of fuel; pollution of surface and ground

67 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

waters due to fuel spillage and its washing out by atmospheric precipitation and into drains from washing equipment and petrol station areas. Precipitations are a periodic source of nutrients into the catchment area. Depending on certain ratios of the catchment area and the area of the water surface of the reservoir, the supply of nutrients from precipitation falling directly into the water area can play a major role in its pollution by nutrients. During spring floods, up to 80% of nitrogen and 60% of phosphorus inflows result from the inflow of solid sediments accumulated with snow in the catchment area, rather than from soil washing. During the wettest years, precipitation contributes an additional source of nutrients for crops and is a priority pollutant for catchments with a high percentage of lakes. The impact of diffuse sources of pollution on surface waters also occurs as a result of wind and water soil erosion, depending on the nature of the vegetation, soil treatment methods, the technology and time of application of fertilizers and pesticides, the occurrence of livestock complexes, the adopted crop rotation system, etc. The impact of rural settlements on water pollution by nutrients is also characterised by surface runoff from settlements and filtering pollution from cesspools. Most rural settlements are not connected to the sewage network, but are equipped with cesspools. From these cesspools, up to 5% of the total amount of nitrogen and phosphorus formed on the territory of rural settlements ends up the river network. The amount of pollutants per inhabitant is: ammonia nitrogen - 2.7 g/day, mineral phosphorus (including detergents) - 0.48 g/day. Wastewater and excrement from livestock complexes are one of the main sources of environmental pollution, including natural waters, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds. The amount of pollution entering water bodies is determined by the capacity of livestock facilities, the volume of solid and liquid waste and its composition. The quantity and properties of manure also depend on livestock age, feed and animal welfare methods. In the Pripyat basin, there are currently 77 farms with more than 3,500 cattle and 53 farms with more than 1,000 pigs, which annually accumulate about 2 million tonnes of liquid manure and sewage with a moisture content of over 97% - 4-5 million.m3. The considerable number of large livestock farms negatively affects the environmental situation in the areas of their location. The main danger is caused by industrial livestock farming with improper farm management. Nitrogen and phosphorus compounds contained in fertilizers, as well as those occurring from improper animal feeding and maintenance stimulate extensive algae growth when they enter surface water bodies, causing overgrowth and eutrophication. Waste from agricultural activity, if stored improperly, can contain up to 150 pathogenic substances harmful to human and animal health, from rubella pathogens to tuberculosis bacilli. In addition, such waste enhances greenhouse gas emissions and destroys the ozone layer. Dead animals cause great harm to nature. Materials that are used for the construction of farms, such as asbestos, are also unsafe. In terms of environmental impact, livestock factories are considered to be equivalent to industrial companies. The agricultural production cooperative (hereinafter referred to as the APC), which farms 2,500 heads of pigs, creates the same amount of waste a village or town with a population of 7,500 people during its lifespan. Moreover, settlements, unlike collective farms, have wastewater treatment systems. For APC (collective farms, state farms and other agricultural enterprises), in particular for large livestock complexes, the problem of recycling a large amount of waste generated during agricultural activities (manure, etc.) is urgent. Environmental problems are aggravated to a large extent by the lack of land and the condition of agricultural irrigation fields.

68 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

According to the “Belmeliovodkhoz“ concern, most irrigation systems were built in the 1980–90s. and have poor status. 68% of the equipment requires repairing. In some cases, the operating conditions of irrigation systems have significantly deteriorated with the use of manure at some pig farms resulting in salt deposits in pressure pipelines. Facilities located in water protection zones and coastal strips represent a threat of pollution to water bodies. The main pollutants located within the water protection zones of the Pripyat river are dairy farms that do not have manure depots in the study area. The disposal of manure requires export to the fields, yet very often this is not done due to a lack of transport or fuel, with the result that manure ac- cumulates in the territory. Dangerous sources of river pollution are domestic yards and agricultural machinery repair workshops. Their territories, for the most part, do not have hard-surface pavements, rainwater drainage or sewage treatment plants. Only a few domestic yards (less than 5%), where there are mechanical workshops, as well as machine and tractor workshops, have hard-surface pavements, and not a single facility has rainwater drainage. Assessment of dispersed (diffuse) pollution sources was carried out using the draft technical code of common “Rules for the assessment of pollutants into surface water bodies from dispersed (diffuse) pollution sources." developed by the RUE “CRICUWR” with the support of the international project EUWI +. An overall assessment of the influx of pollutants into surface objects from dispersed (diffuse) sources of pollution in the Pripyat basin in the territory of Belarus was based on data for the whole of 2017. The assessment was made on the basis of the balance of pollutants in the mouth outlet of the Pripyat river near the Dovlyady settlement–outfall from Ukraine (2.0 km from the village), taking into account the contribution (mass of pollutants) coming from point sources and pollution, as well as the influx of pollutants from the territory of Ukraine along the Pripyat River and its tributaries. In this case, the data used concerned the characteristics of the average monthly runoff over the transboundary sections of the indicated watercourses for the months corresponding to the time of sampling, as well as data from the analysis of water samples provided by Belhydromet. According to the assessment, the total contribution of point source pollution in the Pripyat basin is up to 28% of the total volume of pollutants. The remaining 72% are dispersed (diffuse) sources of pollution and the background content of pollutants in surface water bodies, due to natural factors. A more detailed assessment of the contribution of dispersed (diffuse) pollution sources was made in terms of administrative districts and identified surface water bodies with the use of the above mentioned Technical Code of Common Practice and using the annual statistics of the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus. The data on the yield of sown farmland (cereals and pulses, industrial and forage crops, annual and perennial grasses) were used in view of administrative districts taking into account the proportion of areas of districts located in the river basin. To assess the inflow of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus compounds) with mineral and organic fertilizers, we used data relating to the application of mineral fertilizers for crops and the estimated volumes of organic fertilizers in the context of administrative regions based on the number of livestock (cattle, pigs, horses and poultry) presented in Table 2.1, considering that manure is used for fertilising.

Table 2.1: The estimated level of application of mineral and organic fertilizers per 1 ha of the catchment area of the Pripyat river basin

Organic fertilizers Mineral fertilizers Phosphorus (P O ), Phosphorus (P O ), Nitrogen (N), kg/ha 2 5 Nitrogen (N), kg/ha 2 5 Year kg/ha kg/ha MIN MAX MEAN MIN MAX MEAN MIN MAX MEAN MIN MAX MEAN

69 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Year Organic fertilizers Mineral fertilizers 2014 7.55 11.30 9.34 2.88 4.44 3.61 15.28 22.23 18.63 5.14 8.43 6.71 2015 6.91 10.77 8.72 2.69 4.31 3.43 15.33 22.51 18.79 4.36 7.31 5.79 2016 7.03 10.81 8.80 2.72 4.35 3.46 11.81 18.63 15.17 2.22 4.58 3.34 2017 7.35 11.28 9.20 2.80 4.46 3.56 14.20 22.41 18.22 2.41 4.79 3.53 2018 7.42 11.47 9.33 2.83 4.53 3.61 14.00 21.10 17.50 3.52 6.27 4.87

The calculation results clearly reflect the formation of an overcharge of nutrients as a result of agricultural production, taking into account the main mechanisms of its formation is presented in figure 2.

Figure 2: Dynamics of the total overcharge of nutrient elements of nitrogen (N - blue) and phosphorus (P – red) from agricultural production for 2014 - 2018 in the Pripyat river basin

A more specified distribution of the excess of nitrogen and phosphorus over the territory of the Pripyat River basin, taking into account the results of the analysis of the risk of contamination of surface-water bodies from dispersed (diffuse) pollution sources, is presented on maps B.46 and B.47 of Annex B. In the context of a total volume of 440 tonnes of total phosphorus received in 2017 from diffuse sources, an overcharge of phosphorus has been formed in the basin reaching 8,900 tonnes. Assum- ing phosphorus retention in the basin of up to 96%, the contribution of agricultural production will be about 350 tonnes, with a 90-tonne contribution to pollution from diffuse sources of background pollution, precipitation from the atmosphere and runoff from forest land. In the context of a total volume of 6,700 tonnes of nitrogen received in 2017 from diffuse sources, the overcharge of nitrogen formed in the basin amounts to about 34,000 tonnes. Assuming nitrogen retention in the basin of up to 85%, the contribution of agricultural production will be about 5,100 tones, with a 1,600-tonne contribution to pollution from diffuse sources of background pollution, precipitation from the atmosphere and runoff from forest land. Agricultural nutrient load is characterised by significant spatial variability due to climatic and landscape differences, a variety of approaches to land use and management, as well as political and economic factors. Recently, greater attention has been paid to understanding the importance of assessing sources and pathways of distribution, as well as the processes of formation of pollution by biogens.

70 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The pollution load of water bodies from agricultural land has a different degree of risk from nutrient loading. This risk is determined by a combination of local characteristics. Thus, a cost effective reduction of nutrient load requires taking measures in certain areas.

For the Pripyat River basin, the following river sub-catchments for nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P2O5) are presented in table A.4.12 of Annex A, taking into account their ranking according to risk. There are 13 filtration fields in the Pripyat River Basin, and these have the greatest negative impact on changes in the state of surface and, to a greater extent, groundwater resources in the Pripyat River Basin with agreed regional activities1. A list of these filtration fields with an indication of surface and groundwater bodies at risk of negative effects is given in Table A.4.11 of Annex A. These filtration fields are significant sources of both dispersed (diffuse) and point source pollution.

2.3 Estimation of quantitative pressures on surface water and groundwater

The structure of water use in the Pripyat river basin does not radically differ from the overall structure of water use in the country. A specific feature of the basin is the inflow of extra volumes of water due to the drainage of water from the Pripyat River to the territory of Ukraine. This water goes into the Dnieper-Bug Channel through the Beloozersk water supply system for water delivery to the channel and maintenance of navigability. Water is discharged through the Vyzhevsk water outlet of the Upper Pripyat waterworks facility (Vygevsky floodgate), which is located in Ukraine near the Pochapi settlement (Figure 3).

Dniepro-Bug Canal (DBC)

Republic of Belarus

Beloozerskaya water feed system of DBC Ukraine

Figure 3: General scheme of the Dnieper-Bug Channel

The distribution order of runoff of the Upper Pripyat (Belarus-Ukraine) was approved in 2010 at the inter-state level. This order is based on the optimisation of runoff distribution management while preserving the ecological runoff of the Pripyat River. This runoff is determined based on environmental, hydrological and hydraulic criteria. The general scheme of the runoff distribution depending on the flow of water into the Pripyat River (QPripyat) above the Upper Pripyathydroelectric complex is shown in Fig- ure 4. In certain historical low-water periods, in order to maintain the ecological functioning of the Up-

1 According to the results of the assignment of the Ministry of Natural Resources, carried out by RUE CRICUWR No.41/9/6.4/ 2019 (47/2019) as of 04/23/2019 "Conduct an inventory of existing filtration fields, evaluate the negative impact on the state of water resources for various categories of filtration fields with the elaboration of their list and proposals for their staged decommissioning ”

71 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

per Pripyat, using this procedure, runoff into the Dnieper-Bug Channel was not derived from the Pri- pyat River: this was the case in July-September 2015 and August-October 2016 (Figure 5).

6.0 3.00 5.5 River upper Pripyat downstream Verchnepripjatsky waterworks facility (after part of the flow was taken to the Beloozerskaya water supply system), Ukraine 5.0 Beloozerskaya water feeding system of the DBC, Belarus

4.5

4.0 1.70 3.5 3.00 3.0 1.70 2.5 1.35 1.70 2.0

1.5 1.00

/s 0.70 1.0 3 m 0.35 0.5 3 m /s 0.00 0.0 3.4  QPripyat 

0.0

1.0

1.7

2.4

3.4

6.0 QDBC Qpripyat

0.0  QPripyat  1.0  QPripyat  2.4  QPripyat  QPripyat > 12.0

QDBC=0 QDBC 0.5*(Qpripyat - 1.0) QDBCQpripyat-1.7 Qpripyat-6.0QDBC 34.0

Figure 4: Graphic presentation of the upper Pripyat water allocation rule (Belarus-Ukraine)

27 38 26 Watter allocation - upper Pripyat (2016) 25 Watter allocation - upper Pripyat (2015) 36 24 River upper Pripyat downstream Verchnepripjatsky waterworks facility 34 23 (after part of the flow was taken to the Beloozerskaya water supply 32 River upper Pripyat downstream Verchnepripjatsky waterworks facility 22 system), Ukraine 21 30 (after part of the flow was taken to the Beloozerskaya water supply 20 19 Beloozerskaya water feeding system of the DBC, Belarus 28 system), Ukraine 18 26 Beloozerskaya water feeding system of the DBC, Belarus 17 /s 24 3 16 15 22 m

14 3 20 13 12 m 18 11 16 10 14 9 8 12 7 10 6 5 8 4 6 3 4 2 1 2

0 0

01.01.2016

11.01.2016

21.01.2016

31.01.2016

10.02.2016

20.02.2016

01.03.2016

11.03.2016

21.03.2016

31.03.2016

10.04.2016

20.04.2016

30.04.2016

10.05.2016

20.05.2016

30.05.2016

09.06.2016

19.06.2016

29.06.2016

09.07.2016

19.07.2016

29.07.2016

08.08.2016

18.08.2016

28.08.2016

07.09.2016

17.09.2016

27.09.2016

07.10.2016

17.10.2016

27.10.2016

06.11.2016

16.11.2016

26.11.2016

06.12.2016

16.12.2016 26.12.2016

12.02.2015

26.02.2015

12.03.2015

26.03.2015

09.04.2015

23.04.2015

07.05.2015

21.05.2015

04.06.2015

18.06.2015

02.07.2015

16.07.2015

30.07.2015

13.08.2015

27.08.2015

10.09.2015

24.09.2015

08.10.2015

22.10.2015

05.11.2015

19.11.2015

03.12.2015

17.12.2015 31.12.2015

Figure 5: Examples of practical implementation of the Upper Pripyat water allocation rule during dry and low-water periods in 2015 & 2016

The total characteristics of water use include annual volumes of abstraction and collection of water from surface and groundwater sources, its use for various needs, as well as the quality of wastewater discharged into surface water bodies of the Pripyat River basin (table A.5 of Annex A). The dynamics of annual water withdrawal from groundwater and surface water bodies are shown in Figure 6 (map B.51 of Annex B).

72 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

360 Groundwater drawoff mln. cub.m

340 Surface water exception mln. cub.m

326.517

338.3995 314.5456

320 /year

3 303.108

300 294.9653 288.4458

280 million million m

260

244.4642

240.918723

239.027

236.292 235.4513

240 230.315 228.279

220 218.3223 200

180

160.3617 159.7927

160 153.041

144.4942

144.281

141.68418

138.699

138.16647

136.45234

135.66

135.8212

134.69406 130.7966 140 130.81122 120 100 80 60 40 20

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2006 2007 2008 2009 2016 2017 2018 2005 Figure 6: The dynamics of annual water abstractions from groundwater and surface water bodies

The use of water for various needs from surface water bodies and underground bodies by type of economic activity according to the data for 2018 is shown in Figures 7 to 9. Map B.49 of Annex B outlines the characteristics of water use in the river basin according to districts, regions and regional centres. The specific water consumption in the river basin is given in table А.5.1 of Annex A and on map B.50 of Annex B. It reaches an average of 106 l/day/person, from 80 to 146 l/day/person depending on the regions.

Water use from ground waters (mln m3/year / %) Water use from surface waters (mln m3/year / %) 3.486; 2% 5.52; 2% 17.28; 8% 0.01; 0% 3.22; 1% industry 0.68; 0% industry 24.18; 18% energy energy 33.886; 25% 0.69; 0% agriculture agriculture 27.33; 20%

fish industry fish industry 200.13; 87% housing and 7.79; 6% housing and communal communal services services other industries 0.06; 0% other industries leakage losses 41.72; 31% leakage losses

Figure 7: Use of water from surface water for Figure 8: Use of water from groundwater for various needs various needs

Surface waters are mostly withdrawn and used for fisheries (fish farms), industry and agriculture.

73 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Groundwater is mostly withdrawn and used for housing and municipal services (drinking water supply), agriculture and industry (mainly to provide drinking water supply for these activities). The difference between abstraction and use is due to water transfer and water losses during transportation.

160

150 146.94 surface water volume, mln.m3 140 groundwater volume, mln.m3 130 120 110 100 90 80

70 55.60

60 54.85 50.93 50 40

30 27.51 21.49 20

3.35

2.93

1.55

0.79 0.04

0 0.01

other

energy

industry

domestic agriculture

fishindustry Figure 9: Water abstraction for different types of economic activity

The Pripyat basin region within the territory of Belarus is industrially and agriculturally developed. Therefore, the influence of surface and groundwater resources on social development and the main sectors of the economy is significant. The largest consumers of fresh water (with a volume of more than 5,000,000 m3/year) in the basin are: "SUE 'Lyuban reclamation systems enterprise'"; "OJSC 'Fish farm' Selets', section 'Central' Berezov- sky district"; "RUME 'Granite', Mikashevichi, Luninetsky district"; "OJSC 'Fish Farm Loktyshy of the Gantsevichi district"; "OJSC" Fish Farm Krasnaya Sloboda"; "OJSC Fish Farm" Tremlya"; OJSC Mozyr Oil Refinery; "OJSC 'Fish Farm Polesye' of the Pinsk district"; "OJSC 'BELARUSKALIY', Soli- gorsk"; "Branch Fish Farm 'Lahva'; OJSC 'Pinskvodstroy' Luninetsky district"; "OJSC" Fish Farm "Be- loe"; "SE "Mozyr rayzhilkomkhoz"; "CPUE 'Pinskvodokanal', Pinsk"; "SCUE "Soligorskvodokanal", Slutsk district". In the basin as a whole, both in industry and in settlements, the use of drinking water for production needs is constantly decreasing. It should be noted that the increased percentage of drinking water use is associated with its use in the housing and municipal services system and in the food industry. Quantitative changes in water resources are largely determined by the difference between the withdrawal (production) and water discharge, i.e. irretrievable water consumption (in relation to water bodies). Currently, irretrievable water consumption in the Pripyat basin does not exceed 1% of runoff, has a 95% probability of exceeding (provision), and does not significantly affect the quantitative indicators of water resources in the Pripyat basin. The dynamics of annual volumes of discharge into surface water bodies by the volumes of discharged treated wastewater, including insufficiently treated, as well as by the amount of pollutants in the wastewater is shown in figures 10 to 12..

74 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

360 Wastes discharge, mln. cub. M 340 Wastes discharge of insufficiently treated waste water, mln. Cub.m

320

/year 3

300 295.464

280.432 277.190

280 271.531

261.437 miilon miilon m 260 254.328

240 219.645

220 218.570

208.729

207.638

205.211 202.202

200 199.204 185.645 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40

5.611

4.422

2.251

2.162

1.457

1.341

1.021

0.864

0.843

0.739

0.656

0.175 0.143

0 0.132

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016 2017 2018 Figure 10: Dynamics of wastewater discharges into surface water bodies

2300 2200 Readily oxidable organic matter on BOD5, tons/year Ammonium-ion, tons/year 2100 2156.8

2000 1968 1900 1800 1700

1600 1606.34 1510.6

1500 1370.32

1400 1359.798

1297.66

1289.15 1284.42

1300 1270.4 1206.79

1200 1126.16

1100 997.66 1000 965.34 900

800

725.48

722.7

687.47

683.95

680.2

674.25 659.79

700 655.17

596.42 567.08

600 528.79 497

500 446.01 424.632 400 300 200 100

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016 2017 2018 Figure 11: Priority pollution intake into water bodies in the Pripyat river basin

75 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Petroleum derivatives, tons/year Nitrite-ion, tons/year Phosphate-ion, tons/year Metals (iron total, zink, nickel, chrome total), tons/year Sulfates, tons/year

280 259

260 251.82

240

220 218.7 209.8 200

180 178.4

160 157.2

150.55

149.7

149.86 146.6

140 139.7 121.16

120 120.4

108.52

101.1

100.39 100.28

100 91.34

84.5

78.99 78.06

80 73.55

70.8 65.6

42.965

42.2 41.1

40 38.0

28.6

27.31

22.09

19.28

19.21

19.14

18.75 18.74

18.725

18.02

16.93

16.29

16.545

15.84 15.84

15.71

15.49

15.32

15.18

14.64

14.02

14.1

13.75

12.81

12.42 12.5

20 12.11

9.8

7.579

7.539

7.160

6.319

6.156

6.013

5.647

5.237

4.991

4.765

4.632

4.576

4.378 4.001

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2005 Figure 12: Priority pollution intake into water bodies in the Pripyat river basin

An analysis of the dynamics of wastewater inflow into the water bodies of the Pripyat river basin since 2005 indicates a decrease in wastewater volumes and the proportion of insufficiently treated wastewater (from 2.8% to 0.3%). Despite the fact that insufficiently treated wastewater in the water disposal structure for the period from 2016 to 2018 amounted to less than 1%, the pollutant intake load on water bodies is significant. The prioritised substances, the highest concentrations of which are most often observed in water bodies on the Pripyat basin, are nutrients, and less commonly, organic substances. The relatively high content of metals (iron, copper, manganese, zinc) is associated with their high natural (or background) content. The situation of the inflow of wastewater and pollutants is sufficiently stable. The volumes of pollutants entering the water bodies of the Pripyat Basin generally only change slightly from year to year, excluding easily oxidized organic substances such as BOD5 and phosphates.

2.4 Analysis of other pressures and impacts of human activity on hydromorphological conditions

An analysis of the impact of anthropogenic activities on water resources requires defining the impact of flow regulation on the hydrological regime of surface water bodies and their sections, determining the impact on their morphological indicators, and identifying any irregularities in the continuity of water flow2.

2Annex 2, article 1.4 ”The determination of loads” WFD EU

76 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Hydromorphological elements of the quality of water bodies, i.e. the degree of change in hydromorphological indicators, can determine and include the assessment of the ecological status of surface water bodies along with hydrobiological and hydrochemical indicators of the status of river and lake ecosystems. Disturbances in the continuity of the water flow are caused by the location of retaining hydraulic structures in the channels of watercourses (dams in channel reservoirs and ponds, navigable locks, regulating locks, regulator pipes, spillways). These structures directly restrict the habitat of aquatic flora and fauna and disrupt the natural hydrological mode. In the Pripyat river basin, 77 significant violations of the continuity of water flow have been identified due to the location of retaining structures of channel reservoirs and ponds, as well as navigation locks, affecting 87 sections - 13% of the total number of "river" areas. Tables A.4.4-A.4.6 of Annex A give lists and basic characteristics of water bodies with altered hydromorphological characteristics associated with disruption of continuity, the location of reservoirs, and straightening. In the Pripyat river basin there are 735 reclamation systems with a total area of reclaimed land of more than 10,400 km23 (more than 20% of the total area of the basin) for the needs of regulating humidity on reclaimed agricultural land. A large number of reclamation systems have an anthropogenic impact on the natural hydrological regime of surface water bodies in addition to 449 sites - 70% of the total number of river sites. The analysis of the loads in the Pripyat basin associated with land reclamation and their impact on the change in river flow are shown in Table A.4.8 of Annex A. Thus, the hydrological regime of only 100 sections of watercourses can be considered as undisturbed by anthropogenic impact - 17% of the total number of “river” areas (a map with impacts on the hydrological regime taking into account the location of dams is shown in map B.40 in Annex B). The morphometric indicators of the surface water bodies of the Pripyat River basin have also undergone significant changes, such as straightening and deepening of river channels for more than half the length of the watercourse section, reformation of the bed and channel banks, and bulk reservoirs and ponds. Among the total of 715 sections of surface water bodies ("rivers" and "lakes"), only 111 sites have not undergone significant morphometric changes - 16% have a status of "close to natural" or "no significant changes". Maps B.40 and B.41 of Annex B describe data on water bodies of the Pripyat River Basin with changes in hydrological and morphological parameters due to anthropogenic impacts.

2.5 Other pressures

2.5.1 Climate change

Besides the main loads and their impacts on surface water bodies associated with existing anthropogenic activities, based on the prospects and directions for the development of territories in the Pripyat River basin, other possible loads may occur (Table A.4.7 of Annex A). These loads and their impacts may be caused by a possible change in anthropogenic activity, as a result of social and economic development of the Pripyat river basin, dangerous hydrometeorological phenomena, as well as climate change (table A.4.7 of Annex A). Table A.1.8 of Annex A and map B.29 of Annex B show the results of the forecast change in the average annual river flow in the Pripyat River basin taking into account the multi-model ensemble CMIP5 in four scenarios presented in the fifth report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. For example, forecast of changes in surface runoff until 2035 for the Pripyat River Basin is -25% in Summer from the current state (from -11 to -42% depending on rivers).

3According to the State Association for Land Reclamation, Water and Fisheries "Belvodkhoz"

77 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

2.5.2 Invasive alien species

Invasion of alien species can have a negative impact on the environment. The number of alien species entering the territory of Belarus is increasing rapidly. The invasive plant species that are most dangerous include Sosnowsky’s hogweed and common ragweed (present in southern Belarus, up to 80% of the population is allergic to its pollen in those Ukrainian regions where it has widely spread). According to the data of the Research and Production Centre for biological resources, there are 63 species of fish in Belarus, and more than 40 of them are indigenous. These include roach, perch, bream, pike, tench, and crucian carp. However, in recent years, the number of alien (invasive) fish in rivers and reservoirs in Belarus has significantly increased. In the space of just two years, five new species of fish have been identified in the country, including tube-nosed goby, Ukrainian small stickle- back, white-finned gudgeon, and golden mudfish. In addition, such alien species as silver carp and amur sleeper are widespread in Belarus. They adapt well to the conditions of the rivers and reservoirs of the republic, quickly multiply and constitute serious competition to indigenous fish fauna. To a large extent, climate change is contributing to the spread of invasive fish species throughout Belarus. To make a conclusion about the impact of alien species of flora and fauna on the ecological state of the Pripyat river basin is problematic because of a lack of relevant data. Some economic activities do not have a significant impact on the ecological status of water bodies in the Pripyat river basin. These include forestry, hydropower, tourism, transport, the road network, main oil pipelines and product pipelines, as well as recreational use of water bodies (although there are significant excess recreational loads in a number of active recreation areas).

2.6 Synthesis

2.6.1 Quantity of pollution affected by domain of origin and balance during low flows

On the Pripyat river basin, like other basins in Belarus, the discharge of treated wastewater is subject to strict regulatory acts. The maximum permissible loads on water bodies during discharges of treated wastewater are regulated by TIC 17.06-08-2012 (02120) "Procedure for establishing standards for permissible discharges of chemical and other substances in sewage composition". The extremely low-water years of 2015 and 2016 in the Pripyat river basin did not reveal any significant deterioration compared to other years in the quality of water in receiving water bodies generated by wastewater discharges. The deterioration of water quality observed during those years was mainly due to the nature of the low water content resulting in the shallowing of many rivers, the increased water temperatures, and the decreased dissolved oxygen content. The anthropogenic load of pollutants in water bodies has a negative impact on the quality of surface water bodies and their ecological status coupled with a decrease in flows (especially during low flows) and this nutrient load can increase the risk for water bodies of not reaching a good status/potential. 2.6.2 Quantitative balance between abstractions and resources

The quantitative balance between water abstractions from surface and groundwater resources shows the high sufficiency of surface and groundwater resources in the basin. The impact of water use on these resources is not significant: according to data for 2018 the extraction from surface water bodies is no more than 1.5% from Pripyat river basin runoff for 2018 and no more than 3.5% for a shallow year with 95% probability.

78 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Abstractions from groundwater bodies in 2018 represented a maximum 5.3% from natural groundwater resources and 33% from approved operational reserves annually. Water balances characterise in more detail the quantitative balance between abstraction and surface water and groundwater resources especially for shallow years with a probability of 95% or more.

2.6.3 Global synthesis of problems based on pressures and hot spot analysis

The primary environmental problems in the Pripyat river basin are listed below. They are associated with natural and anthropogenic pressures in the Pripyat river basin, as well as with the prospects for using its water resources. Pollution of surface and groundwater bodies from point and dispersed (diffuse) sources. Water quality in the Pripyat river basin is developed under the influence of both natural and anthropogenic factors. In natural terms, the conditions for the formation of river waters are associated with wetlands and groundwater. The Polesye bogs bring into the rivers of the Pripyat basin an increased amount of coloured organic substances, a significant amount of humic acids, and metals, such as iron. This leads to a general deterioration in the quality of river waters in the basin, which makes them less suitable for drinking water supply. The main pollutants are produced by agricultural activity and, in particular, discharges from large livestock farms, as well as storage and use of agricultural chemicals. In some cases, water quality has deteriorated due to the construction of drainage systems on wetlands. Cities also contribute to river water pollution, primarily due to discharges of insufficiently treated municipal and industrial wastewater. Livestock farming on an industrial scale will imminently lead to a change in the landscape, soil degradation, loss of recreational sites, and high costs for purifying drinking water in settlements close to farms. Significant changes in the hydrological regime due to hazardous hydro-meteorological events leading to floods and droughts Floods in the Pripyat river basin, caused by spring floods and rain floods, lead to significant damages to territories and are one of the main threats to environmental safety in the basin. The Pripyat river and its tributaries are characterised by an unfavourable hydrological regime. Over the past 60 years in the Polessye region, 13 serious floods have occurred, resulting in significant damage. Floods in the Pripyat river basin (floods and high water) are natural, recurring processes. Therefore, the main way to resolve this problem is to increase the efficiency of flood management in the Pripyat basin and manage water resources at the basin level. Very dry periods as a result of droughts lead to significant negative changes in the hydrological regime of water bodies and the hydrogeological regime of adjacent territories, a deterioration of water quality characteristics, and difficulties in navigation, which sometimes even becomes impossible. The most significant negative impacts of dry periods affect the hydrological regime of the Uborot river and Cher- vonoe lake, for which separate measures have been developed. Changes in ecosystems and the need to preserve landscapes and biological diversity The preservation of biological diversity in the Pripyat river basin is of great international importance. As a result of irrigation and drainage works related to land drainage and peat extraction, about half of the wetlands have been lost, bringing some species of flora and fauna to the brink of extinction, including rare species such as turret warbler, dupel, great spotted eagle, etc. The loss of floodplain is linked with the impacts of dams, which threaten the status of ecosystems. This leads to a disruption of the hydrological, hydrochemical and hydro-biological regime of floodplains, which negatively affects biodiversity.

79 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The use of reclaimed (especially over-drained) lands is problematic, since in many cases the upper fertile soil layer has been lost. As a result, some territories that have been withdrawn from agricultural circulation are being “resanded”. The total area of drained lands is 22% of the entire basin territory. The total area of drained bogs is even higher - 64% of the total area of bogs that existed at the beginning of drainage reclamation in the early 1950s. On the one hand, this led to an increase in agricultural lands suitable for agricultural use, and on the other hand, to the destruction of wetlands. Ecosystems in the basin are significantly affected by peat extraction. The environmental impact of peat extraction is so great that in many countries of the world its large-scale removal has been interrupted. An important environmental problem in the basin is the large number of peat fires. The main reason for their occurrence is the artificial drainage of peat deposits, which often leads to spontaneous combus- tion. Such fires cause significant damage to vegetation, farm and collective farm lands, and pollute the air and river systems. Insufficient provision of centralised water supply and sanitation systems, especially in rural areas The level of centralised water supply, especially for the rural population, in the Pripyat river basin is insufficient. According to State Sanitary Inspection data, in 2017 the proportion of non-centralised drinking-water supply sources (usually mine wells) that did not meet sanitary standards, amounted to 1.6% in the Brest region, 34.4% in the Gomel region, 17.1% in the Minsk region, and 16.5% in the Mogilev region. The main problem for providing water of the required quality in rural areas is water treatment. Radioactive contamination caused by the Chernobyl accident remains an important issue (see part 1.4.5 above)

2.6.4 Advantages and possible problems concerned with the possible prospective use of water resources in the Pripyat river basin

The prospective use of water resources in the Pripyat river basin is based on the achievement of the goals specified in the National Strategy for Sustainable Social and Economic Development of the Re- public of Belarus for the period up to 2030 (NSSD-2030) [32], the Water Strategy of the Republic of Belarus for the period up to 2030 in climate change [33], as well as the concept of the development of the potential of the Pripyat River [34]. According to NSSD-2030, the discharge index of insufficiently treated wastewater into water bodies in 2025 compared to 2015 should be no more than 50%, by 2025 no more than 30%, and by 2030 there should be no discharge of insufficiently treated wastewater. The exploitation of water and energy potential in the Pripyat river basin is not very promising due to the flat territory and possible floods. However, the water resources of Pripyat and its tributaries could be used as renewable energy sources on the basis of small hydropower plants. In December 2015, the first power plant in Pripyat was commissioned at the Stakhovo hydroelectric complex with an installed capacity of 690 kW. Other small hydropower plants could potentially be built in the Pripyat Riv- er basin. In the middle of Pripyat, in areas adjacent to the protected areas (the reserve “Srednyaya Pripyat” and the National Park “Pripyatsky”), building small hydropower plants would be impractical for environmental reasons. Prospects for water transport on the Dnieper-Bug Canal and Pripyat River Among the inland waterways of Belarus, the Pripyat River is considered a priority for ensuring favorable conditions for navigation, since it is of international importance, acting as an integral part of the waterway E-40 [35]. Once restored, this river will be able to transport up to six million tonnes of cargo per year, which is three times more than the total current volume of water transport in the country as a

80 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

whole. The Pripyat River is part of the inland waterways of Belarus. Together with the Dnieper-Bug Canal, it acts as the main foreign trade waterway of Belarus. According to the European classification, these watercourses are components of the waterway of international significance, E40. The river passes through the territory of three countries - Poland, Belarus and Ukraine along the route Gdansk (port of the Baltic Sea) - Warsaw - Brest - Pinsk - Kiev - Dnepropetrovsk - Kherson (Black Sea port). According to the classification of European inland waterways, including 7 classes that determine the differences in navigability and capacity of these routes, the waterway comes under class IV. It is designed for the passage of ships with a carrying capacity of 1,000 – 1,500 tonnes, a maximum length of 80 - 85 m, a width of 9.50 m and a draught of 2.50 m. The E-40 waterway represents a competitive advantage for Central and Eastern Europe carriers compared to other European meridional waterways, since it is shorter, generating significant savings in time and fuel. At present, the Rhine – Main – Danube waterway with a length of more than 3,000 km is used in this direction. The E-40 waterway is shorter by almost 1,000 km. As a result, the transportation route is two to four days shorter at an average speed for cargo river vessels of 10−20 km/h. At the same time, modern hydraulic conditions on various parts of the waterway E-40 do not allow stable navigation. This also concerns the Pripyat River. In some sections of the river, characterised by a large channel width, rifts are formed due to sediment deposition, which leads to shallower depths and makes the passway of ships impossible. On the Pripyat river, straightening works have been completed at 15 rifts. However, the measures taken are not sufficient and, even if their volume is increased, will not ultimately make it possible to achieve technical parameters that meet the requirements of the European Agreement on Main Inland Waterways of International Importance. To ensure the navigation conditions on the Pripyat river, it is necessary to provide for the construction of hydroelectric facilities to maintain the conditions required for navigation in the river during low-water periods. These could be standard hydroelectric facilities with bulk dams; however, for environmental reasons, overflow (flooded) collapsible dams that work only during periods of low water are preferable. Along with hydraulic works, the successful operation of water transport also requires measures to organise multi-modal transport, investments in upgrading the port facilities, river and auxiliary fleet, infrastructure, and the introduction of modern security management systems. The hydraulic works required on the Pripyat river to bring it in compliance with class IV inland waterways should be carried out in coordination with similar works on the Polish and Ukrainian parts of the E-40 waterway. To achieve this, appropriate interstate approvals are needed. At the same time, ensuring stable navigation on the river in question must consider not only the interests of international transport, but existing domestic needs. Besides domestic needs, the given depths will also allow for stable water transport links with Ukraine. Along with the positive factors of using the E-40 waterway during the implementation of hydraulic works on the Pripyat River to bring it in compliance with class IV inland waterways, there are threats caused by the following problems: The problem of stimulation of channel processes under the influence of hydraulic engineering construction in Pripyat due to the absolute predominance of loose fine-grained sand in the composition of channel deposits, which will lead to a change in the speed regime of the river, as well as the regime of movement of the material for processing the channel and coastal slopes. These processes will lead to the transformation of historically developed riverbed and coastal processes, as well as to a possible change in the fishery characteristics of the river. The problem of harmonious coexistence of inland waterways and protected natural areas is challenging. Pripyat Polesye, through which the E-40 waterway passes, has significant natural flora and fauna resources. About 60 species of animals, 260 species of birds, 20 species of amphibians and reptiles, 54 species of fish inhabit within its territory. About 70 species living in the territory of Pripyat Polesye are included in the Red Book of the Republic of Belarus and/or are protected in accordance with international obligations. Special protected areas of Pripyat Polesye play an important role in preserving

81 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

the biological diversity of Europe and the world. The Srednyaya Pripyat Nature Reserve, directly adjacent to the E-40, is a Ramsar territory - a wetland of international importance. Together with the Pri- pyatsky National Park, the “Srednyaya Pripyat” reserve has the status of a territory important for the protection of birds. The Polesye State Radiation and Ecological Reserve has the same status, which, in accordance with applicable law, does not apply to specially protected natural areas. In addition, Pripyatsky National Park has the status of a key botanical territory - a territory characterised by exceptional botanical wealth. Due to the significant environmental impact of hydraulic works on the Pripyat River to bring it in compliance with class IV inland waterways, after developing a project for these works, it is necessary to go through all the mechanisms and procedures of the state environmental inspection, including an environmental impact assessment (EIA).

2.6.5 Water balances

Water balances are calculations used to compare the need for water with water resources available in a given territory. They are designed to assess the availability and degree of use of water resources, and plan and make decisions on the use and protection of water (Article 16 of the Republic of Belarus Water Code). The procedure for the development and execution of water management balances is established by the technical code of established practice - TCP 17.06-03-2008 (02120). The water balance is calculated for the transboundary part of Pripyat (from the city of Mozyr to the city of Narovlya). The results of this balance allow us to generally estimate the state of Pripyat water resources. In the calculations of water balances, information is used by the State Institution “Republican Centre for Hydrometeorology, Radioactive Contamination Control and Environmental Monitoring” and data from the state water cadastre. The water balance is calculated for the most unfavourable (conservative) case of minimum water availability, which characterised the year of 2015. In this extremely dry year, the minimum values of river water levels in July turned out to be lower than the historical minimums for the observation period. At the same time, the security of the Pripyat River flow in 2015 was above 95%. The specification of water needs consisted in summarising the data of statistical reporting on water use on the form No.1-water (the Ministry of Natural Resources), as well as identifying the current value of water consumption and water disposal by all water users, determining sanitary and environmental discharges (transit flow), and any additional evaporation losses from the surface of ponds and reservoirs, filtering and transferring water to other areas or pools. All water needs are met by withdrawing water from the source and are taken into account. Additional evaporation from the surface of reservoirs and the distribution of the estimated evaporation per month during the non-leaking period of the year is determined using the methodology of RUE CRICUWR [35]. The values of the minimum necessary releases (ecological runoff) in river beds are determined differ- entially for a particular section depending on the minimum average monthly runoff per year of 95%

provision. Based on this, the basic value of the required release is set at 75% of Qmin 95%. In order to obtain a hydrograph of the necessary releases for each month, the minimum necessary runoff value is determined depending on the ratio between the natural runoff of a particular month and the minimum monthly average runoff, as well as the base value of the required runoff. Calculations and analysis of water management balances for the closing section of the Pripyat River indicate that the withdrawal of runoff from the river channel currently does not exceed 6% of the annual runoff of 95% supply in the entry section to the site. Therefore, withdrawal of runoff cannot have any noticeable effect on a change in the river’s stock regime.

82 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The prospective growth of irrevocable seizures planned for the future will not exceed 10% of the runoff at 95% security, which is also within the error margin for determining hydrological values. An analysis of the water management balance carried out for 2015, with a water availability of more than 95% by runoff, by month, indicates that the water balance of the river for the year as a whole and for all considered time intervals in the closing section of the Pripyat river is positive. Currently, all the needs for the selection of river water are met, while maintaining a sufficient amount of water in the river for environmental purposes.

2.6.6 Brief SWOT analysis

A SWOT analysis is an analysis of strengths and weaknesses, as well as opportunities and threats from the external environment. The acronym stands for: Strengths - strong points, Weakness - weak points, Opportunities - possibilities, Threats - risks. In the frame of management plans, a SWOT analysis can simply be an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the plan as a programme of action in the river basin, including the possibilities of implementing the plan, existing and prospective opportunities, and external threats. External threats are determined by the importance of natural waters for the economy and social sphere (Table 2.2). Table 2.2: General assessment of the importance of water resources for the economy and social sphere Factors General problem description Impact on produc- The intake and extraction of water in the region for industrial needs constitutes a tion (including min- significant proportion of total water consumption. ing, manufacturing) The impact of water resources on the location of industrial facilities and settle- Impact on location ments is assessed as significant, but not critical. The availability of water resources has less impact on the location of settlements. The impact on hydropower is not significant, since the share of hydroelectric Impact on power power stations in the Pripyat river basin in the total energy production is very generation small (only small HPPs). Currently, shipping is carried out on the areas of the Dnieper-Bug Canal including the river Pripyat. The impact of water resources on shipping is significant in Impact on shipping terms of the negative impact of low-water periods and the lowering of water levels. The impact of a huge project like E40 could be significant on hydromorphol- ogy and water quality. Impact on the cost of The impact on the cost of drinking water supply is associated with the quality drinking water sup- and availability of groundwater (transportation and cleaning costs) and is esti- ply mated as significant. The intake and extraction of water by forestry enterprises is relatively small in Forestry relation to total consumption, the impact of water resources on forestry productivity is moderate due to the sufficient moisture input due to precipitation. The importance of the impact of water resources on soil quality and agriculture Impact on soil quali- is moderate. Impact is caused by the use of water in agricultural water supply, ty and agriculture irrigation, and fish pond farms. The significance of water bodies for recreation is average. The condition and Recreation and tour- quality of water in water bodies used for recreational purposes and the condition ism of adjacent coastal zones is significant. Impact on infrastruc- The level of influence on the infrastructure (networks, pipelines, roads, commu- ture nications and other communications) is relatively low.

As the opportunities for implementing the activities of the Pripyat RBMP in Belarus are mainly determined by the availability of financial resources, the most significant action for a general SWOT analy-

83 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

sis is to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the RBMP as a whole and the main directions of its activities (Table 2.3). Table 2.3: Strengths and weaknesses of the Pripyat RBMP as a whole and its main directions Strengths Weakness  Significant water resources (water uses are widely  Significant artificialisation of hydrographic covered as well as ecosystem needs); system and loss of ecosystem functions af-  Mineral resources; ter melioration and other engineering activi-  Significant forest areas; ties;  Significant wetland areas;  Lack of funding;  Nearly full coverage of water supply services in  Lack of centralised water supply in rural cities and high level of service availability, includ- areas; ing for poor people;  Lack of data (water-borne diseases etc).  Significant sanitation service availability in cities with good standard of purification. Opportunities Threats  Water code, Belarusian regulation to strengthen  Intensification of agriculture and industry; legal scope of RBMP;  Development of economic zones with spe-  Country development. cific rules;  Chenorbyl impact;  Climate change.

84 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 3. IDENTIFICATION AND MAPPING OF PROTECTED AREAS

3.1 Drinking water abstraction

Protective sanitary zones of drinking water supply sources Protective sanitary zones (PSZ) for water supply sources and domestic water supply pipelines in Bela- rus are established in accordance with the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On Drinking Water Supply” and sanitary rules and norms of SanPiN of 30 December 2016 No.142 “Sanitary standards and rules “Requirements for an organisation of protective sanitary zones sources and centralised drinking water supply systems”. The PSZs are organised into three areas. The first area (strict regime) includes the territory of the water abstraction location, sites for the location of all waterworks and water supply channels. The second and third areas (restriction areas) include the territory used to prevent water pollution from water supply sources. Sanitary protection of waterways is provided by a sanitary protection strip. In each of the three areas, as well as within sanitary protection strips, depending their purpose, a special regime is established and a set of measures is determined to prevent the deterioration of water quality. The boundary of the first area is established at a distance of at least 30 m from the water abstraction- when using protected groundwater and at a distance of at least 50 m when using insufficiently protected groundwater. The boundary of the second zone of the PSZ is defined by hydrodynamic calculations, based on the condition that microbial contamination entering the aquifer outside the second belt does not reach the water abstraction. The boundary of the third zone of the PSZ, used to protect the aquifer from chemical pollution, is also determined by hydrodynamic calculations. Information on the specific placement of drinking water sources and their sanitary protection zones has limited access. Basic information on the operation of groundwater at group water abstractions in the Pripyat basin is given in table A.14.2 of Annex A.

3.2 Economically significant species

Economically important fish species in the Pripyat river basin are produced at specialised fishery enterprises (experimental fish farms). The most important are “Selets” (Berezovsky district), “Loktyshi” (Gantsevichi district), “Lakhva” (Luninetsky district), “Polesye” (Pinsk district), “Beloe” (Zhitkovichi district), “Tremlya” (Petrikovsky district), "Krasnaya Sloboda" (Salihorsky district). The list of surface water bodies leased for fish-breeding (according to data for 2017) is given in table А.16 of Annex A. There are no special protected areas associated with permanent restrictions on amateur fishing because of economically significant fish species and (or) unique molluscs.

85 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

3.3 Bathing waters

According to Article 38 of the Water Code [1], water bodies can be used for recreation, sports and tourism, as well as for medical (health resort needs). In the Pripyat river basin, there are 96 recreational areas used for bathing in accordance with the decisions of local executive and administrative bodies based on the results of a positive state sanitary and hygienic examination (table A.19 of Annex A). 96 recreational areas are located on 76 surface water bodies, which include 43 sections (water bodies) of the Pripyat River basin. Water safety is determined by state sanitary supervision and production control. Due to the inconsistency of laboratory water tests in the period 2018-2019, the following restrictions were in effect on recreational areas: Prohibition against bathing: 1) the Kopanets (-) – Stolin, 2) the Goryn (18/00) – Rechitsa, 3) the Pripyat (00/13) – Mozyr; bathing is suspended for children: 1) lake Krugloe (-) – Vikorovichi, 2) the L’va River (2603/00) – Koshara, 3) the Yaselda (07/07) – Porechie, 4) Pogost reservoir (0021/00) – Vyaz (Rehabilitational-recreation centre for children «Svitanok»), 5) Pogost reservoir (0021/00) – Vyaz (Fish Farm «Polesye»), 6) Lake Kalinkovichskoe (-) - Kalinkovichy, 7) the Pripyat River (00/13) – Narovlya, 8) the Pripyat River (00/13) – Mozyr, 9) the Sluch River (24/02) – Slutsk, 10) Rudnya reservoir (0032/00) – Rudnya. bathing is suspended for children and adults: 1) the L’va River (2603/00) – Koshara, 2) lake Krugloe (-) – Viktorovichi, 3) the Pripyat River (00/11) – Pietrikaw №1, 4) the Pripyat River (00/11) – Pietrikaw №2, 5) the Pripyat River (00/13) – Narovlya, 6) lake Kalinkovichskoe (-) - Kalinkovichi, 7) Bohonovo (-) - Luninets, 8) the Sluch River (24/02) – Slutsk, 9) Rudnya reservoir (0032/00) – Rudnya, 10) the Oressa River (3831/03) – Luyban, 11) lake Skachal’skoe (-) - н.п. Zelenaya Dubrova, 12) Budenichi (-) - Budenichi, 13) a pondinStaryeDorogi (-) –Starye Dorogi, 14) Soligorskoe reservoir (0033/00) – Soligorsk, 15) Sakovichi (-) - Sakovichi; As a result, in the period 2018-2019, in the Pripyat river basin, a prohibition against bathing due to non-compliance with hygiene standards was adopted in 3 recreational territories. Bathing for children and adults was limited in 15 recreational territories, and bathing was suspended for children in 10 recreational territories. 75 out of 96 (78%) of the recreational areas were not subject to restrictions for contact usage (bathing, snorkelling, spearfishing), as the water complied with the hygienic standard for safety indicators established for the category of surface water bodies “I favourable” and “II relatively favourable”. Information on surface water bodies used for recreation, sports and tourism in the Pripyat river basin, in places identified by local executive and administrative bodies for 2019 are shown in table A.15, A.19 of Annex A and map B.39 of Annex B.

86 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

3.4 Vulnerable zones

The natural protection of groundwater is defined as a set of hydrogeological conditions (depth of groundwater, lithology of the aeration zone, the presence of watertight ceilings, etc.) that prevent the entry of pollutants into aquifers (Map B.54 of Annex B). The geological conditions within the territory of the Republic of Belarus are characterised by rocks that overlap the aquifers at the surface and are highly permeable. On the one hand, this favours the formation of significant fresh groundwater resources, but on the other hand, it determines their very poor natural protection against pollution. The data on the nature of the occurrence of an aquifer in groundwater are particularly useful to assess the geoecological situation in the Pripyat River basin. Groundwater is generated due to the infiltration of precipitation, surface water, partial inflow from the underlying aquifer, and intra-ground condensa- tion. Groundwater is ubiquitous and confined to swamp, lake-alluvial, fluvioglacial and intra-moraine deposits. The criteria for determining the degree of natural protection of groundwater are the power and filtration properties of the aeration zone. The greater the aeration zone power and the lower the filtration properties of the rocks composing it, the higher the degree of protection and, conversely, shallow ground water contained in well-permeable sediments can be easily polluted. To estimate the natural protection of groundwater, the methodology of the All Russian Research Insti- tute of Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology was used, adapted to the conditions of Belarus and taking into account the protective properties of the soil cover. The main criteria for the assessment of natural protection were the depth of the groundwater level, the lithological composition of the rocks of the aeration zone, and the sorption properties of the soil cover. The figure below illustrates the natural protection of groundwater in the Pripyat River basin.

Figure 13: Natural protection of groundwater in the Pripyat river basin Taking into consideration stock data on the natural protection of groundwater and data on levels of groundwater pollution by nitrates, a 2005 assessment by the Institute of Geological Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus and the Belgeologiya RUE formed an assessment of nitrate-

87 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

vulnerable zones for the Pripyat River basin by identifying areas sensitive to nitrate contamination.

Figure 14: - Identification of areas vulnerable to nitrate groundwater pollution

Up to 35% of the basin’s territory is constituted by nitrate-vulnerable zones at risk from groundwater nitrate pollution. Less than 2% of the basin’s territory is at low risk: sections of the catchment area of the Pripyat, Pina, Yaselda, Tsna, Lan, Nacha and Sluch, Oressa and Ipa. The water in most of the wells that the vast majority of the rural population continues to use in the Pripyat basin does not meet sanitary standards for nitrates. Concentrations of this component often reach 7–11 MPC. The all-time record for Belarus was recorded in one of the wells in the Soligorsk region – 2,429 mg/l, which is 54 times higher than the allowable level (information from the Institute of Geological Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus and RUE "Belgeologiya"). So far, no specific regulation is based on this zoning in Belarus.

3.5 Sensitive areas

Possible sensitive zones associated with the eutrophication of water bodies may correspond to the territories with the highest population density and the relevant load on treatment plants and increased volumes of pollutants discharged from them as part of normatively treated wastewater to acceptable concentrations of pollutants in wastewater. The distribution of population density by regions and trends of population are shown on maps B.14, B32, B33 of the Annex B. However, there remains an increased anthropogenic load on surface water bodies of nutrient pollutants. The main sources of increased nutrient content in surface water bodies are industrial and municipal wastewater, surface runoff from livestock farms, non-canalized territories and agricultural land (overcharge of organic and mineral fertilizers). Therefore, surface water bodies revealed in the result of surface water monitoring and local monitoring and presented below in chapter 4 that do not meet good environmental status can be considered as sensitive to eutrophication.

88 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

3.6 Special conservation areas (habitats), special protection areas (birds)

In order to achieve the goals of the Berne Convention, a programme is being implemented on the territory of the European Union to create an ecological network of natural territories that are important for the conservation of species of wild fauna and flora and natural habitats that fall under the scope of the Convention "Natura - 2000". To implement environmental standards used in the Natura 2000 network outside the European Union, in 1998, the Council of Europe launched "the Emerald Network" programme. "The Emerald Network" is a list of natural territories that are valuable for the conservation of the species specified in the Berne Convention and which are a continuation of the Natura 2000 network in countries outside the European Union. The second phase of the Joint Programme of the Council of Europe and the European Commission “Emerald Network. Phase II " began in 2013. This stage of the programme involves further definition and description of the potential territories of the Emerald Network in Belarus, verification of the quality of the scientific information collected on the types and habitats of the Berne Convention located in these territories, and an assessment of their effectiveness for preserving biodiversity at the national level, leading up to the full launch of "the Emerald Network" in 20204. The implementation of "the Emerald Network" programme in Belarus contributes to the preservation and sustainable use of the unique natural resources of our country, and improves the existing state policy in the field of environmental protection. Thanks to obtaining the status of a member of the Em- erald Network, our specially protected natural territories have additional opportunities to attract technical and financial support from the countries of the European Union for their own development and to increase the effectiveness of the management system of protected areas in the Republic of Belarus as a whole. In the period until 2020, it is planned to complete the work on preparation, assessment and clarifica- tion of information on all potential objects of "the Emerald Network" located in the Republic of Belarus, including the territory of the Pripyat River Basin. Adopted Emerald network sites in the Pripyat river basin include the next 32 natural protected areas, shown on map B.30 of Annex B: Belovezhskaya Pushcha (east-southern part), Syalets, Khavanschyna, Sporovsly, Zvanets, Radostovskiy, Vygonoshanskoye, Yelovskiy, Vieluta, Luninskiy, Prostyr, Tyrvonichy, Morochna Swamp, Chyrvonaye, Bielaya Fish Farm, Srednaya Pripyat, Lva Floodplain, Olmanskiye Bolota, Topila Bog, Turovskiy Lug, Stary Zhadzien, Pripyatsky, Strelsky, Staraya Vits, Lower Pripyat, Ptich-river Valley, Omelnyansky, Manchitsy, Bytenskiy, Omgovichskiy, and Falishsky Moch. The Lower Pripyat Valley territory is a candidate site to join the Emerald network. Map B.6 of Annex B shows "the Emerald Network" in the Pripyat River Basin, and map B.7 shows the ecological network of the Pripyat River Basin.

4 http://www.minpriroda.gov.by/printv/ru/news-ru/view/o-realizatsii-proekta-izumrudnaja-set-faza-ii-1785/

89 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 4. MONITORING

4.1 Monitoring networks

4.1.1 Surface waters

Surface water monitoring is a system of regular monitoring of the state of surface waters according to hydrological, hydrochemical, hydrobiological and other indicators in order to timely identify negative processes, predict their development, prevent harmful consequences and determine the effectiveness of measures aimed at the rational use and protection of surface waters [ 6]. Monitoring of the state of surface waters using hydrological indicators The State Hydrometeorological Service of the Republic of Belarus, which ensures the hydrometeorological safety of the country, provides up-to-date reliable and comprehensive information, forecasts and alerts about dangerous hydrometeorological phenomena. The source for obtaining hydrometeorological information is the state network of hydrometeorological observations. Hydrological observations in the Pripyat river basin are carried out for elements of the hydrological regime at 28 watercourse stations (rivers and channels) and at 4 stations on the lakes and reservoirs (table 4.1). The list of existing hydrological stations on rivers and channels is presented in Table A.4.1 of Annex A, and for lakes and reservoirs in Table A.4.2 of Annex A. Data on the hydrological regime of water bodies are presented in the “Surface waters” section of the SWC “Annual data on the regime and surface water resources” (hydrological yearbooks), and the “Long-term data on the regime and resources of surface waters” reference books. The Belhydromet information database “Hydrology - Rivers and Channels”, “Lakes and Reservoirs” also contains data on the monitoring of water conditions using hydrological indicators. Monitoring of the state of water using hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators Monitoring of the state of surface waters in the Pripyat River basin according to hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators is carried out at 45 observation points of the NEMS (National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus), including 8 transboundary observation points and 2 reference observation points (table 4.1) [28,29]. The list of monitoring sites for hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators is presented in tables A.10, A.11 of Annex A, respectively. 20 watercourses at 27 sites (water bodies) are observed regularly: the Pripyat River (5 sites - 00/02, 00/03, 00/12, 00/13, 00/15), the Pina River (1 site - 06/04), the Dnieper-Bug channel (1 site: 06/03), the Yaselda River (3 sites- 07/03, 07/04, 07/07), the Styr River (1 site - 08/00); the Bobrik I river (1 site - 10/03), the Tsna River (1 site - 14/04), the Goryn River (1 site - 18/00), the Sluch River (1 site - 24/06), the Moroch River (1 site - 2418/04); the Stviga River (1 site - 26/01); the L’va River (1 site - 2603/00); the Svinovod River (1 site - 28/01), the Ubort‘ River (2 sites - 34/01, 34/02), the Ptich River (1 site - 38/05); the Dokol’ka River (1 site - 3827/02); the Oressa River (1 site - 3831/04); the Ippa River (1 site - 41/03); the Slovechna River (1 site - 51/00); the Cherten‘ River (1 site - 5104/01), as well as 11 reservoirs on 10 sites ("water bodies"): Selets reservoir (plot - 009/00); Bereza-1 reservoir (site - 0012/00), Lake Beloe (site - 0004/00); Lake Vygonoshchanskoye (site - 0008/00), Pogost reservoir (site - 0021/00); Lake Beloe (-); Loktyshi reservoir (site - 0028/00); Krasnoslobodskoye reservoir (site - 0031/00), Salihorskoye reservoir (site - 0033/00); Lake Chervonoe (site - 00012/00); Luban reservoir (site - 0042/00).

90 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table 4.1: Amount of NEMS monitoring observation points

Number of NEMS Hydrochemical Hydrobiological indicators indicators indicators of physical properties and gas composition Location of the NEMS Total 5 6 phytoperiphyton, of water , BOD5, CODCr, nitrogen-containing and macrozoobenthos - for number phosphorus-containing substances7, mineral watercourses; composition8, metal content9, oil and oil products in phytoplankton, dissolved and emulsified state, synthetic surfactants, zooplankton, chlorophyll - for reservoirs. anionic10, mercury, arsenic

Streams 30 30 28

Lakes 7 7 7

Reservoirs 8 8 7

Total in the Pripyat River Basin 45 45 42

In the Pripyat river basin, there are 8 NEMS transboundary observation points: the Pripyat – Bol’shie Dikovichi "entrance" (site - 00/02), the Pripyat - Dovlyady "exit" (site - 00/15), the Styr - Ladorozh "entrance" (site - 08/00), the Goryn - Rechitsa “entrance” (site - 18/00), L‘va - Olmanskaya Koshara "entrance" (site - 2603/00), the Stviga - Dzerzhinsk "entrance" (site - 26/01), the Ubort - Milashevichi “entrance” (site - 34/01), the Slovechna - Skorodnoe "entrance" (site - 51/00). Background observation points are the Cherten - Makhnovichi (site - 5104/01), the Svinovod - Simonovichi (site - 28/01). Observations using hydrochemical indicators on large watercourses and at the sites of watercourses in the area of the location of pollution sources are carried out once a month. In the case of an absence of pollution sources, the frequency of observations is 7 times a year during periods of the main annual hydrological phases. In the background sections of watercourses, observations are carried out monthly with a cycle of 1 time in 2 years. The observations on water bodies are held quarterly with a cycle of 1 time in 2 years. Observations using hydrobiological indicators on all surface water bodies are carried out in the growing season once every 2 years. In the growing season, the observations on transboundary river sections are conducted every year. Observations of the state of surface waters using hydromorphological indicators The phased deployment of a network for observing the state of water according to hydromorphological indicators began in 2017 as part of the NEMS. The standards STB 17.1304-01-2012/EN 14614: 2004 [30] and STB 17.1304-02-2013/EN 15843: 2010 [31] are the methodological basis for assessing hydromorphological indicators of rivers and the degree of change in hydromorphological indicators of river status. They regulate the assessment of differences from the natural state as a result of anthropogenic impact on hydromorphological characteristics (morphometric: channel, coast and coastal

5 Temperature, transparency (only in lakes and reservoirs), suspended solids, pH value, dissolved oxygen, electrical conductivity. 6 Ammonium ion, nitrate ion, nitrite ion, total Kjeldahl nitrogen. 7 Phosphate ion (including hydro and dihydroforms), total phosphorus. 8 Magnesium, calcium, bicarbonate, chloride, sulfate, water mineralisation. 9 Iron (total), manganese, copper, zinc, nickel, chromium (total), lead, cadmium. 10 Including alkyloxyethylated sulfates, alkyl sulfonates, olefin sulfanates, alkyl benzosulfanates, alkyl sulfates, sodium and potassium salts of fatty acids.

91 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

zone, floodplain; hydrological: continuity, hydrological changes) and establish criteria for determining the degree of change of hydromorphological indicators of the state of the river. Currently, the observations are located at 9 NEMS observation points, most of them transboundary (Table A.4.5 of Annex A): the Pripyat – Bol’shie Dikovichi (site - 00/02), the Pripyat –the city of Pinsk (site - 00/02), the Pripyat - Mozyr (site - 00/13), the Goryn - Rechitsa (site - 18/00), the Stviga - Dzer- zhinsk (site - 26/01),the L‘va - Olmanskaya Koshara (site - 2603/00), the Slovechna - Skorodnoye (site - 51/00), the Styr - Ladorozh (site - 08/00), the Ubort - Miloshevici (site - 34/01). The frequency of observations on hydromorphological indicators is once every ten years during the period of hydrobiological observations (table A.12 of Annex A). The locations of existing monitoring sites for quantitative and qualitative indicators in the Pripyat basin are shown on map B.13 of Annex B. Proposals for optimising the surface water observation network The current surface water monitoring system in the Pripyat River basin only partially meets WFD criteria. According to the WFD, the following three types of monitoring should be carried out: - Surveillance monitoring; - Operational monitoring; - Investigative monitoring. Surveillance monitoring is carried out within the entire catchment area or in areas that are significant for the basin (large rivers, large lakes, etc.) to obtain a general assessment of the ecological state of surface waters. Its main purpose is to verify the appropriateness of the developed environmental impact assessment procedure. As a result of the surveillance monitoring, requirements may include sup- plementing and improving, evaluating long-term trends, determining the requirements for making ad- justments to the existing RBMP, and obtaining the necessary information for the preparation of the next River Basin Management Plan. Surveillance monitoring is carried out once a year within the valid- ity period of each RBMP for all the required parameters until a good environmental condition is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance monitoring is carried out regularly during the implementation of the three subsequent RBMPs. The parameters are presented in the following national regulations:  TCP 17.13-10-2013 (02120) Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Rules of definition the ecological (hydro biological) status of river ecosystems;  TCP 17.13-11-2013 (02120) Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Rules of definition the ecological (hydrobiological) status of lakes ecosystems;  TCP 17.13-08-2013 (02120) Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Rules of definition the chemical (hydrochemical) status of river ecosystems;  TCP 17.13-09-2013 (02120) Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Rules of definition the chemical (hydrochemical) status of lakes ecosystems. Operational monitoring is carried out in order to control those water bodies for which there is a risk that environmental goals according to the RBMP may not be achieved, as well as to assess the impact of measures taken in the framework of the Programme of Activities on the ecological status of waters. Operational monitoring is carried out in regards to those facilities for which, on the basis of an impact assessment or surveillance monitoring, it has been established that there is a risk of not achieving established environmental goals, as well as for water bodies which are polluted by harmful substances included in the list of priority substances. Operational monitoring is carried out in regards to only those quality elements and parameters that are sensitive to specific impacts. Investigative monitoring is carried out when: - the fact of any excess for unknown reasons has been established; - the results of the review and control monitoring show that the purpose indicators cannot be achieved, and operational monitoring has not yet been put into effect; - it is necessary to determine the extent and degree of the impact of accidental pollution.

92 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Investigative monitoring serves to provide the governing bodies with necessary information for the development of a programme of measures to achieve environmental goals and eliminate the consequences of accidents. Surveillance monitoring of surface waters The selection of sampling sites and the development of the SM program is based on interconnected subsystems that perform the basic tasks of the SM described above. Subsystems of the SKM program for watercourses include the following conditions (sections): – SM1: be representative of the general condition of surface waters; – SМ2: determine the long-term trends (assessment of long-term changes in natural conditions and assessment of long-term changes under the influence of anthropogenic activities); – SМ3: supplement and verify risk assessment; – SМ4: survey large rivers and significant transboundary sections of rivers and lakes.

According to the delineation, 9 river surface water body types have been identified in the Pripyat River Basin: 1. S-LOW -S: small rivers at low altitudes in silicon rocks - 339 sites (53.3%) - 1 NEMS observation point; 2. S-LOW-O: small rivers at low altitudes in organic rocks - 139 sites (21.8%) - 1 NEMS observation point; 3. S-MID-S: small rivers at medium altitudes in silicon rocks - 2 sites (0.3%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 4. M-LOW-S: medium rivers at low altitudes in silicon rocks - 70 sites (11.0%) - 2 NEMS observation points; 5. M-LOW-O: medium-sized rivers at low altitudes in organic rocks - 34 sites (5.3%) - 0 NEMS points of observation; 6. L-LOW-S: large rivers at low altitudes in silicon rocks - 18 sites (2.8%) - 9 NEMS observation points; 7. L-LOW-O: large rivers at low altitudes in organic rocks - 16 sites (2.5%) - 7 NEMS observation points; 8. XL-LOW-S: very large rivers at low altitudes in silicon rocks - 13 sites (2.0%) - 7 NEMS observation points; 9. XL-LOW-O: very large rivers at low altitudes in organic rocks - 5 sites (1.0%) - 3 NEMS observation points. Nevertheless, only for 7 of them it was possible to find sampling points corresponding to the criteria of the surveillance monitoring programmes for the basin. Suggestions for optimising the existing network of surface water observations include additional sampling sites for the surveillance monitoring programme in the Pripyat River Basin, which are presented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Proposed additional observation points for monitoring and control of watercourses Expected Name of water- Type of water ecological Risk cate- № Sampling point SМ criteria course body status/ gory potential 1 Narovlyanka S-LOW-S high Narovlya NR SМ1 2 Plessa S-LOW-O high Bezdezh NR SМ1 3 Ptich S-MID-S good Ozertso NR SМ1 4 Shat‘ M-LOW-S good Shatsk NR SМ1 5 Ptich M-LOW-O good Pravdinskiy NR SМ1 6 Pripyat XL-LOW-S good above Pietrikaw NR SМ2 7 Pripyat XL-LOW-S moderate above Pietrikaw R SМ2 8 Yaselda L-LOW-O high Senin RC SМ3

93 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

9 Pripyat XL-LOW-O high Khoino RC SM4 10 Prostyr XL-LOW-O moderate Pare R SM4

Note: SWB – surface water body; RC – reference conditions; NR – no risk; R – risk.

According to their delineation, 13 lake surface water body types were identified In the Pripyat River Basin:

1. S-V-LOW-S: a small shallow lake at low altitude in silicone rocks - 17 sites (21.5%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 2. S-V-LOW-O: a small shallow lake at low altitude in organic rocks - 11 sites (13.9%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 3. S-S-LOW-S: a small shallow lake at low altitude in silicone rocks - 7 sites (9.0%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 4. S-S-LOW-O: a small shallow lake at low altitude in organic rocks - 7 sites (9.0%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 5. S-S-MID-S: a small shallow lake at medium altitude in silicone rocks - 1 site (1.2%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 6. M-V-LOW-S: a medium shallow lake at low altitude in silicone rocks - 7 sites (9.0%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 7. M-V-LOW-O: a medium shallow lake at low altitude in organic rocks - 4 sites (5.0%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 8. M-S-LOW-S: a medium shallow lake at low altitude in silicone rocks - 6 sites (7.6%) - 0 NEMS observation points; 9. M-S-LOW-O: a medium shallow lake at low altitude in organic rocks - 9 sites (11.4%) - 2 NEMS observation points; 10. L-V-LOW-S: a large shallow lake at low altitude in silicone rocks - 1 site (1.2%) - 1 NEMS observation point; 11. L-V-LOW-O: a large shallow lake at low altitude in organic rocks - 6 sites (7.6%) - 8 NEMS observation points; 12. L-S-LOW-S: a large shallow lake at low altitude in silicone rocks - 1 site (12%) - 1 NEMS observation point; 13. L-S-LOW-O: a large shallow lake at low altitude in organic rocks - 2 sites (2.4%) - 2 NEMS observation points. However, only for 8 of them it was possible to find sampling points that corresponded to the criteria of the surveillance monitoring programmes for the basin. Suggestions for optimising the existing network of surface water observations include additional reservoir sampling sites for the surveillance monitoring programme in the Pripyat River Basin, which are presented in Table 4.3. Table 4.3: Proposed additional observation points for monitoring and control of reservoirs Expected Type of water Risk cate- SКМ sub- № Name of water body status/ Sampling point body gory system potential Lake Goro- 1 S-V-LOW-O good Gorodische NR SКМ1 dischenskoe 2 Lake Sergeevichskoe M-V-LOW-S good Sergeevichi NR SКМ1 3 Lake Sporovskoe L-V-LOW-O satisfactory Zditovo R SКМ2 4 Lake Beloe M-S-LOW-S good Svaryn R SКМ4 Note; SWB – surface water body; RC – reference conditions; NR – no risk; R – risk.

Operational monitoring of surface waters

94 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The Operational Monitoring (OM) Programme is focused on monitoring the effect of supporting measures aimed at achieving the objectives of the WFD in the water bodies (possibly) at risk.

Criteria of the operational monitoring programme for watercourses include:

– OM1: estimate the effectiveness of measures aimed at reducing the effects of point sources of pollution (both individually and in combination, and in total, including organic pollution, the effects of eutrophication and priority pollutants); – OM2: estimate the effectiveness of measures aimed at reducing the impact of diffuse (dispersed) pollution sources; – OM3: estimate the effectiveness of measures aimed at reducing the impact of hydromorphological changes; – OM4: classify water bodies with high and good status, which are currently not classified “at risk”, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures of the OM programme aimed at maintaining a high and good status of water bodies - cross-border monitoring, which is held in the Pripyat river basin on transboundary sections; – OM5: classify water bodies at risk located in protected areas. Suggestions for optimising the existing observed river network include additional sampling sites for the OM programme (table 4.4). Additional sampling sites have not been identified to date in the lake part of the OM programme. In future, lakes and reservoirs at risk will also be included in the OM programme. Table 4.4: Proposed additional sampling sites under the operational monitoring programme of water bodies general character- Expected Name of water- istics Risk cate- OM crite- № status/ Sampling point course of water gory ria potential body 1 Ptich river L-LOW-S moderate below Glusk R ОМ1 2 Sluch river L-LOW-O moderate below Slutsk R ОМ1 3 Tsna river M-LOW-S moderate below Hantsavichy R ОМ1 4 Naut‘ S-LOW-S moderate below Zhitkavichy R ОМ1 Lukhinetskiy chan- 5 M-LOW-S moderate Below Luninets R ОМ1 nel Lyakhovichskiy 6 M-LOW-S moderate Lyakhovichi R ОМ1 channel 7 Tsepra river M-LOW-S moderate below Kletsk R ОМ1 8 Mazha river S-LOW-S moderate below Kopyl R ОМ1 below Starye Doro- 9 Solyanka river S-LOW-S moderate R ОМ1 gi Serebronskaya 10 S-LOW-S moderate below Oktyabrski R ОМ1 channel 11 Struga channel S-LOW-S moderate Sykhoe R ОМ1

Investigative monitoring Investigative monitoring should be implemented on surface water bodies that are classified as “at risk” or “possibly at risk” of not achieving a good ecological status when operational monitoring has not already been established, to ascertain the magnitude and impacts of accidental pollution or in cases where the reason for any exceedance is unknown. The list of studied indicators in the case of IM is dynamic. When it is necessary to obtain information on the status of water bodies in the context of the occurrence of potential risks associated with pollutants, sources of exposure and any other relevant changes, this list can be changed in a timely manner.

95 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

See maps in Annex B of the Pripyat RBMP. A map of a prospective surface water monitoring network is shown in Figure B.42 Annex B. The following aspects and UBA suggestions should be taken into account to improve the surface water monitoring system in Belarus: - Implementation of the requirements of the ISO EN 17025; - New equipment and training for continuous maintenance of equipment; - Internal and external training of staff, following an agreed training plan; - Collection of chemical and biological data in a central database; - Survey of further biological quality elements (BQE) in the routine monitoring in addition to macro- invertebrates, with the goal of creating a basis for the development of WFD-compliant ESCS for all BQE; - Extension of the hydro-morphological survey to other sub-basins of Belarus; - Accomplishment of an intercalibration exercise for biological, chemical and hydro-morphological parameters and evaluation of existing ESCS by performing a joint survey of transboundary rivers; - Implementation and evaluation of the measures for improvement specified in EUWI+ survey reports.

4.1.2 Groundwater

The current groundwater monitoring system (objectives, monitoring tasks, frequency and parameters of sampling, number of observation points) relates to 11 identified groundwater bodies in the Pripyat river basin presented in tables A.14, A.14.1 of Annex A and on maps B.18-B.28 of Annex B. Sugges- tions and recommendations have been made on the optimal regime network of wells and monitoring of groundwater in the Pripyat River basin in accordance with the requirements of the EU WFD. New groundwater monitoring points, parameters and frequency of sampling for observational and operational monitoring have been proposed. Current groundwater monitoring network Groundwater monitoring is a system comprising the regular monitoring of groundwater conditions employing hydrogeological, hydrochemical and other parameters. It also includes assessing and forecast- ing any changes in conditions in order to timely identify negative processes, prevent their harmful effects and determine the effectiveness of activities aimed at rational use and protection of groundwater. To achieve this, the structure of the observation network (interposition and development of observation points) takes into consideration the natural specificity of the identified geosystems, the direction and configuration of groundwater flows, as well as the conditions for potential discharge of contaminants into the underground hydrosphere, their accumulation and migration. During the performance of groundwater monitoring, groundwater and artesian aquifers are observed. The observation points are wells that are supplied with various aquifers and complexes. Groundwater monitoring in the Pripyat River Basin is conducted on the basis of the “Instruction on the technology of works on organising and conducting observations on the State Groundwater Observa- tion Network”, as well as the “Instruction on the procedure for conducting monitoring of groundwater in the Republic of Belarus” (thereinafter - Instruction). At present, groundwater monitoring within the territory of the Pripyat River basin is conducted in natural regimes at 26 hydrogeological posts (76 observation wells); and in disturbed regimes (water intakes) at 44 water intakes (111 wells). Local monitoring is also conducted at 35 local groundwater monitoring stations (314 observation wells) (map B.50 of Annex B showing the existing groundwater monitoring network). Reference information on the natural regime (data on levels, chemical composition, description of observation wells), acquired from groundwater monitoring, are sent to the information and analytical centre. This centre is located in the branch of the Institute of Geology of the State Enterprise "RPCG",

96 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

from the branch "Belarusian Complex Integrated Expedition" of the State Enterprise "RPCG." Accord- ing to the system regulations, as well as upon the request of users, this information is processed and published in the form of background information on the status of groundwater and the development trend in given time frames. The published information is presented in the form of text, tables, graphs and schemes. The information is analysed and recorded in an electronic database. In addition, the information and analytical centre for monitoring groundwater forwards summarised information on the status of groundwater, as well as data on the number and location of observation points for monitoring groundwater to the Main Information and Analytical Centre. This information is published annually. It is available on the official website of the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus (www.nsmos.by). In addition, data of groundwater monitoring are submitted to the State Geological Fund in electronic form and in the form of research reports. Quantitative groundwater monitoring According to the above-mentioned regulatory documents, the frequency of measurements of the regime level is 3 times a month. Automatic level gauges are installed at 4 hydrogeological sites (natural regime), which comprise 13 wells. This means that out of 76 wells operating on a natural regime, only 13 are equipped with level gauges. It should be noted that quantitative monitoring is regularly conducted at almost all observation points Qualitative groundwater monitoring The frequency of water sampling is once a year. The list of monitored hydrogeochemical components includes the pH index, total hardness, total mineralisation (dry residue), permanganate oxidation, Cl, SO4, carbonates, hydrocarbonate-ion, nitrates (NO3), Na, K, Ca, Mg, ammonia (nitrogen), carbon dioxide free (CO2), total Fe, intensified silica (Si), nitrite ion, and fluorides (F). Due to an insufficient budget, qualitative monitoring (chemical) is not conducted at all observation wells. For example, in 2016, chemical monitoring was conducted on 57 wells and in 2018 on 10 wells (out of 76). In the results of the work carried out in 2018 under the project “Update of the Delineation of groundwater bodies and the design of groundwater monitoring network in the Pripyat River basin in Belarus”, 11 groundwater bodies were identified to be included in the Pripyat River basin management plan (table 4.5). Table 4.5: Ground water bodies in the Pripyat river basin to be included in the RBMP Number Number of sub- GWB Total area [km²] of GWB bodies in GWB Total number 11 25 165993.72 Shallow GWB (quaternary) 5 15 65436.53 Deep GWB 5 9 99149.82 Local GWB 1 1 1407.37

Water bodies associated with ecosystems 2 7 36096.33 Transboundary GWB 5 11 132702.12

Water bodies with quantitative monitoring 10 19 147472.33 Water bodies with quality monitoring 10 19 147472.33

Proposed groundwater monitoring system Based on the analysis and assessment of the groundwater monitoring structure in the Pripyat River Basin, the inventory of wells and the available hydrodynamic and hydrogeochemical data on groundwater monitoring in the study area, and in accordance with the requirements of the EU WFD, the sug-

97 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

gestions and recommendations to improve and revise the monitoring design are presented below. They include the integration of regime network wells; interval/frequency of quantitative and qualitative monitoring; and a list of hydrogeochemical indicators of groundwater and data management. The large number of wells upon which groundwater is monitored or could be monitored is typical for water bodies of Quaternary sediments. This is due to the fact that the geology of the Quaternary sediments is heterogeneous and requires a more intense monitoring network. In total, 265 wells are located in Quaternary (near surface) water bodies (existing and preserved, water-intake and hydrogeological stations), and only 125 of them are monitored. However, the Holocene- bearing swamp aquifer (BYPRGW0001) is not covered by monitoring observations (there are no observation wells), but it would be necessary to estimate the impact of groundwater exploitation on surface water ecosystems. Some of the bogs and peat lands have become or will become protected areas for birds. This makes it necessary to drill at least nine monitoring wells in this groundwater body. There are 17 wells in groundwater body BYPRGW0002, but only 8 of them are active and belong to the observation points of the natural groundwater regime. There are 14 and 47 observation wells in groundwater bodies BYPRGW0003 and BYPRGW0004, but only 6 and 30 wells are active, respectively. There are 187 observation wells in the sub-Quaternary deposits (existing and preserved, water-intake and hydrogeological stations), but only 24 wells are under observation. There are 112 wells in groundwater body BYPRGW0009 but only 3 are under observation. A regime network of wells has been established for groundwater bodies BYPRGW0010, BY- PRGW0011 and monitoring is conducted. However, in order to obtain information about the status of groundwater, it is necessary to contact either organisations that monitor groundwater on a contractual basis or directly ask water users. It is proposed to maintain all available monitoring wells and rotate them every year to ensure the best territorial coverage of the analysed Quaternary water bodies/objects. Table 4.6 presents preliminary recommendations for amendments to the monitoring network of the 11 groundwater bodies in the Pripyat river basin.

Table 4.6: Recommendations for improvement of GW monitoring network of wells in the Pripyat river basin Name and Number of observation wells code of GWB BYPRGW0001 No monitoring wells. Drilling of 9 new observation wells

8 operating wells in natural mode. There is no information about single, water BYPRGW0002 intake and wells located on local sources of groundwater pollution. 6 operating wells in natural mode. There is no information about single, water BYPRGW0003 intake and wells located on local sources of groundwater pollution. In case of their complete absence it is necessary to drill 1 well. 3 operating wells in natural mode. There is no information about single, water BYPRGW0004 intake and wells located on local sources of groundwater pollution. In case of their complete absence it is necessary to drill 2 wells.

7 operating wells in natural mode. There is no information about single, water BYPRGW0005 intake and wells located on local sources of groundwater pollution.

43 wells in the natural mode and 62 in the disturbed regime. Rotation of at least 25 BYPRGW0006 wells. BYPRGW0007 11 operating wells. Inventory of observation wells at water intakes

98 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Name and Number of observation wells code of GWB BYPRGW0008 10 operating wells. Inventory of observation wells at water intakes 3 operating wells in natural mode. There is no information about single, water BYPRGW0009 intake and wells located on local sources of groundwater pollution. In case of their complete absence it is necessary to drill 2 wells A local network of groundwater monitoring exists. Because of the specific features BYPRGW0010 of the object, the coordinate information and the descriptions of the wells are missing A local network of groundwater monitoring exists. It is necessary to collect all BYPRGW0011 available documents for observation wells.

When interpreting the existing National Groundwater Monitoring of the Republic of Belarus according to the requirements of the WFD, the following conclusions can be drawn: Quantitative groundwater monitoring includes all existing hydrogeological stations, water intakes, and local sources of groundwater pollution, according to the active legal documents of the country. In addition, as recommended by respective EU GIS guidance documents, the groundwater monitoring network should also include wells, springs, points for measuring surface water levels during the dry period (for example, on the Goryn, Sluch, Ptich, Stviga Rivers, etc.), as well as waterlogged territories and lakes that are essentially dependent on groundwater. According to the WFD, the wells in the Pri- pyat River basin should be distributed over all groundwater bodies in order to obtain a good spatial distribution of information sources on the zones of feeding and discharge of groundwater. Electronic sensors should be gradually installed at all observation points, starting with transboundary hydrogeological posts. The frequency of quantitative groundwater monitoring is 3 times a month for natural and disturbed conditions. In case of detection of changes in the state of groundwater and for new water abstractions (with the installation of automatic sensors), the frequency will be every 12 hours during 3 months. Qualitative monitoring of groundwater includes observational and operational monitoring. Observational (surveillance) groundwater monitoring will include local groundwater monitoring, as well as groundwater monitoring conducted in natural and disturbed conditions. In accordance with the WFD, the frequency of observational monitoring should be at least once during the planning period of the development of the River Basin Management Plan (the Republic of Belarus - every 5 years; the European Union - every 6 years). The frequency of observations, as well as a list of monitored indicators, is presented in table 4.7. The frequency of hydrogeochemical observations will be every 5 years. The frequency of the hydrodynamic observations will be 3 times a month. Operational monitoring: The operational groundwater monitoring includes hydrogeological posts (natural regime), and water abstractions in large urban agglomerations. The frequency of operational monitoring will be at least once a year, including the main macro- and microcomponents, as well as the parameters that lead to a risk of not achieving good groundwater chemical status. The frequency of hydrodynamic observations will be 3 times a month for natural and disturbed conditions. In case of detection of changes in the state of groundwater and for new water abstractions (with the installation of sensors), the frequency will be every 12 hours during 3 months. The list of parameters and the frequency of observations are presented in table 4.8.

99 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table 4.7: List of analysed substances and indicators for GW observational monitoring Frequency of Name of the indicator Name of the Monitoring hydro- № Unit № Unit to be determined indicator frequency dynamic observations 1 Dry residue мg/dm3 13,14 SO4, Cl мg/dm3 Permanganate oxi- мgО /d 2 2 15 Fe total мg/dm3 dation m3 3 Mineralisation мg/dm3 16 SiO2 мg/dm3 4 Na мg/dm3 17 Pb мg/dm3 5 K мg/dm3 18 Cd мg/dm3 6 Ca мg/dm3 19 As мg/dm3 3 times Once every 5 7 Mg мg/dm3 20 Hg, Cu, Cr мg/dm3 per month years 8 NH4 мg/dm3 21 Pesticides мg/dm3 9 NO2 мg/dm3 22 Organics мg/dm3 10 NO3 мg/dm3 23 Mn мg/dm3 3 Cs-137 (for According 11 PO4 мg/dm 24 subsoil water) to SanPiN Sr-90 (for 10-124 RB 12 F, В, Ва мg/dm3 25 subsoil water) 99 Table 4.8: List of controlled parameters for GW operational monitoring

№ GW Physical and chemical parameters Frequency of observations Dry residue, permanganate oxidation, mineralization, рН, Eh, Na, K, Ca, Mg, NH4, 1 NO2, NO3, PO4, SO4, Cl, SiO2, organoleptic, hardness total F, B, Ba, Fe, As, Hg, Cd, Pb, Zn, Cu, Cr, Mn 2 …. Every year 3 Pesticides, at risk polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, phenols, 4 trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene, at risk 3 times a month. In case of detection of Groundwater level in monitoring and produc- changes in the state of groundwater and for new 5 tion wells, flow rate and level in surface wa- water intakes (with the installation of automatic ters and streams sensors), the frequency will be every 12 hours during 3 months

On the basis of the review, analysis and assessment of the existing groundwater monitoring system and the requirements of the WFD, the improvement of groundwater monitoring in the Republic of Bela- rus as a whole and in the Pripyat river basin should include: 1. Improving the obtaining primary information from water users; 2. Improving the transfer and storage of received information on the quantitative and qualitative status of groundwater in one organisation and one database (State Enterprise "RPCG", on the basis of which the Information and Analytical Centre for Monitoring Groundwater of the Republic of Belarus operates); 3. Conducting an inventory of single wells with an evaluation of their coordinates and an entry in the register of groundwater observation points; 4. Equipping observation wells with automatic data-recording devices;

100 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

5. Updating the computer programs (GIS-technologies) with transfer and processing of the received information in raster and vector image. When comparing the current situation of monitoring groundwater in the Pripyat river basin with the envisaged situation, on some points of the EU WFD, the frequency of observations is different, some additional hydrogeochemical indicators are included, the number/quantity of observation points is greater, and all wells are equipped with automatic level gauges (Table 4.9).

Table 4.9: Estimated/proposed groundwater monitoring system Type of Number of groundwater wells is equal monitoring Type of monitoring, according to Hydrochemical Frequency to the number according to requirements Republic of Belarus indicators of level WFD gauges requirements Quantity ground water monitoring All existing hydrogeological posts (national, background and transboundary levels), water intakes local sources 3 times per month. In case of of groundwater pollution, according to the current legal detection of changes in the documents of the country. In addition, as recommended state of groundwater and for by the EU WFD, the observation points of quantitative new water intakes (with the groundwater monitoring will include wells, springs, installation of automatic Total of 153 points for measuring the levels of surface watercourses sensors), the frequency will be wells (after (for example, on the rivers Goryn, Sluch, Ptich, Stviga, every 12 hours during 3 inspection of etc.), as well as wetlands and lakes, which are months single wells, significantly dependent on groundwater the number of Quality groundwater monitoring observation wells can and local groundwater monitoring, as well According to Once every should Observational as groundwater monitoring in natural SanPiN 10-124 5 years increase) and disturbed conditions RB 99 National, transboundary hydrogeological posts (natural Every year According to regime), water intakes of large urban or as Operational SanPiN 10-124 agglomerations (disturbed regime), needed RB 99 local sources of groundwater pollution (at risk)

A map of a prospective groundwater monitoring network is shown in map B.52 of Annex B.

4.2 Results of the monitoring programmes

4.2.1 Status of surface water (ecological, chemical)

The ecological status of surface water bodies and their parts is specified on the basis of hydrobiological indicators using hydrochemical and hydromorphological indicators [24]. The designation of a surface water body to the class of ecological status is carried out on the basis of data obtained at observation points of the state observation network of the NEMS. To specify the ecological status of watercourse sections, the average values of hydrobiological indicators obtained by analysing the structural characteristics of macrozoobenthos and phytoperiphyton communities are used; reservoirs - phytoplankton and zooplankton. General physico-chemical indica-

101 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

tors used as a supporting element to classify the ecological status of watercourses and reservoirs include the following groups of indicators: gas composition11, organic matter12, and nutrients13. Hydromorphological indicators used as supporting elements to classify the ecological status of watercourses (especially high ecological status) include an assessment of the following groups of indicators:

 morphometric (channel, coast and coastal zone, floodplain);  hydrological (continuity, hydrological changes);  to specify the ecological status of water bodies - morphometric (water area, coast and coastal zone, catchment), hydrological (continuity, hydrological changes).

The following colour codes are used to display the results specifying the class of ecological status:

 high ecological status/potential - blue;  good ecological status/potential - green;  moderate ecological status/potential - yellow;  poor ecological status/potential - orange;  bad ecological status/potential - red.

The results of surface water monitoring by hydrobiological and hydrochemical indicators with an assigned quality class by hydrobiological and hydrochemical indicators of water bodies of the Pripyat basin at the NEMS observation points for 2015-2018 were transferred to RUE CRICUWR according to the Instruction on the procedure for interaction in the system of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection on maintaining the state water cadastre [25]. The quality class for hydromorphological indicators of water bodies at the NEMS observation points was assigned to RUE CRICUWR according to the results of desktop studies without field work, with the exception of the network of observations of surface water conditions developed in 2017 based on hydromorphological indicators, where full hydromorphological studies were carried out: the Pripyat – Bol’shie Dikovichi, the Pripyat - Pinsk, the Pripyat - Mazyr, the Goryn - Rechitsa, the Stviga - Dzerzhinsk, the L’va - Olman- skaya Koshara, the Slovechna - Skorodnoye, the Styr - Ladorozh, the Ubort - Miloshevici (table A.12 of Annex A). In 2015, in the Pripyat river basin, the quality class of hydrobiological indicators was assigned to surface water bodies in 26 out of 42 NEMS observation points; in 2016, in 8 out of 42 NEMS observation points; in 2017, in 35 out of 42 NEMS observation points, and in 2018, at 8 out of 42 NEMS observation points. In 2015, in the Pripyat river basin, the quality class of hydrochemical indicators was assigned to surface water bodies in 45 out of 45 NEMS observation points; in 2016, in 30 out of 45 NEMS observation points; in 2017, in 42 out of 45 NEMS observation points; in 2018, at 33 out of 45 NEMS observation points. Thus, in 2015, the results of surface water monitoring in the Pripyat basin made it possible to assign a class of ecological status to water bodies to 26 out of 42 NEMS observation points: good ecological status to 20 points, and moderate status to 6 points (Yaselda river –below Bereza, Chervonoe lake - Pukhovichi, the Moroch river - Yaskovichi, the Pripyat river – Bol’shie Dikovichi, the Styr – the L’va River - Olmanskaya Koshara). In 2016, the results of surface water monitoring in the Pripyat basin made it possible to assign a class of ecological status to water bodies in 8 out of 42 NEMS observation points: good ecological status to 7 points, and moderate status (Goryn River) – Rechitsa) to 1 point.

11 Dissloved oxygen 12 Biochemical Oxygen Demand BOD5 13 Ammonium ion, nitrite ion, nitrate ion, Kjeldahl total nitrogen, phosphate ion (including hydro and dihydroforms), total phosphorus

102 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

In 2017, the results of surface water monitoring in the Pripyat basin made it possible to assign a class of ecological status to water bodies in 33 out of 42 NEMS observation points: high ecological status to 2 points, good environmental status to 23 points, and moderate status to 8 points (the Pripyat river - above Pinsk, the Yaselda river - below Bereza, the Goryn river – above Rechitsa, the Goryn river – below Rechitsa, the Ubort river - Krasnoberezhye, the Dokolka river - Boyanovo, the Moroch river - Yaskovichi, the Pripyat river – Bol’shie Dikovichi). In 2018, the results of surface water monitoring in the Pripyat basin made it possible to assign a class of ecological status to water bodies in 8 out of 42 NEMS observation : good ecological status to 5 points, and moderate status to 3 points (the Pripyat river - Dovlyady, the Ubort river - Milashevichi, the Stviga river - Dzerzhinsk). (see figure 15)

54 52 50 no sampling bad ecological status/potential poor ecological status/potential 48 moderate ecological status/potential good ecological status/potential high ecological status/potential 46 44 42 40 38 9 36 34 16 32 30 28 8 26 24 34 34 22 6 20

amount of of bodiesamountwater 18 16 14 23 12 10 20 8 1 6 3 4 7 2 5 0 2 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 15: Ecological status of surface water bodies in the Pripyat river basin

The final assessment of the ecological status of the surface water bodies of the Pripyat basin and the expected ecological status of the water bodies after the implementation of the RBMP is presented in table A.13, A13.1 of Annex A, on map B.43 of Annex B and in more detail in a special MS Excel file including risk assessment. Features of the quality characteristics of surface water bodies in the Pripyat river basin in 2018 according to the results of the NEMS According to NEMS data [26] in 2018, the status of river ecosystems in the Pripyat river basin based on hydrobiological indicators had declined compared to the previous year. The analysis of the observation results showed that the average annual concentration of some pollutants (organic matter (based on BOD5), ammonium ion, surfactant) in water had increased compared to the previous year. In 2018, the number of water samples taken in the river basin continued a downward trend. Pripyat

River had a high content of ammonium ion, nitrite ion, organic matter (according to BOD5), and oil products. The total phosphorus content remained unchanged. The number of samples with an excess of phosphate ion increased compared to the previous year. Throughout the year, as in the long-term

103 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

observation period, the content of nitrate ion in the water of all surface water bodies of the basin did not exceed the regulatory permissible level. The Pripyat River The basic salt composition in Pripyat River is considered as natural water with average salinity. Based on the pH measurements (ranging from 7.1 to 8.5), the Pripyat water is in the range from neutral to slightly alkaline (according to the classification of A.M. Nikanorov). The gas regime (oxygen budget) of the watercourse was satisfactory. The average annual concentration of ammonium ion in the river water had decreased in 2018 compared with the previous observation period. The maximum content of this indicator (0.31 NH4-N mg/l) was recorded in the water of the river below the city of Pinsk in December. The minimum (0.06 mgN/l) was recorded in the water of the river near the settlement Bol’shie Dikovichi in November. The results of observations indicate a decrease in the content of phosphate ion in the water of the Pripyat River. The average annual value of the indicator exceeded the maximum permitted concentration (MPC) in the water of the Pripyat river 45.0 km below the city of Mozyr (0.068 mgR /dm3). The highest amounts of nitrite ion (0.021 NO2-N mg/l) and phosphate ion (0.086 PO4-P mg/l) in August and total phosphorus (0.116 mg/l) in May were recorded in water of the Pripyat River 45 km below the city of Mozyr. At all sampling sites, enhanced concentrations of metals (total iron, manganese, copper and zinc) were recorded in the water, caused by high natural background concentration. The average annual concentration of iron and manganese compounds in the river water exceeded the MPC value, whereas the average annual concentration of copper and zinc corresponded to the quality standard14. Cases exceeding the permissible content (0.05 mg/l) of oil products in the water Pripyat were not recorded. The maximum concentration of the indicator was observed in the river water below Pinsk (0.048 mg/l). The content of synthetic surfactants for the study period in the water of the Pripyat River did not exceed the normative allowable level. The hydrochemical status of the river along its entire length was assessed as excellent and good. Phytoperiphyton. The taxonomic diversity of benthic algae in the Pripyat River is represented by 56 taxa in total. The values of the saprobic index were between 2.12 and 1.82. Macrozoobenthos. The taxonomic diversity of macrozoobenthos organisms at observation points of the Pripyat River ranged from 14 (Dovlyady) to 33 species and forms (Bol’shie Dikovichi). The value of the biotic index was 5 (Dovlyady) and 8 (Bol’shie Dikovichi). Tributaries of the Pripyat River The water of the Pripyat tributaries in 2018 was characterised as neutral and slightly alkaline (pH = 6.6-8.5) (according to the classification of A.M. Nikanorov). During the reporting year, as a rule, tributary water was supplied with a sufficient amount of dissolved oxygen for the stable functioning of river ecosystems. There was no oxygen deficiency in the water of the Goryn River, which is used for breeding, feeding, wintering, and migration of sturgeon-like fish species. In the rivers Ippa, Moroch, Oressa and Yaselda above and below the city of Bereza, a decrease in the content of dissolved oxygen was observed with a minimum in the Dokolka River reaching 0.7 mgO2/L in August.

The occurrence of organic substances (according to BOD5) during the year was characterised by significant fluctuations in concentrations - from 1.4 mgO2/L in the water of the Ippa, L’va, Slovechno,

Stviga and Ubort rivers to 8.0 mgO2/L (1.3 MPC) in water of the Moroch River. The average annual content of organic substances (according to COD Cr) varied from 26.0 to 71.2 mgO2/L.

14 Resolution of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus “On the establishment of water quality standards for surface water bodies” (No. 13 March 30, 2015)

104 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Over the years, the water in the tributaries of the Pripyat river basin has developed a rather unfavourable hydrochemical situation due to an increased content of nutrients. In 2018, the indicators slightly improved. 16.2% of water samples were characterised by an excessive presence of ammonium ion. An excess of the standard value of the phosphate ion content was recorded in 33.5% of water samples.

The maximum concentration of ammonium ion (2.02 mg NH4-N /L, 5.2 MAC) was analysed in the waters of the Dokolka river in July; phosphate ion (0.39 mg/l, 5.9 MPC) in May, total phosphorus (0.58 mg PO4-P /L, 2.9 MPC) and nitrite ion (0.13 mg NO2-N/L, 5.4 MPC) in June and July, respectively, in the water of the Yaselda river below the city of Bereza. In 2018, an excess of 0.08 mg/l in the quality standard for phosphate ion was recorded in the water of the Dnieper-Bug channel. The content of total iron, manganese, copper, and zinc exceeded the maximum permissible levels in the water of most tributaries. The highest value of total iron (2.9 mg/l) was recorded in the water of the Bobrik river in May, manganese (0.277 mg/l) - in the water of the L’va river in May, copper (0.022 mg/l) in the Sluch river in August and zinc (0.03 mg/l) in the Yaselda below Bereza in April. The excesses of the permissible level of oil products during the year were recorded in the water of the Stviga and Ubort rivers with a maximum in the Dokolka river (0.087 mg/l) in April. The content of synthetic surfactants in the water of the tributaries did not exceed the standard permissible level. Phytoperiphyton. The total taxonomic diversity of benthic algae in the tributaries of the Pripyat river amounted to 134 taxa. The values of the saprobic index varied from 1.44 (the Slovechno) to 2.0 (the Ubort). Macrozoobenthos. In the tributaries of the Pripyat river basin, the species diversity of macrozoobenthos ranged from 16 species and forms in the Stviga River (Dzerzhinsk) up to 34 species and forms in the Styr River (Ladorozh). The biotic index ranged from 5 (the Goryn) to 7 (the Styr, the L’va, the Slovechno, the Stviga). Lakes and reservoirs of the river basin Pripyat An analysis of the seasonal dynamics of dissolved oxygen in 2018 showed that the variability of its compounds in the water of the Krasnaya Sloboda, Lyubanskoe, Selets, and Lake Beloe (Bostyn) corresponded to the natural seasonal dynamics.

The content of easily oxidised organic substances (according to BOD5) in the Pripyat River varied during the year from 1.03 mgO2/dm3 in February in the water of the Selets reservoir to 8.0 mgO2/dm3 in October in the water of the Krasnaya Sloboda reservoir. The values of bichromate oxidizability (according to COD Cr) varied from 12.0 mgO2/dm3 in the water of Lake Beloe in February to 87.0 mgO2/dm3 (2.9 MAC) in the water of the Krasnaya Sloboda reservoir in July. An analysis of long-term data on the chemical composition of water indicates a decrease in the content of ammonium ion in the water bodies of the Pripyat river basin. In the reporting period, the content of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds in the water reservoir did not exceed the MPC value. Water bodies in the Pripyat river basin are characterised by a high natural content of metals. In the reporting period, values were recorded that exceed the maximum permissible concentrations for total iron (up to 1.30 mg/l) in the water of the Lubansk reservoir; manganese (up to 0.093 mg/l) in the water of the Krasnaya Sloboda reservoir; and copper (up to 0.004 mg/l) and zinc (up to 0.019 mg/l) in the water of the Selets reservoir. The content of oil products and synthetic surfactants in the water did not exceed the maximum allowable level.

4.2.2 Status of groundwater

In 2018, 10 samples were taken from the Pripyat river basin to analyse the physicochemical composition of groundwater in the wells of Borovitsky, Zarechinsky, Gorokhovsky, Letenetsky, Mlynoksky,

105 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Ploskinsky, Snyadinsky, Khlupinsky and Simonich-Rudny hydrogeological stations. Wells are equipped for ground (2 wells) and artesian (8 wells) waters. The observation results of the hydrochemical indicators of groundwater in 2018 [26] showed, that - in general - the physicochemical composition of the investigated groundwater and artesian waters in terms of the content of the main physicochemical parameters corresponds with the established water quality requirements [27]. Exceptions were found in local areas, revealing excesses of maximum permissible concentrations for nitrogen compounds, silicon oxide, permanganate oxidation, organoleptic properties. In addition, an increased content of iron was identified almost everywhere. The exceedances of established standards are due to both anthropogenic (agricultural, domestic pollution) and natural causes (high permeability of cover deposits, the occurrence of fulvic and humic substances in the soil, lithological composition of water-bearing rocks, heavy precipitation, hydrogeological factors). According to the observation results of the hydrogeological indicators of groundwater in 2018, fluctuations in water pressure levels practically mirror fluctuations in groundwater levels, which confirms a good hydraulic relationship between aquifers and surface waters (rivers and reservoirs). An analysis of seasonal changes in groundwater levels in 2018 in the Pripyat basin showed a general decline in both groundwater and artesian water levels, while the average decrease in groundwater levels was 0.6 m and 0.69 m for artesian waters. The 2018 monitoring results for groundwater in the Pripyat river basin are summarised below:

 The pH value in 2018 was between 5.7 and 7.8, which implies that the waters of the basin are mostly neutral, less often slightly alkaline.

 The total hardness index varied from 0.48 to 6.44 mmol/ dm3. This indicates a distribution of soft and medium hardness of groundwater in the Pripyat river basin.

 The groundwater of the Pripyat river basin mainly comprises bicarbonate magnesium- calcium and bicarbonate calcium.

 The solids content in the pool ranged from 182.0 to 435.0 mg/l, chlorides from 23.6 to 56.6 mg/l, sulphates from 22.6 to 69.1 mg/l, nitrates from 15.2 to 54.4 mg/l, and nitrites from 0.01 to 0.2 mg/l.  The cationic composition of water varied in the following ranges: sodium - from 8.2 to 27.5 mg/l, potassium - from 1.9 to 2.2 mg/l, calcium - from 22.7 to 78.0 mg/l, magnesium - from 5.2 to 19.7 mg/l, ammonia (for nitrogen) - <0.1 mg/l.  MPC shows excesses detected for silicon oxide at 1.03-1.3 times (in wells of 1 Borovitsky and 1235 Zarechensky g/g posts) and for nitrates at 1.21 times in well 1 of Borovitsky g/g post. According to their chemical composition, artesian waters in the Pipyat river basin comprise mainly magnesium bicarbonate and calcium bicarbonate.  The solids content in the basin varied from 55.0 to 361.0 mg/l, chlorides from 1.0 to 10.0 mg l, sulphates from <2.0 to 7.4 mg/l, nitrates from <0.1 to 8.0 mg/l, sodium from 2.2 to 7.6 mg/l, magnesium from 1.3 to 19.9 mg/l, calcium from 7.4 to 96, 2 mg/l, potassium from 1.0 to 5.0 mg/l, and ammonia (for nitrogen) from <0.1 to 1.5 mg/l.  Most excesses were revealed in the permanganate oxidation: 1.08-4.83 times (in wells 720 Gorokhovskogo, 1300 Simonichsko-Rudnenskogo, 729 Letenetskogo g/g posts); silicon oxide 1.03-3.4 times (in wells 720 Gorokhovsky, 681 Khlupinsky, 729 Letenets g/g posts).  In well 729 of the Letenets g/g post, an excess of MPC by nitrite ion was recorded at 1.18 times. In a number of wells, the turbidity and colour indicators did not meet with established

106 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

requirements. Such indicators for these components are due to the influence of both natural and anthropogenic factors (agricultural pollution).  The temperature regime of groundwater during sampling varied from 8.0 °C to 9.1 °C. The hydrodynamic regime of groundwater in the Pripyat river basin was studied at 25 hydrogeological posts. Groundwater levels were measured in 75 wells, 13 of which are equipped for groundwater, and 62 for artesian water. The seasonal regime of groundwater is characterised by the occurrence of a spring rise and a summer-autumn recession, which in some places lasts until the end of the year. Thus, from January to April there is a rise in the groundwater level, while from April to September-November there is a decrease. However, in some wells a slight increase was noted in levels from October. In 2018, the groundwater level slightly decreased compared to 2017. In 2018, the minimum level was mainly in September-November and the maximum level was in March-April. Annual fluctuations in groundwater levels in wells of g/g posts in the Pripyat river basin varied from 0.55 to 1.07 m. The maximum fluctuations were recorded in the wells of 214 Sitnensky, 31 Pinsky, 225 Ploskinsky g/g posts and amounted to 1.07; 0.97; 0.96 m respectively. The temperature regime of groundwater was characterised by a change in temperature from 4.0 °C to 14.0 °C. The seasonal regime of artesian waters in the basin, as well as in other basins, was characterised by the occurrence of a spring rise and a summer-autumn recession. The course of artesian water levels was similar to the change in the position of the groundwater table and was characterised by a rise in levels from the end of 2017 to March-April 2018. A decrease in the level was then observed from May- June to October-November. Comparing the depths of the artesian water level for 2017 and 2018, we can conclude that they either remained practically unchanged or slightly decreased. The minimum values of the level were mainly in October-November, and the maximum was in April. Annual fluctuations in artesian water levels in 2018 in wells of the year-on-year posts in the Pripyat river basin varied from 0.65 to 2.04 m. The maximum fluctuations were observed at the Turovsky g/g post in well 1292, in the wells of 685 Snyadinsky, 680 Khlupinsky g/g stations and amounted to 2.04 m; 0.41 m and 0.42 m respectively. The temperature regime of artesian waters was characterised by a change from 2.1 °C to 14.0 °C.

107 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 5. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (PART 1 RELATED TO BASIN CHARACTERISATION)

5.1 Economic weights by relevant water use (results from chapter 2), socio-economic issues, main trends

In general, the concept of water use includes the totality of all forms and types of use of water resources. In the Republic of Belarus, relations arising from the possession, use and disposal of water resources are regulated by the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus. Water use in Belarus is subject to payment, apart from general water use, the use of water bodies for emergency response and (or) its consequences, and the use of surface water bodies for navigation needs. The general conditions for using water bodies (restrictions) are brought to the attention of interested parties by local executive and administrative bodies through information published in the media and posted on their official websites. In the Republic of Belarus in the Pripyat river basin, the following types of water use can be distinguished:

1. Drinking water supply; 2. industrial; 3. agricultural; 4. energy; 5. health (medical, resort, health service); 6. fire-fighting; 7. navigational (inland water transport); 8. recreational; 9. other. To define the economic weight of each type of water use in the Pripyat River basin, data from the state water cadastre were employed. The result is a list of water users classed according to the economic activities that have the greatest impact on water resources in the Pripyat river basin (Table A.20.1 of Annex A). This list, consisting of 71 water users, includes enterprises and organisations belonging to various sectors of the economy (Figure 16). Distributions of water use in the context of administrative districts by industry and specific water use are presented on the maps B.48 and B.49 of Annex B, respectively.

108 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Figure 16: number of the most important water users in the Pripyat river basin by industry Drinking water supply In order to associate the type of water use with a group of surface waters in the Pripyat River basin, we analysed the statistical data of users that withdraw water from water bodies for drinking water supply or discharge domestic wastewater into water bodies (table A.20.2 of Annex A). This list is compiled by domestic and communal service providers that collect, process and distribute water, as well as sanatorium-resort organisations that provide health services. In the Pripyat river basin, domestic wastewater is discharged into a water body by priority water users at 30 outlets. Water is withdrawn for domestic and drinking needs from one water body. By means of geographical information systems (GIS), we identified 92 water objects (water bodies) associated with the use of water for drinking needs.

Industrial water supply Industrial companies account for 30% of the total number of priority water users in the Pripyat river basin. In order to associate this type of water use with a group of surface waters in the Pripyat River basin, we analysed the statistical data on water users extracting water from water bodies for industrial purposes, and/or discharging industrial wastewater into water bodies (table A.20.3 of Annex A). This list is composed of mining and manufacturing companies that use water for industrial purposes. By means of geographical information systems (GIS), we identified 68 water bodies (water bodies) associated with the industrial use of water. Agricultural water supply Agricultural enterprises, farms and fish farms account for 34% of the total number of priority water users in the Pripyat river basin. In order to associate this type of water use with a group of surface waters in the Pripyat River basin, we identified water users who extract water from water bodies for agricultural use (including for fish farming), and dispose of wastewater into water bodies after agricultural use (including discharge from fish ponds) (table A.20.4 of Annex A). This list consists of enterprises engaged in fisheries (freshwater fish farming), livestock and crop production. By means of geographical information systems (GIS), we identified 95 water objects (water bodies) associated with the agricultural use of water.

109 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Energy water supply In the Republic of Belarus, the energy sector is one of the largest consumers of water. Water from surface water bodies is used in technological processes and to cool equipment. Moreover, according to Article 43 of the WC RB, water bodies can be used for energy needs provided that the temperature regime of surface water bodies is respected and in compliance with the requirements of the legislation on environmental protection. In the Pripyat river basin, companies produce electric energy, as well as peat products, use water from surface water bodies for energy needs: Berezovskaya TPP (Beloozersk, Brest region), Pinsk TPP (Pinsk, Brest region), Peat-Briquette Plant Sergeevichskoye (Rusakovichi, Minsk Region) (table A.20.5 of Annex A). By means of geographical information systems (GIS), we identified 9 water bodies (water bodies) associated with the energy use of water. Health water supply (medical, resort, health services) The analysis of data from the state water cadastre (statistical reporting of water users) in the Pripyat river basin identified 2 health care institutions that discharge wastewater into surface water bodies (table A.20.6 of Annex A). By means of geographic information systems (GIS), 12 water bodies (water bodies) were established associated with this type of water use. Fire-fighting water supply According to article 41 of the WC RB, the extraction (withdrawal) of water for fire-fighting needs is allowed from all water bodies without permission, free of charge, and as required to eliminate the fire. Thus, all water bodies located in the Pripyat river basin can be associated with fire-fighting water use. Navigational water supply (inland water transport) In Belarus, the use of surface water bodies assigned to inland waterways for transport needs is conducted in accordance with the legislation in the field of inland water transport. The legal, economic and organisational basis of inland waterways shipping in the Republic of Belarus is established by the In- land Water Transport Code No.118-3 of 06.24.2002. In the Pripyat river basin, 5 watercourses (sites of watercourses) are used for inland water transport:  the Pripyat River (Pinsk – Usovskiy, length used 449 km)  the Pripyat River (Turovskiy backwater, length used 1.5 km)  the Pina River (Pererub – Pinsk, length used 41 km)  the Goryn River (mouth – David – Gorodok, length used 12 km)  the Dnieper-Bugchannel (Selische – Pererub, length used 40 km),  the Mikashevichskiy channel (mouth – Sitnitsa, river port Mikashevichi, length used 7 km).

Transportation of goods and passengers by water in the Republic of Belarus is carried out by the Re- publican Transport Unitary Enterprise “Belarusian River Shipping Company”.

Having determined the precise boundaries of the watercourse sections used for inland water transport, and by means of geographic information systems (GIS), we identified 21 water bodies (water bodies) associated with transport water use.

Recreational water supply Annually in the Republic of Belarus, lists of water bodies (sites of water bodies) used for recreation are established by district executive committees. In 2019, 96 recreation places near the water were approved in the Pripyat river basin (table A.20.7 of the Annex A). Having determined the definite location of the recreation areas, and by means of geographic information systems (GIS), we identified 52 water objects (water bodies) that can be correlated with recreational water use in the Pripyat River basin.

110 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Others According to data from the state water cadastre, among those water users having the greatest impact on surface water bodies in the Pripyat river basin, only 2 industrial companies use water for other needs not related to the previous types of water use (table A 20.8 of Annex A). Thus, using data from the state water cadastre, together with geographic information systems (GIS), we assigned all selected water objects (water bodies) in the Pripyat river basin to the corresponding type of water use, as represented in the final map B.36 in Annex B. This map reflects watercourses and reservoirs in the Pripyat river basin which are highlighted in different colours, depending on the number of water uses that exert pressure on the water body. To further define the priority type of water use in the Pripyat River basin, an economic analysis of the costs (payments) associated with each type of water use was conducted.

5.2 Water prices, tariffs for discharges by sector and by territory

According to Article 35 of WC RB, payments related to water use are charged in the form of tax or rent. The regional and Minsk city executive committees establish tariffs for water supply and sanitation services for water users on the basis of Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus No.72 dated 25 February 2011 “On Certain Issues of Regulation of Prices (Tariffs) in the Republic of Belarus” and paragraph 4 of the Regulation on the Procedure for Tariff Indexation (prices) for utility services provided to legal entities by organisations of the system of the Ministry of Housing and Communal Services, approved by resolution of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus No.175 of 02.27.2014. The establishment, introduction, amendment and termination of levies in the sphere of protection and use of water, as well as the procedure and conditions for collection are determined by tax legislation. The amount of rent for the use of surface water bodies for fish farming, and its procedure, conditions and terms are determined in the lease agreement and approved by the local Councils of Deputies, executive and administrative bodies. The Tax Code of the Republic of Belarus (Particular Conditions) with the latest amendments dated 30 December 2018 No.159-З (hereinafter - the Tax Code) establishes a system of taxes for the use of natural resources, including for the use of water bodies: 1. Environmental tax; 2. Tax for the abstraction of natural resources. Environmental tax Water users discharging wastewater into surface water bodies are environmental tax payers. The amount of the environmental tax is determined for each water user-payer based on the amount of wastewater discharged into the water body multiplied by the rate of the environmental tax. The environmental tax rates for wastewater discharge are determined by the Tax Code and depend on the wastewater receiver (table A.5.20.9 of Annex A). According to Article 247 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Belarus, wastewater discharged into the environment through the rainwater drainage system from the territory in which it was formed as a result of precipitation and snow melting is not subject to environmental tax. The following decreasing coefficient factors apply to environmental tax rates: 1) For discharge of wastewater into the environment by owners of municipal and departmental sewers (discharge from the population) - 0.006; 2) For discharge of wastewater into the environment by aquaculture organisations and pond farms (discharge from ponds) - 0.006;

111 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

3) For discharge of wastewater into surface water bodies by thermal power plants using non- renewable energy sources in their work - 0.5; 4) For discharge of wastewater into surface water bodies by thermal power plants using renewable energy sources in their work - 0.2. In 2018, in the Pripyat river basin on the territory of the Republic of Belarus, the environmental tax for the discharge of wastewater into surface water bodies was paid for 76 discharges, amounting to a total of 5.4 million Belarusian rubles (2.4 million euros) (table A.20.10 of Annex A). The contribution (%) of each type of water use to the amount of environmental tax in the Pripyat river basin is presented in table A.20.11 of Annex A. Thus, the largest contribution to the total environmental tax for wastewater discharges into water bodies in the Pripyat river basin (97%) is made by industrial water users. The list of water user data is presented in table A.20.12 of Annex A. Of these: 66% accounts for the extractor and producer of crushed granite, RUME "Granit", and 31% accounts for the oil refiner, OJSC "Mozyr Oil Refinery". Tax for the abstraction of natural resources In the Republic of Belarus, according to the Tax Code, water users (private organisations and individual entrepreneurs) that extract natural resources (water resources) pay taxes for the abstraction of natural resources. At the same time, the extraction (withdrawal) of water to control emergency situations and (or) their consequences, as well as the extraction of groundwater used to produce geothermal energy, are not taxed. The amount of tax levied for the withdrawal of natural resources (water resources) is specified for each water user-payer based on the actual amount of water withdrawn multiplied by the tax rate. Tax rates for the extraction (withdrawal) of natural resources (water resources) are determined by the Tax Code and depend on the goals of water use (table A.20.13 of Annex A). In 2018, in the Pripyat river basin on the territory of the Republic of Belarus, taxes for the withdrawal of natural resources (water resources) were paid for 42 water withdrawals totalling 1.1 million Belarusian rubles (500,900 euros) (table A.20.14 of Annex A). Table A.20.15 of Annex A shows the contribution (%) of each type of water use to the total tax in the Pripyat river basin. Thus, the largest contribution to the total tax for the withdrawal of natural resources (water resources) in the Pripyat river basin (68.9%) is made by industrial water users. The list of water user data is presented in table A.20.16 of Annex A. Of these: 46% accounts for the oil refinery OJSC Mozyr Oil Refinery, and 36% accounts for the largest producer and exporter of potash mineral fertilizers in Belarusn OJSC. Belaruskali. Fee policy in the field of water supply in the Republic of Belarus The key documents regulating pricing issues affecting the water supply and sewage system (WSS) providers in the Republic of Belarus are: – Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus of 25 February 2011 N 72 “On Certain Issues of Regulation of Prices (Tariffs) in the Republic of Belarus”; – Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus dated 05.12.2013 N 550 “On Certain Issues of Regulation of Tariffs (Prices) for Housing and Communal Services and Amendments and Additions to Some Decrees of the President of the Republic of Belarus”;

112 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

– Instruction on the procedure for planning and calculating costs for the provision of certain housing and communal services (Approved by the Decree of the Ministry of Housing and Communal Services of the Republic of Belarus of 04.15.2016 N 13) (hereinafter the Instruction); – Decree of the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Belarus of 28 June 2007 N 121 “On approval of the instruction on the procedure for regulating prices (tariffs) for goods (work, services) of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs included in the state register of economic entities dominant in the commodity markets , and the state register of natural monopolies.” Key work on the implementation of price regulation is carried out by the Ministry of the Economy. In accordance with the Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus of 25 February 2011 No. 72 “On some issues of regulation of prices (tariffs) in the Republic of Belarus”: – Tariffs for water supply, sanitation (sewage) for the needs of the population are established by the regional executive committees and the Minsk city executive committee (in agreement with the Ministry of Economy); – Tariffs for water supply, sanitation (sanitation) provided by legal entities of the Ministry of Housing and Communal Services, as well as to individuals (including individual entrepreneurs) operating non- residential premises, are established by the regional executive committees and the Minsk city executive committee. Presidential Decree No. 550 of 5 December 2012 defines the basic rules for setting tariffs for housing and communal services. Tariffs for the population are approved until the next fiscal year. The level of tariffs is determined taking into account the growth of incomes of the population and the level of return on services provided by all sources. The instruction defines the procedure for planning and calculating costs in organisations operating the housing stock and (or) providing housing and communal services, with the exception of organisations under the system of the Ministry of Energy of the Republic of Belarus, for the provision of housing and communal services, including cold and hot water supply, and sewerage services. Water users (budget organisations, commercial and industrial companies) pay higher tariffs than the general population for water supply and sanitation services. At national level, these tariffs are on average 8 times higher than tariffs for the general population. According to a survey of utilities by the World Bank, the maximum tariff for legal entities was more than 20 times higher than the basic tariff for the population. As a result, large industrial enterprises have strong incentives to develop their own water supply systems. Tariffs for water supply and sanitation for legal entities are indexed quarterly using a coefficient that takes into account the share of payment of fuel and energy resources in the total volume of operating costs, as well as changes in USD / BYR exchange rates. In some cases, water supply companies are allowed to levy tariffs on industrial enterprises in some sectors that are almost twice as high as the tariff for other legal entities. Tariffs for water supply and water discharge (sanitation) provided to legal entities by organisations of the Ministry of Housing and Communal Services, as well as to individuals (including individual entrepreneurs) operating non-residential premises vary by administrative region and district of the Republic of Belarus and depend on the category of water (drinking, technical), as well as the purpose. Drinking water used for the production of alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks is subject to a higher tariff. Table A.20.17 of Annex A provides information on the maximum limit rates for water supply and sanitation services for water users in the Pripyat river basin. In 2018, in the Pripyat river basin on the territory of the Republic of Belarus, the annual amount of payment for water supply services amounted to 2.5 million rubles (1.1 million euros) (table A.20.18 of

113 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Annex A). The largest contribution to this amount (56%) is made by the OJSC Mozyr Oil Refinery, which receives drinking and technical quality water through water supply (sewage) networks. In 2018, in the Pripyat river basin in the Republic of Belarus, the annual amount of payment for water disposal services amounted to 526,400 rubles (235,100 euros) (table A.20.19 of Annex A). The largest contribution to this amount (70%) is made by industrial companies: RUME Granit, CJSC Holding Company Pinskdrev, OJSC Berezastroimaterialy, OJSC Belaruskali, which discharge water into city sewage networks Agriculture In Belarus, the use of surface water bodies for agricultural purposes makes a significant contribution to the formation of the total amount of environmental tax and tax on the withdrawal of natural resources (water resources). Tables A.20.20 and A.20.21 of Annex A present lists of water users in the Pripyat river basin that extract water from surface water bodies and discharge wastewater into surface water bodies used for agricultural purposes, ranked by the amount of tax payable. These lists are fish farms engaged in freshwater fish farming and providing paid amateur and commercial fishing services. They are one of the largest water users in the basin. However, according to the Tax Code, they are subject to decreasing coefficients when calculating the environmental tax and the tax on the withdrawal of natural resources (water resources).

5.3 Description of recipients of the funds and management principles

In the Republic of Belarus, water supply and sanitation facility operators receive payments for the services provided. The costs of providing water supply services consist of the following: – water lifting; – water withdrawal from surface sources of drinking water supply, including technological water losses within the established standards, but no higher than the predicted indicators; – water purification (including the costs of operating iron removal posts); – transportation and water supply; – emergency repair works; – taxes, fees and other mandatory contributions; – other direct costs; – overhead expenses. After specifying the costs for each item, the total costs for 1 m3 of water sold are determined. Operat- ing costs for water treatment vary significantly depending on the housing and communal services (utilities). A significant share of these costs, as a rule, relate to energy and wages. The costs of providing sewage services consist of the following: – pumping wastewater; – wastewater treatment; – transportation and wastewater treatment; – emergency repair works; – taxes, fees and other mandatory contributions; – other direct costs; – overhead expenses. After specifying the costs for each item, the costs for 1 m3 of wastewater discharged are determined.

114 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table A.20.22 of Annex A provides a list of water utilities that receive payments for services in the field of water supply and sanitation. The total amount of payments received in the Pripyat river basin in 2018 amounted to 2.9 million Bela- rusian rubles. 46% of the total amount of payments received comes from companies in the Mozyr district of the Gomel region. This is due to the fact that the largest oil refinery OJSC Mozyr Oil Refinery is located in this region, which in turn is the main payer of the environmental tax and the tax on the withdrawal of water resources, as well as payments for water supply and sanitation in the Pripyat river basin.

5.4 Funding (investment, maintenance) by sector of economy

Implementation of investment projects on the territory of the Pripyat river basin in the Republic of Bela- rus can be carried out by concluding an investment agreement between an investor or investors and the Republic of Belarus (hereinafter referred to as the “Investment Agreement”). This should be done in the manner and subject to the conditions determined by the Investment Code of the Republic of Belarus, Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus dated 06.08.2009 N 10 (as amended on 06.06.2011) “On the creation of additional conditions for investment activity in the Republic of Belarus” and other legislative acts. According to the available data of the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus, the volume of foreign investment received in the real sector of the economy of the Republic of Belarus in 2018 amounted to 10.8 billion dollars USA, which is 40% more than 10 years ago. At the same time, investments in fixed assets amounted to 25 billion Belarusian rubles. The share of investments for each type of economic activity is presented in Figure 17.

Figure 17: The share of investments in fixed capital by type of economic activity

115 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The largest percentage of investments (25%) accounts for industry, which also confirms the priority of this type of economic activity. According to the Concept of improvement and development of the housing and communal services of the Republic of Belarus until 2025 (approved by the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus dated 29 December 2017 No. 1037), the conditions have been created for attracting potential investors to modernise the infrastructure of housing and communal services. This involves interaction with business on the basis of public-private partnerships, attracting loans and grants, and efficient- ly using these resources to introduce innovative technologies to reduce operating costs. Agriculture in the Republic of Belarus is one of the fastest-growing sectors of the economy. It accounts for 11.2% of all investments in fixed capital. The Republic of Belarus is interested in further modernis- ing the industry, including through foreign investment. The Ministry of Agriculture, within its compe- tence, pursues state policy aimed at attracting foreign investment to the agricultural sector, and devel- ops and implements strategies and programmes to develop exports of goods and services and investment projects with the participation of foreign capital in agricultural production and agricultural processing industries. According to data available from the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus, 5.6 million Belarusian rubles of fixed capital investment were made on the territory of the Pripyat River basin from January-July 2019. This is an average of 105.75% compared to the same period in 2018. Currently, investment projects in the Pripyat river basin concern the industrial sector, agriculture, housing and communal services, as well as the sport and tourism sector, for a total of 28.4 million euros with a payback period of 2-9 years: 1. “The construction of a factory for the manufacture of bridge cranes with a lifting capacity of up to 240 tonnes with the reconstruction of existing production facilities at OJSC “Slutsk Plant of Lifting and Transporting Equipment”. The total amount of the project is 12.8 million US dollars. 2. “The organisation of a new production of semi-finished products (OJSC" Bobruisk meat processing plant "). The total amount of the project is 2 million euros. 3. “The creation of a workshop for the production of polyethylene film in the territory of Communal Housing Unitary Enterprise Braginskoe”. The total project amounts to 0.3 million US dollars. 4. “The generation of electric energy from extracted biogas from the household waste landfill in Svetlogorsk (Communal Housing Unitary Enterprise “Svetoch”)”. The total project amounts to 2 million US dollars. 5. “The creation of a tourist cultural and ethnographic complex “Our native Kut Sabali”. The total amount of the project is 6.6 million US dollars. 6. "The construction of a hotel with 40 rooms and a cafe in Ivatsevichi". The total amount of the project is 300,000 US dollars. 7. A roadside service facility , including service stations, retail space, parking for cars, catering point (Minsk district)”. The total amount of the project is 3.2 million US dollars. 8. “The object of the tourist complex, including a restaurant, a mini-hotel, a landing for the rental of water modes of transport (Minsk district)”. The total amount of the project is 468.8 million US dollars. 9. “The construction of a tourist complex in the Osipovichsky district of the Mogilev region”. The total amount of the project is 3.6 million US dollars. The largest contribution to the total amount of implementable investment projects in the Pripyat River basin is by sports and tourism projects (45%) and industrial investment projects (40%).

5.5 Preliminary cost-recovery assessment

According to data available from the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus in Janu- ary-July 2019 on the territory of the Pripyat River Basin, the financial results of organisations can be described by the following indicators:

116 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

 proceeds from sales of products, goods, works, services amounted to 26.5 billion rubles (110% compared to the same period in 2018);  cost of sales of products, goods, works, services – 21.4 billion rubles (110% compared to the same period in 2018);  benefit from the sale of products, goods, works, services– 1.9 billion rubles (104% compared to the same period in 2018);  profit before tax – 1.4 billion rubles (154% compared to the similar period of 2018);  number of lossmaking organisations - 266.5 units (102% compared to the same period in 2018). The volume of industrial production in the territory of the Pripyat River basin in 2018 amounted to 42.03 billion rubles. The net profit of medium-sized organisations by type of economic activity in 2018 in the territory of the Pripyat river basin amounted to:  industry – 76.4 million rubles;  agriculture (including fish farming) – 77.4 million rubles. In 2018, the total environmental protection costs in the territory of the Pripyat River basin in amounted to 287.60 million rubles, including:

1. the volume of investments in fixed capital for environmental protection – 39.4 million rubles: - collection and treatment of wastewater – 9.9 million rubles; - protection and rehabilitation of land, surface and groundwater – 5.8 million rubles; - environmental protection (non-water-related resources) – 23.7 million rubles 2. the volume of the current environmental protection running costs – 248.2 million rubles): - collection and treatment of wastewater – 116.4 million rubles; - protection and rehabilitation of land, surface and groundwater – 4.4 million rubles; - environmental protection (non-water-related resources) – 127.4 million rubles.

Thus, in 2018, the current environmental costs (excluding investments) amounted to 248.2 million rubles. The largest contribution to this amount was the costs of the industrial sector of the economy (50% of total current costs), and the housing and utilities sector (45% of the total current costs), which is also explained by the priority of the corresponding types of water use in the Pripyat river basin (figure 18) Starting from 2018, when calculating the volume of total environmental protection operating costs, the data on current environmental protection operating costs do not include value added tax or deprecia- tion charges on fixed assets intended for environmental protection.

117 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Figure 18: Current costs on environmental protection by type of economic activity for 2018 (thousand rubles)

In order to conclude on the cost recovery rate, Belarus does not have enough data on the number and types of operation costs of companies, or on their income. Unfortunately in Belarus, this information is not freely available and can only be obtained if an agreement is reached at the level of the relevant ministries and departments. The general economic analysis is shown in figures below.

118 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

45000

40000 volume of industrial 35000 42030 production (VIP) in the territory of the Pripyat river 30000 basin in 2018, million rubles

25000 total environmental protection running costs in 20000 the Pripyat river basin in 2018, , million rubles 15000

10000 287.6

5000 (0.7%) from VIP in the Pripyat river basin 0

Figure 19: Ratio between total environmental protection running costs and volume of industrial production (VIP) in the Pripyat river basin based on data from 2018

290 280 270

260 250 240 230 127.4 220 environmental protection (non-water resources related) 210 200 protection and rehabilitation of land, surface 190 and groundwater 180 volume of the current 170 collection and treatment of wastewater environmental protection 160 running costs – 4.4 150 248.2 million rubles 140 environmental protection (non-water million million rubles resources related) 130 120 protection and rehabilitation of land, surface 110 and groundwater 100 116.4 90 collection and treatment of wastewater 80 70 60 50 40 30 volume of investments in fixed capital for the 23.7 20 environmental protection - 10 39.4 million rubles 5.8 9.9 0 Figure 20: Distribution of current environmental protection running costs (248.2 million rubles) in the Pripyat river basin based on data from 2018

119 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 6. OBJECTIVES

6.1 Risk assessment

Risk assessments are performed in order to identify water bodies for which good ecological status cannot be achieved until 2025 (and possibly until 2030). Such water bodies are considered at risk of not achieving good environmental status at the end of the planning cycle. From these complete risk assessments, we can conclude that “the risk of not achieving a good ecological status ” based on monitoring data from surface waters 2015-2018 includes the following 4 water body sites on the Pripyat River basin:

 the Yaselda River – below the city of Bereza (07/04);  the Goryn River – Rechitsa (18/00);  the Moroch River – Yaskovichy (2418/04);  the Pripyat River – Bol’shie Dikovichy (00/02). The category “possibly at risk of not achieving a good ecological status” on the basis of surface water monitoring data for 2015-2018 includes the following 9 water body sites on the Pripyat river basin:

 the Pripyat River–above the city of Pinsk (00/02);  the Ubort River – Krasnoberezhie(34/02);  Lake Chervonoe – Pykhovichy (00012/00);  the Dokolka River – Boyanovo (3827/02);  the Pripyat River – Dovlyady (00/15);  the Styr River – Ladorozh (08/00);  the Ubort River – Milashevichy (34/01);  the Stviga River – Dzerzhinsk (26/01);  the L’va River – Olmanskaya Koshara (2603/00). Risk assessment summaries featuring the surface water bodies’ ecological status and pressure and impact analyses for watercourses and reservoirs are presented in table A.13.1 of Annex A. The following conclusions can be made based on the results of the risk assessment, taking into account data from monitoring of water bodies, local monitoring of point source and diffuse source pollution and their impact on water bodies, and expeditionary studies conducted as part of the EUWI + project. The assessment of water bodies at risk or possibly at risk was carried out separately in the following areas:

- for water bodies affected by point source pollution: by comparing the measured or calculated (in the absence of measurements) concentration of this type of pollution in water bodies in zones in which river and wastewater are mixed with surface water quality classes according to hydrochemical indicators; - for water bodies affected by diffuse pollution sources: based on an assessment of possible nutrient loads from the catchment area depending on land use, topography and water content of the water body; - by comparing the quality classes by hydrobiological indicators, hydrochemical indicators, the degree of change of hydromorphological indicators and the final environmental status with the established ranges of these indicators and status.

120 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The final assessment of water bodies at risk or possibly at risk is carried out depending on the combination of estimates obtained in the above areas. Among 636 identified rivers water bodies in the Pripyat river basin in Belarus:

 24 water bodies are at possible risk;  17 water bodies are at risk;  10 water bodies are not at risk;  585 water bodies cannot be assessed due to a lack of information.

Among 79 identified lakes water bodies in the Pripyat River basin in Belarus:

 2 water bodies are at possible risk (Lake Chervonoe and Bereza reservoir);  8 water bodies are not at risk;  69 water bodies cannot be assessed due to a lack of information.

The final list and locations of water bodies at possible risk and at risk are given in tables 6.1, 6.2, on map B.44 of Annex B and in a special MS-Excel file including ecological status and risk assessment. . Table 6.1: Sections of watercourses at risk of not achieving at least a good ecological status

№ Name of watercourse Site code Start coordinates End coordinates Risk category 51.981506 52.116085 1 the Pripyat river BY5_00/02 “Possibly at risk” 26.098663 26.123254 52.116085 52.117222 2 the Pripyat river BY5_00/03 “Possibly at risk” 26.123254 26.445364 52.102284 52.145646 3 the Pripyat river BY5_00/11 “At risk” 28.469844 28.865438 51.676363 51.482470 4 the Pripyat river BY5_00/15 “Possibly at risk” 29.690824 29.990829 52.079550 52.087544 5 Lyakhovichsky channel BY5_060203/02 “Possibly at risk” 25.777919 25.129730 52.151683 52.037072 6 Lyakhovichsky channel BY5_060203/03 “At risk” 25.151446 25.170341 52.133003 52.068629 7 Struga channel BY5_060403/00 “At risk” 25.598245 25.597583 52.604469 52.534147 8 the Yaselda river BY5_07/03 “Possibly at risk” 24.878740 25.007074 52.623700 52.430918 9 the Yaselda river BY5_07/04 “At risk” 24.776779 25.066393 52.534052 52.533990 10 Krechet stream BY5_0709/00 “Possibly at risk” 24.800008 25.007191 52.521589 52.488969 11 МК BY5_071001/00 “Possibly at risk” 24.931252 24.966021 52.500518 52.448053 12 Obvodnoy channel BY5_071606/00 “Possibly at risk” 25.221454 25.247437 51.868656 52.107719 13 the Styr river BY5_08/00 “Possibly at risk” 26.175181 26.582772 52.161066 52.144212 14 Lyuninteskiy channel BY5_12/02 “At risk” 26.283545 26.828109 52.213572 52.690476 15 the Tsna river BY5_14/02 “At risk” 26.803784 26.506338 51.800489 52.142877 16 the Goryn river BY5_18/00 “At risk” 26.754702 27.281641

121 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

№ Name of watercourse Site code Start coordinates End coordinates Risk category 52.888699 52.157038 17 the Lan‘ BY5_19/03 “Possibly at risk” 26.691175 27.298209 52.823883 52.996311 18 the Tsepra river BY5_1904/02 “At risk” 26.708233 26.692761 53.024455 52.837334 19 the Sluch river BY5_24/03 “At risk” 26.699155 27.650274 52.780738 52.610334 20 the Moroch river BY5_2418/03 “Possibly at risk” 27.138059 27.420218 52.853984 52.577005 21 the Moroch river BY5_2418/04 “At risk” 26.972974 27.586754 52.577005 53.086910 22 the Mazha river BY5_241804/02 “At risk” 27.586754 26.975649 53.086906 52.700770 23 Krivichskiy channel BY5_241809/02 “At risk” 26.975650 27.319450 52.772944 52.184264 24 Volhva river BY5_2424/03 “Possibly at risk” 27.412674 27.524301 52.259257 52.193889 25 Pangalasovskiy channel BY5_242404/00 “Possibly at risk” 27.471611 27.506412 51.608540 52.006904 26 the Stviga river BY5_26/01 “Possibly at risk” 27.487324 27.541285 51.768546 52.007110 27 the Mostva river (L‘va) BY5_2603/00 “Possibly at risk” 26.996498 27.541215 52.202338 52.090394 28 the Naut‘ river BY5_2702/02 “At risk” 27.926018 27.940594 51.616309 51.736909 29 the Ubort river BY5_34/01 “Possibly at risk” 27.917782 28.298767 51.736993 52.101397 30 the Ubort river BY5_34/02 “Possibly at risk” 28.298863 28.468517 52.394243 52.209889 31 Mikhedovo-Grabovsky Canal BY5_3502/00 “Possibly at risk” 28.269842 28.449826 53.854739 53.822990 32 the Ptich river BY5_38/01 “Possibly at risk” 27.099007 27.367546 52.890115 52.550329 33 the Ptich river BY5_38/04 “At risk” 28.715114 28.751095 52.889096 52.766125 34 the Dokolka river BY5_3827/02 “Possibly at risk” 28.476755 28.778336 52.626973 52.606071 35 Serebronskaya Ditch BY5_3830/01 “At risk” 28.907597 28.824831 52.819838 52.646813 36 the Oressa river BY5_3831/03 “Possibly at risk” 28.021798 28.159584 53.041489 53.031771 37 the Solyanka river BY5_3831021/02 “At risk” 28.229700 28.146433 52.785251 52.780287 38 Kolodniansky channel BY5_383111/02 “Possibly at risk” 27.976207 28.006165 51.755936 51.735917 39 Rodalsky channel BY5_4902/00 “Possibly at risk” 29.212514 29.371210 52.091315 51.960204 40 Izbynka ditch BY5_5002/02 “At risk” 29.935675 29.833479 52.004407 51.890150 41 the Cherten river BY5_5104/01 “Possibly at risk” 28.894323 28.934952

Table 6.2: Parts of water bodies at risk of not achieving at least a good ecological status

№ Name of watercourse Water body code Centre coordinates Risk category 1 Lake Chervonoe BY5_00013/00 52.406293° 27.971141° “Possibly at risk”

122 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

№ Name of watercourse Water body code Centre coordinates Risk category 2 Bereza q reservoir BY5_0012/00 52.480313° 25.241959° “Possibly at risk”

Note that groundwater bodies are considered as not at risk for this first planning cycle.

6.2 Environmental objectives

Environmental goals and the measures to achieve them, in accordance with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive of the European Union, are set to improve the status of surface water bodies (or their parts). Environmental goals also comply with Article 15 of the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus and TCP 17.06-14-2017 (33140) “Environmental protection and nature management. Hydrosphere. Re- quirements for the development, compilation and execution of draft of river basin management plans.” The identification of environmental goals is based on Article 4 (paragraphs 4.3–4.7) of EU Guidance Document No.1, “Economics and the Environment. Issues of implementing the Water Framework Di- rective”. Taking into account the requirements of the Water Framework Directive, as well as the approved national indicators, the main environmental goals for water bodies in the Pripyat basin are based on the achievement of:

 good ecological and chemical status of surface water bodies;  good ecological potential of heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) and artificial water bodies (AWB);  good quantitative and chemical status of groundwater bodies.

Map B.45 of Annex B presents the environmental objectives for surface water bodies to be achieved by the appropriate deadline (2025, 2030).

Ecological goals for water use until 2030: - The intensity of use of fresh water reserves (water stress) does not exceed 10% (weak water stress); - The discharge of insufficiently treated wastewater into surface water bodies is prevented.

Environmental objectives for protected areas: until 2024:  sanitary protection zones are used for all water intakes with a volume of more than 5 m3/day, including water intakes that are not part of the centralised water supply network (CWSN);  the quality of 75% of drinking water withdrawn with a sampling of more than 5 m3/day is monitored at least once a year, including water intakes not included in the central water supply network (CWSN); until 2030:  the quality of 100% of drinking water withdrawn with a sampling of more than 5 m3/day is monitored at least once a year, including water intakes not included in the CWSN;  good quantitative and chemical status of all drinking water of more than 5 m3/day is monitored, including water intakes that are not included in the CWSN, with fences installed to protect abstraction sites.

123 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Ecological goals for water bodies vulnerable to nitrate pollution: possible goals until 2025  identification of vulnerable areas with respect to nitrate contamination;  implementation of a monitoring program for nitrates (surface and groundwater).

possible goals until 2030:  90% of water bodies used as sources of centralised drinking water supply meet the requirements of national legislation on the content of nitrates in drinking water [27]. Ecological goals until 2030 for water bodies used for recreation (bathing) are based on the good quality of all facilities. Map B.45 of Annex B shows the environmental objectives for water bodies. The main way to solve environmental problems is to implement the measures to achieve environmental goals presented in Section 7 of this Pripyat RBMP and in Table A.21 of Annex A.

6.3 Water-related objectives related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Protocol for water and health, other international and national strategies and/or policies

The Republic of Belarus has fulfilled a number of obligations in order to implement international agreements in the field of rational use and protection of water resources:

- The Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, concluded in Helsinki on 17 March 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the Water Convention), to which the Republic of Belarus affiliated by Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus dated 21 April 2003 No.161 “On Affiliation of the Republic of Belarus to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes”;

- The Protocol on Water and Health (hereinafter referred to as the PWH) to the Water Convention, to which the Republic of Belarus affiliated by Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus dated 31 March 2009 No.159; - The Agenda for Sustainable Development for the period 2016-2030, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 25 September 2015 (hereinafter - the 2030 Agenda), and approved by UN General As- sembly resolution A/RES/70/1 on 25 September 2015. As a Party to the Water Convention, the Republic of Belarus regularly implements the principles of integrated water resources management and the basin management system (creating basin councils and developing RBMPs), and also regularly reports on the implementation of the provisions of the Water Convention in the country. The Pripyat River basin, which shares a boundary with Ukraine, is 100% covered by the existing mechanism of transboundary cooperation (Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Belarus and the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on the joint use and protection of transboundary waters, 16 October 2001). In the framework of PWH activities, in 2013 by Decree of the Ministry of Health dated 4 December 2013 No.116, the Republic of Belarus established a list of measures and targets to reach 9 of the 20 target areas of the PWH and regularly provides reports on their achievement. In 2019, work was carried out to update the target indicators for the PWH: a list of measures and target indicators for their achievement was developed in 17 of the 20 target areas, which are currently being approved by the government.

124 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

The focus area for the Pripyat River Basin, as well as for the whole of Belarus, is the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda. The development of national indicators for monitoring progress towards SDG 6 is the main challenge related to water resources. In the framework of SDG 6, 8 targets and relevant indicators for assessing progress towards achieving the goals were identified. Most of the goals and indicators for SDG 6 are also objectives and indicators of the draft strategy for water resources management in the context of climate change for the period until 2030. When developing activities and targets for the Pripyat RBMP, the main focus will be on indicators for the implementation of goals 6.3-6.5 of SDG 6: - Indicator 6.3. By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimis- ing the release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater, and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally; - Indicator 6.4. By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of fresh water to address water scarcity, and substantially reduce the number of people suffering from water scarcity; - Indicator 6.5. By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation if appropriate. In order to assess the increased efficiency of wastewater treatment and the implementation of goal 6.3 of SDG 6, it is advisable to use indicator 6.3.1. “The proportion of safely treated wastewater (PSTW)”. This indicator in the Republic of Belarus for 2013-2018 is in the range of 99.3-99.7% (i.e., the volume of insufficiently treated wastewater is about 4-6 million m3 per year). At the same time, the volume of insufficiently treated wastewater is associated mainly with the operation of water treatment facilities or companies operating under concessions. Moreover, the discharge of wastewater, especially when insufficiently treated, has the greatest impact on the ecological status of water bodies. Progress on indicator 6.3.1 for 2013-2018 for the republic and the Pripyat basin is shown in table 6.3. Table 6.3: Progress on indicator 6.3.1 “The share of safe wastewater” in the Republic of Belarus and the Pripyat river basin“ The Republic of Belarus # Characteristic Unit 2013 2014 2015 2016* 2017 2018 Water discharge million 1 into surface wa- m3/per 973.9 954.2 869.6 1 048.4 1 052.7 1034.0 ter bodies year million without preliminary 3 1.1 m /per 317.02 315.74 245.73 339.13 354.02 340.90 cleaning year million 1.2 treated to standard m3/per 653.92 635.02 618.17 702.96 694.40 689.07 year million not sufficiently 3 1.3 m /per 2.92 3.43 5.71 6.34 4.27 4.0 treated year 2 PSTW % 99.70 99.64 99.34 99.39 99.59 99.61 The Pripyat River Basin Water discharge million 1 into surface wa- 3 277.2 254.3 185.6 251.1 181.2 205.2 m /per year ter bodies without preliminary million 1.1 3 215.74 194.99 126.96 169.47 118.60 145.75 treatment m /per year million 1.2 treated to standard 3 61.27 58.60 56.52 80.79 61.26 58.81 m /per year not sufficiently million 1.3 3 0.17 0.74 2.16 0.84 1.36 0.66 treated m /per year

125 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

2 PSTW % 99.94 99.71 98.84 99.66 99.25 99.68 Note: since 2016, data take into account the discharge of surface wastewater In order to assess the effectiveness of water use and the implementation of target 6.4 of SDG 6, it is advisable to use indicator 6.4.2. “The intensity of use of fresh water reserves (water stress)”. This indicator in the Republic of Belarus for 2010-2018 is in the range of 2.84-2.41%, which, in accordance with the methodology for calculating the indicator, is classified as weak water stress. Progress on indicator 6.4.2 for 2010-2018 for the republic and the Pripyat basin is shown in table 6.4.

Table 6.4: Progress on indicator 6.4.2 “Intensity of use of fresh water reserves (water stress)” in the Republic of Belarus and in the Pripyat river basin for 2010-2018.

Year Summarisation Unit 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Republic of Belarus % 2.76 2.83 2.84 2.72 2.72 2.51 2.51 2.42 2.41 Pripyat % 3.31 3.51 3.57 3.38 3.22 2.62 2.79 2.87 2.74 To fulfil international obligations, a number of strategic documents have been developed in the country, including target forecast indicators of water use. Their achievement will contribute to improving the state of water resources. The Belarus Water Strategy for the Period until 2020, the Environmental Strategy for the Period until 2025, and the National Strategy for Sustainable Development of the Re- public of Belarus until 2030 are in force in Belarus. Projected water use target indicators are also included in the Programme of Social and Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2016- 2020, the state programme "Ensuring comfortable living conditions and a favorable living environment" Subprogram 5 "Clean water", and the state programme "Environmental protection and sustainable use of natural resources for 2016 - 2020”. The main indicators of water use, which the Republic of Belarus plans to achieve, in accordance with the listed documents, are shown in table 6.5.

Table 6.5: Indicators for the use and protection of water resources established in national strategic documents Name of the document in Indicator values by which the obligations are Indicator name years validated 2020 2025 2030 Water strategy of the Decrease in the discharge volume of insufficiently 20 - - Republic of Belarus for treated wastewater into surface water bodies, % the period until 2020 by 2010 Water saving due to the introduction of circulating 93 - - and recycling (sequential) water supply systems Environment Strategy Increase in water consumption in the circulating 95 until 2025 and recycling systems in industry, % Specific water consumption for drinking and other 140 needs of the population, l/person Reducing the flow of pollutants into water bodies, % by 2010: heavy metals – 95 persistent organic pollutants – 95 nitrogen compounds– 50 phosphorus compounds– 50 Phased decommissioning followed by reclamation - 50 of the filtration fields, in % State programme "Enviro Discharge index of insufficiently treated 60 30 0

126 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Name of the document in Indicator values by which the obligations are Indicator name years validated 2020 2025 2030 nmental Protection and wastewater into water bodies, in % by 2015 Sustainable Use of Natu- Water use in circulating and recycling water sup- 92 92 93 ral Resources" for 2016 - ply systems, % 2020, NSSD-2030

127 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 7. PROGRAMME OF MEASURES

In accordance with the ecological goals presented in the previous chapter 6, the activities of the Pri- pyat River Basin Management Plan to achieve these goals are aimed primarily at improving the environmental status of surface water bodies (their parts), as well as at reducing the negative anthropogenic impact on groundwater bodies. Measures aimed at improving the ecological status of surface water bodies (their parts), as well as the quantitative and chemical status of groundwater bodies, also serve to achieve the SDGs, the targets of the Protocol on Water and Health, and NSSD-2030. Measures are divided into two types. The first type includes general-purpose measures (basic measures). The second type includes measures for specific water bodies (supplementary measures). Measures for specific water bodies are aimed at improving their status or maintaining their excellent or good status (Table A.21 of Annex A).

7.1 Principles of measures

This chapter determines the main strategic framework and directions in the field of protection and use of water resources in relation to the Pripyat basin, and forms the basis for activities for specific water bodies. The following strategic directions of measures are proposed for the main issues facing the Pripyat basin Increased coverage of the centralised water supply and sanitation systems, especially in rural areas: - construction of new water supply systems and reconstruction of existing ones using the best available technical methods (BAT), including high-efficiency and low-cost water treatment technologies; - development of regulatory instruments for the rational and careful use of water resources, the, improvement of the financial and economic mechanism for stimulating the use of BAT; - improvement of the pricing policy for water, in order to eliminate the unreasonable use of drinking- quality water for the technological needs of industrial enterprises; - plugging and removal of inoperative water wells. Reduction in the pollution of surface and groundwater bodies from point and diffuse sources:

 implementation of circulating and recycling water supply systems in order to reduce the consumption of fresh water and reduce the amount of wastewater discharged;  reduction in the use of drinking water for industrial needs when permitted in compliance with the legislation of the Republic of Belarus;  construction and reconstruction of local treatment facilities for industrial wastewater before their discharge into the sewage systems of settlements to reduce the load on municipal treatment facilities;  implementation of modern technologies for the deep treatment of wastewater using biogens in municipal wastewater treatment plants and industrial companies discharging wastewater into surface water bodies;  treatment of surface wastewater in settlements with a population of more than 50,000 people, in resorts and industrial areas;  prevention of the discharge of untreated and insufficiently treated wastewater into water bodies;

128 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

 measures for the disposal of wastewater - treatment of all types of wastewater (industrial, municipal, from livestock complexes, surface wastewater);  sewage and rainwater treatment, primarily from the sites of industrial companies, streets with heavy traffic and high-rise areas, to prevent river water pollution from surface runoff from urban areas;  removal (reclamation) of filtration fields in the Pripyat river basin, which have a significant negative impact on surface and underground water bodies;  measures carried out directly in water bodies - sanitary releases from reservoirs, aeration, removal of floating impurities from the water surface;  measures to reduce the anthropogenic load on the water body due to a possible reduction in production volumes and improved location of production facilities in river basins and water management sites;  implementation of the best available technical methods in agriculture;  compliance with the norms and technologies of fertilizing, rules for their storage, selection of the rational structure of crops on coastal slopes, creation of protective forest belts along waterways;  upgrade of water users with modern measuring instruments;  accounting of the discharge of pollutants through rainwater drainage systems;  preparation of water management and hydrochemical balances for large industrial centres;  development of a scientific and methodological framework to manage the use and protection of water bodies, including development of cost-effective mechanisms to stimulate effective water use;  development of an observational network for the status of water bodies and water management systems, including a state network for observing the status of surface and groundwater bodies of the National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus in terms of combining observations of quantitative and qualitative indicators of surface waters;  development of methodological and normative support for simulated mathematical models for assessing the input of pollutants from dispersed (diffuse) sources of pollution and their impact on water bodies, making estimates of the input of pollutants from these sources and their impact on surface and underground water bodies.

During the implementation of these measures in a number of specific cases, environmental criteria may take precedence over economic criteria. However, in the Republic of Belarus as a whole, investments in water protection measures are significantly lower than preventable damage. Reduction of the negative consequences of significant changes in the hydrological regime due to hazardous hydrometeorological events leading to floods and droughts:

 assessment of the potential degree of development of hazardous hydrometeorological phenomena in water bodies (spring floods and summer-autumn rain floods; dry periods);  identification of territories subject to flooding, their classification and mapping. Development of flood risk assessment maps in accordance with the approaches of EU Directive 2007/60/EU;  inventory of existing polder and reclamation systems in the basin, assessment of their effectiveness, safety and environmental impact with the development of recommendations for their improvement;  implementation of engineering water management measures to protect settlements and agricultural lands from floods in the most flood-prone areas of Polesye within the framework of state programs and individual projects;  installation of posts for operational automatic control of the hydrological regime of the rivers of the Pripyat basin (the Pinsk district is the first region in Belarus where modern technologies for operational tracking of the hydrological regime are being introduced - six automated hydrometeorological stations have been installed as part of international technical assistance projects at hydrological posts on the Pripyat rivers above the city of Pinsk, Styr and Goryn in the Pinsk and Stolin districts, Pina in the city of Pinsk, Tsna in the Luninets district and Yaselda in the city of Bereza);

129 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

 creation of an early warning system based on operational data on automatic control of the level regime of rivers in the Pripyat basin;  development of approaches and methods for managing the flood control system;  restoration of channel capacity;  development of alternative methods of flood control (planning of construction of territories, land withdrawal from agricultural circulation, creation of a flood insurance system, training of the population on flood protection).

The following basic activities are planned at the interstate level:  monitoring of the hydrological regime in the Upper-Pripyat waterworks (the Pripyat river above and below the water intake, the Vyzhevsky Channel of the Beloozersk water supply system of the Dnieper-Bug Channel), as well as on the Svyatoye, Volyanskoye and Beloye lakes by the Volyn Regional Water Agency (Ukraine) with the provision of information to the Belarusian side;  optimisation of water intake management at the Upper-Pripyat waterworks on the territory of Ukraine and the Beloozersk water supply system in order to maintain water supply to the watershed of the Dnieper-Bug Channel, on the condition that the Pripyat River operates ecologically below the water intake and the recommended range of changes in water levels in Svyatoye, Volyan- skoe, Beloye lakes;  joint research with the Ukrainian side in order to develop optimal solutions for managing the water resources of the Upper Pripyat, operating the Upper-Pripyat waterworks, and improving the environmental state of Svyatoye, Volyanskoye, Beloye (the main natural water reservoirs of the Beloozersky water supply system in the Dnieper-Bug Channel) and the downstream section of the Pripyat River.  inventory and expert assessment of existing national and regional projects, programmes and schemes for flood protection with a view to joint basin implementation;  elaboration and development and development of basin geographic information systems;  development of automated management systems for the use and protection of water bodies based on the introduction of mathematical modelling tools and projections of the state of the river basin, the full and operational use of data from state monitoring of water bodies, as well as state control and supervision of the use and protection of water bodies;  development of operational information systems and alerts to executive authorities, local authorities, water users and the public about the state of water bodies and the potential harmful effects of water;  development of a data management scheme in order to share relevant data between decision- makers and stakeholders. Changes in ecosystems and conservation of landscape and biological diversity: - development of the existing system of specially protected natural territories and elements of the National Ecological Network, their integration into the all-European ecological network as a key condition for preserving the biological and landscape diversity of the national and all-European levels. - development of fisheries and hunting, their transfer to an adapted type of management; expansion of harvesting of wild plant products based on the existing high potential of natural ecosystems and specially protected natural areas; - harmonisation and standardisation of the biological assessment system of the Pripyat River and its tributaries between the Republic of Belarus and Ukraine with the exchange of hydroecological information; - systematic organisation of environmental educational activities among the population, development of ecological and water tourism based on existing environmental facilities and the Pripyat River (there is a steady demand for these types of tourism from both the population of Belarus and European countries, which will increase as urbanisation grows and income rises);

130 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

- reconstruction of selected reclamation systems and hydraulic structures that have operated through the normative period and have reached a state unsuitable for further operation; - maintenance of selected reclamation systems and separately located hydraulic structures in technically sound and efficient condition; timely behaviour of works to eliminate minor damage and prevent damage; - implementation of land reclamation measures on drained farmland; - maintenance of an optimal soil hydrological regime for agricultural crops by managing hydro- regulatory structures; - monitoring of the hydrological regime in reclamation systems and reclaimed lands. Radioactive pollution of river waters caused by the Chernobyl nuclear accident: The main basic measure to prevent the pollution of river waters in the Pripyat basin is the existing system for monitoring surface waters using hydrochemical indicators in transboundary river sections.

7.2 Localised measures

In total, according to this Pripyat River Basin Management Plan, 44 measures have been proposed, of which 40 are main measures and 4 are additional. Table A.21 of Annex A provides a list of specific measures for water bodies, based on their strategic directions and the content of the measures themselves. The special MS-Excel file and the map B.55 in Annex B show the distribution of these measures in the context of water bodies, and takes into account their directions. Thirty-nine measures are directly aimed at improving the environmental status of surface water bodies in accordance with the EU Water Framework Directive. Five measures relate to reducing the negative effects of hazardous hydro-meteorological phenomena (floods and droughts), which are not related to the WFD. This list also includes the activities of the state programme “Engineering water management measures to protect settlements and agricultural lands from floods in the most flood-hazardous areas of Polesye for 2011-2015”, which was not actually implemented during these years. The implementation of the programme was subsequently postponed to 2020, and then 2025. The distribution of the number of water bodies covered by measures, based on their strategic directions, is shown in Figure 21. In total, measures cover 225 water bodies, which is 31.5% of all allocated surface water bodies. Measures aimed at improving the environmental status of surface water bodies cover 139 water bodies in the Pripyat River basin, which make up about 20% of all allocated surface water bodies. The list of water bodies covered by the Plan activities, based on their strategic directions, is presented in table 7.1.

131 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Amount of water bodies affected by measures

Development of surface and groundwater monitoring systems 19; 9% 55; 24% Reducing hazardous hydrometeorological phenomena (floods, droughts)

38; 17% Reducing the impact on water bodies from the housing and utilities sector (construction and reconstruction of treatment facilities, water supply and sanitation systems) Decreased anthropogenic impact on water 27; 12% bodies from industrial and agricultural production 86; 38% Land use regulation in water protection zones, including the elimination (reclamation) of filtration fields

Figure 21: General distribution of supplementary measures by different types of measure

Table 7.1: Distribution of water bodies affected by different types of measure

Amount Main directions of of water Water bodies affected by measures measures bodies Institutional measures (support of the Pripyat All SWBs and GWBs.

basin council, etc.) Pripyat river (00/01, 00/10, 00/11, 00/13, 00/15), Bobrik river (10/03), Dokolka river (3827/02), Ipa river (41/03), Moroch river (2418/04), Oressa river (3831/04), Svinovod river (28/01), Sluch river (24/03, 24/06), Ubort river (34/02), Tsna river (14/04), Cherten river (5104/01), Yaselda river (07/03, Development of 07/07), Beloe lake (0004/00), Vygonoshanskoe lake (0008/00), Chervonoe surface and lake (00012/00), Narovlyanka river (47/00), Plessa river (0717/00), Ptich groundwater river (38/01, 38/02, 38/04, 38/05), Shat river (3810/02), Prostyr river (02/00), monitoring sys- 55 Gorodishenskoe lake (0009/00), Sergeevichskoe lake (00014/00), Spo- tems including rovskoe lake (0005/00), Beloe lake (0001/00), Tsna river (14/02), Naut river data sharing (2702/02), Luninetskiyi canal (12/02), Lyakhovichskiyi canal (060203/03), scheme Tsepra river (1904/02), Mazha river (241804/02), Solyanka river (3831021/02), Serebronskaya canal (3830/01), Struga canal (060403/00), Bobrik II river (35/02), BYPRGW001 (9 new wells), BYPRGW003 (1 new well), BYPRGW004 (2 new wells), BYPRGW009 (2 new wells).

132 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Amount Main directions of of water Water bodies affected by measures measures bodies Stviga river (26/02), Ubort river (34/01, 34/02), Ptich river (38/04, 38/05, 38/06), Luninetskiyi canal (12/01), Pripyat river (00/01, 00/02, 00/03, 00/04, 00/06, 00/08, 00/09, 00/10, 00/11, 00/12, 00/13, 00/14, 00/15), Turovo- Olgomelskiyi canal (25/00), Remel-Semigostichskiyi canal (22/00), Dubov- skiyi canal (13/02), Vinets canal (0712/02), Tsna river (14/02, 14/03, 14/04), Zhirovskiyi canal (060205/01), Lyakhovichskiyi canal (060203/01, 060203/02), Yaselda river (07/06, 07/07), Oginskiyi canal (0729/01, 0729/02), Khodakovskiyi canal (071901/00), Glavnyiyi canal (0719/01), Bobrik river (10/02, 10/03), Lan river (19/03), Smerd river (16/02, 16/03), Pangalasovskiyi Reduction of canal (242404/00), Volkhva river (2424/03), Styr river (08/00), Kletnyanskiyi hazardous hy- canal (072501/00), Zavishanskiyi canal (0606/02), Pina river (06/05), Vislitsa drometeorological 86 river (1007/02), Rukhchanskiyi canal (11/00), Goryn river (18/00), Vetlitsa phenomena river (15/01), Mostva river (2603/00), Vysoko-Makhnovichskiyi canal (floods, droughts) (510203/02), Mlynok river (4901/01), Slovechna river (51/00), Glinitsa river (2701/01, 2701/2), Sluch river (24/02, 24/05, 24/06), Nenach river (42/03), Plotnitsa river (3406/00), Svinovod river (28/01), Neratovka river (383002/02), Rudobelskiyi canal (3830021/00), Tremlya river (39/01, 39/04), Skolodina river (36/02), Sekerichskiyi canal (3834/00), Khorometskiyi canal (3829/00), Ipa river (41/02), Shpilovichskiyi canal (383114/00), Oressa river (3831/02, 3831/03), Berezovka river (3831091/01, 3831091/02), Vit river (50/03), Turya river (46/02), Pogonyanskiyi canal (54/01, 54/02), Rozhava river (5305/00), Zhelon river (53/03, 53/04), Khrapun river (5302/00), Strelka river (5303/00), Veresozhka (5304/00), Kozhukhovskiyi canal (52/02). Reduction of the impact on water Sluch river (24/03), Moroch river (2418/04), Krivichnskiyi canal (241809/03), bodies from the Tsepra river (1904/02), Pripyat river (00/03, 00/11, 00/14), Yaselda river housing and (07/04), Krechet river (0709/00), Luninetskiyi canal (12/02), Neslukha river utilities sector (0604/02), Lyakhovichskiyi canal (060203/03), Oressa river (3831/03), Naut (construction and 27 river (2702/02), Vit river (50/03), Mazha river (241804/02), Oginskiyi canal reconstruction of (0729/02), Goryn river (18/00), Khotlyanskiyi canal (381001/00), Nenach river treatment facili- (42/02), Mlynok river (4901/01), Kozhukhovskiyi canal (52/01), Ubort river ties, water supply (34/02), Ptich river (38/04), Bereza 1 reservoir (0012/00), Beloe lake and sanitation (0004/00), Pina river (06/04). systems) Sluch river (24/02, 24/03, 24/04), Neslukha river (0604/02), Pina river (06/03, 06/04), Serebronskaya canal (3830/01), Duboiskiyi canal (13/02), Merechan- Decrease in the ka river (0730/01, 0730/02), Luninetskiyi canal (12/02), Struga canal anthropogenic (060403/00), Kopanets river (1803/00), Bobrik 2 river (35/02), Pripyat river impact on water (00/03, 00/13), Matsovka river (0706/00), Yaselda river (07/02, 07/03, 07/08), bodies from in- 38 Goryn river (18/00), Tsna river (14/04), Bobrik river (10/03), Philippovka river dustrial and agri- (0605/01), Mlynok river (4901/01), Nenach river (42/02), Lokneya river cultural produc- (2410/02), Lan river (19/02, 19/03), Tsepra river (1904/01), Ptich river (38/02, tion 38/03), Glusskiyi canal (3823/00), Moroch river (2418/03), Vislitsa river (1007/03), Oressa river (3831/03), Tremlya river (39/04), Pangalasovskiyi canal (242404/00), Smerd river (16/03). Land use regula- Goryn river (18/00), Tsna river (14/04), Bobrik river (10/03), Yaselda river tion in water (07/08), Merechanka river (0730/02), Pina river (06/03), Philippovka river protection zones, (0605/01), Struga river (060501/00), Mlynok river (4901/01), Nenach river including the 19 (42/02), Pripyat river (00/13), Sluch river (24/02), Lokneya river (2410/02), elimination (rec- Lan river (19/02), Tsepra river (1904/01), Ptich river (38/02, 38/03, 38/05), lamation) of filtra- Glusskiyi canal (3823/00), Chervonoe lake (00012/00). tion fields Additional All SWBs and GWBs. measures

133 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 8. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (PART 2 RELATED TO THE PROGRAMME OF MEASURES)

When performing economic analyses in the framework of the programme of measures and the characterisation of the Pripyat river basin, the EUWI + Guidance document on economic analysis was used [36]. The total cost of the measures amounts to 456.24 million euros, including measures aimed at reducing the risks of the negative consequences of hazardous hydrometeorological phenomena (floods and droughts) and improving the environmental status of surface water bodies,. In total, the cost of measures aimed at improving the environmental status of surface water bodies is 354.78 million euros. The distribution of the cost of measures, based on their strategic directions, is shown in Figure 22 and in Table 8.1

410; 0.1% 210; 0.0% Estimated cost of measures, thousands Euro/ % from total cost 5672; 1.2% 3370; 0.7% Istitutional Measures (support of the Pripyat basin counsyl etc)

Development of surface and groundwater monitoring systems 59840; 13.1%

101465; 22.2% Reducing hazardous hydrometeorological phenomena (floods, droughts)

Reducing the impact on water bodies from the housing and utilities sector (construction and reconstruction of treatment facilities, water supply and sanitation systems)

Decreased anthropogenic impact on water bodies from industrial and agricultural production 285268; 62.5%

Land use regulation in water protection zones, including the elimination (reclamation) of filtration fields

Additional measures

Figure 22: General distribution of estimated cost of measures by different types of measure

134 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

Table 8.1: General distribution of estimated cost of measures by different types of measure Cost of measures, Main directions of measures thousands of euros Institutional Measures (support of the Pripyat basin council, etc.) 210 Development of surface and groundwater monitoring systems 3370 Reduction of hazardous hydrometeorological phenomena (floods, droughts) 101465 Reduction of the impact on water bodies from the housing and utilities sector (construction and reconstruction of treatment facilities, water supply and 285268 sanitation systems) Decrease in anthropogenic impact on water bodies from industrial and agri- 59840 cultural production Land use regulation in water protection zones, including the elimination (rec- 5672 lamation) of filtration fields Additional measures 410 Total cost of measures 456235 Total cost of measures for improving ecological status of water bodies 354770

Compared with gross domestic product (GDP) in the Pripyat river basin for 2018 (42,030 million rubles/16,880 million euros), the cost of measures of 354.77 million euros (mainly in the first five-year period of the implementation of the Pripyat river basin management plan) can tentatively be no more than 2.1% per year of the GDP created in the Pripyat basin (not more than 70 euros per year per inhabitant of the basin). The cost of measures to improve the environmental status of water bodies is comparable to the annual financial resources used in the Pripyat river basin for environmental protection purposes (total environmental protection running costs), which is 287.6 million rubles/115.5 million euros (2018 data). On an annual basis, the implementation of the Pripyat River Basin Management Plan measures may require a slight increase of the established existing financing of environmental protection measures - by 25%. The funding sources for the measures are the state budget, local budgets, companies’ own and bor- rowed funds, government programmes, and funds from programmes of the World Bank and the Euro- pean Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). It should be noted that the analysis of the economic effectiveness of measures for the Pripyat basin (comparing the values of costs and benefits) raises a number of issues and is largely unrealistic [36]. This is due to the fact that it is practically impossible to assess the value terms of the benefits of measures, including due to the unique technical solutions required for many problems. Thus, one could argue about the indirect and direct advantages of introducing the plan of measures for all types of economic activity by improving the condition of surface waters. In particular, it is possible to improve the characteristics of fisheries, increase tourist attractiveness due to the better quality bathing water, and reduce the cost of water treatment and wastewater disposal, etc. A total assessment of the financial consequences of the programme of measures, carried out in accordance with the guidance document [36], allows us to conclude that due to the implementation of measures, it is unlikely that tariffs for water supply and sanitation services, as well as environmental tax, will be changed. The conclusion mentioned indicates insignificant negative financial consequences of implementing the measures of the Pripyat River Basin Management Plan.

135 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

CHAPTER 9: INFORMATION AND CONSULTATION

1. River Basin Organisation The first meeting of the Pripyat Basin Council was held on 29 June 2018, in accordance with Article 19 of the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus. Its structure was approved by order of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus dated 21 June 2018 No. 190-OD “On the Creation of the Pripyat Basin Council”. The formation of the Pripyat Basin Council is the implementation of one of the basic principles of the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, which the Republic of Belarus ratified in 2003. The activities of the basin council are primarily aimed at integrated water resources management. This will require conducting not only a thorough analysis of the current water management situation, but also an objective assessment of the prospective use of water resources, taking into account the achievement of indicators of social and economic development for the Republic of Belarus, as well as the Sustainable Development Goals contained in the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly from 25.09.2015 No.70/1. During the session of the Basin Council, information was given on the results of the development of the very first draft Pripyat River Basin Management Plan. This draft was prepared by the CRICUWR within the framework of applied research in accordance with Article 15 of the Water Code of the Re- public of Belarus. It was noted that the draft Pripyat River Basin Management Plan was being developed with the prospect of a 10-year implementation. According to the protocol of the first meeting of the Pripyat Basin Council, the following goals were proposed in the framework of the international technical assistance project “EU + Water Initiative” (EUWI +):

 to provide more detail in the sections of the Pripyat RBMP taking into account the results of the inventory and identification of water bodies;  to improve the proposed measures aimed at improving the ecological status of surface water bodies of the Pripyat River basin, including taking into account the environmental action plan for the ecological rehabilitation of the Bolev Mokh complex - Lake Chervonoe in the Zhitkovichi district of the Gomel region for the period until 2022. This was approved by the First Deputy Chairman of the Gomel Regional Executive Committee, A.V. Mikalutskiy, with prospects for the development of business in the region;  to send the improved document for reconsideration by those interested with a view to its subsequent consideration at the next meeting of the Pripyat Basin Council with the adoption of a final decision. The second meeting of the Pripyat Basin Council was held on 16 October 2020. During this meeting, the final draft of Pripyat River Basin Management Plan has been presented and approved by the Bain Council. In accordance with Belarusian procedure, the Pripyat RBMP was then transmitted to the concerned Oblast executive committees for approval.

2. Public consultation A first public consultation on the draft of the Pripyat RBMP was held in Minsk on 1 November 2019. The Pripyat RBMP was improved to take into account the results of these consultations and other

136 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

comments and proposals received from different ministries, stakeholders and other governmental and non-governmental organisations. On 31 January 2020, a second public consultation was held in Gomel concerning the draft of the final version of the Pripyat RBMP.

137 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

REFERENCES

1. Water Code of the Republic of Belarus of 30 April 2014 № 149-3. 2. Monitoring, use and management of the Pripyat river basin water resources/under the general editorship of M.Kalinin and A.Obodovsky. - Мinsk: BelSENS, 2003-- 269 p. 3. Climate of Belarus/Edited by V.Loginov.- Minsk: Institute of Geological Sciences, National Acad- emy of Sciences of Belarus, 1996. 4. Scientific and Applied Handbook on the Climate of the USSR. N. 7. S.3. Part 1-6. – L.:Hidro. 5. Babichenko V., Barabash M., Logvinov K. and others. The nature of the Ukrainian SSR. Climate. - K .: Naukova Dumka, 1984. - 232 p. 6. Barabash M., Gribenyuk N., Tatarchuk O. Climate change with global warming//Ukraine. 1998. No 3 - P. 9–12. 7. Geomorphology of Belarus: A manual for students of the Faculty of Geography/O.Yakushko, L.Maryina, Yu.Yemelyanov. Edited by O.Yakushko. - Minsk: BSU, 2000. 8. Volchek A., Kalinin M. The current state of the water resources of the Belarusian Polesye/Natural environment of Polesye: the current state and its change. Materials of the Polish-Ukrainian-Belarusian International scientific conference Lublin-Shatsk-Brest, June 17-21, 2002, Part 1. - Brest, 2002. - p. 62–67. 9. Popov O. Underground rivers supply. - L .: Gidrometeoizdat, 1968. - 292 p. 10. Yurkevich I., Geltman V. The forests of Belarus and their role in the conservation of nature.//Protection of Nature. - Mn, 1972. 11. Maslovsky O., Rykovsky G. Transformation of natural complexes, biodiversity conservation and environmental management of the territory of Polesye Radiation and Ecological Re- serve//Natural Resources. 2000, No 1. - p. 66–80. 12. Treasures of Belarusian nature: areas of international importance for the conservation of biological diversity/Edited by A.Kazulin - M .: Belarus 2002. 13. Delineation of surface water bodies in Pripyat river basin in Belarus including characterization of Pripyat river basin, description and GIS shapefiles of delineated surface water bodies. Final Technical Report,– Minsk, December 2018, prepared by the Central Research Institute for Com- plex Use of Water Resources on the Service contract #EUWI-EAST-BY-06. – 26 p. 14. Surface water resources of the USSR. Hydrological studies. Volume 5. Belorussia and the upper reaches of the Dnieper - Edited by N.Shek. GIMIZ - Leningrad - 1963 – 304 p. 15. Reference Book of water bodies of the Republic of Belarus - http://www.cricuwr.by/invent_vo/frontpage.htm. 16. Reservoirs in Belarus: Reference Book/ Edited by Doctor of Technical Sciences M.Kalinin - M: OAO "Polygrafcombiant named after Yakub Kolas ", 2005. - 182 p. 17. Reference Book of Water Resources / Edited by B.Strelets. – K.: "Urozhai", 1987. – 304p. 18. Lishtvan I., Azyava G., Yaroshevich L. Flooding challenges in Polesye and measures for flood protection of settlements and land agricultural lands// Natural Resources. 1999. No 2. - P. 49 – 58. 19. The republican program of water engineering measures for the protection of residential areas and agricultural lands from floods in the most flood-prone areas of Polesye. – Mn., 2000. 20. Vasilchenko G., Grinevich L. The experience of flood control in the USSR and the tasks of engineering protection from farmland flooding in the flood plain of the Pripyat River//Problems of Polesye. Issue 9. - Minsk: Science and Technology, 1984. - P.20 - 27. 21. Volchek A., Kalinin M. Water resources of the Brest region. - Minsk: Publishing Centre of BSU, 2002.

138 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

22. Voytsehovich V., Luzan L. Current changes maximum runoff of the rivers of the Ukrainian Polesye// Naukovi pratsi UkrNDGMІ. - 1999. - Issue. 247. - P. 125–135. 23. Shevtsova N., Martsinkevich G. and others. Functional tourist and recreational zoning of medium and small rivers of the Brest region.//Natural resources - 2015. - № 2 - P 107-116. 24. Technical Code of Commom Practise 17.13.-21-2015 (33140) Environmental protection and nature management. Analytical (laboratory) control and monitoring. The procedure for classifying surface water bodies (and their parts) to classes of ecological status. 25. Order of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Bel- arus dated 02.03.2012 No.79-OD “On Certain Issues of Maintaining the State Water Cadastre and Recognizing the Flow of Technological Schemes”. 26. The National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus: observation results, 2018/Edited by E.Bogodyazh - Minsk, Republican Center for Hydrometeorology, Radioactive Contamination Control and Environmental Monitoring. - 2019.-476 p., Ill. 364. 27. Sanitary rules and norms 2.1.4 “Drinking water and water supply in populated areas. Drinking water. Hygienic requirements for water quality of centralized drinking water supply systems. Quality control. Sanitary rules and 28. Regulation on the procedure for the monitoring of surface waters and the use of its data as part of the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus//Decree of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus of April 28, 2004 No.482. 29. Order of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection No.4-OD dated Janu- ary 30, 2015 “On some issues of the organization of work on monitoring surface and groundwater at observation points of the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus”. 30. STB 17.13.04-01-2012/EN 14614:2004 Environmental protection and nature management. Ana- lytical control and monitoring. Guidelines for assessing hydromorphological indicators of the state of rivers 31. STB 17.13.04-02-2013/EN 15843:2010 Environmental protection and nature management. Ana- lytical control and monitoring. Guidelines for assessing the degree of change in hydromorphological indicators of the state of rivers 32. The National Strategy for Sustainable Social and Economic Development of the Republic of Bel- arus for the period until 2030 - Minsk. - 2015 .-- 143 p. 33. The strategy for water resources management in the context of climate change for the period up to 2030 (project) - Minsk. - 2018 .-- 35 p. 34. The concept of the developing the potential of the Pripyat River - Minsk, Institute of Nature Man- agement of the NAS of Belarus. - 2018 .-- 43 p. 35. Bulavko A.G. Determination of calculated evaporation from the reservoirs of Belarus // RUE "CRICUWR" / Land reclamation and water management, No.8 / 1979. - p. 16-19 36. Assistance for the Water Framework Directive compliant use of economic analysis in the development of river basin management plans. Draft Guidance/ European Union Water Initiative Plus for Eastern Partnership Countries (EUWI+). – 2019. - 19 p.

139 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

ANNEX A: TABLES RELATED TO THE PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN (PRESENTED IN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT)

140 Draft Pripyat RBMP - Belarus

ANNEX B: MAPS RELATED TO THE PRIPYAT RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN (PRESENTED IN A SEPARATE DOCUMENT)

141