The Upper Dnieper River Basin Management Plan (Draft)

This project is funded Ministry of Natural Resources The project is implemented by the European Union and Environmental Protection by a Consortium of the Republic of Belarus led by Hulla & Co. Human Dynamics KG

Environmental Protection of International River Basins

THE UPPER DNIEPER RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN (DRAFT)

Prepared by

Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources, Belarus

With assistance of Republican Center on Hydrometeorology, Control of Radioactive Pollution and Monitoring of Environment, Belarus And with Republican Center on Analytical Control in the field of Environmental Protection, Belarus

February 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS...... 4 1.1 Outline of EU WFD aims and how this is addressed with the upper Dnieper RBMP ...... 6 1.2 General description of the upper Dnieper RBMP...... 6 CHAPTER 2 CHARACTERISTIC OF DNIEPER RIVER BASIN ON THE BELARUS TERRITORY...... 10 2.1 Brief characteristics of the upper Dnieper river basin ecoregion (territory of Belarus) ...... 10 2.2 Surface waters...... 10 2.2.1 General description ...... 10 2.2.2 Identification of surface water bodies and their typology...... 12 2.3 Ground waters...... 14 2.2.1 General description ...... 14 2.2.2 Identification and typology of ground water bodies ...... 15 2.3 Protected areas ...... 17 CHAPTER 3 SIGNIFICANT PRESSURES AND POSSIBLE IMPACTS ON WATER STATUS ...... 18 3.1 Surface waters...... 19 3.1.1 Point sources of pollution...... 19 3.1.2 Diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution ...... 21 3.1.3 Hydromorphological changes of water bodies...... 27 3.1.4 Other possible pressures and impacts ob surface water bodies...... 30 3.2 Ground waters...... 31 3.2.1 Pont sources of pollution...... 31 3.2.2 Diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution ...... 31 CHAPTER 4 PROTECTED AREAS...... 33 4.1 Inventory of protected areas related to various Directives and PA categories ...... 33 4.2 Outline of planned monitoring for protected areas...... 33 4.3 Environmental objectives for protected areas...... 33 4.4 Program of measures for protected areas...... 33 4.5 Water protection zones and riversides ...... 34 4.5.1 Basic regulations ...... 34 4.5.2 General characteristics of water protection zones and riversides ...... 35 CHAPTER 5 MONITORING PROGRAMMES AND NETWORKS ...... 39 5.1 Introduction and requirements ...... 39 5.2 Surface waters (rivers and lakes) ...... 40 5.2.1. Description of existing surface water monitoring system...... 40 5.2.2 Perspective surface waters monitoring system ...... 44 5.2.3 Assessment of surface water bodies status...... 52 5.2.4 Surface water bodies at risk assessment...... 60 5.3 Ground water ...... 72 5.3.1 Assessment of ground water body status ...... 72

2 5.3.2 Ground water bodies at risk assessment...... 74 5.3.3 Existing ground water monitoring network ...... 77 5.3.4 Perspective ground water monitoring network ...... 77 CHAPTER 6 ENVIRONMENT OBJECTIVES AND EXEMPTIONS ...... 83 6.1 Environmental objectives...... 83 6.2 Exemption according to WFD ...... 83 CHAPTER 7 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS...... 86 7.1 Features of the economic (business) activity in the basin...... 86 7.1.1 Population ...... 86 7.1.2 Industry ...... 88 7.1.3 Agriculture ...... 89 7.1.4 Navigation, transport and transport infrastructure ...... 90 7.1.5 Energetic ...... 91 7.2 General characteristics of the water use...... 92 7.3. Water balances...... 96 CHAPTER 8 PROGRAM OF MEASURES...... 99 CHAPTER 9 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND CONSULTATION...... 104 CHAPTER 10 COMPETENT AUTHORITIES ...... 105 CHAPTER 11 CONTACT POINTS ...... 105 ANNEXES ...... 106 ANNEX А CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER BODIES OF THE UPPER DNIEPER RIVER BASIN WITHIN BELARUS ...... 106 ANNEX B EXISTING PRESSURES AND IMPACTS ON THE WATER BODIES...... 111 ANNEX C. LIST OF PROTECTED AREAS...... 127 ANNEX D LIST OF MONITORING STATION...... 129 ANNEX E RANGES OF CHEMICAL AND HYDROBIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS FOR THE GOOD WATER BODIES STATUS IN THE UPPER DNIEPER BASIN...... 132 ANNEX F THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FACTORS OF SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER INFLUENCE ON THE SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE MAIN SECTORS OF THE ECONOMY ...... 135 ANNEX G GOVERNMENTAL AND SECTORAL PROGRAMS IN THE FIELD OF USE AND PROTECTION OF WATER RESOURCES ...... 137 ANNEX H WATER BALANCES CALCULATIONS RESULTS...... 139 ANNEX I PROGRAM OF MEASURES TO ACHIVE GOOD ECOLOGICAL STATUS OF WATER BODIES IN THE UPPER DNIEPER BASIN ...... 141 Annex I.1 – Basic measures to achive good ecological status of water bodies...... 141 Annex I.2 – Additional measures to achive good ecological status of water bodies...... 145 Annex I.3 – Additional measures to support good ecological status of water bodies ...... 157

ABBREVIATIONS

AWB artificial water bodies

Belarus Republic of Belarus

BNTU Belarusian National Technical University

CRICUWR Central Research Institute for Complex Use of Water Resources (MNREP, Belarus)

CSCP Communication Strategy and Communication Plan for Upper Dnieper Basin

EPIRB EU-funded project “Environmental Protection of International River Basins”

EU European Union

GWB Groundwater body

HMWB Heavily modified water body

MNREP Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus

NEMS National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus

PoM Program of Measures

RBMP River Basin Management Plan

REC Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

HYDROMET Republican Center on Hydrometeorology, Control of Radioactive Pollution and Monitoring of Environment, Belarus

RCACEP Republican Center of Analytical Control in the field of Environmental Protec- tion (MNREP, Belarus)

SWB Surface water body

SWC State Water Cadaster of the Republic of Belarus

Water Conven- United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) – Convention on tion the protection and use of transboundary watercourses and international lakes

WFD Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 23 Oc- tober 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (EU Water Framework Directive)

RPC State Enterprise"Research and Production Center for Geology"(MNREP, Bel- for Geology arus)

TCP Technical Code of Common Practice (national regulations, Belarus) project International project “Development of draft river basin management plan pilot basin of the upper Dnieper, Belarus"

PA Protected areas

NAS National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

GWB Ground Water Body

SCUWR Scheme of complex use of water resources

KE Key Expert

STE Scientific Technical Expert

5 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 Outline of EU WFD aims and how this is addressed with the upper Dnieper RBMP

According to the paragraph (30) of the Water Framework Directive “In order to ensure a full and consistent implementation of this Directive any extensions of timescale should be made on the basis of appropriate, evident and transparent criteria and be justified by the Member States in the river basin management plans”. The Republic of Belarus in accordance with the Presidential Decree of 21 April 2003 №161 assume obligations to implement the provisions of the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, adopted on 17 March 1992 in Helsinki, by joining to the Convention. It means that the implementation of international obligations should be based on modern approaches and the experience of neighboring countries. In international practice basin principle approach is widely used in water resources management. The implementation of this approach in the Republic of Belarus has been undertaken by the development of schemes of complex use and protection of water resources (SCUPWR), which are systematic materials research and projects work on the state, the prospective use and protection of water bodies. SCUPWR are developed in order to determine the water and other activities to meet the future needs of the population, economic and other activities in water resources, to ensure the rational use and protection of waters, as well as to prevent and eliminate harmful effects of water. In accordance with the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus adopted in 2014 (Law of the Re- public of Belarus on April 30, 2014 N 149-3) the basin principle in the field of water protection and use was introduced. For its implementation River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) are developed. Development of River Basin Management Plan for the Upper Dnieper river basin is a pilot project for the Republic of Belarus. 3 of 5 major river basins of Belarus are located within the Euro- pean Union (EU), and the European experience in the development of this document is important. Positive role in improving the state of the Dnieper Basin can play use of the experience of the European Union, namely, the provisions of the Water Framework Directive, in which one of the most important is the development of River Basin Management Plan. In turn, this plan should be based on the analysis of the river basin state, as required by Article 5 of the WFD, "Characteris- tics of the river basin region, a review of environmental impact of human activity and economic analysis of the water use". Therefore, the basis for the development of the Upper Dnieper RBMP is the Directive of European Parliament and the Council of the European Union 2000/60 /EU of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for the EU activity in the field of water policy (Water Framework Directive, WFD) and Guidelines to it, as well as the national previous experience in the development of SCUPWR. SCUWR is complimentary with the WFD RBMP only in some parts.

1.2 General description of the upper Dnieper RBMP

The present upper Dnieper River Basin Management Plan report is prepared by specialists of CRICUWR with assistance its partners HYDROMET and RCACEM, within the signed contract Development of draft River Basin Management Plan for a Selected Pilot Basin in Belarus (the Upper Dnieper Basin) in the scope of EU funded project “Environmental Protection of Interna- tional River Basins”.

6 The following experts participated in preparing this report: - Vladimir Korneev, Lubov Hertman, Kanstantsin Tsitou, Aliaksandr Pakhomau, Ivan Bulak (CRICUWR); - Genady Tischikov, Igor Tischikov (HYDROMET). When carrying out of the RBMP preparation significant methodological assistance and coopera- tion have been provided by the key project expert Aliaksandr Stankevich. The following experts provided support and substantial assistance in the course of the upper Dnieper RBMP development: − Timothy Turner, EPIRB project, KE1 - Team Leader of the International Experts Group; − Zurab Jincharadze, EPIRB project, KE2 - Deputy Team Leader/ River Basin Management Expert; − Bernardas Paukstys, EPIRB project, KE5 - Groundwater Expert; − Birgit Vogel, Senior STE - EU WFD and RBMP Expert; − Romina Álvarez, Senior STE – Ecology/Biology Expert; − Peter Rončák, Mgr. , Senior STE - Monitoring and Hydro-morphological Expert; − Olga Vasniova, PhD, State Enterprise “Research and Production Center for Geology”- Groundwater Expert; − Vasilij Pashkevich, PhD, Institute for Nature Management, National Academy of Sciences - Groundwater Expert; − Igor Vitsen, State Enterprise “Research and Production Center for Geology” - Groundwa- ter Expert; − Paul Buijs, Senior STE - Chemistry Expert.

Acknowledgements are given by the authors to the experts of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Protection of the Republic of Belarus for the review, comments, proposals and support of this document: − Sergei Zavyalov, Head, Department of Atmospheric Air and Water Resources Impact Con- trol; − Victoria Voranava, Consultant, Department of Atmospheric Air and Water Resources Im- pact Control. In preparing the upper Dnieper RBMP the materials were used also which are presented in the following project reports: - “Pressures and impacts analysis on water bodies” (report prepared by CRICUWR); - “Water bodies and risk analysis” (report prepared by CRICUWR); - “Environmental objectives” (report prepared by CRICUWR); - “Economic analysis and priority measures” (report prepared by CRICUWR); - "Identification, characterization and delineation of groundwater bodies in the Dnieper basin, Belarus" (author – Bernardas Paukstys); - "Identification and typology of water bodies" in the Dnieper basin, Belarus "(authors - Tatiana Kol'tsova and Michael Jackman, with the assistance of Aliaksandr Stankevich and technical exe- cution of CRICUWR); - "Classification of groundwater bodies" (report prepared by Bernardas Paukstys - KE5 expert on ground water); Guidelines for groundwater monitoring programme in the Upper Dnieper river basin of Bel- arus. (report prepared by Bernardas Paukstys - KE5 expert on ground water);

- «Joint Field Survey Report: Surface Waters 2013: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, DRAFT v.1, 01 September 2013 (Authors of report: Svetoslav Cheshmedjiev - KE3 Ecology & Biology Expert, Tatjana Kolcova - KE4 Hydromorphology, ZurabJincharadze KE2);

7 - Surface Waters Monitoring Programme in the Dnieper (BY) River basin (Authors of report: Romina Alvarez and Peter Roncak); and other project materials. “Scheme of complex use and protection of water resources for the Dniepre River Basin” (Report prepared in 2013-2014 yy. by CRICUWR with the leadership of PhD A.M.Penkovskaya in the frame of separate project of the MNREP financed for the Belarusian budget) also was used while preparing the upper Dnieper RBMP. Upper Dnieper RBMP prepared with using planning process presented on the figure 1.1

Implementation of Measures

Programme of Measures

Set Environmental Objectives

Monitoring and Status Assessment

Basin Characterisation, Pressure/Impact Analysis and Economic Analysis

National legislation; RBD delineation; competent authorities; administratives set‐up; cooordination

Figure 1.11 - Planning Process: WFD River Basins Management Plans

Upper Dnieper RBMP includes:: − results of the identification and typology of the surface and ground water bodies; − assessment of the water bodies status on three groups of indicators: hydrochemical, hydromorphological and hydroecological defining their quality class (status); − identification of the main types of pressures and their common features, including land use, urbanization of the territory and its development trends, industry, agriculture and other significant anthropogenic impacts on water bodies; − identification of point and diffuse (dispersed) sources, existing and possible potential threats on the ecological status of water bodies, taking into account the characteristics of water and land use; − characterization of pressures and their possible impacts on the quantity and quality of water bodies depending on the pressures degree and characteristics of receiving water bodies (the vulnerability of water bodies to pressures); − the program od monitoring and description of the currect and perspective monitoring program ans network; − main results of the water balance calculation; − environmental objectives; − water bodies at risk assessment; − general description of the Program of measures; − attachments with detail list of basic and supplementary measures and other technical information regarding description of surface and groundwater bodies, pressures and impacts of

1 Figure prepared by Birgit Vogel 8 of point, diffuse, and other sources including climate change and dangerous hydrometeorological phenomena, hydromorphological changes of water bodies, water balances results etc. The main document used in the frame of the upper Dnieper RBMP preparation. − Directive of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union № 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (Water Framework Directive); − Water Code of the Republic of Belarus in the 2014 edition;

Additionally the following regulations and tools of the water-ecology policy were used: − Water Strategy of the Republic of Belarus for the period until 2020 (approved by the Minis- try of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus 11.08.2011 № 72- P); − Draft Guidance Document on the Development of Programme of Measures and the Achievement of Environmental Objectives According to the EU WFD; − TCP 17.13-10-2013 (02120) Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Rules of definition the ecological (hydrobiological) 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; − STB EN 14614-2012 Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Guidance on the assessment of hydromorphological indicators of the rivers; − TCP 17.06-08-2012 (02120) Environmental protection and nature use. Hydrosphere. The procedure for establishing standards for allowable discharges of chemical and other substances in the wastewater; − TB/PR_3/17.13.04-XX-20XX / EN 15843:2010 Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Guidance on determining the change of hydromorphological indicators of the rivers; − TCP 17.13- ХХ -201H/OP Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. The procedure of classification of a surface water body on ecological status.

Economic analysis and preparation of preliminary priority measures to achieve and maintain good ecological status of water bodies in the Upper Dnieper basin are based on the experience: - Danube River Basin District Management Plan 2009; - National river Tisza basin management plan, 2012; - International River Basin District Meuse - Analysis, Roof Report, International Meuse Commission, 2005; - Internationally Coordinated Management Plan for the International River Basin District of the Rhine, in 2009; - Plan of gradual improvement of the water system the Svisloch river – the Osipovichy reservoir for 2014-2020, 2013. - Investigation of the water supply and sanitation sector in the Republic of Belarus. The World Bank Washington. 2013 Photo on the cover – river Dnepr below Byhov (Belarus), represented by Kanstantsin Tsitou.

9 CHAPTER 2 CHARACTERISTIC OF DNIEPER RIVER BASIN ON THE BEL- ARUS TERRITORY

2.1 Brief characteristics of the upper Dnieper river basin ecoregion (territory of Belarus)

The upper Dnieper basin in Belarus refers to ecoregions “Eastern Plains”. This lowland ecoregion lies on the East European Plain, average elevation is about 100 m. River valleys were formed after the retreat of the glacier, which left depressions in landscape and glacial deposits in the form of moraines. Ecoregion has a warm, humid continental climate, affected by the Atlantic Ocean and the European continent. Summer is relatively warm and humid, and winter - soft. The average annual precipitation ranges from 550 to 800 mm and the average annual temperature is between 3 and 7 Celsius degrees. Minimum temperatures vary in the range from -5 to -14 Celsius degrees, while the maximum temperatures ranging from 20 to 23 Celsius degrees. This ecoregion is characterized by large interannual variability of precipitation, as well as large seasonal temperature fluctuations inland region. Much of the territory is in Sarmatian mixed forests and bordered with the Scandinavian and Russian taiga in the north. Meadows, floodplains, swamps are the features of the landscape of the region. Fish fauna includes about 50 local species of fish. Many riparian zones and wetlands in the region are taking a large population of migratory birds. Ichthyofauna of the region is young enough. Modern fish populations appeared in the process of colonization of newly created ponds after the retreat of the glacier, which covered the entire catchment area of the Baltic Sea and destroyed all local early ichthyofauna during the last glaciations.

2.2 Surface waters

2.2.1 General description

Dnieper River is the largest river flowing through the territory of Belarus. The river originates from the southern spurs of the Valdai Hills from a small bog (236 m above sea level) in 2.0 km south-east from Aksenino village, Andrew district of Smolensk region of Russia. The river flows into the Dnieper-Bug estuary of the Black Sea (Ukraine). (Figures 2.1-2.3).

Figure 2.1 – Scheme of the upper Dnieper river basin on the territory of Belarus2

Figure 2.2 – river Dnieper downstream of Or- Figure 2.3 – river Dniepre downstream Byhov sha town3 town

In Belarus the river flows through Vitebsk, Gomel and Mogilev regions.

2 the map was developed using the information resource http://planetolog.ru/map-continent- big.php?id=EUR&scheme=3 3 Photos in the Figures 2.2, 2.3 represented by Kanstantsin Tsitou 11 The length of the Dnieper River is 2145 km (before the construction of reservoirs - 2285 km), in Belarus - 689 km. The catchment area is 504000 km2, on the territory of Belarus - 63700 km2 (excl. Pripyat river basin). The length of the river from its source to the mouth of the Pripyat River is 1182 km, catchment area - 225000 km2. To the town of Orsha the river flows in a southwesterly direction, below - in the south, above the settlement Vyale river is in the backwater of the Kiev reservoir filled in 1966 to the normal water horizon - 103 m. The general decline – 141,5 m, average slope - 0,12 ‰, weighted average slope - 0,09 ‰. The coefficient of the winding river – 2.09. Watershed has irregularly shape and it is strongly expanded in the middle part. Right bank is sit- uated within the Central Berezina water-glacial plains, left bank - on the Orsha-Mogilev plateau that smoothly transforms into the vast marshlands of the Belarusian Polesie. According to the features of the structure of the valley, stream flow conditions Dnieper River can be divided into three sections: 1 - 410 km length, the source - Smolensk (Russia); 2 - 239 km length, Smolensk - Mogilev; 3 - 533 km length, Mogilev - the mouth of the river Pripyat.

2.2.2 Identification of surface water bodies and their typology

Surface water bodies in the Upper Dnieper basin were identified in accordance with elaborated by EPIRB project methodology of identification, typology and classification of water bodies. Within the Upper Dnieper river basin were identified appropriate surface water objects with dif- ferentiation by developed typology. These types were determined with using of System A under Water Framework Directive and Guidance №2 – Identification of water bodies. The rivers with the catchment area of 100 km2 and lakes with area more than 1 km2 were under consideration for purpose of identification and designation of surface water bodies. The process of typology was started after identification. The basis of the methodology of definition of types is the frame for determination of similar characteristics of water body on general morphometric, hydrological and hydrogeological characteristics. Hydrogeological characteristics used for typology of surface water bodies, are a type of pre- dominant bedrock geological origin. According to the WFD requirements, depending on the prevailing rock composition, watersheds are eliminated which composed of limestone, silicate and organic rocks. Watersheds in the basin of the Upper Dnieper belong to the first two types. Geology factor causes a number of details of the river basin. As a result of typology process within identified surface water bodies has been determined that all the rivers of the Belarusian part of the pilot basin of the Upper Dnieper belong to the same Ecoregion (№16 East European Plain) and geological factors, altitude and size of the catchment area of these rivers are 9 types. The results of identification of water bodies (rivers and lakes) per types are presented in Table 2.1 and 2.2 accordingly.

Table - 2.1 Type designation for rivers in the Belarus part of pilot Dnieper basin

Types Descriptor I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX Ecoregion 16 Geology Silicate Limestone Catchment 100 - 1000 - 1000 - < 100 >10000 < 100 100 - 1000 >10000 area, km2 1000 10000 10000 <20 200- Altitude, m <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 0 800 Number of 1 29 9 6 2 43 2 6 6 water objects

On the basis of geographical and morphological characteristics, lake water bodies in the Belaru- sian part of the pilot Dnieper basin were assigned to 2 types (Table 2.2)

Table - 2.2 Type designations for lakes in the Belarus part of pilot Dnieper basin

Types Descriptor I II Ecoregion 16 Geology Оrganic Limestone Surface area, km2 1-10 1-10 Altitude, m <200 <200 Number of water objects 5 4

In the Belarusian parts of the pilot basin of the Upper Dnieper were identified 104 river water bodies and 9 lake water bodies. Table A.1 of the Annex A provides a summary table identifying surface water bodies according to their types. The general map of surface waters objects in the basin of the upper Dnieper within Belarus based on performing identification is shown in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 – Scheme of surface water bodies of the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus

2.3 Ground waters

2.2.1 General description

Groundwater in the upper Dnieper basin (Belarus) widely spread and occur mainly at depths from 0.5 to 1.5-3.0 m. Due to the shallow depth of occurrence and high permeability of the over- burden groundwater is characterized by low natural protection from various types of pollution (agricultural, municipal, industrial, etc.). Currently traces of groundwater contamination are fixed over the entire area of farmland where applicable mineral or organic fertilizer, on the livestock farms, within rural and urban settlements, on the industrial areas, etc. This contamination is - - 2- + + 2+ 2+ manifested in increasing contents of components such as NO3 , CI , SO4 , Na , K , Ca , Mg , oil products , heavy metals (Pb, Zn, Cd, etc.), detergents, phenols, pesticides, etc. Nitrate contamination is mostly widespread, formed under the influence of agricultural activities and facilities of municipal domestic pollution. As a result, 50 to 80% of non-centralized water supply sources (dug wells) in rural areas and small towns have nitrate contamination exceeding the MPC level (45 mg/l). For the needs of the centralized water supply in the region confined aquifers are operated in intermoraine upper and middle sediments (code- GW03), as well as in the Paleogene (GW04), Cretaceous (GW05), Devonian (GW06) and Upper Proterozoic sediments (GW07, figure 2.5). As a rule, they are characterized by the absence of anthropogenic trace of contamination, except aquifers in intermoraine Quaternary sediments (GW03), whose close relationship with groundwater may be the cause of the pollution by nitrates, oil products and heavy metals (Cr, As, etc.). Such contamination is fixed at water intakes in Minsk, Borisov and other cities. In some cases this leads to the wells closure and abandonment. Upper Proterozoic aquifer system (GW07) is most widely used in Minsk area. Natural groundwater geochemical feature of this complex are increased concentrations of components such as F, B, and, rarely, Ba, often exceeding the MAC. Feature of southeastern Belarus - soil contamination. More than 40,000 hectares of Belarus contaminated by radioactive emissions resulted from the Chernobyl accident. Soils, forests, meadows and peatlands represent 50 % of these contaminated areas. The vegetation of these forests, meadows and peatlands have absorbed and stored radioactive particles. Fortunately, the content of radionuclides in groundwater aquifers is not excessive, although traces of radionuclide contamination clearly recorded. Currently content (activity) of the radioactive cesium 137Cs reaches 0.2-1.0 Bq/l, and this concentration is significantly lower MAC (maximum allowable concentration) for drinking water (11 Bq/l), but at the same time, much higher than the natural background for unconfined groundwater4.

2.2.2 Identification and typology of ground water bodies

Seven groundwater bodies (GWB) have been delineated in the Dnieper river basin in Belarus: three - in Quaternary aquifers, and four - in artesian aquifers pre-Quaternary sediments (Table A.2 of the Annex A). A groundwater monitoring network consisting of 21 monitoring stations (clusters of wells, totally 80 wells) is installed for routine observations of underground aquifers of the basin. Digital monitoring data is available from 1988. Analysis of the monitoring data revealed that all groundwater bodies are of good quantitative and chemical status. Analysed monitoring data do not indicate any saline water or other intrusions and no sustained upward trend of pollution in the delineated groundwater bodies. The exception is groundwater system around Minsk city where three hydraulically intercon- nected aquifers (shallow, inter-moraine and Upper Proterozoic) are affected by intensive groundwater abstraction causing GWBs around Minsk city to become “at risk” of not achieving the WFD environmental objectives. Generalization of the identification and classification of groundwater bodies is presented in At- tachment A and on the Figure 2.5. Figure 2.5 should be shown in the chapter 5.3.2 Assessment

4 Current state of underground sources of drinking water in Dnieper basin. Ed. L.S. Yasvin, V.M. Shestopalov, M.M. Cherepansky. Minsk. 2004.

15 of ground water body status. Here another picture should be placed: Figure 1.10. Preliminary delineated groundwater bodies in Dnieper river basin5

Figure 2.5 - Classification of groundwater bodies in Dnieper river basin, Belarus

5 Report “Idemtification, characterisation and delineation OF GROUNDWATER BODIES IN BelArus, Moldova and Ukraine” 16 2.3 Protected areas

Network of protected areas (PAs) of Dnieper River basin consists of two reserves, 18 sanctuaries (Figure 2.6, Annex B). Berezinsky Biosphere Reserve occupies the largest area. In addition, the basin has a large number of landscape (Vydritsa, Chernevichsky, etc.), hydrological (Zaozerye, Ostrova Duleby, Svis- loch-Berezinski etc.), biological (Dnieper-Sozh, Kopysh, Mateevichsky etc.) reserves. There are unique forest areas and plantations of valuable tree species (Chigirinskiy planting valuable tree species, Dobrush spruce, Veprinskaya oak grove etc.)

Figure 2.5 – Protected areas of Upper Dnieper river basin CHAPTER 3 SIGNIFICANT PRESSURES AND POSSIBLE IMPACTS ON WATER STATUS

List of the main human activities types in the upper Dnieper basin and the relationship of this activity in the presence of the pressures on the various categories of water bodies and achieve their good water status under the WFD are shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 - Types of human activities in the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus and their pressure on the different categories of water bodies and their achievement of good water status under the WFD Categories of water bodies Type of human activities Surface WFD6 PAs7 Ground rivers lakes 1 Pollution of water bodies 1.1 Housing and utilities Х Х 1.2 Population not connected with a central- Х Х Х Х Х ized wastewater treatment system 1.3 Industry Х Х 1.4 Agriculture Х Х Х Х Х 1.5 Fisheries Х Х Х 1.6 Urban areas (surface runoff from imperme- Х Х Х able surfaces) 1.7 Forestry Х 1.8 Transport Х Х Х Х 1.9 Landfills and dumps Х 1.10 Recreation Х Х Х Х 2 Changes in the hydrological and hydrogeological regimes of water bodies 2.1 Irrevocable water use Х Х Х Х Х 2.2 Water regulation (dams, dykes, polders, Х Х Х Х Х canals, melioration network) 2.3 Hydroelectric power stations Х Х Х Х 2.4 Water transfer Х 2.5 Fisheries Х Х Х 3 Change the morphological characteristics of water bodies 3.1 Agriculture Х Х Х 3.2 Urbanization Х Х Х Х Х 3.3 Industrial zones Х Х Х Х Х 3.4 Flood protection Х Х Х Х 3.5 Navigation Х Х 3.6 Regulation of the hydrological regime Х Х Х Х 3.7 Hydroelectric power stations Х Х 4 Interference in biodiversity of water bodies 4.1 Fishing Х Х Х Х 4.2 Fisheries (aquaculture) Х Х Х 4.3 Cleaning of water bodies from sediment and other engineering activities, leading to the Х Х Х Х turbidity

6 significance of the activity to achieve good status of water bodies according to WFD 7 significance of the activity for protected areas (PAs) 18

General categorization of pressures by types and reasons in the upper Dnieper river basin are presented below.

Table 3.2 - General categorization of pressures by types and reasons

Type of pressure Reason of pressure (driver of pressure) Point sources − wastewater; − industry; − contaminated lands; − agricultural enterprises (centralized wastewater issues); − landfills and dumps Diffuse (dispersed) sources − surface runoff from urban areas (including rainwater); − runoff from livestock complexes and agricultural land; − runoff from forest areas and wetlands; − other diffuse sources of pollution Activities associated with the − delivery (emission) of specific pollutants from industrial use of specific substances and agricultural enterprises Irrevocable water use − reducing runoff; − reducing groundwater flow Activities related to the changes − water management; of morphological characteristics − water regulation Other activities - can be various reasons for the load

3.1 Surface waters

3.1.1 Point sources of pollution

According to the official statistical reporting of water use within the state water cadastre total number of water users in the upper Dnieper basin on the territory of Belarus is 163. 23 companies are making more than 90% of the total volume of discharged sewage water in the basin (Ta- ble 5), which in 2012 was amounted to 451 692 thousand m3. And the greatest contribution (about 40%) comes from Minsk waste water treatment plant (MTP), which perfoms wastewater treatment from population and industry in Minsk. Location of major point sources of pollution is shown in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 - Map of the major point sources of pollution in the upper Dnieper basin

Based on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of point sources of pollution (sewage outlets), as well as quantitative and qualitative characteristics of water bodies receiving the pressures and impact analysis is carried out. Generalization of the pressures and impact analysis for water bodies, which significantly impact on the hydrochemical status, is given in Attachment B. The most significant point sources of pollution are the wastewater treatment facilities outlets of housing, communal services and industry, the most significant of which - the outlets of Minsk waste water treatment plant, which purifies almost all population and enterprises wastewater of Minsk city.

3.1.2 Diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution

Analysis of the recent years data suggests that one of the main sources of surface water pollution are diffuse sources of pollution caused by human activities in the catchment areas of rivers and reservoirs. Agricultural production (crops with extensive use of mineral and organic substances, animal husbandry, etc.) provides the most significant role in shaping the overall anthropogenic pressure on watershed. Intensive economic activities on the catchment areas, the development of industry, the improvement of human settlements and housing has led to the fact that in the last decade, almost every- where there is a significant change in hydrological and hydrochemical conditions of surface waters. And the most notable changes are observed in small streams, more sensitive to anthropogenic influence. Hydrochemical regime of watercourses is influenced by natural and anthropogenic factors that occur in the river basin, as well as inwater processes (self-purification, dilution, etc.). Diffuse pollution is caused by the transfer of pollutants from sources scattered in the catchment area, to watercourses. In general, the formation of such pollution is transient, intermittent and variable, tied to seasonal, climatic and anthropogenic factors (season of the year, the frequency of atmospheric phenomena, the level of fertilizer use, population and cattle density, etc.). It is necessary to note the difficulties in monitoring and control measures for diffuse sources of pollution. The sources of diffuse pollution of water bodies: agricultural runoff coming from arable areas and reclaimed areas; runoff from pastures and woodlands; runoff from urbanized areas of settlements ( impervious surfaces); runoff from industrial sites; precipitation coming in the catchment area and water areas; runoff from rural settlements and livestock complexes; economic activity in the catchment area (logging, draining wetlands, construction of roads and canals). Analysis of the sources of diffuse pollution in the Dnieper basin was conducted according to the National Statistical Committee of the Republic of Belarus (the number of cattle, mineral and organic fertilizers, land-use patterns, etc.). The main source of diffuse pollution of water bodies by nutrients is agriculture (livestock and crop).

Livestock in the Dnieper River Basin Livestock is one of the most important branches of agricultural production in the Republic of Belarus. On 01.01.2013 in the agricultural organizations of the Dnieper basin there were concentrated about 83.9 thousand heads of cattle, 0.45 million cows, 0.99 million pigs and more than 15 million birds. On the territory of the Republic of Belarus in the the Dnieper basin at the end of 2012, there were 20 livestock complex, 35 pig-breeding complexes and 18 large poultry farm (production of eggs and meat). Tables B.8 – B.11 of the Annex B provide data on large objects of livestock sector. Assessment of the livestock intensity development was carried out using the methods of spatial analysis based on the use of geographic information systems (GIS) to analyze the quantitative impact of agricultural production on the environment, such as the number of animals per 1 ha of agricultural land. For standardized assessment of the number of cattle per 1 ha of agricultural land was used unified method of translation groups of agricultural animals in the conventional units of cattle, applicable in the European Union, with the coefficients used by the European Statistical Agency (Eurostat). Reference standard unit of cattle is dairy cow milk yield of 3000 kg annual milk. Data on the number of livestock (cattle, cows, pigs and poultry) were summarized at the administrative-territorial units (village councils) and by calculation it is performed their reduction to standard unit of cattle. The following conversion factors are based on the recommendations of the European Statistical Agency: 1 unit of cattle - 0.8; 1 unit of cow - 1; pig - 0.6; bird - 0,001. The development level of livestock in the Dnieper basin is shown in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2 - The livestock intensity in the Dnieper basin

Map of the livestock intensity provides specific quantities of livestock per 1 ha of agricultural land in the context of rural councils. High stocking density increases the amount of waste generated by livestock, which in turn has a direct effect on the quality of surface water and groundwater. Change of hydrochemical status of water bodies (Uza) and hydrobiological status, (Udoga) due to the high value of the conventional cattle. However, compared with European countries such as Denmark and Poland, the level of of livestock intensity in Dnieper basin in the Republic of Bela- rus is below.

23 But the low efficiency of sewage treatment plants on livestock complexes, the lack of modern systems and manure processing and making of manure significantly increases the risk of contamination of water bodies. Crop production in the Dnieper basin Figures 3.3-3.5 provide the level of nitrogen, phosphorus and organic fertilizing per 1 ha of agricultural land.

Figure 3.3 - Level of nitrogen fertilizing in the upper Dnieper basin on the territory of Belarus

Figure 3.4 - Level of phosphorus fertilizing in the upper Dnieper basin on the territory of Belarus

Figure 3.5 - Level of organic fertilizing in the upper Dnieper basin on the territory of Belarus

These cartographic materials help to visually assess the potentially unsafe water catchment sites and facilitate the identification of those who may be at risk of failing good status.

3.1.3 Hydromorphological changes of water bodies

Table of B.3 of the Annex B includes lists the 46 river sites that have the impact of objects, discontinuous rivers (see also Figure 3.6).

Figure 3.6 - Location of objects causing discontinuous river flow

27 Hydrological changes (effects of reservoirs) The main criteria for selection of hydrological changes is the presence of reservoirs with a total volume of water over 1 million m3. Channel reservoirs may have an impact on the water regime of river sites as downstream (oscillation water levels) and upstream (decrease water velocity). In the Dnieper basin it is identified 17 channel reservoirs affecting 13 rivers sites (Figure 3.7). Table B.4 of Annex B consists a list of 13 river sites affected by channel reservoirs.

Figure 3.7 - Map of the channel reservoirs which have an impact on the water regime of rivers

28 Changes in the morphology of rivers (straightening of river channels)

In the Dnieper basin during the Soviet period large-scale river melioration was carried out with straightening channels. 69 river sites of 104 considered have undergone a change of morphology and straightening channels (Figure 3.8). Table B.5 of Annex B consists of a list of 69 river sites with changed river morphology ranked by the percentage of the river length affected by channel straightening.

Figure 3.8 – Map of watercourses sites with the characteristics of their straightening

3.1.4 Other possible pressures and impacts ob surface water bodies

In addition to basic pressures and their impacts on surface water associated with existing human activities in current environmental conditions, characteristics of water bodies and their catchment areas, there may be other possible pressures. These possible pressures and their impacts are associated with the potential change in the human activities on the basis of socio-economic development forecast in the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus, dangerous hydrometeorological phenomena concerning flood risk (picture 3.9), as well as climate change (Table B.11 of the Annex B). Dobrush town watercources (Iput and Horoput rivers) territory is especially affected area in term of flood risk. For this territory Pilot project on the flood risk assessment and mapping as well as initial design of protection measures is implementing during 2014-2015 yy. in frame of the EPIRB project. The protected measures will be added to this RBMP after the finishingin of Pilot Project.

Figure 3.9 - General assessment of flood risks in the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus in the context of administrative districts

3.2 Ground waters 3.2.1 Pont sources of pollution

Industry The large industrial centres – Minsk, Mogilev, Gomel, Borisov, Bobruisk, Svetlogorsk, Zhlobin, Zhodino, Rechitsa and others are located within the Dnieper river basin. These have the production facilities for manufacturing trucks, tractors, furniture as well as metallurgy, chemical, mining and other sectors. The largest production facilities are Khimvolokno Production Association in Mogilev, Rechitsadrev OJSC in Rechitsa, Experimental-Production Hydrolysis Plant in Re- chitsa, Agricultural Machine-Building Plant in Zhlobin, Self-Propelled Combine Harvester Plant in Gomel, Khimvolokno Production Association in Svetlogorsk, Fandok JSC in Bobruisk, Belo- russian Metallurgic Works in Zhlobin, Tractor-Making Plant in Minsk, Automobile Plant in Zhodin and others (see Figure 3.10). Groundwater abstraction Households remain the main users of fresh groundwater in Belarus and in the Dnieper basin and groundwater is the main supply. Cities are supplied by centralised water supply networks and rural population uses central and non-centralized sources (dug wells) - 86 percent of inhabitants of the cities and 57 percent of rural population are connected to the centralized water supply systems. Installation of water metering devices has reduced water consumption for household and drinking needs. In 2010 the volumes of water consumed for household and drinking needs dropped by 36 % comparing to 2000. Intensive exploitation of groundwater in the area of Minsk urban agglomeration led to the formation here of depression cones in areas of all 12 group water intakes. To date, they are united in one mega depression with the diameter of up to 40-70 km, and water level drawdown of 25-40 m in the center of the cone. In the cone flow of small rivers sharply reduced (Volma, Trostyanka, Tsna, Loshitsa, Slepyanka) and some of them almost completely dried up (Perespa, Drazhnya).

3.2.2 Diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution

At the heart of agriculture sector are collective farms and state farms, which have been renamed and are now, being run on the market basis with intense governmental support. The private farms are oriented toward vegetable growing, and, as agricultural organizations,toward cattle breeding. Agriculture is a source of diffuse pollution of groundwater. Industrial and agricultural facilities, widespread within the river basin of the Dnieper, impacts most significantly on unconfined aquifers (shallow groundwater). Waste accumulation As of the end of 2011, the accumulated wastes at Belarus’ enterprises were: 21 032 400 tons of phosphor-gypsum, 3 930 000 tons of hydrolyzed lignin, 4 337 000 tons of sludge from water treatment at boiler-heating stations and drinking water, treatment of rainwater and use of water by power plants, and 7 384 200 tons of other wastes. High accumulations of industrial waste in Gomel Region compared to other regions are due to high production of phosphor-gypsum in Gomel and hydrolyzed lignin in Rechitsa (the Dnieper basin). The lignin dumps near Bobruisk contribute to the accumulation of industrial waste in Mogilev Region. Over the last ten-year period, Belarus has experienced a constant growth of municipal waste. The indicator increasing from 0.485 to 1.12 kg/man per day, i.e. twice as much as for the EU countries (0.85–1.7 kg/man per day). Main human activities causing impact on the surface and groundwater bodies are:

31 − Untreated and/or insufficiently treated wastewater; − Point and diffuse pollution from industrial and agricultural activities; − Radionuclide pollution washed out contaminated areas as a result of the Chernobyl NPP accident; − Transfer of pollutants from transboundary tributaries;

Figure 3.10 - Point sources of pollution in the upper Dnieper basin, Belarus

32 CHAPTER 4 PROTECTED AREAS

4.1 Inventory of protected areas related to various Directives and PA categories

There are 19 specially protected areas (PAs) on the territory of the Upper Dnieper river basin, 18 of which are sanctuaries, 1 - biosphere reserve, 1 - radiation and ecological reserve. According to IUCN sanctuaries are classified as IV Habitat / Species Management Area, Berezinsky reserve - Ib Wilderness Area, Polesie radiation ecological - II National Park (Annex C).

4.2 Outline of planned monitoring for protected areas

Integrated monitoring of ecosystems in protected areas is conducted on the territory of Berezin- sky biosphere reserve.

4.3 Environmental objectives for protected areas

The purpose of the integrated monitoring of ecosystems in protected areas - information support for management decision-making in the field of conservation and sustainable target-use of resources of protected areas on the basis of assessment of the nature ecosystems state, their dynamics and development forecast. Objectives: - Control and qualitative assessment of composition and structure of PAs ecosystems; - Assessment of the main categories of natural ecosystems protected areas on set criteria based on bioindicative, biogeochemical, landscape, hydrological and other environmental indicators; - Collection, compilation and analysis of available information on the PAs ecosystems; - Assessment of the effectiveness of conservation and wildlife management in PAs; - Identifying the main factors that have a negative impact on the PAs ecosystems (threats); - Forecast of development of the main protected natural systems; - Development of recommendations for making management and design decisions in relation of natural systems of PAs; - Accumulation of the results of monitoring of PAs ecosystems and their provision to interested governments, state environmental agencies, research organizations, the public and others.

4.4 Program of measures for protected areas

Program and observations regulation for integrated monitoring of ecosystems is developed for Berezinski reserve. Program and regulation include observed parameters, frequency of observation, reporting format and monitoring organizations8.

8 www.berezinsky.by 4.5 Water protection zones and riversides

4.5.1 Basic regulations

In accordance with the Water Code water protection zones are established to prevent pollution and depletion of water bodies, as well as to conserve flora and fauna habitat in the riparian areas. Within the water protection zones riversides are allocated with strict protection regime. Special regime of economic and other activities is established in water protection zones. Projects of water protection zones and riversides of water bodies in the Dnieper basin were developed by CRICUWR on maps of scale 1: 50000, according to administrative districts. Regulatory and legal basis for the development of the project of water protection zones were the following basic legal documents and acts: - Law of the Republic of Belarus "On Environmental Protection" dated November 26, 1992 № 1982-XII (as amended); - Water Code of the Republic of Belarus; Water Protection zone borders and nature use regimes were determined by a special evaluation studies of natural conditions and factors of anthropogenic load. The establishment of water protection zones is one of the most effective organizational and pre- ventive measures for ecological optimization of landscapes of the valley complexes and allows to: - improve the hydrochemical and hydrological regime of surface waters; - improve the qualitative composition of groundwater drained by river network; - reduce water and wind erosion, abrasion of riparian zone; - save riparian meadows, trees and shrubs; - keep the spawning grounds of fish and habitats of terrestrial animals; Projects of water protection zones and riversides of small rivers, streams and reservoirs have been developed by the institute "Belgiprozem" and its regional branches in 1988-1991 on maps of scale 1: 10000 and approved by the decision of regional executive committees in 1990-1991. At the present time it is necessary to conduct clarify the boundaries of water protection zones and riversides of small rivers with current ideas about their role in the use and conservation of water resources. The list of projects of water protection zones and riversides of large and medium-sized rivers in the Dnieper basin developed by CRICUWR is given in Appendix C. It is necessary to develop projects of water protection zones and riversides for lakes, reservoirs and ponds, which have not previously been studied. The development and correction of water protection zones and riversides for water bodies must be performed in accordance with the current legislative and normative acts in this sphere: - Water Code of the Republic of Belarus from 30 April 2014 № 149-З) - Regulation about establishment of size and boundaries of water protection zones and riversides for the water objects and economic activities regimes from 21 March 2006 № 377, (with addition in the 2010); - Act of the Ministry of Environmental Resources and Environmental Protection of the Repub- lic of Belarus «Requirements for development projects of water-protection zones and riverside for water objects from 29 October 2007 № 78» (updated in 2010).

34 4.5.2 General characteristics of water protection zones and riversides

The boundaries of water protection zones and riversides of the rivers Svisloch, Berezina and Ptich within Minsk region were established as a result of a comprehensive assessment of the natural conditions (structural features of the terrain, land cover, geological and hydrogeological conditions, and distributional pattern of green vegetation) and landuse. During the establishing of the boundaries of water protection zones and riversides the simulation data of slope erosion as results of surface runoff influence also were taken into account. The width of water-protected zone for River Berezina is about 700 – 6000 m, for River Svisloch – 700 – 2100 m and River Ptich - 700-4900 m. The boundaries of buffer strips was established according to article 11 of Regulation about water protection zones and riversides for the large and medium-sized rivers where mentioned that width of buffer stips set amount up to 200 m. When adjacent to the river floodplain lakes and oxbow established generalized riverside. The width of riversides for Berezina River is 125 – 500 m, River Svicloch - 125 – 180 m and Ptich - 125 -150 m. The area of water protection zones of rivers Berezina, Svisloch, Ptich within the Minsk region of 96,187.55 hectares, which corresponds to 2.4% of the total territory. It was recognized that this territory belong to lands of 73 agricultural organizations and farmer households, 10 forestry enterprises and 152 settlements relating to the 35 rural administrations. In addition to the main categories of landusers in the boundaries of the water protection zone included 4 industrial enterprises, 45 camps of summer cottages, 3 sanatoriums and 47 other land users, represented by small enterprisers, road-building organizations and governings. The level of agriculture use for water protection zones is 30%, plowed about 11.4 that is significantly lower the average per Minsk region (respectively 47% and 31.5%) The forest fund within water protected zones (WPZ) - 41701,3 ha or 43% of the WPZ area presented by forests of group I, tree and shrub vegetation is 6805,04 ha or 7.1% of the WPZ area. Within the boundaries of the riversides of the rivers Berezina, Svisloch, Ptich is 12449,05 hectares of land, which is about 12.9% of the area of water protection zones. Agricultural land development of the riversides - 40.3 %, mainly meadows used for hay, Affore- station - 20%, bushyfication about 11%. The general scheme of water bodies and settlements connected to water bodies for which is developed projects on water protection zones and riversides, is shown in figure 4.1

Figure 4.1 - The general scheme of water bodies and settlements connected to water bodies have developed projects on water protection zones and riversides.

Assessment of the ecological state of the water protection zones territory under the terms of its functional use showed that the area of water protection zones is related to areas with an adequate level of anthropogenic load. The cattle-breeding complexes and farms, mechanical workshops are located оn the territory of water protection zones. The water protected measures which was impelemented n the territory of water protection zone and riversides of the rivers Berezina, Svisloch, Ptich are proposed Within the Gomel region the width of water protection zone for River Dnieper is about 200 – 10000 m, for River Drut – 200 – 3100 m and River Berezina - 200 - 6500 m. The width of riversides for River Dnieper is 200 – 600 m, for River Drut – 25 – 5000 m and Riv- er Berezina - 20 - 1100 m. The area of water protection zones of rivers Dniepr, Drut, Berezina within the Gomel region of 191030.29 hectares, which corresponds to 4.7% of the total territory. It was recognized that this territory belong to lands of 138 agricultural organizations and farmer households, 9 forestry enterprises and 163 settlements relating to the 52 rural administrations. In addition to the main categories of landusers in the boundaries of the water protection zone included 5 industrial enterprises, 95 camps of summer cottages, 6 sanatoriums and 83 other land users, represented by small enterprisers, road-building organizations and governings. The level of agriculture use for water protection zones is 34%, plowed about 9 that is significantly lower the average per Minsk region (respectively 41% and 23%) The forest fund within water protected zones (WPZ) - 62804 ha or 33% of the WPZ area presented by forests of group I, tree and shrub vegetation is 15968 ha or 8% of the WPZ area. Within the boundaries of the riversides of the rivers Dnieper, Drut, Berezina is 22536.37 hectares of land, which is about 12% of the area of water protection zones. Agricultural land development of the riversides - 38 %, mainly meadows used for hay. Affore- station - 13%, bushyfication about 23%. Assessment of the ecological state of the water protection zones territory under the terms of its functional use showed that the area of water protection zones is related to areas with an adequate level of anthropogenic load. The cattle-breeding complexes and farms, mechanical workshops are located оn the territory of water protection zones. Within the Mogilev region the width of water-protected zone for River Dnieper is about 200 – 5000 m, for River Sozh – 200 – 6000 m. The width of riversides for River Dnieper is 20 – 500 m, for River Sozh –10 – 500 m. The area of water protection zones of rivers Dniepr, Sozh within the Mogivel region of 86953,12 hectares ( including River Dniepre– 47733,79 ha and River Sozh– 39219,33 ha), which corresponds to 3.0% of the total territory. The main categories of users of the water protection zone River Dnieper are agricultural and farmer enterprizers (59,8% of the area WPZ), land of settlements (8,7%), forest enterprises (26,6%). The areas of land distribution, respectively the following per rayon: Shklovsky - 46,2; 12,5; 34; Mogilevsky, 51,6; 10,1; 30,4; Bykhov - 69,5; 6,5; 21,8. The main categories of users of the water protection zone River Sozh are agricultural and farmer enterprizers (48,1% of the area WPZ), land of settlements (4,2%), forest enterprises (37,8%). The areas of land distribution, respectively the following per rayon: Mstislaysky -81,1; 11,5; 5,4; Krichevsky: 65; 6,1; 23,9; Klimovichky; 64,7;4,5; 30,1, Cherikovsky - 27,9; 2,4; 64,8; Slav- gorogsky – 36,6; 1,6; 36,7.

37 There are two enterprizers forest processing factory in Cherikovsky district (35.8 ha) and Krichevsky drinks plant (6.01 ha). On the territory of water protection zones of the rivers Dnie- per and Sozh there are 90 settlements located. Within the boundaries of the riversides of the rivers Dnieper and Sozh is 10653.44 hectares of land, which is about 12.5% of the area of water protection zones. Agricultural land development of the riversides - 67.8%, mainly meadows used for hay. Affore- station - 10.5%, bushyfication about 6.5%. Assessment of the ecological state of the water protection zones territory under the terms of its functional use showed that the area of water protection zones is related to areas with a adequate level of anthropogenic load. The cattle-breeding complexes and farms, mechanical workshops are located оn the territory of water protection zones.

38 CHAPTER 5 MONITORING PROGRAMMES AND NETWORKS

5.1 Introduction and requirements

The operation of surface water monitoring described by several documents. The Resolution of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus “About national system of environmental monitoring in the Republci of Belarus” from 14 July 2003 № 949 is defined the the organization and functioning of the National Environmental Monitoring System (NEMS), which includes the surface water monitoring. The organization of the surface water monitoring is in responsibility of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of Republic of Belarus. The Resolution of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus «Regulations on the procedure within the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus surface water monitoring and use its data » from 28 April 2004 № 482 is defined the procedure of surface water monitoring and using data with NEMS and fixes are responsible organizations for the collection, transmission, processing, storage, order data and store them. The Degree of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of Republic of Belarus from 30.01.2015 № 44-OD « On some issues of organization of work of monitoring on the surface and groundwater at the stations in the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus » establishes a set of points of observation of the state network observations of surface waters by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators, the frequency of observations, the list of parameters, as well as the organization responsible for carrying out observations on hydrochemical and hydrobiological for assessing the quality and ecological status of aquatic ecosystems. The Resolution of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of Republic of Belarus from 14.06.2006 № 39 «On approval of the procedure for groundwater monitoring » sets the number and location of groundwater monitoring stations, technology works on organiz- ing and conducting groundwater monitoring, a list of parameters and frequency of observations as well as the organization performing the groundwater monitoring. TCP 17.13-04-2014 (02120) «Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Terms of observations of surface waters by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators» are defined the rules of the observations of the surface water on hydro-chemical and hydro-biological indicators for monitoring of surfacewater within the National Environmental Monitoring System TCP 17.13-06-2012 (02120) «Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. The procedure for monitoring of persistent organic pollutants in the natural environment» is determined the procedure of persistent organic pollutants content in the surface water and bottom sediments.

5.2 Surface waters (rivers and lakes) 5.2.1. Description of existing surface water monitoring system

List of existing monitoring stations of the state network observations of surface waters by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators, including transboundary, approved by Degree of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus of 30.01.2015 № 44-OD "On some issues of organization of work of monitoring on the surface and groundwater at the stations in the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus". All observation points on surface water monitoring networks included in the state reestr of observation points of the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus (Resolution of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Republic of Belarus of 17.12.2008 №119 «Instruction on the order of the state register of observation points national monitoring system of the environment in the Republic of Belarus"). Principles of organization observation network of surface waters by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators in the National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus (NEMS), including the principles of organization network of observation points, the organization and conduct of observation, as well as a list of indicators of surface water and the frequency of observations are shown in TCP 17.13-04-2014 (02120) «Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Terms of observations of surface waters by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators» are defined the rules of the observations of the surface water on hydro-chemical and hydro-biological indicators for monitoring of surface water». Monitoring of surface water in the River Dnieper basin in Belarus is carried out on 38 water objects (25 rivers, 10 reservoirs and 3 lakes). Network of points of observations has 88 observation points, including 5 and 6 background (reference) transboundary river sections (Figure 5.1, Table D.1 of the Annex D).

Figure 5.1 – Observation network scheme on hydrological and hydrochemical regime of surface waters

Observation on the surface waters status by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators in the monitoring stations of the state network of observations in carried out on a mandatory basis according to the list of indicators of surface water (Table 5.1), given in the TCP 17.13-04-2014 (02120) «Environmental protection and nature use. An analytical control and monitoring. Terms of observations of surface waters by hydrochemical and hydrobiological indicators».

41 Table 5.1 – The list of indicators of surface water

Measurement The list of indicators of surface water units Hydrochemical parameters 1.Temperature ºС Indicators of physical char- 2. Transparency1) sm acteristics of water and gas 3. Suspended Matter mg/dm3 composition 4. Hydrogene Indicator (рН) units рН 3 5. Dissolved oxygen mgO2/dm 6. Total mineralization mg/dm3 1. Chloride-ion mg/dm3 2. Sulphate-ion mg/dm3 3. Hydrocarbonate-ion mg/dm3 Main ions 4. Manganese mg/dm3 5. Calcium mg/dm3 6. Mineralization mg/dm3 3 1. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) mgO2/dm 3 2. Chemical oxygen demand (CODcr) mgO2/dm Organic substances 3. Oil and oil products in the dissolved and mg/dm3 emulsified state 4. Detergents anionic mg/dm3 1. Ammonim-ion (in terms of N) mgN/dm3 2. Total nitrogen (by Kjeldahl) mgN/dm3 3. Nitrate -ion (in terms of N) mgN/dm3 Nutrients 4. Nitrite -ion (in terms of N) mgN/dm3 5. Phosphate-ion (in terms of P Р) mgP/dm3 6. Total phosphorus mg/dm3 1. Iron mg/dm3 2. Manganese mg/dm3 3. Copper mg/dm3 4. Zinc mg/dm3 Metals 5. Nickel mg/dm3 6. Chromium mg/dm3 7. Lead mg/dm3 8. Cadmium mg/dm3 Hydrobiological parameters 1. Phytoplankton2) mg/dm3 2. Zooplankton2) mg /dm3 3. Chlorophyll а3) µg/dm3 4. Phytoperiphyton 3) mg /dm3 5. Macrozoobenthos (quality)3) ball 1), 2) for reservoirs; 3) for streams.

Frequency of observations is determined depending on anthropogenic pressures on the water body and the status of observation (national, reference, transboundary). In parts of watercourses by hydrochemical observations carried out once a month in the observation points located: - in the river stretch near the pollution source (or group of sources) of surface waters; 42 - at the mouths of tributaries classified as large in size and water content in accordance with the STB 17.06.02-02-2009 (02120) Environmental Protection and Nature. Hydrosphere. Classifi- cation of surface water and groundwater. In the river stretchs in the absence of the pollution source (or group of sources) of surface water the monitoring hydrochemical indices were seven times a year during the main hydrological phases of the water objects: - During the rise, peak and decline of flood (approximately March, April and May); - At the lowest and highest water discharges during the summer low water level (approximately July - August); - In the autumn before freezing-over (approximately September - October) and during the winter low water level (approximately January). Observations by hydrochemical parameters at refence observation points are held monthly with cycles 1 every 3 years. In the reservoirs the observations of hydrochemical parameters are held quarterly with cycles 1 every 2 years: – in winter period; – in ending period of spring high water; – during summer in the period of low water level; – in the period before freezing-over. Observations on hydrobiological indicators on water bodies is carried out in the growing season with cyclical 1 every 2 years. In water samples are determined by the following parameters: - hydrochemical: - indicators of physical characteristics of water and gas composition (temperature, transparency – only in the reservoirs), suspended matter, hydrogene indicator (рН), dissolved oxygen, total conductivity) - biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), chemical oxygen demand (CODcr) - nitrogen-containing substances (ammonim-ion, total nitrogen (by Kjeldahl), nitrate–ion, nitrite -ion) - phosphate-containing substances (phosphate-ion incl. hydro and digidroformy, total phosphorus ) - mineral composition (chloride-ion, sulphate-ion, hydrocarbonate-ion, manganese-ion, calcium-ion, mineralization) - metals content (iron (total), manganese,copper,zinc,nickel, chromium (total), lead, cadmium) - oil and oil products in the dissolved and emulsified state - detergents anionic (including alkyl ethoxylated sulfates, alkyl sulfonates, olefin sulfonates, alkyl benzenesulfonate, alkyl sulfates, sodium and potassium salts of fatty acids ) - hydrobiological: - phytoplankton, zooplankton (for reservoirs), - chlorophyll (for reservoirs), - phytoperiphyton, macrozoobenthos (for stream). In addition, on transboundary monitoring stations observations on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) in surface waters and sediments were conducted. Observations are carried out at least one time per year (in II-III quarters) in surface waters and at least one time in 3 years in sediments. In the absence of POPs in surface waters and sediments - not less than one time in 5 years. Determined with the polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides (OCPs).

43 On several transboundary observation points within the area affected by the Chernobyl accident, the observations are conducted on surveillance indicators for radioactive-contamination (cesium- 137 and strontium-90). Observations on hydromorphological indicators in the Republic of Belarus in the monitoring of surface waters have not yet carried out. Since 2012 began the scientific study to establish the ba- sics of hydromorphological monitoring in the areas of placement of large hydraulic structures in the framework of the State program to ensure the functioning and development of the National Environmental Monitoring System of the Republic of Belarus for 2011-2015. In the work carried out by CRICUWR in 2012, analyzed the changes that have occurred with the rivers as a result of human activities, resulting in selection of water bodies, in line or in the floodplain where the construction of reservoirs, where is made the water withdrawal, subjected to sewerage, irrigation actively used for navigation purposes. According to the results of this research are selected sections of rivers to organize them as observations in the framework of the State Program to ensure the functioning and development of the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Re- public of Belarus for 2011 - 2015 years, and for a further period of NEMS.

5.2.2 Perspective surface waters monitoring system9

1. The existing surface water monitoring system in the Dniepre basin only partly respond to criteria EU WFD. The two key environmental objectives of the Water Framework Directive (Directive 2000/60/EC; WFD) for surface waters are: • to prevent deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water; • achieving good surface water status. The status of surface waters is determined by both its ecological status and its chemical status. Monitoring programmes and assessment is required in order to substantiate where the objectives are achieved. The surface water monitoring programme for the Dnieper (BY) River basin covers: • surface water categories: rivers and lakes; • the protected areas as defined in Article 6 of the WFD; • artificial and heavily modified water bodies. The structure and content of this monitoring programme represents the outcome of the activities conducted under the EPIRB Project as part of the River Basin Management Plans for the Dnieper (BY) River basin. 2. Development of WFD compliant monitoring programme The monitoring programme outlined here is designed to meet the stated requirements of the WFD and related CIS Guidance Documents. The WFD sets out three types of monitoring programmes: surveillance, operational and investigative. These programmes will be explained further in the sections below. In the process of monitoring programme development the data and information from the JFS-I, JFS-II and national monitoring programmes conducted in the Dnieper (BY) River basin were used. Furthermore, the Typology Report, the Pressure – Impact Analysis and Risk Assessment Reports were used as basic documents in selecting the sampling locations for the Operational Monitoring.

2.1 Surveillance Monitoring Programme of Surface Waters The objectives of Surveillance Monitoring (SM) Programme for surface water are as follows:

9 Subchapter 5.2.2 prepared take into consideration of the Report “Surface Waters Monitoring Programme in the Dnieper (BY) River basin” (Authors of report: Romina Alvarez and Peter Roncak) 44 • supplementing and validating the impact assessment procedure detailed in Annex II of the WFD, • the efficient and effective design of future monitoring programmes, • the assessment of long-term changes in natural conditions, and • the assessment of long-term changes resulting from significant anthropogenic activities.

2.1.1 Sampling locations The selection of sampling locations and the design of the SM programme is based on sub- networks each related to fulfil one or more of the main objectives of SM as presented above. The sub-networks of the SM programme for rivers include the following ones: • SM1: to be representative of the overall surface water status; • SM2: detection of long-term trends (the assessment of long-term changes in natural conditions and the assessment of long-term changes resulting from the anthropogenic activities); • SM3: supplementing and validating risk assessments; • SM4: Large rivers and significant cross border river and lake water bodies. Note: 12 types of the surface water bodies were identified in the Dnieper (BY) River basin. How- ever, only for 5 of them it was possible to find the sampling location with reference conditions and are included in the SM Programme of the pilot river basin. The sampling locations for the SM Programme of the Dnieper (BY) River basin are summarized in the Table 5.1 ad shown in Figure 5.2. All together 10 sampling locations were selected to be representative for the SM Programme.

Table 5.1 Surveillance Monitoring sampling locations in the Dnieper (BY) River basin (rivers) SM Character Expected sta- Risk No. River name Location name sub- of WB tus/potential category network 1 Volches NWB RC Ustye NR SM1 2 Ut NWB RC Tereshkovichi NR SM2 3 Greza NWB RC Vyazma NR SM1 4 Vabich NWB RC Barsuki NR SM1 5 Usha NWB RC Usha NR SM1 6 Drut NWB Good Vyazma NR SM1 7 Drut NWB Moderate Krugloye R SM2 8 Plavna NWB Moderate Vysokaya Gora R SM1 9 Dnieper NWB Good upstrem Dubrovno NR SM2 10 Dnieper NWB Good Border BY/UA NR SM4 NWB means Natural Water Body

Regarding the SM Programme for lakes there were not identified any lakes to be monitored in the pilot river basin.

Figure 5.2 - Sampling locations for the SW Monitoring Programme in the Upper Dnieper pilot river basin (BY). (Note: This map is the first draft, the final one will be developed after comments from the national team and based on the coordinates assigned to the sampling locations by the national experts).

2.1.2 Quality Elements According to WFD Annex V.1.3.1, Surveillance Monitoring Programme shall be performed at each selected surveillance monitoring location for a period covered by a RBMP for (see Table 5.2): • parameters indicative of all biological quality elements; • parameters indicative of all hydromorphological quality elements; • parameters indicative of all general physico-chemical quality elements; • priority list pollutants which are discharged into the river basin or sub-basin; • other pollutants discharged in significant quantities in the river basin or sub-basin (pilot river basin specific pollutants).

46 Sampling methods and devices based on the European Standards will be used in the monitoring programmes (exception ichtyofauna).

The biological quality elements incorporate for rivers: Macroinvertebrates, Phytobenthos, Macrophytes and Fish; for lakes: Macroinvertebrates, Phytoplankton, Macrophytes and Fish. The water samples will be identified for the abundance and composition for all biological quality elements up to Genus/Species level. Individual metrics (indices) will be applied to the biological quality elements (for ichtyofauna only migratory fish species will be described).

The physico-chemical quality elements include for both rivers and lakes: General conditions; Specific both synthetic and non synthetic pollutants. EN, ISO and other international standards will be applied for the analysis of the water samples.

The hydromorphological quality elements will incorporate the following elements: Hydrological regime; River continuity; Morphological conditions. Hydromorphological field and assessment protocols as used during the JFS in the EPIRB project will be applied.

Table 5.2 - List of the quality elements monitored for the Surveillance Monitoring Programme (SM) in the Dnieper (BY) River basin (rivers) and Existing Monitoring Program (EM) Parameter Unit SM EM Physico-chemical Quality Elements General conditions o Temperature C X X Dissolved Oxygen mgO2/l X X pH pH units X X Conductivity µS/cm X X Hardness mg/l CaCO3 X X Colour visual X X o-Phosphate mg P/l X X Nitrate mg N/l X X Ammonium mg N/l X X Chloride mg/l X X Sulphate mg/l X X Total suspended solids mg/l X X Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) mgO2/l X X Chemical oxygen demand (COD - di- X X chromide) mgO2/l Oil substances visual X X Other specific pollutants Copper** µg/l X X Radioactivity* X X Priority Substances and Certain Other Pollutants

47 Parameter Unit SM EM All ‘Priority substances and certain other pollutants’ that can be ana- X X lysed with the existing laboratory capacity Biological Quality Elements Macroinvertebrates (Macrozoobentos) Metrics X X Macrophytes Metrics X Phytobenthos (Phytoperiphuton) Metrics X X Migratory X Fish fish species Hydromorphological Quality Elements River morphological conditions HM protocol X Daily Mean X X River flow Flow (m3/s) * in the sampling locations which are connected with Chernobyl ** to be monitored in the water bodies if there are discharged in the significant quantities

2.2 Operational Monitoring of Surface Waters The Operational Monitoring (OM) Programme is focussed on monitoring the effect of supporting measures aimed at achieving the objectives of the WFD in the water bodies (possibly) at risk. It is designed to provide targeted information on the effectiveness of specific measures taken within the Dnieper (BY) River basin. The objectives of OM programme are defined as follows: • to establish the status of those bodies identified as being at risk of failing to meet their environmental objectives; • to assess any changes in the status of such bodies resulting from the programmes of measures. Because the protection of high and good status from deterioration is required by the WFD, OM programme must also provide information on whether the POMs, aimed at maintaining such status, are effective. Therefore, even water bodies that are not categorized to be at risk in the Risk Assessment Report prepared are included in the OM programme because measures are required to maintain them at their current high or good status regardless of existing risk category. Risk Assessment Analysis has identified 12 water bodies “at risk” and 8 ones “possible at risk” in the Dnieper (BY) River basin. These results were transferred into the OM programme.

2.2.1 Sampling locations Sampling locations for OM programme are assigned to one or more sub-networks each related to fulfil one or more of the main objectives of the OM programme. The sub-networks of the OM programme for rivers include the following ones: • OM1: to assess the effect of measures that have been aimed at improving the impact of individual and combined point sources (organic pollution, eutrophication impacts and priority substances); • OM2: to assess effectiveness of the measures related to diffuse pollution sources; • OM3: To assess effectiveness of measures to reduce hydromorphological alterations; • OM4: To monitor high and good status sites currently not categorized to be at risk in order to assess the effectiveness of POMs aimed at maintaining high and good status water bodies; • OM5: to monitor protected areas which are at risk.

Note: Several water bodies with the same type were identified to be “at risk” due to the same pressure type (sources of pollution). Therefore, some of sampling locations for the OM programme were selected to be representative for the group of water bodies.

48 All together 6 sampling locations for rivers were identified to be monitored under the OM for the Dnieper (BY) River basin and results are summarized in the Table 5.3.

Table 5.3 -Operational Monitoring sampling locations in the Dnieper (BY) River basin (rivers) and OM Character of Expected sta- Risk No. River name Location name sub- WB tus/potential category network 1 Berezina NWB Moderate Below Borisov R OM1 2 Svisloch NWB Moderate Osipovichi R OM1 3 Berezina NWB Moderate Mouth R OM1 4 Udoga NWB Moderate Cherikov R OM1 5 Sozh NWB Moderate Below Gomel R OM1 6 Uza NWB Moderate Berezovka R OM1

2.2.2 Quality Elements In order to assess the magnitude of the pressure to which the surface water bodies are exposed in the Dnieper (BY) River basin those quality elements are monitored that are indicative of the identified pressures. The following quality elements will be monitored as relevant (see Table 5.4): • parameters indicative of the biological quality elements, most sensitive to the pressures to which the water bodies are subject; • all other specific pollutants discharged in significant quantities into the river basin or sub- basin; • parameters indicative of the hydromorphological quality elements most sensitive to the pressure identified.

Table 5.4 - List of the quality elements monitored for the Operational Monitoring (OM) in the Dnieper (BY) River basin (rivers) and Existing Monitoring Program (EM) Parameter Unit OM EM Physico-chemical Quality Elements General conditions o Temperature C X X Dissolved Oxygen mgO2/l X X pH pH units X X Conductivity µS/cm X X Hardness mg/l CaCO3 X X Colour visual X X o-Phosphate mg P/l X X Nitrate mg N/l X X Ammonium mg N/l X X Chloride mg/l X X Sulphate mg/l X X Total suspended solids mg/l X X Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) mgO2/l X X Chemical oxygen demand (COD - di- X X chromide) mgO2/l Oil substances visual X X Other specific pollutants

49 Parameter Unit OM EM Copper** µg/l X X Radioactivity* X X Biological Quality Elements Macroinvertebrates Metrics X X Macrophytes Metrics X X Hydromorphological Quality Elements Daily Mean X X River flow Flow (m3/s) * in the sampling locations which are connected with Chernobyl ** to be monitored in the water bodies if there are discharged in the significant quantities

2.3 Investigative monitoring The WFD includes a third type of monitoring called Investigative Monitoring (IM). The WFD states that this type of monitoring is required for situations when the surface water body is at risk with a very specific manner that causes of water bodies failing to achieve the required environmental objectives under the WFD. The list of parameters in this case will be dynamic and its va- lidity in time should be limited, in order to respond to new information on the potential risks posed by emerging pollutants and any others alterations. However, it is not expected to conduct the IM in the Dnieper (BY) River basin in this stage of the monitoring programme.

2.4 Frequency of monitoring programme Sample frequency will vary depending on the monitoring programme and the individual sub- networks and the quality element. The WFD outlines the minimum requirements for frequency of monitoring, as it is presented in Table 5.5.

Table 5.5 - Monitoring frequencies according to WFD Annex V.1.3.4

Rivers Lakes Biological quality elements Phytoplankton 6 months 6 months Other aquatic flora 3 years 3 years Benthic invertebrate fauna 3 years 3 years Fish 3 years 3 years Hydromorphological quality elements Continuity 6 years Hydrology continuous 1 month Morphology 6 years 6 years Physico-chemical quality elements Thermal conditions 3 months 3 months Oxygenation 3 months 3 months Salinity 3 months 3 months Nutrient status 3 months 3 months Acidification status 3 months 3 months Other pollutants 3 months 3 months Priority substances 1 month 1 month

Long-term trend monitoring locations will require high frequency sampling. The sites required for supplementing and validating the risk assessment will be monitored with different frequencies depending on the importance of the risk, details of the frequency of monitoring required for each of the individual river sub-networks are given in Appendix 1 _EPIRB_River_MP_ Dnie- per_Belarus.

3. Quality Control and Quality Assurance It is important for the surface water monitoring programme to ensure that data generated by WFD physico-chemical and biological monitoring parts are reliable and representative. Further- more, as it is known a data should allow the assessment of the impacts of Programs of Measures on the water body status. Therefore, Quality Management Programme should be prepared for all steps of the monitoring programme from sampling via analysis to the data management and in- terpretation. It is expected that sampling and analysis (physico-chemical and biological quality elements) will be conducted in accordance with ISO Standards (other International Standards) and laboratories will meet the requirements of the ISO 17025 Standard.

4. Ecological Status Assessment The WFD defines ecological status in five classes for each of the ecological quality element for each of the surface water categories. It describes the biological and hydromorphological parameters and the physico-chemical and relevant pollutants required in the overall ecological assessment. The overall ecological status assessment is shown on the scheme below.

Figure 5.3 – Scheme of the overall ecological status assessment

All biological quality elements must be taken into account when assigning water bodies to any of the ecological status or ecological potential classes. For each biological element the set of the metrics (or indices) will be selected to be indicative for the given pressures. The status of each of the biological elements for natural water bodies is determined by measuring the extent of the de- viation, if any, of the observed condition from the reference condition established for that type of water body. Reference conditions are the conditions established for the biological elements in the absence of pollution or disturbance (or at least minimum disturbance). Ecological status assessment system will be expressed numerically as ecological quality ratios (EQR) in the range between 1 (high status) and 0 (bad status). The EQR scale for the assessment

51 system for each surface water category is divided into the five classes by assigning a numerical value to each of the boundaries between the classes. The physico-chemical and hydromorphological quality elements are supporting elements of the biological assessment for the purpose of the overall ecological status assessment. It should be noted that the approach on surface water quality assessment – ecological status calculation, proposed by EU technical experts, is already implemented in Belarus. According the paragraph 1 of article 6 of the actual Water Code of the Republic of Belarus “Ecological state (status) of surface water objects (and their parts) is defined based on hydrobiological parameters using hydrochemical and hydromorphological parameters”. Technical legal document on assessment of ecological status (class of ecological state) of surface water object with accout of chemical (hydrochemical) status, hydrobiological status, and degree of changes of hydromorphological parameters. What is more total assessment of ecological status, used now in Belarus, is compatible with the scheme of the procees at figure 5.3. The results of the assessment provided in accordance with the last Belorussian technical legislation documents on assessment of chemical status, hydrobiological status and changes of hydromorphological parameters, harmo- nized with EU approaches, are presented in the next chapter of the present report. It may be proposed to enhance established in legal acts boundaries of classes of statuses for Dnieper river basin based of the experience of field surveys (including JFSs of EPIRB project) and stastistical processing of data of NEMS.

5. Chemical Status Assessment The chemical status of surface water bodies is linked with the WFD Annex X pollutants. The latest EU directive specifying both the pollutants (‘Priority substances and certain other pollutants’) and their environmental quality standards (EQS) is the Directive 2013/39/EU “amending Directives 2000/60/EC and 2008/105/EC as regards Priority substances in the field of water policy”. The Directive 2013/39/EU has defined EQSs for in total 45 (groups of) substances, comprising four metals (cadmium, lead, mercury and nickel) and a wide array of organic micropollutants. In principle, two (complementary) environmental quality standards are defined; both EQSs are to be met in order to qualify as ‘good chemical status’: • annual average – environmental quality standard (AA-EQS), applying to the arithmetic mean of one year of data, with monthly sampling presumed; • maximum concentration – environmental quality standard (MAC-EQS), applying to the maximum concentration in the annual set of data.

5.2.3 Assessment of surface water bodies status

The analysis of chemical (hydrochemical) status of water bodies was based on observations of surface water quality by hydrochemical parameters on the fixed NEMS network in 2012. Status is determined for 68 observation points of NEMS. The results of evaluation status for NEMS points were extrapolated and interpolated on the water body sites, taking into account sources of impacts on the hydrochemical regime and reduce their impact factors (Figure 5.4). The results of calculations of the chemical (hydrochemical) status by NEMS points: high - 6; good - 51; moderate - 11. Poor and very poor hydrochemical statuses were not detected. Moderate chemical (hydrochemical) status is set for the following water bodies sites: − Svisloch river downstream Minsk to mouth (BY010812/02, BY010812/03, BY010812/04); − Plissa river (BY010805/01, BY010805/02); − Berezina river downstream Borisov to Svetlogorsk (BY0108/04, BY0108/05); − Uza river (BY011015). Good and high chemical (hydrochemical) status is set for other water bodies.

52 Objects with worse than "moderate" chemical status there were not found. Good chemical (hydrochemical) status is set for all other water bodies’ sites. According to the results of research expeditions in 2013 and 2014 are not found additional water bodies with chemical status differ from the «good» or “high”. The reference (closest to the natural) conditions by the chemical (hydrochemical) status are determined by identifying water bodies having high status. In the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus a high chemical (hydrochemical) status is set for the following water bodies sites: − Berezina river, from source to Borisov (BY0108/01, BY0108/02, BY0108/03); − Dnieper from Loev to the border (BY01/06, BY01/07). Closest to the reference conditions is Berezina site, from source to Borisov, which is a significant part of the territory of the Berezinskiy biosphere reserve.

Figure 5.4 – Chemical (hydrochemical) status of water bodies of the upper Dnieper basin in Bel- arus

53 The analysis of hydrobiological (ecological) status of water bodies was based on observations of surface water quality hydrobiological indicators on the fixed NEMS network for 2012 and the results of single expedition surveys conducted in 2013 and 2014 years (Figure 5.6).

Figure 5.5 - Hydrobiological status of water bodies of the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus (dashed lines show the results of evaluation studies on single expedition)

Status is determined for 56 points. Among them points with the status: high - 5; good - 40; satisfactory - 11. Moderate hydrobiological status is set for the following water objects sites: − Svisloch downstream Minsk to Osipovichy reservoir (BY010812/02, BY010812/03); − Gayna from source to Logoisk (BY010803/01);

54 − Adrov (BY0103); − Udoga (BY011006); − Zhadunka downstream Kostyukovichi to mouth (BY01101301/02); − Dobysna (BY0107); − Uza (BY011015); − Berezina downstream Svetlogorsk to mouth (BY010805). Other water bodies’ sites have good and high hydrobiological status. There are no water objects of "poor" or "very poor" hydrobiological status in the upper Dnieper basin. The reference conditions (or closest to the natural) by hydrobiological status are determined by identifying water bodies which have high status. In the upper Dnieper basin high hydrobiological status is set for the following water bodies sites: by systematic observation on the NEMS points: − Bobr (BY010807); − Iput (BY011014/02). by expedition survey: − Berezina from the lake Palik to settlement Brody (BY0108/02); − Skha (BY010804); − Usha (BY01081202/02); − Drut (BY0106/01, BY0106/02, BY0106/03, BY0106/04); − Greza (BY010608); − Vabich (BY010602); − Resta (BY01100803/01, BY01100803/02); − Volches (BY011005/01, BY011005/02); − Chernaya Natopa (BY011002); − Oster (BY011003); − Senna (BY011007); − Deryazhnya (BY01101302/02); − Pokot (BY011011); − Ut (BY011016). − Kleva (BY0110810). Closest to the reference conditions are Berezina site in its upper stream from the lake Palik to settlement Brody, Iput and listed above small rivers, whose status is identified on the basis of the Project 2014 research expeditions. Hydromorphological changes - anthropogenic changes in the morphology of channels, banks, floodplains and hydrological regime. The examples of water objects in the Upper Dnieper in natural conditions and with significant hydromorphological changes are presented in the figures 5.6 – 5.8.

Figure 5.711 Example of stream in natural conditions (upper reaches of River Vyacha)

Figure 5.8 = Example of stream with significant hydromor- Figure 5.6 - Example of stream in natural phological changes ( heavily modified water body) due to conditions (River Resta) 10 straightening channels (River Ola)

Anthropogenic impacts of hydrotechnical facilities may significantly affect the hydromorphological structure of rivers. This structure is of great importance to ensure adequate living conditions of aquatic biota. Changing the natural hydro-morphological structure of the rivers can lead to negative consequences for the entire river ecosystem and, therefore, lead to a deterioration of the ecological status of surface waters. The main sources of hydromorfological changes in the Dnieper basin in Belarus are hydropower, flood protection engineering, shipping, urban development and agricultural activities. In the Dnieper basin there were investigated 104 river sites in accordance with the Table A.1 of the Annex A and identified the following key hydromorphological changes: − discontinuity in the rivers and obstacles migration of aquatic organisms; − rivers hydrological changes associated with the influence of reservoirs; − changes in the morphology of rivers due to straightening channels. Discontinuity in the rivers Hydrotechnical water retaining structures (dams reservoirs, pumping stations) which cover the riverbed, violate its continuity and limit migration of fish and other aquatic organisms. Criterion for classifying constructions can act height of structures - more than 0.3 m for rivers, dominated by fish of the carp family, and more than 0.8 m for rivers, dominated by fish of the salmon family. In the Dnieper basin it is found 73 object discontinuous rivers flow including: - 17 channel reservoirs dams; - 37 artificial ponds dams located on rivers;

10 Photo on figure 5.5 presented by A.P. Stankevich 11 Photos on figures 5.7, 5.8 presented by K.S. Tsitou 56 - 19 pumping stations. The classification results of surface water bodies (adjusted scheme is shown in Figure 4) by the chemical (hydrochemical) water status, hybrobiological status and ecological status class12 based on the above status assessments and hydromorphological changes shown in the Figure 5.9 and in the Table 5.6. Gap in the table means the absence of the information necessary to determine the status.

Figure 5.9 - Ecological status class of water bodies of the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus taking into account chemical (hydrochemical) status, hydrobiological status and hydromorphological changes

12 In determining the ecological status class TCP 17.13-ХХ-201Х/ОР "Environment protection and natural resources. Analytical control and monitoring. Rules of reference of a surface water body to classes of ecological status" was used 57 Table 5.6 - Assessment of chemical (hydrochemical), hydrobiobiological status and ecological status class Length Watershed hydrochemica hydrobiobiological ecological status Code Name Type l km area,km2 status status class BY01/01 Dnieper 73.1 1080 3 good good good BY01/02 Dnieper 36.9 990 2 good good good BY01/03 Dnieper 62.9 818 2 good good good BY01/04 Dnieper 167.1 2451 3 good good good BY01/05 Dnieper 111.5 1452 3 good good good BY01/06 Dnieper 122.0 1658 3 good good good BY01/07 Dnieper 118.9 768 2 high good good BY0101 Mereya 50.2 356 2 BY0102 Orshitsa 26.9 598 2 good BY0103 Adrov 58.4 674 2 good moderate moderate BY0104 Lakhva 80.0 687 2 high good good BY0105 Ukhlyast 40.1 500 2 BY0106/01 Drut 24.7 283 2 good high good BY0106/02 Drut 22.4 463 2 good high good BY0106/03 Drut 104.6 1536 3 moderate high good BY0106/04 Drut 63.3 1065 3 good high good BY010601 Oslik 63.8 437 2 BY010602 Vabich 60.4 577 2 good high good BY010603 Greza 49.3 449 2 good high good BY0107 Dobysna 82.1 874 2 good moderate. moderate. BY0108/01 Berezina 112.3 1608 3 high good good BY0108/02 Berezina 18.6 615 2 high high high BY0108/03 Berezina 36.8 381 2 high good good BY0108/04 Berezina 144.6 1559 3 moderate good moderate BY0108/05 Berezina 222.5 2987 3 moderate good moderate BY010801 Ponya 40.3 503 2 good good BY010802 Serguch 42.4 242 2 good BY010803/01 Gaina 14.0 128 2 good moderate moderate BY010803/02 Gaina 27.5 238 2 good good good BY010803/03 Gaina 36.1 212 2 good good good BY01080301 Tsna 55.4 638 2 good good good BY01080302/01 Usyazha 5.2 128 2 BY01080302/02 Usyazha 29.6 350 2 BY010804 Skha 61.7 578 2 high high high BY010805/01 Plissa 29.6 173 2 moderate good moderate BY010805/02 Plissa 33.8 447 2 moderate good moderate BY010806/01 Rova 10.7 95 1 BY010806/02 Rova 20.2 141 2 BY010807 Bobr 105.4 1005 3 good high good BY01080701 Plisa 29.8 182 2 BY01080702 Mozha 66.0 527 2 BY01080703/01 Nacha 30.6 252 2 good good good BY01080703/02 Nacha 30.4 277 2 good good good. BY010808 Usha 81.5 725 2 good high good BY010809/01 Brusyata 22.8 283 2 BY010809/02 Brusyata 9.4 89 1 BY010810 Kleva 71.7 501 2 high high good BY010811 Usa 46.6 545 2 good good good BY010812/01 Svisloch 12.2 240 2 good good good

58 Length Watershed hydrochemica hydrobiobiological ecological status Code Name Type l km area,km2 status status class BY010812/02 Svisloch 38.5 578 2 good good good BY010812/03 Svisloch 115.1 1926 3 moderate moderate moderate BY010812/04 Svisloch 33.8 987 2 moderate good moderate BY01081201/01 Vyacha 12.4 89 1 BY01081201/02 Vyacha 6.9 50 1 BY01081201/03 Vyacha 14.8 163 2 good BY01081202/01 Volma 21.8 172 2 good BY01081202/02 Volma 12.1 287 2 good BY01081202/03 Volma 14.0 258 2 good BY01081202/04 Volma 32.8 509 2 good BY010813/01 Olsa 77.3 1691 3 BY010814/01 Ola 47.0 627 2 BY010814/02 Ola 42.9 609 2 BY010815 Zherdyanka 27.9 371 2 BY010816 Sved 44.1 623 2 good good BY0109/02 Vedrich 19.3 1123 3 good good good BY0109/02 Vedrich 47.6 314 2 good good good BY0110/01 Sozh 194.5 1288 3 good good good BY0110/02 Sozh 284.9 3324 3 good good good BY011001 Vikhra 84.8 280 2 good good good Chernaya BY011002 39.7 462 2 good high good Natopa BY011003 Oster 211.0 544 2 good high good BY011004/01 Lobzhanka 34.1 332 2 BY011004/02 Lobzhanka 13.2 156 2 BY011005/01 Volches 26.6 112 2 high high good BY011005/02 Volches 40.3 314 2 high high good BY011006 Udoga 31.4 282 2 good moderate moderate BY011007 Senna 46.9 542 2 good high good BY011008 Pronya 171.0 1991 3 good good good BY01100801 Bystraya 46.7 686 2 BY01100802/01 Basya 111.8 990 2 good good good BY01100803/01 Resta 34.5 203 2 good high good BY01100803/02 Resta 63.0 770 2 good high good BY0110080301/01 Rudeya 11.3 58 1 BY0110080301/02 Rudeya 20.5 262 2 BY011009 Dobrich 37.0 233 2 BY011010 Chechera 50.8 551 2 BY011011 Pokot 71.5 501 2 high high high BY011012 Lipa 54.0 577 2 BY011013 Besed 244.7 3844 3 high good good BY01101301/01 Zhadunka 32.8 453 2 good good good BY01101301/02 Zhadunka 13.1 36 1 good moderate moderate BY01101302/01 Deryazhnya 14.1 91 1 high high good BY01101302/02 Deryazhnya 33.7 220 2 high high good BY01101303/01 Kolpita 17.0 128 2 good good good BY01101303/02 Kolpita 37.0 422 2 good good good BY011014/01 Iput 31.9 273 2 BY011014/02 Iput 59.5 375 2 good high good BY01101401 Ochesa 30.2 130 2 BY01101402 Khoroput 40.3 409 2 good

59 Length Watershed hydrochemica hydrobiobiological ecological status Code Name Type l km area,km2 status status class BY011015 Uza 74.4 944 2 moderate moderate moderate BY011016 Ut 63.1 458 2 moderate high good BY011017 Teryukha 55.4 359 2 good good good BY0111 Pesochenka 50.8 340 2 BY0112 Braginka 122.2 2480 3

There are 12 water bodies which probably at risk due to new Belarusian water quality (WQ) classification results garmonized with EU WQ approaches. These water bodies are not satisfied of good ecological status class in the upper Dnieper basin. This is 11.5% of the total amount of water objects. Svisloch site downstream Minsk wastewater treatment plant (MWWTP) is in the most risk level (Figure 5.10). Additional analysis of these and other water bodies for the final assign them to the risk of failing good ecological status is presented in the next section.

100%

90% 31 / 29.8% 80% 37 /35.6% 37 /35.6% Number of water bodies for which there is no 70% information

60%

50% Total number of water bodies that meet good and high status 40% 64 /61.5% (ecological status class) 60 / 57.7% 55 /52.9% 30% Number of water bodies 20% that do not meet good status (ecological status 10% class) 9 / 8.7% 7 / 6.7% 12 / 11.5% 0% chemical hydrobiological status ecological status class (hydrochemical) status

Figure 5.10 - Common ratio of the number of water bodies that are possible at risk to fail good status (ecological status class)

5.2.4 Surface water bodies at risk assessment

Identification and analysis of water bodies at risk of failing to 2015 good status in the upper Dnieper basin include (Figure 5.11): − identification of water bodies that do not conform to good chemical (hydrochemical) and hydrobiological status, as well as a good class of ecological status; − synthesis of various indicators of diffuse (nonpoint) pollution and determination of its integral characteristics; − synthesis of various indicators of hydromorphological alterations and determination of their integral characteristics; − a comprehensive analysis of all pressures types, including the combination of different map layers with indicators of status and ecological class, integral characteristics of hydromorphological alterations, point sources of pollution and diffuse pollution to the development of generalized map;

60 − identification of water bodies not at risk and water bodies at risk (most vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures; − analysis of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the impacts on water bodies at risk; − identification of water bodies for which it is advisable to conduct additional studies due to the lack or absence of the necessary information for the subsequent identification of their relationship to water bodies at risk or not at risk.

Risk assessment Input data to meet the information needs for pressures and impact analysis

Pressures and impact analysis

Chemical Hydromorphological Hydrobiological status (hydrochemical) status status Ecological status class of water bodies Water bodies for which it is advisable Water bodies not at risk to conduct additional studies on Water bodies at risk definition risk threats Additional studies and analysis

Water bodies for Water Water which it is advisable bodies bodies at to conduct not at possible additional studies on risk risk definition risk threats

Detail studies

Quantitative and Water Water qualitative pressures bodies bodies at and impact on water not at risk bodies at risk analy- risk sis

Program of measures to achieve

good ecological status class Figure 5.11 - Scheme of a common methodology for the identification and analysis of water bodies at risk

In the upper Dnieper basin in the territory of Belarus there were allocated 12 water bodies as possible at risk of failing good ecological status. This is 11.5% of the total amount of water bodies. This is following water bodies: Svislach downstream Minsk waste water treatment plant, Berez- ina river sites (downstream Borisov), Plissa, Udoga, Zhadunka, Uza, Gaina, Adrov, Dobysna. Svislach downstream Minsk waste water treatment plant is at highest risk. After identifying the objects as possible at risk it was performed refinement of risk using the Guidance Document “Guidance Document on Pressure/Impact Analysis (Risk Assessment) in the EPIRB Project Pilot Basins - RBMsolutions (Birgit Vogel) - may, 2014 - 32 p.”. In terms of impact on water bodies of local sources, including sewage, rivers Uza and Svislach downstream Minsk waste water treatment plant are in the category at risk of water bodies. In terms of the agricultural development influence all water bodies are at risk. The intensity of the livestock does not affect the status of water bodies. 8 water bodies are selected for which it is advisable to conduct additional studies to determine the risk level. This is rivers Ola, Horoput, Braginka, Olsa, Usyazha, Rova, Lipa. Proposed in the guidance document EPIRB risk assessment approaches allowed to specify the degree of wastewater influence (point sources) and diffuse pollution sources risk.

The guidance document to analyze the impact of point sources on water bodies it is proposed to use two criteria. 1. Untreated wastewater impact, which is calculated by the formula: Dww = L / Qmin,r , (1)

Dww – specific wastewater discharge into the respective river water body; L – total (dimensionless) load equivalent originating from wastewater discharge into the river in terms of organic matter as BOD (ATH) or COD or nutrient load, in terms of Ntot or Ptot, or number of inhabitants connected to the sewerage system; 3 Qmin,r – minimum annual flow of the river, m /s. or Dww = (L*(1-η))/ Qmin,r , (2)

η – treatment efficiency. Treatment efficiency can be selected according to the knowledge on the performance of the treatment plant

Impact of untreated wastewater was evaluated in relation to the selected water bodies sites on the basis of the provided information. In terms of water bodies sites the information was obtained about discharges of polluting substances in the waste water and the number of population connected to centralized sewerage systems. Instead indicator of total nitrogen the amount of nitrogen compounds (ammonia nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen) was used based on the total nitrogen. This was due to the fact that the State Water Cadastre data do not contain data on total nitrogen discharges for all outlets in the study sites.

Table 5.7 shows the iput data for the calculation.

Table 5.7 - Input data for the calculation of the untreated wastewater impact indicator polluting substances in the The population served by the system of waste water, tons centralized sewerage Urban Rural Code River name Mineral Phospha number per- number per- BOD 5 nitrogen tes cent- cent- age age

BY0103 Adrov 9.34 1.56 0.50 17337 76.2% 12735 27.4% BY0107 Dobysna 0.80 0.00 0.01 71196 92% 21516 47% BY0108/04 Berezina 197.58 302.60 30.33 164053 85% 26000 20% BY0108/05 Berezina 319.68 562.29 13.93 302596 92% 31000 47% BY010803/01 Gaina - - - - - 2553 20% BY010805/01 Plissa 18.25 22.12 0.76 14100 85% 10847 20% BY010805/02 Plissa 14.79 13.87 1.97 59324 85% 9200 20% BY010812/03 Svisloch 1763.6 2512.71 115.90 1638000 90% 37000 20% BY010812/04 Svisloch 71.73 29.96 0.13 37400 90.9% 10600 45.3% BY011006 Udoga - - - 8600 90% 3000 45.3% BY01101301/ Zhadunka 4.48 7.86 1.24 45.3% 02 - - 500 BY011015 Uza 610.92 677.03 99.64 491173 95% 36904 50%

There are no point sources of wastewater discharge in two water bodies (BY010803/01 and BY011006) – hence, the calculation on these objects was not carried out. For other water bodies, the calculation was undertaken on the equivalent load discharged from the volumes of organic and biogenic substances in the wastewater, and considering the average efficiency of the wastewater treatment plant. The calculation was based on the following values of the cleaning efficiency by organic matter (BOD5) - 80%, total nitrogen – 50% and phosphorus - 45% (Table 5.8).

Table 5.8 - Results of the indicator calculation impact of untreated wastewater

The indicator value Dww by individual parameters phosphoru Code River name nitrogen organic substances s

BY0103 Adrov 0.10 0.24 0.91 BY0107 Dobysna 0.01 0.02 BY0108/04 Berezina 0.07 1.53 1.85 BY0108/05 Berezina 0.05 1.18 0.35 BY010805/01 Plissa 0.47 7.78 3.22 BY010805/02 Plissa 0.13 1.64 2.82 BY010812/03 Svisloch 3.38 65.74 36.69 BY010812/04 Svisloch 0.12 0.71 0.04 BY01101301/02 Zhadunka 0.15 3.65 6.98 BY011015 Uza 10.22 154.42 274.98

Using the criteria set out in the Guidance of allocable water objects by category (Table 5.9) the next river sites assessment in the context of wastewater impact by organic and nutrients was obtained (Table 5.10).

Table 5.9 Criteria to assess the risk regarding an identified pressure

Indicator Not at risk Possibly at Risk At Risk Untreated wastewater D < 1 1 < D < 1.5 D > 1.5 impact ww ww ww

Table 5.10 – Assessment results by the risk criteria Risk criteria by individual parameters

Code River name organic nitrogen phosphorus substances

BY0103 Adrov Not at risk Not at risk Not at risk BY0107 Dobysna Not at risk Not at risk BY0108/04 Berezina Not at risk At Risk At Risk BY0108/05 Berezina Not at risk Possibly at Risk Not at risk BY010805/01 Plissa Not at risk At Risk At Risk BY010805/02 Plissa Not at risk At Risk At Risk BY010812/03 Svisloch At Risk At Risk At Risk BY010812/04 Svisloch Not at risk Not at risk Not at risk BY01101301/02 Zhadunka Not at risk At Risk At Risk BY011015 Uza At Risk At Risk At Risk

The union analysis based on assessment by the risk criteria show that 6 water bodies at the risk, one possible at the risk and 3 not at risk.

At risk Possible at risk Not at risk BY0108/04 Berezina BY0108/05 Berezina BY0103 Adrov BY010805/01 Plissa BY0107 Dobysna BY010805/02 Plissa BY010812/04 Svisloch BY010812/03 Svisloch BY01101301/02 Zhadunka BY011015 Uza

The results also show that the two water bodies are at risk by the three indicators (BY010812/03 and BY011015) and four by two (BY0108/04, BY010805/01 BY010805/02, BY01101301/02). These criteria allow selecting objects for which there is no danger of point pollution, and assume that moderate ecological status is caused primarily by diffuse pollution.

64 Application of these criteria is suitable for water bodies sites, where there are inventory or monitoring data on water discharges. Comprehensive analysis on groups (organic and biogenic indicators) using the Guidance allowed to determine water bodies directly at impact and the results of the analysis confirmed it – 6 water bodies directly at risk from point sources of pollution left of 12.

2. Waste water impact assessment was carried out by the second Guidance criteria (Sww). The indicator can be calculated to analyse pressures according to the following equation:

Sww = ∑Qww/MQr , (3)

Sww – total share of wastewater in a river at a given cross section along the river; 3 Qww – total of all (current/future) upstream wastewater discharges into the river [m /s]; 3 MQr – mean annual flow of the river [m /s].

The results are shown in Table 5.11.

Table 5.11 - Impact assessment of wastewater on water bodies at risk

Total share of Code Name Description The boundaries wastewater, Sww Borisov (Borisov d-t) - Svis- BY0108/04 Berezina Dnieper tributary 0.02 loch (Osipovichi d-t) Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) – Svisloch mouth - Be- BY0108/05 Berezina Beregovaya Sloboda (Rechitsa 0.004 rezina mouth d-t) Sloboda (Smolevichi d-t) – Ja- BY010805/01 Plissa Berezina tributary 0.03 lovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Bo- BY010805/02 Plissa Berezina tributary 0.01 risov (Borisov d-t) downstream MWTP – Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) - BY010812/03 Svisloch 0.18 Osipovichi rsrv Lapichi (Osipovichi d-t) Osipovichi rsrv - Vazye (Osipovichi d-t) - Svis- BY010812/04 Svisloch 0.002 mouth loch (Osipovichi d-t) Berezovka (Buda-Koshelevo d- BY011015 Uza Sozh tributary 0.37 t) - Bobovichi (Gomel d-t)

Based on these results Svisloch downstream MWTP (BY010812/03) and Uza (BY011015) are included in the category of water bodies at risk. Despite the much smaller amount of incoming waste water Uza has more strong impact, because of significantly lower runoff in a water body. The remaining water bodies have significantly less impact and are classified as "not at risk". Using this criterion to evaluate only the quantitative characteristics of wastewater and runoff of the receiving water body significantly reduces the number of water bodies at risk - only two have left of 12 that can testify about the most generalized approach. This may suggest its use of only to identify the most important water bodies at risk from those that are considered.

The application of this risk criteria for water objects which are potentially at risk shown that only two water objects at risk and it help us to prioritize water objects at risk in future.

3. Diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution

Table 5.12 shows the characteristics of diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution of water bodies at risk

Table 5.12 - Characteristics of diffuse (dispersed) sources of pollution

The characteristics of diffuse (dis- Code Name Water body boundary persed) sources of pollution More than 70% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Dubnitsy (Orsha d-t) - Orsha BY0103 Adrov average unit nitrogen load -125 kg per 1 (Orsha d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 172 kg per 1 ha. More than 70% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Skachok (Kirovsk d-t) - Zhlobin BY0107 Dobysna average unit nitrogen load -125 kg per 1 (Zhlobin d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 193 kg per 1 ha. Up to 40% of the water body catchment Borisov (Borisov d-t) - Svisloch area - agricultural land, the average unit BY0108/04 Berezina (Osipovichi d-t) nitrogen load -62 kg per 1 ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 179 kg per 1 ha. Up to 40% of the water body catchment Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) – area - agricultural land, the average unit BY0108/05 Berezina Beregovaya Sloboda (Rechitsa nitrogen load -65 kg per 1 ha. Maximum d-t) nitrogen load - 201 kg per 1 ha. More than 55% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Rezyachino (Logoisk d-t) - BY010803/01 Gaina average unit nitrogen load -76 kg per 1 Kuzevichi (Logoisk d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 129 kg per 1 ha. More than 70% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Sloboda (Smolevichi d-t) – Ja- BY010805/01 Plissa average unit nitrogen load -154 kg per 1 lovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 212 kg per 1 ha. More than 49% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Bo- BY010805/02 Plissa average unit nitrogen load -85 kg per 1 risov (Borisov d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 249 kg per 1 ha. More than 53% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) - BY010812/03 Svisloch average unit nitrogen load -67 kg per 1 Lapichi (Osipovichi d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 267 kg per 1 ha. Vazye (Osipovichi d-t) - Svis- Less than 30% of the water body catch- BY010812/04 Svisloch loch (Osipovichi d-t) ment area - agricultural land, the average

66 The characteristics of diffuse (dis- Code Name Water body boundary persed) sources of pollution unit nitrogen load -56 kg per 1 ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 201 kg per 1 ha. More than 55% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Veremeiki (Cherikov d-t) - BY011006 Udoga average unit nitrogen load -81 kg per 1 Cherikov (Cherikov d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load – 172 kg per 1 ha. More than 65% of the water body Kostukovichi (Kostukovichi d- catchment area - agricultural land, the BY01101301/ Zhadunka t) - Belynkovichi (Kostukovichi average unit nitrogen load -111 kg per 1 02 d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 157 kg per 1 ha. More than 80% of the water body catchment area - agricultural land, the Berezovka (Buda-Koshelevo d- BY011015 Uza average unit nitrogen load -129 kg per 1 t) - Bobovichi (Gomel d-t) ha. Maximum nitrogen load - 255 kg per 1 ha.

The most susceptible to anthropogenic impacts associated with agricultural production water bodies sites are following: BY011015 (Uza), BY0103 (Adrov), BY0107 (Dobysna), BY010805/01 (Plissa). A high percentage of arable lands (70%) and high unit nitrogen load (application of mineral and organic fertilizers) lead to the formation of high concentrations of nitrogen compounds in surface and ground waters. In order to clarify the degree of influence of distributed diffuse sources of water bodies indicators were used to assess the extent of impacts. One of them determines the crop intensity level, the second - livestock farming development level. This indicator describes the likelihood of diffuse pollution including typical agricultural contaminants, such as nutrients from fertilisers, pesticides and other plant protection products. The indicator uses a general variable for the quantification of agricultural activities. Therefore not only general physic-chemical influences are covered but also other impacts that may go along with agriculture, such as pollution with agriculture related priority substances.Definition of agricultural land was conducted using spatial analysis of project data of the European Space Agency (ESA Globcover Project). Catchment areas of the rivers have been selected and distribution of land types has been obtained by each of them. The indicator is calculated (Table 5.13) in the framework of the procedure described in the Guidance Document on the impact analysis (risk assessment) of water bodies by the following formula:

Sagri = Aagri/Awb , (4)

Sagri – share of agricultural area in a given water body catchment; 2 Aagri – area used for intensive/industrial agriculture in the respective catchment, km ; 2 Awb – catchment area of the respective water body, km .

Table 5.13 - Agricultural development assessment of water bodies at risk

Agricultural River Catchment 2 Agricultural develop- Code 2 land area, km area, km ment level, Sagri

BY0103 Adrov 674 581 0.86 BY0107 Dobysna 874 728 0.83 BY0108/04 Berezina 1559 690 0.44 BY0108/05 Berezina 2987 1329 0.44 BY010803/01 Gaina 128 83 0.65 BY010805/01 Plissa 173 147 0.85 BY010805/02 Plissa 447 211 0.47 BY010812/03 Svisloch 1926 1030 0.53 BY010812/04 Svisloch 987 312 0.32 BY011006 Udoga 282 154 0.55 BY01101301/02 Zhadunka 36 26 0.72 BY011015 Uza 944 826 0.88

The second indicator, which is used in the Guidance Document on the impact analysis (risk assessment) on water bodies is livestock intensity expressed through the density of livestock units per 1 ha. To assess the impact of livestock this formula is used: Icatch = Ue/Awb , (5)

Icatch i – Indicator for animal livestock [LU/ha];

Ue i – Animal livestock unit;

Awb – Catchment area of the respective water body, ha; For standardized assessment of the number of cattle per 1 ha of agricultural land was used unified method of translation groups of agricultural animals in the conventional units of cattle, applicable in the European Union, with the coefficients used in (http://adlib.everysite.co.uk/adlib/defra/content.aspx?id=000IL3890W.198AWLDOHJ69F3). Reference standard unit of cattle is dairy cow milk yield of 3000 kg annual milk. Data on the number of livestock (cattle, cows, pigs and poultry) were summarized at the administrative-territorial units (village councils) and by calculation it is performed their reduction to standard unit of cattle. The following conversion factors are based on the recommendations of the European Statistical Agency: 1 unit of cattle - 0.8; 1 unit of cow - 1; pig - 0.6; bird - 0,001. The analysis results are given in Table 5.14. They include also additional assessment of pressures from animal livestock in units per agriculture lands (I agri).

Table 5.14 - Assessment of livestock intensity in water bodies at risk

Agricultural Number of Livestock Livestock River Catchment land area, conventional Code intensity intensity area, ha 2 units for cat- km level, I tle catch level, Iagri

BY0103 Adrov 67400 58100 12508 0.19 0.21 BY0107 Dobysna 87400 72800 22968 0.26 0.31 BY0108/04 Berezina 155900 69000 35539 0.23 0.48 BY0108/05 Berezina 298700 132900 30001 0.10 0.22 BY010803/01 Gaina 12800 8300 3032 0.24 0.36 BY010805/01 Plissa 17300 14700 7227 0.42 0.49 BY010805/02 Plissa 44700 21100 9037 0.20 0.42 BY010812/03 Svisloch 192600 103000 40230 0.21 0.39 BY010812/04 Svisloch 98700 31200 14662 0.15 0.46 BY011006 Udoga 28200 15400 7014 0.25 0.45 BY01101301/02 Zhadunka 3600 2600 279 0.08 0.1 BY011015 Uza 94400 82600 30997 0.33 0.37

Based on the proposed by Guidance document on impact analysis (risk assessment) on water bodies criteria to assess the risk factors (Table 5.15) summary table was prepared (Table 5.16).

Table 5.15 Criteria to assess the risk regarding an identified pressure Indicator Not at risk Possibly at Risk At Risk Agricultural Sagri < 0.1 0.1 0.3 development level, Sagri Livestock intensity 0 < Ihus < 0.3 0.3 < Ihus < 1.0 Ihus > 1 level, Icatchm,,Iagri

Table 5.16 – Summary table with assessment results by the risk criteria Agricultural Livestock intensity level, Code River development level, Sagri Ihus Iagri

BY0103 Adrov At risk Not at risk Not at risk BY0107 Dobysna At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY0108/04 Berezina At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY0108/05 Berezina At risk Not at risk Not at risk BY010803/01 Gaina At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY010805/01 Plissa At risk Possibly at risk Possibly at risk BY010805/02 Plissa At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY010812/03 Svisloch At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY010812/04 Svisloch At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY011006 Udoga At risk Not at risk Possibly at risk BY01101301/02 Zhadunka At risk Not at risk Not at risk BY011015 Uza At risk Possibly at risk Possibly at risk

In addition, for 25 water bodies are carried out detailed field studies to assess their hydrobiological, hydrochemical and hydro-morphological characteristics and their subsequent analysis. These 25 water bodies include 10 of the above water bodies at risk (except Svisloch), 8 water bodies under the possible risk, 4 - checking reference (benchmark) conditions and 3 water bodies to establish their status (Figures 5.12-5.14)

Figure 5.1213 – Participants of field suveys

Figure 5.1314 – Hydrobiological surveys Figure 5.14 – Hydrological surveys

After processing the data of field studies conducted in September 2014, assessment of their hydrobiological, hydrochemical and hydromorphological status, ecological status, as well as an assessment of their inclusion in the risk of failing good ecological status are obtained conclusions that the condition of the 7 water bodies for which were proposed and conducted additional research to determine their ecological status, can be classified as excellent and of good ecological status. Final conclusions about water bodies at risk based firstly on hydrobiology, secondary on hydrochemistry and later on hydromorphology. If hydrobiology and hydrochemistry will high and

13 Photos at figure 5.12, 5.14 are represented by Aliaksabdr Stankevich 14 Photo at figure 5.13 is represented by Vladimir Korneev 70 good status finally they can be not less than good status and not at risk independently from hy- dromorpholhical status (Table 5.17). This conclusion is also followed from evident impossibility (with a few exceptions) of water body recovering to natural condition, including in the case of HPP influence, canalization and etc. For example by experience of filed surveys it could be stated that straighted water bodies in the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus for a long time have a form of natural water bodies. Schemes of water bodies at risk and additional measures of achiving of good status are presented in annex I.2. As additional objects at risk, identified with the support of hydromorphological parameters assessment, characterized by no worse than good status by chemical and environmental indicators, these additional water bodies are proposed not to refer to objects at risk due to Belarusian regulation. It is therefore proposed at this stage not to reduce the previously defined list of water bodies at risk (taking to account the risk assessment criteria for hydromorphological elements pressures) and don’t reduce proposed early list of water objects at risk based on risk criterion of point and non-point sources of pollution.

Table 5.17 – Summary of methodological approaches for the determination water bodies at risk with using proposed methodology∗ and new Belarusian legislation garmonized with EU WQ – assessment practises Characteristics of risk1 Status/ class (from 1 to 5) Summary Hydrobiology Hydrochemistry Hydromorphology conclusion NAR NAR NAR NAR 1 1 1 1 NAR NAR PAR, AR NAR 1 1 2-:-5 2 NAR PAR, AR NAR NAR 1 2-:-5 1 2 NAR PAR, AR NAR, PAR, AR NAR 1 2-:-5 1-:-5 2 NAR NAR NAR, PAR, AR NAR 2 1-:-2 1-:-5 2 NAR PAR, AR NAR, PAR, AR AR 2 3-:-5 1-:-5 3 PAR, AR NAR, PAR, AR NAR, PAR, AR AR 3-:-5 1-:-5 1-:-5 3:-5 (same as WQ on hydrobiology) Total amount of water bodies PAR and AR 7 9 53 12 1 – NAR – not at risk; PAR – possible at risk; AR – at risk;

∗ Birgit Vogel Guidance Document on Pressure/Impact Analysis (Risk Assessment) in the EPIRB Project Pilot Basins - RBMsolutions (Birgit Vogel) - may, 2014 - 32 p.

71 5.3 Ground water

5.3.1 Assessment of ground water body status 15

According to the WFD Annex V 2.3.2, good groundwater chemical status is achieved when: The chemical composition of the groundwater body is such that the concentrations of pollutants: - do not exhibit the effects of saline or other intrusions; - do not exceed the quality standards applicable under relevant legislation; - are not such as would result in failure to achieve the environmental objectives for associated surface waters nor any significant diminution of the ecological or chemical quality of such bodies nor in any significant damage to terrestrial ecosystems which depend directly on the groundwater body. Good chemical status means that concentration of pollutants is not exceeding national drinking water standards and/or the EU norms for groundwater. Main parameters used inthe determination of groundwater chemical status are conductivity and concentrations of pollutants. Conductivity can be easily measured in the field and/or in laboratory and depends on the degree of mineralization or concentrations of total dissolved solids –TDS. Concentrations of pollutants are usually analysed in the laboratories. According to the WFD Annex 2.1.2, good groundwater quantitative status is achieved when: The level of groundwater in the groundwater body is such that the available groundwater resource is not exceeded by the long-term annual average rate of abstraction. Accordingly, the level of groundwater is not subject to anthropogenic alterations such as would result in: 1. failure to achieve the environmental objectives for associated surface waters; 2. any significant diminution in the status of such waters; and 3. any significant damage to terrestrial ecosystems which depend directly on the groundwater body Alterations to flow direction resulting from level changes may occur temporarily, or continu- ously in a spatially limited area, but such reversals do not cause salt water or other intrusion, and do not indicate a sustained and clearly identified anthropogenically induced trend in flow direction likely to result in such intrusions. Threshold Values for Groundwater Bodies at risk Article 3.1.b of the GWD also requires countries to derive “threshold values” for other relevant parameters that are causing the GWB to be at risk of not meeting the WFD Article 4 objectives. Therefore, beside nitrates and pesticides listed in the table 1, the following list of minimum parameters must be considered for each groundwater body: − Substances or ions or indicators which may occur both naturally and/or as a result of human + - 2- activities: As, Cd, Pb, Hg, NH4 , Cl , SO4 ; − Man-made synthetic substances: trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene (PCE&TCE); - 2- − Parameters indicative of saline or other intrusion”: conductivity or Cl and SO4 depending on geological situation. Two types of criteria should be considered when deriving the threshold values: − environmental criteria, reflecting relations with associated aquatic ecosystems and dependent terrestrial ecosystems,

15 "Classification of groundwater bodies" (report prepared by Bernardas Paukstys - KE5 expert on ground water) 72 − usage criteria, reflecting groundwater use for drinking purposes and other legitimate areas (irrigation, industry, etc.).

Conceptual Models For properclassification and management of groundwater, a clear understanding of natural environmental situation which supports achievement of the environmental objectives is needed, and how this situation could be affected by human activities. Such conceptual models/understanding of the groundwater system in which the general scheme of flow conditions and of the hydrogeo- chemical properties are known is essential. Conceptual models are not necessarily numerical models but are a working understanding of the hydrogeological system being studied. As a groundwater body is three-dimensional and the concentration of contaminants as well as the background levels may vary significantly in vertical and lateral direction this has to be considered in the establishment of threshold values as well as in the status and trend assessment procedure. Conceptual models shall be improved based on new available information, data, and research results. Classification Tests As mentioned earlier, achieving good status in groundwater involves meeting a series of conditions, which are defined in the GWD/WFD. In order to assess whether those conditions have been met, a series of classification tests for both quantitative and chemical status have been developed. The worst-case classification from the five chemical tests is reported as the overall chemical status of the groundwater body, and the worst-case classification from the four quantitative tests is reported as the overall quantitative status. This is the one-out all-out system, as required by the WFD. If any one of the tests results in poor status, then the overall classification of the body will be poor. All relevant tests must be completed for each groundwater body and the process should not stop after the first poor result is achieved. The results of the tests for both the quantitative and chemical status are then combined to give an overall classification of good/poor for each groundwater body. There are five chemical and four quantitative status tests, some elements of which are common to both. Classification tests are briefly explained below, using information from the Guideline documents 3, 4 and 5. 1. No saline or other intrusion (test for both quantitative and chemical status). The conditions for good chemical and/or quantitative status are not met when there is an entry into the groundwater body of either: − saline water of higher conductivity/salinity from connate or sea water; − water of different chemical composition, from other groundwater bodies or surface waters, and which is liable to cause pollution. 2. No significant diminution of surface water chemistry and ecology(test for both quantitative and chemical status). 3. No negative impact to the Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems (GWDTE) (test for both quantitative and chemical status). 4. Drinking Water Protected Areas (DWPA) (test for chemical status only). 5. General assessment of quality (test for chemical status only). 6. Water balance (test for both quantitative and chemical status). For this test, countries have to assess annual average abstraction against the available groundwater resource in the groundwater body. The available groundwater resource is calculated from the difference between rechargeand the flow required to support the ecology in surface water bodies

73 that are dependent on the groundwater body. All those bodies where the available groundwater resource exceeds annual average abstraction will be classified as good status. High confidence of information will be assigned to the bodies where hydrogeological and ecological monitoring has been undertaken.Where there are more than five monitoring points and no evidence of elevated concentrations or impacts confidence is high. Where there is less evidence, confidence will be low. Six-year averages from relevant groundwater monitoring points are calculated and aggregated across the groundwater body. If themean of the last six years data at an individual monitoring point is not exceed standard or TV the groundwater body is assigned good status.

5.3.2 Ground water bodies at risk assessment

In the basin of the Upper Dnieper in Belarus areal located 7 groundwater bodies, 1 of them is identified as water body at risk of failing good status on chemical and quantitative indicators16. ["Classification of groundwater bodies" (report prepared by Bernardas Paukstys - expert KE5 Groundwater)]. This groundwater body is on the territory of Minsk and the surrounding area. Detailed protection measures for this water body were proposed in 2015 in the framework of the pilot project "Detailed assessment sources of pollution of potable GW sources supplying the" Novinki"in the territory of Minsk”, which has started in November 2014. Measures prepared under this pilot project will be included in this RBMP in 2015 after the finalization if this pilot project. The main impact source on groundwater bodies at risk in the area of Minsk urban agglomeration in the Dnieper-Sozh and Proterozoic sediments is an intensive exploitation of groundwater associated with their intense intake for industrial and municipal water supply. Eleven well fields are established for domestic-industrial water supply of Minsk city with total number of inhabitants of over 2 million. Each of the well fields consists of dozens of exploitation wells of depth of 50-200 m. The oldest well fields (Novinki, Petrovschina, Zelionovka, and Drazhnia) were constructed between 930-1950 and now are located within the territory of the city. Other well fields (Borovliany, Ostrovy, Volma, Vickovschina, Vodopoy, Felicianovo, and Zelenyj Bor) are located at the distance from eight to 25 km from the city in more favourable environmental surroundings. Long-term intensive groundwater abstraction from the inter-moraine Dnieper-Sozh water- bearing complex for the water supply of Minsk city has created a huge depression cone with the diameter of 40 km and drawdown of groundwater levels of 25-30 m in the central part of the depression (Figure 5.15).

16 "Classification of groundwater bodies" (report prepared by Bernardas Paukstys - expert KE5 Ground- water) 74

Figure 5.15 – Depression cone in Dnieper-Sozh water bearing complex around Minsk city in 2008. On the right - scale of water level drawdown, left and below scale of the map, meters

Second most important aquifer used for groundwater abstraction in Minsk city is Upper Protero- zoic aquifer. It provides 8-10 percent of total groundwater supply for the city. The aquifer is located at the depth of 160-320 m and is well protected from the superficial pollution. On the other hand, intensive exploitation of the isolated aquifer has led to development of a large depression cone with the diameter of 40-70 km and water level drawdown of 20-25 m in the centre of the cone (Figure 5.16).

Figure 5.16 - Depression cone in Upper Proterozoic water bearing complex around Minsk city in 2008. On the right - scale of water level drawdown, left and below scale of the map, meters

Intensive groundwater abstraction has also led to water level drawdowns in the uppermostuncon- fined groundwater aquifer (Figure 5.17), which is closely related to the river valleys: the aquifer is recharging rivers in low flow periods.

Figure 5.17 - Depression cone in the shallow-unconfined aquifer around Minsk city in 2008. On the right - scale of water level drawdown, left and below scale of the map, meters Groundwater exploitation is not only causing large-scale water level drawdowns but also reducing flows of small rivers around the Minsk city. Rivers are feeding depleted aquifers and losing their flow during the low-flow periods. This phenomenon in Minsk region was firstly noticed in 1974 when 7km of Volma River disappeared in summer time, 4 years after establishment of Volma well field, which was abstracting groundwater from Dnieper-Sozh water bearing complex. Now upstream flows of rivers Tsna, Loshitsa, Slepyanka, Volma, Trostianka and Sennitsa are impaired by exploitation of Minsk well fields. Groundwater abstraction also accelerates pollution of productive aquifers. Well field Novinki is one of the oldest well fields in Minsk used for water supply since 1932. Groundwater monitoring reveals development of anthropogenic pollution of the aquifers mainly by nitrates. In 1932 nitrates were absent from the groundwaters of the well field but by 1970 concentrations of nitrates in a number of wells had reached 20–27 mg/l and in 1990 they had increased to 50–65 mg/l (European norm for drinking groundwater is 50 mg/l). Analyses of groundwater samples collected from the well field in 2009 indicated concentrations of nitrates reaching 62,3–81,8mg/l in 9 wells. In 18 wells concentrations of nitrates did not exceed drinking water standard but were above the natural background values (Figure 5.18).

- Figure 5.18 – Concentration of nitrates in artesian aquifers of Novinki well field: 1 –NO3 con- - centrations above MAC (> 50 mg/l); 2 –NO3 concentrations above natural geochemical back- - ground but below MAC (from 5 to 45 mg/l); 3 –NO3 concentrations corresponding to natural geochemical background (up to 5 mg/l)

76 5.3.3 Existing ground water monitoring network

In accordance with the objectives of groundwater monitoring observation network is divided into two ranks: national and reference. Reference network of groundwater monitoring designed for study of natural (reference) regime of groundwater which is the source (reference) point in the assessment of anthropogenic load with account the overall hydrodynamic and hydrochemical zonality of groundwater. Forming of groundwater caused by natural conditions of particular region and development of man-maid changes in groundwaters is studied at the stations of impacted groundwater monitoring. At present transboundary monitoring network is formed and includes following stations: - Stations which are located close to the state boundary of the Republic of Belarus; - Stations with minimal anthropogenic load; - Wells installed into various aquifers (complexes) for the assessment of transboundary impact of groundwater flow. There are 45 monitoring wells at 5 transboundary stations, impacted and 2 reference stations in the upper Dnieper basin. Existing groundwater monitoring network at the pilot territory includes 21 acting hydrogeological stations: Vysokovsky, Babinovsky, Klukovsky, Starokoitinsky, Vasilievsky, Sverzhensky, Iskrovsky, Proskurinsky, Antonovsky, Michaelovsky, Khonovsky, Babichsky, Grebenevsky, Va- silevichsky, Minsky, Lipovsky I, II, Zarubovshinsky, Berezensky I, II, Logoisky, Yanushkovichsky, Gorokhovsky (Table D.2 of the Annex D).

5.3.4 Perspective ground water monitoring network17

WFD compliant groundwater monitoring programme in the pilot Dnieper river basin of Belarus shall consist of quantitative and chemical monitoring which will be further sub-divided into surveillance, operational and investigative sub-programmes. As per WFD requirements also drinking water protection areas and monitoring of polluted sites (prevent&limit monitoring) shall be organised. Surveillance monitoring programme shall be proposed for six groundwater bodies with good quantitative and chemical status (temporary codes GW01-GW06). The minimum number of sampling sites per GW-body is three (source: "The EU Water Framework Directive: Statistical aspects of the identification of groundwater pollution trends, and aggregation of monitoring results"). Holms et. al proposes to install five monitoring wells in each groundwater body with the homogenous hydrochemical and hydrodynamic features. Five monitoring points will guarantee confident characterisation of the body of groundwater (source: Irrigation Sector Reform Activity (ISRA) River Basin Management Sub-activity Identification, Delineation, and Classification of Water Bodies). Operational monitoring programme will focus on observation of „at risk“ groundwater bodies, establishing the presence of any long-term anthropogenically induced upward trend in the concentration of pollutants, supporting the design of PoMs and assessing the effectiveness of such measures within groundwater bodies. Operational monitoring programme and measures for improvement of quantitative status will be proposed for the groundwater body around Minsk

17 Subsection prepared base on “Guidelines for groundwater monitoring programme in the Upper Dnieper river basin of Belarus. (report prepared by Bernardas Paukstys - KE5 expert on ground water)” 77 (temporary code GW07) which was assigned “at risk” category due to over-exploitation and development of depression cone. All other larger well fields in Dnieper basin that abstract >100 m3/day of groundwater shall also perform operational monitoring for the assessment of their impact on the underground and surface environments. In a specific case, which needs further investigation an investigative monitoring is required. Investigative monitoring will be proposed for the Novinki well field of Minsk city for detecting the origin and source of nitrate pollution. Observation of surface-groundwater interaction is an important WFD requirement. It is well known that increasing abstraction is negatively influencing surface waters - bogs, peat lands and small streams first. Surface-groundwater interaction is not a separate branch of monitoring but should be considered in all types of monitoring: surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring programmes. Several unimpaired groundwater monitoring stations in Belarus contain also surface water sampling points. It is suggested to continue sampling of surface watercourses larger attention paying to flow regime of surface streams in the low-flow periods when rivers are mainly fed by the groundwater discharge.

5.3.4.1 Quantitative monitoring The overall objectives of the quantitative monitoring include observation of long-term water level trends and assessment of saline or other intrusions caused by groundwater abstraction. This information will also be used for validating risk assessments. Groundwater level monitoring stations in Dnieper basin, Belarus shall be located across a groundwater body to achieve a good spatial spread of information within groundwater body recharge and discharge areas. Groundwater level and flow measurements shall be carried out in: − Monitoring boreholes, and/or production wells in the delineated groundwater bodies for the observation and prevention of negative human impact (at least 5 monitoring stations in each homogenous groundwater body); − Transboundary aquifers with Russia and Ukraine; Observations of impact of groundwater abstraction (operational monitoring near the well fields); − Measurements of flow in the surface water courses during the drought periods (e.g. Volma, Cna, Loshica, Slepianka, Volma, Trostianka, Sennica and other rivers that are impaired by exploitation of Minsk well fields). The installation of data loggers is recommended in all quantitative groundwater monitoring boreholes because continuous and frequent data recording provides an opportunity to achieve a greater understanding of the aquifer response to changes of discharge-recharge regimes and behaviour to pollution/abstraction events.Monitoring stations with electronic data reading devises shall be first installed in the groundwater bodies, which are transboundary with Russia and Ukraine (GW04, GW05, and GW06).

5.3.4.2 Surveillance chemical monitoring The main objective of the surveillance monitoring programme is assessment of long-term water quality trends, caused by changes in natural conditions and through anthropogenic activity. Surveillance monitoring data may be also used for assisting design and evaluation the effectiveness of programmes of measures. As mentioned above, at least five monitoring wells in each consistent groundwater body are required for further monitoring and confident characterisation of the body of groundwater. Artesian groundwater bodies in Belarus: Palaeogene, Cretaceous and 18 Devonian are rather consistent from the hydrochemical and hydrodynamic point of views; therefore five monitoring stations need to be installed (recovered) in each groundwater body. Geology of Quaternary aquifers is more heterogeneous and requires denser monitoring network. It is proposed to maintain all existing monitoring wells and rotate sampling every year to ensure better territorial coverage of analysed Quaternary GWB.

78 Existing GW monitoring network in Belarus has to be modernised to comply with the WFD requirements. Totally, 40 monitoring stations consisting of 101 wells may be used for monitoring of unimpaired (natural) groundwater regime in Dnieper basin and 16 monitoring stations are used for observations of impact of groundwater abstraction. Unimpaired monitoring network may be further used for the surveillance monitoring and wells located near abstraction points will serve as operational monitoring stations. Rotation of monitoring stations installed in the Quaternary aquifers shall be used, annually sampling about 50 wells. Existing eight monitoring points in the Cretaceous GWB shall be used; whereas at least two monitoring stations shall be installed in, the Palaeogene and four monitoring station into Devonian groundwater bodies to make minimum five monitoring points for each delineated groundwater body. Five monitoring wells shall be installed in the peat land aquifers which are very good sensors, indicating impact of groundwater abstraction to surface water ecosystems. Some bogs and peat lands are now or may become in future protected areas for birds and habitats. In this case, groundwater observations in bogs may be used for monitoring of protected areas. Specific feature of Belarus is soil pollution (and probably shallow groundwater) by radionuclides after the Chernobyl accident in 1986. This area has to be included into surveillance monitoring programme under the special status. The existing and perspective surveillance chemical monitoring network are presented on the table 5.18 and on the figure Figure 5.19.

Table 5.18 - Recommended surveillance groundwater monitoring network (quantitative and chemical) No/ Name and code of No of monitoring What is Purpose of monitoring No GWB wells monitored 1 Bogs and peat-lands 5 new monitoring Level and Surface-groundwater GW01 wells (GW01-1- chemistry interaction; GW01-5 Birds and Habitats protected areas 2 Quaternary alluvial 44 existing wells Level and GWB recharge-discharge unconfined, GW02 rotated every year chemistry zones to 25 points 3 Quaternary confined 42 existing wells Level and GWB recharge – discharge (inter-moraine) GW03 rotated every year chemistry zones; to 25 points Impact of abstraction of Minsk GWB at risk 4 Palaeogene-Neocene 5 (3 existing wells Level and GWB recharge – discharge GW04 + 2 new ones, chemistry zones; GW04-1, GW04-2) Transboundary with Russia and Ukraine 5 Cretaceous 8 existing wells +1 Level and GWB recharge – discharge GW05 new transboundary chemistry zones; well (GW051) Transboundary with Russia 6 Devonian GW06 5 (1 existing + 4 Flow and GWB recharge – discharge new ones, GW06- chemistry zones; 1-GW064) Transboundary with Russia 7 Proterozoic GW 07 5 (2 existing wells Level and Impact of abstraction of + 3 new ones, chemistry Minsk GWB at risk GW07-1-GW07-3) 8 GWB with potential 5 new Level and Radionuclide pollution after radionuclide pollution wells?(GW08-1- chemistry the Chernobyl accident GW08-5)

Figure 5.19 – Scheme of location of the existing and perspective hydrogeological stations in the upper Dnieper basin

80 The following groundwater monitoring frequency for the surveillance monitoring proposed for the Upper Dnieper pilot basin, Belarus (table 5.19).

Table 5.19 - Groundwater monitoring parameters and sampling frequency Parameters and indices Frequency, at least Main anions and cations (Na, K, Ca, Mg, Fetot, 2-4 times a year NH4, HCO3, Cl, SO4, NO3, NO2) and physical properties (pH, specific conductivity, permanganate index, or TOC) Trace elements (Fe, As, Hg, Cd, Pb, Zn, Cu, Once per 2 years Cr, etc.) Pesticides* Once per 6 years Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, Phenols, Once per 2 years Trichloroethylene, Tetrachlorethylene** Groundwater levels in monitoring boreholes, Electronic data loggers – every 6-12 hrs. exploitation wells and flow&level of natural Other monitoring wells 3 times/month. springs and rivers River flows and levels- during the sampling events (2-4 times/year during the drought periods) Notes: * pesticides have to be analysed only in monitoring points located in the agricultural areas; choice depends on local usage, land-use framework and observed occurrences in groundwater; ** PAH, phenols, TCE&PCE have to be analysed in the wells located in urban territories (Minsk, Gomel, etc.) and near the industrial sites. Precise choice depends on local pollution sources.

5.3.4.3 Operational monitoring Operational monitoring is used for: − Determining the chemical status of groundwater bodies that are at risk of failing to meet WFD environmental objectives (GW body around Minsk); − Detecting upward trends in pollutant concentrations due to either natural or human impacted causes; − Defining starting points for trend reversal; − Assisting design and evaluating the effectiveness of programmes of measures. Operational monitoring has to be carried out first in the groundwater bodies defined as being at risk of not achieving WFD environmental objectives. In Dnieper basin, Belarus groundwater body around Minsk (code-GW07) is assigned “at risk” category due to: − exceedance of available groundwater resource by long-term annual average rate of abstraction for drinking water supply of Minsk agglomeration; − failure to achieve environmental objectives for associated surface waters – Volma, Cna, Loshica, Slepianka, Volma, Trostianka, Sennica and other rivers that are impaired by exploitation of Minsk well fields. These rivers should be also included into the surveillance or operational monitoring programmes. The following groundwater monitoring frequency for the operational monitoring is proposed for the Dnieper pilot basin, Belarus (table 5.20):

81 Table 5.20. Operational groundwater monitoring parameters and sampling frequency Parameters and indices Frequency, at least tot 2 times a year Main anions and cations (Na, K, Ca, Mg, Fe , NH4, HCO3, Cl, SO4, NO3, NO2) and physical properties (pH, specific conductivity, permanganate index, or TOC) Trace elements (Fe, As, Hg, Cd, Pb, Zn, Cu, Cr, etc.) Once per year Pesticides* Once per 6 years Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, Phenols, Once per year Trichloroethylene, Tetrachlorethylene** Groundwater levels in monitoring boreholes, production Electronic data loggers – every 6-12 wells, and flow of impaired rivers hrs. Other monitoring wells 3 times/month. Rivers- during the sampling events in drought periods (2-4 times/year)

State Enterprise “Research and Production Centre for Geology”, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection is monitoring 16 stations of disturbed regime which corresponds to operational monitoring. If this monitoring covers all groundwater bodies, it shall be continued and extended to other (unmonitored) groundwater abstraction areas, obliging water supply companies and other economic entities to carry out groundwater monitoring. Water companies may use abandoned exploitation wells for impacted groundwater monitoring.

CHAPTER 6 ENVIRONMENT OBJECTIVES AND EXEMPTIONS

6.1 Environmental objectives

Determionation of the environmental objectives based on the article 4 (paragraphs 4.3-4.7) of the Guidance document #1“Economics and the environment. The implementation challenge of the Water Framework Directive”. The main methodological ideas for the environmental objectives are the followings: - for surface water, the highest ecological and chemical status possible is achieved, given impacts that could not reasonably have been avoided due to the nature of the human activity or pollution; - for groundwater, the least possible changes to good groundwater status, given impacts that could not reasonably have been avoided due to the nature of the human activity or pollution. The WFD requires achievement of the following environmental objectives a. good ecological/chemical status of surface water bodies; b. good ecological potential and chemical status of HMWBs and AWBs; c. good chemical/quantitative status of groundwater bodies. Finally environmental objectives for the upper Dnieper river basin based on the good ecological status class/ good ecological potemtial of surface water bodies which is determined take into account the chemical (hydrochemical) status, hybrobiological status and and hydromorphological changes18. Ranges of chemical and hydrobiological parameters for the GOOD WATER bodies status in the Upper Dnieper Basin are presented in the tables E.1 – E.4 of the Annex E.

6.2 Exemption according to WFD

An integral part of the environmental objectives set out in Article 4 of WFD are the so-called exemptions. Article 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 describe the conditions and the process in which they can be applied. These exemptions range from small-scale temporary exemptions to midand long term deviations from the rule "good status by 2015", and include the following aspects: − the extension of the deadline , in other words, good status must be achieved by 2021 or 2027 at the latest (Article 4.4) or as soon as natural conditions permit after 2027; − the achievement of less stringent objectives under certain conditions (Article 4.5); − the temporary deterioration of the status in case of natural causes or "force majeur" (Article 4.6); − new modifications to the physical characteristics of a surface water body or alterations to the level of bodies of groundwater, or failure to prevent status deterioration of a body of surface

18 In determining the ecological status class TCP 17.13-ХХ-201Х/ОР "Environment protection and natural resources. Analytical control and monitoring. Rules of reference of a surface water body to classes of ecological status" was used. water (including from high status to good status) as a result of new sustainable human development activities (Article 4.7). The exemption decribed in Article 4.6 not taken to account due to our water objects at risk can not be affected by natural factors more than antropogenic pressures in the future.

The application of WFD Article 4.4 indicates that respective measures probably will not be implemented in the upper Dnieper river basin by 2022, whereas less stringent environmental objectives will be aimed for in water bodies subject to WFD Article 4.5. The term of 2022 of year was accepted due to following reasons: − The Upper Dnieper River Basin Management Plan (UDRBMP) will be finalized and approved in 2015; − Realization of UDRBMP will be implemented during next six years from 2016 till 2022. Future Infrastructure Projects (FIP) may need an exemption according to WFD Article 4.7 in the case that they would provoke deterioration in water status – the application of these exemptions is also summarised. For the 104 surface river water bodies of the upper Dnieper river basin it can be summarised that Article 4.4 is applied for 4 water bodies (4%) and Article 4.5 for 4 water bodies (4%) and article 4(7) is implemented in 4 water bodies (4%) (Table 6.1). There are determined that 5 surface water bodies and one ground water body probably will not reached environmental objectives to 2022 after implementation of the Program of measures For other water bodies at risk can be expected possibilities to reach of the environmental objectives to 2022 after implementation of the Program of measures.

Table 6.1 – Summary table of Exemption according to WFD - water bodies which probably will not reached environmental objectives to 2022 after implementation of the Program of measures Code Name Reasons Surface water bodies Article 4.4 It will be expected that good ecological status designation for this water object will be extent for 2022 or 2028 due to significant impact from point sources located in the Minsk urban and industrial area (MUPE "Minskvodokanal"). Past years data shows annual substantional increase of population in Minsk as well as Minsk region due to demographic situation and migration condition. Svisloch Expected possible problem with watering of Svisloch River due to limit of funds for maintain current level of diversion from BY010812/03 (downstream Viliya river can caused to deterioration of the status for the wa- Minsk) ter body. Article 4.5 Possible activity in connection with local environmental measures (increasing capacity of Minsk WWTP, modernizaion of city storm sewer system ) can be affect on improving water quality in the River Svisloch Article 4.7 Increasing impossibilities of self-purification of river Svisloch can affect on ecological status Svisloch Article 4.7 BY010812/04 Secondary pollution affected from the Osipovichy reservoir (downstream where bottom sediments are extremely polluted. Pollution 84 Code Name Reasons Osipovichi transfer from the upper river district. reservoir) Article 4.4 It will be expected that good ecological status designation for this water object will be extent for 2022 or 2028 due to significant impact from point sources located in the Gomel urban and industrial area (MUPE "Gomelvodokanal", JSC "Gomel- steclo", JSC "Gomel chemical plant" etc.) Article 4.5 BY011015 Uza Possible activity in connection with local environmental measures (increasing capacity of Gomel WWTP, modernizaion of city storm sewer system) can be affected on improving water quality in the River Uza Article 4.7 Increasing impossibilities of self-purification of river Uza can affect on ecological status Article 4.4 It will be expected that good ecological status designation for this water object will be extent for 2022 or 2028 due to significant impact from new point sources (new urban settlement of the city Misk) which will be located in the Smolevichy district Plissa as well as exsisting big agricultural enterprizers. BY010805/01 (Smolevichi Article 4.5 d-t) Possible activity in connection with local environmental measures (increasing capacity of Smolevichi WWTP, etc.) can be affected on improving water quality in the river Plissa. Article 4.7 Increasing impossibilities of self-purification of river Plissa can affect on ecological status Article 4.4 It will be expected that good ecological status designation for this water object will be extent for 2022 or 2028 due to problem Plissa upstream river district BY010805/01 and significant impact (Smolevichi from industrial point and diffuse sources (including JSC "BE- BY010805/02 LAZ" and others) which are located in the Smolevichy district. and Borisov Article 4.5 d-t) Possible activity in connection with local environmental measures (increasing capacity of local WWTPs) will affect on improving water quality in the river Plissa but can not allow to reach doog eco;ogical status. Ground water bodies Groundwater bodies in the Articles 4.4, 4.7 Dnieper-Sozh and Proterozoic Uncontrolled groundwater extraction around Minsk exceeds sediments in the area of Minsk their available resources, where megacone is formed with the urban agglomeration in areas diameter of up to 40-70 km and water level drawdown of 25- of all 12 group intakes. 40 m in the center of the cone as a result of intensive exploitation of groundwater. Extensive growth of population on Minsk agglomeration and increase of groundwater abstraction from ground water bodies.

85 CHAPTER 7 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

7.1 Features of the economic (business) activity in the basin19

Identified in earlier phases of research water bodies at the risk of failing good ecological status represent only 11.5% of the total amount of the allocated water bodies. For them are identified the most important sources of exposure, it allows to identify the main activities to improve the ecological status of water bodies. Nevertheless, the development of measures to maintain a good ecological status of other water bodies in the basin is also important. Therefore, economic analysis of the situation in the basin and determination of the most characteristic effects in the whole basin are necessary for assessment of the long-term development in the basin, including hydro problems.

7.1.1 Population

In the basin of the Upper Dnieper in Belarus are located 41 city, 26 small towns and of district type, over 15 large villages and many smaller settlements (hamlets, villages, etc.). Population density (73.63 people per 1 km2) is the largest compared to other basins of major rivers. The highest population density is in the Minsk region - 185.01 people per 1 km2. In large cities - Minsk, Gomel, Mogilev, Orsha, Zhodino and Bobruisk - population density exceeds 2,000 people per 1 km2 (Minsk - 6,201.56 people per 1 km2). Water to the population in the basin is carried out mainly from centralized systems exploited by public utilities of settlements. Provision of urban population with centralized water supply in Minsk – up to 99%, in the Minsk region - 93%, Mogilev region - 97.2%, Gomel region - 81.6%. Provision of rural population of Mogilev region - 69.9%, Gomel region - 50%. Public water supply is carried out with water from underground sources, with the exception of the city of Minsk, where the average daily intake is 535.3 thous.m3and 150 thous.m3from it are supplied from surface water sources Vileika-Minsk water system. Currently a phased transfer of water supply to the city of Minsk from underground sources is carried out. Provision of the population with centralized wastewater disposal in Minsk - up to 95%, urban population in the Gomel region - 81.6%, in the Minsk region - 85%, Mogilev region - 90.9%.The provision of rural population with centralized and local systems for household wastewater in the Mogilev region – 45.3%, Gomel region - 50%. The main problems in the field of water supply and sewerage in the basin are: - Inadequate supply of the population with centralized water supply, especially in rural areas (for example, in the Gomel region is not provided about 272 thousand people, including 52 thousand of urban and 220 thousand of rural population), as well as centralized sewerage system; - Ensuring the quality of drinking water sources in the non-centralized water supply systems (wells and boreholes); - Inadequate drinking water supply standard quality of centralized water supply systems due to increased iron concentrations greater than 0.3 mg / l); - High physical deterioration of sewage treatment facilities, lack of modern technology and equipment for waste water treatment, including of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), and in- sufficient level of automation and scheduling processes;

19 While preparing this chapter the materials of the report "Development of Scheme of complex use and protection of waters for river Dnepr basin (2013)”, CRICUWR- Minsk, 2013

- High physical deterioration of networks, equipment and facilities; - Violation of the requirements of urban development in matters of sanitary protection zones of water intakes; - Failure modes for sanitary protection zones of water intakes and norms of sanitary protection of sources of centralized water supply. Problems exist also in the functioning of public utilities providing water and wastewater services to the population. In the period under review the level of reimbursement of operational costs is provided by the so-called "cross-subsidization" and the direction of subsidies from local budgets Reimbursement of depreciation costs, and the more income-providing development of water and wastewater systems at their own expense is yet unattainable in the short term. There is the goal of eliminating "cross-subsidization" and grants to ensure full recovery of operating costs. In this connection, the investment in the industry ensures the implementation of the state program "Clean Water" with funding from state and local budgets, borrowing the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and other international and regional financial institutions. Remains rather low level of sanitary arrangement of rural settlements. Simple and still widely used technical solutions in this area are raked and the well screen to divert domestic wastewater. Hygienic risk when using this kind of structures is quite high. Due to the filter waste water through the soil is an intensive flow of pollutants into groundwater. Especially, this problem is exacerbated at high elevations in groundwater levels. When water is taken from wells and wells drilled in the upper aquifer, the content of nutrients (especially nitrogen compounds - nitrate and ammonium nitrogen) in water may exceed the allowable concentrations for decentralized water supply several times.There have been cases of nitrate content in water abstracted from wells about 100-500 mg /dm3 at MAC of 40 mg / dm3. The use of such water for drinking is a serious danger, especially for children. The use of septic tanks instead of raking can only reduce the pollution intensity of pollutants, but does not fully solve the problem of environmental safety sanitation. Such traditional approaches to sanitation in rural areas and in the areas of individual building in cities also lead to contamination of surface water and groundwater. Furthermore uneasi- ness when placing buildings in the planning of individual building in areas adjacent to small rivers leads to intense discharges in river when snow melts, runoff of contaminated water generated during rainfall. To a high risk of surface and groundwater contamination also leads the practice of allocating land for construction of a new individual buildings with a minimum level of engineering infrastructure (electrical networks, water and dirt roads or driveways), i.e. without equipping sewerage system. This approach leads to the widespread use of simple structures for sewage - septic tanks and raked, leading to an intense flow of contaminants during filtration. Large communities are a powerful source of local pollution by nutrients, primarily due to receipt of sewage from wastewater treatment plants utilities. Through intensive sampling of groundwater for water supply is noted formation of hydrodynamic funnels of different sizes. In the district of Minsk urban agglomeration as a result of intensive exploitation of groundwater has formed a mega funnel with a diameter up to 40-70 km down the center to 25-40 m. Within settlements are formed the sources of water pollution with surface waste water containing a significant amount of oil. The big problem is MSW landfills, which are a source of contamination of both surface and underground water bodies. Another aspect is related to the right of the population on the use of water bodies for recreation. Eutrophication of water bodies leads to a sharp decrease in their recreational appeal. Branch does not have the resources to impact water bodies subject to eutrophication. The result is that for

87 these purposes are starting to use less available water bodies with increasing anthropogenic impact on them.

7.1.2 Industry

In the Dnieper River basin are concentrated the largest industrial centers of the country - Minsk, Zhodino, Gomel, Bobruisk, Mogilev, Zhlobin, Shklov, Svetlogorsk Dobrush, Orsha and others. Minsk is the major industrial center of the country. Minsk enterprises produce 19.7% of the national volume of industrial production. The presence of natural waters pollution sources with different pollutants, the content of which depends on the structure of production is characteristic for large industrial centers. All selected in the basin of the Upper Dnieper water bodies at risk of failing good ecological status have large industrial towns within its catchment area, where the significant contamination forms with sewage from industrial and municipal wastewater treatment plants and with runoff of settlements. For industrial water supply in the region is quite widely used groundwater removal industry which has remained stable over the last years, in contrast to the use of surface water, removal of which has considerably decreased. At the industrial enterprises of the region is formed a substantial amount of contaminated wastewater that is discharged into sewerage system of settlements, water bodies, storages. Remains urgent problem of sewage treatment (food industry and others) on the local wastewater treatment plants before discharge into the sewerage system of settlements. A very common practice is wastewater from water treatment plants without city sewer systems, causing problems of municipal wastewater treatment plants operation. Requires to be solved the problem associated with disposal highly mineralized water salt-coating production of fish processing plants. Remains quite severe problem with recycling sludge formed after electroplating wastewater treatment plants. There is an ongoing practice of storing sediments containing heavy metals on the enterprises areas. A serious problem is the pollution of surface waste water discharged from the areas of enterprises. The lack of rainwater drainage and sewage treatment plants of the surface wastewater at the part of enterprises leads to the contamination of ground and surface waters. In enterprises practically is no interest to use rain water in the technical water supply. There are problems with the placement of certain industrial wastes. For example, Gomel chemical plant for the production of fertilizers is functioning for 45 years of the in the open area of more than 100 hectares, during this period is accumulated about 22 mn tons of phosphogypsum and the amount of waste continues to increase, requiring activities to protect surface water and groundwater. The region has developed mining industry. Development of minerals is presented in the form of local building materials mining and mining of molding clay in open quarries, as well as the development of peat on the open areas. In the basin are presented a number of large peat enterprises "Osintorf", "Tatarka", "The Dnieper’s". In the basin area is made sapropel mining from water bodies, accompanied by certain negative impact on aquatic ecosystems. There are located a number of significant developing deposits such as oil near Rechitsa town. Annual oil production is 1.6 mn tons. In 2014 is started producing oil from dense rocks using hydraulic fracturing technology, which improves the possibility to extract previously inaccessible oil deposits in the rocks. Also in the region are deposits of chalk and marl near the town of Krichev and Kostyuk- ovichi and used for cement production.

88 Development and production of the above minerals is accompanied by intensive anthropogenic impacts on water bodies and groundwater. With the introduction of technology with hydraulic oil production risks associated with possible contamination of aquifers and surface water bodies are significantly increased.

7.1.3 Agriculture

Agriculture in the Dnieper River basin specializes in growing traditional crops of temperate lati- tudes. Among crops are dominantly cereals, mainly barley, rye, wheat, potatoes, fodder crops. At the highest level is the flax. In livestock is grown mainly cattle for milk and meat production, as well as pigs and poultry. In the basin of the Dnieper major share in the structure of land in use is agricultural land, of which nearly 30% are arable land, nearly 15% is grassland. About 40% is covered by forests; under different water bodies and marshes is occupied 4.5% (Table 7.1).

Table 7.1 – The structure of agricultural land in the basin

Type of land Area, thous. km2 % of total Total agricultural land 29.2 45.8 - arable 18.7 29.4 - fallow 0.2 0.4 - used for permanent crops 0.4 0.7 - meadow 9.8 15.4 among them improved 5.9 9.2 % of agricul- There claimed farm land: tural area - irrigated land 0.5 1.7 - drained land 13.0 43

Enterprises for breeding and fattening animals are a powerful source of local water pollution. In the basin of the Upper Dnieper in Belarus operates 16 poultry farms, 20 complexes for breeding and fattening of cattle, 35 complexes for breeding and fattening pigs. Most of the water bodies are at risk by the degree of agricultural development, and only two of them there are at risk of livestock. The main problem associated with the impact of livestock facilities on water bodies is the han- dling of manure containing wastewater, because the volumes of wastewater generated in these enterprises and the amount of pollutants significantly exceed the number of pollutants in other types of wastewater. For example, in average in pig-breeding complex is formed 18-22 liter / day per animal manure containing waste water under the gravity system of manure removal and 27- 3 3 37 dm / day under hydro flushing, which are characterized by BOD5 6000-12500 mg / dm , con- 3 3 tain 700-1500 mg / dm total nitrogen, 300-600 mg / dm phosphorus P2O5. The main methods of manure containing wastewater processing in accordance with the applicable technical regulations include: - Removal manure containing wastewater into manure storages with further use as fertilizer with the export;

89 - Separation of wastewater by mechanical cleaning on fractions: liquid (clarified liquid) and solid (pellet) with further recycling as organic fertilizer. - cleaning of manure containing waste water and removal them into water bodies, disposal of sewage sludge as an organic fertilizer. Technological schemes with biological wastewater treatment are recommended for pig farms with 56000, 108000, 216000 pigs. It is regulated by design standards that the so-called biological treatment the liquid fraction of the manure pig farms is allowed in exceptional cases with a lack of suitable land areas and water for irrigation, as well as unfavorable climatic, geographical and hydrogeological conditions and in the case of transfer to the urban sewerage facilities. However, biological wastewater treatment and further removal to water bodies in some cases are a forced step associated with the inability of agricultural utilization considerable discharges of wastewater generated at the complex with a large amount of animals. Assuming the above concentrations of BOD5 in manure containing wastewater, the requirement to remove nitrogen and phosphorus compounds is to be implemented on pig farms with livestock over 2000-2500 animals, i.e. much smaller than that of the complexes built on standard projects (12 000, 24 000 animals). Thus, on pig complexes when wastewater removing occurs is to be implemented technological purification scheme with the removal of nutrients, which leads to problems of an economic nature. This kind of wastewater treatment is very expensive and requires highly trained personnel to operate, making it unprofitable production at such facilities. Industrial and agricultural facilities, widespread within the river basin of the Dnieper, the most significant negative impact have on shallow located unconfined aquifers (groundwater). For the basin are typical highly transformed water bodies due to the drainage of land. Besides artificial reclamation networks, large areas of water bodies are canalized and have dams. With the use of hydro-morphological criteria river morphology change (channel straightening) are identified 26 water bodies at risk and 18 water bodies at possible risk (including 3 water bodies at risk and 1 at the possible risk from the 12 water bodies at risk, determined using the chemical and ecological status, as well as criteria for evaluating the risk of threats from point and diffuse sources). Farmland with drainage are usually characterized by a high degree of plowed while canalized rivers are practically deprived the coastal strip. Removal of nutrients with melt and rain water in such areas is very intense. At the same opportunities to expand the coastal strip is very difficult, as they are connected with the reduction of the area of arable land. Significant amounts of nutrients enter the water bodies with the drainage flow. Possible measures to reduce such impacts, such as the construction of ponds, sumps, filter jumpers and dams on drainage collectors require cost and space to accommodate them.

7.1.4 Navigation, transport and transport infrastructure

The basin area is full of transport infrastructure. Major traffic flows on the rail and road are di- rected to the west and east. Orsha-Minsk-Russian border, as well as in northern and southern areas of Minsk-Gomel, Vitebsk-Orsha-Mogilev-Gomel. The railway network in the region is partly electrified. Impacts on water bodies due to the economic activities of enterprises operating rail- roads are associated with water use and discharge of industrial waste into the environment. Roads in most parts are paved. Operation of road is associated with local impacts on water bodies at the intersections with watercourses due to flushing of contaminants, including anti ice re- agents by melt and rain water. Also local centers of emission of pollutants exist in the road alignment on roadside infrastructure, as well as on the territory of enterprises making repair and maintenance of roads (RED industrial sites, storage area of sand and sand-soya blend, etc.).

90 In the region there are a number of airports: Minsk-1(Minsk-1), Machulishchy, Mogilev (Mogilev district, v. Nikitinichi), Minsk National Airport (Smolevichi district), Gomel Airport (Gomel district).The impacts are associated with air emissions of pollutants and their subsequent precipitation, water consumption and wastewater disposal. The region has a series of gas pipelines and associated infrastructure, including the gas pipeline "Yamal-Europe", and a network of pipelines for the distribution of gas in the gas supply to the region. In the basin area is built and operates underground gas storage "Osipovichskoye." Also there is located oil pipeline (parts of pipeline "Druzhba") and pipelines for the transportation of petroleum products (diesel), a branch of the oil pipeline "Druzhba" Unecha-Polotsk and associated product pipelines for the transport of oil and oil products. Operation of this pipeline system is accompanied by the risk of leaks and accidents with a hit of oil into the environment. The rivers Dnieper, Sozh, Berezina are navigable. The system of water transport includes 4 river ports (Bobruisk, Gomel, Mogilev, Rechitsa), 2 waterways enterprises (Gomel, Bobruisk) serving waterways on the rivers Dnieper, Berezina, Sozh. Ship building is carried out on the specialized plants (Pinsk, Rechitsa, Gomel). Design of ships is carried at JSC "Belsudoproekt", Gomel. Apart from the risk of contamination of surface water from the boats, with shipping is connected impact on river banks in the period of construction of quays and ports and coasts wave processing of moving boats.

7.1.5 Energetic

The basin area has a number of large thermal power plants: Minsk TPP-4 capacity of 1035 MW, Gomel TPP -2540 MW, Mogilev TPP -2345 MW, Minsk TPP-3 – 320 MW, Minsk TPP-5 – 320 MW, Bobruisk TPP - 180 MW, SvetlogorskTPP – 155 MW, and TPP of medium and low power:OrshaTPP –72.96 MW, ZhodinoTPP – 54 MW, Minsk TPP-2 – 29 MW, Mogilev TPP-1 – 21.2 MW, Bobruisk TPP -1 – 12 MW. The functioning of a number of TPP required the construction of reservoirs for the abstraction of water for production and for removal of wastewater and heated wastewater. Most of these reservoirs are strongly eutrophic, and impact negative on aquatic ecosystems watercourses on which they are built. Hydropower potential in the Dnieper River basin is currently used in very small amounts. The powerщаthe largest hydro power plant in Belarus in the Dnieper basin is 2,175 MW (Osi- povichskaya HPP, start of expluatation - 1953). The basin area is flat, that determines the development of hydropower using low-pressure streams. The greatest potential of hydropower in the Dnieper basin is concentrated in the Mogilev region directly in the river Dnieper. In accordance with the state program of construction hydroelectric power stations in 2011-2015 in the Republic of Belarus it is considered to construct a cascade of four hydroelectric power stations on the Dnieper river with the total capacity of 20.3 MW: Orsha (5.7 MW) - 2017; Rechitsa (4.6 MW) - 2018; Shklov (4.9 MW) - 2018; Mogilev (5.1 MW ) - 2019. One of clean energy sources - hydroelectric power plant, its construction and operation leads to significant hydro-morphological pressures on surface water bodies. With the use of hydro-morphological criteria discontinuity of flow of rivers and reduction of aquatic habitats is identified in 35 water bodies at risk and 11 water bodies at possible risk (including 2 water bodies at risk and 1 at the possible risk of the 12 water bodies at risk determined using the chemical and ecological status, as well as criteria for assessing the risk of threats from point and diffuse sources).

91 7.2 General characteristics of the water use

The use of water resources and (or) the impact on water bodies in the implementation of economic and other activities - water use - is an important characteristic for the development of measures to achieve good ecological status of water bodies. This is due to the fact that the use of water, including water abstraction and wastewater characteristics, determines the extent of the impact on water resources within a given water body. According to the State Water Cadastre of the Republic of Belarus for the 2012 water intake (surface river waters) for the use in the basin of the Upper Dnieper was 125.05 million m3/year, which is less than 0.6% of the total river flow for the year (22.6 billion m3) [http://www.cricuwr.by/gvk/default.aspx]. Groundwater intake for use was 436.25 million m3/year, which does not exceed 38.5% of the total of proven operational stocks constituting 1.1327 billion m3/year (Figure 7.1). Consumptive use and losses amounted to 109.9 million m3/year, which is less than 0.5% of the available water resources of the total stream flowin reporting 2012. In the basin of the Upper Dnieper use of groundwater is much greater than the use of surface waters that characterizes the use of water mainly from the underground water sources. In general, the upper basin of the Dnieper River in the territory of Belarus is a zone of runoff formation, characterized by low levels of water use.

Water intake in the upper Dnieper River Basin (Belarus) (mln m3/year / %) 125.05; 22%

from surface water from ground 436.25; water 78%

Figure 7.1 - Water intake in the basin of the Upper Dnieper (Belarus), million m3/ year/%

Surface waters are mostly used for industry, fisheries (fish farms), agriculture (Figure 7.2).

92 industry 24.66; 20%

agriculture 1.08; 1%

fish industry

23.11; 18% housing and communal services 65.76; 53% other industries 10.44; 8%

Figure 7.2 - Use of water from surface water bodies by activity (million m3/year/%)

Ground waters are mainly used for housing and utilities, agriculture and industry (mainly for drinking water supply in these activities) (Figure 7.3).

10.38; 2% 40.56; 9% industry

49.28; 11% agriculture 3.55; 1% fish industry

housing and communal services

other industries 332.48; 77%

Figure 7.3 - Use of water from groundwater sources by activity (million m3/year/%)

Especially the basin is the receiver of additional volumes of water about 137 million m3 per year due to water transfer from Vileika-Minsk water system from the basin of the Vilia river for water supply and irrigation of Minsk. Total according to the statistical reporting of water use within the state water cadastre in the basin of the Upper Dnieper in the territory of Belarus is located 163 water users. Of these 23 enterprises discharged more than 90% of the total volume, which in 2012 amounted to 451 692 thousand m3.

The main sources of pollutants in the wastewater are Orsha, Mogilev, Rechitsa, Borisov, Minsk, Gomel, Bobruysk and other industrialized towns. The largest contribution (about 40%) comes from Minsk treatment plant (MTP), on which is performed wastewater treatment from industry and population of Minsk. However, to assess the loads and impacts presented in the following sections, detailed information was used in all 163 water users (major point sources of pollution), 93 including the volumes of waste water and the content of pollutants, as well as the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the receiving water bodies. Table 7.2 shows the data of wastewater removal in the Dnieper basin and the main receiver of wastewater – surface water bodies.

Table 7.2 – Removal of wastewaters and other waters by river basins for the year 2012, mn. m3

Removal of wastewaters and mine waters In water bodies in the subsoil, the Capacity of from them River basin groundwater by treatment total Insuffi- total Without standard using filtration facilities ciently treatment treated fields, drives, etc. treated 1. Dnieper 461.13 427.61 0.96 38.97 387.67 33.53 859.32 1.1. Berezina 299.79 289.03 0.64 35.66 252.73 10.76 569.75 1.1.1.Svisloch 208.35 203.04 0.04 18.72 184.28 5.32 359.95 1.2. Sozh 64.57 55.97 0.20 2.48 53.29 8.6 93.84

Despite the fact that insufficiently treated waste water in the drainage structure is less than 1%, the load on water bodies is a significant. In this context, the question of protection water bodies from sewage pollution is primary. The region is a developed in the industrial and agrarian relations, and therefore, the influence of surface water and groundwater on the social development and the main sectors of the economy is essential here. Summary of the characteristics of the impact of water resources as a factor of social and economic development, and assessment of their significance for the economy are presrmted in the Annex F. Currently within the basin of the Upper Dnieper operates a number of Government programs (Annex G), their tasks in the field of use and protection of water resources are to ensure the protection of water bodies from biological and chemical contamination, depletion, as well as providing the population with drinking water of a high quality from centralized water systems. In the field of environmental issues they focused on the implementation of measures to reduce the pollution of surface and groundwater bodies by sewage, as well as harmful substances coming from urban and agricultural areas with surface waste water; restrict cross-border transfers; provision of population with clean drinking water; creating favorable conditions for the development of water tourism and recreation on water bodies. The main expected results of the program in 2020: - reduction of fresh groundwater withdrawals to 4%; - ensuring 100% centralized sanitation in settlements with a population of over 10 thousand people; - improving the quality of wastewater treatment and the reliability of the sewerage system; - an increase in the replacement of water and sewer pipelines and networks; - increase the reuse and recycling of water up to 93%; - improving the reliability of the water supply and sanitation and reducing water wastage in its supply and distribution to 5%; - ensuring efficient operation of existing treatment facilities; - construction and reconstruction of local treatment facilities of industrial waste waters; - providing rainwater and meltwater treatment in settlements with a population of over 50 thousand people, in resort and industrial areas; - termination of wastewater into water bodies without treatment; − prevention of wastewaters releases into the lakes and closed pounds, except of technological water objects for construction ore reconstruction;

94 - creation of new recreational areas in water bodies not involved in recreational activities

In Belarus are developed and adopted sectoral programs (Annex G), the implementation of their measures will affect the water bodies of the upper Dnieper River Basin. The activities scheduled for implementation in the above program, include the water bodies in the basin of the Upper Dnieper. These programs are intended to achieve certain socio-economic effects in certain industries. Their implementation may have various implications for the water bodies, including the negative. This should be considered when designing the program of activities of the Management Plan of the Upper Dnieper. Program provides the following measures that may impact on water bodies of the basin: - Reconstruction, technical re-equipment, construction and conversion of enterprises to grow poultry. - The creation of new and development of existing aquaculture systems for growing fish farming perspective objects, creating the conditions for the reproduction of fish resources, the development of aquaculture farming and recreational fishing. - Construction of new facilities, breeders, breeding plants (cores) for breeding pigs. - Conducting agromeliorative activities on drained farmland and fish ponds, the reconstruction and rehabilitation of drainage and drainage-watering reclamation systems, the reconstruction and rehabilitation of irrigation systems. - Increasing the supply of the population with centralized water supply and drainage, including in rural areas and the agricultural settlements. - Building energy sources operating on biogas resulting from the processing of sewage sludge and organic part of municipal waste. - Providing planning and regular sanitary cleaning of villages and one hundred percent coverage of the multistory residential buildings in rural areas by separate collection of municipal solid waste. - The development of engineering infrastructure of settlements, including artificialisation of villages with the missing types of equipment. - Formation of the "green" economy based on energy conservation, implementation of environmental ("green") technologies, renewable and alternative energy sources, efficient waste processing technologies. - Increasing navigable waterways. - Modernization of the transport fleet of river ports. - Reconstruction of berthing facilities. - Development of the monitoring network on hydrological and hydromorphological regimes of water bodies in accordance with the requirements of the water legislation of the European Union. - Technical re-equipment of the monitoring network of surface and groundwater. - Assessment and forecast changes in runoff of the Dnieper based on adaptation to climate change.

95 7.3. Water balances20

Water balances are calculated materials, allowing to compare the water demand with availability of water quantity and water quality in given time at certain area. The purpose of drafting of water balances is to assess suffieciency of water resources at certain area to meet the needs of water users with account of prevention of water resources depletion and detoriation of water quality. Water balance is primary tool to control the modern state of water resources and also to plan water usage in near future.It allows to assess the presence and extent of water usage, determine the possibility of development of economic sectors, distribute the water resources among the water users, and provide the nessesary water supply measures at certan level of economic development. Water balances ususally complided for river basins and water management sections (tables 7.3, 7.4).

Table 7.3 – List and codes of water management sections in the upper Dnieper basin Code of water management section name of water management section # of section sea - river tributary L1* L2** 1 2 3 4 5 6 BLACK SEA 1645 1715 Dniper (Russian boundary - Orsha) 1 DNIEPER BLACK SEA 1554 1645 Dnieper (Orsha - Mogilev) 2 DNIEPER BLACK SEA 1360 1554 Dnieper (Mogilev- river Drut) 3 DNIEPER BLACK SEA 1360 0 9999 Drut 4 DNIEPER BLACK SEA 1245 1360 Dnieper (river Drut – river Berez- 5 DNIEPER ina) BLACK SEA 1245 0 9999 Berezina 6 DNIEPER BLACK SEA 1168 1245 Dnieper (river Berezina – Rechitsa 7 DNIEPER post) BLACK SEA 1121 1168 Dnieper (Rechitsa post – river 8 DNIEPER Sozh) BLACK SEA 0 9999 Sozh 9 DNIEPER BLACK SEA 1010 1121 Dnieper (river Sozh –Ukrainian 10 DNIEPER boundary) Comment: * - distance from river mouse to closing target ** - distance from river mouse to entry target

Water balances, calculated for water demand in 2012 are presented in the Ammex H.

20 While preparing this chapter the materials of the report "Development of Scheme of complex use and protection of watersfor river Dnepr basin (2013)”, CRICUWR- Minsk, 2013 were used.

Table 7.4 – Results of water balance calculations for years of different probability in whole river Dnieper at the territory of the Republic of Belarus

Compoments of Year of 95 % probability Year of 75 % probability water balance annual low high annual low high water water water water period period period period Incoming part 13570.4 1740.2 7605.9 15381 1940 9920 Outcoming part 4212.2 1001.2 976.7 4213 1002 977 Results of balance 9358.2 739.0 6629.2 11168 938 8943

Analysis of the all data calculations display that rivers water intake does not exceed 6 % of annual flow of 95 % probability at belorusian input point, therefore it can not influence flow regime. Planned growth of irrevocable water intakes does not exceed 10 % of the flow of 95 % probability that is within the error of determination of hydrological variables. However the water balances for years of 50 %, 75 %, and 95 % probabilities are calculated and presented. Analyis of the water balance, calculated for the dry year of 95 % probability in monthly scale, display that river water balance on the whole and in all intervals for upper Dnieper basin is positive and provides meeting all utilitarian reqirements in water intakes and also conversation of the sufficient water for environmental objectives. However, in some summer months some tensions of water balance may appear at Dnieper tributaries, due to needs to comply the requrements of environmental protection. It is necessary to pay special attention on quality of wastewater discharged in rivers, because of reduction of dilution capacity of watercources. It should be noted that small local sites of water shortage could be indicated at more detailed ex- amination of territorial units. It requires regional approach to calculate water balance for distinct water bodies in upper Dnieper basin. In near future in Dnieper basin it is planed to construct cascade of HPP. Expected main feature of these HPPs is preservation of river flow regime, as HPPs will us natural flow without regulations. In this case HPP passing capacities water discharges flow through turbins. With increasing of water discharge excess of water is released through spillway waterworks. The most intense waterway in Belarus – river Svisloch is reqired special attention in water balance calculations. The obtained data display that in modern operating mode of water releases from Zaslavskoe reservouir in annual scale and in summer months there is water shortage downstream Minsk, because necessary water releases are not maintained. Excess of flow occurs after wastewater income (255 mln. m3/y) downstream Minsk wastewater treatment plant. As a result river flow downstream Minsk consist of 45-46 % of treated city wastewaters, which are characterized by high content of harmful substances. A comparison of the level of water consumption in Minsk with available water resources (water balance for low water conditions with frequency of occurency once per 20 years) demonstrates good level of water provision for drinking and industrial needs in city by surface water and groundwater in present conditions. The fixed size of water releases from Vilia river (Nieman basin) into Minsk (Svisloch river) for flooding and water improvement are not maintained. This situation is due to economic reasons

97 (high costs of electricity for water supply), thus designed capacity of Vileisko-Minsk water feed system uses less than 50 %. Water releases failure for sure leads to detorioration of water status in the city, but it is imposible to gain effective results by increasing of water releases without measures to reduce the inflow of pollutants into the river. It is planned to upgrade Minsk water supply system from surface water sources to groundwater suources by 2020. In that case the influence of water intake for city needs will not change in comparison with present time. Runoff from the territory of the city will increase due to increase of urban area, but it will not have a significant impact on the quantitative flow characteristics. Prospective water balances of the river Svisloch, even calculated without the requiremnts for city water improvements, will remain positive. The solution of problem of water qulity and water improvements is possible by development, prioritization and implementation of measures on all factors of anthropogenic impact on waters.

98 CHAPTER 8 PROGRAM OF MEASURES

To develop a program of measures, the recommendations contained in the following documents are taken as a basis: 1. Guidance Document on the Development of Programme of Measures and the Achievement of Environmental Objectives According to the EU WFD (hereinafter - Guidance Docu- ment); 2. TAP 1 / 17.06-XX-20XX (02120) the development of a management plan for the basin water resources of the water body. Following recommendations of «Guidance Document», a program of measures should include the following measures. Article 11 defines the types (species) of measures as a part of a program of measures that achieve the environmental objectives of the WFD (Table 8.1). These are: 1. Basic measures, and if necessary, 2. Additional measures. Basic measures are aimed at meeting the requirements of other EU Directives, which support the implementation of the WFD. If necessary, they are supplemented by additional steps to achieve the environmental objectives

Table 8.1 - Structure and basic principles of the program of measures under the EU WFD

PROGRAM OF MEASURES Basic measures Supplementary measures Compulsory Possible (optional) Based on the performance of other EU Directives and na- Implementation of projects, re- tional legislation search; Initiatives The implementation of other EU Directives, For example, economic instru- other than the WFD ments, rules and regulations, agreements on negotiations Directive on the processing of municipal wastewater, sew- For example, rehabilitation (recov- age sludge, on integrated prevention pollution, crop protec- ery) infrastructure, research, education, accidental spillage, environmental impact assessment, tion, demand management drinking water, bathing water, nitrates, habitats and birds Implementation of other basic measures Control of water intake, licensing, authorizing discharges, prohibition of direct discharges into groundwater

Basic measures are based on legal acts. In addition, it is recommended to include in the list of basic steps following: - measures for the application of the principle of cost recovery for water use; - measures to promote efficient and sustainable water use; - measures for the protection of drinking water sources; - measures to control water abstraction and recharge of surface and groundwater; - measures to control point and diffuse sources of pollution; - measures to validate direct discharges to groundwater; - management measures for priority substances; - measures to control physical alteration of surface waters; - measures to control any other actions that may affect the status of water; - measures to prevent accidental spills.

3 Supplementary measures

For EU-Member States, supplementary measures are an option and are applied in cases where the basic measures can’t ensure the achievement of environmental objectives and good water status. While the basic steps are connected with national and basin-wide level and are implemented as measures of national law, additional measures are more relevant to specific water bodies and local levels. In addition, there are also so-called soft measures, which can designed in the frame of the EPIRB Project to help the competent authorities of the beneficiary countries in a better planning of the WFD full compatibility. Soft measures may include, for example, improvement programs and monitoring network in accordance with the requirements of the EU WFD (for all biological quality elements); improvement water status assessment and conduction of inter calibration in accordance with WFD ; validation of abiotic (non-living) typology through biological monitoring; harmonization of national legislation with the requirements of the WFD, including the process of issuing licenses and permits, as well as the adaptation of the technical and human capacities for the full implementation of the WFD. Soft measures are based on gaps that have been identified during the development of the EPIRB Project RBMPs and aim to support the competent authorities of the beneficiary countries to better plan towards full WFD compliance. Soft measures may e.g. include the improvement of monitoring networks and programmes to comply wit the requirements of the EU WFD (address- ing all biological quality elements); improve water status assessment, undertake WFD intercali- bration; validate the abiotic typology with biological monitoring; align national legislation to WFD requirements including the permit and licencing process, adapt technical and personnel capacities to enable full WFD implementation. [EPIRB Project Activity 2 Pilot Testing in EPIRB Project River Basins Draft Guidance Document on the Development of Programme of Measures and the Achievement of Environmental Objectives According to the EU WFDP 13].

In accordance with the recommendations of the Guidance Document [Draft Guidance Docu- ment on the Development of Programme of Measures and the Achievement of Environmental Objectives According to the EU WFD] it is necessary to develop a range of measures for the Upper Dnieper basin by groups of water bodies.

100 Table 8.2 – Basic and additional measures due to different groups of water bodies in the upper Dnieper river basin on the territory of Belarus and environmental objectives

The combination of basic and sup- Water status– 2021 Environmental objectives plementary measures Water bodies that Need for setting environmental • Identify key actions on the basis of have high (excel- objectives and determining meas- other EU Directives and national lent) or good status ures to maintain water status on legislation that would ensure the in 2021 six-year cycle of planning until maintenance of water status with- 2033 and beyond out further deterioration Water bodies that Need for setting environmental • Definition of soft additional meas- have: goals in the first planning cycle ures to ensure the compatibility of (i) the risk of fail- (= by 2027): the WFD by 2027, particularly in ing the environ- (i) have the WFD-compliant as- relation to monitoring and assess- mental objectives sessment of the status or ment of status, but also in respect in 2021 or (ii) to achieve good status by of other aspects which provide the (ii) a moderate 2027 WFD- compatibility (for example, status in 2021 technical capabilities; legal framework; inter calibration). • Focus on the basic measures of the high priority that are feasible fi- nancially and technically, with a focus on Directive on urban waste water treatment, nitrates, drinking water and habitats Water bodies that Need for setting environmental • Identification of the main meas- have: goals in the first planning cycle ures to achieve environmental ob- (i) the risk of fail- (= by 2027): jectives by 2033. ing the environ- (i) have the WFD-compliant as- • Further identification of soft and mental objectives sessment of the status or other additional measures to en- in 2021 or (ii) to achieve moderate status by sure the WFD-compatibility ex- (ii) poor status in 2021and good status by 2027 cept those that have been imple- 2021 mented by 2027 Water bodies that Need for setting environmental • Identification of the basic meas- have: goals in the first planning cycle ures to achieve these environ- (i) the risk of fail- (= by 2027): mental objectives ing the environ- (i) have the WFD-compliant as- • Further identification of soft and mental objectives sessment of the status or other additional measures to en- in 2021 or (ii) to achieve poor status by sure the WFD-compatibility ex- (ii) bad status in 2027; moderate or good by 2033 cept those that have been imple- 2021 and to ensure good status in mented by 2033 2039

At the same time, the draft TCP 1 / 17.06-XX-20XX (02120) The development of a water resources management plan for water bodies of the basin, which is based on the WFD and Com- mon implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60 / EC), encourages to develop activities management Plan in the following areas. The program of measures should consist of two sections. The first section should be submitted to water conservation measures to improve the ecological state (status) of water bodies at risk of not achieving good ecological state (status) to the end of the Plan, as well as measures to prevent or degrade the impact on water status, as well as meas-

101 ures to restoration of water bodies, the ecological state (status) of which is estimated by fourth or fifth class. The second section should be submitted to water protection and conservation measures for maintenance of the existing ecological condition (status) of all other water bodies The RBM Plan should be submitted to measures aimed at the reduction of pollutants into water bodies from point and diffuse sources of pollution, and measures aimed at the rational (sustainable) use of water resources and reduce the negative impact of other sources of environmental degradation of water bodies. Based on the recommendations contained in the Guidance Document concerning the development of program measures and in the TCP project concerning management plans, the following structure of the Program measures is offered (Figure 8.1).

Basic measures

supplementary measures for the water body

Figure 8.1 - Schematic diagram of the ratio of basic and supplementary measures

It is offered to develop Basic measures for all the water bodies of the Upper Dnieper. Their goal should be to implement the established regulatory acts measures. Such measures should maintain high or good status of water bodies as well as allow water bodies at risk of failing good ecological status and which have not satisfactory status to reach a satisfactory status in the first phase of the program of measures implementation. For water bodies at risk of failing good ecological status is offered to develop supplementary measures that will include specific activities that improve the ecological status of water bodies by 2021 Program of basic and additional measures to achive and to support good ecological status of water bodies in the upper Dnieper basin is presented in the Annex I. Characteristics of basic measures that are the basis of measures to maintain the status of water bodies with high (excellent) or good status and to restore water bodies, are legislative, regulatory

102 and technical normative legal acts of the Republic of Belarus regulating the activities in the field of protection and use of water resources. Main groups of basic measures include: − arrangements for the application of the principle of cost recovery for water use; − measures to promote efficient and sustainable water use; − measures for the protection of drinking water sources; − measures to control water abstraction and recharge of surface and groundwater; − measures to control point and diffuse sources of pollution; − measures to authorize direct discharges into groundwater; − management measures for priority substances; − measures to control physical changes of surface water; − measures to control any other actions that may affect the water status; − measures to prevent accidental spills. Supplementary measures should include specific activities that improve the ecological status of water bodies at risk of failing good status by 2021 and to support existing good status. It should be noted that the information basis of additional activities on other water bodies is tar- gets for reducing anthropogenic sources of pollution load (the amount by which it is recommended to reduce the concentration and amount of pollutants entering the water from the source). Nevertheless, list of additional activities includes the desirable actions to achieve good water quality. And it will be taken into account in the detailed design of activities. However, to achieve a good grade of water quality necessary to consider the combined effect of sources that, despite the small contribution of each of them leads to a reduction in overall water quality class. Approximated amount of investment for the implementation of the supplementary measures is assessed in 30.0 millions of EURO for the achievement of good status of water bodies. It is required additionally 25.5 millions of EUR for supplementary measures to support good status. Financing sources can be State budget and (or) local budget, water user’s funds including credit financial resources.

103 CHAPTER 9 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND CONSULTATION

Citizens and public associations (non-governmental organizations) in the field of environmental protection have the right to: − To take part in activities on the protection and rational use of water resources in the basin councils; − To initiate (in prescribed manner) conduction of the public ecological expertise; − To recive (in accordance with legislation framework) ecological information in the field of protection and rational use of water resources; − To bring an action in courts for compensation of environmental damange; − Other rights of citizens and public associations can be determined by legislation. Citizens and public associations (non-governmental organizations) in the field environmental protection must: − Comply with the legislation framework on protection and rational use of waters; − Compensate in the manner prescribed by law, the harm caused to the environment; − Meet the requirements (regulations) of the state bodies and state officials responsible for control (supervisory) activities in the field ofprotection and use of waters. Public associations in field of environmental protetction inform the territorial bodies of the Min- istry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus, local authorities and administrative bodies of the identified cases of irrational use of water resources, pollution of waters and other violations of the legislation on protection and use of water. Other duties of citizens and public associations in the field of environmental protection can be determined by legislation. Basin councils are been created in order to develop recommendations on protectection and rational (sustainable) use of waters for following national river basins: Dnieper, Zapadaya Dvina, Zapadnyi Bug, Nieman and Pripyat. Basin councils are interdepartmental and interterritorial advisory body. Decisions of basin councils are advisory and are been sent to the relevant local authorities and administrative bodies, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus. Decisions of basin councils are taking into consideration in the development of river basin management plans as well as in the development of programme of measures in the field of protection and use of waters within the bodies of river basins. Representatives of state agencies, water users as well as public associations and scientific organizations are included in members of basin councils. The order of activity of basin councils is determined by Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus. Structure of basin councils is approved by the Ministry of National Resources and Environ- mental Protection of the Republic of Belarus. CHAPTER 10 COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus or- ganizes the development of draft of rivers basins managements plans with participation of con- cerned state bodies (organizations) and has the right to receive all the necessary information for their development from other state bodies (organizations) on free of charge conditions. In accordance with article 15 of the Water Code of the Republic of Belarus river basin management plans are approved by joint decision of regional, Minsk city executive committees on whose territory is located the respective river basin. The upper Dnieper RBMP must be submitted for approval in Minsk city, Minsk, Gomel, Vitebsk, and Mogilev executive committees. The requirements for the development, preparation and design of drafts of river basin management plans are established by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus.

CHAPTER 11 CONTACT POINTS

Coordination of RBMP development from the MNREP side: Head of the department of managing impacts on athmospheric air and water resources of MNREP Sergei Zavyalov, tel. +375172006048; Consultant of the department of managing impacts on athmospheric air and water resources of MNREP Victoria Voranava, tel. +375172005967.

Coordination of RBMP development from project side: Team Leader Timothy Turner, [email protected], [email protected]. Country Water Manager Aliaksandr Stankevich, tel. +375172671140.

Head of RBMP development: Head of department of water monitoring and cadaster of the Central Research Institute for Com- plex Use of Water Resources Vladimir Korneev, tel. +375172634833

ANNEXES

ANNEX А CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER BODIES OF THE UPPER DNIEPER RIVER BASIN WITHIN BELARUS Table А.1 – Characteristics of water bodies of the upper Dnieper river basin within Belarus Lengt Area, Code Name Description The boundaries h km km2 Mereya mouth - Aleksandriya (Dubrovno d-t) - Or- BY01/01 73.1 1080 Dnieper Adrov mouth sha (Orsha d-t) Adrov mouth - Orsha (Orsha d-t) - Shklov (Shklov BY01/02 36.9 990 Dnieper downstream Orsha d-t) downstream Orsha Shklov (Shklov d-t) - Novoselki BY01/03 62.9 818 Dnieper - downstream (Mogilev d-t) Mogilev Novoselki (Mogilev d-t) - Ro- BY01/04 167.1 2451 Dnieper to the Drut mouth gachev (Rogachev d-t) Drut mouth - Rogachev (Rogachev d-t) – Bere- BY01/05 111.5 1452 Dnieper Berezina mouth govaya Sloboda (Rechitsa d-t) Berezina mouth - Beregovaya Sloboda (Rechitsa d-t) BY01/06 122.0 1658 Dnieper Sozh mouth - Loev (Loev d-t) Sozh mouth – Loev (Loev d-t) – Nizhnie Zhary BY01/07 118.9 768 Dnieper Ukraine border (Bragin d-t) Stefanovo (Gorki d-t) - Aleksan- BY0101 50.2 356 Mereya Dnieper tributary driya (Dubrovno d-t) Orehovsk (Orsha d-t) - Orsha (Or- BY0102 26.9 598 Orshitsa Dnieper tributary sha d-t) Dubnitsy (Orsha d-t) - Orsha (Or- BY0103 58.4 674 Adrov Dnieper tributary sha d-t) Staraya Vodva (Shklov d-t) - BY0104 80.0 687 Lakhva Dnieper tributary Zalohvinye (Bykhov d-t) Krasnitsa (Bykhov d-t ) – Pribor BY0105 40.1 500 Ukhlyast Dnieper tributary (Bykhov d-t) source - Teterin- Novoe Selo (Tolochin d-t) - Drutsk BY0106/01 24.7 283 Drut skoe rsvr (Tolochin d-t) source - Teterin- Drutsk (Tolochin d-t) - Teterino BY0106/02 22.4 463 Drut skoe rsvr (Krugloe d-t) Teterinskoe rsvr – Teterino (Krugloe d-t) - Chigirinka BY0106/03 104.6 1536 Drut Chihirinskoe rsrv (Kirovsk d-t) Chihirinskoe rsrv - Chigirinka (Kirovsk d-t) - Ro- BY0106/04 63.3 1065 Drut mouth gachev (Rogachev d-t Sanniki (Krugloe d-t) - Osovets BY010601 63.8 437 Oslik Drut tributary (Belynichi d-t) Burovshchina (Krugloe d-t) - Pribor BY010602 60.4 577 Vabich Drut tributary (Belynichi d-t) Zagrezye (Mogilev d-t) - Vazma BY010603 49.3 449 Greza Drut tributary (Bykhov d-t) Skachok (Kirovsk d-t) - Zhlobin BY0107 82.1 874 Dobysna Dnieper tributary (Zhlobin d-t) Dokshitsy (Dokshitsy d-t) - Palik BY0108/01 112.3 1608 Berezina Dnieper tributary (Borisov d-t) Palik (Borisov d-t) - Veselovo BY0108/02 18.6 615 Berezina Dnieper tributary (Borisov d-t) Veselovo (Borisov d-t) - Borisov BY0108/03 36.8 381 Berezina Dnieper tributary (Borisov d-t)

106 Borisov (Borisov d-t) - Svisloch BY0108/04 144.6 1559 Berezina Dnieper tributary (Osipovichi d-t) Svisloch mouth - Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) – Bere- BY0108/05 222.5 2987 Berezina Berezina mouth govaya Sloboda (Rechitsa d-t) Vardomichi (Vileika d-t) - Bere- BY010801 40.3 503 Ponya Berezina tributary sponye (Dokshitsy d-t) Zaborye (Lepel d-t) - Brody (Bo- BY010802 42.4 242 Serguch Berezina tributary risov d-t) source – Tsna Rezyachino (Logoisk d-t) - Kuzevi- BY010803/01 14.0 128 Gaina mouth chi (Logoisk d-t) source – Tsna Kuzevichi (Logoisk d-t) - Sutoki BY010803/02 27.5 238 Gaina mouth (Smolevichi d-t) Tsna mouth - Sutoki (Smolevichi d-t) - Veselovo BY010803/03 36.1 212 Gaina mouth (Borisov d-t) Domashkovichi (Logoisk d-t) - Su- BY01080301 55.4 638 Tsna Gaina tributary toki (Smolevichi d-t) Prilepy (Smolevichi d-t) - Juryevo BY01080302/01 5.2 128 Usyazha Gaina tributary (Smolevichi d-t) Ostroshitskiy Gorodok (Minsk d-t) BY01080302/02 29.6 350 Usyazha Gaina tributary – Okolitsa (Minsk d-t) Mikhailovo (Borisov d-t) - Borisov BY010804 61.7 578 Skha Berezina tributary (Borisov d-t) Sloboda (Smolevichi d-t) – Ja- BY010805/01 29.6 173 Plissa Berezina tributary lovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Borisov BY010805/02 33.8 447 Plissa Berezina tributary (Borisov d-t) Zeleniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) - Ze- BY010806/01 10.7 95 Rova Berezina tributary leniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) Zeleniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) – No- BY010806/02 20.2 141 Rova Berezina tributary voselki (Borisov d-t) Rafolovo (Tolochin d-t) – Cher- BY010807 105.4 1005 Bobr Berezina tributary navka (Borisov d-t) Evlakhi (Tolochin d-t) - Plisa BY01080701 29.8 182 Plisa Bobr tributary (Krupki d-t) Shinka (Krupki d-t) - Vydritsa BY01080702 66.0 527 Mozha Bobr tributary (Krupki d-t) Zhaberichi (Krupki d-t) – BY01080703/01 30.6 252 Nacha Bobr tributary Valyatichi (Borisov d-t) Borki (Krupki d-t) - Zhaberichi BY01080703/02 30.4 277 Nacha Bobr tributary (Krupki d-t) Smolnitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Usha BY010808 81.5 725 Usha Berezina tributary (Berezina d-t) Lozhki (Krupki d-t) - Leskovichi BY010809/01 22.8 283 Brusyata Berezina tributary (Berezino d-t) Leskovichi (Berezino d-t) - BY010809/02 9.4 89 Brusyata Berezina tributary Zhornovka (Berezino d-t) Zaorezye(Belynichi d-t) – Krasniy BY010810 71.7 501 Kleva Berezina tributary Bereg (Berezino d-t) Damavitsk (Cherven d-t) - Yak- BY010811 46.6 545 Usa Berezina tributary shitsy (Berezino d-t) mouth - Minsk Vedelevo (Volozhin d-t) - Zaslavl BY010812/01 12.2 240 Svisloch (Zaslavl rsrv) (Minsk d-t) Minsk (Zaslavl Zhdanovichi (Minsk d-t) – Noviy BY010812/02 38.5 578 Svisloch rsrv) - downstream Dvor (Minsk d-t) MWTP

107 downstream Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) - Lapichi BY010812/03 115.1 1926 Svisloch MWTP – Osipovi- (Osipovichi d-t) chi rsrv Osipovichi rsrv - Vazye (Osipovichi d-t) - Svisloch BY010812/04 33.8 987 Svisloch mouth (Osipovichi d-t) Selishche (Logoisk d-t) – Beloruchi BY01081201/01 12.4 89 Vyacha Svisloch tributary (Logoisk d-t) Beloruchi (Logoisk d-t) - Mochany BY01081201/02 6.9 50 Vyacha Svisloch tributary (Logoisk d-t) Pilnitsa (Minsk d-t) - Semkovo BY01081201/03 14.8 163 Vyacha Svisloch tributary (Minsk d-t) Slobodshchina (Minsk d-t) - Volma BY01081202/01 21.8 172 Volma Svisloch tributary (Smolevichi d-t) Petrovichi (Smolevichi d-t) - BY01081202/02 12.1 287 Volma Svisloch tributary Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) - Ozerniy BY01081202/03 14.0 258 Volma Svisloch tributary (Cherven d-t) Ozerniy (Cherven d-t) – Svetliy Bor BY01081202/04 32.8 509 Volma Svisloch tributary (Pukhovichi d-t) Matevichi (Berezino d-t) - BY010813/01 77.3 1691 Olsa Berezina tributary Shchatkova (Kirovsk d-t) Vilenka (Kirovsk d-t) - BY010814/01 47.0 627 Ola Berezina tributary Turkovskaya Sloboda (Bobruisk d- t) Turkovskaya Sloboda (Bobruisk d- BY010814/02 42.9 609 Ola Berezina tributary t) - Chirkovichi (Svetlogorsk d-t) Slavan (Svetlogorsk d-t) - BY010815 27.9 371 Zherdyanka Berezina tributary Svetlogorsk (Svetlogorsk d-t) Podluki (Kalinkovichi d-t) – Sved- BY010816 44.1 623 Sved Berezina tributary skoe (Rechitsa d-t) Noviy Svet (Rechitsa d-t) - BY0109/01 19.3 1123 Vedrich Dnieper tributary Rechitsa (Rechitsa d-t) Podluki (Kalinkovichi d-t) - Noviy BY0109/02 47.6 314 Vedrich Dnieper tributary Svet (Rechitsa d-t) Paradino (Mstislavl d-t) - Slavgorod BY0110/01 194.5 1288 Sozh Dnieper tributary (Slavgorod d-t) Slavgorod (Slavgorod d-t) - г. Loev BY0110/02 284.9 3324 Sozh Dnieper tributary (Loev d-t) Rassvet (Mstislavl d-t) - Paradino BY011001 84.8 280 Vikhra Sozh tributary (Mstislavl d-t) Chernaya Hodosy (Mstislavl d-t) - Selets BY011002 39.7 462 Sozh tributary Natopa (Mstislavl d-t) Ivanovsk (Klimovichi d-t) - BY011003 211.0 544 Oster Sozh tributary Krichev (Krichev d-t) Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - г. Kli- BY011004/01 34.1 332 Lobzhanka Sozh tributary movichi (Klimovichi d-t) Klimovichi (Klimovichi d-t) - BY011004/02 13.2 156 Lobzhanka Sozh tributary Krichev (Krichev d-t) Dolgovichi (Mstislavl d-t) - Ver- BY011005/01 26.6 112 Volches Sozh tributary hovtsy (Cherikov d-t) Verhovtsy (Cherikov d-t) - Ustye BY011005/02 40.3 314 Volches Sozh tributary (Cherikov d-t) Veremeiki (Cherikov d-t) - BY011006 31.4 282 Udoga Sozh tributary Cherikov (Cherikov d-t) Kliny (Cherikov d-t) - Bakov BY011007 46.9 542 Senna Sozh tributary (Cherikov d-t)

108 Lashinka (Orsha d-t) - Slavgorod BY011008 171.0 1991 Pronya Sozh tributary (Slavgorod d-t) Rubanovka (Mstislavl d-t) - Dribin BY01100801 46.7 686 Bystraya Pronya tributary (Dribin d-t) Antipenki (Orsha d-t) - Chausy BY01100802/01 111.8 990 Basya Pronya tributary (Chausy d-t) Aleksandrovka (Shklov d-t) - BY01100803/01 34.5 203 Resta Pronya tributary Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) - BY01100803/02 63.0 770 Resta Pronya tributary Horonevo (Slavgorod d-t) Makovnya (Mogilev d-t) - Maker- BY0110080301/01 11.3 58 Rudeya Resta tributary antsy (Mogilev d-t) Makerantsy (Mogilev d-t) - Tem- BY0110080301/02 20.5 262 Rudeya Resta tributary nolesye (Chausy d-t) Zadubye (Korma d-t) -Vysokaya BY011009 37.0 233 Dobrich Sozh tributary (Korma d-t) Buda Borovaya (Korma d-t) - BY011010 50.8 551 Chechera Sozh tributary Chechersk (Chechersk d-t) Bolin (Krasnopolye d-t) - Petro- BY011011 71.5 501 Pokot Sozh tributary polye (Vetka d-t) Buda Lushevskaya (Buda- BY011012 54.0 577 Lipa Sozh tributary Koshelevo d-t) - Andreevka (Buda- Koshelevo d-t) Trostino (Hotimsk d-t) - Besed BY011013 244.7 3844 Besed Sozh tributary (Vetka d-t) Vysokoe (Klimovichi d-t) - Kos- BY01101301/01 32.8 453 Zhadunka Besed tributary tukovichi (Kostukovichi d-t) Kostukovichi (Kostukovichi d-t) - BY01101301/02 13.1 36 Zhadunka Besed tributary Belynkovichi (Kostukovichi d-t) Savinichi (Klimovichi d-t) - Du- BY01101302/01 14.1 91 Deryazhnya Besed tributary brovka (Kostukovichi d-t) Dubrovka (Kostukovichi d-t) – Be- BY01101302/02 33.7 220 Deryazhnya Besed tributary laya Dubrova (Kostukovichi d-t) Kovpita (Krasnopolye d-t) - BY01101303/01 17.0 128 Kolpita Besed tributary Zavodok (Krasnopolye d-t) Zavodok (Krasnopolye d-t) – Ka- BY01101303/02 37.0 422 Kolpita Besed tributary zatskie Bolsuny (Vetka d-t) Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - Makee- BY011014/01 31.9 273 Iput Sozh tributary vichi (Klimovichi d-t) Demyanki (Dobrush d-t) - Gomel BY011014/02 59.5 375 Iput Sozh tributary (Gomel d-t) Sinitsyn (Vetka d-t) - Demyanki BY01101401 30.2 130 Ochesa Iput tributary (Dobrush d-t) Galoe (Dobrush d-t) - Dobrush BY01101402 40.3 409 Khoroput Iput tributary (Dobrush d-t) Berezovka (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) - BY011015 74.4 944 Uza Sozh tributary Bobovichi (Gomel d-t) Dubrovka (Dobrush d-t) - BY011016 63.1 458 Ut Sozh tributary Tereshkovichi (Gomel d-t) Olhovoe (Dobrush d-t) - Terukha BY011017 55.4 359 Teryukha Sozh tributary (Gomel d-t) Lipnaki (Loev d-t) – Glushets BY0111 50.8 340 Pesochenka Dnieper tributary (Love d-t) Prokisel (Rechitsa d-t) - Gden BY0112 122.2 2480 Braginka Dnieper tributary (Bragin d-t)

109 Table A.2 - Classification of groundwater bodies in the upper Dnieper basin, Belarus Groundwater body classification tests

Test 1. Test 2. Interac- GWB name and Test 3. Test 4. Test 5. General Test 6. Water Saline tion with sur- overall status GWDTE DWPE chemistry balance intrusions face waters Groundwater body in No saline Groundwaters are No negative Groundwater The prevalent ions Groundwater level 2+ - Holocene bog and lake- or other feeding wetlands influence to abstraction is are Ca and HCO3 . has natural seasonal bog sediments (bIV). intrusions and bogs GWDTEs very limited, Ground waters are fluctuations; no level GWB code GW01 few dug wells fresh and no sus- decrease trend is Good status only. No im- tained upward observed. Abstrac- High confidence of data pact on drink- trends of any pol- tion is limited to few ing water lutant observed dug wells. treatment Groundwater body in No saline GWB is intercon- No negative Groundwater Prevailing cations Groundwater levels Holocene and Upper or other nected with sur- influence to abstraction and anions are Са, have natural (sea- - Quaternary alluvial sedi- intrusions face waters. GWDTEs does not cause Mg, НСО3 . No sonal) fluctuations ments (aIV, aIIIpz). Groundwater dis- additional sustained upward GWB code GW02 charge does not treatment of trends of any pol- Good status have negative drinking water lutant observed High confidence of data influence on surface water quality Groundwater body in No saline GWB is discharg- No negative Groundwater Prevailing ions Groundwater level 2+ - intermoraine Upper and or other ing into river val- influence to abstraction Ca , HCO3 , some- has a decreasing + 2- Middle Quaternary sedi- intrusions leys. Discharge GWDTEs does not cause times Na , SO4 trend due to inten- ments (f,lgI, f,lgI-IIbr-d, does not have additional No sustained up- sive exploitation. f,lgIId-sž, f,lgIIsžs). negative influence treatment of ward trends of any Large depression GWB code GW03 on surface water drinking water pollutant observed cone has developed Good status quality awound Minsk city High confidence of data in the Dnieper-Sozh aquifer Groundwater body in No saline GWB is discharg- No negative Abstraction Prevailing ions are Natural (seasonal) Palaeogene sediments or other ing into river val- influence to does not cause Са, Mg, НСОз. M fluctuations of (Pkn-hr). intrusions leys. Discharge GWDTEs additional 0,2-0,4 g/l. No sus- groundwater levels GWB code GW04 does not have treatment of tained upward Good status negative influence drinking water trends of any pol- High confidence of data on surface water lutant observed quality Groundwater body in No saline Groundwater dis- No negative Abstraction Prevailing ions are Natural (seasonal) Cretaceous sediments or other charge into sur- influence to does not cause Са, Mg, НСОз) fluctuations of (K1-K2). intrusions face waters does GWDTEs additional M 0,3–0,4 g/l. No groundwater levels GWB code GW05 not have negative treatment of sustained upward Good status influence on sur- drinking water trends of any pol- High confidence of data face water quality lutant observed Groundwater body in No saline Groundwater dis- No negative Abstraction Prevailing ions are Natural (seasonal) Devonian sediments (D). or other charge into sur- influence to does not cause Са, Mg, HCO3. M fluctuations of GWB code GW06 intrusions face waters does GWDTEs additional 0,2-0,4 g/l. No sus- groundwater levels Good status not have negative treatment of tained upward High confidence of data influence on sur- drinking water trends of any pol- face water quality lutant observed Groundwater body in Intrusions Groundwater ab- Some nega- Abstraction Prevailing ions are Decreasing trend. Proterozoic rocks (PR2). from straction has negative influence does not cause Na, Са, Сl, SО4. No Large depression GWB code GW07 neighbour- tive influence on to GWDTEs additional sustained upward cone is developed Good status ing aqui- river flow. River is observed treatment of trends of any pol- around Minsk city At risk fers ob- are feeding aqui- drinking water lutant observed High confidence of data served fers

110 ANNEX B EXISTING PRESSURES AND IMPACTS ON THE WATER BODIES

Table B.1 – Major water users, wastewater discharges from which more than 90 % of the total wastewater volume containing pollutants in the upper Dnieper basin

Wastewater volume containing № Water user, outlet pollutants, thousand m3 1 MUPE "Minskvodokanal", outlet in Svisloch river, 227 km from the mouth 164118 2 Mogilev MUE "Gorvodokanal", outlet in Dnieper river 46039 3 MUPE "Gomelvodokanal", outlet in Uza river, 1 km from the mouth 42090 Bobruisk unitary municipal subsidiary production enterprise "Vodokanal", 4 25660 outlet in Berezina river JSC "Svetlogorskhimvolokno", outlet in Berezina river, 57 km from the 5 14678 mouth MUPE "Borisovvodokanal", outlet in Berezina river, 400 km from the 6 14107 mouth State Enterprise "GorSAP" (rain water), outlet in Sozh river, 101 km from 7 13140 the mouth State Enterprise "GorSAP" (rain water), outlet in Sozh river, 101 km from 8 11640 the mouth 9 JSC "Rybhoz Svisloch", outlet in Svisloch river, 1 km from the mouth 11362 10 MUE "Unicom" Zhlobin, outlet in Dnieper river, 1312 km from the mouth 8931 State enterprise "Orshavodokanal", outlet in Dnieper river, 1640 km from 11 8754 the mouth 12 MREUE "Gorremlivnestok", outlet in Loshitsa river, 7 km from the mouth 8427 13 SMUE "Zhodinsky vodokanal", outlet in Rova river, 13 km from the mouth 7221 State Enterprise "GorSAP" (rain water), outlet in Uza river, 101 km from 14 6300 the mouth 15 JSC "Rybhoz Volma", outlet in Volma river, 55 km from the mouth 5330 MUE "Rechitsavodokanal", outlet in Dnieper river, 1108 km from the 16 3299 mouth Borisov municipal unitary enterprise "Housing" (rain water), outlet in 17 3159 Berezina river MREUE "Gorremlivnestok" (rain water), outlet in Loshitsa river, 7 km from 18 2984 the mouth SRUE of electricity "Gomelenergo" branch "Svetlogorskaya HPP", outlet in 19 2672 Berezina river, 61 km from the mouth 20 MHEUE "Rogachev", outlet in Dnieper river, 1375 km from the mouth 2545 Bobruisk subsidiary unitary municipal road operational enterprise (rain wa- 21 2292 ter), outlet in Bobruyka river Bobruisk subsidiary unitary municipal road operational enterprise (rain wa- 22 2226 ter), outlet in Berezina river Shklovskiy UME "Zhilkomhoz", outlet in Dnieper river, 1543 km from the 23 2196 mouth

111

Table B.2 - Withdrawal from surface water sources on watercourses sites of the upper Dnieper river basin in Belarus in 2012 № Code River Water body site Number of Volume, m3, 2012 water intakes 1. BY0108/05 BEREZINA Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) – Beregovaya Sloboda (Rechitsa d-t) 10 46965000 2. BY01/03 DNIEPER Shklov (Shklov d-t) - Novoselki (Mogilev d-t) 15 13689200 3. BY010812/04 SVISLOCH Vazye (Osipovichi d-t) - Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) 3 13145000 4. BY0110/02 SOZH Slavgorod (Slavgorod d-t) - Loev (Loev d-t) 11 7926000 5. BY01081202/03 VOLMA Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) - Ozerniy (Cherven d-t) 2 7820000 6. BY01081202/04 VOLMA Ozerniy (Cherven d-t) – Svetliy Bor (Pukhovichi d-t) 1 6700000 7. BY0108/03 BEREZINA Veselovo (Borisov d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 8 4887700 8. BY010812/03 SVISLOCH Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) - Lapichi (Osipovichi d-t) 7 4817000 9. BY01/04 DNIEPER Novoselki (Mogilev d-t) - Rogachev (Rogachev d-t) 5 2785000 10. BY011014/02 IPUT Demyanki (Dobrush d-t) - Gomel (Gomel d-t) 2 2152000 11. BY0110/01 SOZH Paradino (Mstislavl d-t) - Slavgorod (Slavgorod d-t) 3 2091000 12. BY01/02 DNIEPER Orsha (Orsha d-t) - Shklov (Shklov d-t) 4 2071600 13. BY01/05 DNIEPER Rogachev (Rogachev d-t) – Beregovaya Sloboda (Rechitsa d-t) 2 2056000 14. BY01080302/01 USAZHA Prilepy (Smolevichi d-t) - Juryevo (Smolevichi d-t) 1 1709000 15. BY010812/02 SVISLOCH Zhdanovichi (Minsk d-t) – Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) 2 1046000 16. BY010805/02 PLISSA Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 1 886000 17. BY011015 UZA Berezovka (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) - Bobovichi (Gomel d-t) 2 881500 18. BY010814/01 OLA Vilenka (Kirovsk d-t) - Turkovskaya Sloboda (Bobruisk d-t) 1 540000 19. BY01/06 DNIEPER Beregovaya Sloboda (Rechitsa d-t) - Loev (Loev d-t) 2 422100 20. BY0107 DOBYSNA Skachok (Kirovsk d-t) - Zhlobin (Zhlobin d-t) 2 400000 21. BY0106/04 DRUT Chigirinka (Kirovsk d-t) - Rogachev (Rogachev d-t 1 363000 22. BY01/01 DNIEPER Aleksandriya (Dubrovno d-t) - Orsha (Orsha d-t) 3 284000 23. BY0108/04 BEREZINA Borisov (Borisov d-t) - Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) 1 180000 24. BY011006 UDOGA Veremeiki (Cherikov d-t) - Cherikov (Cherikov d-t) 1 110000 25. BY011004/02 LOBZHANKA Klimovichi (Klimovichi d-t) - Krichev (Krichev d-t) 1 90000 26. BY0103 ADROV Dubnitsy (Orsha d-t) - Orsha (Orsha d-t) 3 76100 27. BY011004/01 LOBZHANKA Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - Klimovichi (Klimovichi d-t) 1 61000 28. BY0102 ORSHITSA Orehovsk (Orsha d-t) - Orsha (Orsha d-t) 2 56000 29. BY0106/01 DRUT Novoe Selo (Tolochin d-t) - Drutsk (Tolochin d-t) 1 52000 30. BY010803/03 GAINA Sutoki (Smolevichi d-t) - Veselovo (Borisov d-t) 2 50000 31. BY011012 LIPA Buda Lushevskaya (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) - Andreevka (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) 1 20000 32. BY011001 VIHRA Rassvet (Mstislavl d-t) - Paradino (Mstislavl d-t) 1 18000 33. BY010804 SKHA Mikhailovo (Borisov d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 1 10000 34. BY01080703/01 NACHA Zhaberichi (Krupki d-t) – Valyatichi (Borisov d-t) 1 8900 35. BY011013 BESED Trostino (Hotimsk d-t) - Besed (Vetka d-t) 1 7800

112

Table B.3 – Rivers discontinuity Including Number of con- channel № Code River Water body site tinuity flow vio- pumping type artificial ponds lations, total stations reservoirs 1. BY010812/02 SVISLOCH Zhdanovichi (Minsk d-t) – Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) 10 5 - 5 2. BY01081202/01 VOLMA Slobodshchina (Minsk d-t) - Volma (Smolevichi d-t) 3 - 3 - 3. BY011009 DOBRICH Zadubye (Korma d-t) -Vysokaya (Korma d-t) 3 - 3 - 4. Vilenka (Kirovsk d-t) - Turkovskaya Sloboda (Bobruisk d-t) BY010814/01 OLA 3 - 2 1 5. BY010812/01 SVISLOCH Vedelevo (Volozhin d-t) - Zaslavl (Minsk d-t) 3 - - 3 6. BY010808 USHA Smolnitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Usha (Berezina d-t) 3 - 3 - 7. BY01100802/01 BASYA Antipenki (Orsha d-t) - Chausy (Chausy d-t) 2 - 2 - 8. BY0106/01 DRUT Novoe Selo (Tolochin d-t) - Drutsk (Tolochin d-t) 2 9. ZHER- Slavan (Svetlogorsk d-t) - Svetlogorsk (Svetlogorsk d-t) BY010815 DANKA 2 - 1 1 10. BY01080701 PLISA Evlakhi (Tolochin d-t) - Plisa (Krupki d-t) 2 - 2 - 11. BY010805/02 PLISSA Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 2 1 - 1 12. BY0110080301/0 Makovnya (Mogilev d-t) - Makerantsy (Mogilev d-t) 2 RUDEYA 2 1 1 - 13. BY010812/03 SVISLOCH Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) - Lapichi (Osipovichi d-t) 2 - 2 - 14. CHERNAYA Hodosy (Mstislavl d-t) - Selets (Mstislavl d-t) BY011002 NATOPA 2 - 2 - 15. BY0108/01 BEREZINA Dokshitsy (Dokshitsy d-t) - Palik (Borisov d-t) 1 - 1 - 16. BY010807 BOBR Rafolovo (Tolochin d-t) – Chernavka (Borisov d-t) 1 - 1 - 17. BY0112 BRAGINKA Prokisel (Rechitsa d-t) - Gden (Bragin d-t) 1 - - 1 18. Rubanovka (Mstislavl d-t) - Dribin (Dribin d-t) BY01100801 BYSTRAYA 1 - 1 - 19. Petrovichi (Smolevichi d-t) - Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) BY01081202/02 VOLMA 1 1 - - 20. Ozerniy (Cherven d-t) – Svetliy Bor (Pukhovichi d-t) BY01081202/04 VOLMA 1 - 1 - 21. Dolgovichi (Mstislavl d-t) - Verhovtsy (Cherikov d-t) BY011005/01 VOLCHES 1 - - 1 22. BY01081201/01 VYACHA Selishche (Logoisk d-t) – Beloruchi (Logoisk d-t) 1 - 1 - 23. BY01081201/03 VYACHA Pilnitsa (Minsk d-t) - Semkovo (Minsk d-t) 1 1 - - 24. BY010803/01 GAINA Rezyachino (Logoisk d-t) - Kuzevichi (Logoisk d-t) 1 - 1 - 25. BY010803/03 GAINA Sutoki (Smolevichi d-t) - Veselovo (Borisov d-t) 1 - 1 - 26. BY010603 GREZA Zagrezye (Mogilev d-t) - Vazma (Bykhov d-t) 1 - 1 - 27. BY0107 DOBYSNA Skachok (Kirovsk d-t) - Zhlobin (Zhlobin d-t) 1 1 - -

113 28. BY0106/03 DRUT Teterino (Krugloe d-t) - Chigirinka (Kirovsk d-t) 1 1 - - 29. BY0106/04 DRUT Chigirinka (Kirovsk d-t) - Rogachev (Rogachev d-t 1 1 - - 30. Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - Makeevichi (Klimovichi d-t) BY011014/01 IPUT 1 1 - - 31. BY011014/02 IPUT Demyanki (Dobrush d-t) - Gomel (Gomel d-t) 1 - - 1 32. Zaorezye(Belynichi d-t) – Krasniy Bereg (Berezino d-t) BY010810 KLEVA 1 - - 1 33. Staraya Vodva (Shklov d-t) - Zalohvinye (Bykhov d-t) BY0104 LAKHVA 1 - 1 - 34. Buda Lushevskaya (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) - Andreevka (Buda-Koshelevo BY011012 LIPA d-t) 1 - 1 - 35. Stefanovo (Gorki d-t) - Aleksandriya (Dubrovno d-t) BY0101 MEREYA 1 - 1 - 36. Zhaberichi (Krupki d-t) – Valyatichi (Borisov d-t) BY01080703/01 NACHA 1 - 1 - 37. BY010805/01 PLISSA Sloboda (Smolevichi d-t) – Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) 1 - - 1 38. Aleksandrovka (Shklov d-t) - Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) BY01100803/01 RESTA 1 1 - - 39. Zeleniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) – Novoselki (Borisov d-t) BY010806/02 ROVA 1 - 1 - 40. BY010812/04 SVISLOCH Vazye (Osipovichi d-t) - Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) 1 1 - - 41. BY011007 SENNA Kliny (Cherikov d-t) - Bakov (Cherikov d-t) 1 - 1 - 42. BY010804 SKHA Mikhailovo (Borisov d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 1 - 1 - 43. BY01080302/01 USYAZHA Prilepy (Smolevichi d-t) - Juryevo (Smolevichi d-t) 1 - 1 - 44. Ostroshitskiy Gorodok (Minsk d-t) – Okolitsa (Minsk d-t) BY01080302/02 USYAZHA 1 1 - - 45. Dubrovka (Dobrush d-t) - Tereshkovichi (Gomel d-t) BY011016 UT 1 - - 1 46. BY011010 CHECHERA Buda Borovaya (Korma d-t) - Chechersk (Chechersk d-t) 1 1 - -

TOTAL 73 17 37 19

114

Table B.4 – Hydrological changes of watercourses sites due to reservoirs

Number № Code River Water body site Reservoir name of rsrv. Zaslavskoe, Krinitsa. Drozdy, 1 BY010812/02 SVISLOCH Zhdanovichi (Minsk d-t) – Noviy Dvor (Minsk d-t) 5 Komsomol lake, Chizhovskoe 2 BY01081202/02 VOLMA Petrovichi (Smolevichi d-t) - Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) 1 Petrovichskoe 3 BY01081201/03 VYACHA Pilnitsa (Minsk d-t) - Semkovo (Minsk d-t) 1 Vyacha 4 BY0107 DOBYSNA Skachok (Kirovsk d-t) - Zhlobin (Zhlobin d-t) 1 Dobysna 5 BY0106/03 DRUT Teterino (Krugloe d-t) - Chigirinka (Kirovsk d-t) 1 Teterinskoe 6 BY0106/04 DRUT Chigirinka (Kirovsk d-t) - Rogachev (Rogachev d-t 1 Chigirinskoe 7 BY011014/01 IPUT Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - Makeevichi (Klimovichi d-t) 1 Miloslavichskoe 8 BY010805/02 PLISSA Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 1 Smolevichskoe 9 BY01100803/01 RESTA Aleksandrovka (Shklov d-t) - Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) 1 Zarestye 10 BY0110080301/02 RUDEYA Makerantsy (Mogilev d-t) - Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) 1 Rudeya 11 BY010812/04 SVISLOCH Vazye (Osipovichi d-t) - Svisloch (Osipovichi d-t) 1 Osipovichskoe 12 BY01080302/02 USYAZHA Ostroshitskiy Gorodok (Minsk d-t) – Okolitsa (Minsk d-t) 1 Dubrovskoe 13 BY011010 CHECHERA Buda Borovaya (Korma d-t) - Chechersk (Chechersk d-t) 1 Merkulovichi

115

Table B.5 – Upper Dnieper basin river sites, affected by straightening

Percentage № Code River Water body site Length, km of straightening 1 BY01101401 OCHESA Sinitsyn (Vetka d-t) - Demyanki (Dobrush d-t) 30.2 99 2 BY010801 PONYA Vardomichi (Vileika d-t) - Beresponye (Dokshitsy d-t) 40.3 99 3 BY010814/02 OLA Turkovskaya Sloboda (Bobruisk d-t) - Chirkovichi (Svetlogorsk d-t) 42.9 98 4 BY0110080301/01 RUDEYA Lozhki (Krupki d-t) - Leskovichi (Berezino d-t) 11.3 97 5 BY010809/01 BRUSYATA Lozhki (Krupki d-t) - Leskovichi (Berezino d-t) 22.8 97 6 BY010806/01 ROVA Zeleniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) - Zeleniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) 10.7 93 7 BY0112 BRAGINKA Prokisel (Rechitsa d-t) - Gden (Bragin d-t) 122.2 92 8 BY01081202/02 VOLMA Petrovichi (Smolevichi d-t) - Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) 12.1 91 9 BY011010 CHECHERA Buda Borovaya (Korma d-t) - Chechersk (Chechersk d-t) 50.8 90 10 BY010803/01 GAINA Rezyachino (Logoisk d-t) - Kuzevichi (Logoisk d-t) 14.0 90 11 BY010815 ZHERDYANKA Slavan (Svetlogorsk d-t) - Svetlogorsk (Svetlogorsk d-t) 27.9 89 12 BY010814/01 OLA Vilenka (Kirovsk d-t) - Turkovskaya Sloboda (Bobruisk d-t) 47.0 89 13 BY010603 GREZA Zagrezye (Mogilev d-t) - Vazma (Bykhov d-t) 49.3 89 14 BY01080703/02 NACHA Borki (Krupki d-t) - Zhaberichi (Krupki d-t) 30.4 87 15 BY0109/02 VEDRICH Podluki (Kalinkovichi d-t) - Noviy Svet (Rechitsa d-t) 47.6 86 16 BY010805/01 PLISSA Sloboda (Smolevichi d-t) – Jalovitsa (Smolevichi d-t) 29.6 85 17 BY0111 PESOCHENKA Lipnaki (Loev d-t) – Glushets (Love d-t) 50.8 84 18 BY01081202/01 VOLMA Slobodshchina (Minsk d-t) - Volma (Smolevichi d-t) 21.8 83 19 BY010816 SVED Podluki (Kalinkovichi d-t) – Svedskoe (Rechitsa d-t) 44.1 79 20 BY010809/02 BRUSYATA Leskovichi (Berezino d-t) - Zhornovka (Berezino d-t) 9.4 78 21 BY011012 LIPA Buda Lushevskaya (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) - Andreevka (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) 54.0 76 22 BY01101303/01 KOLPITA Kovpita (Krasnopolye d-t) - Zavodok (Krasnopolye d-t) 17.0 74 23 BY01080301 TSNA Domashkovichi (Logoisk d-t) - Sutoki (Smolevichi d-t) 55.4 74 24 BY011014/01 IPUT Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - Makeevichi (Klimovichi d-t) 31.9 72 25 BY010812/01 SVISLOCH Vedelevo (Volozhin d-t) - Zaslavl (Minsk d-t) 12.2 71 26 BY01101402 KHOROPUT Galoe (Dobrush d-t) - Dobrush (Dobrush d-t) 40.3 70 27 BY011017 TERUKHA Olhovoe (Dobrush d-t) - Terukha (Gomel d-t) 55.4 68 28 BY0107 DOBYSNA Skachok (Kirovsk d-t) - Zhlobin (Zhlobin d-t) 82.1 68 29 BY011015 UZA Berezovka (Buda-Koshelevo d-t) - Bobovichi (Gomel d-t) 74.4 59 30 BY01081201/03 VYACHA Pilnitsa (Minsk d-t) - Semkovo (Minsk d-t) 14.8 57 31 BY010806/02 ROVA Zeleniy Bor (Smolevichi d-t) – Novoselki (Borisov d-t) 20.2 56 32 BY011004/01 LOBZHANKA Nedved (Klimovichi d-t) - г. Klimovichi (Klimovichi d-t) 34.1 52 33 BY011005/01 VOLCHES Dolgovichi (Mstislavl d-t) - Verhovtsy (Cherikov d-t) 26.6 50 34 BY011002 CHERNAYA NATOPA Hodosy (Mstislavl d-t) - Selets (Mstislavl d-t) 39.7 49

116 35 BY0105 UHLAST Krasnitsa (Bykhov d-t ) – Pribor (Bykhov d-t) 40.1 46 36 BY010602 VABICH Burovshchina (Krugloe d-t) - Pribor (Belynichi d-t) 60.4 45 37 BY010811 USA Damavitsk (Cherven d-t) - Yakshitsy (Berezino d-t) 46.6 41 38 BY01101302/01 DERYAZHNYA Savinichi (Klimovichi d-t) - Dubrovka (Kostukovichi d-t) 14.1 40 39 BY01080702 MOZHA Shinka (Krupki d-t) - Vydritsa (Krupki d-t) 66.0 38 40 BY01101301/01 ZHADUNKA Vysokoe (Klimovichi d-t) - Kostukovichi (Kostukovichi d-t) 32.8 37 41 BY010601 OSLIK Sanniki (Krugloe d-t) - Osovets (Belynichi d-t) 63.8 36 42 BY011004/02 LOBZHANKA Klimovichi (Klimovichi d-t) - Krichev (Krichev d-t) 13.2 33 43 BY011007 SENNA Kliny (Cherikov d-t) - Bakov (Cherikov d-t) 46.9 30 44 BY01080302/02 USYAZHA Ostroshitskiy Gorodok (Minsk d-t) – Okolitsa (Minsk d-t) 29.6 29 45 BY01080701 PLISA Evlakhi (Tolochin d-t) - Plisa (Krupki d-t) 29.8 29 46 BY011016 UT Dubrovka (Dobrush d-t) - Tereshkovichi (Gomel d-t) 63.1 25 47 BY0106/01 DRUT Novoe Selo (Tolochin d-t) - Drutsk (Tolochin d-t) 24.7 24 48 BY0103 ADROV Dubnitsy (Orsha d-t) - Orsha (Orsha d-t) 58.4 23 49 BY010810 KLEVA Zaorezye(Belynichi d-t) – Krasniy Bereg (Berezino d-t) 71.7 23 50 BY01081202/03 VOLMA Smilovichi (Cherven d-t) - Ozerniy (Cherven d-t) 14.0 22 51 BY0101 MEREYA Stefanovo (Gorki d-t) - Aleksandriya (Dubrovno d-t) 50.2 22 52 BY0104 LAKHVA Staraya Vodva (Shklov d-t) - Zalohvinye (Bykhov d-t) 80.0 20 53 BY01100801 BYSTRAYA Rubanovka (Mstislavl d-t) - Dribin (Dribin d-t) 46.7 19 54 BY011009 DOBRYCH Zadubye (Korma d-t) -Vysokaya (Korma d-t) 37.0 19 55 BY010808 USHA Smolnitsa (Smolevichi d-t) - Usha (Berezina d-t) 81.5 19 56 BY0110080301/02 RUDEYA Makerantsy (Mogilev d-t) - Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) 20.5 18 57 BY01100802/01 BASYA Antipenki (Orsha d-t) - Chausy (Chausy d-t) 111.8 16 58 BY010804 SKHA Mikhailovo (Borisov d-t) - Borisov (Borisov d-t) 61.7 15 59 BY0108/01 BEREZINA Dokshitsy (Dokshitsy d-t) - Palik (Borisov d-t) 112.3 14 60 BY010813/01 OLSA Matevichi (Berezino d-t) - Shchatkova (Kirovsk d-t) 77.3 12 61 BY01100803/01 RESTA Aleksandrovka (Shklov d-t) - Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) 34.5 12 62 BY01101303/02 KOLPITA Zavodok (Krasnopolye d-t) – Kazatskie Bolsuny (Vetka d-t) 37.0 11 63 BY011011 POKOT Bolin (Krasnopolye d-t) - Petropolye (Vetka d-t) 71.5 10 64 BY01081202/04 VOLMA Ozerniy (Cherven d-t) – Svetliy Bor (Pukhovichi d-t) 32.8 8 65 BY01080703/01 NACHA Zhaberichi (Krupki d-t) – Valyatichi (Borisov d-t) 30.6 8 66 BY011008 PRONYA Lashinka (Orsha d-t) - Slavgorod (Slavgorod d-t) 171.0 7 67 BY010802 SERGUCH Zaborye (Lepel d-t) - Brody (Borisov d-t) 42.4 5 68 BY010807 BOBR Rafolovo (Tolochin d-t) – Chernavka (Borisov d-t) 105.4 3 69 BY01100803/02 RESTA Temnolesye (Chausy d-t) - Horonevo (Slavgorod d-t) 63.0 2

117 Table B.6 - Point sources of impacts on river sites with moderate chemical (hydrochemical) status № Code Site Driver force Pressure Impact п.п. 1. BY010812/02 Svisloch down- MUPE "Minskvodokanal", Domestic wastewater Hydrochemical BY010812/03 stream Minsk outlet in Svisloch river, 227 km (BOD5, SS, chlorides, status deteriora- BY010812/04 to mouth from the mouth sulfates, group of nitrogen tion. High con- and phosphorus, copper, centrations of zinc, nickel, chromium, nitrite and phos- lead) phate ions oil JSC "Rudensk" (rain water), Surface waste water (SS) products outlet in Svisloch river, 230 km from the mouth

RUE "Minskenergo" HPP-5, Industrial wastewater outlet in Svisloch river, 131 km (BOD5, SS, sulfates, chlo- from the mouth rides, surfactants, ammonium ion, nitrate ion)

"Belkarton" JSC " Managing Industrial wastewater company "Belarusian wallpa- (BOD5, chlorides) per", outlet in Svisloch river, 109 km from the mouth

UE "Zhilteploservice", outlet Domestic wastewater in Svisloch river, 11 km from (BOD5, SS, sulfates, chlo- the mouth rides, phosphate ion, ammonium ion, nitrate ion, nitrite ion, surfactants) Osipovichi UMPE "Vodoca- Domestic wastewater nal", outlet in Mlynka river, 8 (BOD 5, SS, sulfates, chlo- km from the mouth rides, nitrite ion, nitrate ion, ammonium ion, copper, zinc, nickel, chromium) Osipovichi UMPE "Vodoca- Domestic wastewater nal" (Lapichi), outlet in (BOD5, chloride ion, ni- Zhitenka river, 3 km from the trate ion, zinc) mouth

2. BY010805/01 Plissa JSC "Smolevichi broiler", out- Industrial wastewaters Hydrochemical BY010805/02 let in Plissa river, 42 km from (BOD5 BB ions sulfate, status deteriora- the mouth chloride, phosphate, ni- tion. The high trate, nitrite) content of phosphate ions, ni- Minsk republican unitary en- Industrial wastewater (sur- trogen com- terprise electrical energy "Min- factants; ions: chloride, pounds, easily skenergo" Branch Zhodinskaya sulfate, nitrate) oxidized organic HHP, outlet in Plissa river compounds, petroleum products, reducing the dissolved oxygen content JSC "Belaz" Managing com- Industrial wastewaters pany " Belaz-holding" Zhodino (nickel) (rain waters), outlet in Plissa river, 16 km from the mouth № Code Site Driver force Pressure Impact п.п. 3. BY0108/04 Berezina down- MUPE "Borisovvodokanal ", Domestic wastewater Hydrochemical BY0108/05 stream Borisov outlet in Berezina river, 400 (BOD5, SS, ions sulfate, status deteriora- to Svetlogorsk km from the mouth chloride, phosphate, am- tion. High con- monium, nitrate, nitrite, tent of nitrite detergents, copper, zinc, and phosphate nickel, lead, phenol) ions, oil, de- Branch DEU-6 RUE "Min- Surface waste water (SS) creased dis- skavtodor center" (rain waters), solved oxygen outlet in Berezina river, 400 km from the mouth

Belarusian-Austrian CJSC Industrial wastewaters "Glassworks Elizovo" Osi- (ions: sulfate, chloride, povichsky district, outlet in ammonium, cobalt, zinc) Berezina river, 0 km from the mouth

JSC "FanDOK" Bobruisk, out- Industrial wastewaters (SS, let in Berezina river, 181 km ions: sulfate, chloride) from the mouth

Bobruisk subsidiary unitary Surface waste water municipal road operational (BOD5, SS, ions: sulphate, enterprise (rain water), outlet in chloride, ammonium, ni- Dneprets river, 0 km from the trate, detergents) mouth

Bobruisk subsidiary unitary Surface waste water municipal road operational (BOD5, SS, ions: sulphate, enterprise (rain water), outlet in chloride, ammonium, ni- Bobruika river trate, detergents)

Bobruisk UMPE "Vodokanal", Domestic wastewater outlet in Berezina river (BOD5, SS, ions: sulfate, chloride, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, zinc, nickel, chromium)

4. BY011015 Uza JSC "Gomelsteclo", outlet in Industrial wastewater Hydrochemical Uza river, 50 km from the (BOD5, SS, ions sulfate, status deteriora- mouth chloride, phosphate, am- tion. High con- monium, nitrate, nitrite, centrations of detergents, zinc, nickel, nitrite and phos- lead, cobalt) phate ions easily Industrial wastewaters oxidisable or- JSC "Gomelsteclo", outlet in (BOD5, SS, ions sulfate, ganic com- Uza river, 50 km from the chloride, ammonium ni- pounds mouth trate, detergents) Wastewater surface (BOD5, SS, ions :sulfate, JSC "Gomelsteclo"(rain water), chloride, phosphate, am- outlet in Uza river, 50 km from monium, nitrate, nitrite, the mouth detergents, zinc, nickel, lead, cobalt)

119 № Code Site Driver force Pressure Impact п.п. JSC "Gomel chemical plant", Industrial wastewaters outlet in Uza river, 5 km from (ions sulfate, chloride, the mouth fluoride, nitrate)

MUPE "Gomelvodokanal" Domestic wastewater outlet in Uza river, 1 km from (BOD5, SS, ions: sulfate, the mouth chloride, phosphate, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, detergents, copper, zinc, nickel, lead, cobalt, chromium, phenol)

Table B.7 - Sources of impacts on river sites with moderate hydrobiological status

№ Code Site Driver force Pressure Impact п.п. 1. BY010812/02 Svisloch MUPE "Minskvodokanal", outlet Domestic wastewater Ecological BY010812/03 downstream in Svisloch river, 227 km from (BOD5, SS, chlorides, status deteriora- Minsk to Osi- the mouth sulfates, group of ni- tion povichi reser- trogen and phosphorus, voir copper, zinc, nickel, chromium, lead) JSC "Rudensk" (rain water), out- Surface waste water let in Svisloch river, 230 km from (SS) the mouth

RUE "Minskenergo" HPP-5, out- Industrial wastewater let in Svisloch river, 131 km from (BOD5, SS, sulfates, the mouth chlorides, surfactants, ammonium ion, nitrate ion) "Belkarton" JSC " Managing Industrial wastewater company "Belarusian wallpaper", (BOD5, chlorides) outlet in Svisloch river, 109 km from the mouth

UE "Zhilteploservice", outlet in Domestic wastewater Svisloch river, 11 km from the (BOD5, SS, sulfates, mouth chlorides, phosphate ion, ammonium ion, nitrate ion, nitrite ion, surfactants) 2. BY010803/01 Gayna from dispersed Ecological source to status deteriora- Logoisk tion 3. BY0103 Adrov dispersed Ecological status deterioration 4. BY011006 Udoga dispersed Ecological status deterioration 5. BY01101301/0 Zhadunka Kostyukovichi UME "Vodoca- Ecological 2 downstream nal", outlet in Zhadunka river, 8 status deteriora- Kostyukovichi km from the mouth tion to mouth 6. BY0107 Dobysna JSC "Gomel fat factory" branch Industry wastewater Ecological Krasnoberezhskoe PO, outlet in status deteriora- Dobysna river, 30 km from the tion

120 № Code Site Driver force Pressure Impact п.п. mouth 7. BY011015 Uza JSC "Gomelsteclo", outlet in Uza Industrial wastewater Ecological river, 50 km from the mouth (BOD5, SS, ions sul- status deteriora- fate, chloride, phos- tion phate, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, detergents, zinc, nickel, lead, cobalt) Industrial wastewaters (BOD5, SS, ions sul- JSC "Gomelsteclo", outlet in Uza fate, chloride, ammo- river, 50 km from the mouth nium nitrate, detergents) Wastewater surface (BOD5, SS, ions JSC "Gomelsteclo"(rain water), :sulfate, chloride, outlet in Uza river, 50 km from phosphate, ammonium, the mouth nitrate, nitrite, detergents, zinc, nickel, lead, cobalt) JSC "Gomel chemical plant", Industrial wastewaters outlet in Uza river, 5 km from the (ions sulfate, chloride, mouth fluoride, nitrate) MUPE "Gomelvodokanal" outlet Domestic wastewater in Uza river, 1 km from the (BOD5, SS, ions: sul- mouth fate, chloride, phosphate, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, detergents, copper, zinc, nickel, lead, cobalt, chromium, phenol) 8. BY010805 Berezina CAUE "Svetlogorsk vegetable Industry wastewater Ecological downstream factory", outlet in Berezina status deteriora- Svetlogorsk to river, 57 km from the mouth tion mouth

GRUE electricity "Gomelen- Industrial wastewa- ergo" branch "Svetlogorskaya ters (BOD5, SS ions; HPP", 2 outlets in Berezina sulfate, chloride) river, 61 km from the mouth

JSC "Svetlogorskhimvolokno", Industrial wastewater outlet in Berezina river, 57 km (BOD5, SS ions; from the mouth sulfate, chloride, phosphate, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite, detergents, copper, zinc)

121

Table B.8 - Complexes for breeding and fattening pigs, located in the upper Dnieper basin

The average num- Agriculture organization District ber of pigs, 01.01.2013 JSC " Alexandriiskoe" Shklov 26448 Branch "Sovetskaya Belorussia" Rechitsa 33307 CoLtd "Ananichi" Puhovichi 15600 JSC "Jubileiniy" Orsha 32474 JSC "Bobovskiy" Zhlobin 30950 JSC "Agrocompany "Juzhniy" Gomel 28714 JSC " Agrocompany "Voshod" Mogilev 33304 PAUE "Zolak-Agro" Svetlogorsk 21938 Branch "Nartsizovo" Tolochin 45768 SC "Klevitsa" Berezino 32600 JSC "Sovhoz-kombinat "Sozh" Gomel 101527 "Dubrovenskiy" JSC "Orsha KHP" Orsha 17910 APC "Krasniy boets" Kirovsk 8287 CAUE "Agrocompany "Noviy Put" Dobrush 13324 SC "Turets" Cherven 17530 JSC " Zarechye" Rogachev 46255 APC "Uritskoe" Gomel 5477 SC "Hotuhovo" Krupki 18490 CAUE "Zadneprovskiy" Orsha 66316 CoLtd "Tarasovo" Minsk 15070 SC "Agrocompany "Zarya" Mogilev 15416 JSC "Klimovichi" Klimovichi 21797 PAUE "Agrocompany "Ognevskoe" Slavgorod 28957 UE "Borisov КХП" Logoisk 28690 JSC " Dokshitsy agroservice" Dokshitsy 4659 APC "Ovsyanka” Gorki 15685 PAUE "Andreevka" Buda-Koshelevo 23720 JSC "Borisov meat factory" branch "Loshitsa" Borisov 95160 APC "Mazolovskiy" Mstislavl 11325 APC "Popykovichi" Mogilev 8733 SC "Amkodor-Shklov" Shklov 6847 CAUE "Vihra" Mstislavl 34421 CAUE "Lenino" Gorki 11121 APC "Antonovskiy" Chausy 13044 PAUE "Svetliy" Cherikov 67430

Table B.9 - Complexes for breeding and fattening cattle, located in the upper Dnieper basin

The average Agriculture organization District number 01.01.2013 JSC "Mayak-Vysokoe" Orsha 8870 JSC "Alexandriiskoe" Shklov 2579 JSC "Nadezhino" Tolochin 4087 JSC "Torguny" Dokshitsy 6730 Branch "Demehi" JSC "Rechitsa KHP" Rechitsa 2943 APC "Red Army" Rogachev 4095 УКСП "Dobrovolets" Klichev 10384 JSC "Berezinskiy" Berezino 2502 APC "50 let Oktabrya" Rechitsa 2780 APC "Nevskogo" Bobruisk 4757 Branch "Bolshie Novoselki" Borisov 2923 Branch RUE "Gomelenergo" APC "Dubrova-agro" Svetlogorsk 1863 APC "Uritskoe" Gomel 5926 JSC "Teterino" Krugloe 2884 APC "Kudin" Belynichi 2683 SC "Slaveni" Shklov 3756 СSC "Gory" Gorki 2884 APC "Peramozhnik" Bragin 1703 JSC " Gorki " Gorki 6116 APC "Zvezda-agro" Krichev 2926

Table B.10 - Poultry egg production organizations located in the upper Dnieper basin

The average number Agriculture organization District 01.01.2013 JSC "1st Minsk poultry" Minsk 1792.5 JSC "Gomel poultry " Gomel 715.3 JSC " Agrocompany "Pridneprovskiy" Mogilev 817 JSC "Orshanskaya" Orsha 541.6 CAUE "Belorusskiy" Minsk 208.8 SC "Vishnevka" Bobruisk 105.2 JSC "Bobruiskiy KHP" Bobruisk 41.5 PUE "Elets" Mogilev 59.6

123

Table B.11 - Poultry meat production organizations located in the upper Dnieper basin

The average number Agriculture organization District 01.01.2013 JSC "Smolevichskaya" Smolevichi 2946511 Branch "Servolux" Mogilev 2943416 RUE "Belorusneft-Osobino" Buda-Koshelevo 1583757 JSC "Rassvet" Gomel 777387 JSC "Klenovichi" Krupki 531208 JSC " Alexandriiskoe " Shklov 438151 SC "Zarya" Mogilev 378416 JSC "Zhlobinskaya" Zhlobin 238075 JSC "1st Minsk poultry " Minsk 193058 PUE "Elets" Mogilev 123715

124 Таблица B.12 – Analysis of other possible pressures and their impacts in the upper Dnieper basin in Belarus

Pressures Impacts Changing human Change the water use, including quantitative and qualitative characteristics activities associ- of water consumption and wastewater. According to the program of socio- ated with the economic development of the Republic of Belarus for 2011-2015 and the forecast of National Strategy for Sustainable Socio-Economic Development of the Re- socio-economic public of Belarus for the period up to 2020 the index of industrial produc- development tion for the period up to 2020 may be 109 - 110%, agricultural products - 107 - 108%. Perhaps a slight increase in diversion of surface wastewater from surface water bodies for different needs, which can lead to inessential reduction of runoff in the Dnieper basin (no more than 1%), and in housing and communal services consumptive water use may remain the same or decrease. Under the State program of construction of hydroelectric power plants in 2011-2015 in Belarus further increase in hydroelectric power generation will be in the years 2016-2019 with the phased introduction of large hydroelectric power stations on the Dnieper river, which will be located in the economic management of SPU "Belenergo": Rechitskaya HPP (4.6 MW) - 2018; Shklovskaya HPP (4.9 MW) - 2018; Mogilevskaya HPP (5.1 MW) - 2019. Also considered the possibility of increasing power generation at Dnieper by introducing additionally Bykhovskaya HPP and Zhlobin HPP. Prior to 2015, it is scheduled to start 12 micro and mini hydropower plants in the Dnieper river basin. Location of HPPs on watercourses will affect their hydrological regime, as well as the hydrogeological regime of adjoin- ing territory. Dangerous hy- Floodings, leading to economic damage. According to the information of drometeorologi- the Republican Centre for Management and Emergency Response Ministry cal phenomena: for Emergency Situations of Belarus and the National Hydrometeorological - spring floods Center in the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Belarus21 upper and summer- Dnieper basin several areas undergo to the adverse effects of water spring autumn rain floods (Figure 16). Primarily these areas include settlements of the follow- floods; ing districts: - Gomel district, Gomel region - Sozh, Iput; - Borisov district, Minsk region - Berezina, Skha, Plissa; - Rechitsky district, Gomel region - Dnieper, Berezina; - Bobruisk district, Mogilev region - Berezina, Ola; - Bragin district, Gomel region - Dnieper, Braginka; - Dobrushskiy district, Gomel region - Iput, Horoput. In these areas during spring floods there are regular significant flooding of settlements, engineering infrastructure, as well as agricultural land. It is suitable development and implementation of pilot projects for territories, which are significantly vulnerable to flooding, aimed at improving

21 "Catalogue of indicators of danger hydrological phenomena on the territory of Belarus," SI "The Republican Hydrometeorological Center" Pressures Impacts flood risk management, taking into account the recommendations of the relevant EU Directive22. Significant reduction of surface runoff in dry periods. This may be degraded - dry periods ecological condition and recreational potential of surface water bodies (especially small rivers) and adjacent areas, changing hydrogeological regime of groundwater, depletion in the floodplain soil, etc. In addition to economic damage (mainly agriculture), it can lead to the fact that in rural areas, non- centralized water supply systems, due to a lowering of groundwater levels and shallowing of the wells the safety of water supply will be in danger. Climate change The data presented in 2013 in Proceedings of the fifth report of the Inter- governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)23, indicate that climate change is an indisputable fact that is confirmed by observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread snow and ice melting, sea-level rise. It is predicted that in the upper Dnieper basin to 2035 on average over the basin temperature rise of air depending on the climate change scenarios can make in winter from 1,5 to 2,0 °C, in the summer - from 1,0 to 1,5° C. Also it is projected changes in precipitation: in autumn and winter period perhaps a slight increase (maximum - 10%); and in the spring and summer - possible reduction (maximum - 10%)24. While the average annual runoff in the basin may decrease during the period from 2016 to 2035 an average of 10%25, which greatly enhances the probability of occurrence and the negative consequences of low-water periods. It is necessary to develop and implement measures to adapt water resources of Dnieper basin to climate change, including more detailed forecast these changes for watercourses, vulnerability assessment of various types of water and other related natural resources and economy to climate change, the implementation of pilot projects on adaptation.

22 Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks // Access to European Union law [electronic resource]. – Access mode: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32007L0060:EN:NOT 23 Climate Change, 2013. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Summary for Policymakers]. - Geneva: IPCC, 2013. - 28 p. / / Proceedings of the IPCC [electronic resource]. - Mode of access: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1 24 Annex I: Atlas of Global and Regional Climate Projections // IPCC materials, pp.1350-1353. [electronic resource]. – Mode of access: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/docs/review/WG1AR5_FOD_AnnexI_Final.pdf 25 Chapter 11. Near-term Climate Change: Projections and Predictability // IPCC materials, p.987 [electronic resource]. – Mode of access: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/docs/review/WG1AR5_SOD_Ch11_All_Final.pdf 126 ANNEX C. LIST OF PROTECTED AREAS

Table C.1 – – List of PAs of republican level

№ Name Type 1 Berezinskiy biosphere reserve 2 Buda-Koshelevo biological reserve 3 Volmyanskiy biological reserve 4 Vydritsa landscape reserve 5 Glebovka biological reserve 6 Denisovichskiy biological reserve 7 Dnieper-Sozh biological reserve 8 Zaozerye hydrological reserve 9 Kopysh biological reserve 10 Ostrova Duleby hydrological reserve 11 Pekalinskiy biological reserve 12 Polesskiy radiation ecological reserve 13 Prilepskiy landscape reserve 14 Smychok landscape reserve 15 Stiklevo biological reserve 16 Chernevichskiy landscape reserve 17 Chernevskiy biological reserve 18 Chirkovichskiy biological reserve 19 Yukhnovskiy biological reserve

Table C.2 – Information about approved projects of water protection zones and riversides Project names Project approval Project of water protection zones and riversides of rivers The decision of Gomel region executive Sozh, Besed, Iput, Dnieper, Drut, Berezina, Pripyat, Ub- committee from 16.08.2004, №554 orot, and Ptich within Gomel region Project of water protection zones and riversides of rivers The decision of Mogilev region executive Dnieper, Sozh, Berezina, Svisloch, Drut, Ptich, Oster and committee from 29.12.2005, № 30–23 Besed within Mogilev region Project of water protection zones and riversides of rivers The decision of Minsk region executive Svisloch, Berezina, Neman and Ptich within the Minsk committee from 22.07.2006, № 727 region Project of water protection zones and riversides of rivers The decision of Rogachev district executive Dnieper and Drut of Rogachev city committee from 05.10.2004, №1130 Project of water protection zones and riversides of Du- The decision of Minsk district executive brovsky reservoir Minsk region committee № 29/16 from 20.11.2004. Project of water protection zones and riversides of water The decision of Orsha city executive com- bodies of Orsha city mittee from 25.02. 2005, № 159 and № 69 from 27.01.2006 Project of water protection zones and riversides of water The decision of Zhlobin district executive bodies of Zhlobin city committee from 20.09. 2004, № 1813 Adjustment of water protection zones and riversides of The decision of Zhlobin district executive Dnieper river in Zhlobin committee from 12.05.2010, № 1246 Adjustment of water protection zones and riversides of The decision of Zhlobin district executive Dnieper river in Zhlobin committee from 12.05.2010, № 12467 Project of water protection zones and riversides of rivers The decision of Vitebsk region executive Zapadnaya Dvina, Dnieper within Vitebsk region committee from 27.07.2005, № 497 Projects of water protection zones and riversides of wa- The decision of Gomel district executive ter bodies in the administrative districts of the city of committee from 07.03.2007, № 208 Gomel Project of water protection zones and riversides of water The decision of Svetlogorsk district execu- bodies of Svetlogorsk city tive committee from 17.03.2003, № 1175 Project of water protection zones and riversides of water The decision of Minsk city executive bodies of Minsk city committee from 12.03.2009, № 536 Project of water protection zones and riversides of water The decision of Pukhovichi district execu- bodies of Cherven, Smilovichi, Maryina Gorka tive committee from 07.02.2011, № 290 Project of water protection zones and riversides of water The decision of Mogilev region executive bodies of Mogilev city: committee from: Dubrovenka river 21.11.2001, № 15–18 Debrya river and Svyatoe lake 23.11.2002, №13–65 Dnieper river 19.11.2008, №14–50 Establish the boundaries of riparian areas of the rivers of The decision of Mogilev city executive Mogilev, taking into account the approved planning committee from 20.06.2007, № 12–42 documentation, modern building, systems engineering and land improvements Adjustment of the boundaries of the riversides of water The decision of Gomel city executive objects of Gomel, taking into account the approved plan- committee from 16.04.2008, № 378 ning documentation, modern building, systems engineering and land improvements

128 ANNEX D LIST OF MONITORING STATION

Table D.1 - List of surface waters monitoring station

River Location of the observation Place of observation name point Dnieper Sarviry within the boundaries of the settlement (4.2 km from the Russian border) Dnieper Orsha 1.0 km upstream the city Dnieper Orsha 0.5 km downstream the city Dnieper Rechitsa 0.8 km upstream the city Dnieper Rechitsa 5.6 km downstream the city Dnieper Loev 0.8 km upstream the settlement Dnieper Loev 8.5 km downstream the settlement (transboundary river district with Ukraine) Dnieper Bykhov 1.0 km upstream the city Dnieper Bykhov 2.0 km downstream the city Dnieper Mogilev 1.0 km upstream the city Dnieper Mogilev 25.6 km downstream the city Dnieper Shklov 1.0 km upstream the city Dnieper Shklov 2.0 km downstream the city Adrov Porechye 0.4 km to the west from settlement Berezina Brody 0.5 km upstream the settlement Berezina Svetlogorsk 1.0 km upstream the city Berezina Svetlogorsk 2.7 km downstream the city Berezina Borisov 1.0 km upstream the city Berezina Borisov 5.9 km downstream the city Berezina Bobruisk 5.0 km upstream the city Berezina Bobruisk 1.9 km downstream the city Basya Chernevka 0.7 km to the west from settlement Besed Svetilovichi 0.5 km upstream the settlement(15.5 km from the Russian border) Bobr Bobr within the boundaries of the settlement Vedrich Babichi 1.0 km upstream the settlement Vikhra Mstislavl 0.5 km upstream the city (11.5 km from the Russian border) Vikhra Mstislavl 1.5 km downstream the city Volma Korzuny 1.0 km upstream the settlement Vyacha Papernya 1.0 km upstream the settlement Dobysna Malevichskaya Rudnya 1.0 km upstream the settlement Gaina Gaina 1.0 km upstream the settlement Iput Dobrush 0.5 km upstream the city(24.7 km from the Russian border) Iput Dobrush 1.7 km downstream the city Zhadunka Kostukovichi 0.5 upstream the city Zhadunka Kostukovichi 1.0 km downstream the city Loshitsa Minsk Plissa Zhodino 1.0 km upstream the city Plissa Zhodino 0.8 km downstream the city Porositsa Gorki 1.0 km upstream the city Porositsa Gorki 0.2 km downstream the city Pronya Gorki 2.5 km upstream the city Pronya Gorki 2.0 km downstream the city Pronya Letyagi 1.0 km to the west from settlement Svisloch Minsk within the boundaries of Drozdy Svisloch Minsk 0.5 km downstream the city, within the boundaries of Podlosye Svisloch Minsk 10.0 km downstream the city, within the boundaries of Korolishchevichi Svisloch Minsk Orlovskaya str. Svisloch Minsk Bogdanovicha str. Svisloch Minsk Oktyabrskaya str. Svisloch Minsk Aranskaya str. Svisloch Minsk Denisovskaya str. Svisloch Khmelevka 0.5 km upstream the settlement Svisloch Svisloch within the boundaries of the settlement Sozh Gomel 0.6 km upstream the city Sozh Gomel 13.7 km downstream the city Sozh Krichev 1.0 km upstream the city Sozh Krichev 4.0 km downstream the city Sozh Koskovo 1.0 km upstream the settlement (4.0 km from the Rus- sian border) Sozh Slavgorod 0.5 km upstream the city Sozh Slavgorod 8.0 km downstream the city Sushanka Susha 0.5 km upstream the settlement Teryukha Grabovka 2.0 km SW from the settlement Uza Gomel 5.0 km SW from the settlement Uza Gomel 10.0 km SW from the settlement Udoga Cherikov 3.2 km NW from the settlement. Tsna Lipki 1.0 km SW from the settlement

130

Table D.2 - List of groundwater monitoring stations in the upper Dnieper basin

Number of wells Location of the observa- № Name of the post subterranean artesian tion point total waters water 1 Vysokovsky Vitebsk region 4 2 2 2 Babinovsky Vitebsk region 1 1 0 3 Klukovsky Vitebsk region 2 2 0 4 Starokoitinsky Minsk region 3 1 2 5 Vasilyevsky Minsk region 4 2 2 6 Sverzhensky Gomel region 3 1 2 7 Iskrovsky Gomel region 4 3 1 8 Proskurinsky Gomel region 5 2 3 9 Antonovsky Gomel region 4 0 4 10 Mikhailovsky Gomel region 5 2 3 11 Khonovsky M region 9 7 2 12 Babichsky Gomel region 4 2 2 13 Grebnevsky Gomel region 5 3 2 14 Vasilevichsky Gomel region 1 0 1 15 Minsky Minsk region 5 2 3 16 Lipovsky I, II Vitebsk region 4 4 0 17 Zarubovshchinsky Vitebsk region 2 2 0 18 Berezinsky I, II Vitebsk region 7 5 2 19 Logoiskiy Minsk region 4 3 1 20 Yanushkovichsky Minsk region 3 3 0 21 Gorokhovsky Minsk region 4 2 2 Total: 83 49 34

ANNEX E RANGES OF CHEMICAL AND HYDROBIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS FOR THE GOOD WATER BODIES STATUS IN THE UPPER DNIEPER BASIN

Table E.1 - The ranges of hydrochemical data for watercourses related to good chemical status (class 2)

watercourses type Indicator/group performance 1,2 3 4 1 Gas composition 3 Dissolved oxygen, mgО2/dm 6.0 – 7.4 6.0 – 6.9 6.0 – 6.4 2 Hydrogen ions

Hydrogen parameter (pH), minimum 6.5 – 6.9 6.5 – 6.9 6.5 – 6.9 maximum 8.1 – 8.5 8.1 – 8.5 8.1 – 8.5 3 Organic substances Biochemical oxygen demand BOD5, 3 1.5-3.0 1.7 – 3.0 3.1 – 4.5 mgО2/dm 3 Dichromate oxidation, mgО2/dm 19.1 – 30.0 21.1 – 30.0 30.1 – 45.0 4 Nitrogen-containing substances Ammonium ion, mgN/dm3 0.31 – 0.39 0,31 - 0,39 0,40 - 0,59 Nitrite ion, mgN/dm3 0.015 – 0.024 0,017 - 0,024 0,025 - 0,038 Nitrate ion, mgN/dm3 1.1 – 3.0 2.1 – 4.0 3.1 – 5.0 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen, mg/dm3 1.3 – 5.0 1.4 – 5.0 5.1 – 7.5 5 Phosphorous-containing substances Phosphate ion (including hydro - and 0.067 - 0.099 0.067 - 0.099 0.067 - 0.099 dihydro forms) mgP/dm3 Total phosphorus, mg/dm3 0.11 - 0.20 0.12 - 0.20 0.21 - 0.30 6 Metals Copper, mg/dm3 0.0026 - 0.0040 0.0029 - 0.0043 0.0033 - 0.0045 Zinc, mg/dm3 0.009 - 0.012 0.011 - 0.014 0.013 - 0.016 Iron (total), mg/dm3 0.146 - 0.230 0.166 - 0.250 0.186 - 0.270 Manganese, mg/dm3 0.021 – 0.032 0.023 - 0.035 0.026 – 0.038 Nickel, mg/dm3 0.0051 – 0.01 0.0051 – 0.01 0.0101 – 0.015 Chrome (общий), mg/dm3 0.0021 – 0.005 0.0021 – 0.005 0.0051 – 0.0075 7 Contaminants Oil and oil products dissolved and emul- 0.017 – 0.050 0.018 – 0.050 0.051 – 0.075 sified state, mg/dm3 Synthetic anionic surfactants (including alkilok si ethylated -sulfates, alkylsul- fonates, olefinsulfonates, alkylbenzene 0.011 – 0.100 0.021 – 0.100 0.101 – 0.150 sulfonates, alkyl sulfates, sodium and potassium salts of fatty acids, mg/dm3

Note: Typing rivers/river sites is carried out on the watershed area A (km2): type 1 (small) - A <100; type 2 (medium small) - A range from 100 to 1000; type 3 (large and very large) - A> 1000.

Table E.2 - The ranges of physico-chemical parameters for good chemical (hydro-chemical) status of lake ecosystems

Lake type Indicator/group performance 1 2 3 1 Gas composition 3 Dissolved oxygen, mgО2/dm 6.0 - 7.4 6.0 - 7.4 6.0 - 7.4 2 Hydrogen ions Hydrogen parameter (pH), minimum 6.2 - 6.4 6.2 - 6.4 6.2 - 6.4 maximum 8.3 - 8.5 8.3 - 8.5 8.3 - 8.5 3 Physical properties parameter transparency, m 0.70 - 0.99 1.54 - 1.99 2.30 - 2.99

4 Organic substances Biochemical oxygen demand BOD5, 2.6 - 3.5 2.1 - 3.0 1.6 - 2.5 3 mgО2/dm 3 Dichromate oxidation, mgО2/dm 30.1 - 40.0 25.1 - 35.0 20.1 - 30.0 5 Nitrogen-containing substances Ammonium ion, mgN/dm3 0.32 - 0.47 0.28 - 0.39 0.21 - 0.32 Nitrite ion, mgN/dm3 0.020 - 0.029 0.018 - 0.024 0.013 - 0.019 Nitrate ion, mgN/dm3 3.6 - 6.5 2.1 - 5.0 0.6 - 3.5 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen, mg/dm3 1.3 - 4.7 0.9 - 1.9 0.5 - 1.8 6 Phosphorous-containing substances Phosphate ion (including hydro - and dihy- 0.054 - 0.079 0.047 - 0.066 0.031 - 0.053 dro forms) mgP/dm3 Total phosphorus, mg/dm3 0.17 - 0.24 0.15 - 0.20 0.11 - 0.16 7 Metals Copper, mg/dm3 0.0028 - 0.0041 0.0028 - 0.0041 0.0028 - 0.0041 Zinc, mg/dm3 0.009 - 0.012 0.009 - 0.012 0.009 - 0.012 Iron (total), mg/dm3 0.089 - 0.132 0.089 - 0.132 0.089 - 0.132 Manganese, mg/dm3 0.016 - 0.023 0.016 - 0.023 0.016 - 0.023 Nickel, mg/dm3 0.006 - 0.010 0.006 - 0.010 0.006 - 0.010 Chrome (общий), mg/dm3 0.0026-0.0050 0.0026 - 0.0050 0.0026 - 0.0050 8 Contaminants Oil and oil products dissolved and emulsi- 0.011 - 0.035 0.011 - 0.035 0.011 - 0.035 fied state, mg/dm3 Synthetic anionic surfactants (including 0.011 - 0.050 0.011 - 0.050 0.011 - 0.050 alkilok si ethylated -sulfates, alkylsul- fonates, olefinsulfonates, alkylbenzene sulfonates, alkyl sulfates, sodium and potassium salts of fatty acids, mg/dm3

Note: Typing lakes is carried out on the average depth H (m): Type 1 - H <3; Type 2 - H in the range from 3 to 9; Third type - H> 9.

133

Table E.3 - Range of hydrobiological indicators for good hydrobiological status of river ecosystems

Hydrobiological parameters Index small rivers/river sites Saprobity index (by phytoperiphyton) 1.61-1.85 Biotic index (by macrozoobenthos) 8-6 medium rivers/river sites Saprobity index (by phytoperiphyton) 1.66-1.90 Biotic index (by macrozoobenthos) 7-6 large and very large rivers/river sites Saprobity index (by phytoperiphyton) 1.76-1.95 Biotic index (by macrozoobenthos) 6-5

Table E.4 – Range of hydrobiological indicators for good hydrobiological status of lake ecosystems

Hydrobiological parameters Saprobity index 1 type by phytoplankton 1.81-2.16 by zooplankton 1.61-1.92 2 type by phytoplankton 1.71-2.04 by zooplankton 1.51-1.80 3 type by phytoplankton 1.61-1.92 by zooplankton 1.41-1.68

134 ANNEX F THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FACTORS OF SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER INFLUENCE ON THE SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE MAIN SECTORS OF THE ECONOMY

Table F.1 – Assessment of the significance of natural waters for the economic and social spheres

Assessment of the significance of Factors General description of the problems water for economic and social development*

Water intake in the region to the needs of industry is a Impact on production (in- significant share of the total consumption. Water re- cluding mining, manufac- 2 sources are the important, but not the limiting factor in the turing) placement of most industries, except for water-intensive.

Influence of water on the placement of industrial facilities and settlements is estimated as significant, but not critical. Influence for placing For HPP, TPP, other water-intensive industries the impact 2 of water resources is crucial. To accommodate settlements availability of water resources has less influence

The effect on the produc- Water consumption for energy needs is essential when tion of electricity (includ- using water as the heat transfer agent and coolant. Water ing hydropower, thermal resources determine impact on hydropower. However, the 2 energy production and nu- share of hydropower plants in the total energy production clear stations) is relatively small

Currently shipping is carried out on sections of the rivers Dnieper, Berezina, Sozh. Effect of water resources on Impact on shipping shipping is significant in terms of negative impact of arid- 2 ity watercourses due to which water transport is underde- veloped

Impact on the cost of drinking water is connected with the Impact on the cost of drink- quality and availability of groundwater (the cost of trans- 2 ing water port and treatment) and evaluated as significant

Water intake by forestry enterprises is relatively small in relation to total consumption, the impact of water avail- Forestry 1 ability on the productivity of forests is moderate due to very adequacy of moisture due to rainfall

*the relative importance of the influence in the basinby the four-point scale: 1 - the local level and of moderate intensity, 2 - the local level, a significant intensity, 3 - a regional level, but moderate intensity, 4 - a regional level, and a significant intensity Assessment of the significance of Factors General description of the problems water for economic and social development*

The significance of water influence on the soil quality and Effects on soil quality and agriculture is moderate. Influence is due to the use of wa- 1 agriculture ter in agricultural water supply, irrigation, fish in ponds

The significance for recreational water bodies is an average. State and quality of water in water bodies used for Recreation and tourism 1 recreational purposes, the state of the adjacent coastal zones are meaningful

The level of impact on infrastructure (networks, pipelines, Impact on infrastructure - roads, communications and other ) is a relatively small

136 ANNEX G GOVERNMENTAL AND SECTORAL PROGRAMS IN THE FIELD OF USE AND PROTECTION OF WATER RESOURCES

State programs 1. Water Strategy till 2020 years, approved by the decision of board of the Ministry of natural resources and environmental protection of the Republic of Belarus 11.08.2011 № 72-Р; 2. Programme of socio-economic development of city Minsk on 2011-2015, approved by the decision of Minsk city Soviet of Deputies from 23.12.2011 № 187; 3. Programme of socio-economic development of Mogilev oblast on 2011-2015, approved by the decision of Mogilev oblast Soviet of Deputies from 18.10.2011 № 11-1; 4. Programme of socio-economic development of Minsk oblast on 2011-2015, approved by the decision of Minsk oblast Soviet of Deputies from 10.06.2011 № 90; 5. Programme of socio-economic development of Gomel oblast on 2011-2015, approved by the decision of Gomel oblast Soviet of Deputies from 26.07.2011 № 111; 6. Programme of socio-economic development of the Republic of Belarus on 2011-2015, approved by Decree of President from 11.04.2011 . № 136; 7. State programme of water supply and sanitation "Clear Water" on 2011 – 2015, approved by Deci- sion of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 15.09.2011 № 1234.

Sectoral programs 1. Engineering water management measures to protect human settlements and agricultural land from flooding in most areas affected by flood events in the Polessje region on 2011 - 2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 06.09.2010 № 1280 2. Poultry farming development programme in the Republic of Belarus in 2011-2015 approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 28.09.2010 г. № 1395 3. State programme for the development of fisheries activities for 2011-2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 7.10.2010 № 1453 4. Republican program of reconstruction, technical re-equipment and construction of the industrialpig complexes in 2011-2015 approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Bela- rus from 5.09.2011 № 568 5. Republican program of development of the dairy industry in 2010-2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 12.11.2010 № 1678 6. Republican program for purebred breeding in livestock for 2011 - 2015 approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 31.12.2010 № 1917 7. State programme of development of the Belarusian energy system for the period till 2016, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 29.02.2012 № 194 8. The development strategy of the energy potential of the Republic of Belarus, approved by Deci- sion of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 09.08.2010 № 1180 9. State programme for the construction of hydroelectric power plants in 2011-2015 in the Republic of Belarus, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 17.12.2010 № 1838 10. State programme for the construction of energy sources on local fuels in 2010-2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 19.07.2010 № 1076 11. The state programme "Peat" for 2008-2010 and for the period up to 2020, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 23.01.2008 № 94 12. The programme of Forestry Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2011-2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 03.11. 2010 № 1626 13. The main directions of the state urban development policy of the Republic of Belarus for 2011- 2015, approved by Decree of President from 30.08.2011 № 385 14. The programme "Roads of Belarus" for 2006-2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 6.04.2006 № 468 15. The state programme for overcoming the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster for 2011-2015 and for the period up to 2020 approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 31.12.2010 № 1922 16. The State Programme for conservation and use of reclaimed lands in 2011-2015, approved by De- cision Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 31.08.2010 № 1262 17. The state Programme for Development of Railway Transport of the Republic of Belarus for 2011- 2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 20.12.2010 № 1851 18. The State Programme for the development of tourism in the Republic of Belarus for 2011-2015 approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 24.03.2011 № 373 19. The State programme for sustainable rural development for 2011-2015, approved by Decree of President from 01.08.2011 № 342 20. The state programme to ensure the functioning and development of the National Environmental Monitoring System in the Republic of Belarus for 2011-2015, approved by Decree of President from 13.06.2011 № 244 21. The programme of development of housing and communal services of the Republic of Belarus till 2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 08.02.2013 № 97 22. The programme of the industrial complex of the Republic of Belarus for the period up to 2020, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 05.07.2012 № 622 23. The programme of development of inland waterway and maritime transport of the Republic of Belarus for 2011 - 2015, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Bela- rus from 24.12.2010 № 1895 24. The state programme of measures to mitigate the effects of climate change for 2013-2020, approved by Decision of Council of Ministries of the Republic of Belarus from 21.06.2013 № 510

138 ANNEX H WATER BALANCES CALCULATIONS RESULTS26

Table H.1 – Calculated water balance per districts

The calculated level of development – 2012 Flow probability 95 %

The components District 1 District 2 of the water bal- limitative high-water limitative high-water year year ance period period period period Incoming part 2807.7 207.4 2024.4 3238.6 262.6 2292.2 Expenditure 460.1 138.9 138.7 2440.6 201.1 1723.6 Results of balance, В 2347.6 68.4 1885.7 798.0 61.4 573.6

The compo- District 3 District 4 nents of the wa- limitative high-water limitative high-water pe- year year ter balance period period period riod Incoming part 3685.0 289.5 2540.9 600.2 128.7 239.1 Expenditure 2670.3 214.0 1900.3 460.8 100.8 179.0 Results of balance, В 914.7 75.5 640.5 139.4 27.9 60.1

The components District 5 District 6 of the water bal- limitative high-water limitative high-water pe- year year ance period period period riod Incoming part 4496.1 449.8 3000.0 3866.7 604.8 1747.7 Expenditure part 3377.1 339.5 2249.7 2866.0 456.1 1291.2 Results of balance, В 1119.0 110.3 750.3 1000.7 148.7 456.5 The compo- District 7 District 8 nents of the wa- limitative high-water limitative high-water pe- year year ter balance period period period riod Incoming part 8179.1 981.9 4806.9 8231.1 986.2 4846.5 Expenditure part 5974.8 719.0 3494.5 6130.1 736.5 3602.3 Results of balance, В 2204.3 262.9 1312.4 2101.0 249.7 1244.2

26 While preparing this Annex the materials of the report "Development of Scheme of complex use and protection of watersfor river Dnieper basin (2013)”, CRICUWR- Minsk, 2013-2014 were used.

The components District 9 District 10 of the water bal- limitative high-water limitative high-water year year ance period period period period Incoming part 4401.0 591.2 2345.3 12916.51577.8 7466.6 Expenditure part 3319.0 450.8 1759.6 3557.4 838.4 837.8 Results of balance, В 1082.0 140.4 585.7 9358.6 739.4 6628.8

Table H.2 - Results of calculation of balance for years 75% and 95% probability by river flow in total of the Upper Dnieper in the Republic of Belarus

The components Year of 95 % probability Year of 75 % probability of the water bal- limitative high-water pe- limitative high-water year year ance period riod period period Incoming part 13570.4 1740.2 7605.9 15381 1940 9920 Expenditure part 4212.2 1001.2 976.7 4213 1002 977 Results of balance, В 9358.2 739.0 6629.2 11168 938 8943

140 ANNEX I PROGRAM OF MEASURES TO ACHIVE GOOD ECOLOGICAL STATUS OF WATER BODIES IN THE UPPER DNIEPER BASIN

Annex I.1 – Basic measures to achive good ecological status of water bodies

Year Measures 2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2021 2016 Arrangements for the application of the principle of cost recovery for water use Development of integrated environmental permits for enterprises The development of regulatory instruments, improved financial and economic mechanisms to encourage the introduction of BAT Development of the systems of state control and supervision of use and protection of waters The development of the regulatory framework of water resources and water consumption regulation Measures to promote efficient and sustainable water use Basin management organization for the use and protection of water Creating of basin Council Involvement of NGOs in basin council activitities Coordination and information exchange among involved environmental organizations of diferent administrative districts in the Dnieper river basin Formation of regional programs in the field of protection and usage of waters based upon the RBMP Publishing of the main thesis of the upper Dnieper RBMP at official sites of MNREP and local authorities Enhancement of statistical reports on 1-water form (Minprirody) Development of operation rules and landscaping of re- sevoirs Construction iron removal station Control of the management regime within the WP and CS The introduction of water conservation technologies Reducing water losses during transportation and usage in enterprises Reducing the consumption of drinking water for production enterprises Development of sectoral technological norms of water consumtion and water disposal for various industries Development (adjustment) of the individual technological standards for water consumption and wastewater removal for production enterprises Equipment metering of water consumption and wastewater removal for enterprises Equipment metering of water consumption of the population Organization of network for hydrological and hydro- Year Measures 2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2021 2016 morphological observation regime on water bodies Development of surveillance monitoring network of the state of water bodies and water systems Measures on development and implementation of basin GIS Detailed forecast of climate change for the basin Assessment of possible development of severe weather events on water bodies (spring floods and summer- autumn rain floods, drought periods) Identification of the flood prone territories, their clasifi- cation and mapping. Development of flood hazard maps and flood risk maps in accordance with Flood Directive 2007/60/EU Inventarisation of existing polders and drainage system- sin the basin, their efficiency and safety evaluation, impact assessment on the environment and development of recommendation on their reconstruction and improvement Development of flood early warning systems. Instala- tion of AHS at hydrological posts in the upper Dnieper basin Measures for the protection of drinking water sources Improvements to water pricing policy in order to avoid unnecessary use of potable water for the technological needs of the industrial enterprises Reduced water loss during transport from source to con- sumer Measures to control water abstraction and recharge of surface and groundwater Replacement of water and sewer pipelines and networks Construction of new water supply networks Development of scientific-methodical base for management and protection of water bodies Definition of flood zones and areas of underflooding, causing economic damage due to floods Measures to control point and diffuse sources of pollution Reconstruction of local treatment facilities The introduction of modern technologies for treatment of waste water from nutrients on objects Provision of wastewaters treatment in settlements with population over than 50 thousand people, resort and industrial zones Providing rainwater and melt water treatment in settlements with a population of over 50 thousands people, in resort and industrial areas Implementation of Best Agricultural Practice (BAP) in agriculture Regulation the use of areas potentially subject to flooding Correction of the projects of water protection zones and inshore bands with account of actual requirements of legislation Inventarisation of livestock facilities located within wa-

142 Year Measures 2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2021 2016 ter protection zones for the presence of watertight storage tanks, septic tanks, and other equipment providing prevention of environmental pollution Justification of livestock facilities placement with account of the topographic, hydrological and soil conditions Regulation of land use in riparian zones Evaluation of the effectiveness of the citywide sewage treatment plants and the development of recommendations to improve their efficiency Analysis of the status of temporary storage of snow in winter and issuing permits Measures to authorize direct discharges into groundwater Reduction of manual filtration fields with their subsequent rehabilitation with water discharges more than 200 m3/day Calculation of the optimal seizures groundwater for water supply of large settlements Management measures for priority substances Technical re-equipment of the monitoring network of surface and groundwater including installations of new automatized equipment Reconstruction of treatment facilities of galvanic production Implementation of obligations under international con- ventions Measures to control physical changes of surface water Accomplishment of an recreation areas on water bodies Development of a program to monitor hydrological and hydromorphological regimes of water bodies Identification of areas prone to flooding, their classification and mapping Assessment and forecast changes in runoff based on adaptation to climate change Design and development of basin GIS Capital bank protection works Ensuring the reliability of hydraulic structures Monitoring network and monitoring regime optimization to monitor the regime and quality of groundwater Measures to control any other actions that may affect the water status Development of state control and supervision systems over the use and protection of water bodies Enhancement of priciples of data formation and presentation in information resiurces of State Water Cadaster using GIS technologies. Development of technical legislation act in the field of maintain of rge State Water Ca- daster Ensuring the development and maintenance of the State Water Cadastre Forming and presentation of data on water resources and their usage in the Dnieper basin in water mange- ment sections

143 Year Measures 2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2021 2016 Publishing at the official sites of MNREP and State Wa- ter Cadester information on surface water bodies status in Dnieper basin Implementation the systems for informing and alerting public authorities, water users and the public Building energy sources operating on biogas Separate collection of MSW in rural settlements Eliminating of illegal MSW dumping Development of mathematical models of simulation Development and implementation of educational programs Public participation in the development and implementation of measures Development and enhancement of the systems of ecological education. Improvement of public participation in decision-making process and providing the access to justice in environmental matters Development of technical regulations on wastewater from the territory of private farms Vulnerability assessment of various types of water and other related natural resources and economic sectors to climate change Implementation of pilot projects on adaptation to climate change Measures to prevent accidental spills

144 Annex I.2 – Additional measures to achive good ecological status of water bodies

Svisloch (BY010812/03, BY010812/04)

Water body BY010812/03

Водный объект BY010812/04

Figure I.1 – Water bodies of the river Svisloch at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

145 Year Approximate Sources of Measures cost, 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 financing thousand Euros Improving the efficiency of wastewater 5000.0 State budget, treatment on phosphorus and nitrogen local budget, compounds with achievement of designed UE parameters on the output of MTP “Minskvodoka "Minskvodokanal" nal” Implementation of the system of automatic 180.0 Local budget, control of activated sludge concentration UE and load on the activated sludge on organic “Minskvodoka compounds on MTP "Minskvodokanal" nal”»

Introduction of modern technologies for 4500.0 State budget, waste sludge utilization on MTP local budget, "Minskvodokanal" RUE “Minskvodoka nal”» Development of integrated environ- 5,0/pernission Waterusers mental permits for enterprises: (total is 350.0) - in Minsk - 18 enterprises - in the Minsk region (within the basin) - 55 enterprises - in the Mogilev region (within the basin) - 5 enterprises The introduction of modern technologies 1000.0 JSK for treatment of waste water from sus- «Keramin» pended solids at SC "Keramin" Reconstruction of wastewaters treatment 890.0 JSK «BelOMA facilities of galvanic department at JSK - MMW after «BelOMA - MMW after S.I. Vavilov» S.I. Vavilov» Modernization of biological wastewater 600.0 RUE «Beltele- treatment facilities in "Beltelecom" well- com» ness center "Zagorje" Implementation of the systems for ponds 1000.0 Fish farms ozonation in fish farms "Volma", "Svis- «Volma», loch" «Svisloch» Implementation of modern technologies 1800.0 Local budget, of nutrients wastewaters treatment at Osi- Osipovichi povichi UCE “Vodocanal” UCE “Vodo- canal” Reconstruction of wastewater treatment 1500.0 Local budget facilities of city Cherven, RUE “Cherven- skoe HUS” Reconstruction of the sewage system of the 950.0 Local budget Smilovichi settlement, including design and survey works Reconstruction of wastewaters treatment 600.0 Local budget facilities in Druzhny settlement including design and survey works Development of methods and conditions of 120.0 Local budget, removal surface wastewater from residen- Enterprises of tial areas: Ossipovichy; - Puhovichy HUS of Puk- hovichi and Osipovichi Development of rainwater drainage 250.0 Local budget, schemes in Minsk considering its possible UE ”Gorrem- decentralization livnestok" Complete renovation of surface wastewa- 1000.0 Local budget, ters treatment facilities from Loshitsa resi- UE "Gorrem- dential district livnestok" Overhaul of rain wastewater treatment 600.0 Local budget,

146 facilities in the neighborhood "Loshitsa" UE "Gorrem- livnestok"" Centralized collection and treatment of 1000.0 Local budget, surface runoff from the territory of SEZ UE "Gorrem- "Minsk" livnestok" Conducting research on the development of 250.0 Local budget measures to reduce the impact on groundwater and surface water for the waste ac- ceptance landfill "Prudische" to reduce the removal of pollutants from the watershed of the Sennitsa river Purification of the Osipovichi reservoir 1500.0 Local budget from bottom sediments Water transfer from Vilia through Vileika- 900.0/год Local budget, Minsk water system (VMWS) to Svisloch UE for irrigation of Minsk in the amount of not “Minskvodoka less than 63.072 million m3/year or 2.0 m3/s nal” to maintain the ecological functioning of water bodies VMWS, water ring Minsk and waterworks Development of recommendations on the 80.0 State budget use of small rivers within the city of Minsk Development of Program for conducting 80.0 State budget hydromorphological monitoring of Osi- povichy reservoir and the quality of its bottom sediments Conducting hydromorphological monitor- 70.0 State budget ing of Osipovichy reservoir and the quality of its bottom sediments Development of standards for scientific 150.0 Local budget, substantiation of discharging industrial waterusers wastewater into municipal economic - fecal sewer in Minsk Development of measures to control water 150.0 State budget, abstraction and recharge of surface and local budget groundwater in the groundwater body Dnieper-Sozh and Proterozoic sediments in the Minsk City agglomeration area, to prevent contamination

147 Plissa (BY010805/01, BY010805/02)

Water body BY010805/01

Water body BY010805/02

Figure I.2 – Water bodies of the river Plissa at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

148 Year Approximate cost, Sources of Measures 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 thousand financing Euros Improving the efficiency of wastewater 350.0 JSC treatment plants on the poultry farm of "Smolevichy "Smolevichy Broiler", with the introduction broiler" of treatment from compounds of phosphorus and nitrogen. Development of design documentation, reconstruction Development of scientific basis of water use 20.0 RUE "Min- regulations for Zhodinskaya CHP, assess- skenergo" ment of wastewater discharge impact on water bodies, proposals of measures to reduce the discharge of pollutants from wastewater Modernization of sewage system of 900.0 RUE "Min- Zhodino TPP to increase the productivity skenergo"", of wastewaters treatment local budget

Reconstruction of Smolivichy city waste- 1200.0 Local budget waters treatment facilities to implement phosphorus and nitrogen treatment Project development and implementation of 100.0 Local measures to restore coastal strips along riv- budget, wa- ers Plissa and Chernitsa in Smolevichy loca- terusers tion Evaluation of the removal of nutrients from 180.0 Local agricultural land with the drainage reclama- budget, wa- tion system. Development of design docu- terusers mentation and construction of facilities to reduce nutrient loss from reclamation systems Evaluation of nutrient inputs to water 60.0 Local budget from tributaries, including the river Chernitsa. Evaluating the effectiveness of wastewater treatment, including nutrient removal at wastewater treatment plants in Smolevichy with wastewater removalto the river Cher- nitsa Development of scientific substantiation of 120.0 JSC "BE- measures on reconstruction treatment facili- LAZ" ties of surface wastewater "BELAZ" (managing company "BELAZ-Holding", Zhodino). Measures to maintain the technical state of sewage treatment plants. Purifi- cation ponds from biological sludge Assessment of the impact of Zhodino 37.0 State budget, reservoir on water quality of the river local budget Plissa. Assessment of the volume of deposits in the reservoir and the concentrations of the pollutants.

149 Berezina (BY0108/04, BY0108/05)

Water body BY0108/04 Water body BY0108/05

Figure I.3 – Water bodies of the river Berezina at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

Year Approxi- mate cost, Sources of Measures 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 thousand financing Euros Reconstruction of treatment facilities of the 1560.0 State budget, Unitary Enterprise "Borisovvodokanal" with local budget, the introduction of technologies for removal SE “Borisov- phosphorus and nitrogen, sludge treatment vodokanal” Reconstruction of sewage system 3d phase 800.0 Local budget, “Construction of the second line of the SE “Borisov- main sewage from collector #1 to wastewa- vodokanal”" ters treatment facility – 3.266 km; 2d phase “Reconstruction of 2 main sewage with a diameter of 500 mm from collctor #2 to wastewaters treatment facility – 12.138 km; 1st phase “Reconstruction of sewage pumping station #9 in Borisov – 0.336 km in Borisov Comstruction of wastewaters teratment 1300.0 Local budget, facilities for Loshnitsa filial of OJSC “Bo- OJSC “Borisov risov meat processing plant” (pig farm per meat processing

150 100 000 heads), sewage collector with di- plant” ameter of 200 mm, length – 500 m, and capacity of 3840 m3/day Identification of livestock facilities in the 40.0 Local budget catchment area with more than 200 animals, evaluation of equipment facilities for storage and processing of manure and their impact on groundwater and surface water Evaluation of the removal of pollutants 20.0 RUE “Min- from sewage DEU-6 RUE "Minskavtodor skavtodorcen- center" analysis of the sources of their for- ter” mation Development of scientific substantiation of 25.0 RUE “Min- measures to reduce the discharge of pollut- skavtodorcen- ants from sewage and industrial base facili- ter” ties serving affiliate Daewoo-6 RUE "Min- skavtodor center" Reconstruction of Bereza city wastewaters 1200.0 Local budget treatment facility including design and survey works Reconstruction of treatment facilities of the 230.0 Local budget, Belarusian-Austrian plant "Glassworks CJSIC "Glass Elizovo'and workers' settlements Elizovo factory Elizovo with an increase in the degree of purification " of ammonia nitrogen Assessment of the water balance of the plant 30.0 CJSIC "Glass "Glassworks Elizovo" with analysis of sew- factory age sources and their characteristics. Devel- Elizovo” opment of scientific substantiation of measures to reduce contaminants in the wastewater discharged Development of scientific substantiation of 60.0 JSC "FanDOK” measures to reduce the discharge of pollutants with surface wastewater of the "Fan- DOK" production base. Elaboration of design documentation Development of measures to ensure the 20.0 Local budget detention regime of the coastal strip and the water protection zone of the riverDneprets Evaluation of sources that releasepollutants 25.0 Local budget, with surface wastewater in the basin sewer- Bobruisk mu- age Bobruisk subsidiary unitary municipal nicipal unitary road operational enterprise. The develop- subsidiary road ment of measures to reduce contaminants in operation en- surface wastewaters terprise Development of scientific substantiation of 30.0 Local budget, measures to reduce the discharge of pollut- Bobruisk mu- ants to surface waters from sewage facilities nicipal unitary operated by Bobruisk unitary utility subsidi- subsidiary road ary of road maintenance companies operation enterprise Development of measures to ensure the 20.0 Local budget, detention regime of the coastal strip and the waterusers water protection zone of the river Bobruyka Development of measures to restore the 100.0 Local budget, coastal strips and ensure the regime in ripar- waterusers, ian zones of the Berezina tributaries at the landusers of site lands inside water protection zones and enshore bands. Reconstruction of treatment facilities Bo- 2000.0 State budget,

151 bruisk unitary communal production sub- local budget, sidiaries "Waterchannel", with the introduc- Bobruisk mu- tion of treatment from compounds of phos- nicipal unitary phorus and nitrogen and anaerobic sludge subsidiary en- treatment terprise “Vodokanal” Construction of watertight dam around 200.0 Local budget, sludge beds of Bobruisk UMSPE Bobruisk mu- “Vodokanal” in “Gnedovye gory” nicipal unitary subsidiary enterprise “Vodokanal” Development of scientific substantiation of 18.0 UAUE “Svet- measures to reduce the discharge of pollut- logorsk vegeta- ants from sewage of "Svetlogorsk vegetable ble factory” factory" Development of scientific substantiation of 30.0 RUE measures to reduce the discharge of pollut- “Gomelenergo” ants from sewage "Svetlogorsk CHP" Assessment of the water balance of the 30.0 RUE enterprise "Svetlogorskaya CHP" with “Gomelenergo analysis of sources of sewage and their characteristics. Development of scientific substantiation of measures to reduce contaminants in the wastewater discharged Reconstruction of water treatment facilities 450.0 State budget, "Svetlogorskhimvolokno" with the introduc- local budget, tion of treatment from compounds of phos- OJSC “Svetlo- phorus and nitrogen and anaerobic sludge gorskKhimvo- treatment lokno” Construction of surface wastewater treat- 2500.0 State budget, ment facilitiy in Svetlogorsk local budget

152 Uza (BY011015) Water body BY011015

Figure I.4 – Water bodies of the river Uza at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution) Year Approximate cost, Sources of Measures 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 thousand financing Euros Development of scientific substantiation of 30.0 JSC “Gomel- measures to reduce the discharge of pollutants glass” of "Gomelsteklo" Development of measures to ensure the deten- 35.0 Local budget, tion regime coastal strips and ensure the re- landusers of gime in riparian zones of the Uza river and its lands inside tributaries in the catchment area water protection zones and enshore bands, waterusers Identification and assessment of pollution 15.0 Local budget sources in the basin Development of scientific substantiation of 15.0 JSC “Gomel- measures to reduce the discharge of pollut- glass” ants with surface sewage of "Gomelsteklo" Assessment of the water balance of the 60.0 JSC “Gomel "Gomel Chemical Plant" with analysis of Chemical sources of sewage and their characteristics. Plant”” Development of scientific substantiation of measures to reduce contaminants in the wastewater discharged Development of measures to restore the 60.0 JSC “Gomel coastal strips and ensure the regime of eco- Chemical nomic activities in riparian zones of the Sozh Plant” and Uza tributaries Reconstruction of treatment facilities Unitary 3500.0 State budget, Enterprise "Gomelvodokanal" with the intro- local budget, duction of treatment from compounds of UE “Gomel- phosphorus and nitrogen and anaerobic sludge vodokanal” treatment

153 Zhadunka (BY01101301/02), Dobysna (BY0107), Udoga (BY011006), Gaina (BY010803/01), Adrov (BY0103)

Water body BY01101301/02 Figure I.5 – Water bodies of the river Zhadunka at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

Water body BY0107 Figure I.6 – Water bodies of the river Dobysna at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

154 BY011006 Figure I.7 – Water bodies of theUdoga river at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

BY010803/01

Figure I.8 – Water bodies of the river Gaina at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

155 BY0103 Figure I.9 – Water bodies of the river Adrov at risk (highlighted by shading non point / diffuse sources of pollution)

Year Approximate cost, Sources of Measures 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 thousand financing Euros Reconstruction of wastewater treatment 350.0 State budget. plant Kostyukovichi "Waterchannel" Local budget. Kostyukovichi "Waterchannel" Development of measures to restore the 30.0 Local budget. coastal strips and ensure the regime of Land users economic activities in riparian zones oft- within the riparian heBesyadandZhadunka tributaries strips and water protection zones. Water users resources Reconstruction of treatment facilities 180.0 State budget. Krasnoberezhskoe affiliate "Gomel fat Local budget. factory" with increased removal efficiency of ammonium compounds Development of measures to restore the 20.0 Local budget. coastal strips and ensure the regime of Land users economic activities in riparian zones of the within the riparian Udogatributaries strips and water protection zones. Water users resources Reconstruction of Wastewater Treatment 1000.0 State budget. Plant "Logoiskkomhoz". The organization Land users. of production control over wastewater RUE "Logoiski treatment in the plant komhoz" Reconstruction of Logoisk sewerage sys- 890.0 State budget. tem, including design and survey works Land users. and reconstruction of collector on the Karl RUE "Logoiski Liebknecht street komhoz" Reconstruction of Wastewater Treatment 2000.0 State budget. Plant "Orshavodokanal" Local budget. SE "Or- shavodokanal"

156 Annex I.3 – Additional measures to support good ecological status of water bodies

Years The approximate Financing Activity 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 cost, thou- sources sand euros Reconstruction of treatment facilities 300.0 «Children's sana- «Children's sanatorium «Svisloch» torium «Svis- loch» Reconstruction of treatment facilities in 480.0 State budget. Maryina Gorka (UE "Zhilteploservis" Local budget Pukhovichi district) UE "Zhilteplos- ervis" Construction of local treatment facilities 200.0 JSC "Mash- of JSC "Mashpischeprod" Pukhovichi pischeprod" district Reconstruction of sewerage system of 600.0 State budget. Vishnevka, including design and survey Local budget. work Reconstruction of sewerage system of 550.0 State budget. Novoe Pole, including design and survey Local budget. work Reconstruction of treatment facilities of 550.0 State budget. Yusufovo, including design and survey Local budget. work Reconstruction of treatment facilities of 850.0 State budget. Cherven RUE "Chervensky Housing and Local budget. utilities" Reconstruction of treatment facilities of 900.0 State budget. Chechersk Local budget.

Reconstruction of treatment facilities of 850.0 State budget. Merkulovichi, Botvinovo, Belyaevka – Local budget. Chechersk district Reconstruction of pressure collector 200.0 State budget. branch from KNS №3 to treatment facili- Local budget. ties of Parichi Svetlahorsk district Reconstruction of treatment facilities of 800.0 State budget. Rogachev Local budget. UE «Rogachev»

Construction of sewage treatment plants, 320.0 State budget. sewage systems of Belyatsky Rogachev Local budget. district UE «Rogachev»

Reconstruction of collector on the Dvod- 470.0 State budget. nenko street in the amount of 820 m, 600 Local budget. mm in diameter; reconstruction of pressure collector on the Dvodnenko street (from KNS-7 to Sydko street) of 1,200 m (2 lines), with a diameter of 300 mm; reconstruction of collector on Molodezhnaya street with replacement cameras in the amount of 900 m, 800 mm in diameter; reconstruction of sewage network at Pushkin street in the amount of 500 m, 200 mm in diameter in Rechitsa Reconstruction of existing treatment fa- 1150.0 State budget. cilities for the power of 35,000 m3/ day Local budget. with the technology of deep removal of UE «Unikom» nitrogen and phosphorus – Zhlobin Reconstruction of the sewage treatment 580.0 State budget. plants: Local budget Dobrush district - Terekhovka, Barshchovka, Usoha - Budag Modernization of treatment facilities Zy- 350.0 State budget. abrovka Gomel district Local budget Modernization of treatment facilities 750.0 State budget. Buda-Koshelevo Local budget Modernization of treatment facilities 850.0 State budget. Vetka Local budget Modernization of treatment facilities Kho- 400.0 State budget. iniki UE "Khoiniki kommunalnik Local budget Reconstruction of water treatment facili- 380.0 State budget. ties, Loev UE "Loevsky rayzhilkomhoz" Local budget Reconstruction of water supply network 250.0 State budget. 2.6 km Rogachev district Local budget Reconstruction of sewage networks and 850.0 State budget. facilities Local budget in Shklove Shklov UE "Zhilkomhoz" (re- Shklov UE construction of artificial biological treat- "Zhilkomhoz" ment facilities) Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 850.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Slavgorode Local budget Construction of the main sewage collector 1000.0 Loans from in- in Mogilev ternational financial organizations Local budget Reconstruction of biological treatment 500.0 State budget. facilities of Kokhanovo Tolochin district Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 400.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Dokshitsy Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 250.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Baran Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 350.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Orekhovsk Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Bolbasovo Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Yurtsevo Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Obukhovo Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Kopys, Zaslonovka Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 1100.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Cherikov Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 1400.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Bykhov Local budget UE «Bykhov watercanal» Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 1300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Mstislavl Local budget Mstislavl UE «Watercanal» Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 1600.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Krichev Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Dashkovka Local budget Reconstruction of networks and wastewa- 300.0 State budget. ter treatment plants in Soltanovka Local budget Dredging and channel straightening work 1200.0 The Ministry of on inland waterways in the basin of the transport and

158 Berezina and Sozh communications Development of hydrographic charts indi- 150.0 State budget. cating hydromorphological type of river International channels and the channel process with projects dedicated areas of natural strains banks of The Ministry of water bodies transport and communications Repair and restoration of the design char- 1500.0 Local budget acteristics of existing hydrotechnical fa- Enterprise re- cilities sources Restoration of the waterway between 600.0 State budget. Bykhov and Rogachev, 90 km International projects The Ministry of transport and communications Development of measures to control water 150.0 State budget. abstraction and recharge of surface and ground water bodies in the Dnieper-Sozh and Proterozoic sediments near Minsk urban area to prevent their contamination Revaluation of groundwater reserves 50.0 State budget.

159