Environmental Impact Assessment Report
April 2020
UZB: Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Corridor 2 Road Investment Program – Karakalpakstan Road Project (A380 Kungrad to Daut-
Ata Section – 240 km)
Environmental Impact Assessment Report Project Number: 48414-006 2019 Road Investment Program– Karakalpakstan Road Project (A-380 Kungrad to Daut-Ata Section (Km. 964 to km1,204)) and the Design, Supply and Installation of Weigh-in-Motion Systems
Prepared by Project Management Unit of the Committee for Roads under the Ministry of Transport for the Asian Development Bank.
This environmental impact assessment is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. Your attention is directed to the “terms of use” section on ADB’s website.
In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
ABBREVIATIONS
ADB Asian Development Bank AP Affected Person CAREC Central Asian Regional Economic Cooperation CSC Construction Supervision Contractor dBA Decibel EA Executing Agency EARF Environmental Assessment Review Framework EMP Environmental Management Plan EMoP Environmental Monitoring Plan ES Environment Specialist ESO Environment Safety Officer GOST a set of technical standards maintained by the Euro-Asian Council for Standardization, Metrology and Certification (EASC), a regional standards organization operating under the auspices of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) GoUz Government of Uzbekistan GRC Grievance Redress Committees GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism Hokimiyat Town Mayor Office IEE Initial Environmental Examination km Kilometer LARP Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plan Leq Energy-averaged sound level commonly used to describe traffic noise MFF Multi-tranche Financing Facility NGO Non-governmental organizations PIEE Preliminary Initial Environmental Examination PMU Project Management Unit RoW Right of Way RUz Republic of Uzbekistan RRF The Republican Road Fund (the Road Fund) TPM Total Particular Matter TSS Transport Sector Strategy SEMP Site Environmental Management Plan ShNK Construction norms of Uzbekistan SNPC State Nature Protection Committee SEE State Ecological Expertise SPS Safeguard Policy Statement
2 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Contents
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 11 A.1 Project Description ...... 11 A.2 Environmental Policy, Legal and Institutional ...... 12 A.3 Description of the Environment ...... 12 A.3.1 Physical ...... 12 A.3.2 Ecological Resources ...... 13 A.3.3 Socio-Economic ...... 14 A.4 Impact Assessment and Mitigation ...... 14 A.4.1 Physical Environment ...... 14 A.4.2 Biological Environment and Biodiversity ...... 16 A.4.3 Offsets and Additional Conservation Outcomes ...... 18 A.4.4 Socio-economic ...... 20 A.4.5 Information Disclosure, Consultation, and participation...... 20 A.4.6 Grievance and Redress Mechanism ...... 21 A.4.7 Environmental Management Plan ...... 21 B. INTRODUCTION ...... 23 B.1 CAREC Corridor 2 Road Investment Program II ...... 23 B.2 Karakalpakstan Road Project from km 964 to km 1,204 and the Design, Supply and Installation of Weigh-in-Motion Systems ...... 24 B.3 Environment Category and Scope of the EIA Study ...... 26 B.4 EIA Objectives ...... 26 B.5 Project’s Area of Influence ...... 27 B.6 Study Approach and Methodology ...... 27 B.6.1 Reconnaissance Survey and Initial Consultations ...... 28 B.6.2 Impact Screening ...... 28 B.6.3 Primary Data Collection ...... 28 B.6.4 Secondary Data Collection ...... 28 B.6.5 Public Consultations ...... 29 B.6.6 Other Tools, Additional Surveys and Studies ...... 29 B.6.7 Assessment of Potential Impacts ...... 29 B.6.8 Preparation of the Environment Management Plan ...... 29 C. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ...... 30 C.1 Introduction ...... 30 C.2 Existing Karakalpakstan Project Road Condition ...... 32 C.2.1 Pavement ...... 32 C.2.2 Culverts ...... 33 C.2.3 Traffic Count ...... 33 C.3 Proposed Rehabilitation and Upgrading of Karakalpastan Project Road ...... 34 C.3.1 Pavement ...... 34 C.3.2 Culverts ...... 35 C.3.3 Road Design ...... 35 C.3.4 Cross Section Parameters ...... 36 C.3.5 Road Safety ...... 36 C.3.6 Earthworks ...... 37 C.3.7 Sources of Construction Material Sources ...... 37 C.3.8 Construction Equipment Requirement ...... 38 C.3.9 Construction Camps ...... 39 C.3.10 Storage Areas ...... 39 C.4 Projected Traffic ...... 39 C.5 Supply, Installation and Operation of WIM System ...... 40 D. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK...... 44
3 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
D.1 International Environmental Policy ...... 44 D.2 ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement ...... 44 D.3 Country Environmental Policies, Laws, Regulations and Administrative Framework ...... 45 D.3.1 Citizen’s Constitutional Rights and Responsibilities ...... 45 D.3.2 Overall legal framework ...... 45 D.3.3 Relevant Natural Resource and Environmental Management Laws...... 45 D.3.4 Republic of Uzbekistan National Red Data Book ...... 47 D.3.5 Air, Water, Noise and Waste Standards and Regulations ...... 47 D.4 Environmental Impact Assessment ...... 51 D.5 Administrative Framework ...... 52 E. DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ...... 53 E.1 Physical Environment ...... 53 E.1.1 Climate and Meteorology ...... 53 E.2 Ecological Resources (baseline) ...... 63 E.2.1 Introduction ...... 63 E.2.2 Protected and Designated Areas ...... 64 E.2.3 Natural and Modified Habitat ...... 67 E.2.4 Project Natural and Modified Habitat ...... 67 E.2.5 Natural Habitat Losses ...... 69 E.2.6 Studies and sources of information on Ustyurt fauna ...... 70 E.2.7 Experts Involved ...... 70 E.2.8 Biodiversity Screening ...... 70 E.2.9 Review of Other Secondary Data ...... 71 E.2.10 Additional Consultations ...... 71 E.2.11 Fauna and Flora of the Project Area ...... 72 E.2.12 The Ustyurt Saiga Antelope ...... 81 E.3 Economic Development ...... 81 E.3.1 Industries & Agriculture ...... 81 E.3.2 Infrastructure and Transportation facilities ...... 82 E.3.3 Waste Management ...... 82 E.3.4 Water Supply and Sewerage ...... 82 E.3.5 Economic activities along the Project Road ...... 82 E.4 Social and Cultural Resources ...... 84 E.4.1 Socio-economic conditions ...... 84 E.4.2 Road Users ...... 85 E.4.3 Ethnicity ...... 85 F. CRITICAL HABITAT ...... 86 F.1 Overview ...... 86 F.2 Project Critical Habitat Assessment ...... 87 G. ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 89 A. Identification and Assessment of Environmental Impacts ...... 90 G.1 Impacts on the Physical Environment ...... 101 G.1.1 Geology and Soils ...... 101 G.1.2 Air Pollution – Road and Fugitive Dust from Construction ...... 103 G.1.3 Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 114 G.1.4 Disruption of local water supply ...... 115 G.1.5 Generation of hazardous and toxic substances ...... 115 G.1.6 Waste from Cut and Fill ...... 116 G.1.7 Run-off and Spills ...... 118 G.1.8 Noise Impact ...... 119 G.1.9 Assessment WIMs Construction Noise ...... 129 G.1.10 Road Traffic/Operational Noise ...... 132 G.1.11 Vibration ...... 138 G.1.12 Utilities ...... 141
4 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.1.13 Disruption of Traffic ...... 142 G.1.14 Decommissioning Work Sites ...... 142 G.2 Impacts on the Biological Environment ...... 143 G.2.1 Background ...... 143 G.2.2 Study Area and Approach to Ecological Impact Assessment ...... 144 G.2.3 Ecological Impact Assessment and Mitigation Overview ...... 147 G.2.4 Generic Ecological Impacts ...... 148 G.2.5 Specific Impacts and Mitigation ...... 148 G.2.6 Impacts on Protected/Designated Areas ...... 157 G.2.7 Impacts on Habitats and Flora ...... 157 G.2.8 Restoration Methodology ...... 159 G.2.9 Impacts on mammals...... 160 G.2.10 Impacts to Saiga and Critical Habitat ...... 161 G.2.11 Impacts to Birds ...... 169 G.2.12 Impacts to Reptiles ...... 170 G.2.13 Invasive Species ...... 170 G.2.14 Cumulative Impacts and Induced Impacts ...... 170 G.2.15 Residual Impacts ...... 171 G.2.16 Project Commitments ...... 171 G.2.17 Project Implementation ...... 172 G.3 Impacts on the Socio-economic Environment ...... 173 G.3.1 Population ...... 173 G.3.2 Public and workers’ health and safety ...... 173 G.3.3 Visual Impact ...... 176 H. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE ...... 178 I. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE, CONSULTATION, AND PARTICIPATION ...... 182 I.1.1 Public Consultations ...... 182 I.1.2 Use of Consultation Results and Information Disclosure ...... 185 I.1.3 Grievance Redress Mechanism ...... 185 I.1.4 ADB Accountability Mechanism ...... 187 J. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 188 J.1 Bid and Contract Documents ...... 188 J.2 Monitoring and Supervision ...... 189 J.3 Institutional Setting to Implement the Environmental Safeguards ...... 189 J.4 PMU Environmental Counterpart ...... 191 J.5 Environmental Management Plan ...... 192 K. BIODIVERSITY MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN (BMEP) ...... 220 K.1 Objective ...... 220 K.2 Risk Baseline Surveys ...... 220 K.3 Monitoring Baseline Surveys ...... 220 K.4 Further Monitoring Proposals...... 221 L. FRAMEWORK BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN ...... 231 L.1 Biodiversity Indicators ...... 231 L.2 Indicative Schedule ...... 231 L.3 Indicative Budget ...... 232 L.4 Responsibilities for BAP Implementation ...... 232 L.5 EMP, BMEP, BAP Implementation Costs ...... 233 L.6 Implementation Arrangements ...... 233 L.6.1 Institutional Arrangement ...... 233 L.7 Resource Allocation ...... 235 L.8 Reporting ...... 236 M. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 236
5 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Tables Table 1: Proposed Locations and Types of WIM System ...... 25 Table 2: Project Categorization ...... 26 Table 3: Project influence area for the EIA ...... 27 Table 4: Pavement condition of 2 Stretches in Karakalpakstan Road Project ...... 33 Table 5: Summary of Traffic Counts ...... 34 Table 6: Proposed Pipe Culvert Details with 1.25m diameter ...... 35 Table 7: Main design parameters for Category II Road ...... 36 Table 8: Indicative Construction Equipment ...... 38 Table 9: Traffic Projection Growth Rates (%) ...... 39 Table 10: Proposed Locations and Types of WIM System ...... 40 Table 11: Applicable Ambient Air Quality Standards and Guide Values ...... 48 Table 12. Maximum Allowable Concentrations to Water ...... 49 Table 13: Noise Limits from SanPiN No. 0267-09& IFC EHS Guidelines ...... 49 Table 14: Comparison between recorded ambient and applicable standards for dust and noise, March 2019 ...... 59 Table 15: Estimated Natural Habitat losses ...... 69 Table 16: National and international experts involved ...... 70 Table 17: Additional consultations ...... 71 Table 18: Summary of fauna and flora screening results ...... 72 Table 19: Threatened species from biodiversity screening ...... 73 Table 20: Threatened mammals potentially or historically present ...... 75 Table 21: Threatened birds potentially or historically present ...... 78 Table 22: Other (non-threatened) birds potentially present ...... 79 Table 23: Threatened reptiles potentially present ...... 80 Table 24: Other (non-threatened) reptiles potentially present ...... 80 Table 25: Critical habitat determination summary ...... 87 Table 26: Critical habitat assessment summary ...... 88 Table 27: Multi-Criteria Analysis to Determine the Significance of Potential Environmental Impacts ...... 91 Table 28: Grid Displaying the Interaction between Valued Environmental Receptors (VERs) and A-380 Road Improvement Activities ...... 92 Table 29: Summary of Analysis of Environmental Impacts ...... 93 Table 30: Mitigation measures – for minimizing impact on geology and soils during road construction ...... 101 Table 31: Mitigation measures – for minimizing impact on geology and soils during WIM construction ...... 102 Table 32: Location of Structures Outside the Right of Way at Risk from Dust Impacts due to Construction ...... 104 Table 33: Mitigation measures – for minimizing dust impact during construction ...... 108 Table 34: Mitigation Measures – for minimizing Emissions ...... 109 Table 35: Emission factors used in estimating emission from the A-380 operation, in g/mile ...... 110 Table 36: Estimated total emissions from the vehicles, in g/year, 2018 ...... 110 Table 37: Estimated total emissions from the vehicles, in g/year, 2023 ...... 110 Table 38: Estimated total emissions from the vehicles, in g/year, 2028 ...... 111 Table 39: Predicted maximum air pollutant concentration from vehicular emission vs applicable ambient air quality standards ...... 111 Table 40: Estimated Running Exhaust Emission of Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks under Different Test Cycles, g/mi...... 112 Table 41: Estimated Idling Emission of Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks under Different Test Cycles, g/mi ...... 112 Table 42: Test Cycles Used in Dynamometer Testing of Heavy-Duty Trucks ...... 113
6 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 43: Estimated Reduction from a Single Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck With the WIMS, in g ...... 113 Table 44: Estimated heavy truck emission reduction with the WIMs over a 1.6km stretch, in g/day ...... 114 Table 45: Greenhouse Gas Emission Intensity Indicators ...... 114 Table 46: Solid and Liquid Wastes Disposal Mitigation Measures ...... 116 Table 47: Inventory of Construction Equipment to be Used and Noise Rating ...... 124 Table 48: Predicted noise level at the Hotel Façade Wall ...... 128 Table 49: Operational Noise Assessment Vehicular Traffic and Speed Assumptions (PCC Pavement)...... 132 Table 50: Summary of Operation Noise Assessment ...... 133 Table 51: Predicted Vibration Levels of the Structures and Villages Along the Project Road, in PPV (in/sec) ...... 140 Table 52: Human Response to Transient Vibration ...... 141 Table 53: Mitigation on Utility Shifting ...... 141 Table 54: Potential impacts to ecology and their AoI ...... 144 Table 55: Definitions of extent of impact based on IUCN conservation status assessment methodology ...... 146 Table 56: Applied Mitigation Hierarchy ...... 148 Table 57: Generic Construction Ecological Impacts and Mitigation ...... 150 Table 58: Generic Operation Impacts and Mitigation ...... 154 Table 59: A summary of post-construction habitat restoration/ offsetting ...... 158 Table 60: Specific Measures for Sensitive Habitats ...... 159 Table 61: Mitigation Measures for Mammals during Design and Construction Phase...... 161 Table 62: Traffic Projection Growth Rates (%) ...... 163 Table 63: Project road Saiga crossing points ...... 166 Table 64: Side-by-Side Comparison of IFC Guidance Note Requirements and Proposed Project Assessment ...... 172 Table 65: Mitigation Measures – Construction Workers ...... 174 Table 66: Summary of Alternative Analysis ...... 179 Table 67: Summary of Consultation Outcome ...... 183 Table 68: The Environmental management Plan for the A380 Karakalpakstan Road Project ...... 192 Table 69: Environmental Monitoring Plan ...... 212 Table 70: Detailed Ecology Monitoring procedures ...... 222 Table 71: Indicative Schedule on the Implementation of Conservation Actions ...... 231 Table 72: Indicative Budget to Implement the Conservation Programs ...... 232 Table 73: Environmental Costs for Mitigation and Monitoring Source ...... 235
FIGURES Figure 1: Overview of Karakalpakstan Road Project location ...... 25 Figure 2: Karakalpakstan Road Project Existing (in Blue) and Proposed Alignment (in Red) ...... 31 Figure 3: Typical Distance of Re-Aligned/New Road Construction Section of the Proposed Project ...... 32 Figure 4: Major Road Re-Alignment/ New Road Construction Under the Project ...... 32 Figure 5: Typical cross section applied for new construction ...... 36 Figure 6: Typical cross section applied on existing earth road fill ...... 36 Figure 7: Typical pavement condition of the Karakalpakstan Project Road ...... 39 Figure 8: Locations of WIM Systems Type 1 ...... 41 Figure 9: Location of WIM System Type 2 ...... 41 Figure 10: Location of Type 1 WIM System Pull-Off Area in M-39, Km. 817.9 ...... 42
7 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 11: Location of Type-1 WIM Pull-Off Area at A-373, Km. 2.7 ...... 42 Figure 12: Location of Type-2 WIM Pull-Off Area at A-373 Km 192 (at the existing weigh bridge area at Km 192.4) ...... 43 Figure 13: Climate Classification Map Overlaid on Google Earth Showing the Project Road ...... 53 Figure 14: Average Precipitation and Temperatures, Nukus ...... 55 Figure 15: Average Temperatures, Nukus ...... 55 Figure 16: Average Monthly Precipitation ...... 56 Figure 17: Windrose for Nukus ...... 56 Figure 18: Location of Dust and Noise Measurements Near Jaslik Village ...... 57 Figure 19: Location of Dust and Noise Measurements Near Karakalpakiya ...... 58 Figure 20: Dust and Noise Ambient Air Quality Measurement Locations ...... 58 Figure 21: Ustyurt Plateau ...... 59 Figure 22: Topography of Uzbekistan ...... 60 Figure 23: Seismic Distribution Hazard Map of Uzbekistan ...... 61 Figure 24: Regional Water Use ...... 62 Figure 25: Cliffs of the Ustyurt Plateau ...... 64 Figure 26: Saigachy Reserve ...... 65 Figure 27: Sudochye and Saigachy IBA locations ...... 66 Figure 28: Linear infrastructure and temporary roads around the Project area (Project road in blue) ...... 68 Figure 29: Truck using the abandoned, untarmacked road, December 2019 ...... 69 Figure 30: Haloxylon “forest” on the Ustyurt plateau ...... 75 Figure 31: Digging activities of Libyan Jird (Gerbil) along the road ...... 78 Figure 32: Restaurant located Within the Project Right-of-Way in Karakalpakiya ...... 83 Figure 33: Gas Station Along the Project Road in Karakalpakiya ...... 83 Figure 34: Screen 3 Model Result ...... 107 Figure 35: Watering control effectiveness for unpaved travel surfaces (USEPA) ...... 108 Figure 36: Projected Greenhouse Gas Emissions with and with-out Project Scenarios ..... 115 Figure 37: GHG Emission Intensities, with and with-out Project Scenarios ...... 115 Figure 38: US FTA Noise Impact Assessment Screening Procedure ...... 120 Figure 39: Camping buildings within the 152 m Screening Distance at Jaslik, kilometrage 79+535 ...... 121 Figure 40: Police Station Building Within the Screening Distance at Jaslik at kilometrage 85+300 ...... 121 Figure 41: Restaurant @10m and Police Checkpost Buildings within the screening distance, Karakalpakiya kilometrage 220 ...... 122 Figure 42: Hotel at 90 m and Hotel and Gas Station Buildings at 80 m within the screening distance Karakalpakiya, kilometrage 237+423 ...... 122 Figure 43: Border Control Campus Within the Noise Impact Screening Distance, Kazakhstan Border ...... 123 Figure 44: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Ground Preparation ...... 124 Figure 45: Predicted Construction Noise Contour – Ground Preparation...... 125 Figure 46: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Asphalt Breaking ...... 125 Figure 47: Predicted Construction Noise Contour – Asphalt Breaking ...... 126 Figure 48: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Sub-Base Preparation...... 126 Figure 49: Predicted Construction Noise Contour – Sub-base Preparation ...... 127 Figure 50: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Concrete Paving ...... 127 Figure 51: Predicted Construction Noise Contour Plot – Concrete Paving ...... 128 Figure 52: WIM System Type-1 Construction Noise Assessment, Unmitigated ...... 130 Figure 53: WIM System Type-1 Construction Noise Assessment, with 2-m Wall ...... 131 Figure 54: WIM System Type 1 Operational Noise ...... 132 Figure 55: Predicted Single Point Operational Noise Assessment – 2023 Traffic Level ..... 133 Figure 56: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Daytime – 2023 Traffic Level ...... 134 Figure 57: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Nighttime – 2023 Traffic Level ...... 134
8 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 58: Predicted Operational Noise Single Point – 2033 Traffic Level ...... 135 Figure 59: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Daytime – 2033 Traffic Level ...... 135 Figure 60: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Nighttime – 2033 Traffic Level ...... 136 Figure 61: Predicted Operational Noise Single Point – 2038 Traffic Level ...... 136 Figure 62: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Daytime – 2038 Traffic Level ...... 137 Figure 63: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Nighttime – 2038 Traffic Level ...... 137 Figure 64: Typical Levels of Ground-Borne Vibration (source FTA, 2018) ...... 138 Figure 65: Vibration Screening ...... 139 Figure 66: Roller with a typical PPVref of 0.25 in/sec ...... 140 Figure 67: Outline of ESIA process including impact assessment and mitigation planning 143 Figure 68: Identifying biodiversity values that will proceed through impact assessment (Source: Multilateral Financing Institutions Biodiversity Working Group (2015).146 Figure 69: Historical attempted saiga crossing points...... 165 Figure 70: Saiga crossing cross-section ...... 166 Figure 71: Project road Saiga crossing points ...... 167 Figure 72. Alignment Alternatives for A-380 Rehabilitation and Upgrading. (Blue – Existing Alignment, Green – Abandoned Roads, Red – Preferred Alignment) ...... 181 Figure 73: Section of the A-380 that incorporated minor geometric realignment to improve road safety from Km 1043-1074 ...... 181 Figure 74. GRM Process Flow ...... 187
9 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
APPENDICES
A. SPECIES LIST B. SAIGA TECHNICAL NOTE C. IBAT SCREENING RESULTS D. SUDOCHIE LAKE IBA DESIGNATION E. CRITICAL HABITAT ASSESSMENT F. PHOTOS OF TREATENED SPECIES IN THE PROJECT AREA G. RESULTS OF SURVEYS AND CONSULTATIONS H. NOISE SURVEY REPORT I. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EXISTING ROAD CONDITION J. TOR FOR BIODIVERSITY EXPERTS K. FRAMEWORK PLANS
10 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A.1 Project Description 1. This project will rehabilitate the 240-kilometer long section from km 964 to km 1,204 of the A380. This section from Kungrad to Daut-Ata, and referred to in this report as the Karalpakstan Road Project, is part of the about 638 km international highway in the Republic of Karalpakstan, more specifically in the Kungrad district of the Republic of Karakalpakstan. This project also involves the design, supply, and installation of 3 weigh-in-motion systems. This 240 km section is the last missing link in the CAREC Corridor 2 and will provide trade access to the Caspian Sea. Most of the A380 road sections from Bukhara to km 964 have either been reconstructed during the past years, are on-going construction, or in the tender process. 2. The proposed Karakalpakstan Road Project is located on the northwestern most corner of the country and terminating in the Kazakhstan border as depicted in succeeding Figure 1. The proposed rehabilitation involves civil works for the: (i) upgrading of the highway road from 2-lane without paved shoulders to a wider 3.75m 2-lane road with 0.75 m paved and 3.00 m unpaved shoulder using the existing RoW, (ii) replacement of old asphalt pavement with concrete cement pavement, and (ii) replacement / addition of culverts. Of the total 240 km project road, 61.5 km or 25% will follow the existing alignment while the rest, measuring 178.5 km, will be realigned. Of the 178.5 km, only 3.5 km do not follow the abandoned road. This is from km 9.5 to km 12 and km 218 to km 219 where transition between the existing A380 and the abandoned road takes place. Over 98.5% of the route alignment for the project road will follow either existing or abandoned road. 3. The road is entirely located in the Ustyurt Desert and well known for its biodiversity particularly for migrating birds and Saiga (Saiga Tatarica), a critically endangered antelope. The proposed project area is considered as critical habitat, having high biodiversity value and habitat of critically endangered or endangered species and migratory species. The proposed road upgrading which includes realignments, pass through critical wildlife habitat. 4. The project is classified as environmental category A as the rehabilitation and upgrading poses risks of short term and long-term impacts on the several birds, mammals including the Saiga, and reptilian species that are globally endangered species under International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Republic of Uzbekistan’s Red Book. 5. The condition of existing road pavement in the project is generally unsatisfactory. On major sections, there are continuous cracks, potholes, rutting, and edge deterioration forcing the drivers to reduce the travel speed and traverse on the shoulder or tracks. In some sections the existing pavement is completely deteriorated to a gravel road standard. 6. The entire project road will be upgraded to cement concrete pavement. Parking spaces at rest areas will be provided. The new road level will, in general, be raised by 1-2 m. In combination with the applied embankment slope ratio of 1:4 (V:H), the width of the new formation will be more than 20.0 m. The general design speed for the road sections is 120 km/h. Road safety will be enhanced with the installation of traffic controls that includes road signs, signal posts, traffic markings, lighting, bus stops and sidewalks.
11 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
A.2 Environmental Policy, Legal and Institutional 7. Uzbekistan is a party to numerous multilateral environmental agreements on biodiversity, climate change-Kyoto protocol, desertification, endangered species, and hazardous wastes. The relevant natural resources and environmental management laws of Uzbekistan includes: air and water quality standards as provided in the Atmospheric Air Protection, State Sanitary Control, Criminal Code, and Environmental Expertise. Numerous sanitary rules and norms translate these laws into maximum allowable concentrations of air pollutants, water pollutants, and noise standards. Biodiversity is protected by a series of laws and international cooperation agreements. Similar to the IUCNs Red List, the Republic of Uzbekistan published its Red Data Book and serves as the main document containing information on the state of rare, reducing in population size and endangered species of plants and animals and the concomitant national protection they deserve. 8. The ADB has placed significant importance in the protection and preservation of biodiversity. The ADB requires borrowers to assess the risks posed by their project on biodiversity and natural resources as part of the overall environmental impact assessment. In the case of the proposed project, the borrower should demonstrate the following: i) there are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat which could impair its high biodiversity value or the ability to function; ii) the project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species or a loss in area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem be compromised; and iii) any lesser impacts are mitigated (SPS 2009). 9. Environmental protection is administered in Uzbekistan by the Goskompriroda which consists of a central body in Tashkent, and regional and district branches and agencies for scientific and technical support. Goskompriroda, through Glavgosecoexpertiza reviews environmental impact, prepares and implements ecological regulations and standards, coordinates environmental programs and elaborates the structure for environmental monitoring and governance of nature reserves. A.3 Description of the Environment A.3.1 Physical 10. The project area has cold desert climate. Temperatures in this region are cold in the winter months with sub-zero temperatures between December and January. Summer temperatures usually exceed 40 °C while the average winter temperature is about −2 °C but may drop as low as −40 °C. Like most of the country, the project area is also arid with average annual rainfall of no more than 200 millimeters that mostly occur in winter and spring. 11. Noise and dust levels along the project road are lower than applicable national standards. The project road itself traverses the flat (i.e. less than 1 in 10 gradient) desert environment of the Ustyurt Plateau. 12. The project area is located entirely within the Ustyurt Plateau, a central Asian plateau in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, lying between the Aral Sea and the Amu Darya delta in the east and the Mangyshlak Plateau and the Kara-Bogaz-Gol (an inlet of the Caspian Sea) in the west. The Ustyurt Plateau extends roughly 200,000 km², with an average elevation of 150 meters. 13. Soils cover of the Project area are classified as solonetz soils, grey brown loamy desert soils found throughout the west part of Uzbekistan the plains of the Usturt plateau. The soils support sparse vegetation, mostly wormwood, and are highly saline due to both natural and man-made conditions. Soils are also considered to have a negligible value due to historic contamination in the area formerly covered by the Aral Sea, the high
12 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
salinity and poor agricultural quality. Accordingly, there are no agricultural activities within the Project corridor except camel grazing. 14. Erosion is a significant problem for much of Uzbekistan, particularly relating to poor irrigation schemes and water depletion along the Aral Sea. Wind is the main erosion factor on the open plains particularly on the Aral Sea bed. Desert ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to physical damage from vehicle movements, which result in loss of plant cover and disaggregation of soil particles. The project area is located on a low seismic zone according to World Health Organization with recorded peak ground acceleration of 0.2- 0.8 m/s2. 15. The Project road does not cross any river. The nearest surface water features are the Chimboy lake and the Sudochye lake, both of which are more than ten kilometers east and west respectively of the southern start point on the project road. Neither of these surface waters are anticipated to be impacted by project works due to their distance from the road. Ground water in the Project area is highly saline (12 to 30 g/l), not even suitable for road construction, and can be found at depths of 8-10 meters A.3.2 Ecological Resources 16. Uzbekistan is located at the crossroads of several bio-geographical regions and supports habitats as diverse as the high mountain ranges of the Tien Shan, the wetlands of the Amu Darya delta and deserts and semi-arid deserts around the Aral Sea. Almost 85% of the country is, however, desert or semi desert, and the project itself is located within one of the largest arid zones in Central Asia: the Ustyurt Plateau. 17. Two protected areas on the Ustyurt plateau are located near the Project’s area of influence (AoI), but species supported by them are known to occur in the AoI and they provide potential opportunities for conservation gains. The two protected areas are the Saigachy Reserve and the Sudochye Lake IBA. The 628,000 ha Saigachy Reserve was gazetted in 1991 by the State Committee of Karakalpakstan to help safeguard and restore the population of Critically Endangered Ustyurt Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica) and their traditional calving places. Originally designated as a temporary reserve for 10 years (renewed in 2001 and 2011) the reserve has since been re- designated and expanded and is now divided into six strictly protected zones and a buffer area. As a state reserve all activities other than monitoring and research are forbidden in the Reserve. The Sudochye Lake IBA is 46,467 ha in size and is located just over 15 km from the southernmost point of the project road alignment. The IBA is an important area for many waterbird species, including threatened White-headed Duck and Lesser White-fronted Goose, and triggers IBA criteria A1, A3, A4i, and A4iii. The IBA is located in the central part of the Central Asian Flyway (CAF) and is a stopover location for waterbirds from the north of Europe and Asia, Western Siberia and Kazakhstan on migration to wintering areas on the southern Caspian Sea, and in Africa, India and Pakistan. 18. The A380 is known to cut across the southwest corner of the traditional migration corridor for the Ustyurt Saiga antelope. The current Ustyurt Saiga population (5,900) constitutes 1.77% of the global population (334,000) and therefore meets the IFC Criterion ia for critical habitat. 19. While not directly impacted, the project alignment runs close to a well preserved 5 km x 1 km haloxylon forest 10 km north of the town of Jaslik. The haloxylon forest is made from Black Saxaul Haloxylon aphyllum, a tree that can grow up to 7m in height and is much-branched. This is considered an important habitat locally and is also used for autumn and winter grazing being a valuable fodder plant. The haloxylon forest is located from km 95 to km 99 on the right-hand side, at some 250 – 300 m, from the existing A380. This area appears to be the only significant stretch of Haloxylon forest remaining along the entire road alignment and should be protected from impacts.
13 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Haloxlyon forest is important in desert areas of Central Asia where it plays an important role in combating land degradation by helping to fix shifting sands and increasing biological productivity. Herbaceous species can flourish under closed Haloxylon canopies, and Haloxylon forests can produce substantial amounts of edible biomass.
A.3.3 Socio-Economic 20. The Karakalpak economy is largely agricultural. Cotton is cultivated along the Amu Darya and in its delta and is processed in the cities. Other crops include alfalfa, rice, and corn. Cattle and Karakul sheep are raised in the Kyzylkum Desert. A well- developed system of irrigation canals built during the Soviet period traditionally carried water from the Amu Darya to the crops and livestock. However, overuse of the river delta for irrigation and industry has led to the demise of Karakalpakstan’s once-vital fishing industry, and resulted in a shorter growing season and harsher climate. The limited industrial sector of the Karakalpak economy includes light manufacturing, a power station in Takhiatosh, refineries that process oil from nearby petroleum fields, and building-materials plants that use the limestone, gypsum, asbestos, marble, and quartzite of the area. 21. Within 15 kilometers of the Project road the Surgil gas fields and its associated infrastructure can be found including a gas processing plant. No other industrial or agricultural activities can be found within the Project corridor 22. Within the project corridor transmission lines can be observed at various locations, notably at km 1192 where the transmission line towers are within five meters of the edge of the Project road. The Central Asian Gas Pipeline also follows parallel to the Project road for almost its entire length along with a water supply pipeline. Neither the gas pipeline or the water pipeline are within the RoW. A rail line runs parallel to the Project road but this is more than 1 kilometer west of the Project corridor. 23. Majority of the households in the project area have access to safely managed water supply and only two households reported of using ground water. Presently there are insufficient hazardous and non-hazardous waste disposal or treatment facilities to handle the volume of waste generated by a project of this type within the immediate Project area. Both villages have their municipal disposal sites, and these will be used by the Project to managing camp site wastes. Other than the police outpost and the international border crossing post, there are very limited activities along the project road and all are in Karakalpakiya village. Economic activities along the project road are all related to transport services that includes restaurants, gas stations, and hotels. A.4 Impact Assessment and Mitigation A.4.1 Physical Environment 24. Geology and Soils. The main direct and permanent impacts on geology and soils will occur during the construction phase. The environmental impact includes loss of topsoil during site clearance for the road widening particularly on existing road alignment which requires increase in embankment height of curves that require wider carriage width, construction of new road alignment, extraction of materials for road construction, physical works such as embankment construction, construction of ancillary facilities like temporary office, and construction camps. Mitigation measures are to minimize or avoid soil disturbance, collect topsoil for reuse, proper handling of oil and lubricants and treatment of wastewater to avoid contamination. 25. Air Pollution. With low traffic and the absence of industrial sources, the air quality is good. During construction, substantial dust will be generated from unpaved road travel and embankment construction, and construction materials storage piles. The impacts are expected to be minor with human structures and activities along the way. Screening assessment indicated that camps and storage piles should be located at
14 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
least 500 meters from community areas to avoid adverse impacts. During operation, minor air quality impacts will result due to the low emission levels from vehicles, some of which uses natural gas, low traffic, and the limited human activities along the project road. Lower greenhouse gas emissions are anticipated with the project due to improvement in road capacity and road roughness resulting to more efficient travel speeds and avoidance of congestion in the future. 26. Disruption of local water supply. Reconstruction works require large amounts of water, both for supply of drinking water for the labor and the operation of the camp sites, and for all technical purposes relating to construction activities. Since the area has extremely limited groundwater reserves, all water requirements will be sourced locally usually from train stations. All Contractors must submit a plan for identifying the source location, quantity, and drawing schedule of both drinking and technical water extraction. There is no wetland, river or irrigation canal along the entire project alignment. No impacts on hydrology and surface water quality are expected from the rehabilitation and upgrading project. 27. Generation of wastes. A wide range of waste will be generated by the project to include oils, fuels, bitumen, bridge deck waterproofing agents, cement, concrete, construction debris like rocks and soil, concrete, masonry and brick rubble and other wastes like acids and alkaline solutions, batteries, sewage, and domestic type solid wastes. Depending on the type of wastes they will either be recycled, stored, treated on-site prior to disposal or off site, or disposed at the village disposal sites. 28. Noise and Vibration. Construction noise levels are anticipated to exceed commercial IFC guide values along the hotels, restaurants, and police station that are located near the project road. This will be mitigated through timing of noise works, fitting of silencers and acoustic covers, proper maintenance of equipment, and communication with the affected people prior to the start of construction. During project operation, noise levels are not expected to result to elevated noise levels. Predicted vibration levels during construction are too low to cause structural damage or annoyance to the residents along the project road. Operational vibration is minimal and poses no risk to any structures and residents along the project road. 29. Utilities shifting. Some overhead telephone, and transmission and distribution lines will need to be moved and will be vulnerable to accidental damage during the reconstruction work. Where necessary, utilities will be relocated. 30. Disruption of Traffic. During construction stage, the existing traffic flows will be impeded by improvement works on the road pavement, widening operations, and construction or reconstruction of drainage structures. In addition, vehicles involved in construction will increase traffic flows. This will be mitigated by providing advance information to the public about planned reconstruction works maintaining at least one open lane where there is no viable alternative route; use of information signages, use of flagmen and temporary traffic lights to control traffic flows at constricted sites, including safe crossing for pedestrians; and limiting to the extent practicable, the movement of large trucks to off-peak traffic times. 31. Decommissioning Work Sites. The decommissioning will be carried out to ensure the respective sites have been re-instated to satisfactory conditions requiring, among others, stabilization borrow areas and quarries, safe disposal of all hazardous material, including the excavation of soil patches contaminated with fuel and lubricants, fencing of borrow pits with steep cut slopes, clearing of all sanitary and waste management facilities which include grading of soil to natural ground levels, reestablishment of natural vegetation, and non-disruption existing or the creation of new drainage canal are the focal points as these are often a source of environmental pollution, serves as attraction to wildlife, and create public eyesore.
15 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
A.4.2 Biological Environment and Biodiversity 32. The project road including borrow pits and temporary facilities are located in and affect modified, natural, and critical habitats. As mentioned, the project road will follow the existing A380 road and abandoned roads alongside it. Due to the ongoing human development in the area, an increasing amount of the traditional habitat, the project area is now considered as a modified habitat. The ecological impact assessment has been guided by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Guidance Note 6 (IFC GN6) and the Good Practices for Biodiversity Inclusive Impact Assessment and Management Planning prepared by the Multilateral Financing Institutions Biodiversity Working Group (2015).
33. The proposed road project construction poses a wide range of direct and indirect potential impacts to biodiversity typical of any road project that includes loss of plant, habitat, and direct mortality to nesting birds from vegetation clearance; visual, noise, and disturbances and mortality from collision with vehicular movement during construction; fencing can create habitat fragmentation, wastes from road users can attract rodents and their predators and trap small fauna in cans, plastic bottles, and plastic bags; the construction camps may disturb fauna, direct mortality from workers indulging to illegal hunting or trapping and from guard dogs; introduction of invasive species from the construction equipment; construction wastes and dust can affect vegetation; formation of retention ponds particularly in the quarries and crushers plants during construction and culverts with water collection basins can attract birds and mammals increasing the risk of poaching; construction lighting can attract insects which will draw migrant birds and bats looking to hunt in high insect concentrations; traffic particularly at high speeds poses significant barrier to species looking to cross the roads causing further habitat fragmentation; increased road kill from vehicular collision; increased accessibility to the habitat due to the road improvements may result to increase in the risk of disturbance and mortality by hunters and poachers. During operation the increase in traffic also increases the risk of invasive species being carried and colonizing the project area; pollution-laden runoff from roads and from de- icing can affect habitats. 34. Most of these impacts are expected to have low significance and readily mitigated through Good International Industry Practice (GIIP). This include the prohibition of workers on poaching and plant harvesting; minimize vegetation clearance and compensate cleared vegetation through replanting, waste management, camp site location away from sensitive areas, single vehicle track policies and prohibit off-road travel, limit travel speed, conduct pre-clearance survey to prevent animals from being killed or injured, limit fencing to work compounds, removal of non-native species, dust and noise controls, use of direction and non-UV lighting, coordination with local authorities against wildlife trafficking. 35. Anticipated direct impacts from the proposed rehabilitation and upgrading includes: direct loss of both plants and habitat from vegetation clearance; disturbance from dust, noise; soil loss; vehicular collision resulting to mortality; creation of ponds from improper drainage will attract wildlife increasing conflict with human activities, hunting and poaching by the workers, habitat fragmentation, disturbance of the haloxylon forest as habitat. Indirect impacts include increase in poaching and haloxylon harvesting activities as a result to improve access and increase settlement along the project road. Other project activities that poses risk to biodiversity are the balancing ponds and junction lighting. 36. Biodiversity screening for the project identified 343 species and ecosystems as potentially occurring in the project area of influence (AoI). Of this, there are 65 mammals, 242 birds, 27 reptiles, and 9 plant species. A mammal and bird species are considered critically endangered, 5 are endangered, and 11 are vulnerable according
16 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
to the IUCN. The IUCN listed critically endangered, Saiga antelope and Sociable Lapwing, and the endangered, Steppe Eagle, Saker Falcon, Pallas Fish-eagle and Egyptian Vulture. The Republic of Uzbekistan, has identified 9 of these species as either critically endangered or endangered. 37. The critical habitat assessment concluded that the project area is potentially critical habitat for the Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica) while the priority natural habitat identified is an area of Haloxylon forest (5 km by 1 km in size) in close proximity to the road. Although the only critical habitat feature is the Saiga antelope, the Biodiversity Action Plan prepared for the project included mitigation to ensure No Net Loss (NNL) for all threatened species in the project area. The main Natural Habitat feature of higher biodiversity value in the vicinity of the project area is a 5 km by 1 km Haloxylon forest (Black Saxual), which is located to the north-east, between km 95 and km 99, of the project road, some 10km north of the town of Jaslik. 38. The A380 poses significant impacts to the critically endangered Saiga and its Critical Habitat. Saiga numbers in Uzbekistan are currently extremely low. However, based on known Saiga population, and ongoing efforts to make existing habitat barriers with Kazakhstan more porous, it is not impossible for the small local population of about 15 animals to be restored to 6,000 or more individuals within the 30 year project timescale. A precautionary approach was adopted and the Project AoI incorporates critical habitat for this species. During migration the Ustyurt saiga can cover distances of up to 1,000 km as they move north to south, from the Sam desert in Kazakhstan, passing through Almabet and Churuk, and between the settlements of Jaslik and Karakpakiya. In winters with heavy snow, saiga traditionally have moved to southern parts of the plateau. The existing A380, as will the new project road alignment, cuts across the south-west of the traditional saiga migration corridor. The most recent known attempted crossing of the road was in 2004, when an estimated 1,000 individuals tried to cross the A380 to get to the grazing area south-west of the road. 39. During construction. A range of ecological impacts will occur during construction works and will require mitigation as described in the sections above (habitat loss, potential for poaching etc.). Given the scarcity of Saiga in the area at the current time, and the animals sensitivity to disturbance, the animals are not expected to approach any construction works and impacts on Saiga as a result of project construction are expected to be minimal and will be managed through GIIP. 40. Impacts associated with operations have the potential to be more significant and there are global concerns regarding the barrier effect of linear infrastructure on open plains ungulates, a key priority in the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species - CMS. In Central Asia the number, intensity and use of large infrastructure projects that includes railways, mining sites, pipelines, border fences, and roads has increased rapidly in recent years and has been found to impede the movement of large herbivores by preventing access to resources or by forcing animals to make large detours to gain access. They can also reduce the capacity of wildlife to escape droughts or harsh winters by moving to better areas, resulting in increased intra and inter-specific competition, poor body condition, poor recruitment, and high mortality. While the 1:4 embankment ratio means that the height of the proposed road is not considered a physical impediment to saiga crossing. The extremely small number of Ustyurt saiga currently present in the area, and the fact that the road is replacing an existing road, means that in the short-term direct impacts to this species from the upgrade and rehabilitation are expected to be low. However, in the longer term, and given the 30 year minimum design life of the project, there is the potential for this to become an issue should the current population recover or traditional migration patterns be restored for example by changes to the border fences and associated infrastructure. With typical saiga population growth rates of 1.4x annually, even the small local
17 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
population of 15 animals could grow to some 6,000 individuals over that time. A precautionary approach is required. 41. Projected increase in traffic themselves are not expected to increase risks of saiga mortality/disturbance, given the potential for the population to increase dramatically over the same time period, a precautionary and adaptive management approach is proposed to support long-term conservation of this critically endangered species. This will include long term monitoring and periodic re-assessment of impacts of the road, and the efficacy of mitigation measures outlined further below. The potential threats to the saiga critical habitat are barrier effect to movement should the population recover which will impair the ability to function, risk collision with vehicles, poaching, and disturbance during construction works. Mitigation measures to ensure the critical habitat’s ability to function includes intelligent traffic management system to ensure the road remains a permeable barrier for the Saiga movement, traffic calming measures, and when the Saiga population has recovered, possible underpasses. 42. To mitigate impacts on the Saiga Critical habitat, measures to help avoid direct Saiga mortality from traffic accidents will be taken.Saiga crossings with appropriate traffic management system and capacity building with local police should be included in the road design at three known historic saiga crossing points: Abadan N 43 42’: E 57 48’; Jaslyk N 43 58’ E 57 30’; and Bergakh N 44 18’; E 57 03’ details of which will be incorporated in the Biodiversity Action Plan. The said plan includes a fourth crossing point as a reserve: N 44 31’; E 56 38’. A.4.3 Offsets and Additional Conservation Outcomes 43. The Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) includes proposals to encourage the growth of the Saigachy reserve population to support ADB and the project to achieve potential net gain for the critically endangered population. Supporting the management and the resources of the reserve also has the potential to incentivise the Saiga antelope to remain in the reserve, and away from the project area and road. Measures proposed include the creation of watering hole/s for the Saiga, which would also count towards minor habitat restoration in response to the effective clearance of Critical Habitat for the Saiga. Additionally, this would mitigate potential indirect impacts on the Saiga, such as hunting as a result of facilitated access. 44. Further support is proposed to the management of the Saigachy reserve to encourage Saiga population growth in the reserve (e.g. via poaching prevention) as well as monitoring and evaluation of saiga populations in the broader project area, and support to efforts between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan to improve the permeability of the linear infrastructure currently impeding on the Saiga’s traditional migration corridor supported. 45. Impacts to Birds. Habitats within the AoI are generally not considered to be of particular importance for birds except for the local depressions which may collect water and be used for watering or can provide shelter from adverse weather conditions and areas of Haloxylon woodland which can support nesting birds of prey. Impacts to birds during construction include loss of / disturbance to habitats used for nesting, feeding and resting (including habitats used by ground-nesting species, and remnant areas of Haloxylon forest). These will be avoided as far as practical by undertaking vegetation clearance outside of the nesting season (April-June) and using pre-clearance surveys to identify any nests (should nests be found they will not be cleared until any chicks have fledged). Particular attention will be paid to birds of prey that may be nesting, e.g. in areas of Haloxylon forest. Overall, however, and given the modified semi-arid desert landscape affected, such impacts are generally expected to be local in nature and represent only a minor impact.
18 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
46. During project operation, birds may be impacted during road operations by disturbance, habitat fragmentation and direct collisions with vehicles, although no notable species are expected to be particularly affected. Roadkill can provide a source of food to raptors, which will also feed on the large populations of rodents (e.g. gerbils) that burrow into the road embankments (note burrows are also used as shelters by reptiles and some birds for nesting). While this could increase risks of vehicle collision, currently recorded levels of bird roadkill are low. As traffic numbers are only expected to grow minimally with the upgraded road, such impacts are expected to increase only a minor amount and are therefore considered of only moderate significance. No specific mitigation is proposed, although the Project proposes to work with the Saigachy Reserve to support long-term conservation planning for birds in the area, to mitigate any induced impacts associated with the project. 47. Impacts to Reptiles. Reptiles in general are vulnerable to impacts of direct mortality from traffic, especially tortoise because of their relatively slow movement. They may also suffer impacts associated with loss of hibernating areas and habitat fragmentation/loss, especially during construction. Central Asian Tortoise are considered particularly threatened as they may also suffer illegal collection by the construction workers and staff for food, souvenirs, and resale, and may also be affected by guard dogs, especially during peak activity season (mid-March to mid- June). Blotched Snake may also be threatened by direct extermination by workers due to traditional fear of snakes during their active season (April to October). During project operation, impacts to reptiles are primarily associated with direct mortality from collisions and potential hunting or collection by users, which will also be associated to some extent with habitat fragmentation. Such impacts are expected to be minor to moderate significance, although this should be confirmed through monitoring. 48. Invasive Species. Contractors may inadvertently bring in and/or spread invasive plants during the work and vegetation clearance can also create new areas of disturbed habitat which may be favoured by invasive plants. Native, locally-sourced plants will be used for habitat restoration and there will be a ban on workers bringing vegetation or soil from outside the site area to prevent dispersion of non-native invasive species. Wash down of all vehicles and equipment will be mandatory and the Environmental Specialist will be responsible for identifying and removing any invasive species. 49. Cumulative Impacts and Induced Impacts. The ecology of the semi-arid desert has already been adversely affected by human developments, including the existing A380 road and other infrastructure and the recent development of the gas and other industries. While the Project will further add to these cumulative impacts, appropriate habitat restoration and specific proposals for Saiga protection means that cumulative impacts are considered to be of moderate significance and addressed in the BAP. Other induced impacts including increase in hunting and settlement sites due to improved access; better access increasing oil and gas exploration activities and associated traffic; and increased ease of trading in wildlife and animal products (e.g. saiga horns, saker falcon). These will be addressed by supporting ongoing work to train border guards on the identification, surveillance, and enforcement of wildlife trade regulations. 50. Residual Impacts. Construction mitigation will be addressed through both the Contractor’s Biodiversity Management Plan, and the Project’s Biodiversity Action Plan. Once this mitigation has been implemented, project construction will only have a limited number of significant residual impacts including: Loss of >10.87 ha of natural habitat which will rehabilitated; and temporary disturbance impacts to a number of notable species, including loss of foraging, resting, nesting and hibernating habitat; and impacts to migratory terrestrial species associated with habitat fragmentation (notably saiga and goitered gazelle). Throughout construction, a Biodiversity and an Environmental Specialist of the Construction Supervision Consultant will be present on
19 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
site and an adaptive management approach will be put in place, supported by monitoring. During operation phase of the project, residual impacts will remain, primarily associated with Saiga disturbance, habitat fragmentation, and roadkill. A specific biodiversity action plan will be developed by the Committee for Roads for Saiga antelope and with this in place residual impacts are expected to be of only minor significance. 51. Project Commitments. To mitigate the impact to the critical habitat, a combination of the Contractor’s Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) and the Project’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) will be implemented. A Framework BAP (F-BAP) was developed for the Project and will be further refined into a detailed BAP as the project progresses in line with the principle of adaptive management. The BAP will include a range of commitments including, but not limited to, support to long-term conservation of saiga including through support to the management of the Saigachy Reserve. A.4.4 Socio-economic 52. Impacts are typical to road development projects and mainly related to public and workers health and safety. These will be addressed through basic sanitation, general health and HIV/AIDS training (including provision of free condoms) for their local and non-local workforce in compliance to the national and international standard practices. With the advent of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, all contractors will follow the RUz and WHO protocols on screening of workers that includes screening, PPEs, regular temperature testing, reporting, isolation, contact tracing, and treatment. All cases, whether person under investigation and confirmed cases of infection shall be reported to the Ministry of Health’s administration and executive bodies in the Republic of Karakalpakstan. 53. To accommodate the proposed road upgrading, the project involves permanent acquisition of land under private use measuring 0.0613 ha belonging to 1 owner, acquisition of 311.62 ha of valley and other land plots not used in agriculture and 1.5 ha of valley and other land plots for construction of training centres at Jaslik and Karakalpakstan, totalling 313.18 ha and owned by the State. Further, the project will involve temporary acquisition of 915.77 ha of valley and other land plots not used in agriculture for the open pits and owned by the State. In addition, the proposed WIM facilities will involve use of 1.67 ha of land, which is currently managed by Uzavtyoul regional department, a unit of State Committee for Roads, being land parcels abetting the highway and free from encumbrance. Adequate compensation will be provided by the project. A.4.5 Information Disclosure, Consultation, and participation 54. First level consultations were organized on March 20-21, 2019 in Jaslik and Karakalpakstan that attracted the participation of 99 individuals mostly women. The first-level consultations were undertaken principally to disclose the preliminary findings and initial road design to the host villages. Engineering details for the road, prospected schedules, expected benefits and anticipated impacts, including proposed mitigation measures were presented. It was also disclosed that there will be a mechanism in place where local citizens and stakeholders affected will have a chance to forward their concerns, complaints at specified offices. Most of the comments were related on the need for employment opportunities, the bad condition of the roads, need for toilet facilities, need for better transportation, high cost of transportation, and the need for better lighting particularly along road junctions and rest-stops. Minutes of the public meetings were prepared and form part of the EIA report. 55. The Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) was discussed during the consultations highlighting its availability to people living or working in the areas impacted by the project activities. Any person impacted by or concerned about the project activities has
20 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
the right to participate in the GRM, should have the easy access to it, and be encouraged to use it. A.4.6 Grievance and Redress Mechanism 56. The overall responsibility for the timely and effective implementation of the GRM is with the Road Committee in coordination with the Engineer, Contractors, and relevant Khokimyats. A two-stage grievance intake and resolution is adopted by the project. The first level pertains to the hearing and resolution at the local level within 10 working days of grievance registration. The second-level GRM, addresses grievances not resolved at the first level by a committee chaired by the Committee for Roads at the Central level which is given 20 days to resolve the matter. Grievance not resolved at either level, will be referred to the court for resolution in accordance with the RUz legislation. 57. In addition to the GRM, the affected person may access the ADB’s Accountability Mechanism to voice and seek solutions to their problems and report alleged noncompliance with ADB's operational policies and procedures. A.4.7 Environmental Management Plan 58. The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) contains the agreements between the Committee for Roads and the ADB on the implementation of mitigation measures, monitoring program, cost estimates, and institutional arrangement to ensure that no significant adverse impacts result from the project intervention. A sub-set of the EMP is the Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) and the Biodiversity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (BMEP) to address the potential biodiversity impacts as the project is located inside a critical habitat (CH) through the implementation. There are 2 types of environmental management plans to be used in this project, a general management that is appended in this report that provides summary information on the types of impacts, required mitigation and monitoring measures, and implementation arrangements including reporting requirements. The second type of EMP is the site- specific EMPs (SSEMP) the Contractor will prepare in consultation with the Construction Supervision Engineer and Environmental Specialist. No access to the site will be allowed until the SSEMPs are approved by the PMU. 59. The EMP addressed typical impacts related to road rehabilitation and upgrading. This includes impacts related to quarries, material sourcing and transport, fuelling operations and hazardous materials handling and storage, loss of property, damage to infrastructures, drainage, air quality, borrow pits and quarry operations, waste management, poaching and illegal wildlife gathering, topsoil preservation, protection of haloxylon trees, workers camp management, traffic safety, and health and safety. 60. The BAP contains the Project’s strategy for alignment with the ADB SPS in managing risks associated with the priority biodiversity features identified in the EIA. A package of mitigation measures has been proposed, in line with the mitigation hierarchy, to manage direct risks to the Saiga antelope, including a traffic management system that will include traffic calming measures and enforcement by the local police force. Additional measures have been proposed that will see the project support the Saigachy Reserve, home to the closest known population of Saiga to the road. Phase 1 will see the development of a Management Plan for the Reserve, whilst Phase 2 will include implementation of measures outlined in the Plan, including creation of a watering hole(s) and resourcing of anti-poaching measures. 61. Support to the Saigachy Reserve will be provided through a Phase 1 of financial support (Q2 2020) for the development of a Management Plan (MP). MP development will need to initially be completed in conjunction with the Goscomecology of Uzbekistan and the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan in Tashkent. The MP is to include the mid
21 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
and long-term activities (>5 years) to be undertaken as part of Phase 2 of financial support (Q4 2020). 62. With the implementation of the activities in the Management Plan (Phase 2) will come an extended monitoring programme in the Saigachy Reserve. Resourcing of monitoring will significantly improve understanding of the population numbers and needs of species found in the Reserve and will be amalgamated into ongoing regional conservation efforts by the Institute for Natural Resources, University of Nukus. Monitoring of the efficacy of the Reserve’s Management Plan will be conducted annually and an adaptive management approach will be applied to assess if resourcing efforts for Management Plan activities, and approaches to monitoring themselves, need to be re-directed. 63. The estimated cost to implement the EMP is $760,800 and, environmental monitoring is $24,000, and the biodiversity conservations measures are $1,147,500.
22 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
B. INTRODUCTION
B.1 CAREC Corridor 2 Road Investment Program II 64. ADB began the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Program in 1997 to foster economic cooperation and integration in Central Asia. The Program is a partnership of 11 countries (Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, People's Republic of China, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Mongolia, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan), supported by 6 multilateral institutions, working together to promote development through cooperation, leading to accelerated growth and poverty reduction1. Most CAREC countries are landlocked and rely almost exclusively on overland transport for trade within the region and with markets just outside. These transport corridors although extensive are still underdeveloped network of roads and railways spanning the region. CAREC has identified six priority corridors to be developed to expand trade and improve competitiveness and in the process, augment regional economic cooperation and stronger integration. These corridors were identified as priority based on: i) current traffic volume; ii) projected traffic growth and economic potential; iii) future capacity to link economic and population hubs; iv) future potential to reduce transport delays; v) economic and financial sustainability through investment in infrastructure, technology, and management; and vi) multimodal aspects. The six priority corridors are as follows. To date, more than $31.5 billion have been invested in transport, trade facilitation, and energy projects involving 185 projects. • Corridor 1: Europe–East Asia (Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, and XUAR) • Corridor 2: Mediterranean–East Asia (Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and XUAR) • Corridor 3: Russian Federation–Middle East and South Asia (Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) • Corridor 4: Russian Federation–East Asia (IMAR, Mongolia, and XUAR) • Corridor 5: East Asia–Middle East and South Asia (Afghanistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and XUAR) • Corridor 6: Europe–Middle East and South Asia (Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) 65. Transport is one of the priority areas under the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Program because regional cooperation in transport is essential to reduce high transport costs through improved transport infrastructure and services linking the landlocked CAREC countries to import and export markets2. 66. Uzbekistan is a key transit country in Central Asia for trade among themselves, as well as with the rest of Asia and Europe. Transport plays a key role in promoting regional and internal trade. The proposed investment program will reconstruct a section of CAREC Corridor 2, which connects Uzbekistan to Kyrgyz Republic, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan. This reconstruction will improve connectivity, road safety, and boost domestic and international trade. The investment program fits with ADB’s Strategy 2023 and is included in the country operations business plan (2019–2021)3, and aligned to the UN Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011–2020. The proposal is in line with the government’s development strategy for
1 https://www.adb.org/countries/subregional-programs/carec 2 https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/project-document/67213/37362-reg-tcr.pdf 3 Country Operations Business Plan: Uzbekistan, 2019–2021. Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2018, Manila
23 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
2017-20214 and road map, as well as the CAREC Transport and Trade Facilitation Strategy and Action Plan. The initial Multi-tranche Financing Facility (MFF) for the Third CAREC Corridor Road Investment Program proposed by the ADB in 2016 would reconstruct approximately 364 kilometers (kms) of international corridor highways in the Republic of Karakalpakstan, Khorezm and Kashkadarya regions of Uzbekistan. The second tranche of the initial MFF was the 240 km long section from km 964 to km 1,204 on A380 highway (Kungrad to Daut-Ata section), which will be now implemented as a stand-alone project. 67. This project will rehabilitate the 240-kilometer long section from km 964 to km 1,204 of the A380. This section from Kungrad to Daut-Ata, and referred to in this repot as the Karalpakstan Road Project is part of the about 638 km international highway in the Republic of Karalpakstan, more specifically in the Kungrad district of the Republic of Karakalpakstan. This 240 km section is the last missing link in the CAREC Corridor 2 and will provide trade access to the Caspian Sea. Most of the A380 road sections from Bukhara to km 964 have either been reconstructed during the past years, are on-going construction, or in the tender process. B.2 Karakalpakstan Road Project from km 964 to km 1,204 and the Design, Supply and Installation of Weigh-in-Motion Systems 68. CAREC Corridor 2 connects the Caucasus and Mediterranean to East Asia. The route covers Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, and the People's Republic of China (PRC). With the rapid economic expansion of the PRC to the east, the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan to the north, and Azerbaijan to the west, there is an unprecedented opportunity for Uzbekistan to emerge as a center for trade and commerce, to achieve higher levels of economic growth. 69. The A380 highway with a total length of about 1,204 kms passes through lightly populated areas in Karakpalakstan for 638 km and for the rest of the length through highly populated Guzar, Bukhara, Nukus, and Beineu districts. It primarily carries fuel, agricultural commodities, and industrial consumer goods. Another on-going highway investment in Kazakhstan supported by ADB will connect Beyneu on Uzbekistan’s border with Uzbekistan’s A380 highway and the port of Aktau in the Caspian Sea. All these highways, when completed, will provide Uzbekistan and other Central Asian countries direct access to the Caspian Sea, and thereafter to South Asia and the Black Sea through road corridors being built in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Investment program II links with CAREC Corridor 6, which reaches the so-called Ring Road in Afghanistan and thereafter Pakistan’s main ports. 70. The proposed Karakalpakstan Road Project is located on the northwestern most corner of the country and terminating in the Kazakhstan border as depicted in succeeding Figure 1. The proposed rehabilitation involves civil works for the: (i) upgrading of the highway road from 2-lane without paved shoulders to a wider 3.75m 2-lane road with 3.00m paved shoulder using the existing RoW, (ii) replacement of old asphalt pavement with concrete, and (ii) replacement of culverts.
4 Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, UP-4947dated February 7, 2017. " On the Strategy for the Further Development of the Republic of Uzbekistan "
24 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 1: Overview of Karakalpakstan Road Project location 71. Road network is a key element of the economy of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Its effective functioning and sustainable development are important for its economic growth, integrity, national security, and continue the improvement of living standards and livelihood. Roads are an essential part of the transport infrastructure. The share of road transport accounts for 89.2% of the volume of freight traffic. On average, vehicle fleet increasing by 7 - 10% annually in the country. There is a steady increase in long-distance journeys. The primary economic benefits of the investment program are cost savings from vehicle operation, reduction in travel time, and lower transaction costs related to transportation while other benefits include: i) the establishment of international transport corridors, ii) improvements in road transport efficiency, iii) increase in freight and passenger transport due to improvements in the quality of roads, iv) increase axle load capacity to 13 tons, and v) less road crashes due to improvements in road safety measures. 72. A component of the overall project is the design, supply and installation of weigh-in- Motion (WIM) requires the establishment of 3 systems to allow the collection of axle load data and implement enforcement against overloading to protect the accelerated deterioration of transportation infrastructure. A WIM system allows for the accurate measurement of gross and net weight of vehicles. Two types of WIM systems will be installed, Type 1 will have all the equipment described above, while Type 2 will not have the high accuracy low speed WIM system. The WIMs will be installed in the following locations: Table 1: Proposed Locations and Types of WIM System No Road code Approximate Lanes number and Type of WIM Number and name Location direction System of Sets 1 A-373 km 0- km 2,7 2 lanes, in direction Type 1 1
25 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
No Road code Approximate Lanes number and Type of WIM Number and name Location direction System of Sets to Tashkent 2 A-373 km 192 – 193 2 lanes, in direction Type 2 1 to Osh 3 M-39 Km 817- Km 2 lanes, in direction Type 1 1 818 to Tashkent B.3 Environment Category and Scope of the EIA Study 73. Details on the project category under ADB SPS 2009 and Government of Uzbekistan environmental policies are provided in Table 2. Table 2: Project Categorization Project Category per ADB SPS 1. Category A (Road Component) There is risk of short term and long-term impacts on the several birds, mammal, and reptilian species that are globally endangered species under International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Republic of 2. Reason for proposed category Uzbekistan’s Red Book. These species are known to forage, seek refuge during migration seasons, and inhabit a 2-km impact corridor zone centered along the project road alignment. Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) Checklist is attached as Annex 1. 3. Type of assessment Environmental Impact Assessment required Project Category/Environmental Assessment requirements under national /local policies 4. Name/names of The Law on Ecological Expertise (2000) and by Decree of the applicable national Cabinet of Ministers No 491.31.12.2001. acts, regulations 5. Environmental Category II. category 6. Reason for category or environmental Rehabilitation and upgrading of existing roads assessment or N/A
74. The design, installation, and operation of the WIM system is anticipated to have less adverse impacts than the road project. Few of the impacts are irreversible, and mitigation measures are easily designed and implemented. The impact assessment of the WIMs are included in this report. B.4 EIA Objectives 75. The objective of this EIA study is to identify potential environmental impacts of the proposed road upgrading, including the WIM Systems component, and to formulate strategies to avoid and minimize adverse impacts. The scope of work to accomplish the above objective, comprise the following: • understanding the baseline environmental conditions of the project area, • identifying the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project, • recommending appropriate mitigation measures to avoid/minimize the environmental impacts, • recommending environmental enhancement measures to help improve the local environment, and
26 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• preparing an environmental management plan for achieving the recommended measures. B.5 Project’s Area of Influence 76. The area covered in this EIA study includes a core area measuring 200m strip on both sides of the 240 kilometer section of the A-380. Within this core area of impact, majority of anticipated impacts on biodiversity, air, land, vegetation, socio-economic will take place. A wider impact area, defined as 2-kilometer centered along the project road alignment, is also defined in the project where direct bio-diversity survey is conducted. Finally, a wider zone of up to 10 km surrounding the project road was delineated to allow the identification of potential indirect impacts on bird migration routes and land use impacts. 77. The anticipated impacts and risks of proposed road upgrading and rehabilitation are identified and assessed in the context of its area of influence which includes: i) road corridor, borrow pits, disposal areas, and construction camps; ii) associated facilities that takes into account the road section in between the proposed road project; and iii) areas and communities that can be exposed to elevated noise, dust, and vibration from the project’s construction and operation. 78. This EIA covers the entire length of the proposed project road funded by the ADB (240 km). The project’s direct impact zone is a corridor of 200 meters wide on each side of the road over its entire length is identified as the primary impact area. This is well beyond the road-right-of-way (RoW) which varies from 34 meters to 51 meters. Special attention is given to sensitive receptors within this corridor such as schools, hospitals or other places where people congregate. Table 3: Project influence area for the EIA Terrestrial Migration Area Air Shed Acoustic Environment Environment 500 m from road Field observation is 2 500 m from center line 500 m from centerline of centerline and borrow kilometer centered of road (and rising 100 road and extended on pits. along the road m from the road sensitive areas such as alignment wildlife centerline), and 500 settlements. nesting and foraging meters from rock crushing plant, Entire Ustyurt Plateu batching plants, for migration of birds borrow pits, etc. (10 km corridor) 200 m on either side None 200 m from the center 200 m from the center of the WIM facility of the WIM Facility a WIM facilit
B.6 Study Approach and Methodology 79. This EIA report was based on the information provided to SHELADIA as of March 2019 when the feasibility study and detailed design were being updated. An initial environmental examination was prepared in 2016 and is updated in this report to highlight, among others, the change in pavement from asphalt to concrete and in recognition of the sensitive biodiversity in the project are. The review of secondary data was supported by site visits, and stakeholder consultations to meet the requirements for environmental assessment process and documentation as per ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS), 2009. The EIA commenced with the preliminary review of legal requirements for the project. This was followed by gathering technical details, numerous technical meetings and discussions with the ADB missions, Republic Road Foundation, field engineers, environmental agencies, and other representatives of the communities. Details are discussed in the succeeding sections.
27 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
B.6.1 Reconnaissance Survey and Initial Consultations 80. Reconnaissance or “windshield” survey and initial consultations provided key information on the status of the roads; focus of extent of the environmental baseline survey needed; identified the types, locations, and scale of potential environmental receptors; and supported with roadside consultations with stakeholders and guidance from the field engineers identify sensitive areas, data gaps, decide valued environment components, key stakeholders and key informants who can further substantiate the collected information. This task was completed by the end of January 2019. B.6.2 Impact Screening 81. Several tools were used to identify the likely environmental impacts and risk of the proposed project in term of its location or siting and proposed activities including the WIM system component in road rehabilitation and improvement. Impact screening is the first step and dictates the scope of the environmental assessment. The ADB requires impact screening, using sectoral Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) checklist to determine the requirements and type of environmental assessment that needs to be undertaken. The types of impacts identified in the checklist that can be attributed to the proposed project and with a general appreciation of concomitant potential risks, determines the environmental categorization of a proposed project to be funded by the Bank. 82. In addition to the REA checklist, this assessment used the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (iBAT). Developed by International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the iBAT is a basic risk screening tool that uses interactive mapping that provides quick information on the possible presence in the project area of IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Key Biodiversity Areas (priority sites for conservation) and Protected Planet/The World Database on Protected Areas (covering nationally and internationally recognized sites, including IUCN management categories I–VI, Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance, and World Heritage sites. The iBAT provides additional information after the REA screening on potential impacts to biodiversity and natural resources and allows more accurate categorization. 83. Other screening methods and tools adopted in this study are the US Federal Transit Administration’s Noise Impact Assessment Spreadsheet to identify potential road noise impacts and the USEPA SCREEN 3 model to assess worst-case scenario dust dispersion from construction material piles. B.6.3 Primary Data Collection 84. Due to the limited anthropogenic activities that will cause elevated levels of dust and noise along the project area, dust and noise monitoring was performed only in Jaslik and Karakalpakiya. 85. A precautionary approach has been taken to biodiversity screening for the ecological assessment in general and to identify sensitive areas, species and ecosystems potentially present in the Project area, as well as identify data gaps, and decide valued environment components. The full approach to biodiversity screening is detailed in Section E.2.8 below. B.6.4 Secondary Data Collection 86. Secondary sources were identified and available information compiled to constitute relevant environmental baseline that includes project preparation technical assistance reports, land acquisition and resettlement report, published government reports, environmental impact assessments conducted in the same region, government websites, recognized institutions and relevant government departments. Background data and information was obtained from published and unpublished sources, e.g., on: climate, topography, geology and soils, natural resources, biodiversity, natural
28 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
resources (flora and fauna), agriculture, and socio-economic data. Background data and information was obtained from published and unpublished sources, e.g., on: climate, topography, geology and soils, natural resources, flora and fauna, agriculture, and socio-economic data. B.6.5 Public Consultations 87. Meaningful consultations were organized with the government agencies, local people/beneficiary population to know the level of project acceptability, understand their concerns, apprehensions, and overall opinion. Information were gathered about existing baseline environmental condition that includes ambient levels and its effects on health, water resources, flora and fauna, socio-economic standing of local people, impact due to loss of land other assets and common property resources, accident risk during construction and operation stage, and perceived benefits and losses. Relevant Information gathered were integrated in project design particularly in the formulate mitigation measures and environmental management plan. B.6.6 Other Tools, Additional Surveys and Studies 88. Climate risk screening to identify the project’s vulnerability to climate change, and modeling tools to assess noise, dust, and vibration impact were utilized in this environmental examination. B.6.7 Assessment of Potential Impacts 89. The assessment of the type, nature, direct, indirect, cumulative or induced impacts and their significance to the physical, biological, and socio-economic components of the environment has been done to ascertain the project’s environmental sustainability. Nature of impacts has been classified as significant, insignificant, short-term, long- term, reversible, irreversible etc. After identification of nature and extent of impacts, mitigation measures have been suggested. B.6.8 Preparation of the Environment Management Plan 90. The project specific environment management plan (EMP) has been formulated with the aim of avoiding, reducing, mitigating, or compensating adverse environmental impacts/risks and propose enhancement measures. This includes: (i) mitigation of potentially adverse impacts (ii) monitoring of impacts and mitigation measures during project implementation and operation (iii) institutional capacity building and training (iii) compliance to statutory requirements (iv) integration of EMP with Project planning, design, construction and operation. 91. The report is organized to comply with ADB Safeguard Policies (2009).
29 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
C. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
C.1 Introduction 92. The proposed project involves the rehabilitation and upgrading of a 240 kilometer section along the existing A380 between Kungrad and Daut-Ata terminating at the border control point (BCP) between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. The existing road will be upgraded to a Category II road having two lanes with cement concrete pavement. The project road is entirely under the jurisdictional area of the Kungrad region in the Republic of Karakalpakstan. Figure below presents the general alignment of the project road. The project road follows the existing A-380 from kilometrage 0+000 to about 9+207 and then re-aligns to the left from until 79+00 with a maximum separation distance of almost 4.6 kms. The project alignment then runs parallel on the left hand side to the existing road until 109+000km at a distance of about 35m. The separation distance increases to about 850m from 109+000 to 219+000km and from there joins the existing road alignment to Kazakhstan. Of the total 240 km project road, 61.5kms or 25% will follow the existing alignment while the rest, measuring 178.5 kms, will be realigned new road.
30 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 2: Karakalpakstan Road Project Existing (in Blue) and Proposed Alignment (in Red)
31 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 3: Typical Distance of Re-Aligned/New Road Construction Section of the Proposed Project
Figure 4: Major Road Re-Alignment/ New Road Construction Under the Project
C.2 Existing Karakalpakstan Project Road Condition C.2.1 Pavement 93. The condition of existing road pavement in the project is generally unsatisfactory. On major sections, there are continuous cracks, potholes, rutting, and edge deterioration forcing the drivers to reduce the travel speed and traverse on the shoulder or tracks. In some sections the existing pavement is completely deteriorated to a gravel road standard. A pavement survey was conducted by Tashkent Design Institute (Yul
32 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Loyikhasi Byurosi LLC) or TDI on the project road which was divided into two sections; first section is from km 964 to km 971, and the second section from km 1181 to 1204. 94. The first section has a bituminous gravel mix layer thickness from 40-100 mm, 140- 560 bituminous gravel layer, and an existing subsoil while the second section has thinner bituminous gravel layer between 100-450mm and slightly thinner bituminous gravel mix with thinnest section at 30 mm. The succeeding Table presents the types of defects found in the two stretches and it was concluded that the road has reached the end of its economic life, does not comply with the GOST 9128-20095 standards and a complete reconstruction of the pavement structure is needed. It is possible to drive between 70 and 120 kph along several stretches of the project roads, but these pavement defects pose hazardous driving conditions requiring sudden speed reductions and driving on the opposite lanes or even on shoulders. Despite the hazardous road condition, low traffic volume is a major contributing factor for the low record of road crashes. Table 4: Pavement condition of 2 Stretches in Karakalpakstan Road Project Defect Type Extent km 964 to km 971 1181 to 1204 Longitudinal Cracks 1,239m 1,838m Traverse Cracks 1,534m 1,796m Net Crack 368m2 1,174m2 Depressions 1.3m2 0m2 Corrugations 8.1m2 4m2 Pitting 1,954m2 1,715m2 Raveling 8.7m2 200m2 Potholes 3.2m2 45m2 C.2.2 Culverts 95. With the absence of major surface water bodies including rivers and streams, there are limited culverts along the project road. A total of 13 culverts were recorded of which 12 are metal pipes with diameters varying between 0.6m-1.0m and a reinforced concrete metal pipe with diameter of 1.0m C.2.3 Traffic Count 96. The annual average daily traffic (AADT) is estimated at 2,185 based on a 3-day survey, 4-hour measurements, and adjusted using factors established by the Uzavtoyul. The average daily traffic on the project road as reported by TDI is in the range of 1,800 to 2,600 vehicles per day in 2018. The traffic is uniform throughout the road section with majority of traffic as through traffic going up to the border. Cars account for more than half of the project road traffic and together with multi-axle trucks comprise 87% of the total. The traffic on the project road is primarily to/from Kazakhstan border point as there are limited developments along the project road that can generate traffic.
5 Specifications for asphaltic concrete mixtures for roads, aerodromes an asphaltic concrete
33 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 5: Summary of Traffic Counts Vehicle Type Others Count Multi Small Medium Heavy & Location Car Bus axle Tractors Total Trucks Trucks Trucks Motor Trucks bikes 936 1510 122 88 31 126 663 20 54 2614 1049 1163 14 51 20 10 469 34 61 1822 1184 1343 85 20 17 27 551 27 48 2118 Average along 1339 74 53 23 54 561 27 54 2185 corridor % of 61.3 3.4 2.4 1.1 2.5 25.7 1.2 2.5 100.0 Total Source: Tashkent Design Institute, 2019 97. The project road is considered as a single homogenous section based on the traffic characteristics. According to the Road Committee, traffic growth rate between 2015- 18 was 2.1% per annum. Data obtained from State Customs Committee on the number of vehicles crossed and the goods transported (combined export and import) during the same period indicated that car volume has more than doubled and have grown at an average of 21.9% per annum during this period, trucks have grown at a slower pace of 1.4%, while the volume of import and export in terms of weight grew at an annual rate of 4.8%. The import and export for the country as a whole indicate that imports grew at an annual rate of 6.4% and exports grew at an annual rate of 0.6% per annum in volume terms in the last 10 years. C.3 Proposed Rehabilitation and Upgrading of Karakalpastan Project Road C.3.1 Pavement 98. The entire project road will be upgraded to cement concrete pavement consistent with MKN 44-20086 with a minimum design life period of 25 years with the following specifications: • cement concrete pavement with 25 cm thickness from sulfate resistant concrete mixture, by type M-400 (GOST 26633-127). • geotextile (debonding layer); • dry lean concrete base course layer M-75 with 16 cm thickness from gravel sand mixture treated with sulfate-resistant cement (according to GOST 23558-948); • sub-base course with thickness 37 cm from gravel sand mixture with addition of 30 % of scarified pavement (according to GOST 25607-099); • geotextile (filter geosynthetic) on top of the new formation; 99. Parking spaces at rest areas will have the following pavement on top of the mineral base course: • 6 cm wearing course of fine graded, dense asphalt type B class 1 (according to GOST 9128-2009); • 10 cm bituminous binder of coarse graded, porous asphalt class 1 (according to GOST 9128-2009);
6 Instructions for design of rigid road pavements 7 Heavy-weight and sand concretes. Specifications. 8 Crushed stone-gravel-sandy mixtures, and soils treated by inorganic binders for road and airfield construction. Specifications 9 Crushed stone-sandy mixtures for road and airfield surfacing and bases. Specifications
34 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• 46 cm aggregate base of gravel sand mix in two layers (according to GOST 23735- 1410); 100. The pavement structure of merging, stopping and turning lanes will be identical to the pavement of the carriageway and the strengthening of unpaved shoulders with 15 cm thickness will be constructed by using gravel (aggregate) and sand mixture. The existing bituminous pavement shall be cold-milled or scarified and recycled. Material obtained from removal of the existing pavement will be used as material for the gravel shoulders. The design proposes expansion joints and when properly constructed have the advantage to allow for bigger extension of the slabs in between during high temperatures in summer. C.3.2 Culverts 101. The new road level will, in general, be raised by 1-2 m. In combination with the applied embankment slope ratio of 1:4 (V:H), the width of the new formation will be more than 20.0 m, ShNK 2.05.03-12, “Bridges and pipes”, requires a minimum diameter of 1.25 m for pipe lengths over 20m requiring all existing pipe culverts to be replaced. Along the new alignment, pipe culverts of diameter 1.25 m are also proposed. A total of 40 reinforced concrete pipe culverts will constructed for the project road. A total of 495 pipe section will installed with an aggregate length of 989.49 meters. Table 6: Proposed Pipe Culvert Details with 1.25m diameter
Number Number Marking stone Pipe Pipe Marking stone Pipe Pipe of of No. location diameter, length, No. location diameter, length, pipe pipe m m m m sections sections PK + PK + 1 84 75 1.25 26.12 13 22 1585 75 1.25 30.14 15 2 151 0 1.25 22.1 11 23 1611 0 1.25 28.13 14 3 230 25 1.25 22.1 11 24 1632 25 1.25 30.14 15 4 329 75 1.25 22.1 11 25 1649 75 1.25 22.1 11 5 439 75 1.25 24.11 12 26 1689 75 1.25 26.12 13 6 536 75 1.25 24.11 12 27 1726 0 1.25 22.1 11 7 577 50 1.25 24.11 12 28 1754 75 1.25 30.14 15 8 666 50 1.25 26.12 13 29 1839 75 1.25 30.14 15 9 752 50 1.25 22.1 11 30 1891 50 1.25 24.11 12 10 834 75 1.25 22.1 11 31 2107 75 1.25 24.11 12 11 847 75 1.25 22.1 11 32 2128 50 1.25 30.14 15 12 858 0 1.25 36.17 18 33 2149 0 1.25 26.12 13 13 865 25 1.25 22.1 11 34 2168 75 1.25 22.1 11 14 877 0 1.25 22.1 11 35 2222 25 1.25 22.1 11 15 1008 50 1.25 22.1 11 36 2236 25 1.25 22.1 11 16 1212 50 1.25 30.14 15 37 2249 50 1.25 22.1 11 17 1244 25 1.25 22.1 11 38 2266 0 1.25 26.12 13 18 1301 50 1.25 22.1 11 39 2285 75 1.25 22.1 11 19 1335 0 1.25 22.1 11 40 2338 0 1.25 22.1 11 20 1453 25 1.25 22.1 11 Total 989.49 497 21 1546 0 1.25 22.1 11 C.3.3 Road Design 102. The project road design was based on ShNK 2.05.02-07 (Road and Highway Design) which was based on the 1984 Soviet Union SNIP standards but adapted to Uzbekistan requirements to include design speeds and geometric characteristics as follows for Category II roads. The general design speed for the road sections is 120 km/h. At the approaches to the police control station near chainage km 220 and the boarder control point (BCP) at the end of the project road, it is locally limited for safe operation to a
10 Sandy-gravel mixtures for construction work. Specifications.
35 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
minimum of 20 km/h and 60 km/h, respectively. There is another existing police control point at chainage 85+250km, just behind a junction. However, this police control point will be suspended, and no speed limits are proposed at this location. Table 7: Main design parameters for Category II Road Design element Minimum values Design speed 120 km/h 100 km/h 60 km/h Min. radius 800 (600) m 600 (400) m 150 (125) m Max. gradient 4 % 5 % 7 % Min. crest curve 15,000 m 10,000 m 2,500 m Min. sag curve 5,000 (2,500) m 3,000 (1,500) m 1,500 (600) m Note: Values in brackets are allowed in mountainous terrain 103. Transition curves are required between straight alignment sections and circular curves or between two circular curves of significantly different radii. In compliance to ShNK 2.05.02-07, the designers avoided sections with long transitions that may result to unsteady riding and discomfort. Widening of road widths on curved section is required if the road radius is less than 800 m according to Road Standard 2.05.02-85 (SNIP). No curve widening is required in the project road. C.3.4 Cross Section Parameters 104. The succeeding figures present the cross-sectional parameters for Category II projects according to ShNK 2.05.02-07 standards. The project will have 2 lanes each measuring 3.75m wide, a carriage width ranging from 7.5-11.25m, and shoulders from 1.25-3.0m. Crossway slopes are 1.5-2.0% and 4.0% for the roadway and shoulders. Minimum radius is 800 meters and minimum stopping and passing sight distances of 250m and 450m, respectively.
Figure 5: Typical cross section applied for new construction
Figure 6: Typical cross section applied on existing earth road fill
C.3.5 Road Safety 105. The following elements are provided for traffic control and security on road: • Road signs and indicators; • Fences;
36 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• Signal posts; • Traffic markings; • Lighting; • Traffic lights; • U-turns; • Ground for short time stops for vehicles; • Sidewalks; • Bus stops. 106. Traffic control and safety facilities are designed according to the requirements of SHNK2.05.02-07 "Automobile roads". Road signs will be located and constructed according to the GOST10807-78 "Road signs" and GOST23457-86 "Technical means of traffic management". C.3.6 Earthworks 107. The Works include the following types of earthworks necessary for the construction of the Project Road and all associated works: • Removal of topsoil. • Construction of embankments. • Construction of subgrade. • Excavation and removal of the existing pavement materials and the existing road embankment. • Removal and replacement of unsuitable materials. • Structural excavation. • Excavation for the construction of side drainage and cross-drainage works. • Excavation for the removal and relocation of the existing utilities. • All backfilling necessary for the construction of bridges, retaining walls or other earth retaining structures, cross drainage structures and associated works, side drains and erosion protection work. • Preparation of beddings and filters for all structural, cross drainage, side drains or pavement works. 108. In general, the rehabilitation and upgrading project will require the construction of new embankments raising the existing profile by 1.0 to 1.50m against the existing road/embankment fill of the abandoned earth road. Only at limited short sections will the profile be maintained to include railway level crossing, police control point, and the approach to the border control point. The raising of the profile will require the widening of the existing embankments in addition to additional turning lanes and junctions. Benching will be observed where widening will occur for technical reasons and if the height of the new embankment is more than 3 m and the existing embankment slope ratio is steeper than 1:3 (V:H). Since the existing embankment fill of A 380 and the abandoned road is in general not higher than 1.0m, it is assessed that benching is not required. 109. No cuts are foreseen along the whole length of the project road. C.3.7 Sources of Construction Material Sources C.3.7.1 Quarries for Aggregates 110. There is no quarry for the supply of aggregates to be used in the pavement layers of the project road in close vicinity. Thus, such materials are foreseen to be brought from the Karatau quarry, located in the Amudarya district of Karakalpakstan. The quarry has a total reserve of more than 3 billion m3, meeting the requirements of GOST with a yearly production capacity of 2 million m3. Materials shall be transported by rail to the nearest railway station of each lot and be hauled from there by trucks.
37 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
C.3.7.2 Soil Borrow Pits 111. During the construction phase, the main material used will be soil for the new embankment fill. A total 77 borrow areas was selected and the amount of available suitable materials assessed as 6.79 million m3. The 77 borrow pits were selected by the designer based on the materials survey and the suitability of materials, and distances to the project road. However, the information contained in the geotechnical investigation report is limited to the chainage of the proposed borrow pits. The average distance from the road is given as 1.0 km and the average volume of available fill material is 100,000 m3. C.3.7.3 Other Construction Materials 112. Cement concrete will be mixed in batching plants established by the contractor on-site. The cement will be purchased from existing, licensed cement plants, transported by rail to the nearest railway station and then by road. Recently, a new cement plant was opened in the Korauzyak district which can augment the requirement of the project. Asphalt plants exist in Beruniy and Nukus. Bitumen, needed at small quantity and required for the construction of the rest areas and access roads shall also be transported by rail to the nearest railway station. Reinforced concrete structures, support traffic signs and other concrete structures will be sourced from Tashkent plants of concrete products (average haulage distance by railway is 1,035 km). Concrete culverts will also be sourced from Tashkent plants (average haulage distance by railway 1,035 km). Process water will be locally sourced typically available at the railway stations. Approximately 200 m3 of technical water will be needed per day during the construction phase and around 15 m3 of potable water per day. C.3.8 Construction Equipment Requirement 113. The succeeding Table presents an indicative list of the key equipment required in the construction phase. Table 8: Indicative Construction Equipment Equipment Type and Characteristics Minimum Number required Bulldozer (>245HP) 4 Excavator (>100HP) 12 Crushing and screening plant – mobile type at least 150 m3/h 2 including rock material washing machinery Concrete Paving Machinery width not less than 9.0 m for 2-layer 2 concrete placing including film-forming machinery Small Concrete Paving Machinery width not more than 5.0 m 1 including film-forming machinery Front Loader (>135HP) 15 Concrete batching plant (>150m3/hr) 2 Motor grader (>135HP) 10 Bitumen Distributor (>6000 L) 2 Asphalt Plant (>100 t/hr) 1 Paver (>200t/hr) 2 Vibratory roller (> 13T) 8 Tandem roller (8T) 4 Pneumatic Tyred Roller (>15T) 2 Tipper truck (10T) 30 Tipper truck (16T) 30 Mobile concrete carriers (>25T) 25 Transit mixer (>6m3) 6
38 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
C.3.9 Construction Camps 114. Camp sites will be selected keeping in view the availability of an adequate area for establishing camp sites, including parking areas for machinery, stores and workshops, access to communication and local markets, and an appropriate distance from sensitive areas in the vicinity. Construction camps will be required for all project lots. The final locations of the camps will be selected by the Contractor after the approval from the PMU and the Engineer. Camp sites may also include processing plants like rock crusher and concrete batching. The Contractor will provide the following basic facilities in the construction camps: • Safe and reliable water supply. • Hygienic sanitary facilities and sewerage system. • Treatment facilities for sewerage of toilet and domestic wastes • Storm water drainage facilities. • Sickbay and first aid facilities. C.3.10 Storage Areas 115. Temporary storage areas will be required for certain activities, such as the storage of sand and gravels and construction equipment. These storage areas may range in size from anything between 50 m2 to more than a hectare. The precise locations of these temporary facilities are not known at this stage. C.4 Projected Traffic 116. The traffic growth along the project road section is expected to be in line with import and export growth and the past trend observed at the border traffic as well as overall economic growth in Uzbekistan and growth prospect of Karalpakstan Republic. Based on these considerations, the traffic growth rates for projections have been estimated by the technical assistance team as given in Table 9. Table 9: Traffic Projection Growth Rates (%) Traffic growth rate (%) Period Goods Car Bus Vehicles 2018-2023 6.0 4.0 4.0 2023-2028 5.0 3.0 3.0 Beyond 2028 4.0 2.0 3.0 Source: Draft Final Report for Karakalpakstan Road Project; ADB TA No. 8950-UZB PPTA for Third CAREC Corridor Road Investment Program, Phase 1
Figure 7: Typical pavement condition of the Karakalpakstan Project Road
39 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
C.5 Supply, Installation and Operation of WIM System 117. A WIM system is a set of equipment and procedures that allows the measurements of tire loads (truck weight measured at the axles) of moving trucks to enforce the maximum axle loads to protect the roads from premature damage. The WIM system allows the real-time classification of vehicles by type, measure its weight, and process, sort, analyze, and transmit recorded data for enforcement. The operational principle of the WIM system is based on measuring sensors embedded in the road pavement that captures and record the vehicles gross vehicle weight (GVW) moving at normal speeds. Common WIM sensor used to measure weight include polymeric, ceramic, and quartz piezoelectric systems; bending plates; and load cells. The accuracy of WIM systems is affected by the pavement roughness, vehicle suspension, and speed, and the installation, calibration, and maintenance procedures of the system. The proposed Wim will have the following components: • Mainline sorting high speed system composed of weight sensors installed along the road that allows all vehicles to be instantaneously weighed at high speed • High accuracy low speed WIM system (both manned and fully automatic) which provides more accurate measurement of diverted trucks that were identified by the high-speed system • Variable messaged road signs, cameras, number plate recognition • Appurtenances that includes communication module and associated software 118. As previously mentioned, two types of facilities will be installed, Type 1 will have all the equipment described above, while Type 2 will not have the high accuracy low speed WIM system. The WIMs will be installed in the following locations: Table 10: Proposed Locations and Types of WIM System No Road code Approximate Lanes number and direction Type of WIM Number and name Location System of Sets 1 A-373 km 0- km 2,7 2 lanes, in direction Type 1 1 to Tashkent 2 A-373 km 192 – 193 2 lanes, in direction Type 2 1 to Osh 3 M-39 Km 817- Km 2 lanes, in direction Type 1 1 818 to Tashkent
119. The succeeding figures depict the locations of the WIMS in Google Earth Pro.
40 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Tashkent
WIM km 2.7 in A373
WIM km 817.9 in M39
Figure 8: Locations of WIM Systems Type 1
WIM km 192.4 in A373
Angren
Figure 9: Location of WIM System Type 2
41 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 10: Location of Type 1 WIM System Pull-Off Area in M-39, Km. 817.9
Figure 11: Location of Type-1 WIM Pull-Off Area at A-373, Km. 2.7
42 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 12: Location of Type-2 WIM Pull-Off Area at A-373 Km 192 (at the existing weigh bridge area at Km 192.4) 120. The design specifications of the WIM system are divided into 3 major aspects: site selection, technology selection, and installation requirement, and training. Although these design specifications are mainly related to the proper operation of the systems, like the pavement conditions and traffic flows, some of them can be considered as environmental mitigations particularly during the design and installation stages. These specifications include proper location: i) avoid low lying areas to protect against flooding particularly the WIM cabinet, muddy condition that will increase the cost of maintenance, iii) avoid conflicts with the existing flow of traffic particular in the merging area, and iv) enough site distance for easy visual understanding for the driver of the WIM station. The technology selection should consider solar power devices as a power source. Finally, in addition to training on equipment operation and maintenance, the operators will be required to train in handling toxic and hazardous substances, and on the illegal trade of endangered species.
43 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
D. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY, LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
D.1 International Environmental Policy 121. Uzbekistan is a party to numerous multilateral environmental agreements on biodiversity, climate change-Kyoto protocol, desertification, endangered species, and hazardous wastes. Those with relevance to the project includes: • Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wildlife Fauna and Flora, 1973-03-03 • UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 1995-10-17 • Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, 1979-06- 23 • Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous wastes and ther Disposal, 1989-03-22 • Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Ecology and Environmental Protection, 1992-02-08 • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992-05-09 • Agreement between Government of Republic of Kazakhstan, Government of Kyrgyzstan Republic and Government Republic of Uzbekistan on Cooperation in the Sphere of Biological Diversity Conservation of West Tien Shan, 1998-03-17 • Agreement on Cooperation in the Area of Environmental Monitoring, 199-01-03 • Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds D.2 ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement 122. ADB policy requires that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Report be prepared by the borrower in accordance with ADB EA requirements and that loans or grants are classified according to their potential impact on the environment. The road is entirely located in the Ustyurt Desert and well known for its biodiversity particularly for migrating birds and Saiga (Saiga Tatarica) a critically endangered antelope. The proposed project area is considered as critical habitat, having high biodiversity value and habitat of critically endangered or endangered species and migratory species. The proposed road upgrading which includes realignments, pass through critical wildlife habitat. The proposed Karakalpakstan Road Project is classified as Environmental Category A project. Accordingly, the detailed EIA study was carried out in accordance with the ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement 2009, and the ADB’s “A Good Practice Sourcebook, Environment Safeguard, December 2012.” The ADB Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) Checklist for Roads and Highways has been completed for the project. 123. The ADB has placed significant importance in the protection and preservation of biodiversity. The rapid industrialization, urbanization, and increase in natural resources have resulted to loss in biodiversity, among others (ADB SPS 2009). The ADB requires borrowers to assess the risks posed by their project on biodiversity and natural resources as part of the overall environmental impact assessment. In the case of the proposed project, the borrower should demonstrate the following: i) there are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat which could impair its high biodiversity value or the ability to function; ii) The project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species or a loss in area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem be compromised; and iii) Any lesser impacts are mitigated (SPS 2009). 124. Species are considered endangered or critically endangered if they are identified in Word Conservation Union’s Red List of Threatened Species or as defined in the
44 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Uzbekistan Red List11. Finally, when the project involves activities in a critical habitat, the borrower/client will retain qualified and experienced external experts to assist in conducting the assessment. D.3 Country Environmental Policies, Laws, Regulations and Administrative Framework D.3.1 Citizen’s Constitutional Rights and Responsibilities 125. RUz has developed numerous laws and regulations over and has updated the old Soviet legislation and policies to pursue sustainable social and economic development. RUz is continuously revising and improving the national environmental legislation, enacting new environmental laws and regulations, developed programs and action plans to address environmental issues to promote sustainable use of natural resources. 126. The RUz constitution, under its nature protection and management framework define the rights and responsibilities of its citizens to include: • All citizens shall protect the environment (Article 50) • Any property shall not inflict harm to the environment (Article 54) • Land, subsoil, flora, fauna, and other natural resources are protected by the state and considered as resources of national wealth subject to sustainable use (Article 55). D.3.2 Overall legal framework 127. Environmental protection is administered in Uzbekistan by the State Committee for Nature Protection (Goskompriroda). Goskompriroda is the primary environmental regulatory agency reporting directly to the Parliament and responsible for the implementation the Environmental Protection Law (1992). Based on the Regulation on the State Environmental Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan (1996), it is responsible for supervising, coordinating and implementing environmental protection. It also controls the use and renewal of natural resources at the central, region and district levels. 128. The overarching legislative framework that establishes the legal framework for environmental protection in the Republic of Uzbekistan is Law No.754-XII, 1992 on nature protection. The law states legal, economic, and organizational bases for the conservation of the environment and the rational use of natural resources. Its purpose is to ensure balanced relations between man and nature, to protect the environmental system and to guarantee the rights of the population of a clean environment. According to the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the Cabinet of Ministries of Republic of Uzbekistan, Goskompriroda and the local government bodies are responsible for implementing state laws on environmental protection and management of natural resources. Article 25 of this law requires the State Environmental Expertise (SEE) is a mandatory measure for environmental protection, preceded to decision making process. In addition. Article 25 prohibits the implementation of any project without a positive conclusion of SEE. D.3.3 Relevant Natural Resource and Environmental Management Laws 129. Uzbekistan has enacted the following natural resources and media-specific environmental management laws:
11 SPS 2009 footnote no. 6
45 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• “Nature protection” (1992) defines: i) legal, economic, and organizational bases for environmental conservation and rational use of natural resources; ii) ensure balance between man and nature; and iii) protect the environmental system and to guarantee the rights of the population of a clean environment. This law also provides the basis of the State Environmental Expertise (SEE) as a mandatory measure for environmental protection required for decision-making process. It also prohibits the implementation of any project without a positive conclusion of SEE. • ”Atmospheric Air Protection” (1996, amended on 10.10.2006). Specified standards, quality and deleterious effect norms, requirements on fuels and lubricants, production and operation of vehicles and other transport means and equipment, ozone layer protection requirements, obligations of enterprises, institutions and organizations toward atmospheric protection, and compensations for damages from atmospheric pollutions. • “Water and water use” (1993). Regulates the rational use of water and protects waters from pollution and depletion, prevention and liquidation of harmful effects of water, improvement of water bodies, and the protection of the rights of enterprises and institutions, organizations and dehkan farms for adequate and clean water. • “Land Code” (1998). Regulate land use and development by ensuring present and future generations have science-based, sustainable use and conservation of land, breeding and improvement of soil fertility, conservation and improvement of the environment and creating conditions for equitable development of all forms of management, and protection of individuals and legal entities’ right for land. • “Wastes management” (2002, as amended on 2011). Addresses waste management and mandating the SNPC to conduct inspections, coordination, provide ecological expertise and establishing certain parameters for waste management and disposal. The law promotes “polluter-pay” principle and makes enterprises responsible for their waste. Waste recycling is rewarded either through technical assistance grants from the state budget, the National Fund for Nature Protection or from voluntary contributions from businesses and individuals12. • “Protected Natural Reserves” (2004) – Enacts the mandatory preservation of unique, valuable natural objects and complexes, genetic fund of plants and animals, the prevention of the negative impact of human activities on nature, the study of natural processes, the monitoring of the environment, the improvement of environmental education. • “Environmental control” (2013). Provides the approach to that include: (i) prevention, detection and suppression of violation of the requirements of legislation in the field of environmental protection and rational use of natural resources;(ii) monitoring the state of the environment, identifying situations that can lead to environmental pollution, irrational use of natural resources, create a threat to life and health of citizens; (iii) determination of compliance with the environmental requirements of the planned or ongoing economic and other activities; (iv) ensuring compliance with the rights and legitimate interests of legal entities and individuals, performing their duties in the field of environmental protection and rational use of natural resources.
12 Article 25. Financing of Waste Management and a Decrease in their Education. https://countrysafeguardsystems.net/sites/default/files/Law on Management of Waste.pdf
46 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
D.3.4 Republic of Uzbekistan National Red Data Book 130. The Red Data Book of Uzbekistan (UZrdB) is the main document containing the aggregate information on the state of rare, reducing in population size and endangered species of plants and animals in the territory of Uzbekistan. The first edition of the Red Data Book of the Republic of Uzbekistan (1984) included 163 species of plants; the second edition (1998), 301 species; the third edition (2006), 302 species of higher plants and 3 fungi species; the fourth edition (2009), 321 species of higher plants and 3 fungi species. The first edition of the UZrdB (1983) included 63 species; the second edition (2003), 184; the third edition (2006), 184; the fourth edition (2009), 184 animal species and subspecies. In the last 10-15 years, according to International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the threat of extinction of species in the wild has grown for a number of species and subspecies, which is connected with the reduction of their habitats and decline in population size. This primarily concerns hoofed mammals as the most vulnerable and susceptible to anthropogenic influences of components of fauna. 131. The latest version of the UZrdB was released in 2019 and included 202 species of fauna, and 314 species of flora, however it is understood it has not been completed in conjunction with the IUCN. 132. Other laws and standards applicable to road projects are: i) Law on Protection and Usage Objects of Archeological Heritage (2009); ii) Decree of Cabinet Ministries of RUz on the procedure of issuing permits for special water use and consumption No. 171 of 14.06.2013; iii) State standard O’z DSt 1057:2004 “Vehicles. Safety requirements for technical conditions” and O’z DSt 1058:2004 “Vehicles. Technical inspection. Method of control”; iv) SanR&N RUz No.0179-04 Hygienic norms. List of Maximum Allowable Concentrations (MACs) of pollutants in ambient air of communities in the Republic of Uzbekistan; v) SanR&N RUz No. 0267-09 Admissible noise level into the living area, both inside and outside the buildings; vi) SanR&N RUz №0120-01 Sanitarian Norms of allowed level of noise at the construction sites; vii) SanR&N RUz No 0088-99 Sanitarian requirements for development and approval of maximum allowed discharges (MAD) of pollutants discharged into the water bodies with waste waters. D.3.5 Air, Water, Noise and Waste Standards and Regulations D.3.5.1 Air Quality Legislation and Standards 133. The key legislation relating to air emissions and ambient air quality in Uzbekistan applicable to the Project includes the following: • Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Atmospheric Air Protection - No.353-I of 27.12.1996 (as amended on 10.10.2006), specifies standards, quality and deleterious effect norms, requirements on fuels and lubricants, production and operation of vehicles and other transport means and equipment, ozone layer protection requirements, obligations of enterprises, institutions and organizations toward atmospheric protection, and compensations for damages from atmospheric pollutions. The Cabinet of Ministries of the GoU, Goskompriroda and local government bodies are responsible for implementing the law. • Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan on State Sanitary Control - No.657-XII of 03.07.1992 (as amended on 03.09.2010). Regulates sanitary-epidemiological well- being and radiation safety, the right of persons to a healthy environment and the rights and guarantees of their implementation. • Criminal Code, Section 4. Environmental Crimes approved on 22.09.1994 (as amended on 04.01.2011) specifies the concept and defines punishment for violation of the norms and requirements of environmental safety, willful
47 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
concealment or misrepresentation of environmental pollution, violation of flora and fauna, water, land, subsoil, and protected areas. • Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Environmental Expertise - No.73-II of 25.05.2000 (as amended on 04.01.2011) provides the purposes, objectives and types of environmental expertise. The law defines the qualifications, duties and obligations of environmental experts. Goskompriroda has overall responsibility for implementing this legislation through The Departments of Glavgosecoexpertiza and Gosecoexpertisa (which are both under Goskompriroda) and the Provincial branches of Goskompriroda. 134. The key sanitary rules and norms include: • List of Maximum Allowable Concentrations (MACs) of pollutants in ambient air of communities in the Republic of Uzbekistan SanR&N RUz No.0179-04. • Sanitary norms and requirements to protect ambient air in communities of the Republic of Uzbekistan SanR&N RUz No.0246-08. • List of Maximum allowed concentration (MAC) of pollutants into the atmosphere air of settlements in Uzbekistan SanR&N No 0293-11. • List of maximum permissible concentration (MPC)- microorganism-producers in the air of settlement areas SanR&N No 0147-04.
Table 11: Applicable Ambient Air Quality Standards and Guide Values13 Averaging Source of Parameter Unit Concentration Period Standard 1 year 50 Uzbekistan 1 month 100 Uzbekistan Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) μg/m3 24 hour 20 IFC 10 minute 500 IFC One time 500 Uzbekistan 1 year 40 IFC/ Uzbekistan 1 month 50 Uzbekistan Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) μg/m3 24 hour 60 Uzbekistan
1 Hour 200 IFC/ Uzbekistan One time 85 Uzbekistan 1 year 60 Uzbekistan Nitrous Oxide NOx μg/m3 1 month 120 Uzbekistan 24 hour 250 Uzbekistan One time 600 Uzbekistan 1 year 3000 Uzbekistan Carbon Monoxide (CO) μg/m3 1 month 3500 Uzbekistan 24 hour 4000 Uzbekistan One time 5000 Uzbekistan Hydrocarbons saturated μg/m3 One time 1000 Uzbekistan C12- C19 I Year 20 IFC Particulate matter PM10 μg/m3 1 month 80 Uzbekistan
24 hour 50 Uzbekistan Particulate Matter PM2.5 μg/m3 1 year 10 IFC 24 hour 25 IFC
13 OLTIN YO'L GAS TO LIQUIDS PROJECT, Environmental, Social, Health and Safety Impact Assessment (ESHSIA), SECTION 4.0 – LEGAL. Golder Associates, 2014.
48 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
D.3.5.2 Water Quality Legislation and Standards 135. Water resources management, allocation and use in Uzbekistan are under the control of the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources (MAWR). It oversees national specialized associations, provincial and district departments of agriculture and water resources, and interprovincial and inter-district canal management authorities. MAWR is responsible for the implementation of the Water and Water Use Law (No.837-XII of 06.05.1993). It monitors the regulation of water use; protection of waters from pollution and depletion; prevention and liquidation of harmful effects of water; and improvement of water bodies and the protection of the rights of enterprises and institutions, organizations and dehkan farms and individuals. This Law authorizes the following concerned agencies to carry out management and control of water use and protection; i) MAWR for surface water; ii) State Committee for Geology and Mineral Resources (Goskomgeologia); and iii) State Inspectorate for Exploration Supervision, Operations Safety Supervision of Industry, Mining and Utilities Sector (or Sanoatgeokontekhnazorat). The key regulations governing water quality are: i) rationalizing discharges of pollutants into water bodies and on the terrain, taking into account technically achievable performance of wastewater treatment (RH 84.3.6:2004), ii) endorsement and approval of projects of wastes disposal and limits for its disposal (RH 84.3.22:2006), iii) hygiene requirements for the protection of surface waters in RUz (SanR&N No 0172-04) and criteria for hygienic assessment of the level water bodies contamination for health risks population in Uzbekistan (SanR&N No 0255-08); iv) development and approval of maximum allowed discharges (MAD) of pollutants discharged into the water bodies with waste waters (SanR&N No 0088-99). Table 12. Maximum Allowable Concentrations to Water14 # Parameter MAC (River) MAC (Canal) 1 Ammonium (NH4+) 0.50 mg/l 1.50 mg/l 2 Nitrate (NO3) 9.10 mg/l 25.0 mg/l 3 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 0.02 mg/l 0.50 mg/l 4 Sulfate (SO2) 100 mg/l - 5 Phosphate (PO4) 0.3 mg/l 1.00 mg/l 6 Calcium (Ca) 180 mg/l - 7 Iron (Fe) 300 μg/L - 8 Barium (Ba) 100 μg/L - 9 Chromium (Cr) 500 μg/L - 10 Nickel (Ni) 100 μg/L -
D.3.5.3 Noise Standards 136. SanPiN 0267-09 provides the noise limits which are consistent with the IFC guide values as presented in the table below: It should be noted that the IFC EHS guide does not provide indoor values. Table 13: Noise Limits from SanPiN No. 0267-09& IFC EHS Guidelines Location Time SanPiN No. 0267- IFC Standards 09 Areas adjacent to homes, clinics, dispensaries, rest From 7 am to 55 dB(A) 55 dB(A) homes, boarding houses, 11 pm boarding homes for the
14 http://nodaiweb.university.jp/desert/pdf/JALS-P17_195-198.pdf
49 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Location Time SanPiN No. 0267- IFC Standards 09 elderly, childcare facilities, schools and other From 11pm to 45dB(A) 45 dB(A) educational institutions, 7 am libraries Living rooms of apartments, From 7 am to holiday homes, preschool 40 dB(D) - 11 pm From institutions, boarding schools 30 dB(D) - 11 pm to 7 am
137. The IFC-EHS guideline further provides that noise impacts should not exceed the levels these guide values or result in a maximum increase in background levels of 3 dB at the nearest receptor location off-site. D.3.5.4 Other Regulations Relating to Road Construction 138. The following section provides a summary of other regulations relating to road construction in Uzbekistan. • Uzbek Law on Automobile Roads (July 03, 1992) states that any construction or reconstruction of roads requires the official approval of the Ecological Committee. • Law on Protection of Archeological Monuments (October 13, 2009). Regulation of the relations in the range of protection and use of cultural heritage objects which is national property of Uzbek people. • ShNK 2.05.02 – 07; KMK 2.05.03-97 Building Code & Regulations for Automobile Roads Environmental Protection: Indicates the general need to minimize adverse environmental impacts in road design and provides for instructions on the removal and re-use of top soil; the need to provide buffer between the road and populated areas and to carry out noise reduction measures to assure compliance with the relevant sanitary norms; on the dumping of excess materials. • The Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Sanitary and Epidemiological Safety, 1995 Section III: Responsibilities of State Bodies, Agencies, Companies on the Provision of Sanitary and Epidemiological Safety: General framework provisions on the requirement to provide healthy and safe conditions at workplaces and work camps (and many others) in compliance with the relevant sanitary hygiene, construction regulations and norms. • ShNK 3.06.03 – 08; КМК 3.06.04-97 Norms of Construction Safety: Detailed regulations on construction worker’s health and safety providing organizational procedures of construction and work sites and material transport, standards on maximum concentrations of toxic substances in the air of working zones, and information and education requirements for workers on sanitation and health care issues and the specific hazards of their work. • Guidelines for Road Construction, Management and Design, Part I: Planning of Automobile Roads: Addresses environmental issues in road design, construction and maintenance. Part II: Construction of Automobile Roads: Requires that the impacts on the ecological, geological, hydro-geological and other ecological conditions are minimized by implementing adequate protective measures. Part III: Protection of the Environment: Requires the consideration of appropriate protection measures, which shall contribute to the maintenance of stable ecological and geological conditions as well as the natural balance. Provides general overview on the requirements for environmental protection. • КМК 2.01.08-96; ShNK 2.07.01-03; КМК 2.10.09-97 Regulations on Environmental Protection in Construction, Rehabilitation and Maintenance of Roads: Comprehensive provisions on environmental protection measures of surface and
50 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
groundwater resources; protection of flora and fauna; use, preparation and storage of road construction machinery and materials; servicing of construction machinery; provisional structures; provisional roads; fire protection; borrow pits and material transport; avoidance of dust; protection of soils from pollution, prevention of soil erosion etc. The appendices to this document also state standard for: maximum permitted concentrations of toxic substances; noise control measures; soil pollution through losses of oil and fuel from construction equipment; quality of surface water. D.4 Environmental Impact Assessment 139. The Law on Ecological Expertise (2000) and by Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers No 491.31.12.2001. the law establishes the RUz environmental impact assessment system requiring the SEE Department (Glavgosekoexpertiza) to review environmental impact reports, among others. The review of environmental assessment is based on: i) compliance of projected economic and other activities with environmental requirements in the stages preceding decision making on its implementation; ii) level of ecological danger planned or carried out business and other activities, which may have or had a negative impact on the condition of the environment and public health; and iii) adequacy and reasonableness of the measures provided for the protection of the environment and rational use of natural resources. 140. All economic activities subject to SEE are classified into one of four categories based on potential environmental impacts as follows: i) Category I –Corresponds to ADB category A; ii) Category II –Corresponds to ADB category B; iii) Category III – Corresponds to ADB category B or C; and iv) Category IV - Corresponds to ADB category C.15 141. The state environmental review is conducted by the Main Directorate for State Ecological Expertise (Glavgosecoexpertiza) of Goskompriroda. State environmental expertise of the Republic of Karakalpakstan, Provinces and Tashkent city implements state environmental expertise. Depending on the project classification the review of the environmental assessment follows 3 stages: i) Stage 1: Draft Statement on Environmental Impacts (DSEI) (‘PZVOS’ is the national acronym) to be conducted at the planning stage of the proposed project prior to development funds being allocated. ii) Stage 2: Statement on Environmental Impact (SEI) (‘ZVOS’ is the national acronym) to be prepared as required by the Glavgosecoexpertiza at Stage I to include additional investigations or analyses as necessary. The Statement must be submitted to the Glavgosecoexpertiza before approval of the project’s feasibility study, and therefore before construction; and iii) Stage 3: Statement on Environmental Consequences (SEC) (‘ZEP’ is the national acronym) represents the final stage in the SEE process to be completed before the project is commissioned. During this stage, the Goskompriroda at the state and oblast levels, defines the pollution limits of the project. Uzbekistan prescribes the maximum review period for Goskompriroda as 30 days review for Category I and II projects and 20 days for category III and 10 days for Category IV projects. 142. The proposed A-380 Karakalpakstan Project Regional Road Project from km 964 to 1,204 has already been subject to ZVOS and relevant approvals have been given by Glavgosecoexpertiza of Goskompriroda.
15 Based on the report “Uzbekistan Regional Roads and Development Project (P146334) Environmental and Social Management Framework” World Bank, March, 2015. Note – the WB and ADB EIA categories are broadly the same.
51 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
D.5 Administrative Framework 143. As stated above, Environmental protection is administered in Uzbekistan by the Goskompriroda which consists of a central body in Tashkent, and regional and district branches and agencies for scientific and technical support. Goskompriroda, through Glavgosecoexpertiza reviews, inter alia; environmental impact reports, prepares and implements ecological regulations and standards, coordinates environmental programs and elaborates the structure for environmental monitoring and governance of nature reserves. It approves regulations and issues permits for pollutant emissions and may prohibit projects and construction works that do not comply with environmental legislation. 144. The other State bodies within the Uzbekistan administrative framework with relevant environmental responsibilities are as follows: • Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources (MAWR) • State Committee for Land Resources, Surveys, Cartography and the State Cadastre (or Goskomgeodezkadastr) • State Committee for Geology and Mineral Resources (or Goskomgeologia) • Centre of Hydro-meteorological Service (or Uzhydromet) • Ministry of Health (or MHRUz) • State Inspectorate for Exploration Supervision, Operations Safety Supervision of Industry, Mining and Utilities Sector (or Sanoatgeokontekhnazorat) • Ministry of Internal Affairs (or MVD). 145. In 2017, the Government has net has instituted reforms to rationalize the bureaucratic arrangement for more effective environmental management. The State Nature Protection Committee tasked to supervise inter-agency activities on natural resources protection and use was reorganized to form the State Committee for Ecology and Environmental protection by virtue of RUz President Resolution No. 5024 ‘On Improving the System of State Management in the sphere of Ecology and Environmental Protection’. The newly organized Committee was strengthened to improve the environmental quality, pollution control, and further improve domestic waste management including treatment and disposal. 146. The same Resolution re-named provincial committees into departments and organizing the Inspectorate for Control of Wastes Generation, Collection, Transportation, Utilization, Treatment, Disposal and Sales Department at the cebtral and provincial levels. It introduced unitary enterprises named ‘Toza Hudud’ (clean area) under the Committee of the Republic of Karakalpakstan and provincial departments to transport domestic wastes under the district administration. Other reforms included the reorganization of the ‘Republican Inspectorate for Protection of Wild Animals and Plants and their Rational Usage’ to the ‘Inspectorate for Control of Biodiversity Protection and its Usage, and Protected Natural Areas’ under the State Committee for Ecology and Environmental Protection, the re-formation of the State Committee for Ecology and Environmental Protection (Goskompriroda) as the primary environmental regulator with regional branches and agencies providing scientific and technical support with similar structure as the Central.
52 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E. DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT
147. To assess the impacts of the proposed improvement to the project road, secondary data were compiled, and field visits were made by consultants to understand environmental profile of the project influence area. This involved field inspections at all the sensitive locations, collection of secondary information for all the environmental components and discussions with the officials, NGO’s and local populace. The profile presented below comprises of the following: • Physical environmental components such as meteorology, geology, topography, soil characteristics, air quality, surface and sub-surface water quality; • Biological environmental components such as aquatic, biotic and marine flora, fauna and mammals, and • Social and Cultural Resources (health, education, noise, cultural resources, etc.) E.1 Physical Environment E.1.1 Climate and Meteorology E.1.1.1 Climate 148. The project area has cold desert climate. Temperatures in this region are cold in the winter months with sub-zero temperatures between December and January. Summer temperatures usually exceeds 40 °C while the average winter temperature is about −2 °C but may drop as low as −40 °C. Like most of the country, the project area is also arid with average annual rainfall of no more than 200 millimeters that mostly occur in winter and spring. Between July and September, little precipitation falls, essentially stopping the growth of vegetation during that period.
Figure 13: Climate Classification Map Overlaid on Google Earth Showing the Project Road
53 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
149. The climate in Tashkent where the WIM systems will be generally located is describes a warm continental with cold and snowy winters from December to February with long and hot summers. The annual average temperature is 14.6° C and annual average precipitation, mostly in the form of snow is 429 mm. E.1.1.2 Average Precipitation and Temperature 150. The Republic of Karakalpakstan (RK) is located southwest of Uzbekistan occupying northwest part of Kyzylkum desert and the Amudarya delta. The total area the Republic is 165 600 sq.m. Due to its landlocked geographical location, the climate of Karakalpakstan is extreme continental. In the summer solar radiation is high and humidity is relatively low, the average July temperature reaching 28°C in the south and 26°C in the north. However maximum summer temperatures can reach 45°C, while in the open desert they can exceed 50°C. Winters are moderately cold with little snow, the average temperature in January falling to about -5°C in the south and about -8°C in the north. Based on records compiled and modeled by Meteoblue16, Karakalpakstan as represented by weather data in Nukus, from June to October the project area is extremely dry and hot and with an average monthly precipitation of 2.6mm, average monthly maximum temperature of 32° C and hottest day temperature 43° C, average minimum temperature of 14.8° C and coldest nights reaching 2° C (see succeeding Figures).
16https://www.meteoblue.com/en/historyplus
54 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 14: Average Precipitation and Temperatures, Nukus
Figure 15: Average Temperatures, Nukus
55 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 16: Average Monthly Precipitation
E.1.1.3 Wind Speed and Direction 151. The succeeding Figure presents the wind rose for Nukus showing the dominant winds blow from the north east (NE) and east-north east (ENE) directions. Of the 1,256 hours recorded wind speed annually from the northeast, 39% have speeds between 7-19 km per hour (kph), 33% for 5-12 kph, and 20% for 19-28kph. The wind distribution of the ENE winds are 36% for 12-19kph and 33% for 5-12kph.
Figure 17: Windrose for Nukus
56 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E.1.1.4 Dust and Noise Levels 152. The succeeding Table presents the dust and noise measurements along the road that are nearest the villages as illustrated in the succeeding Figures. Site selection to measure existing noise was guided by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Noise Measurement Handbook (2018) that requires the consideration of the following factors: location of noise-sensitive receptors, major nearby noise sources, budget, and schedule restrictions. The measurement of noise and dust serves two purposes in the environmental impact assessment. First, measured noise allows the description on the existing air quality surrounding the project, second, it provides the baseline to assess the magnitude of the impacts attributed to the project’s construction and operation. Short-term (1hr) noise measurements were made consistent with the FHWA guideline. This sampling duration is more than adequate to meet the FHWA’s requirement of “ability to represent the one-hour Leq with a shorter-term measurement to reduce time and cost for the measurement study without sacrificing accuracy.” During the sampling period, traffic can be considered as low-volume with few pass-byes. The FHWA allows sampling period of less than 1-hr17 but in the case of the proposed project sampling was extended for a full-hour to ensure the measurement is representative of the hourly flow. Measurement of noise and dust indicated that along the project road, dust levels are lower standards while the noise levels exceed commercial standards. The low dust concentration is partly explained by the high moisture content of soil coming from the winter thaw. Heavy truck traffic explains the elevated noise level. Appendix H provides the detailed Noise Survey Report.
Figure 18: Location of Dust and Noise Measurements Near Jaslik Village
17 Noise measurement fluctuation and sampling duration: a) Range of 10 dB or less: 10 minutes, b) Range of 10–30 dB: 15–20 minutes, c) Range greater than 30 dB: 30 or more minutes.
57 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 19: Location of Dust and Noise Measurements Near Karakalpakiya
Figure 20: Dust and Noise Ambient Air Quality Measurement Locations
58 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 14: Comparison between recorded ambient and applicable standards for dust and noise, March 2019 Location Dust Applicable Noise dB(A) Applicable Standard Value dB(A) (TSP), Standard Dust Value, Uzbek IFC (day/night) ug/m3 ug/m3 (day/night)
50 64.3/51.2 60/ no 55/45 Jaslik 29 standard
Karakalpakiya 25 50 66.5/53.4 60/ no 55/45 standard
E.1.1.5 Topography, Geology, and Soils 153. The physical environment of Uzbekistan is diverse, ranging from the flat, desert topography that comprises almost 80 percent of the country's territory to mountain peaks in the east reaching about 4,500 meters above sea level. The southeastern portion of Uzbekistan is characterized by the foothills of the Tian Shan mountains, which rise higher in neighboring Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and form a natural border between Central Asia and China. 154. The project area is located entirely within the Ustyurt Plateau, a central Asian plateau in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, lying between the Aral Sea and the Amu Darya delta in the east and the Mangyshlak Plateau and the Kara-Bogaz-Gol (an inlet of the Caspian Sea) in the west (see Figure 21). The Ustyurt Figure 21: Ustyurt Plateau Plateau extends roughly 200,000 km², with an average elevation of 150 meters. 155. The project road itself traverses the flat (i.e. less than 1 in 10 gradient) desert environment of the Ustyurt Plateau. For the first 50 kilometers, the road elevation drops slowly from 145 msl into a depression at around 125 msl before rising again to 140 msl after 110 kilometers. Over the next fifty kilometers the road rises to around 180 msl before slowly descending to the border with Kazakhstan at 90 msl. Figure below illustrates the topography of the Project area.
59 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
` Figure 22: Topography of Uzbekistan18
156. Soils cover (0.3-0.6m) in the Project area are classified as solonetz soils, grey brown loamy desert soils found throughout the west part of Uzbekistan the plains of the Usturt plateau.19 The soils support sparse vegetation, mostly wormwood and are highly saline due to both natural and man-made conditions. Soils are also considered to have a negligible value due to historic contamination in the area formerly covered by the Aral Sea, the high salinity and poor agricultural quality.20 Accordingly, there are no agricultural activities within the Project corridor. 157. Erosion is a significant problem for much of Uzbekistan, particularly relating to poor irrigation schemes and water depletion along the Aral Sea. Wind is the main erosion factor on the open plains particularly on the Aral Sea bed. Desert ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to physical damage from vehicle movements, which result in loss of plant cover and disaggregation of soil particles. 158. Intensive farming activities and heavy industry on the land surrounding the Aral Sea has had the potential to result in widespread soil contamination. Historically the sea water had been impacted by a range of contaminants, mainly from run- off from the use of agro-chemicals in farming areas and the discharge of toxic industrial waste and sewage. It has been reported by some sources that these contaminants have concentrated over time as the waters have receded, leaving a chemical residue on the dry sea basin 159. The topography of the WIM system project sites is relative flat as required for the proper operation of the equipment and sensors. To illustrate, for Type 2 WIM systems, the roadway lane at least for 100 m prior to and 50 m beyond the WIM sensors shall be in straight lane in horizontal plan. The vertical grade should be no more than 1 percent. The cross slopes grade should be no more than 2 percent.
18 http://www.ginkgomaps.com/maps_uzbekistan.html 19 Land Degradation Assessment in drylands (LADA). FAO, 2003 20 Surgil Project ESIA. Mott Macdonad. November 2011
60 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E.1.1.6 Seismicity 160. The project area is located on a low seismic zone according to World Health Organization with recorded peak ground acceleration of 0.2- 0.8 m/s2. At around 0.2 m/s2 shaking people can sense indoors and can wake up from sleep. Noise and vibrations from doors, windows, and building frames are noticeable. Falling of dusts, small cracks in plasters, falling of some roof tiles, bricks falling from a few roof-top chimneys, and rocking or flipping of unstable objects may occur. At 0.8m/s2, most people are unable to stand stably and a few may be scared enough to run outdoors. Cracks in the walls, falling of roof tiles, some roof-top chimneys may crack or fall apart. Cracks in river banks and soft soil; occasional burst of sand and water from saturated sand layers; cracks on some standalone chimneys may occur. 161. In 1999, the country established a law on earthquake disaster preparedness and also special building codes for planning and construction (KMK 2.01.03-96 “Norms and Regulations for Construction in Seismic Zones” and KMK 2.07.01-94 “Town-planning, lay-out and building of urban and village settlements”). 162. The geology in the vicinity of the Project area, except for its potential value as a gas source, is generally assessed as having a negligible geological value, as there are considered to be no sensitive geological features in this part of the Project area.
Figure 23: Seismic Distribution Hazard Map of Uzbekistan E.1.1.7 Hydrology E.1.1.7.1 Surface Water 163. The Republic of Uzbekistan and most of the neighboring countries are situated in the Aral Sea internal drainage basin which shares water across its boundaries for economic and environmental needs. The fresh waters of the rivers, lakes and reservoirs are used to irrigate farms, as process water for industries, and supply domestic consumption and other public utility sector needs. The use of low productivity saline lands for agricultural production, in-stream disposal of collector-drainage waters
61 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
and inefficient wastewater purification systems has currently resulted to the deterioration of Uzbekistan’s water resource quality and in increase in water salinity. 164. The largest amount of surface water resources (about 90%) is generated in the mountainous areas of neighboring countries. Internal water resources comprise lakes, groundwater resources, rivers and the water reserves of glaciers. Large and small rivers, as well as groundwater, are the main constituents of available water resources in Uzbekistan. 165. The main rivers are the Amu Darya River, formed by the confluence of the Vakhsh and Pyandj Rivers, the Syr Darya River, formed by the confluence of the Narin and Karadarya rivers, and the Chirchik River near Tashkent. The Amu Darya River basin includes the Surkhandarya, Sherabad, Kashkadarya, and Zarafshan rivers, but only the Kashkadarya and Sherabad Rivers are entirely located within the territory of Uzbekistan.21 166. The Project road does not cross any river. The nearest surface water features are the Chimboy lake and the Sudochye lake, both of which are more than ten kilometers east and west respectively of the southern start point on the project road. Neither of these surface waters are anticipated to be impacted by project works due to their distance from the road. The Figure below shows regional water use and illustrates the fact that waters from the Amu Dayra divert to the Aral Sea before reaching the Project area.
Figure 24: Regional Water Use22
21 Environmental Performance Review – Uzbekistan. Second Review. UN, 2010 22 http://www.cawater-info.net/aral/i/vod-res-bam-e.gif
62 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E.1.1.7.2 Groundwater 167. The estimated regional groundwater reserves in Uzbekistan is 18,455 million m3/year. The total actual extraction is 7,749 million m3/year, which is about 42 % of the estimated reserves. Fresh groundwater is concentrated mainly in the Fergana Valley (34.5 %) and the regions of Tashkent (25.7 %), Samarkand (18 %), Surkhandarya (9 %) and Kashkadarya (5.5 %), with the rest being brackish or saline and having limited potential for use. Groundwater supplies are mainly used for domestic and drinking water supplies (173.5 m3/s), irrigation and stock water development needs (70.5 m3/s) and industrial and process water supplies (29.6 m3/s). 168. Ground water in the Project area is highly saline (12 to 30 g/l 23), not even suitable for road construction, and can be found at depths of 8-10 meters.24 Groundwater that is extracted for use at depths of 80-90 meters is usually processed through desalination plants, including those found in Takhtakupir (2400m3/day) and five small plants in Muynak (15m3/day each). However, the groundwater in the northern part of the Ustyurt plateau is less saline than in the south as a result of the increased annual average recharge in the north. 169. According to the UN Environmental Performance Review of Uzbekistan (2010) as a result of anthropogenic factors, the groundwater quality continues to deteriorate in some regions of the country, such as the Republic of Karakalpakstan and drinking water supply problems are very acute in Karakalpakstan. E.2 Ecological Resources (baseline) E.2.1 Introduction 170. Uzbekistan is located at the crossroads of several bio-geographical regions and supports habitats as diverse as the high mountain ranges of the Tien Shan, the wetlands of the Amu Darya delta and deserts and semi-arid deserts around the Aral Sea. Almost 85% of the country is, however, desert or semi desert, and the project itself is located within one of the largest arid zones in Central Asia: the Ustyurt Plateau. 171. Ustyurt is a 200,000km2 semi-arid, raised plateau surrounded by chinks (extensive cliffs or escarpments), and bounded by the Caspian lowland in the north, the Aral Sea in the north east, the Mangyshlak Peninsula in the West, and the Karakum and Kyzylkum deserts in the south. 172. The main landscape of the plateau is clay desert with a wavy relief although it also has numerous endorheic basins25, dry lakes, salt lakes, and takirs26 or sand islands. Prominent components include the Assake-Audan depression (~30m above sea level (asl)); the Churuk Depression-and giant Barsakelmes salt-lake, the Agiyik salt marsh, and the Sam, Karticom, and Matai-Kum sands. The central part of Ustyurt is also crossed from the north-west to the south-east by Karabaur Ridge (~300 m asl). The average height of the plateau is some 230 m above mean sea level, although its distinctive cliffs (as seen below) rises to more than 150 meters above this.
23 http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/Y4711E/y4711e05.htm 24 The Aral Sea: The Devastation and Partial Rehabilitation of a Great Lake. Philip Micklin, Nikolay Aladin, Igor Plotniko. 2014 25 Inland drainage basins where water flows to inland terminal locations where it eventually evaporates or seeps into the ground, having no access to discharge into the sea. 26 In Kazakh means smooth, even, or bare
63 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 25: Cliffs of the Ustyurt Plateau 173. The road itself will be located at a considerable distance from these more striking features and runs across a large area of flat, generally undifferentiated semiarid desert. The main notable ecological feature in the vicinity of the Project road is a 5km x 1km Haloxylon forest, located between km 95 and 99 of the Project road. 174. The climate of the Ustyurt plateau is typical of semiarid deserts on Central Asia, sharply continental with hot summers, cold winters, and significant variations in annual and daily temperatures. Atmospheric precipitation amounts only to 90 – 120mm, falling mainly in autumn and spring. Snow cover historically lasts from 14 to 50 days. 175. There are little surface water sources on the plateau, and groundwater (found at depths of 6-60 m) is typically mineralized. Clay depressions across the plateau can form temporary lakes (northern upland, central Barsakelmes, southern lowland) after rains and serve as watering places although animals can be forced to make long migrations between them as they dry out. There are no water courses or permanent lakes in the north of the Ustyurt, though water accumulates in saucer-shaped depressions during spring rains. Waterbodies increase poaching risks, with ungulates (hoofed mammals) especially vulnerable. 176. Two settlements on the Ustyurt plateau are found along the Project road, Jaslik and Karakalpakiya: • Jaslik is a settlement of the Kungrad district in the Republic of Karakalpakstan and has a population of 4,027 people, comprising 51.2% women and 48.8% men • Karakalpakiya settlement has a population of 3,254 people, comprising 52.3% men and 47.7% women E.2.2 Protected and Designated Areas 177. Uzbekistan has five categories of protected natural areas, including national nature reserves (zapovedniks); national parks; ecological centres; wildlife areas (zakazniks); and national nature memorials.27 There are currently eight strictly protected nature reserves, two national parks and 10 state reserves designated for a special purpose. Two of the protected areas on the Ustyurt plateau are located near (although not within) the Project AoI, but species supported by them are known to
27 Environmental Performance Review – Uzbekistan. Second Review. UN, 2010
64 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
occur in the AoI and they provide potential opportunities for conservation gains (should they be required). They are therefore described below. E.2.2.1 Saigachy Reserve / IBA 178. The 628,000 ha Saigachy Reserve was gazetted in 1991 by the State Committee of Karakalpakstan primarily to help safeguard and restore the population of Critically Endangered Ustyurt Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica) and their traditional calving places (although calving hasn’t been recorded in the reserve in recent years). Originally designated as a temporary reserve for 10 years (renewed in 2001 and 2011) the reserve has since been re-designated and expanded and is now divided into six strictly protected zones and a buffer area. As a state reserve all activities other than monitoring and research are forbidden in the Reserve. There are presently 13 people responsible for the management of Saigachy Reserve, constituting 10 rangers and three administrative staff. Resources of the reserve include four cars and a field base, and the rangers carry out daily monitoring for poachers and species identification. According to consultation with Saigachy Reserve staff in December 2019, recent monitoring suggests there is one remaining herd of saiga in the reserve, comprising approximately 15 individuals. The Project does not encroach on either the strictly protected zone or the buffer area of the reserve, but it is located some 22km from the road at its southwest corner i.e. 12 km from the Project AoI. Impacts from the Project on the Saigachy Reserve are expected to be minimal, however species supported by the reserve could potentially occur in the Project AoI.
Figure 26: Saigachy Reserve
65 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
179. The reserve is also overlapped by the 511,000ha ‘Saiga Nature Sanctuary’ IBA, designated primarily for the A1 Trigger Species Houbara Bustard (Chlamydotis undulata – IUCN VU) with up to 30 breeding adults were recorded during the last count in 1999-2002 (see species details below). Other resident bird species are all Least Concern (LC) globally according to the IUCN Red List and include typical desert species. A number of birds of prey were recorded breeding in the Reserve area until the 1980s, including Steppe Eagle (Aquila nipalensis), Cinerous vulture (Aegypius monachus), White-tailed-eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), Eastern imperial eagle (Aquila heliасa) and Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). However, the changes to their habitat and the decline of the saiga has adversely affected these species (together with illegal trapping) and there are no recent records of breeding of these species in the reserve. In addition to Saiga, particularly rare species/subspecies recorded from the area include: Goitered gazelle (Gazella subgutturosa) – currently 2 herds in the reserve (1 herd of 6-7 individuals and another herd of 10-15 individuals); and Turkmen caracal (Caracal c. michaelis) – rare. E.2.2.2 Sudochye Lake IBA 180. The Sudochye Lake IBA is 46,467 ha in size and is located just over 15km from the southernmost point of the project road alignment (outside the Project AoI). The IBA is an important area for many waterbird species, including threatened White-headed Duck and Lesser White-fronted Goose, and triggers IBA criteria A1, A3, A4i, and A4iii. Appendix D provides further detail on species present in Sudochie Lake and its classification as an IBA. The IBA is located in the central part of the Central Asian Flyway (CAF) and is a stopover location for waterbirds from the north of Europe and Asia, Western Siberia and Kazakhstan on migration to wintering areas on the southern Caspian Sea, and in Africa, India and Pakistan. Spring migrations begin in the middle of March and end in the middle of May. The lake supports many breeding waterbird species plus many migrants, including rare and disappearing species, using the Western-Asian migratory route. !
Saigachy IBA
Sudochye IBA
Figure 27: Sudochye and Saigachy IBA locations 181. Given the distance of the IBA from the Project road (over 15km) the risk of impacts associated with the Project to the IBA are thought to be low, although induced growth of nearby towns/industry could lead to changes to local water extraction rates. Some
66 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
of the waterbirds that use the Lake have been recorded crossing the Project area during their migrations, although this represents a very small proportion of their overall passage and the dry semiarid desert nature of AoI means that it is not considered a significant bottleneck or stopover location for these species. As a result the waterbirds are highly unlikely to land on, or use, the project area’s on any regular basis. E.2.3 Natural and Modified Habitat 182. The ADB SPS requires projects to map Natural Habitat and Modified Habitat. Modified Habitat (MH) is defined as follows: • Where the natural habitat has apparently been altered, often through the introduction of alien species of plants and animals, such as in agricultural areas.” 183. In these areas the borrower/client will exercise care to minimise any further conversion or degradation of such habitat, and will, depending on the nature and scale of the project, identify opportunities to enhance habitat and protect and conserve biodiversity as part of project operations. 184. Natural Habitat (NH) is defined as: • Land and water areas where the biological communities are formed largely by native plant and animal species, and where human activity has not essentially modified the area’s primary ecological functions. 185. According to the ADB SPS, in areas of natural habitat, the project road will not significantly convert or degrade28 such habitat, unless the following conditions are met: • No alternatives are available. • A comprehensive analysis demonstrates that the overall benefits from the project will substantially outweigh the project costs, including environmental costs. • Any conversion or degradation is appropriately mitigated. 186. Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve at least no net loss of biodiversity. They may include a combination of actions, such as post-project restoration of habitats, offset of losses through the creation or effective conservation of ecologically comparable areas that are managed for biodiversity while respecting the ongoing use of such biodiversity by Indigenous Peoples or traditional communities, and compensation to direct users of biodiversity. E.2.4 Project Natural and Modified Habitat 187. In general, ecological conditions on the Ustyurt plateau have deteriorated in recent decades with the drying of the Aral Sea, the development of the oil and gas industry (including numerous access roads for the wells), and informal roads. As a result, an increasing amount of the traditional Natural Habitat is now considered at least modified to some extent and, generally, the project road affects such areas.29 .
28 Significant conversion or degradation is (i) the elimination or severe diminution of the integrity of a habitat caused by a major, long-term change in land or water use; or (ii) the modification of a habitat that substantially reduces the habitat’s ability to maintain viable populations of its native species. Significant conversion may include, for example, land clearing; replacement of natural vegetation (for example, by crops or tree plantations); permanent flooding (by a reservoir for instance); drainage, dredging, filling, or canalization of wetlands; or surface mining. 29 Distribution Pattern and Modern Status of Rare Plant Species on the Ustyurt Plateau in Uzbekistan. H. F. Shomurodov, Sh. U. Saribayeva, and A. Akhmedov. Arid Ecosystems. 15, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 261–267.
67 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
188. The proposed project road follows the existing A380 from kilometrage 0+000 to about 9+207. Then it re-aligns to the left until 79+000 with a maximum separation distance of almost 4.6 kms. The project alignment then runs again on the existing road until 109+000km. Behind 109+000 it deviates to the left with a separation distance up to 850m till 219+000km and from there joins the existing road alignment to Kazakhstan. Of the total 240 km project road, 61.5 km or 25% will follow the existing alignment of the A380 while the rest, measuring 178.5 km, will be realigned new road which will follow an abandoned road.
Figure 28: Linear infrastructure and temporary roads around the Project area (Project road in blue)
189. Starting at its southern end the road passes through the typical clayey gravelly desert landscape of the Ustyurt plateau with occasional areas of salt pan and sandy desert. There are no permanent streams here, although temporary freshwater lakes may form on the clay soils after rain. Much of the route passes through similar desert habitat to the southern end (mostly sandy plain), although the semiarid desert habitat has been adversely affected by construction of temporary roads and pipelines, as well as drilling for oil and gas (especially closer to Nukus). Habitat quality generally improves along the road towards the Kazakh border.
68 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 29: Truck using the abandoned, untarmacked road, December 2019 190. Of the 178.5 km, only 3.5 km do not follow the abandoned road. This is from km 9.5 to km 12 and km 218 to km 219 where transition between the existing A380 and the abandoned road takes place. Over 98.5% of the route alignment for the project road will follow either existing or abandoned road, constituting modified habitat. E.2.5 Natural Habitat Losses 191. Around 1.5% (3.5km) of the project route alignment will impact upon arid / semi-arid desert natural habitat of low biodiversity value, including the RoW at its widest possible point (~51m). An estimated 8,691,434m3 of soil fill for the embankments will need approximately 2,897,144m2 in land clearance (final locations for borrow pits yet to be confirmed; final amount potentially could be higher, Environmental Specialist to quantify losses throughout construction). Natural Habitat losses are also expected from culvert construction, where a total of forty culverts with 20m by 20m water collecting basins on either end are planned. Locations for temporary facilities for construction are to be finalized by the contractor, but where possible these will be located on already modified habitat. Table 15: Estimated Natural Habitat losses New alignment connection points incl. RoW at widest point 178,500m2
Borrow pits 2,897,144m2
Culverts 34,200m2
Temporary facilities (construction camps / storage facilities etc. Unknown
Total 3,109,844m2 (310.98 ha)
69 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E.2.6 Studies and sources of information on Ustyurt fauna 192. The ecological assessment has involved (further detail provided on these below): • Rapid biodiversity assessments (RBA); • Secondary data reviews; and • Consultations with key national and international experts. 193. A precautionary approach has been taken to the study. For example, if a species has been recorded in the wider area, and the habitat is considered suitable for the species, it is presumed that the species is present in the site. A precautionary approach has also been applied to the Critical Habitat Assessment (CHA), supplemented with ecologically appropriate areas of analyses (EcAoAs). Further biodiversity assessments and monitoring are proposed as part of the Project Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). E.2.7 Experts Involved 194. The following national and international experts have been involved in the development of this ecological assessment and the associated rapid biodiversity assessments field visits: Table 16: National and international experts involved Dr. Kashkarov Roman Danilovich, Birds Specialist of • Consulted between 28th / 29th Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds and January 2019 and December 2019 senior staff of the national Academy of Science Institute of Zoology. • Conducted drive-by and monitoring of the Project road 1st / 2nd April 2019
Mr. Sherimbov Halilula Satimovich, Specialist of • Consulted between 28th / 29th Biodiversity (SCEEP) and team leader of the United January 2019 Nations Development Programmes (UNDPs) Mainstreaming Biodiversity into the Uzbekistan Oil and Gas Sector. This work included study into saiga antelope in the Project area. Mrs. Elena Bykova, Saiga Conservation Alliance and • Consulted during December 2019 University of Tashkent (Department of Zoology). Mr. Aleksandr Esipov, Saiga Conservation Alliance and • Consulted during December 2019 University of Tashkent. Dr. Joseph Bull, Senior Lecturer in Conservation Science, • Provided technical advice University of Kent. Dr. Bull’s PhD research was conducted regarding Saiga conservation on Biodiversity Offsets for Saiga Conservation in Uzbekistan. • Consulted in December 2019 Dr. John Pilgrim, Biodiversity Consultant • Provided technical advice on Critical Habitat • Consulted between December 2019 /January 2020
E.2.8 Biodiversity Screening 195. A precautionary approach has been taken to biodiversity screening for the ecological assessment in general and to identify sensitive areas, species and ecosystems potentially present in the Project area, as well as identify data gaps, and decide valued environment components. An initial list of potentially present species and ecosystems (Appendix A) was developed based on data from the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) and consultations held with national experts in January 2019. (IBAT is a screening tool that allows the identification of threatened species in the project area based on global databases including the: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Key Biodiversity Areas (priority sites for conservation) and Protected
70 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Planet/The World Database on Protected Areas - covering nationally and internationally recognised sites, including IUCN management categories I–VI, Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance and World Heritage sites). 196. The following field work has also been undertaken:
• January 2019 screening visit undertaken in which involved a “drive-over” of the route and consultations with local community stakeholders. • 1st / 2nd April 2019 – Rapid Biodiversity Assessment (RBA) - conducted by EIA team, supported by Dr. Kashkarov. Involved a mixture of drive-over (km 964 to km 1,204), foot transects and stationary observations as well as additional consultations. A total observation time of 12 hours 45 minutes was involved and local fauna were identified from visual sightings as well as sounds, tracks, feeding marks and other traces. All survey locations were recorded and significant habitats were photographed; and • 10th / 12th December 2019 – RBA - conducted by ecological assessment team, supported by Mrs. Bykova and Mr. Esipov (Saiga Conservation Alliance). The RBA included a drive-by of the Project road alignment by car, including stop-offs at key locations (e.g. abandoned road, Jaslik town, Daut-Ata) E.2.9 Review of Other Secondary Data 197. A range of further secondary data sources were then identified including project preparation technical assistance reports, published government reports, environmental impact assessments conducted in the same region, government websites, recognized institutions and relevant government departments. • The Red Data Book of Uzbekistan (2019 Edition) • Environmental Impact Assessment Report - UZB: Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Corridor 2 Road Investment Program - Karakalpakstan Road Project (A380 Kungrad to Daut-Ata Section – 240 km) – July 2019 • EIA Project design documents (e.g. culverts, borrow pits) • ‘Biodiversity offsets for moving conservation targets’, Dr. Joseph Bull, 2013 E.2.10 Additional Consultations 198. Additional consultations were held in December 2019 with key government agencies, the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan, Goscomecology of Tashkent, and other university departments to improve understanding of the ecological conditions and verify information gathered during screening and secondary data gathering. The following table shows the consultations held: Table 17: Additional consultations Names Title When Dr. Svetlana Deputy director, Institute of Natural Sciences of 12th December Mambetullaeva Karakalpak Branch, Academy of Sciences of 2019 Uzbekistan
Gulara Matekova Researcher at Institute of Natural Sciences of 12th December Karakalpak Branch, Academy of Sciences of 2019 Uzbekistan
Myrat Jolybekov Head of Inspection, Goscomecology of 12th December Karakalpakstan 2019 Ibragimov Boranbay Head of Information Centre, Goscomecology of 12th December Karakalpakstan 2019
Olya Myrzanazarova Specialist of Information Centre, Goscomecology of 12th December Karakalpakstan 2019
71 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Names Title When
Mr. Khalilulla Head of Department of Protected Areas of Main 13th December Sherimbetov Department of biodiversity and Protected Areas 2019 of Goscomecology E.2.11 Fauna and Flora of the Project Area 199. The initial Biodiversity screening resulted in a list of some 343 species of fauna and flora that could occur in the project area, as provided in full in Appendix A. These included 27 threatened species, including (globally) two Critically Endangered (CR), five Endangered (EN), and 11 Vulnerable (VU) species, as well as nine species listed in the Uzbekistan Red Data Book as CR or EN. Some of these species (e.g. wetland birds and fish) are however only found in the wetlands of the region rather than in the vicinity of the proposed road. The table below outlines the results of the biodiversity screening work: Table 18: Summary of fauna and flora screening results IBAT screening IBAT surveys returned results of 172 and 175 species respectively for the grid (grid cells, 66001 cells 66001 and 66082 (see Appendix C for full list). The IBAT survey in total and 66082) identified 17 threatened species (11 birds, 1 fish, 1 invertebrate, and 4 mammals):
Bird species Anser erythropus, Lesser White-fronted Goose (VU, IUCN) Aquila heliacal, Eastern Imperial Eagle (VU, IUCN) Chamydotis macqueenii, Asian Houbara, (VU, IUCN) Clanga clanga, Greater Spotted Eagle, (VU, IUCN) Falco cherrug, Saker Falcon (EN, IUCN) Haliaeetus leucoryphus, Pallas’s Fish-Eagle, (EN, IUCN) Neophron percnopterus, Egyptian Vulture, (EN, IUCN) Otis tarda, Great Bustard, (VU, IUCN) Oxyura leucocephala, White-headed Duck, (EN, IUCN) Streptopelia turtur, European Turtle-Dove, (VU, IUCN) Vanellus gregarius, Sociable Lapwing, (CR, IUCN) Mammal species Gazella subgutturosa, Goitered Gazelle, (VU, IUCN) Ovis orientalis, Mouflon (VU, IUCN) Saiga tatarica, Saiga (CR: IUCN) Vormela peregusna, Marbled Polecat (VU, IUCN)
(also: Fish species Cyprinus carpio, Wild Common Carp, (VU, IUCN); and Invertebrate species Pseudanodonta complata, Depressed River Mussel (VU, IUCN) in wetlands only) Secondary Data Secondary data review focusing on the section of the Ustyurt Plateau (see Review for the sources below) generated a shorter but similar list of threatened species. The EIA review indicated there are 34 threatened species in the project area of which two species are reptiles, 25 bird species, and seven mammal species. 1st / 2nd April 2019 There were 23 species of terrestrial vertebrates (one reptile, 16 birds, six - Monitoring mammals) recorded during the observation period. Among them were large birds of prey like the Golden Eagle and Short-toed Eagle which are threatened according to the Red Book of the Republic of Uzbekistan Further expert The consultations held in January and December 2019 (listed in Section E.2.7 consultations above) were used to verify the findings above, identify gaps and confirm assumptions, based on the most recent observations by experts in Uzbekistan. The result was the final list as seen in Appendix A.
72 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
200. The Secondary Data Review drew on several environmental projects and programmes that have been implemented in the Southern Aral Sea region and Ustyurt Plateau, including: • Water and environment management with aim to restore Sudochie system of lakes (GEF/WB, 1999-2002); • The most important ornithological territories of Uzbekistan (Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds/BirdLife International/Darwin Initiative, 2006 – present); • Studies of the Southern Aral Sea region and Ustyurt as important habitats for birds and other components of biodiversity, development of recommendations for their conservation (Uzbek Agency of International Fund for Saving the Aral Sea/ Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds/Wetlands International/ CLP-SOS, 2008-2015); • Strengthening the sustainability of the national system of protected natural areas by concentration efforts on nature reserves (GEF/UNDP/Government of Uzbekistan, 2009 – 2010); • Ustyurt ecosystem conservation initiative (USAID/Darwin Initiative/FFI/Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds, 2009-2012); • Action plan for biodiversity conservation of the project “Construction of Ustyurt Gas Chemical Complex on the basis of Surgil field” (JV UZ-Kor Gas Chemical LLC/Mott MacDonald Ltd, 2012); • Integration of biodiversity conservation principles into the oil and gas industry of Uzbekistan (GEF/UNDP/ Government of Uzbekistan, 2010-2014); • Protection, rational use of wetlands of the Sudochie system of lakes (CAREC, 2015-2016); and • Complex ecological expedition to South Ustyurt, Uzbekistan (General Directorate of Forestry/Michael Succow Foundation/BMUB/DAAD/WWF, 2011-2017). 201. The biodiversity screening process described in Section E.2.8 resulted in a list of some 27 threatened species that could potentially occur in the project area as summarized in the table below. Table 19: Threatened species from biodiversity screening Status Mammals Birds Reptiles Plants Total Total potentially occurring in project 65 242 27 9 343 AoI Critically Endangered 1 1 0 0 2 (CR) Endangered (EN) 0 5 0 0 5 Vulnerable (VU) 3 8 1 0 11 Uzbekistan Red List: Critically Endangered 6 3 0 0 9 (CR) or Endangered (EN)
E.2.11.1 Flora 202. The flora of Uzbekistan is represented by over 4,800 species of vascular plants from 650 genera and 115 families30, although endemism rates are low at around 8% (or 400 species). The Ustyurt Plateau itself supports over 700 species of vascular plants, with northern areas having the greatest diversity. These include four plant species listed in
30 http://enrin.grida.no/htmls/uzbek/report/english/animal.htm
73 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
the Red Data Book of Uzbekistan (namely Malacocarpus crithmifolius, Euphorbia sclerocyathium, Salsola chiwensis, and Climacoptera ptiloptera) and a further three uncommon species (Crataegus korolkowii, Crambe edentula, and Lagochilus acutilobus). None of these have been recorded near the road to date however. 203. Dominant plants in the wider plateau include Anabasis salsa, which is considered a symbol of Ustyurt, boyalich (Salsola arbuscula), and keyreuk (Salsola orientalis). Black saxaul (Haloxylon aphyllum) is notable for forming brushwood in large areas in the north near Churuk, northwest near Kosbulak, and south near Shakhpakhty. In the central part of the plateau, white saxaul (Haloxylon persicum) grows near the Karaumbet and Barsakelmes salt marshes. 204. Biodiversity screening for the project identified 9 plant species present in the Project AoI, none of which are threatened. E.2.11.2 Haloxylon Forest 205. Whilst not directly impacted, the project alignment runs close to a well preserved 5 km x 1 km haloxylon forest 10 km north of the town of Jaslik. The haloxylon forest is made from Black Saxaul Haloxylon aphyllum, a tree that can grow up to 7m in height and is much-branched. This is considered an important habitat locally and is also used for autumn and winter grazing being a valuable fodder plant. The haloxylon forest is located from km 95 to km 99 on the right-hand side, at some 250 – 300m, from the existing A380. The new alignment at this stage runs along the existing A380 road (as it does from sub-section km 79 to km 110). This area appears to be the only significant stretch of Haloxylon forest remaining along the entire road alignment and should be protected from impacts (eg from construction sites or borrow pits or workers seeeking firewood. Anticipated impact and mitigation, including those related to the haloxylon forest can be read in Chapter G.2.
74 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 30: Haloxylon “forest” on the Ustyurt plateau 206. Whilst not protected, the Haloxlyon forest is important in desert areas of Central Asia where it plays an important role in combating land degradation by helping to fix shifting sands and increasing biological productivity. Herbaceous species can flourish under closed Haloxylon canopies, and Haloxylon forests can produce substantial amounts of edible biomass. E.2.11.3 Fauna 207. In total over 300 species of vertebrates are found in the Ustyurt plateau, including threatened species and Central Asian endemics such as the Central Asian Tortoise, Stepperunner, Severtzov’s Jerboa and Tamarisk Gerbil. Biodiversity screening for the project identified 334 mammals, birds, and reptiles that could potentially occur in the project AoI. E.2.11.3.1 Mammals 208. Ten threatened mammals were identified as being potentially or historically present in the project AoI, including the Caracal, Goitered gazelle, Marbled polecat, and Saiga antelope. Details of these are provided in the table below. Table 20: Threatened mammals potentially or historically present Species/ Status Distribution & Ecology Marbled Mosaically distributed, naturally rare species. It is spread at the Kyzylkum Polecat. desert, the Ustyurt Plateau, the Hungry and Karshi semi-arid deserts, the foothills and upper altitude of the Wester Tien-Shan and Pamir-Alay, the lower
75 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Species/ Status Distribution & Ecology (IUCN VU) part of Surkhandarya. In the upper part of the Ahangaran River there is an isolated high mountain area. Current population is ~5,000 individuals in NRB 2 (VU: Uzbekistan. Limiting factors: land cultivation and reduction of forage resources. D) Present in the sand islands in Ustyurt with interrupted Haloxylon and on the plains with saltwort and wormwood where prey species of Libyan Jird, Great gerbils, and Large Souslik. The Marbled Polecat is active at night. Could be attracted to the Project area because of the large population of rodents, and thus could potentially be at risk of injury or death from vehicular collision.
Goitered Gazelle. Mosaically distributed species it is spread at the Ustyurt Plateau, the Kyzylkum (IUCN VU) desert and adjacent areas, the Karshi semi-arid desert as well as at some places of Surkhandarya region. The semi–captive population is maintained in NRB 2(VU:D) “Djeiran” Ecocenter, in Bukhara. It inhabits clay, rubbly deserts with hard soils, hilly lands and foothills, sandy deserts with hilly dunes. In the past, it was numerous (tens and hundreds of thousands of individuals). Later, the range and numbers reduced sharply. At present the total number is believed to be approximately 4,000. Limiting factors: poaching, development of virgin lands in arid zones. Earlier, it was widespread throughout entire Ustyurt. Goitered Gazelle have recently been recorded across the Ustyurt plateau, and as such occur both north and south of the project AoI. Modern studies estimate a population of 300 individuals in the southern Ustyurt. As of December 2019, it is believed there are two herds present in the Saigachy Reserve - one herd totalling 5-7 individuals and a second herd totalling 10 – 15 individuals. Corsac Fox It is scarce in number and mosaically spread on the edges of takyrs, sand islands and clay plains in the southern and central part of Ustyurt. Active at dusk NRB 2(VU:D) and during the night. It lives in the burrows of Sousliks, Great Gerbils or Foxes, and rarely digs its own burrows. Steppe polecat In Ustyurt, it is spread in clay areas, and found rarely sandy desert. In all its NRB 2(VU:D) – habitats it appears in complex with the settlements of Large Souslik. Active at dusk and the night, and during the day in the warm season. It settles in the burrows of rodents. Could be attracted to the Project area because of the large population of rodents, and thus could potentially be at risk of injury or death from vehicular collision. Caracal The Turkmen Caracal Caracal caracal (nationally CR) is considered the most threatened in Uzbekistan. In the Ustyurt plateau the species is recorded typically IUCN (LC) in sand islands, clay and gravel plains, and cliffs. The main food object of NRB (CR) Caracal is the Tolai Hare, but it also preys on small mammals and birds. Recent studies indicate that it is well distributed across the Ustyurt plateau territory, but its population is extremely low and is more commonly seen in the south of the plateau. The probability of Caracal occurrence on the leveled takyrs of the project area is quite small. The most likely place to find Caracal in the Project area is fixed sand islands with interrupted Haloxylon forest. The more likely places to see the Caracal on the Ustyurt plateau include the Barsakelmes salt-lake, Agiyin salt marsh, the vicinity of the Kubla-Ustyurt village in the central part, and Zharinkudul salt marsh and surrounding area of Churuk Collective farm in the north part. Honey Badger, Locally distributed, subspecies. It can be found in the southwestern part of the CR (Uz RDB) Ustyurt Plateau, the northern edge of the Sarakamysh depression, and the western margin of the Khorezm oasis. It inhabits ravines, precipices and chinks,
deserts with billowy relief and solid (dense) soils, and saline areas. It was always low in number. In 1960–80s only 10 individuals were counted, in 1997–2016s – 13 individuals. Limiting factors: winters with heavy snowfalls, disturbance by wolves and stray dogs. Consultations with national experts confirm this species once inhabited the central and northern parts of the Ustyurt plateau but it is now considered not present in the Project area.
76 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Species/ Status Distribution & Ecology Striped Hyena, Locally distributed, subspecies. At past recorded in South Ustyrt, at present, NT (IUCN), CR spread at the foothills of the northern part of the Babatag Range and lower parts (UZ RDB) of Surkhandarya. Limiting factors: destruction of habitats as a result of water- regime changes in the plain rivers, development of mountain valleys, poaching.
Consultations with national experts confirm this species is no longer present in the Project area. Mouflon (VU, Locally distributed subspecies. It is spread at the southern part of the Ustyurt IUCN), CR (UZ Plateau, mainly, in Kazakhly – Kaplankyr, the Lake Dry, the Sarykamysh RDB) depression and the eastern chinks of the South Ustyrt. It inhabits chinks and deep precipices. The number reduced sharply. Current number is about 150
individuals. Limiting factors: human development of habitats, persecution by human and predators (wolves and dogs), poaching. Not considered to currently be distributed in the project area. Saiga (CR, IUCN) Can be found on the Ustyurt Plateu, spread at the Eastern and Southern Aral CR, UZ RDB) Sea region, former bottom of the Aral Sea. It inhabits semi–desert and desert zones. In the past, it was numerous. From the 1990, the number reduced by 99,5%. In 2016, the total number of the transboundary ustyurt population (Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan) was estimated as low as 1900 individuals, numbers have recovered to 5,900 in 2019; the number of migrating species depends on weather conditions. The number of resident groups in the Aral Sea region and former bottom of the Aral Sea is about 200 individuals. Limiting factors: poaching, loss and fragmentation of habitat due to development and the impact of barriers (border fence, automobile and rail ways, gas pipelines), grassland degradation due to aridization and low grazing pressure from wild ungulates, adverse weather conditions (severe winter, summer drought), the persecution by predators (the wolf), disease. The project is believed to overlap with critical habitat for the Ustyurt saiga population, which is described further below.
209. Common mammals living in the project area include three species of insectivores, Tolai Hare, two species of souslik, five species of jerboa, Mole Vole, Grey Hamster, House Mouse, and two species of gerbils. Rodents are the most widespread and significant species in the project area. The number of Great Gerbil on the plains adjacent to the project road is observed to reach 5-6 colonies per hectare and the entire length of road provides a continuous belt of settlements of Great Gerbil and Libyan Jird, and Large Souslik. The presence of such species attracts terrestrial predators and birds of prey to the project road surface. Burrows of rodents are used as shelters by reptiles, and by some birds for nesting. It should be noted that the active digging of rodents can reduce the stability of the roadway significantly, increase erosion of the mound. Four carnivores have been recorded of which the most common is Corsac fox.
77 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 31: Digging activities of Libyan Jird (Gerbil) along the road E.2.11.3.2 Birds 210. A total of 279 avifauna have been recorded on the Ustyurt plateau, the majority of which are passage migrants. Biodiversity screening for the Project identified 242 birds as potentially occurring in the Project AoI, including one CR, five EN, eight VU, and three nationally threatened species, in the Uzbekistan Red Data Book. These threatened birds can be classified into groups as follows: Table 21: Threatened birds potentially or historically present Land-based Great Bustard is found quite rarely in recent decades in Ustyurt during migrations nesting birds. and migrates from Kazakhstan even more rarely during severe winters for wintering. Very unlikely to occur near the Project road
Asian Houbara Bustard nests rarely and found during migration. Very unlikely to occur near the Project road. Pin-tailed Sandgrouse is rather numerous, it nests in the area of Barsakelmes salt- lake and fly to available watering places in large flocks. Sociable Lapwing migrates to Kazakhstan for nesting through Ustyurt during spring-time and returns in autumn for wintering sites in the Middle East and the Mediterranean. It can stay here for rest and feeding. Unlikely to occur near the Project road. Leveled takyrs and sand island with low bushes in the vicinity of the Project road are typical habitats for these 4 species. Possible threats to these species, if they do occur, include disturbance by guard dogs and workers, poaching from workers and road users, and collisions with vehicles due to their low flying altitude. All 4 species can be attracted to the project by open water ponds (e.g. water retention ponds and borrow pits during construction / culverts during operation), where they could be exposed to risk
78 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Birds of 10 species fall under this group in the Project area, including both migrant species Prey such as Greater Spotted Eagle, Short-toed Eagle and Red-footed Falcon and resident species such as Lesser Kestrel, Saker Falcon, Barbary Falcon, Egyptian
Vulture, Steppe Eagle, Eastern Imperial Eagle and Golden Eagle which may nest on the cliffs, elevations of the terrain and tall shrubs. They can visit the Project area particularly along the road alignment in search of food, which includes rodents living along the mounds, Sousliks road kills, turtles and other reptiles. Of all above birds, the daytime birds of prey are the most exposed to the threats of the road rehabilitation and improvement. As already noted, the rich food base (rodents) attracts birds to the mounds along the roadway shoulders, where they can accidentally collide with moving vehicles. However, this risk is believed to be low. Birds of prey in the area are noted by national experts pers comms to prefer live prey and records of bird of prey road kill along the Project road are minimal.
Falco cherrug, Saker Falcon (EN, IUCN) NT (Uz RDB) Falco pelegrinoides (Temminck, 1829) Barbary Falcon VU:R (Uz RDB) Neophron percnopterus, Egyptian Vulture, (EN, IUCN) Circaetus gallicus (J.F. Gmelin, 1788), Short-toed Snake-eagle/Short-toed Eagle, VU:D (Uz RDB) Clanga clanga, Greater Spotted Eagle, (VU, IUCN), VU:R (Uz RDB) Aquila nipalensis (Hodgson, 1833), Steppe Eagle, EN (IUCN), NT (Uz RDB) Aquila heliacal, Eastern Imperial Eagle (VU, IUCN) VU:D (Uz RDB) Aquila chrysaetos (Linnaeus, 1758), Golden Eagle, VU:R (Uz RDB) Waterbirds The Central Asian Flyway (CAF) covers a large continental area of Eurasia between the Arctic and Indian Oceans and the associated island chains. The Flyway comprises several important migration routes of waterbirds, most of which extend from the northern-most breeding grounds in Russian (Siberia) to the southernmost non-breeding (wintering) grounds in West and South Asia, the Maldives and the British Indian Ocean Territory. The birds on their annual migration cross the borders of several countries. Geographically the flyway region covers 30 countries of North, Central and South Asia and Trans-Caucasus, including Uzbekistan. Whilst it covers at least 279 populations of 182 migratory waterbird species, including 29 globally threatened and near-threatened species, which breed, migrate and winter within the region. The Ustyurt plateau represents a small part of this flyway and due to the habitat being semi-arid desert with little to no surface water, the project area is not considered a significant stop off for waterbirds.
211. A number of more common species are also known from the area including the following: Table 22: Other (non-threatened) birds potentially present Birds of prey Some nine species of medium and small size occur in the project area. They prey on reptiles, small birds and rodents. Most of them are found on the area during fly-over and feeding, and only the Long-legged Buzzard can nest on high shrubs and supports of power transmission lines. Waders and A large group of Curlews (23 species) crossed the project area during fly-over and plovers are not exposed to any threats from the project. However, the Eurasian Stone-curlew, Greater Sand Plover, and Caspian Plovers, which nest rather extensively on takyrs and in the sandy desert. The expected project impact is rather local so it will not harm the condition of these species. Gulls There are two types of gulls – Heuglin's Gull and Caspian Gull can feed on crushed reptiles and rodents on the road carriageway during their fly-over, which increases
79 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
the chance of death from vehicular collision. The populations of such species is quite high and occasional deaths will not harm their numbers. Other The site can be visited by around 100 species, mainly representatives of the order of species Passerine. There are 84 species that could stop along the road project including associated facilities for a short time during their fly-over for watering or shelter from adverse weather conditions, for feeding in the adjacent Haloxylon woodland and in places of household waste collection. A small part of them – six species of Larks, Tawny Pipit, Turkestan Ground-jay, five species of Wheatears and Bluethroat nest in the adjacent desert. The reason for widespread species of Passerine birds to die on the road is that pools of rainwater accumulate regularly on the asphalt, which flocks of birds of passage use as watering.
E.2.11.3.3 Reptiles 212. There is a total of 29 species of amphibians and reptiles recorded on the Ustyurt plateau which compromises 47% of the total number of species of herpetological fauna found in Uzbekistan. Lizards and snakes are the main components of the Ustyurt herpetological fauna. 27 reptiles were scoped in the biodiversity screening for this ecological assessment, with one vulnerable species identified, the Central Asian Tortoise (Testudo horsfieldii). Table 23: Threatened reptiles potentially present Species/ Status Distribution & Ecology Central Asian This species is extant across Central Asia and is found across the entire Tortoise Ustyurt plateau but scarce in number. Areas of local importance include Agrionemys horsfieldii the sands of the Churuk and Sam, and around the Barsakelmes (IUCN: VU) . Depression31 It uses burrows of great gerbils to lay eggs and for wintering. Annex II of CITES Accordingly, the number of turtles may increase particularly along the (2019) UzRDB status 2 immediate vicinity of the road alignment with the observation of numerous (VU) – “vulnerable, new mounds, a definite indication of rodents settling and habitat for the declining in population”. Central Asian Tortoise.
213. Reptiles are preyed upon by local birds of prey. A number of more common species are also known from the area including the following: Table 24: Other (non-threatened) reptiles potentially present Geckos There are five species of geckos – small nocturnal reptiles which can be found within the project area. Some of them live in various cavities and cracks in the walls of household buildings, and some – in the wild. Except for the teratoscincus scincus, the inhabitant of sandy areas, all of them are naturally scarce species. All geckos are beneficial to humans since they feed on small insects including those living in residential houses. Lizards Steppe Agama, two species of toad agama and four species of racerunners are the inhabitants of leveled Takyrs. Of them, the Steppe Agama can be abundant in the immediate project area since it is attracted by any terrain irregularities and large number of rodent burrows. For this reason, there is a risk of mortality from vehicular collision more often than other lizards, but this issue is unlikely to have any significant effect on its population size. Snakes Three species of non-venomous snakes occur within the project area. Spotted desert racer is the typical and widespread species.
31 (Kolesnikov, 1952; Kostin, 1956; Bogdanov, 1960; Bondarenko et al., 2010; Abduraupov, Nuridzhanov).
80 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E.2.12 The Ustyurt Saiga Antelope 214. The project will be implemented in an area considered as potential (and certainly historic) critical habitat for the critically endangered Ustyurt Saiga antelope. A Technical Note on the Saiga antelope is provided in Appendix B and separate Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) for Saiga antelope accompanies this report. 215. The full Critical Habitat Assessment is provided in Appendix E, and a summary is given in Chapter F. E.3 Economic Development 216. This section presents key economic data taken from published government statistics and the socio-economic survey conducted under the poverty and social assessment conducted through the project. The socio-economic survey covered the two villages that are affected by the project road, namely: Jaslik and Karakalpakiya with 324 households respondents. The survey was carried out between 21 March 2019 and 29 March 2019. E.3.1 Industries & Agriculture 217. Economic production is concentrated in commodities. Uzbekistan has the fourth largest gold deposits in the world. The country mines 80 tons of gold annually, seventh in the world. Uzbekistan's copper deposits rank tenth in the world and its uranium deposits twelfth. The country's uranium production ranks seventh globally. The Uzbek national gas company, Uzbekneftegas, ranks 11th in the world in natural gas production with an annual output of 60 to 70 billion cubic metres (2.1–2.5 trillion cubic feet). The country has significant untapped reserves of oil and gas: there are 194 deposits of hydrocarbons in Uzbekistan, including 98 condensate and natural gas deposits and 96 gas condensate deposits. 218. Along with many Commonwealth of Independent States or CIS economies, Uzbekistan's economy declined during the first years of transition and then recovered after 1995, as the cumulative effect of policy reforms began to be felt. However, since the mid-2000s, Uzbekistan has enjoyed robust GDP growth, thanks to favourable trade terms for its key export commodities like copper, gold, natural gas, cotton, the government’s macro-economic management, and limited exposure to international financial markets that protected it from the economic downturn. Overall GDP growth for Uzbekistan has continued at around 8 % annually during 2011-15, supported by net exports and a large capital investment program. 219. Agriculture employs 26 % of Uzbekistan's labour force and contributes 18 % of its GDP (2012 data). Cultivable land is 4.4 million hectares, or about 10 % of Uzbekistan's total area. While official unemployment is very low, underemployment – especially in rural areas – is estimated to be at least 20 %. At cotton-harvest time, all students and teachers are still mobilized as unpaid labour to help in the fields. 220. The Karakalpak economy is largely agricultural. Cotton is cultivated along the Amu Darya and in its delta and is processed in the cities. Other crops include alfalfa, rice, and corn. Cattle and Karakul sheep are raised in the Kyzylkum Desert. A well- developed system of irrigation canals built during the Soviet period traditionally carried water from the Amu Darya to the crops and livestock. However, overuse of the river delta for irrigation and industry has led to the demise of Karakalpakstans once-vital fishing industry, and resulted in a shorter growing season and harsher climate. The limited industrial sector of the Karakalpak economy includes light manufacturing, a power station in Takhiatosh, refineries that process oil from nearby petroleum fields, and building-materials plants that use the limestone, gypsum, asbestos, marble, and quartzite of the area.
81 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
221. Within 15 kilometers of the Project road the Surgil gas fields and its associated infrastructure can be found including a gas processing plant. No other industrial or agricultural activities can be found within the Project corridor. E.3.2 Infrastructure and Transportation facilities 222. Within the project corridor transmission lines can be observed at various locations, notably at km 1192 where the transmission line towers are within five meters of the edge of the Project road. The Central Asian Gas Pipeline also follows parallel to the Project road for almost its entire length along with a water supply pipeline. Neither the gas pipeline or the water pipeline are within the RoW. A rail line runs parallel to the Project road but this is more than 1 kilometer west of the Project corridor. 223. Ninety nine percent of the respondent households have access to safely managed water supply, comprising of 54 percent paying o flat rate basis and 45 percent having metered connection. Only two households reported of using ground water. This compared to the 2012 data32 wherein only 51.2 percent of the population were reported to be using safely managed drinking water services, with vast disparity between urban (86.5%) and rural (31.1%), indicates that these two settlements fair better in terms of having access to safely managed water supply. E.3.3 Waste Management 224. Presently there are insufficient hazardous and non-hazardous waste disposal or treatment facilities to handle the volume of waste generated by a project of this type within the immediate Project area. Both villages have their municipal disposal sites and these will be used by the Project to managing camp site wastes. Only 49 % of the sample households reported that solid waste is being collected by a formal system in place. The other households either are burying the waste (28%), burning the waste (15%), or dumping waste (5%). Very few reported of composting. E.3.4 Water Supply and Sewerage 225. Great majority (99%) of the household surveyed in the Project area have safe access to water supply of which 54% pay flat rate while 45% have metered connection. Only 2 households rely on groundwater. Households that are connected the sewer line represented 64% of the total respondents, 28% have their own septic tanks, 4% have soak pits, and the remaining 3% use open pits. E.3.5 Economic activities along the Project Road 226. Other than the police outpost and the international border crossing post, there are very limited activities along the project road and all of which are in Karakalpakiya village. These structures include a restaurant, a gas station, and a hotel. The relative locations of structures that are potentially to be impacted by the Project are depicted in the succeeding Figures and relative distances from the road centerline are discussed in the noise assessment section.
32 Source: Basic 2019 Statistics published by Statistics and Data Innovation Unit, Economic Research and Regional Cooperation Department, Asian Development Bank
82 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 32: Restaurant located Within the Project Right-of-Way in Karakalpakiya
Figure 33: Gas Station Along the Project Road in Karakalpakiya
83 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
E.4 Social and Cultural Resources E.4.1 Socio-economic conditions 227. The Karakalpaks are a Turkic people who primarily live in Uzbekistan. During the 18th century, they settled in the lower reaches of the Amu Darya and in the (former) delta of Amu Darya on the southern shore of the Aral Sea.[1] The name "Karakalpak" comes from two words: "qara" meaning black, and "qalpaq" meaning hat. The Karakalpaks number nearly 620,000 worldwide, out of which about 500,000 live in Karakalpakstan. 228. Karakalpak people, who used to be nomadic herders and fishers, were first recorded in the 16th century. Karakalpakstan was ceded to the Russian Empire by the Khanate of Khiva in 1873. Under Soviet rule, it was an autonomous area within Russia before becoming part of Uzbekistan in 1936. The region was probably at its most prosperous in the 1960s and 1970s, when irrigation from the Amu Darya was being expanded. Today, however, the drainage of the Aral Sea has rendered Karakalpakstan one of Uzbekistan's poorest regions. The region is suffering from extensive drought, partly due to weather patterns, but also largely because the Amu and Syr Darya rivers are exploited mostly in the eastern part of the country. 229. The ADB’s socio-economic survey undertaken between 21 March 2019 and 29 March 2019 covering 324 husgolds as part of the Initial Poverty & Social Assessment (IPSA) revealed the following social data: a) 52% of the members of the respondent households are male and the rest (48%) are female and the sex ratio is 938. Seventeen % of the households are headed by women. b) Thirty % of the members of sample household surveyed are in the 19 to 35 years age group, followed by 25 % in the age group of 6 to 18 years, 14 % in the age group of 46 to 60 years, 13 % in the age group of 36 to 45 years, 11 % are 5 years and less and 6 % belonging to above 60 years. The 19 to 45 age group than can involve itself actively in economic activity constitute 43 %. c) About two-third (66%) of the sample households are Kazakhs, followed by 19 % Karakalpaks, 15 % Uzbeks and a few belonging to other ethnicity. All respondents reported that they are followers of Islam. d) 59% of the members of the sample households surveyed have completed secondary vocational education, followed by 11 % who have completed between 5th and 11th standard, 8 % have completed up to 4th standard, 7 % have completed kindergarten, 4 % are bachelors and a few have completed masters. Between men and women, the women’s educational attainment is marginally higher than men from 5th standard and above. e) 29% of the sample households surveyed are employed in public sector enterprises, followed by 2% by private entrepreneurs, 1% are employed in private sector enterprises and unregistered entrepreneurs, non-agricultural labourers and those into farming together account for about 1%. Unemployment accounts for 19% and those not in workforce comprise 49 percent, which includes children, students, elderly and women who are not into any economic activity and consider themselves as not in workforce. There are more unemployed women compared to men and in the not in workforce category, there is marginally more women than men. f) About 43% of the households reported a monthly family income ranging between 1,000,001 and 2,000,000 som, followed by 36 % of households who reported a monthly family income ranging between 2,000,001 and 4,000,000 som, 11 % households reported an income ranging between 500,001 and 1,000,000 som, 7 % households reported an income ranging between 4,000,001 and 6,000,000, 2 % households reported an income up to 500,000 som and 1 % households reported
84 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
an income above 6,000,000 som. The average monthly family income reported by the households was 2,187,947 som. g) 66 % of the sample households live in multi-stories buildings, followed by 34 % who live in individual houses. E.4.2 Road Users 230. About 85% of the household that was surveyed commute out of the villages for work, market, and seek hospital service. Most households, 76% of the commuter use public buses followed by taxi users 12%, 9% relies in cycles, 2% use private cars, and 1% uses private buses. To go to school, 55% of the students walk, 46 use public transport, and the remaining 4% use personal vehicles. Travel habits are not affected by season according to 76% of the households that were surveyed while 23% said travel demand increases during the summer months. Majority of the respondents also related the seasonal variation in the travel time and cost are not affected by weather. E.4.3 Ethnicity 231. Despite of the permanent emigration of ethnic minorities from Uzbekistan since the collapse of the Soviet Union, more than 130 nationalities still live in the country. The main ethnic groups are Uzbeks (79.2 %), Russian (4.1 %), Kazakhs (3.8 %), and Karakalpaks (2.2 %). 232. The population of Karakalpakstan is estimated to be around 1.7 million,[9] and in 2007 it was estimated that about 400,000 of the population are of the Karakalpak ethnic group, 400,000 are Uzbeks, and 300,000 are Kazakhs. E.4.3.1 Languages 233. By law, Uzbek is Uzbekistan's exclusive nation-wide state language. Government policy requires the use of Uzbek in all dealings with officials, in street signage, and in business and education. Russian is still spoken widely, however, and enjoys ambiguous legal status as “the language of interethnic communication." In the autonomous Karakalpakstan region, Karakalpak is a state language alongside Uzbek. Within the Project area the main language is Karakalpak. E.4.3.2 Religion 234. Islam is by far the dominant religion in Uzbekistan, as Muslims constitute 90% of the population while 5% of the population follow Russian Orthodox Christianity, and 5% of the population follow other religions. 54% of Muslims are non-denominational Muslims, 18% are Sunnis and 1% are Shias. E.4.3.3 Health & Education facilities 235. No health or educational facilities were noted within the Project corridor. E.4.3.4 Physical and Cultural Resources 236. Historically, the Ustyurt Plateau and wider Central Asian region was a crossroads of civilizations and preserves traces of a myriad of peoples, including the Scythians, Mongols and even more ancient civilizations. More than 200 Mesolithic and Neolithic sites and locations are understood to have been identified in the southern part of the Ustyurt Plateau. Archaeological and cultural heritage features range from World Heritage Site status to sites of national and regional significance and are located across the region. However, no physical or cultural resources were identified within the Project corridor. Notwithstanding the above, chance finds could occur.
85 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
F. CRITICAL HABITAT
F.1 Overview 237. Critical Habitat (CH) is considered to be the most significant and highest priority areas of the planet for biodiversity conservation. It takes into account both global and national priority setting systems and builds on the conservation biology principles of 'vulnerability' (degree of threat) and 'irreplaceability' (rarity or uniqueness). 238. The ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) (2009) states that CH is a subset of both natural and modified habitat that deserves particular attention, and includes areas with high biodiversity value, including: i) habitat required for the survival of critically endangered or endangered species; ii) areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range species; iii) sites that are critical for the survival of migratory species; iv) areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of congregatory species; v) areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated with key evolutionary processes or provide key ecosystem services; vi) areas having biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities. 239. The SPS also states that CH includes those areas: vii) either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet the criteria of the World Conservation Union classification, the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world natural heritage sites. 240. In areas of critical habitat, the ABD SPS states that no project activity will be implemented unless the following requirements are met: 1. There are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat which could impair its high biodiversity value or the ability to function. 2. The project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species or a loss in area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem be compromised. 3. Any lesser impacts are mitigated in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined for Natural Habitat33. 241. Where a project could have significant adverse impacts to critical habitats, it should only go ahead if appropriate mitigation measures are put in place, in accordance with the mitigation hierarchy, to ensure no net loss of biodiversity over the project’s lifespan. The SPS states that, compensatory measures, such as biodiversity offsets, should
33 Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve at least no net loss of biodiversity. They may include a combination of actions, such as post-project restoration of habitats, offset of losses through the creation or effective conservation of ecologically comparable areas that are managed for biodiversity while respecting the ongoing use of such biodiversity by Indigenous Peoples or traditional communities, and compensation to direct users of biodiversity.
86 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
only be used as a last resort, and should achieve no net loss or a net gain of the affected biodiversity. F.2 Project Critical Habitat Assessment 242. In line with ADB requirements a full Critical Habitat Assessment (Appendix E) was carried out for the project. To ensure the robustness and precaution of the assessment, guidelines and thresholds from the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Guidance Note (GN) 6 (IFC GN6) were used to supplement ADB CH criteria. From the 343 species and ecosystem identified as potentially occurring in the project AoI, 13 were assessed to meet ADB CH criteria, and were thus requiring of further analysis to determine whether the project area was CH. The analysis found that the project area is critical habitat for the Saiga antelope, only. Tables 25 and 26 below provide a summary of the assessment findings for critical habitat: Table 25: Critical habitat determination summary Species ADB CH Criteria Critical Habitat Determination Met (ib) IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Central Asian tortoise – species. (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Greater Spotted Eagle species. (iiia) – Migratory (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Eastern Imperial Eagle species. (iiia) – Migratory (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Steppe Eagle species. (iiia) – Migratory (ia) – IUCN CR Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Sociable Lapwing species. (iiia) – Migratory (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Asian Houbara species. (iiia) – Migratory (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Saker Falcon species. (iiia) – Migratory (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species. Pallas's Fish-eagle (ic) – Red list EN
(iiia) – Migratory (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species. Egyptian Vulture (ic) – Red list EN
(iiia) – Migratory (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species. Great Bustard (ic) – Red list CR
(iiia) – Migratory (ic) Red list CR Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Caracal – species. (ib) IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Goitered Gazelle – species. (ia) IUCN CR Project EcAoA is considered critical habitat for this Saiga Antelope – species.
87 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Species ADB CH Criteria Critical Habitat Determination Met (ic) – Red list CR In line with a precautionary approach, the assessment for (iiia) – Migratory the Saiga antelope was made with the consideration that this transboundary subpopulation’s traditional migration range is split by linear infrastructure which in the future has the potential to become more porous. Additionally the Saiga is a resilient species with impressive population recovery and thus the CH assessment was made against the wider Ustyurt Saiga population, including the population on the Kazakh side of the border.
The assessment was therefore made against a population (for the Ustyurt Saiga) of 5,900 (ACBK, 2019).
The project AoI is known to cut across the southwest corner of the traditional migration corridor for the Ustyurt Saiga antelope. The current Ustyurt Saiga population (5,900) constitutes 1.77% of the global population (334,000) and therefore meets the IFC Criterion ia for critical habitat.
The EcAoA for the Saiga is also therefore considered to sustain >1% of the global population of a migratory species and therefore meets the IFC Criterion iiia critical habitat.
As such, it is assessed that the project impacts upon critical habitat for the Ustyurt Saiga antelope (ia) IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this Marbled Polecat – species. Table 26: Critical habitat assessment summary
Critical Habitat Criteria Assessment (i) Habitat required for the survival of critically endangered or Saiga antelope endangered species (ii) Areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range None Identified species (iii) Sites that are critical for the survival of migratory species Saiga antelope (iv) Areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of None Identified individuals of congregatory species (v) Areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated None Identified with key evolutionary processes (vi) Areas having biodiversity / ecosystem services of significant None Identified social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities. (vii) Areas either legally protected or officially proposed for protection. None Identified
243. The potential impacts of the project on CH are covered in Section G: Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures.
88 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G. ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
244. Road improvement projects are likely to bring several changes in the local environment both beneficial and adverse. This section of the report identifies the nature, extent, and magnitude of likely changes in the environment attributable to the project development that includes pre-construction, construction and operation. This chapter presents the environmental assessment process and planning undertaken by Uzbekistan Road Committee in addressing the environmental impacts and risks associated with the rehabilitation and upgrading of the 240 km Karakalpakstan Road Project. This assessment was based on the draft feasibility study and detailed engineering design available. Each anticipated environmental impact was assessed for significance based in intensity, duration, and scope. Mitigation measures were identified to reduce the significant adverse impacts including residual effects. This chapter starts with the identification and screening of potential impacts with a description of the general road development components that includes site mobilization, establishment of camps, road construction, and road operation. Corresponding interactions of these general components with specific environmental aspects i.e. physical, biological, and human were identified through a series of discussions with the community stakeholders, subject experts, and local government officials. 245. The civil work components that are anticipated to affect the receiving environment are the following: (i) Preconstruction Phase: a. Road alignment and design – involves the definition of the road alignment and realignments. The final road alignment includes portions of the existing road which may have minor geometric realignment particularly on intersections and sharp curves, and realignment. As previously mentioned, 61.5 km or 25% or the total project road length will follow the existing alignment while the rest, measuring 178.5 km, will be realigned road, following an abandoned earth road embankment. b. Utility shifting – removal and transfer from the carriage way of mainly electric lines. c. Construction mobilization - land clearing, installation of electricity and other utility connections, perimeter fencing, establishment of storage areas, waste disposal, and installation of production equipment (concrete batching, crusher, casting) in the labor and camp sites. d. Site clearing – clearing and grubbing of road land including uprooting of vegetation, grass, brushes, shrubs, samplings, and trees, removal of stump, and disposal of unwanted materials. This also includes the dismantling of existing structures like culverts and old pavement and their proper disposal or recycling.
(ii) Construction Phase: a. Earthworks: removal of top soil, construction of embankments. construction of subgrade, excavation and removal of the existing pavement materials and the existing road embankment, removal and replacement of unsuitable materials. This also includes structural excavation; excavation for the construction of side drainage and cross-drainage works; excavation for the removal and relocation of the existing utilities; all backfilling necessary for the construction of bridges, retaining walls or other earth retaining structures, cross drainage structures and associated works, side drains and erosion protection work. Preparation of beddings and filters for all structural, cross drainage, side drains or pavement works. Construction of new embankments to a new profile with widened cross-section. No cuts are required along the whole length of the project road.
89 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
b. Pavement – the entire road section will be upgraded to cement concrete; a geotextile debonding layer; gravel and sand base course; gravel, sand, and scarified materials sub-base; and another layer of geotextile on top of the new formation. c. Road Furnitures - installation of cautionary and information signs, kilometer posts using reinforced concrete, and bus bays and waiting sheds.
iii) Post-Construction Phase: a. Road maintenance involving routine (roadside verge clearing, cleaning of ditches and potholes, patching and pothole repair), periodic (resealing, overlay, and pavement reconstruction), and urgent works (collapsed culverts).
A. Identification and Assessment of Environmental Impacts
246. The identification of the potential environmental impacts starts with the definition of the environment into its physical, biological, and human components that are at risk of being impacted during the rehabilitation and upgrading of the A380. Like the Leopold matrix, it involves an integration grid between these components and the proposed project activities. The environmental components defined for this project were drawn from the environmental baseline as follows: a. Physical environment – air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, land and soil, surface water quality and quantity, and groundwater quality and quantity, b. Biological environment – terrestrial vegetation, avifauna, and mammal species c. Human environment – private land and buildings, public infrastructures, sound environment, and community and occupational health and safety.
247. The assessment of potential environmental impacts requires the definition of the effects associated with the road rehabilitation and upgrading in terms of extent, frequency, probability, and reversibility of impacts. The determination of the severity of impacts was guided by the CWRD’s Good Practice Note (June, 2019) and six attributes are considered and described as follow: a. Size of the Impact – is a measure of the relative magnitude of an impact and to the extent possible quantified. In consonance to the CWRD’s good practice four levels of size used: Negligible, Low, Moderate and High. The relative scores for each of these are 1,2,3 and 4 respectively b. Extent of Impact: pertains to the physical or areal coverage where the impact is likely to take place and further defined into four classes: i. Local: The area of influence is contained within the project site or immediate surrounding area (Score: 1) ii. Regional: The area of influence extends to a regional scale, affecting areas outside the project site and into the wider environment (Score: 2) iii. National: Area of influence extends to national scale (Score:3) iv. International: The area of influence will be cross boundary. (Score:4) c. Duration of Impact: defines how long the impact will last and impact is proportional to duration. i. Transient: less than 1 day (Score: 1) ii. Shot-term: 1 day-12 months (Score: 2) iii. Medium: 1-5 years (Score: 3)
90 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
iv. Long Term or permanent: Greater than 5 years (Score: 4) d. Frequency of Impact: defined as the rate of occurrence or repeated over a particular period.
i. One off – The event causing the impact occurs only once in the lifetime of the project (Score: 1)
ii. Infrequent - An event which is expected to occur but not commonly as part of the normal project conditions (Score: 2)
iii. Frequent - An event which will occur regularly throughout a phase of the project or the lifetime of the project (Score:3)
iv. Continuous – An event which by nature of the project is continuous (Score: 4)
e. Probability of Impact – likeliness of an impact to occur.
i. Certain - impact definitely occurs if the project proceeds as planned (Score: 4) ii. Probable – impact which is very likely to occur as part of normal activities (Score: 3) iii. Possible – impact is known to occur in similar circumstances on similar activities but is not intended (Score: 2) iv. Very Unlikely –not expected to occur under normal circumstances but may represent a risk in the event of an accident or other incident (Score: 1).
Table 27: Multi-Criteria Analysis to Determine the Significance of Potential Environmental Impacts
Source: CWRD (2019)
248. The relationship between these project phases and its components, and the environment were established to identify anticipated environmental impact is provided in the succeeding Table while Table 29 presents the summary of the impacts assessment for the proposed project. Detailed description of the impacts and corresponding mitigation measures is provided in the succeeding sections.
91 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 28: Grid Displaying the Interaction between Valued Environmental Receptors (VERs) and A-380 Road Improvement Activities
Environmental Component Pre-Construction Construction Operation
Road Use Road
UtilityShifting
WIM Operation WIM
WIM Construction WIM Construction Road
subbase, sungrade, sungrade, subbase,
Quarries and borrow and Quarries
and CampSite Location CampSite and
Construction Mobilization Construction
(Excavation, enmabnkemt, enmabnkemt, (Excavation, Road Alignment and Design and Alignment Road PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Geology and Soils xXXXX Air Quality and GHG XXXX Water quatity X Wastes Generation XXX BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT Terrestial Vegetation XXXXXX Fauna XXX HUMAN ENVIRONMENT Public buildings and utilities Private land and Buildings XX Sound Environment XX Vibration XX Aesthetic and Visual XX Communiy and OH Safety X XXX Traffic X
92 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 29: Summary of Analysis of Environmental Impacts
Environmen Assessment of S. Project Project tal Description of the Environmental Risks Frequenc Reversibilit Size Extent Duration Probability the Potential No. Phase Component Component and Effects y y Effects s
Selection of Pre- Road Soils and Loss of land from road widening and re- Moderate (3) Permane Not Moderate 1 Constructio Local (1) One off (1) Certain (4) alignment/ geology alignment nt (4) reversible (4) n (17) re-alignment
Acquisition of 1 private structures @ 0.0613ha.
temporary acquisition of 915.77 ha of idle Mostly Pre- Road state lands for soil borrowing reversible Land and Permane Minor 2 Constructio Alignment Low (1) Local (1) One off (1) Certain (4) (compensati Buildings nt (4) n and design on) (13) proposed WIM facilities will involve use of (2) 1.67 ha of land, currently managed by Uzavtyoul regional department, a unit of State Committee of Roads,
Pre- Road Community Increase risk of road crashes due to higher Permane Infrequent Very Partially Minimal 3 Constructio alignment Low (2) Local (1) Safety increase in traffic and faster travel speed nt (4) (2) unlikely (1) reversible (3) n and design (13)
Some overhead telephone, and transmission and distribution lines may need Pre- to be moved and will be vulnerable to Utility Private land Short- One-off Probable Fully Minor 4 Constructio accidental damage during the reconstruction Low (1) Local (1) shifting and buildings term (2) (1) (3) reversible (1) n work which result to temporary disruption of (9) services to private owners and government offices and services.
Loss of topsoil from the establishment of Mostly Constructio Constructio Soils and Short- One-off Minor 5 n contractors site offices, construction yards, Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) Reversible n geology term (2) (1) (12) Mobilization work camps, haul roads (2)
93 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
and Camp Contamination of soil from oil and lubricants Medium Infrequent Probable Partially Site spill particularly near the loading/unloading Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (13) (3) (2) (3) reversible (3) Location and storage areas
Loss of topsoil during site clearance for the road widening and realignment Constructio Road Soils and Short- One-off Probable Partially Medium 6 Negligible (1) Local (1) n construction Geology term (2) (1) (3) reversible (3) (11)
WIM Constructio Soils and Short- One-off Probable Partially Minor 7 Constructio Loss of top soil and compaction of soil Negligible (1) Local (1) n geology term (2) (1) (3) reversible (3) n (10)
WIM Constructio Air Quality Short- Frequent Mostly Minor 8 Constructio Dust emission during construction Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) n and GHG term (2) (3) reversible (2) n (13)
Constructio n Constructio Air quality Dust from storage piles and processing Short- Frequent Mostly Minor 9 mobilization Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) n ang GHG plants term (2) (3) reversible (2) and camp (13) site location
Oils, fuels and chemicals (including bitumen, bridge deck waterproofing agents and Constructio concrete) spillages. Medium Infrequent Probable Fully n Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (11) Constructio Hazardous (3) (2) (3) reversible (1) 10 mobilization n wastes and camp site location Washing, refueling, and maintenance of Medium Infrequent Probable Fully Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (11) equipment. (3) (2) (3) reversible (1)
Constructio n Generation of wastes: construction debris, Constructio Medium Frequent Probable Fully 11 mobilization Waste scarified pavement, containers, oily sludge, Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (12) n (3) (3) (3) reversible (1) and camp acid batteries site location
94 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Constructio n Constructio Generation of wastewater: Grey water from Medium Frequent Probable Fully 12 mobilization Waste Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (12) n the camp and offices. (3) (3) (3) reversible (1) and camp site location
Constructio n Constructio Medium infrequent Probable Fully 13 mobilization Waste Run-off and Spills Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (11) n (3) (2) (3) reversible (1) and camp site location
Hunting, poaching, trapping and disturbance Internatio Medium Infrequent Mostly Moderate of rare / endangered species found in the Moderate (3) Possible (2) nal (4) (3) (2) reversible (2) Constructio project area by construction workers (16) n Constructio Guard dogs also pose a threat to local 14 mobilization Fauna Internatio Medium Infrequent Very Mostly n species and are known to be a threat to Low (2) Minor (14) and camp nal (4) (3) (2) unlikely (1) reversible (2) saiga in the area. site location Medium Infrequent Probable Mostly Collection of firewood from Haloxylon Forest Low (2) Local (1) Minor (13) (3) (2) (3) reversible (2)
Constructio Vehicle movements and use of construction n machinery and equipment causing National Medium Infrequent Probable Mostly Minor mobilization Fauna Low (2) disturbance, habitat degradation and direct (3) (3) (2) (3) reversible (2) and camp (15) mortality to fauna Constructio site location 15 n Constructio Lighting at night attracts insects, which can n draw migrant birds to the area, as well as Medium Infrequent Probable Fully mobilization Fauna bats looking to hunt in high insect Negligible (1) Local (1) Minor (11) (3) (2) (3) reversible (1) and camp concentrations increasing the chance of site location disturbance or mortality during construction
Constructio n Constructio Medium Continuou Fully Minor 16 mobilization Fauna Fencing can create habitat fragmentation Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) n (3) s (4) reversible (1) and camp (12) site location
95 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Poorly managed waste disposal sites can Road attract animals (including scavengers, e.g. Constructio Waste Internatio Medium Infrequent Mostly Minor 17 Constructio Egyptian vulture) which may then be subject Negligible (1) Possible (2) n Management nal (4) (3) (2) reversible (2) n to entrapment, hunting and mortality from (14) equipment and machinery.
General Vegetation Clearance for road Road construction, culvert construction and from Constructio Long- Continuou Partially 18 Constructio Flora borrow pits, resulting in direct loss of plants Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) Moderate (18) n term (4) s (4) reversible (3) n and habitat for other species (see Table 57).
Constructio n Constructio Accidental spread of non-native Long- Infrequent Partially Minor 19 mobilization Flora Low (2) Local (1) Possible (2) n species/invasive by the construction workers term (4) (2) reversible (3) and camp (14) site location
The construction plants that includes hit mix plants, crushers, generators, equipment Medium Continuou Fully Minor Constructio Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) repair shops, storage of hazardous materials (3) s (4) reversible (1) (12) n Community Constructio pose threat to the safety of the workers. 20 mobilization and OH n and camp Safety Unhygienic camp management (food, lodging, waste handling, insect and vermin Medium Continuou Fully Minor site location Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) control) poses health risk to the camp (3) s (4) reversible (1) (12) workers.
WIM Constructio Geology and loss of topsoil during site clearance for the Short- One-off Partially Minor 21 Constructio Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) n soils facility construction term (2) (1) reversible (3) n (11)
Short- Frequent Fully Minor Dust emissions during construction Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) WIM term (2) (3) reversible (1) Constructio Air quality (12) 22 Constructio n and GHG n Short- Frequent Fully Minor Emissions from construction equipment Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) term (2) (3) reversible (1) (12)
96 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Wim Constructio Short- Frequent Fully Minor 23 Constructio Noise From operation of construction equipment Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) n term (2) (3) reversible (1) n (12)
Road An estimated 8,691,434m3 of soil fill for the Constructio Geology and Short- Frequent Mostly Moderate 24 Constructio embankments will need approximately High (4) Local (1) Certain (4) n soils term (2) (3) reversible (2) n 2,897,144m2 in land clearance (16)
Earthworks, pavement improvement operations, quarry operations, and the operation of construction vehicles will Short- Frequent Fully Minor Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) release aerial contaminants, particularly term (2) (3) reversible (1) Constructio Road Air Quality (13) 25 fugitive dust, with potential effects on air n construction and GHG quality.
Emissions from construction equipment and Short- Frequent Fully Minor Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) vehicles. term (2) (3) reversible (1) (13)
Re-construction works require large Road amounts of water, both for supply of drinking Constructio Short- Frequent Fully Minor 26 Constructio Water water for the labor and the operation of the Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) n term (2) (3) reversible (1) n camp sites, and for all technical purposes (13) relating to construction activities.
Constructio Generation of construction debris and Short- Frequent Fully Minor 27 Road Waste Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) n scarified pavement that requires disposal term (2) (3) reversible (1) (13)
Road Constructio Construction dust can impact on vegetation Medium Continuou Fully 28 Constructio Flora Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) Minor (14) n and affect productivity. (3) s (4) reversible (1) n
Water bodies are planned for construction (water retention ponds) and operation Road (culverts with water collecting basins on Constructio Internatio Medium Infrequent Mostly Moderate 29 Constructio Fauna either end). Waterbodies can attract birds Moderate (3) Possible (2) n nal (4) (3) (2) reversible (2) (16)(16) n and mammals which can increase the risk of poaching from construction workers and road users.
97 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Depressions and borrow pits, particularly if the underlying soils are clay, tend to collect Internatio Medium Infrequent Mostly Moderate (3) Possible (2) Moderate (16) water and develop into ponds that will attract nal (4) (3) (2) reversible (2) wildlife
Road Constructio Private lands Short- Mostly 30 Constructio Relocation of 1 residential structure Low (2) Local (1) One off (1) Certain (4) Minor (12) n and buildings term (2) reversible (2) n
Road Constructio Short- Frequent Fully 31 Constructio Noise From operation of construction equipment Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) Minor (13) n term (2) (3) reversible (1) n
During construction, the principal sources of Road Constructio vibration are the operation of the rollers and Short- Frequent Fully 32 Constructio Vibration Negligible (1) Local (1) Certain (4) Minor (12) n loaded trucks which may cause nuisance or term (2) (3) reversible (1) n damage weak structures.
The number of workers will be approximately around 100 people consisting of office and domestic staff, truck drivers Short- Continuou Fully Minor Low (2) Local (1) Possible (2) Road Community and construction workers some of which will term (2) s (4) reversible (1) (12) Constructio 33 Constructio and OH be migrants and may cause social conflicts n n Safety with local residents. Active construction sites, with the presence Short- Continuou Fully Minor of heavy equipment poses safety risk to the Low (2) Local (1) Possible (2) term (2) s (4) reversible (1) community and workers. (12)
During construction stage, the existing traffic flows will be impeded by improvement works Road on the road pavement, widening operations, Constructio Short- Frequent Fully Minor 34 Constructio Traffic and construction or reconstruction of Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) n term (2) (3) reversible (1) n drainage structures. In addition, vehicles (13) involved in construction will increase traffic flows.
Quarries Constructio Soils and extraction of materials for road construction, Short- Frequent Partially Moderate 35 and Borrow physical works such as embankment Moderate (3) Local (1) Certain (4) n Geology term (2) (3) reversible (3) (16) areas construction will require substantial volume
98 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
of earthworks, including road bed/road base filling, will be required.
Quarries Constructio Air Quality Dust emissions at quarry and soil borrow Short- Frequent Fully Minor 36 and Borrow Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) n and GHG sites term (2) (3) reversible (1) areas (13)
Borrow pits and materials disposal sites may Quarries have permanent visual and physical impacts Constructio Aesthetic Medium Mostly Minor 37 and Borrow on the environment, including changes in Low (2) Local (1) Continuou Possible (2) n and Visual (3) reversible (2) (14) Areas land use if the materials are sourced within s (4) river beds.
Community Borrow pits and quarries pose as short and Quarries and Constructio long-term hazards to construction workers Medium Continuou Fully Minor 38 and Borrow Occupational Low (2) Local (1) Possible (2) n and communities if not properly (3) s (4) reversible (1) Areas Health and (14) management and closed. Safety
Air quality Permane Continuou Partially Moderate 39 Operation Road Use Vehicular emissions Low (2) Local (1) Certain (4) and GHG nt (4) s (4) reversible (3) (18)
Direct mortality of species due to higher Road chance of collision with vehicles. Increased Internatio Permane Infrequent Partially Moderate 40 Operation Fauna Moderate (3) Certain (4) Operation road kill can attract birds of prey to the road, nal (4) nt (4) (2) reversible (3) (20) increasing risks to such species
Habitat fragmentation, e.g. Impede the Road Internatio Permane Frequent Partially Major 41 Operation Fauna traditional south-west migratory corridor. High (4) Certain (4) operation nal (4) nt (4) (3) reversible (3) (see Table 58) (22)
Water retention ponds, culverts, and Road Internatio Medium Infrequent Mostly 43 Operation Fauna drainage pools will attract birds and Moderate (3) Possible (2) Moderate (16) operation nal (4) (3) (2) reversible (2) mammals
Nitrogen deposition from vehicles, road-run Road off (including any de-icing salt) and dust may Permane Infrequent Probable Mostly Minor 44 Operation Fauna Negligible (1) Local (1) operation affect habitats and can create surface water nt (4) (2) (3) reversible (2) (13) films.
99 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Road Increased disturbance/ mortality due to Internatio Permane Infrequent Partially Moderate 45 Operation Fauna Moderate (3) Possible (2) operation increased accessibility (see Table 58) na (4) nt (4) (2) reversible (3) (18)
Lights proposed for junction areas near towns. Lighting at night attracts insects, Road which can draw migrant birds to the area, as Permane Infrequent Fully 46 Operation Fauna Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) Minor (11) Operation well as bats looking to hunt in high insect nt (4) (2) reversible (1) concentrations increasing the chance of disturbance or mortality during construction
Increased traffic increases the risk of Road Permane Infrequent Partially Minor 47 Operation Flora invasive species being carried on vehicles Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) operation nt (4) (2) reversible (3) and colonizing the area (13)
Cumulative effects – existing effects such as Road Fauna / risk of hunting, waste production, pollution, Internatio Permane Infrequent Partially 48 Operation High (4) Possible (2) Moderate (19) operation Flora and human development exacerbated by the nal (4) nt (4) (2) reversible (3) project road
Road Community Risk of injury to pedestrian and road users Permane Continuou Partially Minor 49 Operation Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) Operation safety from crashes nt (4) s (4) reversible (3) (15)
Generation of office wastes and domestic WIM Permam Continuou Mostly Minor 50 Operation Waste wastewater. Oil, grease and lubricants for Negligible (1) Local (1) Possible (2) operation nent (1) s (4) reversible (2) weight scale maintenance. (11)
100 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.1 Impacts on the Physical Environment G.1.1 Geology and Soils 249. The main direct and permanent impacts on geology and soils will occur during the construction phase. The environmental impact includes loss of topsoil during site clearance for the road widening particularly on existing road alignment requires increase in embankment height of curves that require wider carriage width, construction of new road alignment, extraction of materials for road construction, physical works such as embankment construction, construction of ancillary facilities like temporary office, and construction camps. Improper disposal of the surplus and unsuitable materials for reuse on productive agricultural lands may result to loss in topsoil. 250. Reconstruction of the highway will have a permanent impact on the non-metallic mineral resources as substantial volume of earthworks, including road bed/road base filling, will be required. Borrow pits and materials disposal sites may have permanent visual and physical impacts on the environment, including changes in land use if the materials are sourced within river beds. Depressions and borrow pits, particularly if the underlying soils are clay, tend to collect water and develop into ponds that will attract wildlife. Loss of vegetation in grass and shrub lands may occur if borrow materials are in these areas. Borrow pits and quarries must be designed and worked with the short- and long-term safety of construction workers and the public in mind. 251. With the availability of vast idle lands surrounding the project road, it is not anticipated for the Contractor to require lands that are currently used for agriculture and grazing. Nonetheless, site preparation may involve removal of vegetation and topsoil, establishment of site offices, contractor’s yards and work camps, and construction of haul roads (for movement of construction vehicles and machinery, and transport of materials). Haul routes should follow established transport corridors/rights-of-way. 252. Mitigation Measures. To the extent possible, the Contractor will: Table 30: Mitigation measures – for minimizing impact on geology and soils during road construction Source Mitigation Measure Land and soil • Avoid or minimize the use of agricultural, grazing, and vegetated conservation lands • The road land width requiring clearing shall be clearly demarcated on ground. • During land clearing operations, to the extent possible and necessary, topsoil shall be collected, preserved, and reused as a base for turfing of embankment slopes, development of barren areas, or expansion of grasslands and shrubland away from the project road to provide additional habitat to threatened, vulnerable, and endangered species • Office and storage areas shall preferably be located on barren/waste lands and conversion of agricultural/cultivable lands for office and storage areas shall not be allowed under any circumstances. • All fuel oil/lubricants loading/unloading and storage areas shall be paved (impermeable), and have separate storm water collection system with facility for separation of oil/lubricants prior to discharge. • The temporary office and storage area shall be provided with adequate water supply, sanitation, septic tank/soak pit of
101 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source Mitigation Measure adequate capacity so that it functions properly for the entire duration of its use. • After completion of construction works, the site shall be restored to its previous state by undertaking clean-up operations.
253. For the associated WIM system, the impacts on the soils and geology are minimal. The facility sites are located within 100 meters from the A373 and M39 National Highways and are active open and parking areas mostly for trailer trucks. Most of the soils are already compacted from the heavy axle loads. The mitigation measures are part of good engineering practices and not prescriptive to supersede the manufacturer or supplier’s specification due to warranty liabilities. Key environmental mitigation to address the impacts on soils includes34: Table 31: Mitigation measures – for minimizing impact on geology and soils during WIM construction Source Mitigation Measure Land and soil • Avoid disruption of existing utilities during mobilization, site conservation, clearing for the Type 1 facility, and underground electric or protection of existing communication lines for Type 2 facilities. Properly put demarcation utilities lines to mark utilities prior to installation of cabinets, grounding, electrical services, telecommunication. Develop and implement a traffic management plan to be approved by the Road Maintenance staff-in-charge to ensure minimal. The plan will include schedule of traffic disruption, manpower, signs, arrow boards, and equipment to maintain the flow of traffic. Properly mark on the road surface extending up to the road edge, particularly for Type 2 facility, excavation and conduit lines and follow the required excavation dimensions to minimize impact on the road surface and disruption of traffic. Minimize the amount of pavement to be removed. Pre-construction meetings should be held before lane closures are set up to discuss safety and the work planned. • Specifically for Type 1 Facilities, the mitigation measures are similar to the road construction which includes: i) proper demarcation of the project site, ii) to the extent possible construct the perimeter wall first to minimize dust, noise, and visual impacts, iii) all top soil shall be collected for reuse like landscaping, iii) temporary office and storage areas are to be located away from existing building and provide with adequate water supply and sanitation facilities; iv) complete site plans should be available on-site to ensure proper placement of equipment, and iv) installation of perimeter drain where the soil has been disturbed to control surface run-off laden with silt from exiting the facility boundary; • The installation should only be performed in good weather, not wet, freezing, or extremely hot (above 100 °F) conditions. The equipment must be protected from lightning and power surges. The equipment cabinet must protect the system electronics from
34 This section was adapted from the FTA Weigh in Motion Pocket Guide which can be downloaded from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/knowledgecenter/wim_guide/wim_guidebook_part2_0709 18_(508_compliant).pdf
102 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source Mitigation Measure vandalism, extreme temperature, dust, water, humidity, and insect or rodent infestation. The equipment must be installed so that routine maintenance can occur without disruption of data collection. Installation start and completion date should be established and posted outside the construction area including the contact person’s details for public complaints.
G.1.2 Air Pollution – Road and Fugitive Dust from Construction 254. The air quality, expressed in PM10 in the study area, generally, is good as confirmed by the ambient monitoring measurements at Jaslik and Karakalpakiya at 29 and 25 ug/m3, respectively. These values are less than the national standard value of 50ug/m3. There are no industrial activities within the vicinity of the alignment and there are no major sources of pollutants from combustion. 255. In general, the main source of air pollution during constriction is dust from unpaved road travel and earth moving. It should be emphasized that dust concentration in the desert environment are typically high due to its flat dry and barren terrain that allows more effective wind erosion and dust generation. During construction, the pollutant of concern for this project with respect to air quality is dust. The dust impacts due to road construction is considered minimal owing to the scant receptors along the project road. However, considering high winds and flat terrain that defines the project site, the area of impact from fugitive dust emission was estimated using the USEPA SCREEN 3 model. SCREEN 3 Model is a single-source Gaussian plume model that incorporates source and meteorological factors to estimate pollutants concentration from continuous sources. Depending on the source and receptor situation, screening models like SCREEN 3 are appropriate to evaluate air quality impacts. These models are generally the first level tools for evaluating impacts and in cases where high predicted concentrations occur will indicate the need for further refined modelling. This is due to the very nature of screening model’s ability to cycle through all possible climatological conditions and report the highest predicted concentration or worst-case scenario. The primary use of SCREEN 3 in this study is identify the receptors that are at risk from elevated dust concentration and more importantly to guide the Contractors in maintaining a separation distance in siting camps, materials storage, and haul roads from community areas. 256. SCREEN 3 is an acceptable and effective way of screening air quality impacts for point, line, volume, and area sources including fugitive dust from construction activities including haul roads, open areas, and construction material piles. SCREEN 3 is being used by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment35 to predict fugitive dust concentrations from unpaved road travel in haul roads, sand and gravel operations. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) also uses SCREEN 3 to predict fugitive dust concentrations from roads and storage piles as contained in their Engineering Guide #691: Air Dispersion Modeling Guidance (2014)36. The assessment of fugitive dust screening dispersion modelling was also performed in Wyoming Transwest Express Transmission Lines Environmental Impact Statement for disturbed acres during construction. As required in the Colorado and Wyoming guidelines, the road in this project was modelled as area source. The ADB has also
35 https://www.colorado.gov/airquality/permits/screen.pdf 36 https://www.epa.state.oh.us/Portals/27/engineer/eguides/guide69.pdf?ver=2014-10-14-142828-380
103 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
used SCREEN 3 in screening impacts from unpaved road travel the includes the IND: Bihar New Ganga Bridge Project environmental impact assessment project37 257. The succeeding section attempts to predict the maximum ground concentration from road construction and storage piles and provide guidance to contractors on the minimum separation distance from the villages. G.1.2.1 Structures at Risk from Dust Impacts 258. The assessment of the dust impacts is based on the predicted levels of dust from the construction activities and the location of the structures at risk. The following Table presents these structures in terms of distance from the project road’s center line and the chainage. Table 32: Location of Structures Outside the Right of Way at Risk from Dust Impacts due to Construction Type Distance from the Road Center Line and Chainage Police Station 152m, 79+535 km Police Station 45m, 85+300 km Hotel 80m, 237+423 km Border Control Campus 51m, end point Jaslik 1,330m, 82+966km Karakalpakstan 1,100m, 218+722 km
259. During the construction stage air quality impacts are mainly associated with the movement of vehicles on unpaved haul roads, soil and gravel extraction along the vicinity of borrow pits, soil movement, and ground shaping related to the embankment formation. Mud tracked onto public roads will dry out to generate dust through resuspension. Dust is the major air quality problem from construction sites. Particle sizes vary considerably depending on their origin and construction activity. Dust emissions from unpaved road travel, construction demolition, aggregate handling and storage piles (traffic) will have PM2.5/PM10 ratio of 0.1 while industrial wind erosion and aggregate handling and storage pile transit have 0.15 ratio38. Background ambient dust concentration in Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia, PM2.5/PM ratio ranges from 0.5-0.739. Monitoring of ambient dust concentration will be carried out in accordance to the Government requirement as stated in the environmental clearance from SNCP. 260. Dust is a problem for a variety of reasons, as outlined below: • Health and safety problems. PM 10 and PM 2.5 exposures are known to cause respiratory and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, such as aggravation of asthma, respiratory symptoms and an increase in hospital admissions; and mortality from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and from lung cancer. Elderly, young people, and those with pre-existing lung and heart diseases are highly susceptible groups. Studies show that there is no evidence of a safe level of exposure or a threshold below which no adverse health effects occur.
37 https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/project-documents/48373/48373-007-eia-en.pdf 3838 USEPA AP-42 (2006) 39 Health effects of particulate matter Policy implications for countries in eastern Europe, Caucasus and central Asia. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/189051/Health-effects-of-particulate- matter-final-Eng.pdf
104 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• Inconvenience to local people. For example, people may have to re-wash laundry that has been put outdoors to dry, and wash windows, curtains and vehicles. Dust can contaminate meat hanging up in open-air butchers and other food that is exposed to it in homes, shops and open-air restaurants, giving food a gritty texture. • Impact on ecology. Dust blowing may also affect plant growth and change the species of plants growing in an area. Dust may also damage trees and other vegetation planted as part of the construction contract. 261. Sources of air pollution nuisance include: • the transportation of aggregates and other fine-grained materials in uncovered trucks; • loading/unloading of materials; • wind erosion of stored aggregates.
262. Fugitive Emissions Modeling During Construction Period involving Unpaved Road Travel. When a vehicle travels on unpaved road, the force of the wheels on the road surface causes pulverization of surface material. Particles are lifted and dropped from the rolling wheels, and the road surface is exposed to strong air currents in turbulent shear with the surface. The turbulent wake behind the vehicle continues to act on the road surface after the vehicle has passed (USEPA AP-42). PM-10 emissions from unpaved road travel was estimated using USEPA equation below for publicly accessible roads as this closely mimics the condition of a road section under construction.
Where k, a, c and d are empirical constants, and
E = size-specific emission factor (lb/VMT) s = surface material silt content (%) M = surface material moisture content (%), assumed at 0.03% S = mean vehicle speed (mph), = 30 kph or 18.75mph during construction C = emission factor for 1980s vehicle fleet exhaust, brake wear and tire wear = 0,00047 lb/VMT (vehicle mile traveled) k, a, d and c for PM10 are given as 1.8, 1, 0.5 and 0.2.
263. Surface silt was assumed at 51% as provided in WARMAP – Water Use and Farm Management Survey – Annual Report 1998. E = (7.65)(0.791)/0.570 = 10.616 lb /VMT
264. Assuming a dump truck travelling at 30 km/hr each weighing 20 tons travelling a 300mx30m active road construction front, the emission rate was computed at 0.00000279 g/s-m2. 265. To assess the impacts of uncontrolled fugitive dust from unpaved road travel of the haul trucks confined along the RoW during embankment formation, the USEPA
105 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
SCREEN 3 air pollution dispersion model as used. Although this model is used, as the name implies, to initially screen impacts under worst-case scenario, available information from the Republic of Uzbekistan’s Preparatory Survey on Navoi Thermal Power Station Modernization Project40 meteorological assessment provides a sound foundation to build air quality impact assessment. Specifically, the use of Paquill- Gifford’s stability Class C based on dominant wind speed of less than 19 km/hr and daytime solar radiation of greater than .60 kW/m2. The predicted maximum PM10 concentration at a height of 1.5m (average human height) for this meteorological stability class is estimates at 175ug/m3 at 151m from the road formation edge. This level is 3-times the national PM10 ambient short-term(24-hr) standards of 50 ug/m3.
03/14/20
07:46:36 *** SCREEN3 MODEL RUN *** *** VERSION DATED 13043 ***
C:\Users\Owner\OneDrive\Documents\kararoad.scr
SIMPLE TERRAIN INPUTS: SOURCE TYPE = AREA EMISSION RATE (G/(S-M**2)) = 0.139400E-04 SOURCE HEIGHT (M) = 1.0000 LENGTH OF LARGER SIDE (M) = 300.0000 LENGTH OF SMALLER SIDE (M) = 30.0000 RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = 0.0000 URBAN/RURAL OPTION = URBAN THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) MIXING HEIGHT OPTION WAS SELECTED. THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) ANEMOMETER HEIGHT OF 10.0 METERS WAS ENTERED.
MODEL ESTIMATES DIRECTION TO MAX CONCENTRATION
BUOY. FLUX = 0.000 M**4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 0.000 M**4/S**2.
*** STABILITY CLASS 3 ONLY ***
********************************** *** SCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES *** **********************************
*** TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES ***
DIST CONC U10M USTK MIX HT PLUME MAX DIR (M) (UG/M**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) (DEG) ------30. 167.7 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 100. 172.6 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 200. 47.36 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0.
40 http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12119723.pdf
106 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
300. 13.84 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 400. 7.002 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 500. 4.325 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 600. 2.970 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 700. 2.182 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 800. 1.681 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 900. 1.344 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1000. 1.108 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1100. 0.9409 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1200. 0.8204 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1300. 0.7325 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1400. 0.6673 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1500. 0.6175 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1600. 0.5785 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1700. 0.5467 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1800. 0.5201 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 1900. 0.4972 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0. 2000. 0.4770 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 1.
MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 30. M: 151. 175.0 3 1.0 1.0 320.0 1.00 0.
*************************************** *** SUMMARY OF SCREEN MODEL RESULTS *** ***************************************
CALCULATION MAX CONC DIST TO TERRAIN PROCEDURE (UG/M**3) MAX (M) HT (M) ------SIMPLE TERRAIN 175.0 151. 0.
*************************************************** ** REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS ** ***************************************************
Figure 34: Screen 3 Model Result
107 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 35: Watering control effectiveness for unpaved travel surfaces (USEPA) 266. Construction Stage. Earthworks, pavement improvement operations, quarry operations, and the operation of construction vehicles will release aerial contaminants with potential effects on air quality. Impacts from dust emissions at quarry sites may be mitigated through water sprinkling, covering of material piles, and minimizing pile height. Emissions from vehicles can be minimized by ensuring all vehicles and batching/crushing plants are properly maintained and the later are sited away from the villages. Dust suppression through water sprinkling, although effective, is difficult to implement due to the scarcity of water in the project area where process water needs to be transported through the railway. In this regard, strategic location of dust sources and timing of dust producing activities should be considered as a mitigation measure. 267. The results of the screening of dust impacts indicated that structures within 500 meters on both sides of the project road at risk where the maximum ground concentration is expected to be higher than standards. Structures at risk are the Police Stations, restaurant, hotel, and the border control campus. No negative impacts from dust are expected in the main villages of Jaslik and Karakalpakiya. 268. Fugitive dust emissions from unpaved road travel particularly during embankment formation should be mitigated through water sprinkling along the road construction fronts where the structures at risk are located. Since the water is scarce in the project area, its use can be minimized and still achieve very good control by at ensuring the moisture content is doubled resulting to a reduction in source strength equal to by 75%. At this level of suppression, the predicted maximum concentration is reduced to 272.1 ug/m3. 269. Dust from construction works can be minimized by adopting good working practices, and suppression of dust by sprinkle water. It is necessary to plan working methods to avoid the generation of dust. The mitigation measures to address risk of dust generation are provided below. Table 33: Mitigation measures – for minimizing dust impact during construction Source Mitigation Measure Haul routes • Select suitable haul routes away from sensitive sites, if possible • Provide a length of haul road before the exit(s) from the site
108 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source Mitigation Measure • Reduce the width of haul roads (while still allowing two-way traffic movements) to minimise the surface area from which dust may be produced • Sweep paved access roads (while still allowing two-way traffic movements) and public roads regularly • Limit vehicle speeds – the slower the vehicles, the less the dust generated • Spray unpaved work areas subject to traffic or wind with water regularly and frequently, particularly during warm and sunny weather Earthworks/ excavation • Re-vegetate or seal temporary or completed earthworks as soon as possible • Keep earthworks damp by sprinkle water Materials handling and • Locate stockpiles out of the wind or provide windbreaks storage • Keep stockpiles to the minimum practicable height and use gently slopes • Compact and bind stockpile surfaces; re-vegetate long-term stockpiles • Minimise the storage time of materials on site • Store materials away from the site boundary and downwind of sensitive areas • Ensure all dust-generating materials transported to/from the site are covered by tarpaulin • Minimise the height of fall of materials • Avoid spillage and clear up spills as soon as possible • Damp down sand, spoil and aggregate stockpiles Concrete batching and Mix large quantities of cement concrete in enclosed/shielded areas before pouring concrete pours, vacuum dirt in formwork rather than blowing it out
270. The table below provides mitigation measures for construction-related air quality issues. Table 34: Mitigation Measures – for minimizing Emissions Vehicles • Keep vehicles used on site well-maintained and regularly serviced • Ensure that all vehicles used by contractors comply with vehicle emissions standards always • Control deliveries to site to minimize queuing, or place strict rule for delivery car to turn off the engine while waiting in queing • Ensure that engines are switched off when they are not in use • Keep re-fuelling areas away from the public Fires on site • Avoid burning waste materials/tires on site Waste materials • Use covered containers for organic waste and remove frequently • Remove organic waste before it starts to decompose Chemicals on site • Store fuels, chemicals and other dangerous substances in an appropriate manner • Take account of the wind conditions when arranging activities that are likely to emit fumes, odors and smoke • Position site toilets away from public areas
271. Operation Stage. The main source of air pollution during the operational phase will be vehicles moving on the highway. The main pollutants from vehicular emissions are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons (HC), sulphur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), carbon dioxide (CO2), ozone (O3), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
109 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
(PAH), particulate matter (PM) and trace metals. Vehicular emissions were estimated using the U.S. Average Vehicle Emissions Rates per Vehicle by Vehicle Type using Gasoline and Diesel as published by the US Department of Transportation Bureau of Transportation Statistics41 and summarized in the succeeding Table. Heavy trucks were assumed to use diesel fuel, while the rest are gasoline fed.
Table 35: Emission factors used in estimating emission from the A-380 operation, in g/mile Vehicle Type EMISFACT HC NOXPM2.5EXHPM2.5 BRAKE PM2.5 TIRE Auto 0.350.2890.0080.0030.001 Medium Truck 0.4210.4780.010.0030.001 Heavy truck 0.06455.9710.2130.0130.004 Buses 0.4210.4780.010.0030.001 Motocycle 2.5440.7190.0240.0010.001 Source: US Bureau of Transportation Statistics
272. Using the projected traffic data provided in Table 9, the total emissions throughout the entire 240km stretch project road provided in the succeeding Tables for years 2018, 2023, and 2025. Table 36: Estimated total emissions from the vehicles, in g/year, 2018 Vehicle Type Emissions in g/year, 2018 HC CO NOXPM2.5 Auto 69,861 786,633 57,685 2,395 Medium Truck 9,853132,371 11,187 328 Heavy truck 5,394162,572 499,339 19,234 Buses 4,64462,392 5,273 154 Motocycle 20,478 109,315 5,788 209 TOTAL110,230 1,253,283 579,271 22,321
Table 37: Estimated total emissions from the vehicles, in g/year, 2023 Vehicle Type Emissions in g/year, 2023 HC CO NOXPM2.5 Auto 93,496 1,052,761 77,201 3,206 Medium Truck 11,987 161,038 13,610 399 Heavy truck 6,567197,926 607,929 23,417 Buses 5,64875,882 6,413 188 Motocycle 27,305 145,753 7,717 279 TOTAL145,002 1,633,360 712,870 27,488
41 https://www.bts.gov/content/estimated-national-average-vehicle-emissions-rates-vehicle-vehicle- type-using-gasoline-and
110 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 38: Estimated total emissions from the vehicles, in g/year, 2028 Vehicle Type Emissions in g/year, 2028 HC CO NOXPM2.5 Auto 119,322 1,343,563 98,526 4,091 Medium Truck 13,869 186,332 15,747 461 Heavy truck 7,605229,223 704,059 27,120 Buses 6,52787,686 7,410 217 Motocycle 34,889 186,240 9,861 357 TOTAL182,213 2,033,043 835,603 32,246
273. SCREEN3 was used to initially predict the air quality impacts from the vehicles during the project operation stage and determine if additional air quality impact assessment is needed. The estimated total emissions were converted into g/s/m2 using a 600m by 60m road stretch, and the maximum pollutant concentration at worst-case scenario are provided in the succeeding Table. The assessment revealed that anticipate low level of traffic and the dominant climatological stability class that dictates the dilution of pollutants in the atmosphere will not result to negative impacts. Table 39: Predicted maximum air pollutant concentration from vehicular emission vs applicable ambient air quality standards Pollutant Predicted Maximum Applicable Comply? Concentration at 1.5m Standards height (ug/m3) HC 2.039 1,000 (UZB) Y CO 22.76 4000 (UZB) Y NOx 4.75 200 (IFC/UZB) Y PM2.5 0.37 22 (IFC) Y
274. Fugitive dust generated from the site preparation is minimal considering the limited land area required for Type 1 facility while the Type 2 Facility excavation is very small, each measuring typically 2m x 2in (W), x 2in (T) across the lane. Staggered in the travel lane, 2 sets of 2 half-lane sensors. For Type 1 Facility, suppression of dust through regular watering of exposed soils, including storage areas is necessary and during high wind events, the windward side of the piles may be covered with tarpaulin. Also, grabbing materials from pile should start from the leeward side of the piles will reduce fugitive dust generation. 275. In contrast to the increase in vehicular emission from the increase in traffic over the A380 project road section, the WIMs will reduce the emissions from diesel trucks with introduction of a more efficient truck weighing scheme. Currently, all trucks are required to enter the weighbridges to detect over loading. This scheme requires all trucks to reduce and increase their operating speeds at average speed of 25 kph for 800m to and from the weigh bridge (acceleration and deceleration) and idle for 30 minutes at the weight stations to complete the weighing procedure. With the WIMs, all trucks will be running near the speed limit and suspected overweight trucks, which is estimated at 5% of the total trucks, will be required to undergo weighting process.
111 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
276. To estimate the reduction in HC, CO, NOx, and CO2, the emission factors developed by the California Air Resources Board (2018)42 were utilized as shown in the succeeding Tables. Emission factors were developed for different test cycles and described in Table 42. 277. Using the operating conditions with- and without the WIMS, a single heavy-duty truck that is flagged down and required to go to the weighbridge will have less time idling due to the shorter cue and automated weighing procedure. Idling is expected to be reduced from 30 to 5 minutes which will result from a 54% to 85% reduction in emissions. The total reduction in emission becomes more dramatic considering that all heavy-duty trucks are required to proceed through the weighing procedure while the WIMs will only subject 5% of the trucks that were detected to be overweight based on the sensors that are installed along the highway. 278. The emission reduction over a 1.6 km (1 mile) stretch centred at the weighbridge, is substantial. To illustrate, with a daily heavy truck traffic of 573, which is assumed at 3- times the projected traffic in A-380 for year 2023, the emission reduction from the heavy trucks with the WIMS could reach as high as 99% as presented in Table 44.
Table 40: Estimated Running Exhaust Emission of Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks under Different Test Cycles, g/mi Test Cycle Running Exhaust Heavy Duty Trucks, g/mi HC CO NoxPM10CO2 UDDS 0.2742.22 14 6.27 6073 Creep 0.0640.3235.796.36 2763 Near Dock Drayage 0.0460.1594.433.43 2423 Local Drayage 0.0120.671.268.92 2360 Transient 0.0180.1622.694.87 2108 40 -mph Cruise 0.0080.0510.735.17 1330 50-mph Cruise 0.0990.1050.2513.4 1636 62-mph Cruise 0.0120.0480.8118.2 1537
Source: CARB (2018)
Table 41: Estimated Idling Emission of Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks under Different Test Cycles, g/mi Idle Mode Idling Exhaust Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (g/hr) Engine MY HC CO Nox PM CO2 Low 2007-09 1.88 3.71 33 0.0041 5318 2010+ 2.21 35.7 25.3 0.0052 6012 High (summer) 2007-09 3.2 11.5 69.4 0.017 12230 2010+ 3.6 32.8 33.8 0.021 7337 High (winter) 2007-09 4.14 27.1 59.5 0.024 9572 2010+ 2.65 35.5 42.9 0.029 7867
42 California Air Resources Board (2018). “EMFAC2017 Volume III – Technical Documentation.” https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/downloads/emfac2017-volume-iii-technical-documentation.pdf
112 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source: CARB (2018)
Table 42: Test Cycles Used in Dynamometer Testing of Heavy-Duty Trucks Test Cycle Average Speed Duration Length (mi)Testing Project/Program (mph) (s) UDDS 18.8 1060 5.54EMA-UCR, MTA, TBSP Creep 1.8 253 0.12EMA-UCR, MTA, TBSP Near Dock Drayage 6.6 3046 5.59TBSP Local Drayage 9.3 3362 8.7TBSP Transient 15.4 668 2.85EMA-UCR, MTA 40 -mph Cruise 39.9 2083 23.1EMA-UCR, MTA, TBSP 50-mph Cruise 50.2 757 10.5EMA-UCR, MTA 62-mph Cruise 621385 23.2TBSP Notes: UDDS – Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule43 EMA – Engine and Truck Manufacturer UCR – University of California, Riverside MTA-Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Agency TBSP – Truck and Bus Surveillance Program
Table 43: Estimated Reduction from a Single Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck With the WIMS, in g Operation Estimated Exhaust, g Without WIMS HC CO NoxCO2 0.5 mile Transient 0.0090.0811.345 1054 30 min idling 1.32517.7521.45 3933.5 0.5mile transient 0.0090.0811.345 1054 Total1.343 17.91224.14 6041.5 Operation with Estimated Exhaust, g WIMS HC CO NoxCO2 0.5 Mile Transit 0.0090.0811.345 1054 5 mins Idling 0.220833 2.9583333.575 655.5833 0.5 Mile Transient 0.0090.0811.345 1054 Total0.238833 3.1203336.265 2763.583 % Emission Reduction 82%83%74%54%
43 Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) is commonly called the "LA4" or "the city test" and represents city driving conditions.
113 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 44: Estimated heavy truck emission reduction with the WIMs over a 1.6km stretch, in g/day No. of Heavy Trucks Emissions, d/day per Day HC CO NOXCO2 573 Trucks to be weighed without the WIMS 769.5410,263.58 13,832.22 3,461,779.50 29 Trucks to be weighed with the 6.9390.49 181.69 80,143.92 WIMS % emission reduction 99%99%99%98% G.1.3 Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions 279. The Transport Emissions Evaluation Model for Projects (TEEMPT) developed by Clear Air Asia3 with support from ITDP, ADB, Cambridge Systematics and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) – Global Environment Facility (GEF) Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel. TEEMP is an excel-based, free-of-charge spreadsheet models to evaluate emissions impacts of transport projects. TEEMPT was utilized to assess the CO2 gross emissions with- and without the project improvements which is mainly surface roughness and directly impacts speed and fuel consumptions. It also allows the assessment of future congestion, if they will occur in the future given the projected increase in traffic and road capacity with-and without the project improvements like lane configuration and road roughness. 280. Traffic data, composition and growth rates were taken from the feasibility study. The TEEMPT vehicle fleet was adapted to Uzbekistan conditions particularly on number of vehicles currently and projected to use CNG. The estimated greenhouse gas emissions include road construction44 for 2 scenarios: business-as-usual which considers the project traffic45 traveling over existing road conditions which hampers travel speed, emissions without induced traffic. 281. The succeeding Figures illustrates that the proposed road improvement, more particularly the improvement in the road roughness will allow vehicles to travel at optimum speed resulting to savings in fuel consumption and overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The succeeding Table provides the reduction in GHG of about 7.6 tons per kilometer or 72.7 tons per year due to the project’s proposed road improvement. Table 45: Greenhouse Gas Emission Intensity Indicators CO2 Details Business-As- Project (without Usual Induced Traffic) tons/km 17,407.14 9,832.53 tons/year 167,108.59 94,392.33 tons/km/year 696.29 393.30 g/pkm 176.30 99.58 g/tkm 159.34 90.00
44 481 tons of CO2/km road built 45 As projected in the feasibility study
114 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 36: Projected Greenhouse Gas Emissions with and with-out Project Scenarios46
Figure 37: GHG Emission Intensities, with and with-out Project Scenarios G.1.4 Disruption of local water supply 282. Construction Stage. During reconstruction and operation of the project, it is important to protect existing water supplies from over-extraction and disruption. Reconstruction works require large amounts of water, both for supply of drinking water for the labor and the operation of the camp sites, and for all technical purposes relating to construction activities. Since the area has extremely limited groundwater reserves, all water requirements will be sourced locally usually from train stations. All Contractors must submit a plan for identifying the source location, quantity, and drawing schedule of both drinking and technical water extraction. The water utilization plan will be meticulously reviewed and monitored requiring prior approval from local authorities and the Project Engineer/Construction Supervision Consultant. 283. There is no wetland, river or irrigation canal along the entire project alignment. No impacts on hydrology and surface water quality are expected from the rehabilitation and upgrading project. G.1.5 Generation of hazardous and toxic substances 284. Oils, fuels and chemicals (including bitumen, bridge deck waterproofing agents and concrete) are substances which are hazardous to human health. During reconstruction
46 The GHG estimate was made with the assumption of no induced traffic
115 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
they need to be stored properly in correctly labeled containers. Bitumen, oil and fuel should be stored in tanks with lined bunds to contain spillage. Proper storage and handling of hazardous materials reduces wastage and reduces the risk of spillage which could lead to pollution of groundwater and/or watercourses; some (e.g. concrete) may have serious impacts on freshwater fauna. Each construction site should have a spill contingency plan. Proper storage and management reduce the risk of vandalism and theft. 285. Designated and confined sites for vehicle maintenance, fuelling, repair, and washing should be provided. Appropriate security procedures for fuelling vehicles will be implemented. Washing of vehicles and equipment in or adjacent to watercourses should be prohibited for both road and WIM sites. G.1.5.1 Waste Management 286. Road construction will generate waste products, such as construction debris like rocks and soil, concrete, masonry and brick rubble and other wastes like acids and alkaline solutions, waste oils and oily sludge, batteries, timber, plastics and bitumen. The existing bituminous pavement will be cold-milled or scarified and recycled and material obtained from removal of the existing pavement will be used as material for the gravel shoulders. Although there are sites for domestic waste disposal in Karakalpakiya and Jaslik there are no sites designated for the disposal of industrial or construction wastes. Therefore, the Contractor will obtain necessary permits from local authorities on dispose construction waste. The permit will specify the disposal location, quantity and type of wastes allowed to be disposed. The supervision consultant will ensure that contractor will dispose wastes only in the areas where permit has been obtained. To the extent feasible, surplus materials will be reused or recycled. 287. Sewage and “grey” water from washrooms and canteens from the site offices and work camps will be appropriately treated prior to disposal. In the absence of functioning sewerage and sewage treatment facilities in most of Uzbekistan, the Contractor is required to provide his own on-site wastewater treatment facilities. For sites servicing a small number of employees (less than 150), septic tanks may be used. For larger sites, liquid wastes at a minimum will receive primary treatment in anaerobic tank or pond preceded by a bar screen to remove large solid objects (e.g. sticks, rags). Primary treatment (also referred to as clarification, sedimentation or settling) is the process where wastewater can settle for a period (around 2 hours) in a settling tank. This leads to separation of a liquid effluent which includes oils and grease and liquid- solid sludge. Primary treatment leads to reduction in suspended solids, biological oxygen demand and removal of floating material (e.g. fences). There will be no direct discharge of untreated sanitary or oily wastewater to surface water bodies. G.1.6 Waste from Cut and Fill 288. The proposed project is in a flat area and no significant cut will be required. However, soil for filling will be required for road widening in locations where the roadbed will be elevated. A schedule of suitable deposit sites and a plan for the distribution and imported filling material will be made during detailed design. The transport of filling materials, sand and aggregate will be made using covered trucks to minimize dusts and at times when communities’ social activities would not be affected. 289. Potential impacts and recommended mitigation to address solid and liquid wastes are as follows: Table 46: Solid and Liquid Wastes Disposal Mitigation Measures Potential Impact Mitigation Measure - Detailed Design Phase- Generation of solid wastes and Sites for the disposal of large volumes waste must be improper disposal. determined in the Pre-construction Stage. Specific contract
116 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Potential Impact Mitigation Measure provisions ensure that construction camps and other potential sources of secondary impacts are properly sited and provided with drainage and wastewater facilities. The following provisions are stipulated:
Construction Camp Wastewater Disposal and Site Drainage Systems. The following conditions must apply: • Explanations of Proposed Site Drainage Systems. Locations likely to be subject to water quality impacts or significant runoff (construction camps, staging areas, etc.) and an explanation of the proposed site drainage system must be indicated on the Site Environmental Management Plan (SEMP). • Wastewater. Wastewater arising on the site must be collected, removed from the site via a suitable and properly designed temporary drainage system and disposed of at a location and in a manner that will not cause neither pollution nor nuisance. The site plan required by SEMPs must indicate the system proposed and the locations of related facilities in the site, including latrines, holding areas, etc. There must be no direct discharge of sanitary or wash water to surface water. Disposal of materials such as, but not limited to, lubricating oil and onto the ground or water bodies shall be prohibited. Liquid material storage containment areas must not drain directly to surface water. Liquid material storage containment areas equipped with drains must be valved, and the valve must be maintained locked in the closed position with supervisory control of the key. Lubricating and fuel oil spills must be cleaned up immediately and spill clean-up materials must be maintained at the storage area. • Drainage. The site plan must be devised to ensure that rain run-off from the construction sites are collected in retention ponds and other facilities. Fuel, lubricating oil and chemical spills must be contained and cleaned-up immediately. Spill clean-up equipment must be maintained on site. • Locations of Fueling Operations and Liquid and Toxic Material Storage Areas. The site plans must specify the locations for the storage of liquid materials and toxic materials. The following conditions to avoid adverse impacts due to improper fuel and chemical storage. • Fueling operations shall occur only within containment areas. − All fuel and chemical storage (if any) must be sited on an impervious base within a bund and secured by fencing. The storage area must be located away from any watercourse or wetlands. The base and bund walls must be impermeable and of sufficient capacity to contain 110 percent of the volume of tanks. • Filling and refueling must be strictly controlled and subject to formal procedures and will take place within areas surrounded by bunds to contain spills / leaks of potentially contaminating liquids.
117 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Potential Impact Mitigation Measure • All valves and trigger guns must be resistant to unauthorized interference and vandalism and be turned off and securely locked when not in use. • The contents of any tank or drum must be clearly marked. Measures shall be taken to ensure that no contaminated discharges enter any drain or watercourses. • Disposal of lubricating oil and other potentially hazardous liquids onto the ground or water bodies must be prohibited. • If accidental spills occur immediate clean up must be undertaken and all cleanup materials stored in a secure area for disposal to a site authorized to dispose of hazardous waste. - Construction Phase - Generation of liquid wastes and Mitigation action of potential impacts related to wastewater improper disposal and solid waste disposal during construction requires strict application of all conditions to the review of the SEMP by the CSC prior to approval and strict supervision during the work. Unannounced site inspections must be undertaken as a routine part of supervision activities.
Plan for disposing these wastes needs to be prepared by the contractors and must be approved by supervision consultant - Post-Construction - Impacts related to wastewater and To mitigate potential impacts related to wastewater and solid solid waste disposal could extend waste disposal extending into the Post- into the Post- Construction/Operational Stage, contracts stipulate that one Construction/Operational Stage due year into the operating period a final inspection is required to improper discharges from site and Contractor’s final payment is released only after a fully facilities or because of unanticipated compliant audit is recorded. Any impacts to related to circumstances wastewater and solid waste disposal are part of the final inspection process and final payments will not be made until outstanding issues are resolved.
G.1.7 Run-off and Spills 290. During operation, the uncontrolled discharge of polluted road runoff has the potential to form ponds that could attract wildlife. The chemical nature of road surface runoff is variable, but typical potential pollutants are: • Suspended solids from mud, corrosion, metal particles, grit, tyre and road surface wear; • Lead – from petrol; • Zinc and cadmium – from deterioration of exhaust pipes and brakes; • Organics – including rubber, bitumen, grease and oil; • Iron – from corrosion; • Herbicides and pesticides – for maintenance of road verges 291. Ensure that the design of all road surface and slope drainage to ensure that: • Damage to embankments and structures from flooding and/or erosion is avoided; • the highway will not cause flooding or ponding of adjacent land; • additional pollution of the drainage channels and ephemeral water courses crossed by, or adjacent to, the highway is avoided.
118 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.1.8 Noise Impact G.1.8.1 Background 292. Noise can be defined as ‘unwanted sound’. Sound is a fluctuation of air pressure and can be detected by the human ear when it occurs between 20 and 20,000 times per second. This is referred to as the frequency of the sound and is measured in Hertz (Hz). The ear is not equally sensitive to sound over the whole of this range and therefore when measuring sound this effect is allowed for by applying a frequency weighting, referred to as the A weighting, to the measured signal. The loudness of the sound is dependent on the magnitude of the pressure fluctuation. The human ear has an approximately logarithmic response to this and therefore the sound pressure level (SPL) is expressed using logarithmic unit, the decibel, written (dB (A)), where the ‘A’ indicates that the sound has been A weighted. Noise outdoors from industry and transportation is generally referred to as environmental noise and a typical feature is its continual change in level. To describe and take account of community response to this varying noise level additional noise indices are used. The most commonly used of these is the equivalent continuous ‘A’ weighted sound pressure level, (LAeq,T), which is defined as the steady sound pressure level which has the same energy as a varying noise level measured over a period (T). It takes account of both the number and level of noise events and is generally referred to as the ambient noise level. G.1.8.2 Noise Impact Screening Procedure 293. As a first step in noise impact assessment, this study conducted noise screening to establish if there are structures that are at risk, and if there are, proceed with general and detailed noise assessments if necessary. Noise screening procedure is a conservative approach to “broadly capture the potential for impact with minimal effort.” The procedure is conservative and assumes a worst-case scenario with the proposed road operating under relatively high-capacity conditions and therefore produce more noise than normal operating conditions. The noise impact assessment provided in the succeeding section complies with the procedures set by the US Federal Traffic Administration’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. The noise impact screening followed procedure is illustrated below.
119 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Step 1: Identify the Project Type
Step 2: Determine the Screening Distance Step 2.a Determine the appropriate screening distance Step 2.b Adjust the Screening Distances
Step 3. Identify the Study Area for Highway/Transit Sources
Step 4: Locate Noise Sensitive Land Uses
Are there noise sensitive land uses within the study area? NO YES Proceed with General Noise Assessment No further analysis is needed
Figure 38: US FTA Noise Impact Assessment Screening Procedure 294. For the proposed project, the busway option in selecting the screening distance was used as this provides the widest corridor of impact at 500 ft (152 m) and 250f t (76 m) from the road edge for unobstructed and intervening buildings, respectively. 295. The succeeding Figures identified 7 individual/cluster of buildings within the 152 m unobstructed screening distance. With reference Table 48, the only sensitive land use is where the hotel is located as depicted in Figure 42. All structures within the screening area are not considered sensitive to noise as these provide direct support service to the transport sector like the border check posts, police, and gas stations and the decision to locate along the road has very little consideration to the noise levels.
120 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 39: Camping buildings within the 152 m Screening Distance at Jaslik, kilometrage 79+535
Figure 40: Police Station Building Within the Screening Distance at Jaslik at kilometrage 85+300
121 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 41: Restaurant @10m and Police Checkpost Buildings within the screening distance, Karakalpakiya kilometrage 220
Figure 42: Hotel at 90 m and Hotel and Gas Station Buildings at 80 m within the screening distance Karakalpakiya, kilometrage 237+423
122 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 43: Border Control Campus Within the Noise Impact Screening Distance, Kazakhstan Border G.1.8.3 Construction Noise 296. It was assumed, based on discussions with the design engineers, that noise calculations related to the rehabilitation of the road would comprise of the following activities carried out during normal daytime working: • Stage 1. Removal of earth on shoulders of widened sections/excavation and concreting (where applicable) of culverts • Stage 2. Breaking up of existing road, loading spoil onto trucks and move off site • Stage 3. Laying new subgrade and vibratory compaction (where applicable) • Stages 4. Laying of concrete pavement using slipform paver 297. SoundPlan Essential 5.0 was used to model construction noise using TNM 2.5/3.0 noise propagation protocol. The location of the receptors and the road alignment were taken from Google Earth based on the kml/kmz files provided by the Committee for Roads. These files were then converted to DXF files and imported in SoundPlan Essential. Ground elevation data were taken from Google Earth that provides elevation data at 90 m x 90 m grid which was deemed adequate given the flat terrain of the project site. Dry season temperatures and relative humidity were used as provided in the baseline chapter of the EIA.
298. A schedule of sound power levels for construction equipment that will be used by the Project and their acoustic usage factors are set out in the succeeding Table. The succeeding Figures present the predicted noise impacts at the hotel façade wall, the only identified sensitive receptor in the entire project alignment. Construction noise levels were estimated on four sub-activities: ground preparation, asphalt breaking, sub-base preparation, and concrete paving. It is assumed that no construction activities will be conducted during night time and therefore the nighttime noise levels were not estimated. Noise impacts at the hotel façade during ground preparation, asphalt breaking, sub-base preparation, and concrete paving are 42.9, 64.2, 59.1, and 37 dB(A), respectively. Considering that existing noise levels already exceed the IFC- EHS daytime guide values, the 3 dB(A) allowable increase threshold was used as criteria for impact assessment. Table 48 presents the summary of assessment.
123 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 47: Inventory of Construction Equipment to be Used and Noise Rating ID Activity Description Usage Sound Power Factor Level LWA (dB) 1 ground Dumper 30% 86.5 preparation Dumper idling 30% 73.9 Bulldozer 70% 89 Excavator 70% 105 Truck Neutral 30% 68.2 2 Asphalt breaking C4.3 Dumper 30% 86.5 Road Planer 30% 89.3 Truck>105 kW, Neutral 30% 68.2 Wheeled Loader 140 kW 100% 107 3 sub base/ Bulldozer 70% 114 preparation Dumper 30% 86.5 Vibratory Roller 70% 82.9 Grader 70% 92.4 Truck 30% 68.2 4 Concrete paving Slipform paver 100% 109 Lifting truck 30% 89.6 Truck neutral 30% 68.2
Figure 44: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Ground Preparation
124 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 45: Predicted Construction Noise Contour – Ground Preparation
Figure 46: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Asphalt Breaking
125 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 47: Predicted Construction Noise Contour – Asphalt Breaking
Figure 48: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Sub-Base Preparation
126 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 49: Predicted Construction Noise Contour – Sub-base Preparation
Figure 50: Predicted Construction Noise Single Point – Concrete Paving
127 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 51: Predicted Construction Noise Contour Plot – Concrete Paving
Table 48: Predicted noise level at the Hotel Façade Wall Construction Predicted Noise Baseline Noise Noise increase Within the Activity Level at the in dB(A) 3dB(A) IFC -EHS Hotel Façade Threshold? Wall ground 42.9 66.5 0 Y preparation asphalt breaking 64.2 66.5 1.8 Y sub-base 59.1 66.5 0.7 Y preparation concrete paving 37.0 66.5 0 Y
G.1.8.4 Mitigation 299. Noise effects arising from construction of road schemes are transient and it is not normal practice to provide mitigation in the form of barriers. Good communication with affected communities is often the most effective way to manage potential construction noise impacts. Therefore, the Contractor should keep structure owners identified earlier particularly the hotel, of the progress of the works, including when and where the noisiest activities will be taking place and how long they are expected to last. All noise complaints should be effectively recorded, investigated and addressed. Account should be taken of the needs of residents near the WIM stations in choice of working hours and where possible these should be chosen to • Avoid night time and weekend working; • Avoid working during prayer time; and to • Carry out noisy works near offices during holiday periods
128 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
300. In addition, the Contractor will observe general good working practices including the following which are particularly relevant to road construction: • Modern, silenced and well-maintained plant and construction equipment should be used; • All vehicles and plant should be fitted with effective exhaust silencers which should be maintained in good and efficient working order. • Fitted acoustic covers should be kept in a good state of repair and should be kept closed when plant is in use. • vehicles should not wait or queue on the road with engines running and plant in intermittent use should be shut down when not in use or where this is impracticable, throttled down to a minimum. • If a site compound, or materials storage area is to be used, both it and any static plant within it should be sited as far as is practicable from noise sensitive buildings. • Where activities, including delivery of material to site, cannot take place during normal working hours they should be carried out as close to normal working hours as is reasonably practicable. • Concrete mixers should not be cleaned by hammering the drums. • When handling materials, care should be taken not to drop materials from excessive heights G.1.9 Assessment WIMs Construction Noise 301. Utilizing the same modeling technique, noise generated from the construction of the Type 1 WIM system was assessed in this study. For Type 1 WIM System, during construction it was assumed that peak noise will be generated during site clearing and excavation, requiring 1 unit of wheeled loader, 1 excavator, and 1 dump truck (see Table 47 for the noise ratings). These heavy equipments are expected to operate for 1 month, considering the facility area. No night time construction activities are anticipated and therefore the assessment is limited to day time and the results presented in the succeeding Figures. 302. Unmitigated peak noise level during construction is expected to reach almost 105.3 dB(A) at the facade of commercial buildings north of the project site while at the police station, located south of the site is 97.5 dB(A). 303. The reference noise ratings and acoustic usage factors previously used in the road construction noise assessment were adopted. Soundplan Essential 5.1 was used to predict the noise levels during the WIM construction following ISO 9613:-2: 1996 Acoustics - Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors - Part 2: General Method Of Calculation. Although two time slices were selected, only the daytime prediction was used on the assumption that no construction activities shall take place during the night time. The ground effect on the noise attenuation and reflection was also considered in the calculation. Using Soundplan Essential 5.1, different heights of the perimeter wall which will act as noise barrier were assessed (2-, 3-, and 4-meter). It should be emphasized that the primary use of this wall is for perimeter security as revealed by the design engineers. This created an opportunity to make use of this perimeter wall as noise barrier. Several iterations of the height of the perimeter wall were investigated and it was found out that a 2-m perimeter wall (except for the project side along the A373 which will remain unobstructed to allow access of trucks to be weighed) is adequate. In the case of the WIM located at A373 Km 2.7, this perimeter will be able to reduce levels to 104.2dB(A) and 97.5 dB(A), respectively on the same set of buildings surrounding the project site. Note that to maintain access to the project site from the A373, the police station will have a clear line of sight to the equipment ang therefore will not be protected (see Figure 53). Increasing the perimeter wall to 3m wall will further reduce the peak noise impacts to 102.6 dB(A), and a 4m wall results to 100.6 dB(A). The receiver buildings are made of concrete walls with a sound
129 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
transmission rating between 30-34dB(A), or the decibel reduction in noise across a partition. This indicates that indoor of these structures, the noise attributable to the project is 74 dB(A) unmitigated and 70 dB(A) with a 4m wall. These levels are still higher than office space acceptable noise level of 55 dB(A) and enough to impair normal communication inside the office. The assessment indicates, as far as the project is concerned, there are no feasible solutions to fully control noise during construction. No structural mitigation measures are required considering the impacts are short-term. Nonetheless, similar to road construction, the following measures will be implemented: • Consultations with the affected buildings to inform them on the schedule and type of construction activities that will cause elevated noise levels • Modern, silenced and well-maintained plant and construction equipment should be used; • All vehicles and plant should be fitted with effective exhaust silencers which should be maintained in good and efficient working order; • If a site compound, or materials storage area is to be used, both it and any static plant within it should be sited as far as is practicable from noise sensitive buildings; • Where activities, including delivery of material to site, cannot take place during normal working hours they should be carried out as close to normal working hours as is reasonably practicable; • Establish indoor noise monitoring in the identified affected buildings during project construction.
Figure 52: WIM System Type-1 Construction Noise Assessment, Unmitigated
130 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 53: WIM System Type-1 Construction Noise Assessment, with 2-m Wall G.1.9.1 Operation 304. With the lack of traffic data on the A373 road, the assessment of the operation noise adopted a typical industrial area source as part of the Soundplan Essential Library. The Sounplan Essential Library provides a menu for several types of parking lots and in this case a truck resting stop will best represent the noise levels from the WIMs operation. To assess the noise during the WIM System Type 1 operation, the facility was assumed to be similar to a motorway station for truck resting, with 75 parking bays, and average park movement per bay during the day time is 2.0 and night time is 1.2. The pavement is assumed to be made of concrete having joints of less than 3.0 mm. The predicted noise levels on the same buildings are 50.6 dB(A) and 45 dB(A), which are lower than 55 dB(A) prescribed levels for office space and therefore no further mitigation is required.
131 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 54: WIM System Type 1 Operational Noise G.1.10 Road Traffic/Operational Noise G.1.10.1 Impacts 305. Operational noise was assessed based on 2018 traffic survey and projected for the years 2023 as the first year of operation and fifteen year after or 2038. Day and night time traffic split in both directions is assumed at 70:30. Peak hourly traffic was assumed at 8% of the average 47daily traffic, recommended for urban areas. The peak hourly traffic will be considered in the US Traffic Noise Model to predict the noise levels at the receptors. The following traffic details used in the operational noise assessment are summarized in the succeeding Table. Table 49: Operational Noise Assessment Vehicular Traffic and Speed Assumptions (PCC Pavement) Vehicle Class Speed, 2028 2033 2038 kph AADT Peak Peak AADT Peak Peak AADT Peak Peak Hour Hourly Hour Hourly Hour Hourly Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic Daytime Night time Daytime Night Daytime Night time time Auto 120 1,289 72 31 1,629 91 39 2,412 135 58 Medium Truck 120 110 6 3 127 7 3 171 10 4 Heavy Truck 100 613 34 15 711 40 17 955 54 23 Buses 120 95 5 2 110 6 3 134 7 3 Motorcycle 80 41 2 1 47 3 1 57 3 1 Source of basic data: Feasibility Study (2019)
47 discussions with engineers indicated that peak hour traffic in an urban area is typically 8–12% of average daily traffic and for a low-volume rural area is about 10–11%.
132 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
306. The US Traffic Noise Model 3.0/2.5 standard calculation for the propagation of sound and emissions under the SoundPlan Essential 5.1 was used to assess the operational noise impacts. Two time slices were considered, 0600-2200HRS and 2200-0600HRS and ground elevation were extracted from Google Earth which was deemed adequate considering flat terrain of the project area. The succeeding Table provides the summary of operational impact assessment comparing predicted noise levels to commercial noise standards as provided in the Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) Guidelines – Noise Management48. Predicted noise levels on the hotel’s façade based on projected road traffic for years 2028, 2033, and 2038 traffic are provided below. All predicted daytime and night time noise levels are lower than the IFC-EHS allowable increase from the baseline of 3 dB(A). Table 50: Summary of Operation Noise Assessment Year Predicted Existing Noise Resulting Noise level Increase Within the Noise Level Levels at the Façade in dB(A) in noise 3dB(A) IFC - (Day/Night) day/night dB(A) EHS (Day/Night) dB(A) Threshold? 2028 53.7/50.2 66.5/53.4 66.7/55.1 0.2/1.7 Y 2033 54.4/50.7 66.5/53.4 66.8/55.3 0.3/1.9 Y 2038 55.8/52.1 66.5/53.4 66.9/55.8 0.4/2.4 Y
Figure 55: Predicted Single Point Operational Noise Assessment – 2023 Traffic Level
48 https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/06e3b50048865838b4c6f66a6515bb18/1 -7%2BNoise.pdf? MOD=AJPERES Table 1.7.1- Noise Level Guidelines
133 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 56: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Daytime – 2023 Traffic Level
Figure 57: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Nighttime – 2023 Traffic Level
134 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 58: Predicted Operational Noise Single Point – 2033 Traffic Level
Figure 59: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Daytime – 2033 Traffic Level
135 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 60: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Nighttime – 2033 Traffic Level
Figure 61: Predicted Operational Noise Single Point – 2038 Traffic Level
136 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 62: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Daytime – 2038 Traffic Level
Figure 63: Predicted Operational Noise Contour Plot, Nighttime – 2038 Traffic Level
137 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.1.11 Vibration G.1.11.1 Background 307. Vibration is an “oscillatory motion that can be described in terms of the displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Because the motion is oscillatory, there is no net movement of the vibration element and the average of any of the motion metrics is zero. (FTA, 2018)”. Ground-borne vibration is defined using several metrics that include vibration decibels (VdB), peak particle velocity (ppv), root mean square (rms), and a-weighted sound level (dBA). PPV which measures maximum vibration peaks are useful in describing impact from construction activities and equipment as it relates to structural stress and not to assess human responses. In contrast, rms velocity is used to describe the vibration signals to the human body. The succeeding Figure presents human responses to typical ground vibration levels.
Figure 64: Typical Levels of Ground-Borne Vibration (source FTA, 2018)
G.1.11.2 Vibration Impact Assessment 308. The vibration impact analysis is divided into three stages namely: i) vibration screening, ii) general assessment, and iii) detailed assessment. The principal objective of the vibration screening procedure is to define the study area and if there is potential risk of impact, either general or detailed vibration analysis is performed to establish the extent and severity of impact. It should be noted that a general analysis is not a pre- requisite for a conduct of a detailed analysis. In cases where vibration-sensitive and uses and receptors will be subjected to substantial impacts, it is prudent to proceed to a detailed vibration analysis rather than a general analysis. Conversely, a general analysis may be adequate if the mitigation measures identified can eliminate vibration impacts like a change in transit mode or alignment. 309. The procedure for vibration screening is provided in the succeeding Figure. During project operation, the heavy trucks that will traverse the project road will generate
138 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
vibration. The screening distance for bus or rubber-tired projects is 100ft or about 30 meters. It should be noted that only 1 structure falls within this corridor, a restaurant which is within 10 meters from the road edge. This structure will ultimately be removed and compensated to allow for road widening. It can be surmised that the project does not pose environmental (structural and human) risks from ground borne vibration during operation and no mitigation measures are required.
Figure 65: Vibration Screening
G.1.11.3 Vibration during construction 310. During construction, the principal sources of vibration are the operation of the rollers (see succeeding Figure) and loaded trucks. To predict the levels of vibration, the CalTrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual49 was adopted in this study.
49 Jim Andrews, David Buehler, Harjodh Gill, Wesley L. Bender(2013). Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. California Department of Transportation Division of Environmental Analysis Environmental Engineering Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, & Paleontology Office 1120 N Street, Mail Stop 27 Sacramento, CA 95814
139 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 66: Roller with a typical PPVref of 0.25 in/sec50
311. The vibration source amplitudes for vibratory and loaded trucks are 0.210 and 0.076 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. Following the equation:
n = 1.3 for competent soils: most sands, sandy clays, silty clays, gravel, silts, weathered rock. (can dig with shovel)
312. The ground’s peak particle velocities at the nearest structures due to the operation of the vibratory rollers and loaded truck are provided in the succeeding Table.
Table 51: Predicted Vibration Levels of the Structures and Villages Along the Project Road, in PPV (in/sec) Type Distance from the PPV (in/sec) velocity due to the Road Center Line and operation Chainage Vibratory Roller Loaded Truck Police Station 152m, 79+535 km 0.0043 0.0016 Police Station 45m, 85+300 km 0.0209 0.0076 Hotel 80m, 237+423 km 0.0099 0.0036 Border Control 51m, end point 0.0178 0.0064 Campus Jaslik 1,330m, 82+966km 0.0003 0.0001 Karakalpakstan 1,100m, 218+722 km 0.0003 0.0001
50 Taken from IR McIver, GREENBeing Consulting Engineers (2012). “Ground vibration from road construction.” https://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/research/reports/485/docs/485.pdf
140 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
313. All the predicted levels from the construction of the road low enough not to cause annoyance to the people in the identified buildings based on the criteria values set out in the succeeding Table. Table 52: Human Response to Transient Vibration PPV (in/sec) Human Response 2.0 Severe 0.9 Strongly Perceptible 0.24 Distinctly Perceptible 0.035 Barely Perceptible
314. Source: Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. (2013) 315. Mitigation measure. No mitigation measures are required to address the vibration impacts during the project construction. G.1.12 Utilities 316. Some overhead telephone, and transmission and distribution lines will need to be moved and will be vulnerable to accidental damage during the reconstruction work. Where necessary, utilities will be relocated. Effects of severance during relocation can be mitigated by providing information to the affected public stating when services will be disrupted, and minimizing to the extent practicable, the duration of severance of services in each case. Risks of accidental disruption can be reduced by ensuring that project reconstruction facilities such as excavators are operated by trained personnel, and that operations are adequately supervised. Table 53: Mitigation on Utility Shifting Potential Impact Mitigation Measure - Detailed Design Phase- Potential impacts to other infrastructure (i.e., Potential negative impacts to other area other than transport infrastructure) include infrastructure will be mitigated by due diligence impacts to irrigation systems and utilities (such and strict enforcement of the contract provisions. as electricity and pipelines) and an inherent part Disruption of services will be coordinated with of road reconstruction projects. Networks are relevant authorities. Future pipeline construction indicated by maps of the area and preliminary planned for the area must be coordinated with designs. Potential negative impacts to these road reconstruction to minimize successive facilities in the subsequent stages of the work will disruptions. be avoided by ensuring complete documentation and by anticipating circumstances that are bound to arise in the construction process. - Construction Phase - Impacts to electrical power, pipelines and other Coordination with relevant authorities, and strict utilities in the project area could occur due to enforcement of the contract provisions outlined inaccuracies in data used for planning purposes, therein. All relocation of utilities will be made accidents of other unforeseen events. through relevant authorities. - Post-Construction/Operational Stage - Impacts to electrical power, pipelines and other To mitigate potential impacts extending into the utilities in the project area in the post- post-construction/operational stage, contracts construction/operational stage if these systems stipulate that one year into the operating period a are not properly restored. final inspection is required and contractor’s final payment is released only after a fully compliant audit is recorded. The audit must include verification that any impacts to infrastructure are
141 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Potential Impact Mitigation Measure part of the final inspection process and a final payment is not made until outstanding issues are resolved. Other than the enforcement of applicable laws, no mitigation of impacts to the area infrastructure networks in the operation period is considered warranted.
317. The WIM System contractors at all sites are also required to comply with these mitigation measures. G.1.13 Disruption of Traffic 318. During construction stage, the existing traffic flows will be impeded by improvement works on the road pavement, widening operations, and construction or reconstruction of drainage structures. In addition, vehicles involved in construction will increase traffic flows. These will result in congestion, delays and increase in noise and exhaust emissions. The following mitigation measures will need to be adopted: • providing advance information to the public about planned reconstruction works, • planning reconstruction activities to minimize disruption and maintaining at least one open lane where there is no viable alternative route; • information signages on the temporary traffic diversions in close coordination with local authorities; • use of flagmen and temporary traffic lights to control traffic flows at constricted sites, including safe crossing for pedestrians and • limiting, to the extent practicable, the movement of large trucks to off-peak traffic times. 319. The WIM System contractors at all sites are also required to comply with these mitigation measures. G.1.14 Decommissioning Work Sites 320. The EMP refers to prescribe good practices for the decommissioning of work sites, both the construction sites, the work camp, storage and stockpiling facilities, and the borrow pits. To achieve proper decommissioning of all work sites, the Contractors will be obliged to present their activities and solutions on the proper execution of such tasks as outlined in the SEMP. Both the Supervision Engineer and the Resident Engineer will conduct pre-construction surveys and keep photographic records of each work site before commencement of works. These photographic evidences shall serve as basis for the later approval that the respective sites have been re-instated to satisfactory conditions. As and if necessary, the Contractor may be requested to include additional enhancement activities, such as slope compaction and stabilization with recommended vegetation when possible, and safe disposal of all hazardous material, including the excavation of soil patches contaminated with fuel and lubricants. In case where borrow pits are to be left with steep cut slopes, fencing of such areas will be implemented to avoid further accident risks. 321. The decommissioning of work camp sites requires attention. Tidy clearing of all sanitary and waste management facilities which include grading of soil to natural ground levels, reestablishment of natural vegetation, and non-disruption existing or the creation of new drainage canal are the focal points as these are often a source of environmental pollution, serves as attraction to wildlife, and create public eyesore. Options need to be explored which would allow the use of workers dormitories, fuel station, workshops, drainage facilities etc. for other purposes as suggested by local leaders. Good landscaping is required to re-install former work camp sites into places where the local communities would meet the desired landscape aesthetics.
142 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.2 Impacts on the Biological Environment G.2.1 Background 322. The ecological impact assessment has been guided by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Guidance Note 6 (IFC GN6) and the Good Practices for Biodiversity Inclusive Impact Assessment and Management Planning51 prepared by the Multilateral Financing Institutions Biodiversity Working Group (2015) that includes the ADB as illustrated in the following figure:
Figure 67: Outline of ESIA process including impact assessment and mitigation planning
323. This EIA has included a range of studies including a review of ecologically relevant national legal requirements for the project and collection of technical details including technical meetings and discussions with the ADB missions, Committee for Roads, field engineers, environmental agencies, and representatives of the communities. Further details on approaches to screening, preliminary assessment, EIA scoping, baseline studies, impact assessment, and mitigation are detailed further below. 324. The ecological impact assessment has involved (see Section E.2 for full detail): • Rapid biodiversity assessments (RBA); • Secondary data reviews; and
51 Hardner, J., R.E. Gullison, S. Anstee, M. Meyer. 2015. Good Practices for Biodiversity Inclusive Impact Assessment and Management Planning. Prepared for the Multilateral Financing Institutions Biodiversity Working Group https://publications.iadb.org/en/good-practices-biodiversity-inclusive- impact-assessment-and-management-planning
143 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• Consultations with key national and international experts. 325. A precautionary approach has been taken to the ecological assessment. For example, if a species has been recorded in the wider area, and the habitat is considered suitable for the species, it is presumed that the species is present in the site. A precautionary approach has also been applied to the Critical Habitat Assessment (CHA), supplemented with ecologically appropriate areas of analyses (EcAoAs). Further biodiversity assessments and monitoring are proposed as part of the Project Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). G.2.2 Study Area and Approach to Ecological Impact Assessment 326. The Project Area of Influence (AoI) is defined by the potential impacts associated with the construction and operation of the new road which will include: • direct impacts: associated with the physical footprint of project activities and infrastructure plus the area affected by disturbance and emissions • indirect impacts: associated with the physical footprint or emissions/disturbance of non-project activities caused or stimulated by the project • cumulative impacts: other impacts occurring in the project landscape (related and unrelated to the project), including land use/population trends and foreseeable developments. 327. For the purposes of the ecological assessment a broader AoI of 60km centred on the road (30km either side) has been used to particularly help address cumulative and induced impacts based on the precautionary approach. The following impacts can be found in more detail above in Chapter F and in the relevant mitigation sections that follow on from here. Table 54: Potential impacts to ecology and their AoI Direct Issue Impact Area of Influence Main source of air pollution during construction is dust from Impacts from dust unpaved road travel and earth moving. Potential for net positive projected to reach Dust impact also as road rehabilitation may reduce off-road travel on 500 metres from the dirt roads. road
Noise emissions from construction activities and road traffic Noise emissions during operation creating disturbance of habitat. expected to reach Noise between 300-750 metres Excavation of soil for embankment fill during construction from Pits set to be 77 borrow pits. maximum 500 Soil metres from the road Rodents in the project area are the principal basis of the food Immediate vicinity supply for almost all species of birds of prey. Common species, such as the Large Souslik, Great Gerbil, and Libyan Jird, are Vehicular known to build burrows in the embankments either side of the collisions existing road and are therefore found in higher density than elsewhere. These rodent concentrations, as well as those killed on the road attracts birds of prey and mammals on the existing road and exposes them to risk of vehicle collisions. Water retention ponds will be assembled for use during Placement of water construction; Permanent culverts and drainage pools are also retention ponds planned. unknown, but Waterbodies thought likely to be in close vicinity to the road
144 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Direct Issue Impact Area of Influence
Basins at culvert locations planned for 40 metres either side of the road Hunting and poaching of rare / endangered species found in Potential for impacts Construction the project area is possible during construction. Guard dogs over 30 km from the workers also pose a threat to local species and are known to be a threat road alignment, to saiga in the area. possibly further Project road and related traffic increases resulting in further Wider, difficult to Habitat fragmentation of the already fragmented Ustyurt plateau. quantify fragmentation
10 km North-West of Jaslik, the project road passes close to Located 250-300 Construction the hilly sandy plain where there is a well-preserved Haloxylon metres from the activities on forest (Haloxylon aphyllum), measuring about 5 km long and 1 existing A380 Haloxylon km wide. At risk from firewood collection. forest
Uncontrolled run-off of hazardous materials / pollutants/waste. Up to n500m from Pollution road Indirect / Induced Impacts Issue Impact Area of Influence Poaching Although the increase in traffic is projected to be minimal, the Potentially 30 km, or resulting upgraded road will make access to the project area quicker and over, from road from easier. This could potentially increase poaching in the area, improved causing a decrease in population numbers of species targeted access due to by poachers. road upgrade
Collection of Degradation of existing forest over time. Haloxylon forest firewood from measures 5 km the Haloxylon long and 1 km wide forest Human Although no infrastructure is currently planned, improved could feasibly be settlement / access to the area could induce further development in the long further than 10km development term. This could lead to further habitat fragmentation and from the road but as (oil and gas / human disturbance of local species. none currently petrol planned, 10km stations / considered to be recreation) adequate with better quality road
145 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 68: Identifying biodiversity values that will proceed through impact assessment (Source: Multilateral Financing Institutions Biodiversity Working Group (2015). 328. Ecological impacts have been assessed based on an evaluation of size, extent, duration, frequency, probability, and reversibility of impact, as described further above in Section G. For the purposes of the ecological impact assessment however ‘extent of impact’ is modified to factor-in irreplaceability and vulnerability of the ecological receptor. Irreplaceability and vulnerability are also reflected in the IUCN’s conservation status which uses the categories of Least Concern (LC), Near Threatened (NT), Vulnerable (VU), Endangered (EN), Critically Endangered (CR), Extinct in the Wild (EW) and Extinct (EX).
Table 55: Definitions of extent of impact based on IUCN conservation status assessment methodology Extent of Description impact Local Net loss in value with status of LC
Regional Net loss in value with status NT National Net loss in value with status of VU
146 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Extent of Description impact International Net loss in value with a status of EN, CR, or status of a value changes to CR due to project impacts
G.2.3 Ecological Impact Assessment and Mitigation Overview 329. The vast majority of the proposed road upgrade will involve affect already heavily modified habitat with around 61.5km (25%) involves upgrade of the existing road (already under tarmac) and most of the remaining work affecting a pre-existing but un- tarmacked road. Some 3.5 km will affect currently semiarid desert habitat where a connection is required between the two roads (km 9.5 - 12, and km 218 - 219). Even in these locations, however, the plateau has been heavily modified by off-road movements of trucks and other vehicles as a result of the poor state of repair of the official road. 330. In addition to the road upgrade itself, the scheme will include a number of ancillary structures such as balancing ponds and lighting at (the few) junctions near villages. It will also be elevated by some 1 -2 m above the existing ground using borrow materials obtained by scraping the surface of the land near the road. Embankment fill is estimated to require 8,691,434m3 of soil from potentially 77 borrow pits. 331. The upgraded road will also be able to cope with more and faster traffic which may create a greater barrier to animals crossing the road than at present. However, given that many vehicles currently drive off-road into the plateau for an easier journey, it should also reduce adjacent habitat degradation, dust plumes from vehicles and associated areas of disturbance. 332. Within the AoI, the impact assessment has focused on threatened and protected species and Critical Habitat-qualifying criteria, although reference is also made to generic impacts which will be managed through the application of Good International Industry Practice (GIIP). 333. Within the AoI, the 300m wide working corridor where there will be direct impacts (150m either side of the proposed route) is considered the key AoI for vegetation and non-mobile species (plus additional elements such as access roads, working areas and borrow pits). However, given the potential barrier effects of the road, impacts within the wider AoI have been assessed for more mobile species and the Critical Habitat Assessment (as discussed earlier). 334. In general impacts to receptors of Moderate/Regional Value level or higher are considered in greater detail below, whilst impacts to receptors of Low/Local Value level or lower will be managed through the implementation of GIIP mitigation and are considered under “generic ecological impacts”. Where mitigation is proposed it has been applied in line with the mitigation hierarchy of: avoid, minimize, restore and lastly offset and is presented as follows: • Good International Industry Practice: generic mitigation to be adhered to throughout the enabling and construction period. This include as standard site supervision by an Ecological Clerk of Works (EcoW) throughout the scheme’s construction period, and is included within the construction EMP; • Bespoke Construction Mitigation: This has been developed for particularly sensitive habitats and/or species by receptor type and will also be included and cross referenced in the Contractors SEMP along with habitat restoration methods; and
147 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• Operational Mitigation: This will include significant maintenance and monitoring required to ensure that the construction impacts are adequately mitigated and that the maintenance for the road is carried out appropriately. G.2.4 Generic Ecological Impacts 335. As outlined above, construction and operation of the upgraded road could result in impacts such as direct habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, disturbance impacts, barriers to animal movements and roadkill. The Project will therefore adopt the mitigation hierarchy to avoid where possible or minimize such impacts through a sequential approach of impact avoidance, reduction, restoration and finally offsetting (if no other approach is effective). The project has already sought to avoid some such impacts through route design, e.g. by avoiding sensitive habitats such as the Haloxylon forest and by using the already degraded habitat (of the existing road) for much of the new route. Table 56: Applied Mitigation Hierarchy
Avoid Minimise Restore Offset When avoidance of When avoidance Biodiversity offsets may As a matter of impacts is not and minimisation of be considered only after priority, the client possible, measures impacts is not appropriate avoidance, should seek to to minimise impacts possible, measures minimisation and avoid impacts on to biodiversity and to restore restoration measures biodiversity and ecosystem services biodiversity and have been applied. ecosystem should be ecosystem services Biodiversity offsets services. implemented should be should be designed to implemented achieve no net loss or a net gain where the affected habitat is critical, natural or modified
336. Construction works will also employ GIIP, as outlined below, to further prevent or reduce impacts, e.g. through timing of works to avoid impacts to nesting birds. To manage this, the Contractor will employ an Environmental Specialist to both undertake pre-clearance surveys for priority biodiversity and ensure that the commitments included within this ESIA are delivered through the Project’s Biodiversity Management Plan. This specialist will be trained in the practical elements of ecology, including handling of species and the recognition of sensitive species and habitats, and will also have a working understanding of wider environmental issues and the construction/engineering process. The specialist will assess the Project RoW ahead of the works through a ‘walkthrough’ one to two days ahead of the works to obtain up to date information on any areas where particular care may need to be taken during the clearance works (or clearance may need to be delayed to a later date, e.g. for nesting birds). 337. The approach to the application of GIIP is outlined in the table below. With its application, the majority of residual impacts to low value receptors are expected to be of only low significance (and short term). More detailed receptor-specific assessments, for higher value receptors, are provided in the following sections. The Environmental Specialist will be required to map and demarcate all sensitive areas. G.2.5 Specific Impacts and Mitigation 338. The road mostly passes through modified semi-arid desert habitat, with negligible soil value, which is common across the region and of relatively limited global conservation
148 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
value. As a result, with the application of GIIP, the majority of impacts are expected to be of only low ecological significance and readily mitigated. There are, however, a number of more valuable habitats and species that could be affected directly or indirectly by the scheme and for which specific mitigation is required and these are described further below.
149 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 57: Generic Construction Ecological Impacts and Mitigation Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment General Vegetation Moderate Whilst only a small amount of natural habitat will Areas for vegetation clearance will be clearly marked out. Clearance (e.g. for road Impact be cleared (3,109,844m2 / 310.98 ha, see Natural corridor, site compounds Habitat Losses above) vegetation clearance can Laydown areas and compounds will be sited to avoid unnecessary and storage, spoil disposal result in impacts associated with direct loss of clearance of vegetation. sites, water retention ponds) both plants and habitat for other species. Fauna could also suffer direct mortality or disturbance Existing tracks or natural gaps in vegetation will be used as preferred during clearance. Impacts to nesting birds may access routes where practical. also occur. Loss of vegetation can also cause habitat fragmentation, causing potential The workforce will adhere to working corridors. Tree/ scrub clearance will population isolation and associated problems. be undertaken outside of the bird breeding season (March to August inclusive) where practical. If this is not practical, a pre-clearance nesting bird check will be undertaken of the vegetation to be cleared and - should nests be found - clearance will be deferred until after the season is over. Removal of scrub and trees will be minimized and no Haloxylon forest is to be removed. Where vegetation has been cleared temporarily, it will be restored by reseeding or replanting using locally collected seed mixes and saplings. Topsoil and subsoils will be removed and stored separately for subsequent restoration. Workforce will be educated on preventing bush fires and this will not be used as a land clearance method.
All vegetation losses to Natural / Critical Habitat will be quantified and offset, compensating (or where possible overcompensating) for habitat lost as a result of the project. Restoration will be overseen by the Environmental Specialist. to ensure no net loss to biodiversity
Impacts from vehicle Minor Impact Disturbance to species including visual and noise Single vehicle track policies and use of low-impact vehicles will be movements (including disturbance. Dust production. Potential for off- applied where practical. Off-road travel will be prohibited where practical. transport of people and road travel resulting in habitat degradation and Natural breaks in vegetation will be used as preferred access routes equipment) to and from the species disturbance. Potential for direct where possible. The workforce will adhere to working corridors. All staff construction site and use of mortality due to collision and will be provided with environmental awareness training. The workforce machinery and equipment. machine/equipment use. will not deviate from approved clearance areas. Appropriate speed limits will be applied and traffic will be restricted to existing and/or dedicated
150 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment Construction noise and visual disturbance can haul routes to reduce direct mortality and disturbance from vehicles result in short term, localized effects, although during construction. Penalties for violation will apply. many animals will become habituated to the Pre-clearance site surveys will be conducted before the noise. Birds are amongst the best studied animal commencement of all works to prevent animals present within the receptors in response to noise and only noise working area being killed or injured during works. Checks will be for all levels in excess of 65dB long term or spikes over vertebrate species and will specifically include ground nesting birds and 70dBs are likely to have an adverse effect. reptiles. Noise is likely to be highly localized and most species will likely avoid the noisiest areas or become habituated to certain noise, i.e. will suffer only short-term temporary impacts. Any species that are considered particularly vulnerable are described further below. Less noisy machinery and/or noise barriers will be used where appropriate (e.g. around static equipment in sensitive areas). Fencing Minor Impact Fencing can create habitat fragmentation Fencing will be restricted to work compounds and associated areas to ensure that habitats are not fragmented by workforce activities, unless this is for species protection measures. Temporary barriers will be used to prevent wildlife from accessing waste disposal areas and similar areas. Waste and Pest Minor Impact The existing road embankment is littered with Contractors will be required to conduct regular debris cleanup activities Management52 solid household waste, plastic bottles and used immediately upon possession of the work site and to maintain the plastic bags. This attracts rodents and their assigned sections throughout project construction including by regular predators and trap small fauna. During collection and hauling of wastes to government-approved landfill construction, contractors will be required to clean locations. Sign boards will be installed along the project road at 5km waste from the existing roadside and put in place intervals to remind drivers not to throw garbage along the road. The an appropriate system of garbage collection. estimated cost of collecting and hauling the waste along the road is Waste disposal sites can attract animals - both assumed to be part of construction costs. Contractor (in coordination with pests and other species - which may be subject regulators) will undertake rodent control in all camps
52 The Contractors will coordinate to implement rodent control programs with the Karakalpak branch of the Republican Center for the prevention of plague, quarantine of especially dangerous infections of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Uzbekistan. In 2003, due to intensive industrial development of the Ustyurt plateau, the Zhaslyk anti-plague department was created for this area to ensure the epidemiological safety of the employed work force. This department has the necessary authority, staff, equipment and materials to perform rat and pest control (limiting population of rodents and fleas) in natural foci of particularly dangerous infections. The CSC environment and wildlife specialist will regularly coordinate with the representatives of the Ministry of Health on the implementation of rodent control in all camps and along the project road.
151 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment to road kill, hunting or disturbance by construction workers. Impacts from working Moderate Construction camps are planned for all project Construction camps will be located away from sensitive areas and a compounds and camps Impact lots during construction although final locations hunting ban will be enforced for all construction workers. Good site are to be selected by the Contractor. These can practice regarding the storage of waste and food will be implemented. result in disturbance of fauna, degradation and Temporary barriers and covers will be used to prevent wildlife from pollution of habitats, and direct mortality through accessing waste disposal areas and similar areas. illegal hunting or trapping. Influx of a number of construction workers can have a significant A total ban will be placed on potential hunting equipment such as traps effect. A number of species will also be at risk and firearms, with regular checks on camps being carried out to enforce from attack from guard dogs used for security in the measure with fines given to offenders. and around ancillary facilities. The generation of food waste from construction camps is likely Spread of non-native / Minor Impact Invasive species can be spread accidentally by Any non-native species will be identified by the Environmental Specialist invasive species workers during the construction process, e.g. on and removed. GIIP (e.g. cleaning of equipment before transport to site) vehicles or clothing. will be applied to prevent accidental introduction of non-native species. Habitat pollution; including Minor Impact Construction dust can impact on vegetation and Use of GIIP to minimize impacts associated with dust and pollution (e.g. deposition and runoff affect productivity. Pollution impacts can occur as use of drip trays understanding equipment, designated refueling areas a result of spills, e.g. during refueling. with hardstanding). Water bodies Moderate Water bodies are planned for construction (water Contractors will be required to avoid water leakage and formation of Impact retention ponds) and operation (culverts with permanent surface water at construction sites that can attract birds and water collecting basins on either end). mammals such as Goitered Gazelles. As part of this, the roadbed must Waterbodies can attract birds and mammals not have depressions where rainwater is accumulated. which can increase the risk of poaching from construction workers and road users. Construction Lighting Minor Impact Lighting attracts insects, which can draw migrant Works will not be lit where this is practical. Where lighting is required it birds to the area, as well as bats looking to hunt will be directional and non-UV lighting sources will be employed. in high insect concentrations. Contractor Behaviour Moderate Disturbance to local biodiversity and natural Biodiversity awareness will be included within the contractor’s site Impact habitat from contractors and construction workers induction training. This will include roles and responsibilities, inventory of is a risk. Risks include hunting, disturbance of all critically endangered, endangered, and protected species wildlife sensitive sites (e.g. nesting sites), and species using photographs, behavior including bans on hunting, foraging, and trapping, national regulatory requirements, activities that should be
152 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment degradation of natural habitat (e.g. haloxylon observed in specific sections or periods/months (e.g. bird nesting period, forest for firewood) bird migratory period) to avoid or minimize the risk of disturbance, injury, or death of critically endangered and endangered, and protected wildlife species, and reporting and protection activities during chance encounter with specific mammals, reptile and bird species.
A total ban will be placed on potential hunting equipment such as traps and firearms, with regular checks on camps being carried out to enforce the measure with fines given to offenders.
153 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 58: Generic Operation Impacts and Mitigation Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment Habitat fragmentation Major Impact Currently on average 1,800 to 2,600 vehicles Fragmentation impacts attributable to the project can be considered use the road per day. Traffic growth estimates minimal as the road has been long extant, including the proposed in the EIA predict approximately 5% increase realignments. However, increases in traffic and traffic speed are likely to every 5 years for the project life span. Improved increase the impact of fragmentation from the road, and will need to be road condition is predicted to increase traffic monitored over time to assess the effectiveness of mitigation approaches. speeds to as much as 120 km/h. The new project road will also reduce the need for off-road driving and is Increased road traffic is likely to mean the road predicted to reduce dust plumes, which are known to disturb animals. poses a more significant barrier to animals looking to cross, therefore causing increased isolation of local populations. This also applies to species looking to cross the road on migration, which may either act as a barrier, preventing migration, or subject them to greater direct mortality if they do cross. Increased road kill Moderate Impact Direct mortality of species due to higher A Biodiversity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (BMEP) will be implemented chance of collision with vehicles. Increased and will include identification of crossings of threatened species, including road kill may attract predators/scavengers to tortoises and other species. Should regular crossing points be encountered, the area, in this instance mainly birds of prey, the Project will install culverts for crossing and warning signs for road users. including threatened species. This, in turn, could increase their risk of mortality via To help avoid direct Saiga, and other species, mortality from traffic accidents collision. road design adaptations (1:10 slope ratio for 50 m in length, road height to be <1m) are to be included in the project road design, and locations of these will be largely based on known historic Saiga crossing points (alongside appropriate traffic management systems). As well as the road design adjustments, a traffic management system will be installed that will include:
154 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment • Speed limits of 50km/h53 in effect 100m either side, and inclusive of, the four 50m Saiga crossing points. To avoid sharp braking, the speed limit will reduce initially to 70km/h in a transition zone (50m in length) from the general speed limit of the project road of 100km/h. • Road markings to inform drivers to slow down at the four crossing points • Sporadic road signage along the motorway warning of random speed checks (considered to be more effective than wildlife-specific signage)
The traffic management system will be legally enforced by the local police through strict financial penalties (fines) given to drivers found not adhering to the traffic calming measures above. Capacity building and awareness raising will be provided to local regulators, such as traffic police, to improve their understanding of the issues at hand. Support from the local police authority is considered to be essential to the success of this mitigation measure. ,. Increased disturbance/ Moderate Impact The upgraded road should make access to the The project will be required to cooperate in knowledge exchange with local mortality due to area easier, potentially resulting in increased authorities to share information regarding poaching. increased accessibility disturbance, such as hunting, in the project AoI.
Spread of non-native / Minor Impact Increased traffic increases the risk of invasive Contractors will be required to take measures to prevent the spread non- invasive species species being carried on vehicles and native/invasive species. Monitoring post-construction will ensure that newly colonizing the area. restored areas are not inundated with non-native species from adjacent areas.
53 We propose a speed limit of 50kph at all saiga crossing points. This known to reduce collisions risk for similar species, for example one study on Red Deer showed that a speed limit of 50kph reduced deer-vehicle collisions to almost zero. Drivers at this speed should have sufficient ability to stop if Saiga are trying to cross, and animals are much more likely to be able to avoid collisions with vehicles travelling at this speed. (Meisingset et al. 2014).
155 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Source of Impact Impact Effect Proposed mitigation Assessment Habitat pollution; Minor Impact During road operation, nitrogen deposition including deposition and from vehicles, road-run off (including any de- runoff icing salt) and dust may affect habitats and can create surface water films. Waterbodies associated Moderate Impact Waterbodies can attract animals in the dry with borrow pits and environment of the semi-arid desert which may balancing ponds. be subject to threats from collisions, hunting or disturbance. Road run-off also may pollute waterbodies which could affect local species. Lighting Minor Impact Lights proposed for junction areas near towns. Traffic lights used will be low brightness.
Cumulative effects, Moderate Impact Existing effects, such as risk of hunting, waste The improvement in the condition of the project road could increase risk of such as increased production and pollution may be exacerbated. trafficking of wildlife, (dead or alive). This situation also makes the customs infrastructure in the border post as an important intervention point to enforce laws against area due to better trafficking. Through the project, the Biodiversity Specialist will conduct access. regular training and develop checklists and toolkits for the border police on the following subjects: Basic awareness on botany and zoology, and wildlife and forest legislations that covers domestic laws on wildlife and forest, species protection (Red Book), wildlife and forest offenses and international agreements including the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, United Nations Convention Against Corruption, and other Bilateral and Multilateral Agreements on Biodiversity as described in the EIA Report Enforcement agencies, mandates, and powers, including international cooperation in criminal matters
Access to assistance from the CITES Management Authorities and the INTERPOL Wildlife Crime Working Group
Law enforcement cooperation and information sharing
156 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.2.6 Impacts on Protected/Designated Areas 339. The current road passes around 22km from the Saigachy Reserve at its nearest point (see baseline section). The new road will be located further from the reserve than the current route and no direct impacts are expected to the reserve during either project construction or operation. There is, however, the potential for indirect impacts (e.g. hunting) which may occur as a result of easier transport to the area, and the upgraded road could also create a greater barrier to Saiga migration (especially should populations recover). Any such induced impacts would be considered of major significance and this is discussed further under Saiga antelope below. 340. No other protected or designated areas will be affected by the proposed project, with all the designated wetland sites located over 15.5km from the scheme, and no significant direct, indirect or induced impacts expected upon them. G.2.7 Impacts on Habitats and Flora 341. The route passes through mainly modified habitats but some semi-arid habitat here will still suffer direct habitat loss, although soils are considered to have negligible value. Given that 178.5 km of road will be affected, with an average 21m embankment cross- section, this is expected to result in the conversion of some 3.75km2 of existing modified habitat, much from the existing (albeit untarmacked) road. As such, impacts are considered to be of moderate significance. The upgrade work is, however, expected to reduce off-road driving in the area, reducing habitat degradation and dust plumes which can negatively impact biodiversity. 342. More Natural Habitat will be affected where the new road joins the old road, but even this has suffered from considerable off-road traffic over the years. These connecting sections represent a total of 1.46% of the new route alignment (3.5km). An estimated 310.98ha of natural habitat will be lost from the connecting sections of the road, the 40 planned culverts and collecting basins, and the borrow pits. This estimate currently excludes the areas required for temporary construction facilities (e.g. camps, storage areas) as this information was unavailable at the time of writing and will be decided by the contractor. Given the potential for these areas to be of greater interest, and the limited information available locally on the distribution of rare/restricted- range/threatened plants, the Environmental Specialist will be required to undertake pre-clearance vegetation surveys here in advance of its removal. The Environmental Specialist will also be required to quantify all Natural Habitat losses during construction. 343. Existing vegetation removal will also be minimized by demarcating areas to be cleared and any priority ecological areas to be protected (e.g. as identified above) during clearance. Topsoil material removed during site preparation will also be stored separately for reuse in line with GIIP (as per the table above) to enable subsequent restoration of any affected areas towards natural habitat. As a result, impacts to semi- arid desert habitat are considered to be of moderate significance. 344. Areas of Haloxylon forest and associated shrub lands are considered to be of greater value and supports a range of threatened species including nesting raptors and potentially caracal. Whilst the existing alignment passes close to one of the biggest contiguous areas of Haloxylon forest in the area, no significant clearing or conversion of Haloxylon will take place as part of the scheme, because road improvements in this area will be limited to the existing right-of-way. These areas will be demarcated as a strict protection zone and no activity, camps, equipment, or workers, will be allowed in the vicinity of the forest. Any contractor(s) working near to the Haloxylon forest will be required to coordinate with the appropriate agencies (e.g. the Glavgosecoexpertiza) and jurisdictional local government to enforce this restriction. Any individual trees that
157 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
do need to be removed will be replaced on a 1:3 ratio. As a result, impacts on Haloxylon forest are considered to be of minor significance only. Table 59: A summary of post-construction habitat restoration/ offsetting Habitat Direct Proposed Where Status Impact Offset Semi-arid desert 310.98ha 310.98ha Ustyurt Natural to pre- plateau project (exact quality location TBC) Haloxyon Forest To be TBC N/A Priority monitored during construction
345. An estimated 3,109,844 m2 (310.98 ha) of Natural Habitat is set to be lost from construction activities. The precise locations of any restoration/offset areas will be confirmed and managed under the supervision of the environmental specialist; however restored areas will be areas unaffected by vegetation clearance from the project road. 346. The environmental specialist will be required to quantify all disturbed and lost Natural Habitat from construction activities and this amount will need to be offset through restoration by the Executing Agency, in line with ADB’s SPS, to ensure NNL to biodiversity from the project. Offsets will be designed in line with the IFC GN6 to achieve ‘like-for-like or better’ which states that biodiversity offsets must be designed to conserve the same biodiversity values that are being impacted by the project (an “in-kind” offset)54 An offset ratio of 1:2 shall be applied. 347. The Environmental Specialist for the project will work with the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan and the Institute of Natural Sciences, University of Nukus, to build on lessons learnt from existing efforts for offsetting applied for the ‘Mainstreaming biodiversity into Uzbekistan’s oil-and-gas sector policies and operations’ project to guide habitat restoration in the methodology outlined below. Restoration requirements shall be calculated based on vegetation condition and area Restoration will be based on international experience, including the aforementioned oil and gas project, adapted to the national context and conditions, and to offset the habitat fragmentation impacts of the road will generally prioritise restoration efforts that target improved habitat connectivity. 348. Habitat restoration offsets will initially be prioritised in the Saigachy Reserve. This will technically be an out-of-kind offset which will involve trading-up by targeting the Reserve which is considered to be of higher conservation priority than the habitat in the vicinity of the project AoI and supports a range of threatened species including the Saiga antelope and Goitered gazelle. Targeting offsets at the Reserve has the additional benefits of incentivising species like the Saiga to remain in the Reserve and avoid the road, and mitigates fragmentation caused by the project road by improving habitat connectivity.
54 The IFC GN6 states a biodiversity offset should be designed and implemented to achieve measurable conservation outcomes that can reasonably be expected to result in no net loss and preferably a net gain of biodiversity. The design of a biodiversity offset must adhere to the “like-for-like or better” principle and must be carried out in alignment with best available information and current practices.
158 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
349. Any surplus offset requirements once the restoration requirements of the Reserve have been met will be carried out to generate improved habitat connectivity on the Ustyurt plateau (e.g. Haloxylon forest). All restoration efforts will be conducted in collaboration with the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan and the Institute of Natural Sciences, University of Nukus, and any restoration in the Saigachy Reserve will be carried out in collaboration with the management team of the Reserve also. G.2.8 Restoration Methodology 350. A degradation weighting system will be applied to calculate the quantity of offsets required from the project based on a sliding scale of habitat quality weighted against the degree of modification to the native habitat. Degrees of modification have been calculated in the BAP as far out as the furthest extent of habitat losses expected from construction activities – 500 m from the project route alignment for borrow pits (final locations of borrow pits to be confirmed by the contractor). 351. Three weighted corridors will be applied (details are provided in section 4.4 of the BAP). The Environmental Specialist will be required to quantify all losses per Corridor from construction activities using geo-technology. Losses from each Corridor will have the following implications for offset requirements. 352. The project will be required to account for losses of Natural Habitat over a reasonable project operational period (20 years) before restoration returns the areas to pre-project quality. 353. During construction the contractor will be prohibited from entering sensitive habitat areas (such as Haloxyon forest), except where absolutely necessary and under the guidance of the Environmental Specialist. Construction contracts will include good construction controls and will require restoration of all areas where vegetation has been damaged. Areas required only temporarily will be rehabilitated and the following specific measures will be applied: Table 60: Specific Measures for Sensitive Habitats Approach Detail Siting of Arrange construction sites to reduce risks of construction impacts such as worksites those associated with fuel spills, oil spills, hydraulic oil spills, and waste disposal. Working Enabling and construction works should be carried out in the pre- corridor determined road corridor so that natural habitats are degraded as little as possible. Timing of Clear vegetation cover ideally during the dormant period (from 1st October clearance until 15th March). Management Material generated during excavation should be used for construction of soil and/or landscape regeneration along the road. Excess material should be deposited in line with regulations at pre-designated locations. Topsoil should be deposited at a temporary storage area and then relayed during rehabilitation of the surrounding area. This will be managed through a Soil Quality and Erosion Control management plan. Vegetation Areas from which vegetation is going to be cleared for enabling works Restoration should be restored to as close to their original condition as practical as far as this is consistent with safety and visibility for road traffic. Seeding will be from seeds gathered from the local vegetation.
G.2.8.1 Indirect Impacts
159 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
354. Habitats adjacent to construction works may also be temporarily or permanently impacted through a combination of: • air emissions, including dust from earthworks and material transfer; • noise from machine operation and vehicle movement; • loss of soil structure including erosion of the upper territorial horizon, leaching of construction sites and soil pollution from waste; and • degradation of surface or groundwaters due to changes in surface run-off during works. 355. Overall, 313.18 ha may be affected by these impacts. However, given the relatively small scale, short-term and partially reversible nature of these impacts, and the fact that they can be readily mitigated through the application of GIIP, they are considered a minor significance impact only. G.2.8.2 Impacts from Operations 356. During operation of the road, and once habitat restoration has been completed, impacts on habitats will be restricted to indirect effects from increased human activity leading to increased hunting, collision mortality, growth of development, degradation in habitat quality (e.g. road run-off, dust). The existing road already has such effects and the additional impacts are expected to be limited in scale, so overall impacts are considered to be of moderate significance. The upgraded road may result in the fragmentation of habitats and such effects, but this is considered to be restricted to species-specific movements as outlined below. 357. With regards to habitat restoration, contracts will stipulate that one year into the operating period a final inspection is required. This will include verification that required re-vegetation has occurred and that the plants are established. Any failures in this regard must be part of the final inspection process and final payments will not be made until outstanding issues are resolved. No additional mitigation actions to offset impacts to flora in the operational period are considered warranted. G.2.8.3 Impacts on Sensitive Fauna 358. A range of threatened fauna are present within the broader project area (see baseline) although only Saiga antelope are considered to trigger Critical Habitat (see Critical Habitat Assessment above). Potential impacts to notable fauna include direct mortality, fragmentation of habitats, visual and noise disturbance, and impacts from pollution, as well as the potential for increased hunting as accessibility is increased. Such impacts will be reduced where practical through the application of GIIP, as well as species- specific mitigation as outlined below. Species-specific biodiversity action plans are also proposed to help ensure that no net loss (and where appropriate “net conservation gain”) is achieved for such species: this is addressed further in the CHA and BAP. Other species-specific mitigation is outlined below. G.2.9 Impacts on mammals 359. Several large mammals have been recorded from within the broad Project area including Caracal and Marbled polecat, as well as both the Goitered gazelle and Saiga antelope (which have been recorded from the nearby Saigachy Reserve). G.2.9.1 Impacts from Construction 360. During construction, impacts to mammals will result from loss and fragmentation of habitat, mortality and injuries during execution of works and disturbance. Fragmentation of habitats already occurs on the existing road, which can form a barrier and lead to significant mortality of certain species. The following mitigation is therefore proposed for the design and construction period:
160 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 61: Mitigation Measures for Mammals during Design and Construction Phase Approach Detail Lighting Lighting (both construction and operational) will be minimized as far as practical whilst taking account of safety requirements. Works will not be lit where practical. Where lighting is required it will be directional and non-UV lighting sources will be employed. Signage Traffic signs and signalling for the drivers (blinking mark) with animal signs will be installed at any locations determined by the environmental specialist as important for mammals. Fencing A temporary fence will be installed around compounds and worksites to prevent entry of mammals during the night. Daily checks Any open works will be checked daily for mammals and any animals found will be removed to safety
361. Works will be carried out wherever practical only during the day to limit disturbance. All construction staff will receive appropriate awareness training to identify the potential for species and advise upon the correct actions to take should species be encountered. The need for good housekeeping (i.e. no litter, food stored appropriately) will also be communicated. 362. The following will also be considered in species-specific BAPs: • Monitoring studies for populations moving through the area (e.g. by tagging); • Studies into safeguarding measures for ungulates and large carnivores; and • Support to the saiga reserve with the creation and implementation of management plans, including obtaining baseline data on the movement of large mammals. 363. Whilst occasional large animals may venture into areas directly affected by construction and operation, most will remain in remoter areas and are unlikely to directly affected by the project. They may, however, be affected by indirect impacts associated with noise and disturbance during construction, lighting and disturbance from the operational road, or increased levels of persecution and hunting as access to the area improves. It is considered that risk to Saiga is low during construction given their currently extremely low population, with none sighted near the project road for over five years. G.2.9.2 Impacts from Operations 364. Operational impacts will be associated with increased hunting, mortality and injury due to collisions, human development along the road, as well as disturbance from noise, light and other elements. The existing road represents an existing risk to mammals, although only limited road kill (mostly gerbils and hares) were recorded during site visits. The significance of operational impacts is considered to be moderate. Impacts from increased traffic to the migration patterns of terrestrial species, including saiga, over the lifetime of the project will need to be monitored. Long term biodiversity management to ensure no net loss, and where appropriate net gain, will be included in the Biodiversity Action Plan which will include specific mitigation for Saiga antelope. G.2.10 Impacts to Saiga and Critical Habitat 365. During migration the Ustyurt saiga can cover distances of up to 1000km as they move north to south, from the Sam desert in Kazakhstan, passing through Almabet and Churuk, and between the settlements of Jaslik and Karakpakiya. In winters with heavy snow, saiga traditionally have moved to southern parts of the plateau. The existing A380, as will the new project road alignment, cuts across the south-west of the traditional saiga migration corridor. The most recent known attempted crossing of the
161 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
road was in 2004, when an estimated 1000 individuals tried to cross the A380 to get to the grazing area south-west of the road. The last three attempted crossings were at: 1. Abadan N 43 42’: E 57 48’ 2. Jaslyk N 43 58’ E 57 30’; 3. Bergakh N 44 18’; E 57 03’ 366. Saiga numbers in Uzbekistan are currently extremely low. However, based on known Saiga population growth (see section 3.1 of the BAP), and ongoing efforts to make existing habitat barriers (e.g. the border fence) more porous, it is not impossible for the small local population of 15 animals to be restored to 6000 or more individuals within the 30 year project timescale. A precautionary approach has therefore been adopted for this impact assessment. It is therefore considered that the Project AoI incorporates critical habitat for this species and given the potential impacts described below a biodiversity action plan (BAP) will be required for the Saiga antelope. G.2.10.1 Construction Impacts 367. A range of ecological impacts will occur during construction works and will require mitigation as described in the sections below (habitat loss, potential for poaching etc.). Given Saiga antelope are very rare and not known to use the project area at the current time, and their sensitivity to disturbance, these animals are not expected to approach any construction works. Impacts on Saiga as a result of project construction are thus expected to be minor and will be managed through GIIP so long as poaching by construction workers can be effectively prevented. Construction activities such as the RoW at alignment connecting points (km 9.5 – 12 and km 218 – 219), borrow pits and culverts, will all require vegetation clearance of Critical Habitat for the Saiga antelope. G.2.10.2 Operational Impacts 368. Impacts associated with operations have the potential to be more significant and there are global concerns regarding the barrier effect of linear infrastructure on open plains ungulates (indeed this is considered a key priority in the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species - CMS). In Central Asia (including Mongolia) the number, intensity and use of large infrastructure projects (including railways, mining sites, pipelines, border fences, roads, etc.) has increased rapidly in recent years and has been found to impede the movement of large herbivores by preventing access to resources or by forcing animals to make large detours to gain access. They can also reduce the capacity of wildlife to escape droughts or harsh winters by moving to better areas, resulting in increased intra and inter-specific competition, poor body condition, poor recruitment, and high mortality (B. Lkhagvasuren et al., 2011). 369. Whilst the 1:4 embankment ratio means that the height of the proposed road is not considered a physical impediment to saiga crossing it (pers. comm., Saiga Conservation Alliance), disturbance effects are considered a more material potential impact. The extremely small number of Ustyurt Saiga currently present in the wider area, and the fact that the road is replacing an existing road, means that in the short- term direct impacts to this species from the upgrade and rehabilitation are expected to be low. 370. However, in the longer term, and given the 30-year minimum design life of the project, there is the potential for associated risks of the road to become a severe issue should the current population recover, or traditional migration patterns be restored for example by impeding linear infrastructure (e.g. border fence, Shalkar – Beyneu railway) becoming more permeable. Indeed, using an average Saiga population growth rate of 27% (see accompanying Saiga Technical Note), even the small local population of 15 animals could grow to some 5,900 individuals over the project lifetime. A precautionary approach to impact assessment is therefore required.
162 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
371. The current average daily traffic count on the road is estimated at between 1,800 and 2,600 vehicles, with the vast majority through traffic heading to the Kazakh border. Cars account for more than half of existing traffic and cars and multi-axle trucks together comprise 87% of the total. There is approximately a 70:30 split in day / night driving, with risk of collision to ungulates such as Saiga antelope believed to be heightened at night. 372. The following traffic growth has been predicted in line with current levels of import/export growth and overall levels of local/national economic growth: Table 62: Traffic Projection Growth Rates (%)55 Traffic growth rate (%) Period Car Bus Goods Vehicles
2018-2023 6.0 4.0 4.0
2023-2028 5.0 3.0 3.0 Beyond 2028 4.0 2.0 3.0
373. Traffic growth rates are given as compound increases annually and have the potential to result in increasing risk of habitat fragmentation and Saiga mortality/disturbance over the 30 years of the project. Given the potential for the population of Saiga to increase dramatically over the same time period and should the linear infrastructure impediments be successfully made more permeable, a precautionary and adaptive management approach is proposed to support long-term conservation of this critically endangered species. This will include long term monitoring and periodic re- assessment of impacts of the road, especially in the context of Saiga population numbers and with regards to the efficacy of mitigation measures outlined further below. 374. Induced impacts from operation of the road are also possible; increased accessibility as a result of the upgrade works to the road could potentially result in increased poaching of the Saiga and increased economic and human development. Economic hardship has been one of the drivers behind high levels of poaching of Saiga for their horns and meat, with male Saiga being targeted specifically for their horns. As well resulting in direct population decline, poaching specifically for males’ results in disproportions in the gender balance of Saiga herd dynamics that themselves result in additional population decline. Human development at different scales is also expected due to the improvements in road quality. Smaller scale infrastructure such as petrol stations and recreation areas are considered likely, whilst larger scale initiatives, such as further oil and gas development, is possible. These would likely have some fragmentation impact to the Saiga antelope. 375. The Committee for Roads will be principally responsible for the implementation of the BAP and its management plans. The Committee for Roads will need the support of various stakeholders that includes NGO like the WWF, Goscomecology of Uzbekistan and the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan in Tashkent, and Saigacy Reserve in the establishment of watering holes within the reserve. To improve antipoaching, the Committee needs to coordinate and support initiatives like the ranger training program
55 Source: Draft Final Report for Karakalpakstan Road Project; ADB TA No. 8950-UZB PPTA for Third CAREC Corridor Road Investment Program, Phase 1
163 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
for the protection of Saiga. Finally, the Committee can provide funds to the Saiga Reserve for camera traps. G.2.10.3 ADB Critical Habitat Requirements 376. In areas of critical habitat, the ABD SPS states that no project activity will be implemented unless the following requirements are met: 1. There are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat which could impair its high biodiversity value or the ability to function. 2. The project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species or a loss in area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem be compromised. 3. Any lesser impacts are mitigated in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined for Natural Habitat56. G.2.10.4 Mitigation and Management G.2.10.4.1 Direct Mitigation of Impacts at Crossing Points 377. The current road embankments planned (1:4) are reported to be at a manageable slope for Saiga antelope crossing, although not having a full visual of the other side of the road may make Saiga nervous of attempting to cross - long term monitoring is proposed to confirm this. Research by Kirk A. Olsen, 201257, highlighted that embankments along most regional rail corridors are also not expected to be tall enough to physically alter Saiga movements, and recommended that some 66 at-grade Saiga crossings were to be designed for the Zhezkagan-Saksaulskiy railway and 20 between Shalkar-Beyneu (at the time of writing, it is unclear if these were included in the final design). These crossings were proposed to resemble a modified at-grade vehicle crossing at 50 meters wide with a 1:10 slope ratio. 378. To help avoid direct Saiga mortality from traffic accidents these same specifications (1:10 slope ratio for 50 m in length) are to be included in the project road design, and locations of these will be largely based on known historic Saiga crossing points (alongside appropriate traffic management systems). These historic Saiga crossing points have been identified along the A380, and are the most recent known attempted crossings by herds of significant numbers of Saiga antelope, at the following coordinate points:
56 Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve at least no net loss of biodiversity. They may include a combination of actions, such as post-project restoration of habitats, offset of losses through the creation or effective conservation of ecologically comparable areas that are managed for biodiversity while respecting the ongoing use of such biodiversity by Indigenous Peoples or traditional communities, and compensation to direct users of biodiversity. 57 ‘Saiga Crossing Options’, Kirk A. Olsen, 2012
164 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 69: Historical attempted saiga crossing points
1. Abadan N 43 42’: E 57 48’ 2. Jaslyk N 43 58’ E 57 30’; 3. Bergakh N 44 18’; E 57 03’
379. Design for the project road will include four Saiga crossing points. An additional crossing point has been added further northwest along the road as consultations with national experts and satellite data show populations present in that area. Each of the four crossings will be 50m in length with an embankment slope ratio of 1:1058. Road height at these four points must be <1m tall to increase visibility to the other side of the road for the Saiga.
58 As the only CH-triggered species, mitigation in this BAP focuses on Saiga, however it is expected that the designated crossing points will also serve to improve other larger mammal species’ in the area, such as Goitered gazelle and Caracal for example, ability to cross the road.
165 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 70: Saiga crossing cross-section
380. Although these four points have been selected based on the known historical crossing points, slight amendments to exact final locations have been made to two of the crossings based on recommendations during consultation with Saiga antelope experts, pers comms59. They are detailed as follows:
Table 63: Project road Saiga crossing points
Crossing Co-ordinates Notes Point Most recent known attempted crossing point (2004). Project crossing point matches the attempted historical crossing co- 1. Abadan N 43 42’ : 57 48’ ordinates.
The known attempted crossing point - N 43 58’ E 57 30’ - is in close proximity to the town Jasliq (Figure 69). To ensure the N 44 05’ : E 57 crossing point does not result in induced risks of human 2. Jasliq 21’ disturbance and poaching by channelling Saiga towards human settlement, the project road crossing point has been shifted some 15 km northwest of the town to N 44 05’ : E 57 21’
59 Elena Bykova and Aleksandr Esipov (Saiga Conservation Alliance) and Dr. Joseph Bull (University of Kent), January 2020
166 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
N 44 18’ : E 56 Project crossing point matches the attempted historical crossing 3. Bergakh 59’ co-ordinates. A fourth crossing point is to be included in the road design. This is because the closest known population of Saiga antelope are N 44 31’ : E 56 4. Reserve currently in the Saigachy Reserve and satellite tracking data (see 38’ Saiga Technical Note) also shows the species traditionally to be present in furthest northwest corners of Uzbekistan.
Figure 71: Project road Saiga crossing points
381. As well as the road design adjustments, a traffic management system will be installed that will include:
• Speed limits of 50km/h60 in effect 100m either side, and inclusive of, the four 50m Saiga crossing points. To avoid sharp braking, the speed limit will reduce initially to 70km/h in a transition zone (50m in length) from the general speed limit of the project road of 100km/h.
60 We propose a speed limit of 50kph at all saiga crossing points. This known to reduce collisions risk for similar species, for example one study on Red Deer showed that a speed limit of 50kph reduced deer-vehicle collisions to almost zero. Drivers at this speed should have sufficient ability to stop if Saiga are trying to cross, and animals are much more likely to be able to avoid collisions with vehicles travelling at this speed. (Meisingset et al. 2014).
167 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• Road markings to inform drivers to slow down at the four crossing points that may include vibrant lines, flashing lights, rumble strips, and other speed calming measures. • Sporadic road signage along the motorway warning of random speed checks (considered to be more effective than wildlife-specific signage).
382. (Traffic lights are considered to be ineffective as it’s thought likely due to the remote- ness of the project area drivers will not heed to them)
383. The traffic management system will be legally enforced by the local police through strict financial penalties (fines) given to drivers found not adhering to the traffic calming measures above. Capacity building and awareness raising will be provided to local regulators, such as traffic police, to improve their understanding of the issues at hand. Support from the local police authority is considered to be essential to the success of this mitigation measure.
384. Crossing of the road for other species will be facilitated by culverts along the road.
385. Mitigation of impacts to achieve NNL, and potentially net gain also, of the Saiga antelope will be done through support of the management of the Saigachy Reserve. Details on how this will be carried out can be found in the BAP.
386. An adaptive management approach will be undertaken to assess how effective mitigation is proving to be. Should there be even a single incident of collision with a Saiga antelope, adaptive management will be triggered - including immediate review by the executing agency of efficacy of the crossing points (completed alongside international E&S experts, the Saiga Conservation Alliance, and Saigachy Reserve) and traffic management system (to be completed alongside local police) described above.
387. Should the currently proposed mitigation be assessed to be ineffective, an intelligent traffic management system will be installed. The intelligent traffic management system will include any adaptations to the crossing points recommended as part of the aforementioned review. It will incorporate additional traffic calming measures that are triggered based on satellite tracking of Saiga movements. This will require the collaring of a number of individuals in order to GPS track the herd, and when a significant number (>10) of Saiga move in the direction of the road the additional traffic calming measures will be activated. Additional traffic calming measures to be considered as part of adaptive management include:
388. Raiseable barriers at Saiga crossing points (similar to those seen as road – rail intersections) which will be operated by the local authorities. Direct control of individual barriers will be available and can be closed off accordingly depending on exact Saiga movements.
389. The intelligent traffic management system will be the responsibility of the Executing Agency and local police authorities.
390. Collaring can be challenging in small herds of ungulates, such as Saiga antelope, due to high die-off rates during collaring. In Kazakhstan, the ACBK have adapted a collaring methodology specifically for the Saiga antelope. Therefore, any collaring attempts for the project must be carried out in cooperation with the ACBK, Saiga Conservation Alliance and Saigachy Reserve.
168 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
391. Monitoring efforts for the project will be integrated with regional biodiversity monitoring and evaluation efforts at the Saigachy Reserve and Nukus University. Further details on all of these elements are included in the BAP.
G.2.11 Impacts to Birds 392. Habitats within the AoI are generally not considered to be of particular importance for birds. Potential exceptions are local depressions which may collect water and be used for watering or can provide shelter from adverse weather conditions and areas of Haloxylon woodland which can support nesting birds of prey. G.2.11.1 Construction Impacts and mitigation 393. Impacts to birds during construction may include loss of/ disturbance to habitats used for nesting, feeding and resting (including habitats used by ground-nesting species, and remnant areas of Haloxylon forest). These will be avoided as far as practical by undertaking vegetation clearance outside of the nesting season (April-June) and using pre-clearance surveys to identify any nests (should nests be found they will not be cleared until any chicks have fledged). Although most bird species recorded in the area are generally widespread particular attention will be paid to birds of prey that may be nesting, e.g. in areas of Haloxylon forest. Overall, however, and given the modified semi-arid desert landscape affected, such impacts are generally expected to be local in nature and represent only a minor impact. 394. In summary, the following measures shall be applied to avoid construction impacts to nesting birds: • Care will be taken to avoid nesting birds during construction. Habitats of greater importance will be marked out for particularly sensitive works. These will include areas of Haloxyon forest; • Care will be taken to avoid impacts to ground-nesting species. Access roads will be clearly defined before commencement of works; • Works will be planned during the period of reduced activity of birds, or in the period outside the reproductive season. The optimal period is after the reproductive season, from the end of August, or before the beginning of the reproductive season in April; and • Potential impacts to birds from contractor guard dogs will be confined to contractor’s camps where guard dogs are active, and managed through appropriate awareness raising, contractor codes of conduct and penalties for violation. G.2.11.2 Operational Impacts 395. Birds may be impacted during road operations by disturbance, habitat fragmentation and direct collisions with vehicles, although no notable species are expected to be particularly affected. Roadkill can provide a source of food to raptors, which will also feed on the large populations of rodents (e.g. gerbils) that burrow into the road embankments (note burrows are also used as shelters by reptiles and some birds for nesting). Whilst this could increase risks of vehicle collision, conversations with local specialists indicate that currently recorded levels of bird roadkill are low. 396. As traffic numbers are only expected to grow minimally with the upgraded road (currently 2,600 daily road users), such impacts are expected to increase only a minor amount and are therefore considered of only moderate significance. No specific mitigation is proposed, although the Project proposes to work with the Saigachy Reserve to support long-term conservation planning for birds in the area, to mitigate any induced impacts associated with the project.
169 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.2.12 Impacts to Reptiles 397. Reptiles in general are vulnerable to impacts of direct mortality from traffic, especially tortoise because of their relatively slow movement. They may also suffer impacts associated with loss of hibernating areas and habitat fragmentation/loss, especially during construction. Central Asian Tortoise are considered particularly threatened as they may also suffer illegal collection by the construction workers and staff for food, souvenirs, and resale, and may also be affected by guard dogs, especially during peak activity season (mid-March to mid-June). Blotched Snake May also be threatened by direct extermination by workers due to traditional fear of snakes during their active season (April to October). G.2.12.1 Construction Impacts 398. Construction impacts to reptiles primarily involve death, injury or disturbance during land clearance and construction works. These will be most significant where they affect sensitive species such as central Asian tortoise. Impacts can include: • Increased hunting from construction workers • Loss of reptile refuges used for breeding, resting and hibernation as a result of vegetation clearance works; • Disturbance effects as a result of noise and vibrations during the construction phase; • Pollution of habitats through emission of dust, waste, excavated soil or other material; and • Increased mortality when crossing the road, notably for tortoises. 399. Impacts to reptiles are expected to be of moderate significance. To minimize this, the following general protection measures will be applied for reptiles during construction: • Use of heavy machinery will be strictly limited to the Project RoW to avoid additional fragmentation and degradation of habitats, as well as subsidence of soil; and • Areas which are temporarily used during construction will be backfilled with soil, which would enable reinstatement of vegetation and reptile habitat. G.2.12.2 Operational phase 400. During road operation, impacts to reptiles are primarily associated with direct mortality from collisions and potential hunting or collection by users, which will also be associated to some extent with habitat fragmentation. Such impacts during operation are expected to be of moderate significance, although this should be confirmed through monitoring. G.2.13 Invasive Species 401. Contractors may inadvertently bring in and/or spread invasive plants during the work and vegetation clearance can also create new areas of disturbed habitat which may be favoured by invasive plants. Native, locally-sourced plants will be used for habitat restoration and there will be a ban on workers bringing vegetation or soil from outside the site area to prevent dispersion of non-native invasive species. Wash down of all vehicles and equipment will be mandatory and the Environmental Specialist will be responsible for identifying and removing any invasive species. G.2.14 Cumulative Impacts and Induced Impacts 402. The ecology of the semi-arid desert has already been adversely affected by human developments, including the existing A380 road and other infrastructure and the recent development of the gas and other industries. Whilst the Project will further add to these cumulative impacts, appropriate habitat restoration and specific proposals for Saiga protection means that cumulative impacts are considered to be of moderate significance, but will be addressed as outlined above.
170 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
403. The project also has the potential for a number of induced impacts including those outlined in the sections above. Of these the following are considered to be of greatest potential impact • Improved access leading to an increase in hunting and settlement sizes; • Better access increasing oil and gas exploration activities and associated traffic; and • Increased ease of trading in wildlife and animal products (e.g. saiga horns, saker falcon). 404. These will be addressed using the mitigation applied above, although with regards to the latter, the project will also specifically support ongoing work to train border guards on the identification, surveillance, and enforcement of wildlife trade regulations. G.2.15 Residual Impacts G.2.15.1 Construction Phase 405. Construction mitigation (as outlined above) will be addressed through both the Contractor’s Biodiversity Management Plan, and the Project’s Biodiversity Action Plan. Once this mitigation has been implemented, project construction will only have a limited number of significant residual impacts including: • Loss (albeit with subsequent rehabilitation/restoration) of >10.87 ha of natural habitat61; • Temporary disturbance impacts to a number of notable species, including loss of foraging, resting, nesting and hibernating habitat; and • Impacts to migratory terrestrial species associated with habitat fragmentation (notably saiga and goitered gazelle). 406. Throughout construction, an Environmental Specialist will be present on site and an adaptive management approach will be put in place, supported by monitoring. Should any of the above impacts be deemed to be more significant than initially anticipated, further mitigation will be implemented as required. As a result, with mitigation in place, residual impacts are expected to be of only minor significance. G.2.15.2 Operational Phase 407. Following implementation of the proposed mitigation, the operational project will still have a limited number of residual impacts, primarily associated with disturbance, habitat fragmentation and roadkill. A specific biodiversity action plan will be developed for Saiga antelope and with this in place residual impacts are expected to be of only minor significance. G.2.16 Project Commitments 408. The above mitigation will form part of the overall Project commitments register and will be implemented through a combination of the Contractor’s Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) and the Project’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). A Framework BAP (F- BAP) is being developed for the Project and will be further refined into a detailed BAP as the project progresses in line with the principle of adaptive management. The BAP will include details of proposed species and habitat monitoring to demonstrate the
61 Estimate currently excludes natural habitat losses from borrow pits. Whilst it is currently known that an estimated 77 borrow pits will be required to secure the soil needed for embankment fill during construction, the exact sizing of these pits is not known. Estimates are to be updated once sizing is confirmed.
171 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
effectiveness of the mitigation measures proposed and will provide a basis for the Project to establish adherence to the principles of no net loss/net gain to biodiversity. 409. The BAP will include a range of commitments including, but not limited to, support to long-term conservation of saiga including through support to the management of the Saigachy Reserve. G.2.17 Project Implementation 410. The IFC Guidance note requires that no project will be implemented unless all the following requirements are compiled with and below is a matrix showing the project’s compliance: Table 64: Side-by-Side Comparison of IFC Guidance Note Requirements and Proposed Project Assessment IFC Guidance Note 6 Requirement for the Project Proposed Project Assessment to Proceed with the Implementation No other viable alternatives within the region The proposed project is a rehabilitation of an exist for development of the project on modified existing road, no other alternatives are available. or natural habitats that are not critical The project does not lead to measurable adverse Tables 57 and 58 present a summary of impacts impacts on those biodiversity values for which the assessment and mitigation measures. Risk of critical habitat was designated, and on the impacts to all EN and CR species are considered ecological processes supporting those LOW and with proper implementation of biodiversity values mitigation measures the residual impacts are not significant. The project does not lead to a net reduction in the With a low risk of impacts. The number and global and/or national/regional population of any composition of species permanently inhabiting Critically Endangered or Endangered species the project area is very low. The project is not over a reasonable period of time; and expected to result to a reduction in population of CR and EN species.
A robust, appropriately designed, and long-term A biodiversity monitoring and evaluation program biodiversity monitoring and evaluation program is will be implemented starting from the pre- integrated into the client’s management program. construction phase. In such cases where a client is able to meet the requirements defined in paragraph, the project’s mitigation strategy will be described in a Biodiversity Action Plan and will be designed to achieve net gains of those biodiversity values for which the critical habitat was designated. In instances where biodiversity offsets are proposed as part of the mitigation strategy, the client must demonstrate through an assessment that the project’s significant residual impacts on biodiversity will be adequately mitigated to meet the requirements of paragraph.
172 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
G.3 Impacts on the Socio-economic Environment G.3.1 Population 411. The available right-of-way (RoW) is adequate for a 4-lane road and therefore, the need to acquire land is very minimal. The land acquisition and resettlement plan has been prepared to address impacts associated with land acquisition. 412. At present, the size of the labour force and location of work camps is unknown. The number of workers will be approximately around 100 people consisting of office and domestic staff, truck drivers and construction workers. Of these, about 80–95% is likely to come from Uzbekistan. As discussed below, this is expected to provide employment opportunities for the local population. The construction works are expected to provide work opportunities over a period of two years for the local population, particularly for truck drivers, labourers and office staff. Most of the (relatively small number of) skilled jobs, including the operation of equipment, are likely to be undertaken by expatriate and regional staff hired by the successful international Contractor. 413. In order to minimize the impact of construction workers on the local area and to protect the health and safety of members of the public and the workers themselves, the following mitigation measures outlined will need to be implemented. 414. During reconstruction activities, each construction site will allocate a well-marked space for first-aid kits with medical supplies, stretchers, bandages and other means for first aid to victims. Adequate training in first aid is also an essential requirement all constructors have to observe. 415. During the operational phase, it is likely that petrol stations and recreational areas will be established at various locations along the project road. These too will provide employment opportunities. The improvement will provide an efficient and faster road network that is foreseen to have the immediate positive impact of improving international trade. In the medium- long term, faster and cheaper transportation of people and goods resulting from improved road conditions. 416. Measures should be implemented to maintain safe vehicle movement within and around the project-affected area. The Contractor will be required to develop and implement traffic management plans based on prior consultation with the traffic police and local authorities, and to coordinate reconstruction traffic and reconstruction activities with them. Appropriate lighting and signalization must be provided at the construction site, e.g. at site entrances/exits and on public roads, where lane closures or diversions are required. Information to the public should be provided as appropriate. G.3.2 Public and workers’ health and safety G.3.2.1 Workers’ health and safety 417. The Contractors will be required to meet the Government standard for providing basic sanitation, general health and HIV/AIDS training (including provision of free condoms) for their local and non-local workforce. Aside from the Government standard health and safety, the international standard practice such the WB Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) will also be used as a reference. On these basis the contractor will develop a Plan for health and safety at work, including: risk assessment of workplace; measures and requirements for safety and health performance of construction works, risk factors, personal protective equipment, safe work instructions, plans for fire prevention and fire-fighting, emergency and evacuation plans for workers and occupants of the site, on-site contractor coordinator of health and safety and other requirements arising from legislation on labor protection. 418. All special works requiring permit/license (e.g. electric installation works, operating construction machinery, works at height, etc.) must be performed by certified personnel
173 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
who have had passed designated training on occupational health and safety. National and international regulations on health and safety at work will be followed. Specifically, safety to workers and the general public will be enhanced through: • proper briefing and training of workers on safety precautions, and their responsibilities for the safety of themselves and others, • All the workers (including sub-contractor workers if any) will need to be provided with safety worker equipment, and enforcing them to wear safety equipment. The contractor has also to prepare health and safety plan to ensure the workers are protected. • provision to workers of protective clothing including hard hats, protective footwear, and high visibility jackets for use when reconstruction activity is to take place at night, • arranging for first aid facilities, readily available trained paramedical personnel, and emergency transport to the nearest hospital with accident and emergency facilities, and allocation of responsibility for ensuring that these arrangements are permanently in place, • arranging for regular safety checks of vehicles and material, and allocation of responsibility to a suitably qualified Health and Safety officer for this, • provision of hazard warning signs around construction sites, and directing vehicle and pedestrian traffic away from work sites and • Awareness training for health and safety needs to be regularly scheduled. Table 65: Mitigation Measures – Construction Workers Issue Mitigation measures Minimisation of nuisance for local • Minimise night-time and public holiday working hours communities near settlements at the WIMs; • Strict enforcement of a maximum noise level of 70dB(A) at the boundary of the construction site near residential and other noise-sensitive areas (e.g. hospitals, schools) at the WIMs; • Ban the use of vehicles and machinery which lack proper noise and exhaust emission control; • Maintain existing patterns of movement and continued use of existing modes of transport and communications. Safe access to local communities, facilities and agricultural land for people and animals should be provided throughout the reconstruction period. Work Camp Management Contractor to provide: • Waste management plan for their work camps (e.g. solid and liquid waste, sewage); • Statement on the source for the drinking water supply for workforce; • Description of the living and eating areas for non-local workforce. Contractor’s Yard Management Contractor to provide: • Detailed method statement on the design and organization of yard, including materials/fuel storage sites and servicing sites, • Details of security measures to prevent access by non-workforce personnel, e.g. children and livestock. Worker’s Health and Safety Contractor to provide: • Drinking water for workforce in accordance with national quality standards; • Method statement on health and safety provisions for workforce;
174 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation measures • Appropriate personal protective equipment for workforce; • Training in the safe construction techniques, including use of equipment; • Provision of, and training in use of, first aid materials and equipment; • Development of, and training in implementation of, an appropriate and comprehensive emergency response plan, e.g. for accident, fire, oil/chemical spill; • HIV/AIDS training and provision of prophylactics for the local and non-local workforce; • Keep records of all accidents and other Health and Safety incidents. Traffic Safety Contractor to provide: • Contractor to manage traffic disruption, inconvenience to the public, and road safety hazards through development and implementation of a traffic management plan in consultation with the traffic police and local authorities, including public information, temporary traffic diversions, one-way working, and all necessary temporary traffic signals, warning signs, lighting and watching (guards/signal men); • Contractor to provide appropriate lighting and signalization at the construction site, e.g. at site entrances/exits and on public roads, where lane closures or diversions are required; • Contractor to provide information to the public as appropriate; • Contractor to coordinate reconstruction traffic and construction activities with the local traffic police.
G.3.2.2 Health protection 419. The proposed project will be under reconstruction for a considerable time, which may increase the potential risk of diseases such as infectious diseases, tuberculosis, malaria venereal diseases and HIV/AIDS. 420. The following should be included to minimize the risk of disease: • Preferential employment policies for local people • HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases awareness programs for contractors and local people • Government–level action together with the transit industry to educate truckers about the issues of HIV/AIDS • Conduct of preventive and periodic medical inspections for protecting workers’ health • Conduct of complex preventive and epidemic actions for prevention of malaria disease 421. Road provision and increasing human movement have emerged as key factors influencing the HIV epidemic in many regions of the world. Of particular concern is the movement of the HIV virus from urban areas of higher infection concentration to rural communities. In addition, the acceleration of social and economic change in rural areas associated with a rise in itinerant construction workers, the demand for commercial sex and the creation of transport hubs that sustain this trade are further areas of concern.
175 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
422. Transport corridors and hubs, together with the lifestyle of truck drivers and other land transport workers have emerged as driving forces of the epidemic in many low-income regions. These factors are also associated with increasing vulnerability of women living near truck stops and activity hubs along roads. 423. Areas under the influence of the Karakalpakstan Road Project project are likely to be highly vulnerable to HIV infection. The primary reason for this is the combination of poverty, migration. Road reconstruction might be expected to increase human movement and associated HIV risks, which is of concern given the existing poor state of HIV services at designated centres in the district hospitals. Two streams of activities are proposed in this report through which the project might reduce HIV risks to local communities and construction workers and contribute to the national HIV response. 424. Direct activities proposed to be undertaken by the project, PIU to mitigate identified risks include: i) HIV/AIDS mainstreaming of all project partners and (ii) adoption of an HIV/AIDS awareness raising policy, to ensure that all construction staff have appropriate information to enable them to adopt protective behaviours. The use of peer-counselling in the workplace would also strengthen the project’s role in HIV risk reduction and response for construction workers, their families and partners. The project should also adopt policies of non- discrimination of HIV positive workers and gender equity in project business. To reduce the risk of creating demand for transactional sex, the project should encourage the employment of local workers. The majority of workers are likely to be local truck drivers involved in the transportation of materials. Information will be provided at rest stops for truck drivers and construction workers. 425. With the advent of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, all contractors will follow the RUz and WHO protocols on screening of workers that includes screening, PPEs, regular temperature testing, reporting, isolation, contact tracing, and treatment. All cases, whether person under investigation and confirmed cases of infection shall be reported to the Ministry of Health’s administration and executive bodies in the Republic of Karakalpakstan. G.3.3 Visual Impact 426. Visual impact is the result of the combination of physical features, both natural (e.g. morphology, vegetation, water and sky) and artificial (e.g. buildings, slope stabilization works, landscaping works), with psychological elements (e.g. unity/disunity, picturesqueness/ugliness, harmony/disharmony) relating to the landscape in question. 427. Construction works will inevitably cause visual impact, the scale of which depends on the distance between the visual receptor and the activities viewed. Intrusions into the existing landscape will include borrow pits and quarries, site offices, equipment and materials storage areas, movement of vehicles. Evening and night-time working, if permitted, will require the use of lighting: security lighting may also be required around site offices and equipment yards. Clearing and grubbing of strips of vegetation will occur during site preparation. The careless handling and disposal of construction waste – from surplus and damaged materials to chemicals and “domestic” waste – can also create a visual nuisance. 428. Construction of a 2-lane highway with shoulders will inevitably have an impact on the landscape in question. However, its impact is unlikely to be severe due to the baseline conditions and the flatness and generally barren appearance of the existing area. 429. Restricting the extent of vegetation clearance, particularly of any shrubland or individual trees, to the minimum required for the works will help screen and soften the view of the works. Although the highway will be fenced, this is likely to be with chain link fencing, which will not provide a visual barrier. The highway will not be lit, so nighttime light pollution – beyond that generated by passing vehicle – is unlikely to be
176 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
a problem. Mitigation measures to reduce temporary reconstruction-related impacts include: • Good site management: keeping a tidy site; • Regular surface cleaning of roads adjacent to site; • Regular removal of litter and waste adjacent to site even if not works-related; • Restrict clearing and grubbing of shrub- and tree plantation strips to minimum practical extent. 430. Signage should be clear so as to inform vehicle drivers but ideally the number of road signs should keep to the minimum. 431. Prompt removal of fly-tipped waste and accident debris on and in the vicinity of the highway will be required to maintain the safety of traffic, limit visual nuisance and discourage further illegal dumping of material.
177 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
H. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE
432. Several alternatives were assessed during the project feasibility study that influenced the environmental impacts of the proposed rehabilitation and upgrading of the Karakalpakstan Road A-380. These alternatives included 3 different options on the alignment and 2 options on the pavement type. These are briefly discussed in this section. 433. Three alignment alternatives were considered during the feasibility study stage by the designer; Option 1 is to retain the original A-380 alignment, Option 2 is to use the existing embankment of the abandoned road; and Option 3, or the preferred option, takes advantage of the two options. The 3 options are depicted in the succeeding Figure. 434. The designer’s analysis revealed upgrading the existing A-380 to accommodate the expansion of the carriage width requires the relocation of the gas mains which will be costly and disruptive. Also, the existing A380 vertical alignment is almost level with the surrounding terrain. To raise the gradient in line with the design guidelines will be costly because of the high volume of fill material required for the new embankment. A slope ratio of 1 in 4 was applied for embankments up to 3 m in height, what leads to a wide road bed and contributes to the high volumes of earthworks required for option 1. 435. To completely follow the abandoned earth road will not allow Committee for Roads to address the safety issues in between kilometre 1043-1074 chainages (design km 79- 110) where an S-curve poses risk to truck drivers that are traveling at high speeds. Using the abandoned road located alongside the A-380 will have the advantage of using the existing embankment and substantially reduce the volume of earthworks as displayed in figure 6 and thus costs. 436. Thus option 3, the preferred option, takes advantage of the existing embankment in the abandoned road, at the same time avoiding the relocation of the main gas line. Two police control points, a railway level crossing and the border crossing point at the very end are located in existing A380 alignment. Keeping it at these locations avoids the need for adjustment of the existing infrastructure as well as disturbance to their operation during construction. Within the preferred option, minor geometric re- alignments were also introduced to avoid the S-curves between km 1043 and 1074 chainages (design km 79-110) as presented in figure 73 to improve road safety particular with heavy trucks traveling at high speeds. The succeeding table presents the summary of the alternatives and the potential environmental, biodiversity, social, and engineering cost impacts. 437. The road pavement design alternatives investigated two options; asphalt vs concrete. Concrete has several advantages over asphalt that includes durability that may outlast asphalt lifetime by 2-4 times, less prone to dips and ruts and therefore more suitable to handle higher truck traffic, and more resistant to freeze-thaw cycle damages. Concrete is considered a greener material than asphalt, as less pollution is produced in its production and vehicles achieve better fuel efficiency running on concrete pavement. Concrete is also produced from limestone, which is widely available. Perhaps the biggest disadvantage of concrete is high initial cost and repairs are more tedious and expensive. Asphalt, on the other hand, is less costly and being black in color allows it to trap heat from the sun which assists in the quicker snow melt and moisture evaporation. The preference to use concrete was mainly based on durability, ability to handle heavier loads that characterizes the existing and projected traffic, and being more resistant to freeze-thaw cycles which is typical climate in the project area.
178 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 66: Summary of Alternative Analysis Options Environmental Impacts Biodiversity impacts Social Impacts Engineering Cost Impacts Evaluated Option 1: Minimal impacts in terms of Since the project is located in the Two sharp curves posing road Construction cost is highest Existing Road environmental disturbance. Saiga’s Critical Habitat, regardless safety issue between km 969 - 971 among the options and of the alignment option the project will remain unmitigated. economic impacts from the To increase the embankment needs to comply with the ADB temporary disruption of the gas height will require more SPS 2009 biodiversity protection Disruption of the gas pipeline and pipeline and electric borrow and quarry materials and management requirements electric transmission line during transmission line will be high. than options 2 and 3. and the (IFC) Guidance Note (GN) construction. These lines will also 6 (IFC GN6) be at risk from major road crashes Since the project is located in during construction due to the the Saiga’s Critical Habitat, proximity of these utilities to the the project needs to comply road embankment. with the ADB SPS 2009 biodiversity protection and Major disturbance to existing road management requirements users and this will require and the (IFC) Guidance Note numerous by-passes and (GN) 6 (IFC GN6) potentially temporary road closures during construction.
The number of structures affected will remain low estimated at 1 permanently and 1 temporarily impacted.
Option 2: Environmental disturbance The S-curve between km 1043 and Construction cost is between Existing will be higher compared to 1074 posing a road safety issue options 1 and 3 considering the abandoned Option 1 but not substantial will remain. volume of earthworks required, road since the road embankment but the economic impacts from is already existing. Disruption of the gas pipeline and the temporary disruption of the electric transmission line during gas pipeline and electric To increase the embankment construction. These lines will also transmission line will be mostly height will require less borrow be at risk from major road crashes avoided. and quarry materials than during construction due to the option 1. Concomitant proximity of these utilities to the impacts on air quality, noise, road embankment. wastes, labor camps, safety,
179 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
and the like will be highest There will be negligible impacts on among the options. the existing road users as the existing road remains accessible during road construction. Option 3. Mix Environmental disturbance Radii of curves between km 969 – Construction cost is the lowest of both will be higher than Option 1, 971 are increased to meet and the economic impacts from sections but lower than Option 2. requirements of design guidelines. the temporary disruption of the gas pipeline and electric A total of 77 borrow areas will The S-curve between km 1043 and transmission line will be supply 8.69 million m3 of fill 1074 is avoided. avoided. materials. Disruption of the gas pipeline and Overall 3.5 kilometer long electric transmission line is new road sections will be avoided during construction. constructed to transition from the existing alignment to the Risk of disruptions to the utility abandoned road from lines in the event of major road chainage 9.5km to 12 km and crashes during project operation is 218 km to 219 km. avoided.
To increase the embankment Disturbances to road users during height will require more construction is avoided since both borrow and quarry materials existing and abandoned roads can than option 2. Concomitant be used. impacts on air quality, noise, wastes, labor camps, safety, The number of structures affected and the like will be second will remain low estimated at 1 highest among the options. permanently and 1 temporarily impacted.
180 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Figure 72. Alignment Alternatives for A-380 Rehabilitation and Upgrading. (Blue – Existing Alignment, Green – Abandoned Roads, Red – Preferred Alignment)
Figure 73: Section of the A-380 that incorporated minor geometric realignment to improve road safety from Km 1043-1074
181 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
I. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE, CONSULTATION, AND PARTICIPATION
438. The ADB SPS 2009 requires consultation with affected communities and stakeholders and their participation in the project design and implementation. These consultations benefit the SCR and ADB to better design the project based on the community’s experience, knowledge, and expectations. Some of the key characteristics of meaningful consultations pertains to timing, conduct, gender inclusive, and responsiveness. Consultations are conducted early and sustained throughout the project life and information disclosed in timely manner allow the communities to make informed decisions. Its conduct by the project sponsor is free form coercion ensuring participation is voluntary. The consultations ensure inclusive and responsive to the disadvantage and vulnerable members of the community to ensure their concerns are considered in the project design and implementation. Finally, consultations should show proofs that relevant views generated during the consultation process are considered in the design. I.1.1 Public Consultations 439. First level consultations were organized on March 20-21, 2019. Due to the peculiar road alignment and very sparse population, a single consultation meeting is not feasible nor recommended to demonstrate meaningful consultation as this will restrict participation of key stakeholders due to transportation cost. Discreet consultations were organized in Jaslik on 20.03.2019 namely in Mahalaya, Women’s committee, Kindergarten school, and Gas Company with 17, 24, 6, and 5 participants, majority of which were women. Another consultation was made in Karakalpakstan with 47 participants and all are women. The consultations were undertaken to: • Advise communities of updated project information on the proposed road upgrade project in respect of the section from A- 380 Km. 964 to km1,204; • Disclose the preliminary findings of the EIA and EMP, more particularly the biodiversity aspect; • Engineering details for the road, prospected schedules, expected benefits and anticipated impacts, including proposed mitigation measures. It was also disclosed that there will be a mechanism in place where local citizens and stakeholders affected will have a chance to forward their concerns, complaints at specified offices, and advance compensation claims for lost assets or business opportunities, as applicable. • Seek comments from community on any further environmental concerns associated with the project 440. It was also disclosed that there will be a mechanism in place where local citizens and stakeholders affected will have a chance to forward their concerns, complaints at specified offices, and advance compensation claims for lost assets or business opportunities, as applicable. The public discussions involved all registered participants. In specific, the latter were invited to forward suggestions and/or concerns pertaining to the near-future planning and implementation of the project. 441. The 99 people who participated in the consultations Jaslik and Karakalpakstan represented Womens’ Committee, Gas Company Employees, Teachers, and village representatives. The list of participants is attached in Appendix G. I.1.1.1 Issues Discussed and Suggestions Forwarded 442. The following summarizes the issues and responses during in Jaslik and Karakalpakstan consultations.
182 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 67: Summary of Consultation Outcome Location Issues / Concerns Response Jaslik 1. Unemployment is major 1. With improved roads, newer concern opportunities are likely as there 2. Absence of public transport could be development happening (buses) greatly affects along the highway access to health care, 2. The people should address the markets and higher requirement of public transport to education the administration 3. High cost of private bus 3. With improved road, more private ticket operators may be interested in 4. Frequency of private operating services and hence operator very poor prices could come down 5. Insecure road to the 4. If more people are commuting Kungrad district as there is and the road is good, chances no lights are there for an increase in 6. Condition of the road is bad services. and it takes long time to 5. In the highway lights will not be travel to Kungrad provided, but the rest areas and 7. Camels and cows are at junctions at Jaslik and risk to vehicular collision Karakalpakstan will have lighting. 6. Once the road work is completed, you will have a high-quality road 7. we have one recommendation to build near the road (village) a wall or fence, to minimize camel and cow crossing Jaslik 1. Lack of the regular public 1. The people should address the (Women’s transportation requirement of public transport to Committee, 2. Lack of the access to the administration kindergarten healthcare, market, college 2. Improved road will reduce the teachers and and universities travel time to Kungrad, and Gas Company 3. Lack of ambulance car people will have faster and safer employees 4. Lack of the facilities along access to markets, health care the road, no bus stops and and education. no toilet 3. Once the road is developed, some hospital in Kungrad may be asked to provide the services 4. Rest areas and bus shelters have been proposed and these will have separate toilets for men and women. Karakalpakstan 1. Unemployment is high as 1. Improved road would help in there are no opportunities encouraging newer economic 2. No public bus service activities in the region and available 3. High cost for taxi service 4. Accidents on the road
183 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Location Issues / Concerns Response thereby there is a possibility of more opportunities 2. The people should address the requirement of public transport to the administration 3. Once the road is improved, there is a possibility that the rates would come down and also more operators could be interested in offering the services. 4. The proposed road with two lanes will result in fewer accidents and there is also a road safety component under the project to create awareness and assess the safety requirement Karakalpakstan 1. Lack of the regular public 1. The people should address the female FGDs transportation requirement of public transport to 2. Lack of the access to the administration healthcare/ hospitals, 2. Once the road is improved, market, and universities access to Kungrad, where 3. Lack of ambulance car healthcare, market and 4. Lack of the facilities along educational facilities are the road available, will be easier and 5. High cost of taxi service faster. 6. Unsafe and poor-quality 3. Once the road is developed, road some hospital in Kungrad may be asked to provide the services 4. Rest areas with some shops and bus shelters are proposed under the project 5. Once the road is improved, there is a possibility that the rates would come down and also more operators could be interested in offering the services. 6. Road will become very safe after it is made into a two lane road with shoulders. The quality will be very good
443. No concerns have been forwarded with respect to environmental impacts or competitive issues affecting the local resources or the social setting in spite of a detailed discussion on the biodiversity was conducted, covering the threatened species that were identified in the project area. The participants shared the hope that this Project will not only result in improving the livelihood of many residents, but will also bring a number of job opportunities to the region which is marred with high rates of unemployment and lack of business.
184 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
I.1.2 Use of Consultation Results and Information Disclosure 444. All protocols (minutes) of the public meetings were prepared and will form part of the ADB safeguard documents. Therein it was stipulated that all forthcoming environmental assessment reports including revisions of this report, the Biodiversity Action Plan, Management Plans, monitoring plans, and completion report, shall be accessible to all interested and concerned/affected parties at the Hokimiyat. The information disclosure included information on contact officers, persons and telephone numbers for anyone who wants to obtain further information or who intends to forward personal claims associated with this Project. All disclosure of information has been given in local language. The Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan of this EIA took all the issues and suggestions forwarded in the Public Consultation events into full consideration. I.1.2.1 Information Disclosure 445. Information was disclosed through public consultation and more formally by making documents and other materials available in a form and at a location in which they can be easily accessed by stakeholders. This involved making a summary of draft reports available (in the Uzbek language) at public locations and districts and providing a mechanism for the receipt of comments and making documents available more widely. In this regard, ADB encourages SCR to disclose all documents onto their own website. This EIA report will be disclosed on the ADB and SCR websites and made available to the interested parties upon request. 446. Monitoring is one of the components of EMP. Monitoring of physical, biological and socio-economic parameters of the environment of this project will be carried out. The outcomes of the monitoring activities will be maintained in a database. The results of monitoring will also be disclosed to the local people, school students and other interested stakeholders. In the process of compliance monitoring of the project construction, local people and construction workers will be consulted. The monitoring reports will also be disclosed on the ADB website. 447. The SCR will extend and expand the consultation and disclosure process during the implementation (construction) of the project. The feedback of the affected people, stakeholders and the public has been incorporated in the detailed project design for implementation during construction. I.1.3 Grievance Redress Mechanism 448. The Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) is available to people living or working in the areas impacted by the project activities. Any person impacted by or concerned about the project activities has the right to participate in the GRM, should have the easy access to it, and be encouraged to use it. The proposed GRM does not replace the public mechanisms of complaint and conflict resolution envisaged by the legal system of the RUz, but attempts to minimize use of it to the extent possible. 449. Overall responsibility for timely implementation of GRM lies with the RFF through its PMU supported by the Engineer involved in managing and supervising the civil works, while the Contractor undertakes the actual civil works. Relevant Khokimyats, who are mandated by law to perform grievance redress related tasks, and mediators who are involved in facilitating amicable resolution of grievances are also included in GRM. 450. This GRM envisages two levels of grievance resolution for the road sector projects implemented under the supervision of the PMU: Grievance Redress Committees (GRC) at the local level and central (Tashkent) level. Local GRCs are usually composed of members nominated from the PMU, Khokimyats, Engineer & Contractor. GRCs at the central levels are chaired by the Heads responsible for the overall operation of GRM and its efficient and timely implementation, while the Coordinators
185 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
are responsible for involving the relevant parties and coordinating the works of GRCs at regional/central levels. I.1.3.1 Local Level 451. At the first stage, the resolution of grievance will be attempted through GRC at local level through the following steps. • Grievance registration: complainants or concerned individuals can visit, call or send a letter or e-mail or fax to the Khokimyat, the Contractor, the Engineer or the PMU. Receipt of grievances lodged in person, via phone, through a letter or e-mail or fax will be acknowledged. Grievances will be recorded in a standard format. • Grievance processing: Queries and complaints that are clarified and resolved at the intake point are closed immediately. Cases requiring further assessment and action are considered by the GRC at the local level. The GRC at the local level: (i) holds meetings on bi-monthly basis, however special ad hoc meetings can be arranged, as needed; and (ii) discusses the grievance case within ten working days and recommend its settlement to parties. The GRC Coordinator at the local level circulates relevant information among the members of GRC, prepares Minutes of GRC meeting and progress reports, and ensures that actions and decisions are properly documented. • Feedback provision: Receipt of grievances lodged in person or via phone will be acknowledged immediately. Receipt of grievances received through a letter or e- mail or will be acknowledged through a letter / e-mail / fax within 3 working days upon receipt by GRC coordinator at regional level. 452. If the grievance was resolved at the local level, the complainant will be informed of the outcome. If grievance was not resolved at the local level and was passed to the GRC at the central level for consideration and resolution, appropriate information will be provided to the complainant, including the date when the case was passed to GRC at the central level and the date by which the outcome at the central level is expected. 453. In case of anonymous complaints, the printed response will be posted at the information board of the relevant Khokimyat, so as the complainant can approach and review the feedback. I.1.3.2 Central Level 454. Following unsuccessful consideration of grievance by the GRC at the local level, complaint resolutions will be attempted at a central level through following steps • Grievance processing: If grievance cannot be resolved by the GRC at the local level, it will be forwarded for consideration by the GRC at the central level, including all relevant documents. The GRC at central level: (i) holds meetings on monthly basis, however special ad hoc meetings can be arranged, as needed; and (ii) discusses the grievance case within twenty working days and recommend its settlement to parties. GRC Coordinator at central level circulates relevant information among the members of GRC, prepares Minutes of GRC meeting and progress reports, and ensures that actions and decisions are properly documented. • Feedback provision: If the grievance was resolved, the complaining party will be informed on the outcome of grievance resolution. If grievance was not resolved by the GRC at central level, appropriate information will be provided to the complaining party, including details why the case was not resolved, as well as recommendation to seek for resolution through the GoU legal system. I.1.3.3 Legal System 455. If after the intervention and assistance from the GRCs at both local and central levels, no solution has been reached, and if the grievance redress system fails to satisfy the
186 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
complaining parties, the case will be referred to the court for resolution in accordance with the RUz legislation. 456. In the meantime, it should also be emphasized that the GRM Guideline does not limit the right of the complaining party to submit the case to the court of law in the first stage of grievance process. I.1.4 ADB Accountability Mechanism 457. In addition to the GRM, the ADB has also developed its Accountability Mechanism (AM) Policy. The AM provides a forum where people adversely affected by ADB- assisted projects can voice and seek solutions to their problems and report alleged noncompliance with ADB's operational policies and procedures. It consists of two separate but complementary functions: problem solving function and compliance review function. The objective of the Accountability Mechanism Policy 2012 is to be accountable to people for ADB-assisted projects as a last resort mechanism. 458. The complaints resolution process was and will continue to be disseminated through information brochures and posted to the Khokimyats. The grievance redress mechanism will also be presented during informal meetings at Project area during the construction phase of the Project. The information of grievance resolution will be summarized in PMU progress reports to be submitted to ADB.
Grievance Khokimyat, Contractor, and Engineer Local Level - receive call, letter, email, or fax - acknowledge receipt of compalints within 3 days - clarify and resolve immediately - holds regular bi-monthly meetings -discuss the grievance case within 10 working days and recomemnd setlement to parties - gievance not resolved at the local level will be passed to the Central GRC Level - prepares minutes of GRC Meetings, progres reports and ensures actions an decisions are properly documented
Yes Resolved? Redressed/END No Central GRC/Road Committee - holds regular monthly meetings - within 20 days from discuss and recommends settlements to both parties Central Level - prepares minutes of GRC Meetings, progres reports and ensures actions an decisions are properly documented
Yes
No May go to local court or access ADB's ` Accountability Mechanism
Figure 74. GRM Process Flow
187 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
J. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
459. The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) contains the agreements between the Committee for Roads and the ADB on the implementation of mitigation measures, monitoring program, cost estimates, and institutional arrangement to ensure that no significant adverse impacts results from the project intervention. 460. The basic objectives of the EMP are to: • establish the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved in the project’s environmental management; • ensure implementation of recommended actions aimed at environmental management and its enhancement; and • ensure that the environment and its surrounding areas are protected and developed to meet the needs of the local communities including other stakeholders and safeguard and the interests of the common people. 461. A sub-set of the EMP is the Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) and the Biodiversity Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (BMEP) to address the potential biodiversity impacts as the project is located inside a critical habitat (CH) through the implementation. 462. This section of the report provides the project’s environmental management plan (EMP), concomitant cost, and the necessary implementation institutional requirements. There are 2 types of environmental management plans to be used in this project, a general management that is appended in this report that provides summary information on the types of impacts, required mitigation and monitoring measures, and implementation arrangements including reporting requirements. The second type of EMP is the site-specific EMPs (SSEMP) the Contractor will prepare in consultation with the Construction Supervision Engineer and Environmental Specialist. The SSEMP describes the precise location of the required mitigation and monitoring, persons responsible, and the schedule and reporting methodology. The SSEMPs will be submitted to the PMU for approval at least 15 days before taking possession of any work site. No access to the site will be allowed until the SSEMPs are approved by the PMU. J.1 Bid and Contract Documents 463. The Bid Documents will provide two sections to define the required environmental management from Contractors. First, is the is a set of basic clause indicating that the Contractor will be responsible for following the requirements of this EMP and the preparation of contract package specific SSEMP. Secondly, the EMP, including the BAP and the BMEP) shall be repeated in its entirety as an Annex to the Bid Documents to ensure the bidder is aware of the environmental compliance requirements under the Project and allow them to prepare responsive cost proposals. 464. The Contract Documents should follow a broadly similar pattern to the Bid Documents. It is not considered necessary to repeat the mitigation measures verbatim in a list of environmental contract provisions, rather the Contract should specify that the Contractor(s) is responsible for implementation of the EMP that further detailed in their respective SSEMPs. Again, the EMP should be included as an Annex to the Contract so the Contractor(s) is liable for any non-conformance with the EMP, and other provisions of this EIA to include the defined roles and responsibilities. 465. Contracting procedures are an essential aspect of the Project Design. The Project shall incorporate procedures which include important safeguards, most notably the SSEMP. It is important to note that, to be meaningful, the recommendations of the EMP must
188 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
go beyond recommendations and become legally enforceable and incorporated in the bid and contract documents. J.2 Monitoring and Supervision 466. Environmental monitoring is an essential component of the implementation of EIA recommendation. The environmental monitoring plan (EMoP) is prepared to monitor the implementation performance of the EMP. An environmental monitoring plan is prepared focusing the following objectives: • To ensure that impacts do not exceed the established legal standards • To check the implementation of mitigation measures in the manner described in the EIA report • To monitor implementation of the EMP • To provide an early warning of potential environmental damage • To check whether the proposed mitigation measures have achieved the intended results, and or/ other environmental impacts occurred 467. The monitoring plan will be used for performance monitoring of the project. A monitoring plan defining all parameters to be monitored, with tentative location, project stages for measurements, implementation and institutional responsibility for different environmental components is prepared for all stages of project. J.3 Institutional Setting to Implement the Environmental Safeguards 468. The Committee for Roads (CR), Republic of Uzbekistan will be the implementing agency. A project management unit (PMU) will be established to support project implementation. The environmental monitoring and supervision roles to implement the EMP are as follows: • Engineer. The Engineer will ensure safeguard compliance of civil works with emphasis on the monitoring of implementation of EMP/ SSEMP and related aspects of the Project. The Engineers team will include one national environmental specialist (NES), one national biodiversity specialist (NBS), and one international biodiversity specialist. • National Biodiversity Specialists. Will lead the implementation of the BAP and the BMEP with support from the CSC-Environment Specialist and the Contractor’s Environment Specialist. • CSC-Environmental Specialist. Will oversee and provide guidance to the Contractors on the overall implementation of the EMP. • Contractor's Environment Officer. The Contractor will be required to retain expertise to do this work and must keep that person/firm to oversee the operation throughout the contract period. • PMU. Responsible for overall EMP implementation and will be assisted by the construction supervision consultant (CSC)/Engineer. Their tasks include but are not limited to supervision for overall compliance with SPS 2009 and IFC Guide Note 6 requirements, preparation and submission of environmental monitoring reports and update of EIA during construction in case of technical design changes or unanticipated impacts. 469. Specific functions of the construction supervision consultants (Engineer and the environmental specialist for environmental functions), are: • Undertake environmental monitoring including all of the requirements of the project EIA to ensure that the construction methods proposed by the Contractor for carrying out the works are satisfactory, with particular references to the technical requirements of sound environmental standards on the basis of the ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2009;
189 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• Prepare with the contractor, the site-specific Environmental Management Plan. This task should be completed before the start of the construction. • Ensure that the construction works are undertaken based on the environmental management plans to mitigate the environmental issues as detailed in the EIA. The status of the implementation of environmental management plans and the environmental monitoring reports shall be covered in the reports submitted by the Engineer to the EA and ADB; • Ensure minimum disruption to the local settlements while approving Contractor’s work program, including monitoring of the impacts of construction work on local settlements, and by reporting impact monitoring to the Employer; • Ensure that no child labour is used for the construction works or any other activities associated with the project; • Ensure opportunities for skilled female labour are facilitated and made available; • Monitor the implementation of the health and safety program at camp site (focusing on construction workers) and local communities in the project area including the information and education campaign in the form of awareness raising seminars and meetings in collaboration with MoH, Women’s Committee of Uzbekistan (regional branches) on sexually-transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS (human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) with disseminating relevant gender-sensitive publications and distribution materials as required under the civil works contract; • Coordinate and monitor the implementation of COVID-19 monitoring, prevention, and treatment with the Ministry of Health, and • Provide on-the-job training for the EA’s staff at site on construction supervision, contract administration, quality control and assurance, safeguards, PPMS and monitoring and evaluation and other activities. 470. The International Biodiversity Specialist and the National Biodiversity Specialist will be principally responsible for the implementation and regular update of the BMEP and the BAP and will provide inputs and guidance on biodiversity issues related to construction methods and design and the environmental impact assessment. Detailed Terms of References of the International and National Biodiversity Experts are provided in the BMEP. 471. The required qualifications of the Contractors Environment Officer (EO) are as follows: • Degree in environmental sciences and related expertise. • Fluent in Uzbek, Russian. English is an advantage. • Experience of at least one construction project of a similar size and scale. 472. The Contractor(s) EO is also responsible for engaging external service from a certified laboratory for environmental instrumental monitoring such as air quality monitoring, noise and water. The monitoring requirements for each time need to be approved by the Engineer. The EO will also be responsible for the preparation of weekly environmental checklists and an environmental section of the contractor’s monthly progress reports that shall be submitted to the Engineer for review. 473. The monthly reports, which will include the weekly environmental checklists, shall contain sections relating to: • General Progress of the Project • Environmental Incidents; e.g. spills of liquids, blasting issues • Progress of any environmental initiatives, e.g. protection of sensitive sites • Records of any environmental monitoring, both observational and instrumental • Conclusions and Recommendations
190 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
474. The EO shall provide daily toolbox training at the construction camp and at construction sites. The EO shall keep a record of all monthly training and toolbox training undertaken. 475. The environmental specialist will prepare a detailed action plan including environmental monitoring checklists to be completed by the national specialist to ensure that the Environmental Management System is established, implemented, maintained and will monitor its performance. He/she will also take care of all environmental issues during bridge construction works. He/she will also conduct environmental training and briefings to provide environmental awareness on ADB and the government environmental safeguards policies, requirements and standard operating procedures in conformity with the government’s regulations and international practice for project and EA staff; ensure baseline monitoring and reporting of Contractor’s compliance with contractual environmental mitigation measures during the supervision stage. J.4 PMU Environmental Counterpart 476. It is required that the PMU designate a full-time safeguard position to manage and coordinate the contractors and Engineer in reporting to EA and ADB on safeguard performance of the project. It is required that the CSC Environmental Specialist provides a short training program to the PMU safeguard person and Contractors EO prior to the start of construction to develop their knowledge and understanding of the environmental, social, health and safety aspects of the Project. The PMUs Safeguards Specialist will supervise the Engineer and Contractors in EMP implementation for overall compliance with SPS 2009 requirements and project environment-related legal covenants. With assistance of the Engineer, prepare, submit to the EA and ADB, and disclose semi-annual environmental monitoring reports on ADB website. Report in a timely manner to ADB of any non-compliance or breach of ADB safeguard requirements. Update the EIA in case of technical design changes or unanticipated impacts. Make sure that the GRM is operational to effectively handle environmental and social concerns of project affected persons. 477. The Committee for Roads will take the lead in the preparation of the Management Plans and implementation of the BAP. The Committee for Roads will seeking support from various agencies and communities that includes: Saiga Reserve Management, Goscomecology of Uzbekistan, Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan in Tashkent, and World Wildlife Fund (NGO) in the implementing activities within the Saiga Reserve; Local Police, Saiga Conservation Alliance (NGO), and Goscomecology in building anti- poaching capacity; and the Saiga Reserve Management on the monitoring of Saiga population. Details of the specific tasks are provided in the BAP.
191 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
J.5 Environmental Management Plan Table 68: The Environmental management Plan for the A380 Karakalpakstan Road Project Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
Land and Impacts associated • Ensure that all design parameters appropriate to the SCR/PMU (the environment inspections to geology with all quarries. seismic risk inherent in the Project. consultant of the PMU and ensure • Adopt contract provisions specifying that only licensed CSC) must be responsible for compliance are facilities in compliance with all applicable regulations and day-to-day issues of discussed industry standards will be used as the sources of quarried environmental management below as part materials. such as proper quarry of the CSC • Licensed quarrying operations for material sources must operations. Compliance budget be used and all uses sources require the prior approval of assurance must be the the CSC. The potential impact of transport of quarried responsibility of the CSC. materials must be considered in the approval process. • Plans for quarry operations must be included in the required SEMP submission. Land and Material sourcing and Tenderer to identify sources of materials, state methods of Design engineers Included in geology transport transportation and provide a realistic breakdown of rates. design, This should include for ongoing maintenance (including drainage, where necessary) and, at the end of their no additional cost Contract, reinstatement of access routes, haul routes and borrow sites.
Cost to tenderer in bid preparation
Water Fueling Operations The site plans must specify the locations for the storage of Drainage plan Design engineer Included in quality and Liquid and liquid materials and toxic materials. The following conditions (specification) Contractor Contractor’s Hazardous Material to avoid adverse impacts due to improper fuel and chemical (construction) General Costs Handling and Storage. storage.
• Fueling operations shall occur only within containment areas.
192 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
• All fuel and chemical storage (if any) must be sited on an impervious base within a bund and secured by fencing. The storage area must be located away from any watercourse or wetlands. The base and bund walls must be impermeable and of sufficient capacity to contain 110 percent of the volume of tanks. • Filling and refueling must be strictly controlled and subject to formal procedures and will take place within areas surrounded by bunds to contain spills / leaks of potentially contaminating liquids. • All valves and trigger guns must be resistant to unauthorized interference and vandalism and be turned off and securely locked when not in use • The contents of any tank or drum must be clearly marked. Measures shall be taken to ensure that no contaminated discharges enter any drain or watercourses. • Disposal of lubricating oil and other potentially hazardous liquids onto the ground or water bodies must be prohibited. • If accidental spills occur immediate clean up must be undertaken and all cleanup materials stored in a secure area for disposal to a site authorized to dispose of hazardous waste. • Locations Relative to Watercourses. The site plans must be devised to ensure that, insofar as possible, all temporary construction facilities must be locate at least 50 meters away from a water course, stream, or canal Socio Permanent loss of Avoidance of resumption / demolition of land /property as Design engineers / PMU’s Part of the economic – property and land, far as possible; Development of Land Acquisition and Land Acquisition Department Land private Resettlement Plan; Acquisition and properties Resettlement Plan
193 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
Socio Infrastructure Avoid damage to existing infrastructure and interference Design engineers As above economic – with planned infrastructure, e.g. high voltage electricity public lines, water pipelines, oil and gas pipelines properties
Water Culvert design general Designer to provide appropriate numbers of suitably sited Design engineers, hydrology / Included in resources and designed culverts and bridges; hydraulic expert design, no additional cost Ecology and Avoid the creation of unnecessary depressions or mounds Biodiversity suitable for rodent nesting along the project road.
Land and Need for proper Mitigation of potential adverse impacts due to earth-moving, SCR/PMU (the environment Contract geology drainage and cut and fill and similar requirements must include contract consultant of the PMU and preparation revegetation. stipulations which require: CSC) must be responsible for costs currently day-to-day issues of budgeted as • Selection of less erodible material, placement of gibbons environmental management part of project and riprap and good compaction, particularly around such as proper quarry preparation bridges and culverts. operations. Compliance (including • Specification that final forming and re-vegetation must be assurance must be the consulting completed as soon as possible following fill placement to facilitate regeneration of a stabilizing ground cover. responsibility of the CSC. services) Contract • Trenching where necessary to ensure successful establishment of vegetation. compliance • Seeding with a fast-growing crop and potential native Supervision seed mix immediately after fill placement to prevent scour must be a and to encourage stabilization. budgeted • Placement of grass sods where applicable. activity for the • Stabilization of embankment slopes and road cuts by CSC. revegetation with grazing resistant plant species, placement of fiber mats, riprap, rock gabbions, or other appropriate technologies. • Completion of discharge zones from drainage structures with riprap to reduce erosion when required.
194 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
• Down drains/chutes lined with rip-rap/masonry or concrete to prevent erosion.
Side slopes adjusted in the range based on soil and other conditions as specified by the Project Specifications to reduce erosion potential. It is recommended that steep slopes be stabilized, covered with riprap or other material to prevent soil erosion
Socio- Impacts to existing To mitigate potential impacts to the existing transport Traffic Control Plan to SCR/PMU (the environment Contract economic transport infrastructure network, a Traffic Control Plan must be submitted to explain be prepared by the consultant of the PMU and preparation and the means and methods to be taken for proper and Contractors CSC) must be responsible for costs currently Community adequate control of traffic during the Works. This Plan must day-to-day issues of budgeted as Health and include but not be limited to: environmental management part of project Safety and safety, including the preparation • The traffic control equipment the Contractor proposes to implementation of the Traffic (including use for the Works; Control Plan. Oversight consulting • Traffic control signage including location and sign supervision is the services) descriptions; responsibility of the CSC with Contract • How and when the Contractor proposes to use traffic full participation by the compliance control flag-men; appropriate offices of SCR. supervision • Traffic control means during no-working periods; must be a • Traffic control means and devices for night and off-hour periods. budgeted activity for the CSC. To mitigate and ensure that potential impacts to the area transport network are avoided in the subsequent stages of the Project, the COPA stipulates a very specific and detailed set of requirements about general traffic management, traffic control, safety provisions that apply to
195 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
temporary traffic ramps, vertical clearance, signage, temporary fencing, warning lights and other details.
Air Quality Air quality impacts in Furnaces, boilers or equipment using any fuel that produce Appointment and approval of Contract later stages are largely air pollutants must not be installed without prior written an Environment/ Safety preparation determined by consent of the CSC. Burning of debris or other materials Officer (ESO) is required costs currently decisions taken (by must not occur on the Site. Dust suppression measures before work can commence. budgeted as design or default) in including but not limited to the following must be part of project the Pre-Construction implemented: preparation Stage, particularly the (including stipulations of the • Stockpiles of sand and aggregate greater than 20 cubic consulting meters for use in concrete manufacture must be enclosed Project’s bid and services) on three sides, with walls extending above the pile and tender documents and two (2) meters beyond the front of the piles. Locations contract specifications must be indicated by the SEMP. • Effective water sprays must be used during the delivery and handling of all raw sand and aggregate, and other similar materials, when dust is likely to be created and to dampen all stored materials during dry and windy weather • Areas within the Site where there is a regular movement of vehicles must have an acceptable hard surface and be kept clear of loose surface material. Locations must be indicated by the SEMP • Conveyor belts must be fitted with wind-boards, and conveyor transfer points and hopper discharge areas must be enclosed to minimize dust emission. All conveyors carrying materials that have the potential to create dust must be totally enclosed and fitted with belt cleaners. Locations must be indicated by the SEMP • Cement and other such fine-grained materials delivered in bulk must be stored in closed silos fitted with a high- level alarm indicator. The high-level alarm indicators must be interlocked with the filling line such that in the event of the hopper approaching an overfull condition, an audible
196 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
alarm must operate, and the pneumatic line to the filling tanker must close. Locations must be indicated by the SEMP Plan • All vehicles, while parked on the Site, must have their engines turned off. • All equipment and machinery on the Site must be checked at least weekly and make all necessary corrections and or repairs to ensure compliance with safety and air pollution requirements. • All vehicles must be properly cleaned (bodies and tires are free of sand and mud) prior to leaving the site areas. The necessary cleaning facilities must be provided on site to ensure that no water or debris from such cleaning operations is deposited offsite. • Locations must be indicated by the SEMP Plans. • All trucks used for transporting materials to and from the site must be covered with canvas tarpaulins, or other acceptable type cover (which must be properly secured) to prevent debris and/or materials from falling from or being blown off the vehicle(s). • Construction walls must be provided in all locations where strong winds cause the blowing of dust and debris. CONSTRUCTION STAGE
Land and Borrow pits and • The selection and operation of borrow pits needs to be A schedule of suitable Design engineer Included in Geology quarries carried out with all due considerations to avoid any impact deposit sites and a plan (specification) Contractor Contractor’s on the existing natural and human environment, and to for the distribution and (construction) General Costs make provisions that no secondary impacts such as soil imported filling material and aquifer pollution will occur. will be made during • Borrow pits should not be located within core or buffer detailed design. zones of the existing or proposed specially protected areas. • Irrespective of which borrow sites are used/developed, it remains the Contractor’s responsibility to source the
197 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
construction materials through obtaining and adhering to all necessary licenses and statutory environmental management requirements associated with the operation and rehabilitation of such sites. • Contractor to avoid excavating borrow pits or quarries on agricultural land to the extent possible • No borrow area will be located inside the Haloxylon forests Land and Haul routes • Select suitable haul routes away from sensitive sites, if Design engineer Included in geology possible including the Haloxylon Forest (specification) Contractor Contractor’s • Ensure all haul roads are cleared by the National (construction) General Costs Biodiversity Expert before its use • Provide a length of haul road before the exit(s) from the site Air Quality • Reduce the width of haul roads (while still allowing two- way traffic movements) to minimize the surface area from which dust may be produced • Sweep paved access roads (while still allowing two-way traffic movements) and public roads regularly • Limit vehicle speeds – the slower the vehicles, the less the dust generated • Spray unpaved work areas subject to traffic or wind with water regularly and frequently, particularly during warm and sunny weather Air Quality Materials handling and • Locate stockpiles out of the wind or provide wind breaks Design engineer Included in storage • Keep stockpiles to the minimum practicable height and (specification) Contractor Contractor’s use gently slopes (construction) General Costs • Compact and bind stockpile surfaces; re-vegetate long- to provide 30 term stockpiles spill kits @ • Minimize the storage time of materials on site US$200 each • Store materials away from the site boundary and or US$6,000 downwind of sensitive areas • Ensure all dust-generating materials transported to/from the site are covered by tarpaulin
198 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
• Minimize the height of fall of materials • Avoid spillage and clear up spills as soon as possible • Damp down sand, spoil and aggregate stockpiles Water Fuel and chemical Contractor to develop and implement a method statement Waste disposal plan Design engineer Included in Quality pollution control on spillages including the use of lined spillage bunds for (specification) Contractor Contractor’s bitumen, oil and fuel storage tanks, and impermeable (construction) General Costs compounds for the storage of chemicals; Contractor to provide designated and confined sites for vehicle maintenance, refuelling and washing, and appropriate security procedures for refuelling vehicles. Location to be agreed with local executive and environmental authorities. Sites to be 500 m from the nearest water sources/irrigation and drainage channel; Contractor to submit a statement on showing the location of fuel storage, filling station and vehicle washing site to local executive and sanitary authorities; Contractor to treat maintenance workshop wastewater to national discharge standards; Contractor to be prohibited from washing of vehicles and equipment in rivers and/or wetland areas. No storage of oils and chemicals in the wetland areas will be permitted and if unavoidable they shall be held within specifically constructed bunded areas
Materials Waste management • Location for the disposal of waste should be agreed with Waste Disposal Plan Design engineer Included in and wastes the local executive and environmental authorities before (specification) Contractor’s the start of reconstruction General Costs • Contractor to store, handle and dispose of waste oil, tires, Contractor (construction) etc. at designated sites in accordance with SNPC’s requirements; • Contractor to regularly remove litter and waste adjacent to the worker camps and contractor’s yard even if not works-related.
199 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
• Use covered containers for organic waste and remove frequently • Remove organic waste before it starts to decompose • Ensure wildlife such as birds, mammals, and reptiles are not attracted to solid and liquid wastes
Ecology and Improper disposal of • all toxic and hazardous materials required for The ESO must be responsible Included in Biodiversity wastes water may construction, fuel and caustic substances shall be stored for day-to-day issues of Contractor’s create ponds which at secure and managed sites, environmental management General Costs may attract threatened • vehicles and equipment shall be maintained in good and compliance with air species operable condition, ensuring no undue leakage of oil or quality requirements. fuel Insurance of contract • vehicles and equipment will be serviced at properly compliance is the managed and equipped workshops, with suitable facilities responsibility of the CSC. to collect and dispose of waste oil, • sanitation arrangements will be made at worksites and any accommodation facilities provided for workers’ accommodation, ensuring that no raw sewage is released into lands that may cause ponding Compliance with all established water quality standards. Ecology and Poaching and illegal Poaching and illegal gathering of any wildlife including CSC will employ a national Included in Biodiversity gathering of wildlife tortoise, snake, and birds is strictly prohibited and will face biodiversity specialist for 8 Contractor’s penalty consistent with RUz laws and regulations to include months/year during the entire General Costs the laborer/staff and contractor. construction phase.
Regular orientation and workshop will be conducted by the CSC on the location and type of protected species that are found in the Project area, how to avoid disturbance, report of sightings, and governing laws on the protection of flora and fauna.
200 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
Ecology and Prohibition of guard Under no circumstance will the contractor employ or use CSC Included in Biodiversity dogs in the project site dogs for perimeter security to avoid conflict with wildlife Contractor’s General Costs
Land and Topsoil Each construction site should have a spill contingency plan. Design engineer Included in geology preservation/soil Proper storage and management reduce the risk of (specification) Contractor’s management vandalism and theft Contractor to remove, store and reuse General Costs of topsoil in accordance with best practice; long-term Contractor (construction) stockpiles to be protected to prevent erosion or loss of fertility; Contractor to construct and use appropriately sited haul roads to minimize soil compaction and loss of agricultural land.
Ecology and Protection of Sections of the road to be widened may require clearing of Included in Biodiversity Haloxylon trees Haloxylon trees. No tree shall be removed unless prior Contractor’s permission is issued by the jurisdictional government. All General Costs measures to prevent injury or damage will be implemented by the contractor to include but not limited to marking and temporary fencing.
Socio- Worker camp Contractor to agree location and facilities of worker camps Site Development Plan Design engineer Included in economic management with local authorities including Ministry of Health’s Central (specification) Contractor Contractor’s and Disinfection Centre and District Disinfection Centre; (construction) / Ministry of General Costs Community Location for the disposal of waste should be agreed with the Health Health and local executive and environmental authorities before the Safety start of reconstruction. Contractor to provide:
• Statement on the source for the drinking water supply for workforce; • Description of the living and eating areas for non-local workforce. • Before worksite operations start, the Contractor must seek approval on the source of drinking water from the local competent authority.
201 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
• Vermin control Noise and Construction Noise Good communication with affected communities is often the Noise Control Plan Design engineer Included in vibration Control particularly most effective way to manage potential construction noise (specification) Contractor Contractor’s near villages (Jaslik impacts. Therefore, the Contractor should keep residents (construction) General Costs and Karakalpakiya) informed of the progress of the works, including when and where the noisiest activities will be taking place and how long they are expected to last. All noise complaints should be effectively recorded, investigated and addressed Account should be taken of the needs of residents in choice Consultations of working hours and where possible these should be and information
chosen to campaign on possible • Avoid night time and weekend working; increase in • Avoid working near mosques during prayer time; and to noise during • Carry out works near schools during holiday periods construction
In addition, the Contractor should consider general good working practices including the following which are US$5,000.00
particularly relevant to road construction:
• Modern, silenced and well-maintained plant and
construction equipment should be used; • All vehicles and plant should be fitted with effective exhaust silencers which should be maintained in good and efficient working order. • Fitted acoustic covers should be kept in a good state of repair and should be kept closed when plant is in use.
• vehicles should not wait or queue on the road with
engines running and plant in intermittent use should be shut down when not in use or where this is impracticable, throttled down to a minimum.
202 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
• If a site compound, or materials storage area is to be used, both it and any static plant within it should be sited as far as is practicable from noise sensitive buildings. • Where activities, including delivery of material to site, cannot take place during normal working hours they should be carried out as close to normal working hours as Contractor is reasonably practicable. • Concrete mixers should not be cleaned by hammering the drums. • When handling materials, care should be taken not to Construction’s drop materials from excessive heights costs Air quality Air quality impacts All contract stipulations established in the Pre-Construction The ESO must be Monitoring and Stage as outlined in the EIA. responsible for day-to-day reporting costs issues of environmental must be part of management and compliance the Additional mitigation measures warranted in the event of with air quality requirements. Contractor's unanticipated conditions or in response to accidental spills Insurance of contract bid or volatile materials or significant accidental air pollutant compliance is the emissions must apply as determined warranted by the CSC.
Periodic unannounced site visits are required to verify air quality and all other environmental compliance.
Compliance with all established air quality standards
Air quality Dust control Contractor to water down/clean haul routes in residential Design engineer Included in and other air quality sensitive areas during dry weather. (specification) Contractor Contractor’s Before worksite operations start, the Contractor must seek (construction General Costs approval on the source of dust suppression water from the local competent authority; Contractor to pave areas in residential and other air quality sensitive areas as soon as
203 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
possible; Contractor to control vehicle speed on unpaved haul routes; Contractor to cover trucks carrying dust- producing materials; Contractor to properly maintain vehicles and equipment to minimize air pollution on the construction site; Vehicle exhausts to be vented upwards; 3 trucks per Based on monitoring and complaints, conduct dust controls week for 1 through sprinkling in the following areas: month:
- Hotel at 90 m and Hotel and Gas Station 2 sitesx3 Buildings at 80 m within the screening distance truckloadsx Karakalpakiya, kilometrage 237+423 4times/ month - Restaurant @10m and Police Checkpost x US$150/ Buildings within the screening distance, truckload of Karakalpakiya kilometrage 220 water = US$3,600
For WIMS:
= 2 sites x 1 truckload/week x 4wks/mo x US$150
US$1,200
Socio- Public hindrances due Provision of a site-specific traffic diversion management Traffic Management Design engineer Included in economic to traffic diversions plan, including precautionary measures such as signage, Plan (specification) Contractor Contractor’s and and hauling routes working hours, public awareness, preparation of emergency (construction) / Police/local General Costs Community plans, and proper decommissioning of such temporary authorities at an estimated Health and roads cost of Safety US$200,000
204 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
Socio- Traffic safety Contractor to manage traffic disruption, inconvenience to Design engineer Minimized by economic the public, and road safety hazards through development (specification) Contractor design; mainly and and implementation of a traffic management plan in (construction) / Police/local applies to Community consultation with the traffic police and local authorities, authorities areas of Health and including public information, temporary traffic diversions, interchange Safety one-way working, and all necessary temporary traffic construction; signals, warning signs, lighting and watching (guards/signal included in men); Providing advance information to the public about Contractor’s planned reconstruction works, Planning reconstruction General Costs activities to minimize disruption and maintaining at least one open lane where there is no viable alternative route; Signing of temporary traffic diversions in close coordination with local authorities; Use of flagmen and temporary traffic lights to control traffic flows at constricted sites, including safe crossing for pedestrians and limiting, to the extent practicable, the movement of large trucks to off-peak traffic times
Socio- Site clearance Contractor to carry out demolition works safely; Contractor Design engineer Included in economic to avoid damage to or loss of trees and other community (specification) Contractor Contractor’s and structures like cemeteries outside the limits of site and to (construction) General Costs Community preserve trees within the limits of site where specifically to include Health and designated in the Contract; Contractor to minimize fencing around Safety vegetation losses in the construction corridor through sensitive areas
appropriate safeguard measures (e.g. demarcation of like cemeteries critical sites prior to reconstruction; instruction of workforce).
Materials Contractor will clear all debris and wastes disposed by and wastes motorist and disposed in designated sites during the entire engagement.
205 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
Ecology and Minimization of Contractor to avoid damage to or loss of trees outside the Design engineer Included in Biodiversity impacts on flora and limits of site and to preserve trees within the limits of site (specification) Contractor’s fauna and their where specifically designated in the Contract; Contractor to General Costs habitats (General) minimize vegetation losses in the construction corridor Contractor (construction) through appropriate safeguard measures (e.g. demarcation of critical sites prior to construction; instruction of workforce); To minimize the potential impact related to the clearance of vegetation the Contractor will be required not to carry out clearance operations (felling of trees and shrubs) during the sensitive breeding period between mid- April and mid-July Contractor to avoid vegetation clearance during the bird breeding season in areas with nests (May- July)
Socio- Access to Information/ Design and supervision consultant /PMU to convene a Design engineer Included in economic Public Relations public consultation meeting (including the Contractor) prior (specification) Contractor Contractor’s and to contractor’s mobilization to: (construction General Costs Community Health and • provide basic project information and construction Safety scheduling • discuss and agree farm access arrangements during the US$2,000*12*5 construction period = US$120,000 • establish and explain the grievance redress mechanism including proactive arrangements for keeping the public informed of reconstruction activities
Contractor to implement obligations as per the Grievance Redress Mechanism
Archaeology Cultural heritage/ Contractor to development a cultural / archaeological find Design engineer Included in and cultural archaeological finds plan for the conservation/protection of cultural (specification) Contractor Contractor’s heritage heritage/archaeology in case of unexpected finds; If an (construction) General Costs cultural/archaeological artefact is found, the Contractor is to
206 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
stop work immediately in that location and notify the appropriate authorities; Contractor is to cooperate with the appropriate authorities during the excavation, examination, and recording of such finds, and to not restart works in that location until permission is given.
Socio- Health and Safety Contractor to provide drinking water for workforce in plan for identifying the Design engineer Provision of economic accordance with national quality standards. Before worksite source location, (specification) HIV/AIDS and operations start, the Contractor must seek approval on the quantity, and drawing training, Community source of drinking water from the local competent authority schedule of both Contractor (construction) information and Health and Septic tanks, mobile toilets and other sanitary facilities to be drinking and technical condoms to be Safety cleaned daily to prevent outbreaks of disease; Contractor water extraction a separate to provide basic sanitation, general health and HIV/AIDS costed item in training (including provision of condoms) for the local and the contract non-local workforce; Contractor to provide training in use of, first aid materials and equipment; Contractor to provide Included in appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for Contractor’s workforce, e.g. safety boots, reflective vests (summer), General Costs reflective jackets (winter), helmets, ear protection, goggles, to cover 5 HIV gloves, etc. and to replace it when damaged; Contractor to test Kits @ provide training in the safe construction techniques, US$1,000/kit or including use of equipment; Contractor to provide details of US$5,000. security measures to prevent access to the site by the General PPEs public/non-workforce personnel, e.g. children, and livestock. per 6 months:
With the advent of the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID- 100 workers * 19) pandemic, all contractors will follow the RUz and WHO $120 (gum protocols on screening of workers that includes screening, boots, googles, PPEs, regular temperature testing, reporting, isolation, vest, hats) x 2 / contact tracing, and treatment. All cases, whether person year x 5years = under investigation and confirmed cases of infection shall $120,000
207 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
be reported to the Ministry of Health’s administration and Fire and spills executive bodies in the Republic of Karakalpakstan. training:
Bi-annually for 5 years, 100 participants @ $20/0erson
=2*5*100*20
= $200,000
Cost of general safety training:
= quarterly for 5 years for 100 workers
= 4*5*100*$50 per participant
=$100,000
Post-Construction/Operational Stage
Land and Borrow pits and The extraction of sand and quarry materials will be geology quarries completed at the operational stage. Proper management of post extraction needs to be adopted to avoid unexpected impact in the future
Air Quality Air quality impacts due Management of vehicles transporting bulk materials will SCR SCR Annual to vehicular use of the best strengthened and explicit requirements will be raised to Budget highway make sure such vehicles are covered with tarpaulins or otherwise enclosed. The planning authority will be advised Coordination to restrict construction of residential houses, schools, with relevant
208 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
hospitals and other sensitive buildings adjacent to the government highway when developing and approving urban construction agencies on plans Inspection and maintenance programs will be vehicle implemented including training programs focusing on emission emission testing, data analysis, and reporting. Annual air testing quality monitoring program will be conducted.
Materials Water ponding Contracts stipulate that one year into the operating period a After the completion of the and waste because of unresolved final inspection is required and contractor’s final payment is final inspection to the reconstruction released only after a fully compliant audit is recorded. This satisfaction of SCR, impacts. includes the decommissioning of construction camps and operational monitoring of other ancillary aspects of the Project with significant environmental parameters (if environmental implications. Any impacts depressions that any) becomes the may cause ponding of water particularly along the project responsibility of SCR road will be rectified as this will attract prey to wildlife and increase the chance of wildlife-vehicular collisions. Compliance to these provisions are part of the final inspection process and final payments cannot be made until outstanding issues are resolved
Noise and Noise impacts due to Potential impacts due to the use of the highway are the SCR SCR Annual vibration vehicular use of the purview of SCR and other national agencies charged with budget highway. protection of the environment.
SCR SCR Budget
Land and Adequacy of erosion Erosion prevention and re-vegetation aspects of the Project After the completion of the geology prevention features must be part of the final inspection. final inspection to the and revegetation satisfaction of SCR, operational monitoring of environmental parameters (if
209 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
any) becomes the responsibility of SCR.
Materials Illegal disposal of These wastes serve as food to animals which could attract SCR $28,800 and Wastes wastes along the road threatened species and increase the risk of mortality from by drivers vehicular collision. Installation of signboards to prohibit disposal of waste every 5 kilometers on both directions.
Ecology and Minimization of Require observation of the operational characteristics of After the completion of the biodiversity Impacts to plant highways to identify problem areas and avoidable impacts final inspection to the diversity to wildlife. satisfaction of SCR, operational monitoring of environmental parameters (if any) becomes the responsibility of SCR.
Ecology and Offsetting land lost Detailed recommended mitigation measures to be followed Executing Agency with the biodiversity during construction can be found in the Biodiversity Action Plan. support of the through habitat Goscomecology of restoration All habitat losses will be quantified by the Environmental Uzbekistan, the Institute of Specialist during construction and will need to be offset Natural Sciences, University through restoration by the Executing Agency to ensure at of Nukus, and any restoration least No Net Loss to biodiversity. Offsets will be designed in in the Saigachy Reserve line with the IFC GN6 to achieve ‘like-for-like or better’ and states that biodiversity offsets must be designed to conserve the same biodiversity values that are being impacted by the project. Habitat restoration will initially be prioritized in the Saigachy Reserve and will target improved habitat connectivity. Detailed methodology is provided in the BAP.
Socio- Concerns related to Recommended actions include: Appropriate road signage, SCR and Traffic Police partly in Env. economic general traffic safety traffic monitoring and control, human capacity development, Budget and review of the driving license issuing system and a wise
210 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Aspect Impact/Issue Mitigation Measure & Related Links Relevant Management Responsibility for Mitigation Mitigation Plan Implementation Cost Source (in US $)
Community application of penalties seem to be the most likely Health and responses. Evaluate the introduction of publicly accessible, Safety well-marked posts containing both an emergency (pay-free) telephone and a first-aid box with medical supplies, stretchers, bandages and other means for first assistance to road victims. To avoid mis-uses, these boxes shall be equipped with an electronic lock that can only be opened by prior telephone contacting to a nearby police station.
Socio- Increased risk of To manage these problems the operator will enforce speed SCR and Traffic Police partly in Env. economic pedestrian accidents limits through increased ‘radar’ surveillance, better and Budget and within settlement more frequent signage and increased speeding fines. In Community areas due to improved villages at crossing the owner will improve the signage and Health and roads, faster speeds include amber lights were possible. As many town bypasses Safety and greater traffic as possible are planned and should reduce project volume generated traffic through towns and villages.
Total EMP Cost without the Biodiversity Action Plan $760,800
211 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 69: Environmental Monitoring Plan Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
Pre-Construction Stage
Permanent loss of Resumption/demolition Route avoids major Check preliminary Once PMUs Land N/A property and land, minimized Land Acquisition settlements design and maps Acquisition incl. agricultural and and Resettlement Plan Department grazing land (LARP) developed Highway LARP exists fence at edge of proposed Location of fence plantations, where practicable
Community access Access maintained for local Access not severed / Check preliminary Once or more, PMU N/A communities, incl. alternatives provided design and maps depending on design pedestrians, non- motorized review
vehicles, livestock
Infrastructure Avoid interference with Infrastructure avoided Check preliminary Once PMU N/A existing/ planned infrastructure design and maps
Embankments/ Design of embankments, Embankments, etc. Check preliminary Once PMU N/A structures culverts, etc. conform with design and maps requirements
Material sources and Ban on extraction of materials Contract requirement Check Once or more, PMU N/A transport and/or disturbance of Contract requirement depending on results protected areas Tenderer to Tenderer provides identify materials sources, information states methods of transportation, provides realistic breakdown of rates, including on- going maintenance and reinstatement of access
212 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
routes, haul routes and borrow site
Highway pollution Approach to pollution control Measures included in Check Once or more, ES of PMU N/A control measures design depending on result
Access to Public informed of Publicity material Spot checks, Approx. monthly, Environmental Included in Information/ Public construction progress produced Grievance feedback from local throughout specialist of CSC CSC budget Relations Grievance Redress Redress Mechanism residents/ NGOs, construction phase, reporting to PM for Env Mechanism established and documented, Grievance feedback from more frequently when Supervision operating effectively Focal Points and Engineer public complaints Complaints logged, responded Grievance Redress to quickly Committee identified Complaints log exists and up-to-date
Construction Stage
Minimisation of No noisy working near Minimal complaints Spot checks, Approx. monthly, Environmental As above nuisance for local settlements between feedback from local throughout specialist of CSC communities 20:0006:00 hours and on residents/ NGOs, construction phase, reporting to PM public holidays Maximum feedback from more frequently when noise level 70 dB(A) at site Engineer public complain boundary Construction $2,000 machinery/equipment with noise and exhaust emission Noise Monitoring:@ control fitted and in use Hotel at 90 m and Access maintained for local Hotel and Gas communities, incl. Station Buildings, pedestrians, non- motorised Karakalpakiya, vehicles, livestock Litter and kilometrage 237+423 waste removed from around work camp/contractor‟s yard Weekly for 3 months
213 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
= 4*3*$100
= $1,200
WIMS 2 sites
Weekly for 1 months
= 2*4*$100
= $800
Worker camp Worker camp facilities agreed MOH permit(s) exist(s) Spot checks, Approx. monthly, Environmental As above management with Ministry of Health (MOH) Waste Management feedback from local throughout specialist of CSC Plan exists and in residents/ NGOs, construction phase, reporting to PMU Drinking water supply operation Sewage feedback from more frequently when Living/eating areas Management Plan workers and complaints from exists and in operation Engineer public/ workers
Monthly drinking $18,000 water quality check for 5 years:
=12*5*$300
= $18,000
Environmental Contractor to employ full time Regular environmental Reports submitted See under mitigation Environmental N/A Manager (Contractor) Environmental Manager, reviews/audit reports measure specialist of CSC qualified and experienced as reporting to PM an ecologist.
Environmental CSC to have full time national Regular environmental Reports submitted See under mitigation PMU Specialists environmental specialist to reviews/audit reports measure assist PMU in supervising Contractors implementation of EMP/SEMP on site. Both
214 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
international and national environmental specialists must have qualifications and experience in ecology:
Health and Safety Drinking water, Toilets, Clean drinking water Spot checks, training Approx. monthly, Environmental Included in washroom and canteen provided Facilities records, accident throughout specialist of CSC CSC budget facilities, Health and HIV/AIDS provided and clean All reports, feedback construction phase, reporting to PMU for Env training, First aid equipment workers have basic from workers and more frequently when Supervision and training, Personal health and HIV/AIDS Engineer complaints from protective equipment and knowledge, condoms public/ workers training, Safe construction provided First aid kits techniques training, provided; all workers Emergency response training, have basic first aid Accident Book Public safety knowledge PPE measures equipment provided and used All workers given training relevant to their activities All workers trained in emergency response Accident Book exists and up-to- date No accidents for members of public
Site clearance Damage to trees, Clearance of No trees damaged / Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above vegetation felled outside limit of feedback from during site clearance specialist of CSC works, No vegetation workers and reporting to PMU cleared unnecessarily Engineer
Infrastructure Damage to infrastructure No damage reported Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above feedback Engineer during reconstruction specialist of CSC reporting to PMU
215 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
Drainage control Site Drainage Plan, Settling Site Drainage Plan Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above ponds, Oil interceptors, exists and in operation feedback from local during reconstruction specialist of CSC Stagnant Water No silty/ muddy water residents/ NGOs, reporting to PMU running off site into feedback from water courses. No oil Engineer film on water courses near site. No stagnant water on / near site
Fuel and chemical Method statement on Method statement on Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above pollution control Spillages, Statement on fuel spillages exists and in feedback from local during reconstruction; specialist of CSC storage, handling and vehicle operation. No uncleared residents/ NGOs, more frequently when reporting to PMU washing, Ban vehicle washing works- related oil/ feedback from complaints from in rivers / wetland areas, No bitumen/ cement/ Engineer public. storage of oils and chemicals concrete spills on site/in in the wetlands areas will be maintenance area. permitted and if unavoidable Statement on fuel they shall be held within storage, handling and specifically constructed vehicle washing exists bunded area and in operation. Workers aware of ban. No vehicle washing in rivers/wetland areas. Any unavoidable storage of oils and chemicals in the wetland area will be held in a specifically constructed budded area
216 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
Waste management Litter and waste in/around Waste Management Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above worker camps and contractor’s Plan exists and in feedback from local during reconstruction; specialist of CSC yard removed. No waste operation. Litter and residents/ NGOs, more frequently when reporting to PMU storage areas shall be waste cleared up. No feedback from complaints from permitted in the wetland waste storage areas Engineer public. areas. within wetland area.
Borrow pits and Ban on disturbance of Workers aware of ban. Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above quarries protected areas. Borrow No borrow pits/quarries feedback from local during reconstruction; specialist of CSC Pit/Quarry permit/operating in protected areas. residents/ NGOs, more frequently when reporting to PMU license. Spoil dump Borrow Pit/Quarry feedback from complaints from permit/ operating Engineer public license exists and in operation. No spoil dumps on agricultural land
Maintenance of local Haul routes Haul routes Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above highway network photographed. Routes feedback from local during reconstruction; specialist of CSC • Prior to the beginning of pre- strengthened residents/ NGOs, more frequently when reporting to PMU reconstruction, the actual state where necessary. feedback from complaints from of all haul routes should be Damage repaired. Engineer public. assessed and photographed Routes rehabilitated to (PIU in cooperation with the original condition after Engineer). use. • Requirement to return all temporarily used haul routes to their original state.
Traffic safety Traffic Management Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above Plan exists and in feedback from local during reconstruction; specialist of CSC operation. No increased residents/ NGOs, more frequently when reporting to PM traffic accidents. No
217 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
unnecessary traffic feedback from complaints from disruption Engineer public
Dust control Dust Control. Haul routes in Dust Control Plan exists Spot checks, Approx. monthly Environmental As above residential areas watered and in operation. No feedback from local during reconstruction; specialist of CSC down/cleaned to reduce dust. clouds of dust on haul residents/ NGOs, more frequently when reporting to PMU Dust-producing materials to be routes in residential feedback from complaints from covered during transportation. areas. No clouds of dust Engineer public No construction from construction $4,000 equipment/vehicles producing vehicles transporting Dust Monitoring: black smoke on or off site. materials. No black 2 sites (See EMP) smoke from equipment/vehicles. During construction weekly when soils are exposed:
=2 sites*4weeks *2months*$250/
Sample and analysis
= $4,000
Cultural heritage/ Cultural/Archaeological Find Cultural/ Archaeological Spot check Once Environmental As above archaeological find Plan Find Plan exists and in specialist of CSC operation. Workers reporting to PMU aware of plan.
Landscaping Felled trees to be replaced Trees planted and Spot check Once, end of Environmental As above surviving reconstruction specialist of CSC reporting to PMU
Post-Construction/ Operational Stage
218 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Issue Mitigation Measure Effectiveness Means of Frequency Institutional Cost (in US $) Indicator Verification Responsibility
Management of Speed restriction. Parameters to be Noise monitoring Suggested twice SCR in cooperation Part of SCR traffic generated monitored are in line data yearly during peak with Ministry of budget noise with the norms and traffic periods Health’s Sanitary and codes of the national Epidemiological environmental Service legislation.
Environmental Spill contingency plan. Regular (monthly / PMU Vehicle hire, Monitoring Maintenance of measures to annual) reporting travel minimise the risk of ground allowance and surface water pollution. Vehicle speed control. Noise monitoring program. Air quality monitoring program. Water quality monitoring program. Waste management monitoring program: regular removal of wastes including litter and wrecked vehicles. Incident book. Record of complaints from the public (appointment of a public liaison officer)
Total $24,000
The Environmental Monitoring Plan prepared and implemented during the construction phase should be subject to on-going revision based on that experience. The monitoring plan for the operational phase should also include post-construction monitoring, during the first year of operation, so that action may be taken if any detrimental effects occur.
219 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
K. BIODIVERSITY MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN (BMEP)
K.1 Objective 478. The Project BMEP is designed to monitor the potential impacts of the proposed scheme on the threatened species in the project area, and the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation. It forms part of the Project Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) and is a requirement of ADB’s SPS 2009 and IFC PS6 for projects in critical habitats. The BMEP will build on the limited baseline data available to date and will help address existing data gaps whilst provide more comprehensive data to help ensure no significant adverse impacts on local biodiversity. K.2 Risk Baseline Surveys 479. To date, only limited biodiversity surveys have been undertaken as part of the EIA, focused on identifying the presence/status of potential biodiversity risks. These included the initial site assessment between 01-02 April 2019 and site drive overs in January and December 2019. These have, however, been supplemented by extensive consultations, and further works are planned for 2020. During the April site assessment, 14 observation/monitoring points were established along the 204 x 2 km corridor centered along the project existing alignment, and observations were carried out over a total period of > 12 hours. Details of the site assessment, including the monitoring point locations, species identification, and number are provided in the Baseline Chapter and Appendix A of this Report. 480. Discussions with national and international experts have confirmed that the project AoI in general, and the area of direct impact in particular, are not considered important stop-over or destination sites for migratory birds. A number of species do pass over the project AoI during the autumn and spring migrations (e.g. when heading to the IBA locations at Sudochye Lake and others). However, they typically pass through the area on a very broad front and stop off in the area – if at all – rarely and in small numbers. This is owing to: (i) the wide open, flat expanse of the plateau, with no topographic features which funnel migratory birds or create bottlenecks;
(ii) the absence of any suitable habitat for many migrants (notably waterbirds) or of abundant sources of food or other resources of value during migration (compared, for example, to sites such as Sudochye Lake); and
(iii) the absence of regular weather conditions (fog, sandstorms, etc.) that might force birds to land.
481. Given this, migratory birds are not expected to occur in the project area in significant numbers, or be significantly adversely affected by the proposed scheme. 482. Further surveys will, however, be undertaken in Spring 2020. Cadastral surveys on the biodiversity of Ustyurt plateau are due to be carried out by the Institute of Natural Sciences of Karakalpakstan and it is proposed that the project will work with the University to help ensure that the results can be used to inform the risk baseline for the project. Survey results will be provided as supplementary documents to the EIA once the work has been completed. K.3 Monitoring Baseline Surveys 483. No specific baselines appropriate for future monitoring have yet been undertaken. Before commencement of any project activities, baseline data will be obtained on the extent and quality of the Haloxylon forest in the project AoI. Before any vegetation
220 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
clearance, baseline data will be obtained on the extent and quality of Natural Habitat to be cleared (Table 57). K.4 Further Monitoring Proposals 484. Mitigation for potentially significant impacts/risks has been detailed in Chapter G above. Table 69 outlines monitoring necessary to assess the effectiveness of mitigation and verify the significance of impacts as assessed in Chapter G. Should significance of impacts vary from that assessed in Chapter G, or mitigation be considerably more/less effective than predicted in Chapter G, monitoring results will inform adaptation of mitigation. Monitoring is proposed to commence in 2020 and to continue until at least after ten years during project operation. 485. Monitoring outlined in Table 70 will be developed into detailed monitoring procedures in either the Construction Management Plan, or in Terms of Reference for specialist surveyors to assess: progress of re-vegetation of temporarily disturbed sites; restoration of Natural Habitat lost through construction; abundance/spread of IAS; numbers of dead animals by the roadside (likely collision impacts); and any presence of Saiga in proximity to the road.
221 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Table 70: Detailed Ecology Monitoring procedures Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
Natural Construction Direct Marking of zones to Clearance zones Project AoI Inspection of Unannounced Environmental Habitat clearance for be cleared, marked, prioritizing Project inspections at least specialist of road, ponds prioritizing already modified habitat records; quarterly, during CSC reporting and borrow modified habitat visual preparation and to PMU pits wherever possible inspection construction phases
Minimization of use Vegetation disturbance Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental of areas outside by Project vehicles and Project inspections at least specialist of marked zones to be contractors; mortality of incident quarterly, during CSC reporting cleared priority bird and plants logbook; preparation, to PMU visual construction and inspection of worksite closure clearance phases versus pre- clearance surveys
No clearance of Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental Haloxylon trees > 1m Project inspections at least specialist of height incident quarterly, during CSC reporting logbook; preparation, to PMU visual construction and inspection worksite closure phases
Tree/ scrub Limited/ no tree/ scrub Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental clearance outside of clearance March to Project inspections at least specialist of the bird breeding August inclusive incident quarterly, during CSC reporting season (March to logbook; preparation, to PMU construction and
222 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
August inclusive) visual worksite closure where practical inspection phases
Pre-clearance site Surveys undertaken Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental surveys for sensitive before clearance; pre- inspections at least specialist of biodiversity clearance delayed clearance quarterly, during CSC reporting where sensitive survey preparation, to PMU biodiversity found documents construction and and Project worksite closure incident phases logbook; visual inspection
Total area of Natural Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental Habitat cleared pre- inspections at least specialist of clearance quarterly, during CSC reporting survey preparation, to PMU documents; construction and visual worksite closure inspection phases
Workforce educated Staff adherence to best Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental on preventing bush practice training inspections specialist of fires and this will not records; quarterly during CSC reporting be used as a review of preparation and to PMU clearance method Project construction phases incident logbook; visual inspections
223 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
Restoration of Topsoil and subsoils At all Project Inspections Unannounced Environmental temporarily disturbed removed and stored temporarily- inspections specialist of areas (borrow pits, separately disturbed quarterly during CSC reporting construction camps, areas preparation and to PMU laydown areas, etc.) construction phases
Physical restoration of At all Project Inspections Before the end of Environmental sites to their original temporarily- the worksite closure specialist of state disturbed phase CSC reporting areas to PMU
Successful progress of At all Project Surveys by Annually, in Environmental re-vegetation using re- specialist summer, from the specialist of locally collected/ grown vegetation sub- last year of the CSC reporting seeds/ plants, and sites contractor worksite closure to PMU need for any additional phase until the fifth re-vegetation year of the operations phase, inclusive
Degradation GIIP to minimize Implementation of GIIP Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental by dust/ impacts associated detailed in the training inspections specialist of pollution with dust and Construction records; quarterly during CSC reporting pollution (e.g. use of Management Plan review of preparation and to PMU drip trays, designated Project construction phases refueling areas with incident hardstanding) logbook; inspections
224 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
Nesting birds Construction Disturbance Pre-clearance site Surveys undertaken Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental surveys for nests of before clearance; Project inspections at least specialist of high priority species clearance delayed incident quarterly, during CSC reporting (e.g., bustards, birds where sensitive logbook; preparation, to PMU of prey) biodiversity found visual construction and inspection worksite closure phases
Location of Construction camps Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental construction camps located in modified pre- inspections at least specialist of Birds, Construction Mortality away from sensitive habitat clearance quarterly, during CSC reporting mammals, owing to areas surveys; preparation and to PMU reptiles hunting by visual construction construction inspection workers or their guard Biodiversity Adherence to best Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental dogs awareness training, practice detailed in the training inspections specialist of hunting ban Construction records; quarterly during CSC reporting Management Plan review of preparation and to PMU Project construction phases Number of hunting incident incidents (and logbook; associated inspection penalties/fines imposed)
Natural Construction Introduction/ GIIP to prevent Washing of vehicles, Transit site Review of Unannounced Environmental Habitat, birds, spread of accidental equipment and outside Project inspections at least specialist of mammals, invasive alien introduction supplies before entry to Project AoI incident quarterly during CSC reporting species Project area logbook; preparation, to PMU construction and
225 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
reptiles, visual worksite closure plants inspection phases
Identify and remove Abundance/spread of Project AoI Surveys by Annually, in summer Environmental any invasive alien invasive alien species specialist during preparation, specialist of species in Project in Project area sub- construction and CSC reporting area contractor worksite closure to PMU phases
Control of Project AoI Records of Quarterly, during Environmental new/spreading areas of invasive preparation, specialist of invasive alien species species construction and CSC reporting in Project area control; worksite closure to PMU visual phases inspection
Operations Induced Train and develop Training undertaken, Border posts Review of Unannounced Environmental increases in checklists and and improved practice training inspections annually specialist of hunting, toolkits for the border undertaken by border records, during construction CSC reporting collecting and police police border police and first ten years of to PMU disturbance inspection/ operations phase seizure records
Birds, Construction Direct Minimization of use Vegetation disturbance Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental mammals, mortality by of areas outside by Project vehicles and Project inspections at least specialist of reptiles crushing/ marked zones to be contractors; mortality of incident quarterly, during CSC reporting collision cleared priority bird and plants logbook; preparation, to PMU visual construction and inspection worksite closure phases
226 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
Restriction of Speed limits observed Project AoI Review of Unannounced CSC in construction vehicles Project inspections at least cooperation with to appropriate speed incident quarterly, during traffic police logbook; preparation, visual construction and inspection worksite closure phases
Pre-clearance site Surveys undertaken Project AoI Review of Unannounced Environmental surveys for sensitive before clearance; Project inspections at least specialist of biodiversity clearance delayed incident quarterly, during CSC reporting where sensitive logbook; preparation, to PMU biodiversity found visual construction and inspection worksite closure phases
Construction; In traditional crossing Crossing points Worksite Review of Unannounced CSC Operations areas for Goitered identified; embankment survey inspections at least Gazelle and Saiga, lowered to ≤ 1m in documents; quarterly, during lower the road those locations visual preparation, embankment to inspection construction and improve visibility and worksite closure crossing potential phases
Identify crossings of Crossing points Worksite Review of Unannounced threatened species; identified; culverts survey inspections at least install culverts where installed in regular documents; quarterly, during regular crossings crossing locations visual preparation, found inspection construction and worksite closure phases
227 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
Numbers of dead Length of Review of Annually, in summer Environmental animals by roadside Project road Project during construction specialist of incident and first ten years of CSC reporting logbook; operations phase to PMU, PMU surveys by specialist sub- contractor
Construction Attraction to Avoid water leakage Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental construction and formation of Project inspections at least specialist of areas, leading permanent surface incident quarterly, during CSC reporting to direct water; ensure no logbook; preparation, to PMU mortality from depressions in the visual construction and crushing/ roadbed which inspection worksite closure indirect accumulate rainwater phases mortality from road kill Avoid night-time Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental lights where Project inspections at least specialist of practical; if incident quarterly, during CSC reporting necessary, use logbook; preparation, to PMU directional, non-UV visual construction and lighting inspection worksite closure phases
Regularly collect and No significant waste Worksite Review of Unannounced Environmental haul waste to away from safely Project inspections at least specialist of government- fenced storage areas incident quarterly, during CSC reporting approved landfill logbook; preparation, to PMU locations. visual construction and Temporary barriers inspection will be used to
228 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
prevent wildlife from worksite closure accessing waste phases disposal areas and similar areas
Operations Install sign boards Sign boards installed Worksite Visual Unannounced CSC along the project inspection inspections at least road at 5km intervals quarterly, during to remind drivers not preparation, to throw garbage construction and worksite closure phases
Birds, Construction Habitat Restrict fencing to No fences away from Project AoI Visual Unannounced Environmental mammals, fragmentation work compounds and work compounds and inspection inspections at least specialist of reptiles associated areas associated areas quarterly, during CSC reporting preparation, to PMU construction and worksite closure phases
Operations In traditional crossing Crossing points Worksite Review of Unannounced CSC areas for Goitered identified; embankment survey inspections at least Gazelle and Saiga, lowered to ≤ 1m in documents; quarterly, during lower the road those locations visual preparation, embankment to inspection construction and improve visibility and worksite closure crossing potential phases
Presence of Saiga in Project AoI Interview- Every two years Environmental proximity to road based survey specialist of of key
229 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
Biodiversity Project Impact/Risk Mitigation What is to be Where will How will When will Who is phase monitored? monitoring monitoring monitoring take responsible for take place? take place? place? monitoring?
informants CSC reporting (reserve to PMU, PMU staff, hunters, etc.) by specialist sub- contractor
230 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
L. FRAMEWORK BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN
486. The Framework Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), which accompanies this report, is prepared based on the existing ecological conditions of project road and the project AoI in general as presented in the baseline chapter of this report. The key findings and recommendations from the biodiversity impact assessment were also considered. This EIA identified the potential risks and impacts to result from the project, including those relating to biodiversity, and appropriate mitigaion. A full Critical Habitat Assessment (Appendix E) identified the project area potentially to be Critical Habitat for the Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica), the only species identified to trigger Critical Habitat. The BAP is therefore predominantly focused on the risk and impacts to Saiga antelope from the project, and appropriate mitigation in accordance with the mitigation hierarchy. It also includes an action plan for implementation of the measures outlined, and a long-term monitoring plan. 487. The BAP is a set of adaptive measures to address the uncertainties in predicting and mitigating impacts on biodiversity. A big part of the uncertainties emanates from data gaps and this problem could persist even after the implementation of a long- term monitoring plan. With the assessment of impacts to biodiversity attributable to the project ranging from low to moderate, based on likelihood and consequence, this BAP has been designed commensurate mitigation measures. It is important that the BMEP is implemented before the start of construction to better define the baseline conditions and enable the contractor to adapt the mitigation measures and comply with the ADB and IFC requirements particularly when new findings arise. 488. The BAP is considered framework in recognition of the need to address the data gaps from the limited site assessment and biodiversity monitoring. The first version of the BAP will be issued by the SCR after the first-year implementation of the BMEP and before the Contractors are allowed to take possession of the work site. This will enable the biodiversity experts guide the contractors in the preparation of their respective site- specific EMPs. The BAP will undergo a series of regular updates through the course of the project implementation and even after 3 years of project completion when the road is already open for traffic. L.1 Biodiversity Indicators 489. The BAP provides indicators that will allow the contractors, ADB, and other stakeholders understand the changes in the critical habitat that are attributable to the project and provide basis to fine-tune the biodiversity conservation actions. These indicators will be updated and revised based on the initial implementation of the BMEP. The draft BMEP will allow the quantification and definition of impacts through surveys along strategic transect lines. L.2 Indicative Schedule Table 71: Indicative Schedule on the Implementation of Conservation Actions Action Description Schedule BMEP Implement the first year Completion 3rd Quarter 2020 biodiversity monitoring prior to construction BAP Develop and Implement BAP First draft 3rd quarter 2020 completed Review construction methods Review contractors plan Completed before the contractor take possession of the road Suggest locations of culverts to Based on the first year TBA depending on the findings serve as wildlife crossings biodiversity monitoring, identify and recommendations of the BMEP
231 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
wildlife crossing for reptiles and small mammals if needed Restrict access to haloxylon Habitat Protection Immediate and to be sustained forest throughout the project implementation Train all contractors on Contractors education to Mandatory to all workers and biodiversity protect the biodiversity in the staff as part of site induction. project area Refresher courses annually Biodiversity workshop with Conservation of biodiversity During pre-construction phase Jaslik and Karakalpakiya and part of social responsibility and annually resident of the Committee for Roads Training of Borders Guards on To address the indirect impact Annually during the project the Illegal Wildlife Trafficking of increase risk in illegal construction phase wildlife trafficking due to access improvement to the critical habitat from the road improvement L.3 Indicative Budget Table 72: Indicative Budget to Implement the Conservation Programs Action Cost Items Estimated Cost and Source BMEP Monitoring equipment, US$990,000; part of the CSC remuneration of the biodiversity budget as detailed in the specialists BMEP BAP Consultations US50,000 Review construction methods Desk review Remuneration of the biodiversity specialist as detailed in their ToR Suggest locations of culverts to Civil work cost To be determined based on the serve as wildlife crossings BMEP findings Restrict access to haloxylon Installation of sign boards US$5000 forest Monitoring Part of biodiversity ToR and responsibility of the Contractors Environment Officer Train all contractors on Workshop venue, materials US$50,000 part of EMP cost biodiversity Biodiversity workshop with Annual workshops in Jaslik, During pre-construction phase Jaslik and Karakalpakiya Karakalpakiya and annually, thereafter resident 50 participants/village per year US$22,500 @ $75 for materials and venue for 3 years Training of Borders Guards on Training on biodiversity, US$30,000 the Illegal Wildlife Trafficking 25 participants/year @ $200/day, for materials, venue, and resource persons from CITES and Interpol 2 day workshop Total 1,147,500
L.4 Responsibilities for BAP Implementation 490. The overall responsibility to implement and update the BAP is the Committee for Roads. The Committee for Roads will engage the services of the an international and a national biodiversity expert to carry-out the BMEP and the BAP. At the field-level, the
232 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
contractors with their respective environmental officers will implement the BAP as a sub-set of the environmental management plans that forms part of the bid documents. 491. The Committee for Roads is principally responsible for the implementation of the BAP and the preparation of the Management Plans. L.5 EMP, EMoP and BAP Implementation Costs 492. The estimated cost to implement the EMP is $760,800, environmental monitoring cost is estimated at $24,000, and the biodiversity conservations measures are $1,147,500. The details of the estimates are provided in Table 68, Table 69 and Table 72 for the EMP, EMoP and biodiversity conservation measures, respectively. L.6 Implementation Arrangements L.6.1 Institutional Arrangement 493. The SCR has established safeguard unit under the PMU, and recommended that this unit is reactivated to carry out the obligation of SCR to comply with environmental requirement of the Government of Uzbekistan and requirement of ADB. The unit was established in 2010 and as of the 2018 revision of this report has ceased to exist. The unit used to have one social development specialist responsible to oversee the implementation of social safeguards and one environment specialist (ES) responsible to oversee the implementation of environmental safeguards within the project. At the design stage, the ES of PMU environmental specialists will ensure that environmental protection is incorporated into the design. During bidding preparation, the ES will be responsible to ensure that all EMP requirements for contractor is included in the bidding document. 494. The PMU (Environment Specialist) responsibilities in respect of implementation of the EMP are as follows: • Ensure that all relevant EMP requirements (including environmental designs and mitigation measures) are duly incorporated into the project bidding documents. • Ensure the implementation of the BAP and the BMEP • Obtain necessary permits and/or clearance, as required, from SNPC and other relevant government agencies, ensuring that all necessary regulatory clearances are obtained before commencing any civil work on the project. • Ensure that contractors have access to the EMP and EIA report. • Ensure that contractors understand their responsibilities to mitigate environmental problems, including risk to biodiversity, associated with their construction activities and facilitate training of their staff in implementation of the EMP. • Approve the Site-Specific Environmental Management Plan (SEMP) before Contractor takes possession of construction site • Monitor the contractor’s implementation of the SEMP in accordance with the environmental monitoring plan. • Submit semi-annual Environmental Monitoring Reports to ADB. • In case unanticipated environmental impacts occur during the project implementation, prepare and implement as necessary an environmental emergency program in consultation with SNPC, any other relevant government agencies, and ADB. 495. The PMU will be supported by the construction supervision consultant’s environment specialist (ES) of CSC, who will be responsible for overseeing the construction and monitoring all works and activities undertaken by the Contractor(s) and ensuring compliance with the specification and contractual requirements. During construction, the contractors will ensure that mitigation measures are implemented and sustained throughout the construction period. In turn, environmental specialist(s) will be hired to join the construction supervision consultant team and to oversee and monitor the
233 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
implementation of all mitigating measures required by the EMP in accordance with ADB’s SPS, 2009, and the Government Uzbekistan Environmental Assessment Requirement. It is recommended, that SCR to invite the Nature Protection Committee to join field monitoring at least one time per year during the construction period. The responsibilities of the ES of CSC include: • ensure that the construction methods as proposed by the contractor for carrying out the works are satisfactory, with particular references to the technical requirements of sound environmental standards on the basis of ADB Environment Source Book and World Bank Group’s Environment, Health and Safety Guidelines,62 as referenced in ADB Safeguards Policy Statement; inspection of contractors’ contraction equipment , safety of the works, property, personal and general public and the recommendations of this EIA; • Review of the construction design to ensure compliance with project engineering design and the EMP about environmental protection and impact mitigation; • Supervise field work including collection of samples for environment assessment, assess environmental impacts directly caused by construction activities, and indirectly caused by the change in the traffic conditions; • Supervise the implementation of the environmental protection and impact mitigating measures by the contractors. The construction may only be ordered to start after the review is completed and ES of CSC is satisfied with the environmental arrangement • Supervise construction activities to ensure minimum impact on the natural and socioeconomic environment, • Regularly monitoring the performance of the Contractor(s) environment staff, verifying monitoring methodologies and results. In case the ES of CSC considers that the Contractor(s) environment staff fail to discharge duties or fail to comply with the contractual requirements, instruct the Contractor(s) to replace the their environment staff; • updating the EIA report, if necessary, of implementing this plan as part of project implementation project, and carry out environmental management seminars for contractors and SCR staff; • Prepare the necessary remedial actions for any unforeseen impacts, and • Instructing the Contractor(s) to take corrective actions within timeframe as determined by the ES of CSC. If there is breach of contract or strong public complaints on contractor environmental performance, the ES of CSC will order contractor to correct, change or stop the work and reporting to the relevant agencies and the EA; • Address complaint related with environmental aspect of the project through GRM; viii. Supervision of the Contractor(s) activities and ensuring that the requirements in the EMP and contract specifications are fully complied with; ix. Instructing the Contractor(s) to take actions to reduce impacts and follow the required EMP procedures in case of non-compliance / discrepancies identified; x. If the contractor discovers cultural relics by chance, the ES of CSC will order site protection and report to the relevant authorities and the EA; xi. Monitoring Contractor(s) performance to ensure that they cut trees in strict accordance with the pre- determined area, numbers, and species set out in the permits and comply with wildlife and plant protection requirements during construction; xii. Monitoring Contractor(s) compliance with the project grievance redress mechanism.
62 World Bank Group, 2007. Environmental, Health, and Safety General Guidelines. Washington, DC.
234 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
• At the end of the project, the consultant will carry out a detailed impact assessment, which will contribute to the preparation of the project completion report. 496. The Contractor should appoint a full time Environment Officer (EO) to be a senior member of the construction management team based on site for the duration of the contract. The ESO shall have a university degree (preferably at Masters level) in Environmental Science or related discipline and have at least 10 years work experience in environmental management of infrastructure projects with specialist expertise in ecology. Key responsibilities of the Contractor (through the ESO) are as follows: • Preparing the site-specific environmental management plan (SEMP) for approval by the Employer (PMU) prior to the Contractors taking possession of the construction site (see below) • Strictly implement the measures identified in the EMP; • Verify that all construction materials suppliers have valid operating licenses and any necessary environmental permits; • Ensuring the SEMP is implemented effectively throughout the construction period. • Coordinating community relations issues through acting as the Contractor’s community relations focal point (proactive community consultation, complaints investigation and grievance resolution) • Establishing and maintaining site records of: • weekly site inspections using checklists based on SEMP, • environmental accidents/incidents including resolution activities • environmental monitoring data, • Corrective action plans issued to the DSC in response to non-compliance notices. • Community relations activities including maintaining complaints register • Monitoring reports • Routine reporting of SEMP compliance and community liaison activities (see below). • Adhoc reporting to the Employer’s Engineer of environmental incidents/spillages including actions taken to resolve issues • In case of non-compliance or discrepancies with respect to EMP implementation, carry out investigation and submit proposals on mitigation measures, and implement remedial measures; • Adhere to grievance redress mechanism procedures. L.7 Resource Allocation 497. The SCR has experience in implementing EMP and undertaking monitoring. This Project is the 7th project financed by ADB. Therefore, SCR has capacity and adequate resource to support the implementation of EMP for this project. The environmental costs for the Project has been incorporated in the project costs, and will comprise the following: (i) costs to fund the study, consultation, and disclosure for updating of the EIA including EMP and Monitoring Plan after detailed design, (ii) costs to engage environmental consultants to work at the safeguard unit of SCR’s PMU, to work with CSC, and Contractor, (iii) costs to implement mitigation measures, including tree planting, and (iv) cost to fund the environmental monitoring and reporting. Table below summarizes the costs required for environmental mitigation measures and monitoring. Table 73: Environmental Costs for Mitigation and Monitoring Source No. Item Source 1 Engage environmental consultant for PMU PMU’s budget 2 Engage Environmental and biodiversity specialist CSC’s budget for CSC 3 Engage Environmental Officer for Contractor Contractor’s budget
235 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
No. Item Source 4 Costs Mitigation Measures (all mitigation related Contractor’s budget with construction works will be part of construction cost) 5 Planting and maintaining trees (compensatory for This costs will be incorporated in the the trees removed in the WIMS) contractor‘s budget 6 Implement the BMEP CSC’s Budget 7 Implement the BAP PMU’s Budget 6 Environmental Quality Monitoring Costs (including PMU‘s budget data sampling and analysis): (3 years during construction period, including cost for data sampling and analysis)
L.8 Reporting 498. After the loan approval, the SCR with submit an environmental monitoring reporting report detailing: • Recruitment status of the PMU-Environment Specialist • Recruitment status of the CSC-Environment Specialist, International Biodiversity Expert, National Biodiversity Expert • Procurement of equipment to implement the BMEP 499. No later than 3 months after the CSC/Engineer has been recruited, an environmental monitoring report will be provided to the SCR and the ADB on the following: • The need to update the EIA and EMP based on detailed engineer design • Status of BMEP implementation and preliminary biodiversity monitoring • Status of review and finalization of the BAP • incorporating the EMP concerns into detailed design, • incorporating environmental concerns into the bidding documents for supervision consultant and contractor, as well as the inclusion on environmental requirement into contract document for both supervision consultant and contractor, • update the EIA and EMP. 500. The implementation of the EMP, including the BAP have to be reported routinely in biannual basis after commencement of civil works. The report will include the implementation of EMP or SEMP, which described: (i) organizational set up to address environmental and biodiversity concerns by contractor and supervision consultant, (ii) obtaining all required permit related with environmental concerns associated with construction activities e.g. extraction of water, borrow pit, deviating route, etc; (iii) environmental and biodiversity impacts that occurred during the reporting period and how the mitigation measures have been implemented; (iv) any un-anticipated impacts that occurred during the reporting period and its mitigation measures; (v) any accident related with construction e.g. leakage, spillage of hazardous substance and other accident, and (vi) any complaint on environmental concerns file by affected people or by other parties.
M. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
501. This project will rehabilitate the 240-kilometer long section from km 964 to km 1,204 of the A380. This section from Kungrad to Daut-Ata, and referred to in this report as the Karalpakstan Road Project, is part of the about 638 km international highway in the Republic of Karalpakstan, more specifically in the Kungrad district of the Republic of Karakalpakstan. This project also involves the design supply, and installation of 3 weigh-in-motion systems.
236 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
502. Evaluation of the Anticipated Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Impacts: All site preparation works, excavation works, particularly at quarrying sites, will generate potential impacts that are mostly local, temporary, and reversible. Potential significant environmental impacts are typical to road construction which are loss of productive soil vegetation, and habitat, air pollution, generation of wastes, temporary disruption of utilities and shifting, noise and vibration, wildlife poaching, introduction of invasive species, improper management of borrow areas, inadequate clean-up operation, restoration and rehabilitation prior to decommissioning. Most of these issues are minor and mitigation measures are relatively easy to design and implement. Most of these impacts are expected to have minor significance and readily mitigated through Good International Industry Practice (GIIP). This includes the prohibition of workers on poaching and plant harvesting; minimize vegetation clearance and compensate cleared vegetation through replanting, waste management, camp site location away from sensitive areas, single vehicle track policies and prohibit off-road travel, limit travel speed, conduct pre-clearance survey to prevent animals from being killed or injured, limit fencing to work compounds, removal of non-native species, dust and noise controls, and coordination with local authorities against wildlife trafficking. 503. However, the project road including borrow pits and temporary facilities are located in and affects modified, and critical habitats. The project area of influence is habitat to the IUCN listed species; critically endangered are the Saiga antelope and Sociable Lapwing, and the endangered, Steppe Eagle, Saker Falcon, Pallas Fish-eagle and Egyptian Vulture. 504. The A380 poses significant impacts to the critically endangered Saiga and its Critical Habitat. Saiga numbers in Uzbekistan are currently extremely low. The habitat assessment concluded that the project area is potentially critical habitat for the Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica) while the priority natural habitat identified is an area of Haloxylon forest (5 km by 1 km in size) in close proximity to the road. Although the only critical habitat feature is the Saiga antelope, the Biodiversity Action Plan included mitigation to ensure No Net Loss (NNL) for all threatened species in the project area. The main Natural Habitat feature of higher biodiversity value in the vicinity of the project area is a 5 km by 1 km Haloxylon forest (Black Saxual), which is located to the north- east, between km 95 and km 99, of the project road, some 10 km north of the town of Jaslik. 505. The most significant risks and impact to Saiga antelope from the road will be as a result of injury or mortality from vehicular collision, induced poaching from the improved accessibility the road will bring, increased habitat fragmentation of their traditional migration corridor, and induced human development in the area. No clearance of Haloxylon forest is planned for construction, however risks will come from human disturbance, either by workers or road users. A package of mitigation measures has been proposed, in line with the mitigation hierarchy, to manage direct risks to the Saiga antelope, including a traffic management system that will include traffic calming measures and enforcement by the local police force. Additional measures have been proposed that will see the project support the Saigachy Reserve, home to the closest known population of Saiga to the road. Phase 1 will see the development of a Management Plan for the Reserve, whilst Phase 2 will include implementation of measures outlined in the Plan, including creation of a watering hole(s) and resourcing of anti-poaching measures. 506. To mitigate impacts on the Saiga Critical habitat, measures to help avoid direct Saiga mortality from traffic accidents will be taken. Saiga crossings with appropriate traffic management system and capacity building with local police should be included in the road design at three known historic saiga crossing points: Abadan N 43 42’: E 57 48’; Jaslyk N 43 58’ E 57 30’; and Bergakh N 44 18’; E 57 03’ and a fourth crossing point
237 Karakalpakstan Road A-380 Km. 964 to Km 1,204 Environmental Impact Assessment
as a reserve: N 44 31’; E 56 38’, details of which will be incorporated in the Biodiversity Action Plan. 507. The Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) encourage the growth of the Saigachy reserve population to achieve potential net gain for the critically endangered population. Proposed actions in the BAP also has the potential to incentivise the Saiga antelope to remain in the reserve, and away from the project area and road. Measures proposed include the creation of watering hole/s for the Saiga, which is a form of habitat restoration in response to the effective clearance of Critical Habitat for the Saiga. Additionally, this would mitigate potential indirect impacts on the Saiga, such as hunting as a result of facilitated access. Further support is proposed, to the management of the Saigachy reserve to encourage Saiga population growth in the reserve (e.g. via poaching prevention) as well as monitoring and evaluation of saiga populations in the broader project area, and support to efforts between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan to improve the permeability of the linear infrastructure currently impeding on the Saiga’s traditional migration corridor supported. 508. To mitigate the impact to the critical habitat a combination of the Contractor’s Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) and the Project’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) will be implemented. A Framework BAP (F-BAP) was developed for the Project and will be further refined into a detailed BAP as the project progresses in line with the principle of adaptive management. The BAP will include a range of commitments including, but not limited to, support to long-term conservation of saiga including through support to the management of the Saigachy Reserve. 509. To mitigate the typical impacts from road projects, site-specific EMPs will be prepared by the contractor subject to be reviewed and approved by the Committee for Roads before the commencement of construction. 510. The estimated cost to implement the EMP is $760,800, environmental monitoring is estimated at $24,000, and the biodiversity conservations measures are $1,147,500. 511. Meaningful consultations have been conducted during the project preparation stage and all concerns of the affected persons and stakeholders have been incorporated in the EIA and the EMPs. These consultations were represented by key environmental agencies, roadside communities, and non-government organizations. An integrated social and environmental Grievance Redress Mechanism has been formed to continue receiving feedback and complaints, if any, from affected parties and addressing them during the construction stage and operation stage. This EIA report is disclosed on the ADB and Committee for Roads websites. 512. The following recommendations are proposed based on the findings: • Environmental Provisions in Bid and Contract Documents. Specific environmental provisions are recommended for inclusion in the bid and contract documents including provisions related but not limited to: erosion control, air and water quality, and noise control, location of construction camps and other facilities (not in environmentally sensitive areas or close to settlements), borrow pit restoration, safety provisions, baseline and routine monitoring of air quality, and local communities relations. • Capacity Building for Environmental Management. Training program for selected staff and addressed to the goals and techniques of environmental management activities in road projects is recommended. • Preparation and implementation of the Contractor’s Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) and the Project’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).
238
APPENDIX A: SPECIES LIST
2
This is a complete species list of all species that may occur, or are known to occur, in the project area. It has been c0mpiled using the IBAT screening list, additional screening carried out by national experts as part of the EIA, and relevant species from the Uzbek Red Book.
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
Reptiles
EIA Central Asian tortoise Agrionemys horsfieldii (Gray, VU Screening 1844) EIA Caspian even-fingered Alsophylax pipiens (Pallas, LC Screening gecko [1814]) IBAT EIA Green toad Bufotes viridis (Laurenti, 1768) LC Screening EIA Comb-toed gecko Crossobamon eversmanni Screening (Wiegmann, 1834) IBAT EIA Saw-scaled viper Echis multisquamatus Cherlin, Screening 1981 EIA Steppe snake/ Steppe Elaphe dione (Pallas, 1773) Screening rattlenskae IBAT EIA Blotched snake Elaphe sauromates (Pallas, VU Screening [1814]) EIA Steppe racerunner Eremias arguta Pallas,1773 Screening EIA Reticulate racerunner Eremias grammica Screening (Lichtenstein, 1823) EIA Aralo-Caspian racerunner Eremias intermedia (Strauch, Screening 1976) IBAT EIA Striped racerunner Eremias lineolata Nikolsky, 1896 Screening EIA Sand racerunner Eremias scripta (Strauch, 1867) Screening EIA Rapid Lizard Eremias velox (Pallas, 1771) Screening EIA Desert sand boa Eryx miliaris (Pallas, 1773) Screening EIA Tatary sand boa Eryx tataricus (Lichtenstein, Screening 1823) EIA Halys' pit viper Gloydius halys (Pallas, 1776) Screening EIA Spotted whip snake Hemorrhois ravergieri Screening Menetries, 1832 EIA Transcaspian bent-toed Mediodactylus russowi (Strauch, Screening gecko 1887) EIA Spotted toad-headed agama Phrynocephalus guttatus Screening (Gmelin, 1789) EIA Sunwatcher toad-headed Phrynocephalus helioscopus Screening agama (Pallas,1771) IBAT EIA Rose-shouldered toad- Phrynocephalus interscapularis Screening headed agama Lichtenstein, 1856 EIA Frilled toad-headed agama Phrynocephalus mystaceus Screening (Pallas, 1776) EIA Ocellated toad-headed Phrynocephalus reticulatus LC Screening agama (Eichwald, 1831) EIA Spotted desert racer Platyceps karelinii Brandt, 1838 Screening
3
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Sand racer Psammophis lineolatus (Brandt, Screening 1838) EIA Diadem snake Spalerosophis diadema Screening (Schlegel, 1837) EIA Caspian bent-toed gecko Tenuidactylus caspius LC Screening (Eichwald,1831) IBAT EIA Turkestan Plate-tailed Teratoscincus scincus Screening Gecko (Schlegel, 1858) EIA Steppe Agama Trapelus sanguinolentus (Pallas, Screening 1814) Birds EIA Chukar / Asian Rock Alectoris chukar (J.E. Gray, Screening Partridge 1830) EIA Eurasian Wigeon Anas penelope Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Common Quail Coturnix coturnix (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Whooper Swan Cygnus cygnus (Linnaeus, NT Screening 1758) EIA Mute Swan Cygnus olor (J.F. Gmelin, 1789) VU:R Screening EIA Grey Partridge Perdix perdix (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Common Pheasant Phasianus colchicus Linnaeus, NT Screening 1758 EIA Common Shelduck Tadorna tadorna (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Common Linnet / European Acanthis cannabina (Linnaeus, Screening Linnet 1758) EIA Twite Acanthis flavirostris (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Shikra Accipiter badius (J.F. Gmelin, Screening 1788) IBAT Levant sparrowhawk Accipiter brevipes LC EIA Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Eurasian Sparrowhawk Accipiter nisus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Common Myna Acridotheres tristis (Linnaeus, Screening 1766) EIA Paddyfield Warbler Acrocephalus agricola (Jerdon, Screening 1845) IBAT EIA Great Reed-warbler Acrocephalus arundinaceus Screening (Linnaeus, 1758) EIA Blyth's Reed-warbler Acrocephalus dumetorum Blyth, Screening 1849 IBAT Moustached Warbler Acrocephalus melanopogon LC IBAT Sedge Warbler Acrocephalus melanopogon LC EIA Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Cinereous Vulture / Monk Aegypius monachus (Linnaeus, NT NT Screening Vulture 1766) EIA Eurasian Skylark Alauda arvensis Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Desert Lark Ammomanes deserti (M.H.C. Screening Lichtenstein, 1823)
4
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Northern Pintail Anas acuta Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Common Teal / Eurasian Anas crecca Linnaeus, 1758 Screening Teal EIA Mallard Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Garganey Anas querquedula Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Gadwall Anas strepera Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT IBAT Lesser White-fronted Goose Anser erythropus VU VU IBAT Demoiselle Crane Anthropoides virgo LC EIA Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Red-throated Pipit Anthus cervinus (Pallas, 1811) Screening EIA Tree Pipit Anthus trivialis (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Common Swift Apus apus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening IUCN EIA Alpine Swift Apus melba (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos (Linnaeus, LC VU:R Screening / 1758) IBAT EIA Greater Spotted Eagle Aquila clanga Pallas, 1811 VU VU:R Screening / IBAT EIA Eastern Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca Savigny, 1809 VU VU:D Screening IBAT EIA Steppe Eagle Aquila nipalensis Hodgson, EN NT Screening 1833 EIA Grey Heron / Common Ardea cinerea Linnaeus, 1758 Screening Heron EIA Purple Heron Ardea purpurea Linnaeus, 1766 Screening IBAT EIA Squacco Heron Ardeola ralloides (Scopoli, 1769) VU:D Screening EIA Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus (Pontoppidan, Screening 1763) EIA Long-eared Owl Asio otus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Little Owl Athene noctua (Scopoli, 1769) Screening IBAT EIA Common Pochard Aythya ferina (Linnaeus, 1758) VU Screening EIA Tufted Duck Aythya fuligula (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca (Güldenstädt, NT NT Screening 1770) EIA Bohemian Waxwing Bombycilla garrulus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT
5
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Eurasian Bittern / Great Botaurus stellaris (Linnaeus, Screening Bittern 1758) IBAT EIA Eurasian Eagle-owl Bubo bubo (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening IBAT EIA Trumpeter Finch Bucanetes githagineus (M.H.С. Screening Lichtenstein, 1823) EIA Mongolian Finch Bucanetes mongolicus Screening (Swinhoe, 1870) EIA Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Eurasian Stone-curlew / Burhinus oedicnemus Screening Eurasian Thick-knee (Linnaeus, 1758) IBAT EIA Rough-legged Buzzard Buteo lagopus (Pontoppidan, Screening 1763) IBAT EIA Long-legged Buzzard Buteo rufinus (Cretzschmar, Screening 1829) IBAT EIA Greater Short-toed Lark Calandrella brachydactyla Screening (Leisler, 1814) IBAT EIA Asian Short-toed Lark Calandrella cheleensis Screening (Swinhoe, 1871) EIA Lesser Short-toed Lark Calandrella rufescens (Vieillot, Screening 1819) EIA Sanderling Calidris alba (Pallas, 1764) Screening EIA Dunlin Calidris alpina (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea NT Screening / (Pontoppidan, 1763) IBAT EIA Little Stint Calidris minuta (Leisler, 1812) Screening EIA Egyptian Nightjar Caprimulgus aegyptius M.H.C. Screening Lichtenstein, 1823 EIA Eurasian Nightjar / Caprimulgus europaeus Screening European Nightjar Linnaeus, 1758 IBAT EIA Common Rosefinch Carpodacus erythrinus (Pallas, Screening 1770) EIA Kentish Plover Charadrius alexandrinus Screening Linnaeus, 1758 IBAT EIA Caspian Plover Charadrius asiaticus Pallas, Screening 1773 IBAT IBAT Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius LC EIA Common Ringed Plover Charadrius hiaticula Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Greater Sand Plover Charadrius leschenaultii Lesson, Screening 1826 IBAT EIA Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius (Pallas, CR VU:R Screening 1771) IBAT EIA Macqueen's Bustard/ Asian Chlamydotis macqueenii(J.E. VU VU:D Screening houbara Gray, 1832) IBAT
6
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybrida (Pallas, Screening 1811) EIA European Greenfinch Chloris chloris (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA White Stork / European Ciconia ciconia (Linnaeus, 1758) NT Screening White Stork EIA Short-toed Snake-eagle / Circaetus gallicus (J.F. Gmelin, VU:D Screening Short-toed Eagle 1788) IBAT EIA Western Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Northern Harrier / Hen Circus cyaneus (Linnaeus, Screening Harrier 1766) IBAT IBAT Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus NT EIA Rock Pigeon Columba livia J.F. Gmelin, 1789 Screening EIA European Roller Coracias garrulus Linnaeus, Screening 1758 IBAT IBAT Common Raven Corvus corax LC EIA Hooded Crow Corvus cornix [corone] Screening Linnaeus, 1758 EIA Rook Corvus frugilegus Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Eurasian Jackdaw Corvus monedula Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Oriental Carrion Crow Corvus orientalis [corone] Screening Eversmann, 1841 IBAT EIA Brown-necked Raven Corvus ruficollis Lesson, 1831 Screening IBAT EIA Common Cuckoo / Eurasian Cuculus canorus Linnaeus, Screening Cuckoo 1758 IBAT EIA Little Egret Egretta garzetta (Linnaeus, VU:D Screening 1766) EIA Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Ortolan Bunting Emberiza hortulana Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Pine Bunting Emberiza leucocephalos Screening [citrinella] S.G. Gmelin, 1771 EIA Horned Lark / Shore Lark Eremophila alpestris (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA European Robin Erithacus rubecula (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Rufous Scrub-robin Erythropygia galactotes Screening (Temminck, 1820) IBAT EIA Saker Falcon Falco cherrug J.E. Gray, 1834 EN NT Screening / IBAT EIA Merlin Falco columbarius Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Lesser Kestrel Falco naumanni Fleischer, 1818 NT Screening IBAT EIA Barbary Falcon Falco pelegrinoides Temminck, VU:R Screening 1829
7
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Eurasian Hobby / Northern Falco subbuteo Linnaeus, 1758 Screening Hobby EIA Common Kestrel Falco tinnunculus Linnaeus, Screening 1758 IBAT EIA Red-footed Falcon Falco vespertinus Linnaeus, NT Screening 1766 EIA Red-breasted Flycatcher Ficedula parva (Bechstein, Screening 1792) IBAT EIA Chaffinch / Common Fringilla coelebs Linnaeus, 1758 Screening Chaffinch EIA Brambling Fringilla montifringilla Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Common Coot / Eurasian Fulica atra Linnaeus, 1758 Screening Coot EIA Crested Lark Galerida cristata (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT Great Snipe Gallinago media NT EIA Gull-billed Tern Gelochelidon nilotica (J.F. Screening Gmelin, 1789) IBAT EIA Black-winged Pratincole Glareola nordmanni J.G. NT VU:R Screening Fischer, 1842 EIA Collared Pratincole Glareola pratincola (Linnaeus, Screening 1766) EIA Red-headed Bunting Granativora bruniceps (J.F. Screening Brandt, 1841) IBAT EIA Eurasian Griffon / Griffon Gyps fulvus (Hablizl, 1783) NT Screening Vulture EIA Eurasian Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus NT Screening Linnaeus, 1758 IBAT EIA White-tailed Sea-eagle / Haliaeetus albicilla (Linnaeus, VU:R Screening White-tailed Eagle 1758) EIA Pallas's Fish-eagle Haliaeetus leucoryphus (Pallas, EN EN Screening 1771) IBAT EIA Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus Screening (Linnaeus, 1758) IBAT IBAT Upcher's Warbler Hippolais languida LC EIA Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT EIA Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia (Pallas, Screening 1770) IBAT EIA Booted Warbler Iduna caligata (M.H.C. Screening Lichtenstein, 1823) IBAT EIA Sykes's Warbler Iduna rama (Sykes, 1832) Screening IBAT IBAT Common Little Bittern Ixobrychus minutus LC EIA Red-backed Shrike Lanius collurio Linnaeus,1758 Screening
8
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Steppe Grey Shrike / Desert Lanius lahtora [excubitor, Screening Shrike meridionalis] (Sykes, 1832) IBAT EIA Red-tailed Shrike / Lanius phoenicuroides Screening Turkestan Shrike / Rufous [isabellinus](Schalow, 1875) Shrike EIA Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans Pallas, 1811 Screening EIA Common Gull Larus canus Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Slender-billed Gull Larus genei Brème, 1840 Screening EIA Heuglin's Gull / Siberian Gull Larus heuglini Bree, 1876 Screening EIA Great Black-headed Gull / Larus ichthyaetus Pallas, 1773 VU:R Screening Pallas's Gull EIA Little Gull Larus minutus Pallas, 1776 Screening EIA Common Black-headed Gull Larus ridibundus Linnaeus, 1766 Screening IBAT Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa NT IBAT River Warbler Locustella fluviatilis LC EIA Thrush Nightingale / Luscinia luscinia (Linnaeus, Screening Sprosser 1758) EIA Bluethroat Luscinia svecica (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT Bimaculated Lark Melanocorypha bimaculata LC EIA Calandra Lark Melanocorypha calandra Screening (Linnaeus, 1766) EIA White-winged Lark Melanocorypha leucoptera Screening (Pallas, 1811) IBAT EIA Black Lark Melanocorypha yeltoniensis Screening (J.R. Forster, 1768) EIA Common Merganser / Mergus merganser Linnaeus, Screening Goosander 1758 EIA European Bee-eater Merops apiaster Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT EIA Blue-cheeked Bee-eater Merops persicus Pallas, 1773 Screening IBAT EIA Corn Bunting Miliaria calandra (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT Black Kite Milvus migrans LC EIA White Wagtail Motacilla alba Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT EIA Citrine Wagtail Motacilla citreola Pallas,1776 Screening EIA Black-headed Wagtail Motacilla feldegg Michahelles, Screening 1830 EIA Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Masked Wagtail Motacilla personata Gould, 1861 Screening EIA Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus EN VU Screening / (Linnaeus, 1758) IBAT EIA Red-crested Pochard Netta rufina (Pallas, 1773) Screening
9
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata (Linnaeus, NT Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca (Linnaeus, VU Screening 1758) EIA Black-сrowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Little Bunting Ocyris pusillus (Pallas, 1776) Screening EIA Desert Wheatear Oenanthe deserti (Temminck, Screening 1825) EIA Finsch’s Wheatear Oenanthe finschii (Heuglin, Screening 1869) EIA Isabelline Wheatear Oenanthe isabellina (Temminck, Screening 1829) IBAT EIA Northern Wheatear Oenanthe oenanthe (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Variable Wheater Oenanthe picata (Blyth, 1847) Screening EIA Pied Wheatear Oenanthe pleschanka Screening (Lepechin, 1770) EIA Eurasian Golden Oriole Oriolus oriolus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Great Bustard Otis tarda Linnaeus, 1758 VU CR Screening IBAT EIA White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala (Scopoli, EN EN Screening 1769) IBAT EIA Osprey Pandion haliaetus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Bearded Reedling / Bearded Panurus biarmicus (Linnaeus, Screening Tit 1758) IBAT EIA Turkestan Tit Parus bokharensis [major] Screening M.H.С. Lichtenstein, 1823 EIA Great Tit Parus major (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening IBAT EIA Saxaul Sparrow Passer ammodendri Gould, Screening 1872 EIA House Sparrow Passer domesticus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Spanish Sparrow Passer hispaniolensis Screening (Temminck, 1820) EIA Indian Sparrow Passer indicus [domesticus] Screening Jardine et Selby, 1831 EIA Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Rosy Starling Pastor roseus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening IBAT EIA Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus crispus Bruch, 1832 NT EN Screening IBAT EIA Great White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus Screening Linnaeus, 1758 EIA Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Red-necked Phalarope Phalaropus lobatus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758)
10
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus roseus Pallas, Screening 1811 EIA Common Chiffchaff , Phylloscopus collybita (Vieillot, Screening Siberian Chiffchaff (для 1817) tristis) EIA Greenish Warbler / Two- Phylloscopus trochiloides Screening barred Greenish Warbler (Sundevall, 1837) IBAT (для plumbeitarsus) EIA Willow Warbler Phylloscopus trochilus Screening (Linnaeus, 1758) IBAT IBAT Eurasian Magpie Pica pica EIA Eurasian Spoonbill Platalea leucorodia Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus (Linnaeus, Screening 1766) EIA Grey Plover / Black-belled Pluvialis squatarola (Linnaeus, Screening Plover 1758) EIA Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Black-necked Grebe / Eared Podiceps nigricollis C.L. Brehm, Screening Grebe 1831 EIA Turkestan Ground-jay / Podoces panderi J.G. Fischer, Screening Pander’s Ground-jay 1821 EIA Baillon's Crake Porzana pusilla (Pallas, 1776) Screening EIA Black-throated Accentor Prunella atrogularis (J.F. Brandt, Screening 1843) EIA Siberian Accentor Prunella montanella (Pallas, Screening 1776) EIA Pin-tailed Sandgrouse Pterocles alchata (Linnaeus, Screening 1766) IBAT EIA Black-bellied Sandgrouse Pterocles orientalis (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) IBAT EIA Eurasian Penduline-tit Remiz pendulinus (Linnaeus, Screening 1758) EIA Desert Finch Rhodospiza obsoleta (M.H.С. Screening Lichtenstein, 1823) EIA Pale Sand Martin / Pale Riparia diluta (Sharpe et Wyatt, Screening Martin 1893) EIA Collared Sand Martin / Bank Riparia riparia (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening Swallow IBAT EIA Pied Stonechat Saxicola caprata (Linnaeus, Screening 1766) EIA Siberian Stonechat / Eastern Saxicola maurus (Pallas, 1773) Screening Stonechat EIA Reed Bunting / Common Schoeniclus schoeniclus Screening Reed Bunting (Linnaeus, 1758) IBAT EIA Eurasian Woodcock Scolopax rusticola Linnaeus, Screening 1758 EIA Streaked Scrub Warbler Scotocerca inquieta Screening (Cretzschmar, 1830) EIA Eurasian Siskin Spinus spinus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening EIA Little Tern Sterna albifrons Pallas, 1764 Screening EIA Common Tern Sterna hirundo Linnaeus, 1758 Screening
11
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Eurasian Collared-dove Streptopelia decaocto Screening (Frivaldszky, 1838) IBAT Oriental Turtle-dove Streptopelia orientalis LC EIA Laughing Dove Streptopelia senegalensis Screening (Linnaeus, 1766) IBAT IBAT European Turtle-dove Streptopelia turtur VU VU EIA Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT Garden Warbler Sylvia borin LC EIA Common Whitethroat Sylvia communis Latham, 1787 Screening EIA Lesser Whitethroat, Small Sylvia curruca (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening Whitethroat / Desert IBAT Whitethroat (для minula) EIA Asian Desert Warbler Sylvia nana (Hemprich et Screening Ehrenberg, 1833) IBAT EIA Pallas’s Sandgrouse Syrrhaptes paradoxus (Pallas, Screening 1773) IBAT EIA Little Grebe / Dabchick Tachybaptus ruficollis (Pallas, Screening 1764) IBAT Ruddy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea LC EIA Little Bustard Tetrax tetrax (Linnaeus, 1758) NT Screening IBAT EIA Spotted Redshank Tringa erythropus (Pallas, 1764) Screening EIA Wood Sandpiper Tringa glareola Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Common Greenshank Tringa nebularia (Gunnerus, Screening 1767) EIA Green Sandpiper Tringa ochropus Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis (Bechstein, Screening 1803) EIA Common Redshank Tringa totanus (Linnaeus, 1758) Screening IBAT EIA Black-throated Thrush Turdus atrogularis Jarocki, 1819 Screening IBAT IBAT Redwing Turdus iliacus NT EIA Song Thrush Turdus philomelos C.L. Brehm, Screening 1831 EIA Fieldfare Turdus pilaris Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Common Hoopoe Upupa epops Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT EIA Long-tailed Rosefinch Uragus sibiricus (Pallas, 1773) Screening EIA White-tailed Lapwing Vanellochettusia leucura Screening (M.H.C. Lichtenstein, 1823) EIA Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellus (Linnaeus, NT Screening 1758) Mammals EIA Small five-toed Jerboa Allactaga elater Lichtenstein, Screening 1825 IBAT
12
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Great Jerboa Allactaga major Kerr, 1792 Screening IBAT EIA Severtzov's Jerboa Allactaga severtzovi Vinogradov, Screening 1925 IBAT EIA Siberian Jerboa Allactaga sibirica Forster, 1778 Screening IBAT EIA Bobrinski's Jerboa Allactodipus bobrinskii Screening Kolesnikov, 1937 EIA Golden or Indian Jackal Canis aureus Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Grey Wolf Canis lupus Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT EIA Caracal Caracal caracal Schreber, 1776 LC CR Screening IBAT EIA Migratory, Grey Hamster Cricetulus migratorius Pallas, Screening 1773 IBAT EIA Lesser White-toothed Crocidura suaveolens Pallas, Screening Shrew, Lesser Shrew 1811 IBAT EIA Piebald Shrew Diplomesodon pulchellum Screening Lichtenstein, 1823 IBAT EIA Hairy-footed Jerboa, Dipus sagitta Pallas, 1773 Screening Northern three-toed Jerboa EIA Mole Vole Ellobius talpinus Pallas, 1770 Screening IBAT EIA Botta’s serotine Eptesicus bottae Peters, 1869 Screening IBAT EIA Serotine Bat Eptesicus serotinus Schreber, Screening 1774 EIA Wild Ass, Kulan Equus hemionus Pallas, 1775 NT CR Screening EIA Lichtensttein's Jerboa Eremodipus lichtensteini Screening Vinogradov, 1927 EIA Jungle Cat Felis chaus Guldenstaedt, 1776 Screening EIA Steppe Cat (African wildcat) Felis libyca Forster, 1780 Screening EIA Manul, Palas’s Cat Felis manul Pallas, 1776 NT Screening EIA Sand Cat Felis margarita Loche, 1858 Screening IBAT Wildcat Felis silvestris LC EIA Goitered Gazelle Gazella subgutturosa VU VU Screening Guldenstaedt, 1780 IBAT EIA Long-eared Hedgehog Hemiechinus auritus Gmelin, Screening 1770 IBAT EIA Brandt’s Hedgehog Hemiechinus hypomelas Brandt, Screening 1836 EIA Striped Hyena Hyaena hyaena Linnaeus, 1758 NT CR Screening EIA Savi's Pipistrelle Hypsugo savii Bonaparte, 1837 Screening
13
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Indian Crested Porcupine Hystrix indica Kerr, 1792 Screening EIA Turkmen Jerboa Jaculus turcmenicus Vinogradov Screening et Bondar, 1949 EIA Tolai Hare Lepus tolai Pallas, 1778 Screening IBAT IBAT Asian Badger Meles leucurus LC EIA Badger Meles meles Linnaeus, 1758 Screening EIA Honey Badger Mellivora capensis Schreber, LC CR Screening 1776 EIA Libyan Jird (Gerbil) Meriones libycus Lichtenstein, Screening 1823 IBAT EIA Midday Jird (Gerbil) Meriones meridianus Pallas, Screening 1773 IBAT EIA Tamarisk Jird (Gerbil) Meriones tamariscinus Pallas, Screening 1773 IBAT EIA House Mouse Mus musculus Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT EIA Steppe or Asiatic Polecat Mustela eversmanni Lesson, Screening 1827 IBAT EIA Weasel Mustela nivalis Linnaeus, 1766 Screening IBAT EIA Lesser Mouse-eared Bat Myotis blythi Tomes, 1857 Screening EIA Whiskered Bat Myotis mystacinus Kuhl, 1817 Screening IBAT Nepal Myotis (bat) Myotis nipalensis LC EIA Short-tailed Bandicoot Rat Nesokia indica Gray et Screening Hardwicke, 1830 EIA Noctule Bat Nyctalus noctula Schreber,1774 Screening EIA Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Linnaeus, Screening 1766 EIA Hemprich's Long-eared Bat Otonycteris hemprichi Peters, Screening 1859 EIA Transcaspian (Ustyurt) Urial Ovis vignei arcal or Ovis VU CR Screening (Subspecies of Mouflon) orientalis vignei Eversmann, IBAT 1850 or EIA Common Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus Schreber, Screening 1774 EIA Long-eared Bat Plecotus austriacus Fischer, Screening 1829 EIA Lesser fat-tailed Jerboa Pygerethmus platyurus Screening Lichtenstein, 1823 IBAT EIA Lesser five-toed Jerboa Pygerethmus pumilio Kerr, 1792 Screening IBAT EIA Brown or Norway Rat Rattus norvegicus Berkenhout, Screening 1769 EIA Buchara Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus bocharicus Screening Kastschenko et Akimov, 1917 EIA Greater Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum Screening Schreber, 1774
14
Data Source Common name Latin name IUCN Red List status status
EIA Great Gerbil Rhombomys opimus Screening Lichtenstein, 1823 IBAT EIA Saiga Antilope, or Saiga Saiga tatarica Linnaeus, 1758 CR CR Screening IBAT EIA Long-clawed Ground Spermophilopsis leptodactylus Screening Squirrel Lichtenstein, 1823 EIA Yellow Ground Squirrel Spermophilus fulvus LC Screening Lichtenstein, 1823 IBAT EIA Pygmy Souslik Spermophilus pygmaeus Pallas, Screening 1778 EIA Thick-tailed three-toed Stylodipus telum Lichtenstein, Screening Jerboa 1823 IBAT EIA Wild boar, Eurasian Wild Pig Sus scrofa Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT IBAT Particoloured Bat Vespertilio murinus LC EIA Marbled Polecat Vormela peregusna VU VU Screening Guldenstaedt, 1770 IBAT EIA Corsac Fox Vulpes corsac Linnaeus, 1768 Screening IBAT EIA Fox, Red Fox Vulpes vulpes Linnaeus, 1758 Screening IBAT Plants IBAT Mediterranean Aegilops Aegilops biuncialis LC IBAT Persian Goat Grass Aegilops crassa LC IBAT Jointed Goat Grass Aegilops cylindrica LC IBAT none Aegilops juvenalis DD IBAT none Aegilops kotschyi LC IBAT Rough-spike Hard Grass Aegilops tauschii LC IBAT Jointed Goat Grass? Aegilops triuncialis LC IBAT none Aegilops vavilovi LC IBAT Alfalfa Medicago sativa LC
15
APPENDIX B: SAIGA TECHNICAL NOTE
16
Figure B.1: Saiga antelope The antelope has two subspecies, the nominate subspecies Saiga tatarica tatarica in Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan and the Mongolian saiga Saiga tatarica mongolica in Mongolia (Kholodova et al., 2006). Both sub-species are considered highly important in maintaining the balance in the ecosystems in which they are found, and population levels are considered indicative of the health of the ecosystems. The nominate subspecies has 4 major subpopulations which historically migrated hundreds of kilometres every year in vast herds across the semiarid landscapes to escape seasonal changes in climatic conditions and forage availability (Bekenov et al., 1998; Milner-Gulland et al., 2003, Singh et al, 2010a). One of the subpopulations is found on the Ustyurt Plateau, traditionally moving between winter pastures in northern Uzbekistan and summer pastures in the northern part of the Kyzylkum desert (in Kazakhstan). Animals have typically arrived in Uzbekistan between late September and early November, leaving again in May after the young are born to head north to Kazakhstan. The traditional main winter range for the Ustyurt saiga (which covers some 200,000km2) includes the project corridor. Figure B.2: Saiga antelope migration patterns
Globally, saiga populations have drastically declined since the fall of the Soviet Union, falling by over 95% (Milner-Gulland et al., 2003) as a result of a combination of habitat fragmentation, development of industrial infrastructure, and poaching for horns and meat. The pressure on the species leading to it being listed by the IUCN Red List as critically endangered (CR). Recent aerial surveys in Kazakhstan however suggest population numbers might be recovering. Annual surveys conducted by the Association for the Conservation of the Biodiversity of Kazakhstan (ACBK) have revealed increases across all three Kazakhstan sites in recent years. Estimates suggest global numbers having increased from 152,600 to 334,400, with the Ustyurt population enjoying a particularly strong resurgence, rising almost 130% to 5,900 between 2017 and 2019.
17
Figure B.3: Saiga population development, Kazakhstan, 1990 - 2019
Declines to the Ustyurt population since the turn of the Century have been as a result of pressures from heavy poaching and the construction of linear infrastructure (including a border fence between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan and a railway running parallel to the border), which has impeded traditional migration routes. However, it is thought possible that should the population grow to a sufficient density, the saiga might cross the railway in the future. The vast majority of the Ustyurt population is now restricted to the Kazakh side of the border1 and local experts2 believe that the Uzbekistan population may be as few as several hundred individuals, mostly on Vozrozhdeniye Island (even this population is threatened by a land bridge that has recently appeared given the drying up of the Aral Sea). Indeed, during the site visits rangers from the Saigachy Reserve (see below) estimated that only around a single small herd (possibly as low as 15) had been recorded there in the last 12 months. Areas traditionally used by the Ustyurt population are now bounded on all sides including:
• rail and highway corridors to the north and west (although data shows the saiga are still able at present to cross the railway running north to south on the western side of the Ustyurt plateau, possibly due to relatively low volumes of train traffic), • a 215km border fence along an approximately NE-SW alignment (which has had mitigation applied to allow for easier crossing for the saiga), and • an approximately 400km long fence aligned North-South (hasn’t had any mitigation applied to it) • the Aral Sea to the east
1 According to the results of aerial surveys in 2019, the Ustyurt saiga population on the Kazakh side of the border is approximately 5,900 individuals (Kazakhstan Biodiversity Conservation Association (ACBK) 2 Elena Bykova and Sacha Aleksandr (Saiga Conservation Alliance) and Rinat Musaev (Saigachy Reserve), pers comms December 2019
18
Figure B.4: Project Road and surrounding boundaries (approximates)
Key Project Road (A380) Railways Uzbek – Kazakh Border Saigachy Reserve
Within the project area, land to both the south west and north east of the A380 has traditionally been used by Saiga but there have been no recent records of saiga to the south west and the last attempted crossing of the A380 of a large aggregation of saiga (approximately 1,000), was in 20043 (Elena Bykova pers comm December 2019). Figure B.5 below shows historical saiga sightings (2006 – 2012) which highlights the saiga’s ability to cross the existing A380 and Kungrad-Beineu railway to its west. Discussions with local residents and national experts indicate that no saiga have been sighted near the project road in the past 5 years even at the northern most section near the border. This lack of sightings is thought to be directly associated with the linear infrastructure north of the Saigachy Reserve (closing of border fence in 2012 and Shalkar-Beyneu railway). However, recent modifications to the border fence are believed to have made it more porous for the saiga. Figure 6 below shows satellite tracking of the saiga prior to the operation of the Shalkar-Beineu railway, showing evidence of successful crossing of the border fence. Figure B.5: Saiga sightings (red dots) and the Project Road, 2006 - 2012
3 Last attempted crossing of the A380, in 2004, at: Abadan N 43 2’: E ’
19
In recent years, the closest known saiga to the existing road have been recorded within the Saigachy Reserve, which is located some 22 km away from the road alignment. This 628,000 ha Reserve was gazetted in 1991 by the State Committee of Karakalpakstan primarily to help safeguard and restore the local population of the Ustyurt saiga antelope and their breeding (birthing) places. Originally designated as a temporary reserve for 10 years (renewed in 2001 and 2011) the Reserve has since been re-designated and expanded and is now divided into 6 strictly protected zones and a buffer area. Whilst the project road does not encroach on either the strictly protected zone or the buffer area of the Reserve, it does run at least 22km from the south west border. There are presently 13 people responsible for the management of Saigachy Reserve, constituting 10 rangers and 3 administrative staff. Resources of the reserve include 4 cars and a field base, and the rangers carry out daily monitoring for poachers and species identification. According to consultation with Saigachy Reserve staff in December 2019, recent monitoring suggests there is 1 remaining herd of saiga in the reserve of approximately 15 individuals. Threats to the Ustyurt saiga Habitat fragmentation The Ustyurt plateau, and surrounding region, is undergoing increasing industrialisation and expanding natural gas development (in Uzbekistan) and infrastructural intensification (in Kazakhstan) has increasingly fragmented local habitats (Bull, 2016; Olsen, 2012). Given that Saiga react strongly to disturbance and will typically avoid areas of human activity these developments are restricting saiga access to key areas during both migration and calving and is affecting calving ground selection (Singh et al., 2010). Figure B.6: TRACECA routes including routes (dashed yellow) that bisect saiga range (http://www.traceca-org.org/en/routes/)
20
The Shalkar-Beyneu railway that runs parallel with the border fence, on the Kazakh side, experiences high volumes of rail traffic and is proving to essentially form a total barrier to the southerly migration of the Ustyurt population. A further railway is said to be planned for construction in the area. Figure 5 below shows satellite data of movement of the Kazakh sub- population of the Ustyurt saiga population to the north of the Shalkar-Beyneu railway. Figure B.7: Satellite tracked saiga at the Shalkar-Beyneu railway (red line)
Running closely parallel to the western side of the A380 is the Kungrad-Beineu railway. A single-track railway that passes through the towns of Jaslik and Karakalpakiya. This railway experiences low volumes of rail traffic (confirmed during on site in December 2019) and Saiga have been reported crossing these railway tracks in the past. However, accounts suggest that the Saiga remain wary of the structure and cross only after congregating until something triggers them to cross. Border crossing fence between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. In 2006, as part of efforts to reduce regional drug smuggling, Kazakhstan built a barbed-wire fence along the border with Uzbekistan and they subsequently upgraded this in 2012 to create an extensive border fence which now runs for some 215km in a NE-SW alignment and a further 400km in a North-South alignment (Olsen, 2012). The fence has generally limited Ustyurt saiga access to winter habitat in Uzbekistan as they have found it difficult to pass through. Existing mitigation measures have been applied to the fence to open it up for the Saiga, including openings in the fence every kilometre and a section of 11km without a lower strand of barbed wire. Mitigation was targeted at the known saiga crossing point between the two countries, prior to the drop-off in 2010. The assumption is this mitigation will allow easier crossing for the Saiga however the total barrier the Shalkar-Beineu railway to the north has formed means its effectiveness has not been completely tested. However Figure 8 shows that prior to the railway to the north and even prior to the latest mitigation to the fence, crossing of the border fence by the Saiga was possible.
21
Saiga that attempt to pass through the fence do still face a number of challenges, and even walking along the fence looking for a suitable crossing point uses additional energy and can weaken animals. Whilst crossing between remaining barbed wire strands a Saiga is also likely to snag hair and leave bare skin that is exposed directly to extremely cold temperatures, and the animals can become entangled and die or be seriously injured in looser wires. Animals unable to cross may starve lose body condition when overwintering in less than optimal conditions and the fence can be used to trap saiga by predators or poachers.
Figure B.8: Movement of saiga across the Uzbekistan – Kazakhstan border between 2011
and 2013
Poaching Poaching of saiga antelopes, typically for horns but also meat, is reported to be a key reason for the decline in saiga population numbers and senior officials within the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan report it as both a significant issue and one that is difficult to keep on top of. A high demand for saiga horns has been responded to especially given the context of a general economic downturn, growth of unemployment and a practically complete absence of control all encourage poaching. Illegal hunting is largely reported in winter during the saiga migration. In the warm period, hunters usually switch to other species and collect old saiga horns. On Vozrozhdeniye Island, because the Aral Sea has all but dried up, a land corridor to the saigas’ home has opened up and people are now freely entering the area to hunt the saigas. Poaching is also believed to potentially negatively impact saiga reproduction. Targeting from poachers of male saiga for their horns can lead to a distortion in the sex ratio in the herd which is thought to result in drastic decline in the number of pregnancies (Milner-Gulland., 2003). Disease Mass mortality events caused by severe winter weather are regularly observed amongst saiga antelope (Milner-Gulland et al., 2000).
22
In May 2015, a mass die-off of approximately 200,000 saiga occurred in central Kazakhstan to the Betpak-dala Saiga population, attributable to hemorrhagic septicemia associated with the bacterium Pasteurella multocida serotype B4. Environmental triggers associated with local weather conditions (specifically air moisture and temperature) during the 10-day period running up to the event, are considered to have been critical to the proliferation of latent bacteria. These conditions appear similar to those accompanying historically similar die-offs in the same area (Fereidouni et al., 2019) such as those in Kazakhstan in 1955, 1956, 1958, 1967, 1969 and 1974, 1981, 1984, 1988, 2010 and 2011 (B. Bekenov et al., 2015). Importantly, however, Saiga populations seem to have been able to recover rapidly from such die-offs (see section on population dynamics) when other conditions are favourable. Climate change Mean temperature has trended upwards at the Jaslyk meteorological station since 1977 and data from other meteorological stations on the Ustyurt plateau indicate that there are representative of the plateau as a whole, and in line with IPCC data for Central Asia (Meehl et al., 2007) and across Uzbekistan (Lioubimtseva & Cole, 2006; Ackura et al., 2008). The rises in annual mean temperature have been accompanied by an increase in mean winter temperature and given that the annual saiga migration south is, in part, triggered by temperature and snow depth (Esipov et al., 2009) any upward trend in winter temperature could influence how far south into Uzbekistan the species will migrate. Saiga Population Dynamics The Saiga antelope is considered a robust species able to withstand high levels of exploitation and is adapted to cope with large, unpredictable variations in climatic conditions by having the ability to recover rapidly from episodes of mass mortality.5 However, the Saiga is also susceptible to over-exploitation in a number of ways and Saiga populations have fluctuated dramatically since the start of the 20th Century, principally as a result of hunting for meat and horns, and climatic variability. The 4 populations of the Saiga tatarica subspecies (Kalymykia, Ural, Betpak-dala and Ustyurt) experienced a significant decline in population at the turn of the 21st Century mainly due to poaching pressure.6 The horns are borne only by males and are used in traditional Chinese medicine. Targeting of male saiga by poachers for these horns, and their extra meat, is reported to lead to a distortion in the sex ratio of the herd that can also bring about drastic declines in conception rates and population figures. However, aerials surveys by the ACBK indicate that since 2017 population numbers for the Saiga tatarica are showing signs of recovery, with global population growth from 152,600 to 334,400. The Ustyurt population has enjoyed a strong resurgence, increasing in size by almost 130% to 5,900 between 2017 and 2019. In May 2015 the Betpak-dala population was hit with the catastrophic mass die-off (caused by bacterial infection) which saw at least 200,000 individuals die (90% of the population), leaving the Betpak-dala population of saiga at 36,200. Data from the recent surveys show this sub- population in 2019 is up to approximately 109,000, an increase of 201% in four years. The Ural sub-population also experienced a mass die-off of 12,000 individuals in 2010 but appears now to be making a strong recovery.
4 https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/1/eaao2314 5 E.J. Milner-Gulland, A Population Model for the Management of the Saiga Antelope, 1994 6 E.J. Milner-Gulland, Dramatic declines in saiga antelope populations, 2001
23
The results of the annual aerial surveys show continued growth at a high rate for all saiga sub- populations in Kazakhstan: Table B.1: Saiga numbers in different Kazakh sub-populations
Kazakh sub-population 2019 population Increase from 2018 Ural ~217,000 60.7% Betpak-dala ~109,000 42.7%
Ustyurt ~5,900 59.5%
Figure 9: Ustyurt saiga population trends, 2011 - 2019
Future Population Growth Projecting population growth for this critically endangered species is challenging. However, considering the robustness of the saiga antelope and its ability to recover from population setback at significant rates, impact assessment and mitigation recommendations must forecast potential growth in numbers of the Ustyurt population. As recent evidence suggests, the Saiga antelope is capable of significant annual growth under the right conditions, although is susceptible to catastrophic mass die-offs with some regularity. To forecast a population number for the project an upper and lower limit of possible population growth has been calculated using existing survey data from the ACBK’s aerial surveys of saiga populations in Kazakhstan. An upper limit of 49% annual population increase was calculated. This was based on population data from 2015 to 2019, which on average has seen the Ustyurt population grow 49% each year. When compared with historical data this percentage appears higher than average, and is considered the upper limit as it, crudely, seems to present possible growth under favourable conditions.
24
A lower limit of 7% was set. A study titled “An individual-based model of the dynamics of the North-West pre-Caspian saiga population”7 created 3 different models of saiga population growth and included the impact of both poaching and unfavourable climate variability in the 3rd model, which had the lowest growth rate (7%). Although this is a different Saiga population the types of threats are similar to those faced by the Ustyurt population and when compared with historical data appears lower than average for annual growth for the Ustyurt saiga. A median average across the upper and lower limit is 27% for potential growth of the Ustyurt saiga population. Figure B.10: Projected potential population growth of the Uzbekistan saiga population across the project life span, based on growth forecasts above. Population size presented on a logarithmic (base 10) scale. Uzbekistan saiga population growth forecast 1000000.00
100000.00
10000.00
1000.00
100.00
10.00
1.00
2031 2038
2030 2037 2024 2044
2029 2036 2023 2043
2022 2028 2042 2035
2027 2021 2034 2041
2025 2032 2039 2020 2026 2033 2040
Lower Mean Upper
Table B.2 Estimated Saiga population after 25 years
Forecast Estimated Projected Uzbek Saiga Population (Individuals) Upper Limit 320,440 Mean 5,904 Lower Limit 81
Figure B.11: Potential growth to the whole Ustyurt population based on the same forecasts over a 10-year period. Shows the 1992 population, the highest in the last four decades.
7 Rodnikova et al. 2018
25
Recent Saiga engagement with the A380 The Saiga is known to have most recently tried to cross the road in a significant congregation (~1000 individuals) in 2004 at Abadan. The most recent saiga crossing points identified along the A380 are:
1. Abadan N 43 42’: E 57 48’ 2. Jaslyk N 43 58’ E 57 30’; 3. Bergakh N 44 18’; E 57 03’
Figure B.12: Attempted saiga crossing points along A380 (Google Earth)
26
Figure B.13: Footprints from attempted saiga crossing, December 2004, Abadan
27
APPENDIX C: IBAT SCREENING RESULTS
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
APPENDIX D: SUDOCHIE LAKE IBA DESIGNATION
46
The Lake has been designated as an IBA under the following criteria:
• A1 (Globally threatened species - 6 passage species and 1 breeding species - saker falcon) • A3 (Biome-restricted species) • A4i (congregations of ≥1% of the global population of one or more species on a regular basis). • A4iii (general waterbird congregations) Key “notable” trigger species for the designation are outlined in the tables below, with IUCN Least Concern Category A4 trigger species highlighted in the table in the Appendices.
Table D.1: Trigger Species for criteria A1 (Globally threatened species)
IUCN Year(s) of Population IBA Species Season Red List estimate estimate Trigger White-headed Duck Oxyura EN passage 1999-2008 1-4,000 adults A1, A4i
leucocephala
Ferruginous Duck Aythya nyroca NT passage 1999-2005 1-204 adults A1 Dalmatian Pelican Pelecanus NT passage 1999-2002 20-434 adults A1, A4i
crispus Slender-billed Curlew Numenius CR passage 2000-2001 1-4 adults A1
tenuirostris Asian Dowitcher Limnodromus NT passage 2000-2002 1-10 adults A1, A4i
semipalmatus Greater Spotted Eagle Clanga VU passage 2000-2002 2-5 adults A1
clanga
Saker Falcon Falco cherrug EN breeding 1999-2002 1-6 adults A1
Table D.2: Triggers for category A3 (Biome-restricted species) as shown below:
Species IUCN Season Year(s) of Population IBA Red List estimate estimate Trigger Egyptian Nightjar Caprimulgus LC breeding 2000-2002 1 adults A3
aegyptius Houbara bustard Chlamydotis VU breeding 2000-2002 1-2 adults A3 undulata Greater Sandplover Charadrius LC breeding 2000-2002 common A3
leschenaultii Caspian Plover Charadrius LC breeding 2000-2002 common A3
asiaticus
Sykes's Warbler Iduna rama LC breeding 2000-2002 1-14 adults A3 Asian desert warbler Sylvia nana LC breeding 2000-2002 1-2 adults A3 Desert Finch Rhodospiza LC breeding 2000-2002 4 adults A3
obsoleta
1. In addition to the above a GEF-World Bank project on “Ecological monitoring of Sudochie lake” ran from autumn 1999 for 3 years and collected a great deal of material on the area. Habitats recorded included large shallow lakes, channels, extensive reedbeds, saline soils, stands of saxaul and the cliffs of the Ustyurt plateau. Typical biomes included desert and
47 semi desert, saline soils, freshwater and brackish lakes, marshes, and reed and bush thickets. The neighboring Ustyurt plateau was reported as supporting both breeding birds of prey and many mammals, including the Endangered Saiga.
48
APPENDIX E: CRITICAL HABITAT ASSESSMENT
49
Definition of Critical Habitat
Critical Habitat (CH) is considered to be the most significant and highest priority areas of the planet for biodiversity conservation. It takes into account both global and national priority setting systems and builds on the conservation biology principles of 'vulnerability' (degree of threat) and 'irreplaceability' (rarity or uniqueness). The ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) (2009) states that CH is a subset of both natural and modified habitat that deserves particular attention, and includes areas with high biodiversity value, including: i) habitat required for the survival of critically endangered or endangered species; ii) areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range species; iii) sites that are critical for the survival of migratory species; iv) areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of congregatory species; v) areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated with key evolutionary processes or provide key ecosystem services; vi) areas having biodiversity of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities;
The SPS also states that CH includes those areas: vii) either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet the criteria of the World Conservation Union classification, the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world natural heritage sites.
In areas of critical habitat, the ABD SPS states that no project activity will be implemented unless the following requirements are met: 1. There are no measurable adverse impacts, or likelihood of such, on the critical habitat which could impair its high biodiversity value or the ability to function. 2. The project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the population of any recognized endangered or critically endangered species or a loss in area of the habitat concerned such that the persistence of a viable and representative host ecosystem be compromised. 3. Any lesser impacts are mitigated in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined for Natural Habitat8.
Where a project could have significant adverse impacts to critical habitats, it should only go ahead if appropriate mitigation measures are put in place, in accordance with the mitigation hierarchy, to ensure no net loss of biodiversity over the project’s lifespan. The SPS states that, compensatory measures, such as biodiversity offsets, should only be used as a last resort, and should achieve no net loss or a net gain of the affected biodiversity.
8 Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve at least no net loss of biodiversity. They may include a combination of actions, such as post-project restoration of habitats, offset of losses through the creation or effective conservation of ecologically comparable areas that are managed for biodiversity while respecting the ongoing use of such biodiversity by Indigenous Peoples or traditional communities, and compensation to direct users of biodiversity.
50
CH should always be considered when evaluating a project. Its presence does not, however, prevent a project from going ahead per se but it is an important process to raise warning flags and implement appropriate mitigation to ensure no significant residual impacts. 1. The Critical Habitat Assessment Process
Critical Habitat Assessment (CHA) is a process to identify those areas of highest biodiversity value which are considered particularly sensitive to impacts and where special attention must be paid. The project type, impacts and proposed mitigation are not considered relevant in the identification of CHA and both natural and modified habitats may contain areas that could qualify as CH.
The following process is the process followed for this Project and is based on the IFC GN6. It is assumed that prior to this process being followed some biodiversity screening will have been undertaken to determine biodiversity present in the project area.
1. Determine potential trigger features for which the analysis is to be undertaken (see Table below). 2. Define the Project Area of Influence (AoI) - Impact and risk assessment, including critical habitat assessment, will be analysed in the context of the project’s AoI. The AoI should be set based on the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the project. 3. Screening for biodiversity features potentially qualifying as Critical Habitat from those shown to be actually, or potentially, present during initial screening. 4. Undertake stakeholder consultation and desktop review of available data (including that obtained during initial screening) to understand the biodiversity within the landscape from the perspective of all relevant stakeholders. 5. Define Ecologically Appropriate Areas of Analysis (EcAoA) - The project should identify an ecologically appropriate area of analysis (EcAoA) to determine the presence of critical habitat for each species with regular occurrence in the project’s AoI, or ecosystem. The extent of this area will depend on the biodiversity features of interest and the ecological functions required to maintain them. Different triggers may require different areas of analysis. 6. Verify available information within the area, to the extent practical, including by in-field data collection and via engagement of qualified specialists. 7. Determining Critical Habitat status for each species and ecosystem that’s EcAoA could potentially be impacted by the project AoI, through assessment of biodiversity features against thresholds set in Step 1. For each species, providing justification as to why or why not it’s EcAoA has Critical Habitat status based on analysis of all collected data. 8. Map all habitat present by complete mapping of all CH, Natural Habitat and Modified Habitat
Following this analysis, the potential for the project to impact any CH features must then be assessed and requirements for mitigation in project design and/or specific species or habitat action plans are to be determined.
51
2. Determination of Critical Habitat Triggers
For the sake of CH determination, International Finance Corporation (IFC) Guidance Note (GN) 6 provides greater detail for the setting of numerical thresholds than the ADB SPS. Therefore, where relevant, this CHA methodology includes the numerical thresholds set by the IFC GN6 (2019). The thresholds presented in the IFC GN6 are broadly based upon globally standardised numerical thresholds published in the IUCN’s A Global Standard for the Identification of Key Biodiversity Areas and Red List Categories and Criteria. The thresholds are indicative and serve as a guideline for decision-making only. There is no universally accepted or automatic formula for making determinations on critical habitat. The involvement of external experts and project-specific assessments is of utmost importance, especially when data are limited (as will often be the case). Table E.1: Critical Habitat Criteria
Critical Habitat Trigger Features (i) Habitat required for the survival of critically endangered or endangered species Areas supporting species at high risk of extinction (Critically Endangered or Endangered) on the IUCN Red List of Threatened species (or equivalent national/regional systems).
GN6 thresholds for this criterion:
(a) Areas that support globally important concentrations of an IUCN Red-listed EN or CR species (≥ 0.5% of the global population AND ≥ 5 reproductive units of a CR or EN species)9;
(b) Areas that support globally important concentrations of an IUCN Red-listed Vulnerable (VU) species, the loss of which would result in the change of the IUCN Red List status to EN or CR and meet the thresholds in (ia);
(c) As appropriate, areas containing important concentrations of a nationally or regionally listed EN or CR species10.
9 IFC PS6 GN paras 68 and 69 clarify that all species present listed as CR and EN on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species should be considered potential CH triggers given their risk of extinction in the wild 10 The inclusion of nationally/regionally CR or EN species should be determined in consultation with competent professionals. For this project all nationally/regionally CR/EN species likely to be present within the AoI are considered as potential trigger species and have been evaluated further with national experts to determine the potential for CH triggering in the context of the national/regional populations.
52
(ii) Areas having special significance for endemic or restricted-range species Areas holding a significant proportion of the global range or population of species qualifying as restricted-range. For the IFC PS6 GN, the term endemic is defined as restricted-range. Restricted-range refers to a limited extent of occurrence (EOO). For terrestrial vertebrates and plants, IFC PS6 GN defines restricted-range species as those species that have an EOO of less than 50,000 square kilometres.
GN6 thresholds for this criterion:
(a) Areas that regularly hold ≥10% of the global population size AND ≥10 reproductive units of a restricted-range species.
(iii) Sites that are critical for the survival of migratory species, and (iv) Areas supporting globally significant concentrations or numbers of individuals of congregatory species For the sake of CH determination, the IFC PS6 GN combines the setting of thresholds for (iii) and (iv), and defines them as follows:
Migratory species are defined as any species of which a significant proportion of its members cyclically and predictably move from one geographical area to another (including within the same ecosystem). Congregatory species are defined as species whose individuals gather in large groups on a cyclical or otherwise regular and/or predictable basis.
Likely sites to trigger this criterion include Global-level Key Biodiversity Areas, Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas identified for congregatory species and Wetlands of International Importance designated under criteria 5 or 6 of the Ramsar Convention.
GN6 thresholds for this criterion:
(a) Areas known to sustain, on a cyclical or otherwise regular basis, ≥ 1 percent of the global population of a migratory or congregatory species at any point of the species’ lifecycle.
(b) Areas that predictably support ≥10 percent of the global population of a species during periods of environmental stress. v) Areas with unique assemblages of species or that are associated with key evolutionary processes As there is no IFC guidance directly applicable to this criterion, we will consider areas with unique assemblages of species to include rare or threatened ecosystems under the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, as well as other sites internationally recognised to host unique species assemblages.
The IFC GN6 recommends following the criterion where formal IUCN assessments of ecosystems have been performed.
GN6 thresholds for this criterion:
(a) Areas representing ≥5% of the global extent of an ecosystem type meeting the criteria for IUCN status of CR or EN.
The IFC GN6 states that areas associated with key evolutionary processes include areas with high spatial heterogeneity, environmental gradients, or sites of demonstrated importance to climate change adaptation (IFC GN6 Criterion 5 provides further detail). vi) Areas having biodiversity / ecosystem services of significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities.
53
This will be assessed from consultation with local social experts and stakeholders. vii) Areas either legally protected11 or officially proposed for protection. Critical habitats include those areas either legally protected or officially proposed for protection, such as areas that meet the criteria of the World Conservation Union classification, the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world natural heritage sites.
3. Biodiversity Screening
The results of the biodiversity screening carried out for the ecological assessment (see previous section) were used as part of the CHA. A precautionary list of 343 potentially occurring species and ecosystems was established (see Appendix A), of which 25 species were found to meet ADS SPS CH criteria (see Table E.2 for breakdown).
Table E.2: threatened species potentially present
Status Mammals Birds Reptiles Plants Total
Total Occurring in 9 project AoI 65 242 27 343
Critically Endangered 1 1 0 0 (CR) 2
Endangered (EN) 0 5 0 0 5
Vulnerable (VU) 3 8 1 0 11 Uzbekistan Red List: Critically Endangered 6 3 0 0 (CR) or Endangered 9 (EN)
The ecological features of the threatened fauna and flora identified can be summarised as follows:
Migratory Waterbirds
The Central Asian Flyway (CAF) covers a large continental area of Eurasia between the Arctic and Indian Oceans and the associated island chains. The Flyway comprises several important migration routes of waterbirds, most of which extend from the northern-most breeding grounds in Russian (Siberia) to the southernmost non-breeding (wintering) grounds in West and South Asia, the Maldives and the British Indian Ocean Territory. The birds on their annual migration cross the borders of several countries. Geographically the flyway region covers 30 countries of North, Central and South Asia and Trans-Caucasus, including Uzbekistan. Whilst it covers
11 The IFC GN6 recognises: legally protected areas that meet the IUCN definition: A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values. For the purposes of this Performance Standard, this includes areas proposed by governments for such designation.
54 at least 279 populations of 182 migratory waterbird species, including 29 globally threatened and near-threatened species, which breed, migrate and winter within the region. Within north-west Uzbekistan exist a number of waterbodies and Important Bird Areas (IBAs) which play an important role in supporting some of these waterbirds: (i) Sudochie Lake IBA is an important area for many waterbird species, including threatened species such as the White-headed Duck and Lesser White-fronted Goose, and triggers IBA criteria A1, A3, A4i, and A4iii. The IBA is 46,467 ha in size and is located approximately 15km from the southernmost point of the project road alignment. The IBA is located in the central part of the CAF and is a stopover location for waterbirds from the north of Europe and Asia, Western Siberia and Kazakhstan on migration to wintering areas on the southern Caspian Sea, and in Africa, India and Pakistan. Spring migration begins in the middle of March and ends in the middle of May. During monitoring 24 rare and vulnerable species were recorded, 13 of them included in the International Red Book of IUCN (2000), and 18 in the Red List of Uzbekistan (2003).
(ii) Sarygamysh Lake IBA covers 503,647 ha of the Sarygamysh lake in total, with 95,974 ha of the IBA on the Uzbekistan side of the Uzbekistan – Turkmenistan border. The lake supports approximately 160 species of avifauna, including waterbirds, and triggers IBA criteria A1, A4i, A4iii. It also incorporates the Eastern Cliffs (chinks) of the Ustyurt plateau which are home to the endangered Saker Falcon and Egyptian Vulture. Sarygamysh Lake IBA is approximately 130km from the southernmost point of the project road.
(iii) Saigachy Reserve IBA consists of an IBA within the wider Saigachy Nature Reserve. The IBA butts up to the Aral Sea and meets IBA criteria A1. The Saigachy Reserve is 22km from the project road at its closest point (the Reserve’s south-west corner). The flat, open, Ustyurt plateau forms an important fly-way, as waterbirds migrate along their north to south axis, inevitably at times over the Project road, in passage. Thus, whilst the project road intersects with this CAF fly-way, the project AoI is not considered to constitute a key point of settlement for migratory waterbirds, likely due to the lack of suitable breeding or feeding grounds, and as such impacts from the construction and operation of the road to these species are anticipated to be minimal. Birds of prey
Biodiversity screening and consultations with national ornithologists identified 10 species of raptors which occur in the Project AoI, including threatened species such as the Saker Falcon, Egyptian Vulture, Steppe Eagle and Eastern Imperial Eagle. These raptors, typically, hunt across the semi-arid desert and are observed during their fly-over. They nest in the cliffs, elevations of the terrain and tall shrubs and trees across the Ustyurt plateau, including sometimes the mature trees (7 – 8m in height) found in the haloxylon forest (5km by 1kmin size, located just north of Jaslik). Birds of prey can cover large distances whilst searching for food and have large home ranges, for example male Saker Falcons satellite tracked in Mongolia had an average home range size of 214 km2 (15 by 15km) and would cover a 60 km2 area every day. These birds of prey will typically hunt rodents, such as Great Gerbils and Sousliks (which are found in abundance burrowed into the road-side embankment) and reptiles. They will also be attracted to road kill
55 along the project road, although during consultations in-country, national ornithologists explained they prefer to hunt live prey. Construction and operation of the road will present risks for birds of prey in the area, including potential injury or mortality from vehicular collision (as a result of being attracted to the abundance of rodents road-side), and the threat of poaching, either by workers or road users. However, it was advised by national experts that impacts to these species by the project will be minimal. This assessment was made by the national experts because whilst birds of prey can be attracted to carrion, they are believed to prefer live kill, and additionally because recordings of raptor road kill along the existing A380 are extremely low. Land-based Nesting Birds
Land-based nesting birds are found to occur across the Ustyurt plateau, including the Great Bustard, Houbara Bustard, Pin-tailed Sandgrouse and Sociable Lapwing, and whilst some of these species are migratory, the Ustyurt plateau is an important feature of their habitat. Leveled takyrs and sand islands with low bushes, found in the vicinity of the project road, are typical habitats for all 4 of these species. The Great Bustard has been observed rarely in recent decades in Ustyurt and the probability of its occurrence in the project AoI is slim. The Houbara Bustard nests rarely in the project AoI and is typically only found during migration. The Pin-tailed Sandgrouse is more numerous and nests in the area of Barsakelmes salt-lake and flies to available watering places in large flocks. The Sociable Lapwing migrates to Kazakhstan for nesting through Ustyurt during spring-time and returns in autumn for wintering sites in the Middle East and the Mediterranean. It will tend to stay in the Ustyurt plateau to rest and to feed. National experts believe the probability that the Great Bustard and Houbara Bustard will occur near the project road is extremely small, however the threat to such species still exist. Poaching by workers and hunters passing on the project road is possible. A possible threat to the Sociable Lapwing is disturbance by the guard dogs. All 4 species can be attracted to the project by open water ponds, where they exposed to a risk. Whilst the probability of occurrence of land-based nesting birds near the road is considered low, risks to these species do exist, and appropriate mitigation will be required. Mammals
Forty-one species of mammal have been recorded on the Ustyurt plateau, including rare species such as the Caracal, Goitered Gazelle, Honey Badger and Saiga Antelope. Many of the mammal’s present are known to have large ranges and can cover long distances daily (e.g. saiga antelope and caracal). The saiga antelope covers distances from 300 to 1000km and within Uzbekistan and migration traditionally passes north to south from the Sam desert in Kazakhstan, through Almabet and Churuk and between the towns of Jaslik and Karakalpakiya. Caracal have been recorded in the southernmost reaches of the Ustyurt plateau and, although not as common, in the north of the plateau too, with isolated incidences of occurrence in the haloxylon forest north of Jaslik. Goitered Gazelle used to be found in the past throughout Ustyurt but now dwell only in the southern part of the plateau. It is found in the vicinity of Barsakelmes salt marsh, Karabaur uplands, Shakhpakhty and Lake Sarykamysh. Desert rodents, including Great Gerbils, jerboas, and ground-squirrels, and the Toloi Hare are found in abundance across the Ustyurt plateau.
56
The mammals recorded on the Ustyurt plateau are thought to inhabit most areas of this semi- arid desert habitat. Impacts of linear infrastructure, such as the project road, to migratory terrestrial species can be significant and can result in the modification of animal behaviour, fragmentation of natural habitat, and mortality. As the project road alignment either follows or runs closely parallel to an existing road, and predicted traffic data suggests increases in traffic as a result of the road will be low, the impacts of this project, to local mammals, is anticipated as low. However, an adaptive management approach will be required to assess the medium to long term direct and induced impacts of the road to ensure this does not change over time. Reptiles There is a total of 29 species of amphibians and reptiles recorded on the Ustyurt plateau which compromises 47% of the total number of species of herpetological fauna found in Uzbekistan. Lizards and snakes are the main components of the Ustyurt herpetological fauna. 27 retiles were scoped in the biodiversity screening for this ecological assessment, with 1 vulnerable species identified, the Central Asian Tortoise (Testudo horsfieldii). 4. Screening for Biodiversity Features Potentially Qualifying as Critical Habitat
Screening was then undertaken of species, habitat and protected areas against ADB SPS CH criteria, to identify what requires more detailed CH assessment against numerical thresholds. The following is a summary of species and habitat (including legally protected areas) that were shown to occur in the Project AoI and that had ecological features that met ADB SPS CH criteria, thus required assessment against the IFC GN6 thresholds:
Table E.3: Summary of biodiversity features meeting CH criteria
ADB CH Criteria IFC Critical Habitat Thresholds Species that met ADB CH criteria
Egyptian Vulture EN
Pallas's Fish Eagle EN (ia) Areas that support globally important concentrations of an IUCN Red-listed EN or CR Saker Falcon EN species (≥ 0.5% of the global population AND ≥ Sociable Lapwing CR 5 reproductive units of a CR or EN species); Steppe Eagle EN White-headed Duck EN Saiga antelope CR
Central Asian tortoise Lesser White-fronted Goose (i) Habitat required for the Greater spotted Eagle survival of critically (ib) Areas that support globally important endangered or endangered Eastern Imperial Eagle concentrations of an IUCN Red-listed Vulnerable species (VU) species, the loss of which would result in Common Pochard the change of the IUCN Red List status to EN or Asian Houbara CR and meet the thresholds in (ia); Great Bustard European turtle dove Goitered gazelle Ustyurt Urial (Mouflon) Marbled polecat (ic) As appropriate, areas containing important Pallas’s fish eagle EN concentrations of a nationally or regionally listed Great Bustard CR EN or CR species White-headed duck EN Caracal CR
57
Wild ass/Kulan CR Ustyurt Urial CR Striped Hyena CR Honey badger CR All 343 species screened as potentially occurring were assessed to determine whether they were restricted range. No (iia) Areas that regularly hold ≥10% of the global restricted range species were found. (ii) Areas having special population size AND ≥10 reproductive units of a significance for endemic restricted-range species, where a restricted- The Ustyurt plateau is home to one or restricted-range species range species has an EOO of less than 50,000 endemic plant species, Allium square kilometres. delicatulum, however this is only recorded in the eastern chink of the plateau, and not in the Project AoI. A number of migratory species are found to occur within the Project AoI. Numerous waterbirds were identified during biodiversity screening. The Project area is assessed to typically represents an extremely small proportion of migratory waterbird species’ overall passage distribution. It is also not known, or suspected owing to topography or habitat, to constitute a significant flyway for migratory birds. It is also not thought to be a significant stop-over, as birds are highly unlikely to land on, or use, the project area’s dry semi-arid desert on any regular basis. Each species was assessed to ensure its individual features met this assumption. Therefore, unless stated (iii) Sites that are critical (a) Areas known to sustain, on a cyclical or otherwise, it was assumed the Project AoI for the survival of otherwise regular basis, ≥ 1 percent of the global did not constitute critical habitat for migratory species population of a migratory or congregatory migratory waterbirds. species at any point of the species’ lifecycle. Three migratory land-based nesting birds were found to occur in the Project AoI, and generally for resting, feeding and nesting. And /or These were:
(iv) Areas supporting Houbara bustard VU globally significant (b) Areas that predictably support ≥10 percent of Great bustard VU concentrations or numbers the global population of a species during periods of individuals of of Sociable lapwing CR congregatory species environmental stress. 6 migratory birds of prey were identified as: Steppe Eagle EN Eastern Imperial Eagle Egyptian Vulture EN Pallas Fish Eagle EN Saker Falcon EN Greater-Spotted Eagle VU
Terrestrial migratory species identified were: Saiga Antelope CR Goitered Gazelle VU
58
The project AoI does not directly interact / impact upon with any registered KBAs or IBAs. However, there are three IBA’s in the Ustyurt plateau that are known to support bird species that can occur in the Project AoI. For this reason these are described here, however as they are not to be impacted upon by the Project they are not Likely sites to trigger the above criterion include considered further in the CHA: Global-level Key Biodiversity Areas, Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas identified for 1) Saigachy Reserve IBA – part of the congregatory species and Wetlands of 628,000ha Sagiachy Nature Reserve. IBA International Importance designated under Criteria: A1. Situated 22km from the project criteria 5 or 6 of the Ramsar Convention. road at its closest point.
2) Sudochie Lake IBA - situated approximately 15km to the east of the southernmost point of the project road. IBA Criteria A1, A3, A4i, and A4iii
3) Sarykamysh IBA – located at least 130km south from project AoI. As there is no IFC guidance directly applicable to this criterion, we will consider areas with unique assemblages of species to include rare or threatened ecosystems under the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, as well as other sites internationally recognised to host unique species assemblages. None identified
(v) Areas with unique (a) Areas representing ≥5% of the global extent assemblages of species or of an ecosystem type meeting the criteria for that are associated with key evolutionary IUCN status of CR or EN. processes
Areas with landscape features that might be associated with particular evolutionary processes or populations of species that are None identified especially distinct and may be of special conservation concern given their distinct evolutionary history.
(vi) Areas having biodiversity / ecosystem services of significant Assessed from consultation with local social None identified social, economic, or experts and stakeholders. cultural importance to local communities. No legally protected or officially proposed areas for protection were found to be in the (a) Uzbekistan state protected areas AoI or deemed to be at risk from the Project.
(b)World Conservation Union (vii) Areas either legally The Saigachy Nature Reserve is 22km from the protected or officially (c) the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Project road at its closest point and whilst it Importance, and the United Nations Educational, proposed for protection. wo ’t e i pa ted y the Proje t, spe ies it Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s world supports will potentially interact with the natural heritage sites. Project road. For this reason it is mentioned here, however it is not considered further in the CHA.
59
This 628,000 ha Reserve was gazetted in 1991 by the State Committee of Karakalpakstan primarily to help safeguard and restore the local population of the Ustyurt saiga antelope and their breeding (birthing) places. Located 22km at its closest point to the project road. 5. Stakeholder Consultation and Desktop Review
Further stakeholder consultation and desktop review was undertaken at this stage to verify assumptions made during initial screening and CH criteria assessment stages. Consultations were held with national and international biodiversity experts, local NGOs, relevant government authorities and external experts during 2019 (see Appendix G). Additional desktop review of secondary data was also undertaken.
The species and ecosystems that were assessed to have met ADB CH criteria (Table E.4) were analysed against the latest understanding of population numbers and local and global distribution to define an appropriate list of biodiversity features to be measured against the numerical thresholds.
This process resulted in the following observations and decisions:
• Traditionally the Honey badger is a locally distributed sub-species that historically would have inhabited large parts of the Ustyurt plateau. Information from the 2019 Uzbekistan Red Data Book and information gathered during consultations with national biodiversity experts however revealed it can now be found in the southwestern part of the Ustyurt Plateau, the northern edge of the Sarakamysh depression, and the western margin of the Khorezm oasis, and not in the Project AoI. • Striped hyena is a locally distributed sub-species which in the past was recorded in South Ustyurt, with potential to be found further north on the plateau also. However the Striped Hyena is currently recorded to be spread at the foothills of the northern part of the Babatag Mountain Range approximately 1000km from the Project Road and the lower parts of Surkhandarya approximately 900km from the road, and as such was removed from consideration • The Project area is assessed to typically represents an extremely small proportion of migratory waterbird species’ overall passage distribution. It is also not known, or suspected owing to topography or habitat, to constitute a significant flyway for migratory waterbirds. It is also not thought to be a significant stop-over, as waterbirds are highly unlikely to land on, or use, the project area’s dry semi-arid desert on any regular basis. The closest waterbody of an appropriate size to support migratory waterbirds is Sudochie Lake IBA, 15.5km from the Project and outside of the Project AoI. Each species was assessed to ensure its individual features met this assumption. Therefore, unless stated otherwise, it was determined that the Project AoI did not constitute critical habitat for migratory waterbirds. • In the past the Kulan (Wild Ass) was spread on the foothills and plains of the Ustyurt plateau, at present however it is understood there are approximately 50 – 100 individuals who are part of a transboundary population with Turkmenistan. The species is critically endangered in Uzbekistan with numbers declining. Its current distribution is thought to be considerable distance from the project road and the project is therefore not considered CH for this species.
60
• The Ustyurt Urial is spread at the southern part of the Ustyurt Plateau, mainly, in Kazakhly – Kaplankyr, the Lake Dry, the Sarykamysh depression and the eastern chinks of the South Ustyrt. It inhabits chinks and deep precipices. Recent numbers have reduced sharply and continue to do so, with current numbers believed to be at approximately 150 individuals. National experts understand this species to not currently be present in the project area and the project area therefore is not critical habitat for the Ustyurt Urial. • The European Turtle-dove is understood to be spread at low mountains of the Western Tien–Shan, the Western Pamir–Alay, the valleys of the Syrdarya, Amudarya, Zaravshan, Kashkadarya, the Sherabaddarya and Surkhandarya Rivers (nesting). However it is not considered to presently use the project area for nesting, only possibly in passage during migration. Species forages for seeds, grains and berries, although is opportunistic and will consume most types of food. Based on the distribution data available this species was not assessed further for critical habitat • The Uzbekistan Red Book is understood to have not been completed in conjunction with the IUCN, and thus are likely not directly applicable to IFC Criterion 1c
6. Defining Ecologically Appropriate Areas of Analysis
IFC GN6 requires the Project to identify an ecologically appropriate area of analysis (EcAoA) to determine the presence of critical habitat for each potential trigger with regular occurrence in the Project’s AoI, or ecosystem. The extent of this area will depend on the biodiversity features of interest and the ecological functions required to maintain them. Where it can be shown that multiple values have largely overlapping ecological requirements and distributions, a common or aggregated area of critical habitat may be appropriate. Paragraphs of the IFC GN6 provide further detail on best practice for demarcating an EcAoA. EcAoAs were defined per species, unless multiple values were shown to have largely overlapping features and distributions, when an aggregated EcAoA was used (e.g. resident birds).
61
Table E.4: Project EcAoAs (Project Road is shown in Red).
Birds Maps
Resident An EcAoA for resident birds has been set at 30km x 240km = 7,2000km2. Birds This is considered precautionary and captures the largest range size (15 x 15 km) of the resident birds flagged during biodiversity screening, the Saker Falcon. This is on the basis that any individuals found within this area could potentially interact with the project. Resident bird species includes species that are present all year round as well as migratory species that spend at least part of the year within the Project area, for example for breeding or overwintering.
This EcAoA is also set to adequately capture the 5km x 1km well-preserved haloxylon forest, located 10km from Jaslik along the A380. The haloxylon forest plays an important role in the semi-arid desert ecosystem and is considered a potential, although not preferred, nesting site for some of the birds of prey identified.
Passage An EcAoA for birds in passage on migration is not appropriate, therefore the Birds Project AoI (240km x 20km = 4,800km2) is applied to make this assessment.
For passage bird migrants (e.g. Steppe Eagle and Greater Spotted Eagle) it is not considered appropriate to define an EcAoA as these birds will typically be in passage over the Project road only during migration. The behaviour of these birds might differ slightly to waterbirds as there is the potential for migratory birds of prey in passage to be attracted to the Project road to feed. However, similar to waterbirds the Project area typically represents an extremely small proportion of these migratory bird species’ overall passage distribution and it is also not known, or suspected owing to topography or habitat, to constitute a significant flyway for migratory birds. However, as the semi- arid desert habitat and Project area is potential stop-over for hunting for these birds individually using alternative biodiversity against critical habitat thresholds, for these reasons the project AoI is not thought to be critical habitat for any species found in the
62
area only on passage during migration.
Impacts from workers and road users, such as poaching and disturbance, are possible, but considering their probable fleeting interaction with the road and surrounding area, considering unlikely.
Land- An EcAoA for migratory land-based nesting birds is set at 240km x 50km = based 12,000km2 nesting birds The land-based nesting birds found to potentially occur in the project AoI are known to be passing through on migration, with the rare possibility of nesting on the Ustyurt plateau also. The wide open nature of the plateau makes setting an EcAoA challenging, therefore a precautionary 50km x 240km is being used to ensure any impacts from the project on possible nesting sites are covered.
Mammals
63
Saiga An EcAoA of 166km x 240km = 66,000km2 is applied to assess the Saiga antelope.
Due to habitat fragmentation and natural topographical boundaries, the Ustyurt saiga antelope population on the Uzbekistan side of the Kazakhstan – Uzbekistan border, are currently bounded; the Aral Sea to the east, the Kazakh border fence and Shalker-Beyneu railroad to the north, and the A380 and Kungrad – Beineu railway to the west.
However a precautionary approach is being taken due to the resilience of the species and impressive population recovery rates, and the efforts being made to make the linear barriers to migration more porous. Ustyurt Saiga antelope typically, unbounded can cover migrate between 300 – 1,000 km and recent data shows them migrating as far north as Shalkar in Kazakhstan
The EcAoA is therefore set to reflect:
• Northern Ustyurt saiga movements as far north as Shalkar • Most southern recent attempted crossing of the project road (2004) adjacent to Abadan • To the east the Aral Sea and eastern chinks which stop movement in that direct and • A boundary to the west has been set which reflects the species traditional migration corridor to the southwest of the road, based on satellite tracking
64
Caracal An EcAoA of 66km x 240km = 15,840km2 is set for the Caracal.
This species tends to have large territories and can cover very large areas in search of food. Studies of male caracal home range sizes suggests that individuals use areas of between 308km2 (Bothma and Riche 1994) and 1116 km2 (Yolanda 1998). Therefore, with a precautionarily approach, we assume individual Caracals use areas of 1116km2, which is (33 x 33km). Therefore, there is designated an EcAoA for the Caracal of 33km to either side of the road, on the basis that any individuals found within this area could potentially interact with the project.
Goitered An EcAoA of 44km x 240km = 10560km2 is set for the Goitered Gazelle. Gazelle Goitered gazelle inhabits clay, rubbly deserts with hard soils, hilly lands and foothills, sandy deserts with hilly dunes. Historically spread across the Ustyurt, now more common in south although evidence suggests its range may be stretching north. Small herds currently identified in the Saigachy Reserve. Will move around their habitat to find watering holes. As the closest known population to the project road is in the Saigachy Reserve an EcAoA of 44km x 240km is being set (22km on either side of the road as 22km the closest point of the Reserve to the road)
65
Marbled An EcAoA of 10 km x 240km = 2500km2 is set for the Marbled Polecat. Polecat Spread across the Ustyurt plateau, but sporadic, naturally scarce species. It inhabits the sand islands in Ustyurt with interrupted Haloxylon and on the plains with saltwort and wormwood. Known to prey on rodents and will be attracted to the rodent burrows along the road alignment. An EcAoA of 5km either side (10km x 240km = 2400km2) of the road is being set for the Marbled Polecat to ensure the nearby haloxylon forest
Reptiles
Central EcAoA set at 4km x 240km = 960km2 for the Central Asian Tortoise Asian Tortoise Tortoises tend to have much smaller ranges than the other species considered; they are slow moving and are not thought to travel long distances in search of food. There is no range data on this tortoise species, however data from a closely related species, the Egyptian tortoise, that male tortoises have average home ranges of just 0.349 square kilometres (600 x 600m). However, a precautionary EcAoA of 2km either side of the road will be assigned to make sure all individuals that could potentially interact with the road are covered.
66
4.1 Determining Critical Habitat Status
Ultimately this step should determine the Critical Habitat status for each species and ecosystem that’s EcAoA could potentially be impacted by the project AoI, through assessment of biodiversity features against thresholds set in Section 1.2 above. For each species, justification is provided as to why or why not it’s EcAoA has Critical Habitat status based on analysis of all collected data.
The Uzbekistan Red Data Book (2019) was not believed to have been compiled to IUCN standards and as such the status of species within are not considered appropriate to consider for an ADB / IFC CHA.
The Table below is a summary of all 13 of the species that initially met ADB SPS CH criteria and required assessment for CH determination (full analysis for determination in Appendix E).
The assessment found that the project impacts upon critical habitat of the saiga antelope, only.
Table E.5 below provides a summary of the assessment made to determine whether the Project AoI impacts on any critical habitat12:
12 It is recommended by the IFC GN that where estimates of species’ global population and/or local population are not available (or not obtainable by reasonable means through a field assessment in the case of the local population), expert opinion should be used to determine the significance of the potential critical habitat with respect to the global population. Surrogates of population size (for example, extent of occurrence, estimates of total area of known sites, estimates of area of occupied habitat) will be essential in this decision-making.
67
Table E.5: critical habitat determination
Species Potential criteria Critical habitat determination triggered Central Asian tortoise (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species. Greater Spotted Eagle (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical (iiia) – Migratory habitat for this species. Eastern Imperial (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical Eagle (iiia) – Migratory habitat for this species. Steppe Eagle (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical (iiia) – Migratory habitat for this species. Sociable Lapwing (ia) – IUCN CR Project EcAoA is not considered critical (iiia) – Migratory habitat for this species. Asian Houbara (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical (iiia) – Migratory habitat for this species. Saker Falcon (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical (iiia) – Migratory habitat for this species. Pallas's Fish-eagle (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical (ic) – Red list EN habitat for this species. (iiia) – Migratory Egyptian Vulture (ia) – IUCN EN Project EcAoA is not considered critical (ic) – Red list EN habitat for this species. (iiia) – Migratory Great Bustard (ib) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical (ic) – Red list CR habitat for this species. (iiia) – Migratory Caracal (ic) – Red list CR Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species. Saiga Antelope (ia) – IUCN CR Project EcAoA is considered critical habitat (ic) – Red list CR for this species. (iiia) – Migratory Marbled Polecat (ia) – IUCN VU Project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species.
68
4.2 Summary of Project Critical Habitat
Table E.6: critical habitat summary
Critical Habitat Criteria Assessment (i) Habitat required for the survival of critically Saiga antelope endangered or endangered species (ii) Areas having special significance for endemic or None Identified restricted-range species (iii) Sites that are critical for the survival of migratory Saiga antelope species (iv) Areas supporting globally significant concentrations None Identified or numbers of individuals of congregatory species (v) Areas with unique assemblages of species or that are None Identified associated with key evolutionary processes (vi) Areas having biodiversity / ecosystem services of None Identified significant social, economic, or cultural importance to local communities. (vii) Areas either legally protected or officially proposed None Identified for protection.
69
Table E.7: critical habitat determination (with detail)
Name IUCN Nation Restric CH Evidence Critical Habitat Determination statu al Red ted Screen s List Range Result status ? Central VU N Y Global population: unknown Data on global and local population figures for the Asian Central Asian tortoise are unavailable. The species tortoise (ib) The Central Asian tortoise occurs across large parts of Central Asia and is is known to have a range that covers large parts of especially common in Afghanistan, Pakistan and parts of Iran. Central Asia (~5,750,500km2), with relative Testudo abundance in Afghanistan, Pakistan and parts of horsfieldii Iran. (Gray, 1844) This species is known to be ubiquitous across Uzbekistan, including across the Ustyurt plateau. Population density on the plateau has been recorded as 1.3 individuals per hectare (ha), a relatively low density when compared to other parts of Uzbekistan.
This species is listed as Vulnerable owing to previous population declines. Considering the project AoA represents <0.5% of this species’ estimated EOO, and taking into account its Distribution map from edmonton valley zoo website relatively low abundance in the Ustyurt plateau (Bondarenko and Peregontsev 2017), it is No IUCN data are available on EOO or Area of Occupancy (AOO) for this extremely unlikely that even the loss of the species. A rough estimate calculates the above global distribution map (using population from the whole AoA would result in Google Earth) covers an EOO of >5,500,000km2 the global threat status of this species changing to Endangered. The project AoA is thus not National biodiversity experts say the species is present across Uzbekistan, considered critical habitat for the Central Asian and present across the Ustyurt plateau, but scarce in number. tortoise.
Project EcAoA for the central Asian tortoise has been set as 960km2 – meaning the project EcAoA represents just 0.000192% of the species estimated EOO.
Distribution map of the Central Asian tortoise across Uzbekistan:
70
Map from (Bondarenko and Peregontsev 2017)
The population density on the Ustyurt plateau is 1.3 individuals/ha, which is a low density relative to other populations across Uzbekistan. (Bondarenko and Peregontsev 2017)
Species is known to use the burrows of Great gerbils to lay eggs and for wintering.
Greater VU VU:R N Y Global population: minimum 3,300 (IUCN) Local population numbers in Uzbekistan of the Spotted Greater Spotted Eagle are unknown. Eagle (ib) Local population unknown. Two national experts independently reported that the Greater Spotted Eagle only migrates over Uzbekistan, as is shown by This species is listed as Vulnerable under C2a, Aquila (iiia) IUCN distribution data. which refers to its fragmented population structure clanga and continuing decline in overall population. It is Pallas, 1811 Passage Birds EcAoA applied to this species of 4,800km2 only known from the project area during migration, but the project area is not known, or suspected owing to topography, to constitute a significant flyway for this species. The area appears to represent a very small proportion of its overall passage distribution. It is thus extremely unlikely that the loss of the whole EcAoA could result in the uplisting of this species to Endangered (IFC GN6 Criterion ib).
71
It is plausible that ≥1% (33 individuals) of the species’ population fly over the project AoI each year. However, from consultation with local experts and the available data it is not thought that birds regularly use the area (it prefers wetter habitats). It is thus unlikely that the EcAoA qualifies under IFC GN6 Criterion iiia.
The project AoI is thus not considered critical habitat for this species.
A 2000-2002 Birdlife International survey of nearby Sudochie IBA estimated a population of 2-5 birds, which were thought to be on passage. (BirdLife International (2020) Important Bird Areas factsheet: Sudochye Lake) 3
Uzbek Red Book: It is observed in the plain and low mountain regions of Uzbekistan during migration and in flood land of high stream of the River Amudarya (wintering). The number was always low. During migration and wintering single birds and small groups are usually observed.
Eastern VU VU:D N Y Global population: minimum 2,500 (IUCN) Local population numbers in Uzbekistan of the Imperial Eastern Imperial Eagle are unknown. Eagle (ib) Local population: unknown. This species is listed as Vulnerable under C2a, due Aquila (iiia) Passage Bird EcAoA applied of 4,800km2 to continuing decline in overall population. It is only heliaca known from the project area during migration, but Savigny, Estimated EOO is 14,900,000km2 (IUCN) the project area is not known, or suspected owing to 1809 topography, to constitute a significant flyway for this Northern breeding range (summer range) estimated to more than 8 million species. The area appears to represent a very small km2 from IUCN distribution data. Understood to migrate over the project AoI. proportion of its overall passage distribution. It is thus extremely unlikely that the loss of the whole EcAoA could result in the uplisting of this species to Endangered (IFC GN6 Criterion ib).
72
It is plausible that ≥1% (25 individuals) of the species’ population fly over the project AoI each year. However, from consultation with local experts and the available data it is not thought that the project area sustains a population this size and it is therefore considered very unlikely that the EcAoA qualifies for IFC Criterion iiia.
The project AoI is thus not considered critical habitat for this species.
Study from 2011 reported 150 breeding pairs north west of the Aral Sea, in between the Aral Sea and the Caspian Sea. Approximately 150km from the northwest point of the project AoI, at the Daut Ata border crossing point.
Data of breeding territories on the Ustyurt plateau from (Karyakin et al., 2011, Eagles of the Aral-Caspian Region). This shows no breeding territory in the Uzbekistan region of the Ustyurt plateau. The closest breeding location shown is more than 50km from the EcAoA for resident raptor species.
Preferred nesting conditions (where the highest density of breeding is found) is typically raised conifer forests (e.g. on foothills / low mountains) with pastures below. (Karyakin et al., 2011, Eastern Imperial Eagle in Russia and Kazakhstan)
Steppe EN VU:D N Y Global population: minimum 50,000 (IUCN) Local population numbers in Uzbekistan are Eagle unknown, however the Steppe Eagle is known to (ia) Local population unknown. Not considered present in northern Uzbekistan or migrate over the project AoI. Aquila project AoI according to IUCN. Although listed as potentially breeding in parts nipalensis (iiia) Uzbekistan (IUCN). National experts say species migrates over the Ustyurt This species is listed as Endangered due to the Hodgson, plateau from Kazakhstan to overwintering sites further south. population undergoing extremely rapid declines in 1833 overall population. It is only known from the project Passage bird EcAoA applied of 4,800km2 area during migration, but the project area is not known, or suspected owing to topography, to Estimated global EOO: 10,080,000km2 constitute a significant flyway for this species. The area appears to represent a very small proportion of its overall passage distribution. The EcAoA applied to for the Steppe Eagle represents 0.048% of the 73
species global EOO. Considering this is a passage migrant and the EcAoA is not understood to be a significant flyway for the Steppe Eagle, it is assessed that the EcAoA does not support a globally important (>0.5%) concentration according to IFC Criterion ia (24 individuals)
It is plausible that ≥1% (50 individuals) of the species’ population fly over the project AoI each year. However, from consultation with local experts and the available data it is not thought that the project area sustains a population this size and it is therefore considered very unlikely that the EcAoA qualifies for IFC Criterion iiia.
The project AoI is thus not considered critical Found nesting in Kazakhstan / Russia / Mongolia, the present habitat is habitat for this species. confined mainly to the steppe zones of plains and the mountains in the steppe desert zone including deserts and tundra. Ability to nest on level ground.
Birdlife International: Steppe Eagles historically nested to breed in the Saigachy Reserve in the 1970s and 80s.
Uzbek Red Book: It is distributed across the Plateu Ustyurt (1 – nesting, migration, roaming); plainlands and low mountain regions (1 – roaming, 2 – migration, wintering). Single nesting was recorded in 1948. Single individuals and groups were recorded during migration. Sometimes, about one hundred eagles migrate through some desert points per day. Several dozens of roaming birds are recorded; single individuals winter irregularly in Hungry Semi-arid desert and the Amudarya River valley, near Termez.
Sociable CR VU:R N Y Global population: 11,200 (IUCN) This species is listed as CR under A3 and A4, Lapwing Local population (Uzbek): 4,225 (2015, Birdlife) meaning it its population size is suspected to have (ia) Estimated global EOO (IUCN): 1,620,000km2 decreased by ≥80% over 10 years or three Vanellus Land-based nesting bird EcAoA applied of 12,000km2 generations. gregarius (iiia) The Sociable Lapwing migrates over the Ustyurt plateau and project AoI. (Pallas, Migrates to Kazakhstan for nesting, through the Ustyurt plateau during Historically the northern Ustyurt and project AoI 1771) spring-time, and returns in autumn for wintering sites in the Middle East and have formed a rest and feed stop-off site for the the Mediterranean. Sociable Lapwing as it migrates north-south. Today the species is understood to typically only stop-off in 74
Satellite tracking suggests the species has two migration corridors from its Uzbekistan in an IBA in the south of the country, nesting sites in Kazakhstan, one to the Middle East and north east Africa, approximately 800km from the project road. and one to west India / Pakistan Consultation with national experts suggest it is extremely unlikely, although possible, that this species will occur in the project AoI during passage. Thus, considering the information describing current distribution it is extremely unlikely that the EcAoA supports >0.5% of the global species (56 individuals) and meets IFC Criterion ia.
It is plausible, although extremely unlikely that ≥1% (112 individuals) of the species’ population fly over the EcAoA each year. However, the project area is not known, or suspected owing to topography or habitat, to constitute a significant flyway for this species, and birds are not known to not known to currently regularly use the area whilst on migration (this species prefers wetland stop overs). It is therefore very unlikely that the EcAoA qualifies under IFC GN6 Criterion iiia.
The project AoA is thus not considered critical habitat for this species.
Images from the Darwin Project report EIDPO035 ‘Tracking the Sociable Lapwing: conservation beyond the breeding grounds’ 2011 The species is known to stop over to rest and feed in Uzbekistan, on migration, for up to two months. From 2011 Birdlife International article ‘New Sociable Lapwing habitats discovered in Uzbekistan’
Data available and international experts suggest typically Uzbekistan is a stop off point for this species in and typically it is stopping off at two IBAs in southern Uzbekistan / eastern Turkmentistan (Tallymerjen and Talimarzhan) around 800km from the project AoI. Between 6000 and 8000 individuals are estimated to be present yearly in this area. This potentially represents half of 75
the global population of sociable lapwing, and therefore likely the majority of birds on the eastern migration route (Donald et al. 2016)
National experts stated during consultation that the sociable lapwing had not been recently been recorded in the Project AoI. Most recent sightings were the Amadaryu river.
It is considered extremely unlikely this species will be impacted by the project AoI.
Macqueen's VU VU:D N Y Global population: minimum 33,000 (IUCN) The EcAoA does not today constitute a significant Bustard/ area for the flyway of this species, with tracked Asian (ib) Local population: unknown flyways being located significantly further south in houbara Uzbekistan (secondary data, backed up by national (iiia) Estimated global EOO: 13,200,000 km2 experts). Chlamydotis macqueenii( Land-based nesting bird EcAoA applied of 12,000 km2 However there are historical records of species J.E. Gray, Uzbek Red Book: During recent years, can be sometimes found while occurrence and nesting across the Ustyurt plateau 1832) wintering in the South Kyzylkum. and Saigachy Reserve, and, whilst considered very unlikely, national experts say there is a slim Kazakhstan hosts 77% of global population (~25,000 individuals) possibility of occurrence in the EcAoA.
In 2002 the nearby Saigachy Reserve IBA was estimated to host just 15-30 Thus It is assessed that it is extremely unlikely adults, though they were thought to be breeding in the area, by birdlife that the loss of the entire EcAoA would result in international. the uplisting of this species to Endangered, meaning the EcAoA does not meet IFC Criterion Data below shows Houbara breeding in West-Kazakhstan migrated towards ib. This is supported by the fact that the EcAoA the south-east down the coast of the Caspian Sea. Upon reaching the represents 0.09% of the global EOO for the Asian southern part of the Caspian Sea, they crossed the Elburz Mountains in houbara and that at least 77% of global population North-Iran at an altitude of 1700–2000 m and continued their journey in a are known to occur in Kazakhstan (CITE) south-westerly direction along the northern edge of Dasht-e-Kavir. Birds either stopped on the eastern side of the Zagros Mountains or crossed them It is possible, although unlikely, that ≥1% (330 at an altitude of 1500–2000 m and wintered around the Iran-Iraq border or individuals) of the species’ population fly over the further west into Iraq. project EcAoA each year, although satellite data suggests they typically migrate over other parts of Uzbekistan. The EcAOA is not known to represent a bottleneck for this species’ migration, and there is no evidence to suggest that birds currently regularly use the area during migration. It is thus highly unlikely that the EcAoA qualifies under IFC GN6 Criterion iiia.
76
Therefore, the project EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for this species.
IUCN data suggests this species is resident and breeding in the area. It is thought to migrate to overwintering grounds further south.
IUCN - This species inhabits open, arid and sparsely vegetated semi-arid desert and semi-desert (Launay et al. 1997, Osborne et al. 1997, Mian 2003, Yang et al. 2003). It favours scattered shrubby vegetation, typically comprising xerophytic or halophytic plants (Collar 1996)
Uzbek Red Book: It is distributed in the Plateau Ustyurt, the Kyzylkum desert, the Karshi Steppet (nesting, migration), Southern Kyzylkum (irregular wintering), Golodnaya Steppe (former nesting, migration). Inhabiting undulated loose sandy and clayey saline parts of the desert with rare shrubs 77
(nesting); in all plains, except oases migration. Nesting population ranges in 1960–80-s from 1,500 to 3,000 individuals; during migration up to 20,000 individuals were recorded. The numbers and nesting area were sharp decreasing during last decades. During recent years, can be sometimes met while wintering in the South Kyzylkum. Saker EN NT N Y Global population: minimum 12,000 (IUCN) This species has been uplisted to Endangered Falcon because a revised population trend analysis (ia) Local population: 70 breeding pairs in Uzbekistan, 7 breeding pairs on the indicates that it may be undergoing a very rapid Falco Ustyurt plateau (Uzbek red list, Action plans for conservation of globally decline. This negative trend is a result of a range of cherrug J.E. (iiic) threatened bird species in Uzbekistan / Kashkarov R.D., Lanovenko E.N. - anthropogenic factors including electrocution on Gray, 1834 Tashkent, 2011) power lines, unsustainable capture for the falconry trade, as well as habitat degradation and the Resident Birds EcAoA applied of 7,200km2 impacts of agrochemicals, and the rate of decline appears to be particularly severe in the species's According to the database of Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds central Asian breeding grounds. (UzbPB), in the period between 2000 – 2010, 7 breeding pairs were identified in the southern and eastern cliffs of the Ustyurt plateau (eastern cliffs Understood to be approximately 7 breeding pairs approximately 15km from the start of the road – covered by Sudochie IBA; (14 individuals) on the eastern and southern cliffs of and southern cliffs are found adjoining the Sarykamysh lake, approximately the Ustyurt plateau. Therefore the EcAoA does 120km from the project AoI) not support the >0.5% (60 individuals) required to meet IFC Criterion ia
The Saker Falcon is known to nest on the escarpments of the Ustyurt plateau and is thus assessed under the Resident Birds EcAoA. The species is however a migratory species. The EcAoA does not support >1% of the global population of this species (120 individuals), and thus the EcAoA does not qualify as critical habitat under IFC GN6 Criterion (iiia).
The EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for the Saker Falcon
Image from Action plans for conservation of globally threatened bird species in Uzbekistan / Kashkarov R.D., Lanovenko E.N. - Tashkent, 2011
Mitropolsky et al., 1987) states that “the Saker is widely distributed across the country, breeding along the southern and eastern escarpments of the Usturt Plateau.” 78
IUCN says the species is present in the AoI but only in passage (on migration), breeding elsewhere.
Local ornithologists confirmed they are still found nesting in the escarpments (chinks) of the Ustyurt plateau.
Birdlife International survey of the Sudochie IBA estimated a population of 1- 6 adults (breeding).
Pallas's EN EN N Y Global population: 1,000 (IUCN) Little data on both local and global populations of Fish-eagle the species. This species has a small, declining (ia) Local population: unknown. population as a result of the widespread loss, Haliaeetus degradation and disturbance of wetlands and leucoryphus (iiia) Estimated global EOO: 1,740,000 km2 breeding sites throughout its range. (Pallas, 1771) Passage migrant EcAoA applied of 4,800km2 It is only known from the project area during migration, and the project area is not known, or Project AoI is a potential hunting area during passage. Not breeding suspected owing to topography, to constitute a however, species breeds much further south in Bangladesh and northern significant flyway for this species. This species is India before migrating north to areas between Caspian Sea and northern known to be closely associated with wetlands and China, including Uzbekistan. has a preferred diet of fish, although they will prey on birds and nestlings, mammals, reptiles, and carrion
The area appears to represent a very small proportion of its overall passage distribution. The 79
EcAoA represents 0.28%% of the species global EOO.
Based on inferred distribution (EcAoA is 0.28% of global EOO) we can estimate a potential population within the EcAoA of 2.8 individuals, as such the EcAoA does not support the >0.5% required to meet IFC Criterion ia
It is plausible that ≥1% (1 individuals) of the species’ population fly over the project AoI each year. However, from consultation with local experts and the available data it is not thought that the project area sustains a population this size and it is Species is closely associated with wetlands, principally large lakes and therefore considered very unlikely that the rivers, from the lowlands to 5,000 m. It generally nests in trees near water. EcAoA qualifies for IFC Criterion iiia They have a diet of mostly fish, which they catch close to surface of the . water. They also eat birds and nestlings, mammals, reptiles, and carrion It is therefore concluded that the EcAoA does not constitute critical habitat for the Pallas Fish Uzbek Red Book: It is recorded in the southern Aral region (roaming); the Eagle basin of the River Amudarya (roaming, wintering); the Kyzylkum desert (migration). It inhabits large plainland reservoirs, flood-lands of the rivers with gallery forests. Before 1960s about several dozen individuals had been recorded; currently, single, mostly migrating and wintering individuals are recorded. Egyptian EN VU:D N Y Minimum global population: 12,000 This species is globally EN This long-lived species Vulture qualifies as Endangered owing to a recent and (ia) Local population: 2 breeding pairs on Ustyurt plateau extremely rapid population decline in India, Neophron combined with severe long-term declines in Europe percnopterus (iiia) Estimated global EOO (IUCN): 55,500,000 km2 and West Africa, plus continuing declines through (Linnaeus, much of the rest of its African range. 1758) Resident Birds EcAoA applied of 7,200km2 As there are 2 breeding pairs (4 individuals) the IUCN – Present and breeding in the southern part of the Ustyurt plateau. Egyptian vulture is assessed under the Resident Thought to migrate south in winter. Bird EcAoA, although this bird is classified migratory. National ornithologist stated during consultation that they are found nesting on the escarpment (cliffs) to the south of the project AoI, although they likely The known breeding sites of this species are feed in the project AoI, and have indeed been sighted within it. outside of the project EcAoA. Still, to be precautionary we assume that both pairs (4 adult This species typically nests on ledges or in caves on cliffs (Sarà and Di individuals) breeding on the Ustyurt plateau could Vittorio 2003), crags and rocky outcrops, but occasionally also in large trees, occur within the project EcAoA. Even so, the 4 80
buildings (mainly in India), electricity pylons (Naoroji 2006) and exceptionally individuals recorded are well below the >0.5% on the ground (Gangoso and Palacios 2005). It forages in lowland and (60 individuals) of this species global montane regions over open, often arid, country, and also scavenges at population, thus not meeting IFC Criterion ia. human settlements As a migratory species, the Egyptian could also potentially trigger criterion (iiia). However, as it has been concluded that the EcAoA does not support does not support 1% of the global population of this species (120 individuals), and thus the EcAoA does not qualify as critical habitat under IFC GN6 Criterion (iiia).
Therefore, the EcAoA is not concluded to be critical habitat for the Egyptian Vulture.
.
Uzbek Red Book: distributed species. It is distributed in the Kugitang, the Babatag, the Hissar, the Baysuntau, the Chatkal, the Pskem, the Kurama and Turkestan ridges, mountians of central part of the Kyzylkum desert, the Amudarya River valley. It inhabits desert low mountains, the mergins of arid ridges of the Tien-Shan and Pamir- Alay. In 1990-2000s, the amount in Uzbekistan was 200 pairs. At the present – 134-140 pairs (incl. Ustyurt – 2 pairs, Amu Darya - 2 pairs). Great VU CR N Y Global population: minimum 44,000 (2010) Listed as VU by IUCN as it has suffered rapid Bustard population reductions across most of its range. (ib) Local population: Up to 11 individuals in Uzbekistan. Species is listed as CR according to the Uzbekistan Otis tarda Red Data Book, although this list was not completed Linnaeus, (ic) Estimated global EOO: 20,100,000 km2 in conjunction with the IUCN. 1758 Land-based nesting bird EcAoA applied: 12,000 km2 Sightings of the species on the Ustyurt plateau in recent years have been extremely rare and the Species is met irregularly and only during cold winters. Single specimens, project area is known to the species as a potential sometimes, groups (up to 11 individuals) are reported. Migrates across overwintering sight due to harsh weather conditions Ustyurt plateau in Kazakhstan.
The majority (57-70%) of the global population is found in the Iberian The species was described by Kreitsberg-Mukhina, Peninsula, with the second largest population center (15-25%) located in (2009) as “on the verge of complete extinction” and 81
southwestern Russia. These populations are relatively stable. Populations in recent estimates suggest 11 individuals across Central Europe represent 3-4% of the world’s Great Bustards Uzbekistan.
Species migrates from breeding areas in Russia and Kazakhstan in the The local population in Uzbekistan of 11 north, to the Middle East and China. There are also resident populations individuals means we can conclude that the loss found in Europe (60% of global population found in Spain) of the project EcAoA does not support would not result in the uplisting of this species to Project AoI considered fly-way passage during migration (IUCN) Endangered, meaning the EcAoA does not meet IFC Criterion ib. National ornithologists during consultation stated the Great Bustard is found quite rarely in recent decades in Ustyurt plateau during migrations. Therefore the EcAoA is not considered critical habitat for the Great Bustard Great Bustards wintering in south Kazakhstan irruptively migrate into Uzbekistan during harsh winter conditions.
National expert assesses the chances of the species being present in the AoI extremely slim however the threat from poaching from road users or workers is still a potential risk.
Uzbek Red Book: Migratory European subspecies. It is distributed across the Plateau Ustyurt during migration, in the south– western Kyzylkum, the Syrdarya, Keles, Chirchik, Akhangaran, the Zaravshan, the lover streams of Surkhandarya and Sherabaddarya rivers (migration; irragular, wintering); Golodnaya and Dalverzin Steppes, foothills of the Nuratau Range (migration; in the past, nesting). It can be found in the foothill plains with grasslands, semi-deserts, fields of alfa-alfa. It was rare during nesting, and common during migration and wintering. Now, it is met irregularly and only during cold winters. Single specimens, sometimes, groups (up to 11 individuals) are reported. Caracal LC CR N Y Global population: unknown The Uzbekistan Red Data Book is understood to not have been completed in conjunction with the IUCN, Caracal (ic) Local population: ~28 individuals Described in the Uzbekistan Red Book as therefore making it very challenging to assess caracal “close to complete extinction, mosaically spread species”. against IFC Criterion ic. Schreber, 1776 Estimated global EOO: 51,245,224 km2 The Caracal is typically seen spread across southern Ustyurt, and is very rarely seen in northern Estimated global Area of Occupancy (AOO): 17,204,761 km2 Ustyurt although recent evidence suggests its range in Uzbekistan might be stretching north. Project EcAoA for the caracal: 15,840 km2 The project EcAoA for Caracal represents 0.09% of The main habitations of this species on Ustyurt are sand islands, clay and the global AOO for the Caracal. gravel plains, and cliffs. The main food object of Caracal is the Tolai Hare, but 82
it also preys on small mammals and birds. Modern studies of the Ustyurt The EcAoA for Caracal is assessed to not plateau have indicated that it is well distributed within the territory but its contain an important concentration of this population is extremely low. species as it is unlikely to even sustain a minimal fraction of the 28 individuals thought to According to the national experts, the closest place of Caracal observations to inhabit Uzbekistan. the project AoI is the Barsakelmes salt-lake, Agiyin salt marsh, the vicinity of the Kubla-Ustyurt village in the central part, and Zharinkudul salt marsh and surrounding area of Churuk Collective farm in the north part.
The probability of Caracal occurrence on the leveled takyrs of the project AoI is quite small. The most probable place to find Caracal in the project AoI is fixed sand islands with interrupted Haloxylon along the northern border of the Agyin salt marsh.
In hot temperatures the Caracal needs water sources, which it can find near the construction site and thus can to be exposed to the risk of hunt by the builders and guard dogs.
Uzbek Red Book: locally distributed subspecies. It is spread at the Ustyurt Plateau, in the lower reaches of the River Amudarya, in the northwest and the southwest Kyzylkum desert. It inhabits the desert with hilly and fixed sands, gypsum flat plains, precipices and chinks, seldom, in gallery river forests. Single specimens are observed, more seldom in pairs. Between 1954 and 1980, 22 individuals were counted, in 2006 – 2016 – 28 individuals. Goitered VU VU:D N Y Global population: 42,000 minimum Goitered Gazelle is listed as Vulnerable under Gazelle criterion A2 because of ongoing declines due to (ib) Local Population: approximately 22 individuals in the Saigachy Reserve. poaching, habitat degradation from overgrazing, Gazella Estimated total of 4,000 across Uzbekistan. competition with livestock and industrial and subgutturosa commercial development. The decline is estimated Guldenstaed Historically the Goitered Gazelle was widespread across the Ustyurt plateau. to have exceeded 30% in the last 14 years (three t, 1780 More modern studies show that currently Goitered Gazelle is mainly distributed generations). in the southern part of the plateau (Barsakelmes salt lake, Karabaur Ridge, Assake-Audan Depression) where its population is estimated at a maximum Historically the Goitered Gazelle was widespread 300 specimens (2019). Has been observed in the northern part of Ustyurt and across the Ustyurt plateau. More modern studies the project AoI only several times. show that currently Goitered Gazelle is mainly distributed in the southern part of the plateau and 22 Rangers from the Saigachy Reserve informed during consultations (2019) individuals in the Saigachy Reserve that 2 herds of goitered gazelle have been identified at the western edge of the reserve recently, 1 consisting of 6-7 individuals and another consisting of The loss of the local population of Goitered 10-15. Gazelle from the Saigachy Reserve is unlikely to result in the uplisting of this species to Endangered (IFC GN6 Criterion ib. 83
Uzbek Red Book: Mosaically distributed subspecies. It is spread at the Ustyurt Plateau, the Kyzylkum desert and adjacent areas, the Karshi semi- Therefore, the project EcAoA is not considered arid desert as well as at some places of Surkhandarya region. The semi– critical habitat for this species. captive population is maintained in “Djeiran” Ecocenter, in Bukhara. It inhabits clay, rubbly deserts with hard soils, hilly lands and foothills, sandy deserts with hilly dunes. In the past, it was numerous (tens and hundreds of thousands individuals). Later, the range and numbers reduced sharply. At present the total number – about 4 thousand. Saiga CR CR N Y Global population: 123,450 (IUCN) / 334,000 (ACBK) Although the Saiga currently does not meet the Red Antilope, or List Criteria thresholds for Critically Endangered, the Saiga (ia) The Saiga antelope has two subspecies, the nominate subspecies Saiga previous assessment of CR A2acd is retained in the tatarica tatarica in Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan and the Mongolian latest assessment because this reassessment falls Saiga (ic) saiga Saiga tatarica mongolica in Mongolia under the IUCN’s five year rule. This rule applies to tatarica taxa that appear to be genuinely improving in status, Linnaeus, (iiia) The population of the Saiga tatarica tatarica found in Ustyurt plateau is and states that “a taxon may be moved from a 1758 estimated to be 5,900 (ACBK), with the overwhelming majority found on the category of higher threat to a category of lower Kazakh side of the border The population in Uzbekistan is estimated to be in threat if and when none of the criteria of the higher the low hundreds, and according national experts and rangers from the category has been met for five years or more”. The Saigachy Reserve, 1 herd remaining of ~15 individuals in the Saigachy Saiga is considered to have crossed the thresholds Reserve. between CR and EN around 2015, therefore its status will be re-evaluated again in 2020. Saiga currently meets the thresholds for Endangered under criterion A4 based on observed, estimated and projected declines of >50% over 11 years (three generations), commencing from May 2015, due to the risk of mass mortality events (MME) resulting from outbreaks of disease, exacerbated by climatic and environmental factors, and taking place alongside ongoing poaching pressure for the illegal trade in horns. Saiga populations are inherently vulnerable to mass mortality from a range of diseases. Since 2010, four disease outbreaks have caused large-scale mortality in Saiga.
In line with a precautionary approach when assessing the local Saiga population, critical habitat is being assessed against the entire Ustyurt saiga population, including the individuals on the Kazakh side of the border. Thus, the local population is considered to be at present 5,900 (ACBK, 2019).
84
The traditional migration corridor for the Ustyurt saiga population is from The project AoI is known to cut across the north Uzbekistan on the Ustyurt plateau and summer pastures in the southwest corner of the traditional migration northern part of the Kyzylkum desert in Kazakhstan. However, due to habitat corridor for the Ustyurt Saiga antelope. The fragmentation (e.g. border fence), and other threats (e.g. poaching) the current Ustyurt Saiga population (5,900) Ustyurt Saiga population is decreasing in number. constitutes 1.77% of the global population (334,00) and therefore meets the IFC Criterion ia The traditional migration corridor includes areas south west of the existing for critical habitat. road and new road alignment. In 2004, an estimated 1000 individuals tried to cross the A380 to get to the sout west of the project AoI – the last attempted The EcAoA for the Saiga is also therefore crossing. considered to sustain >1% of the global population of a migratory species and therefore Based on an mean average estimated saiga population growth rate of 28% meets the IFC Criterion iiia critical habitat.
Therefore it is assessed that the project impacts upon critical habitat for the Ustyurt Saiga antelope.
annually, even the small local population of 15 animals in Uzbekistan could grow to some 5,900 individuals over the project road lifespan (25 years).
Efforts are underway to mitigate the impacts of linear infrastructure currently restricting their traditional migration corridor.
In the longer term and given that 25-year minimum design life of the project, there is the potential for saiga population to grow in Uzbekistan and the project impacts on the saigas migration corridor to increase. A precautionary approach is therefore being taken to impacts associated with operation of the proposed road by assuming a viable population in place that is able to migrate across the border
85
Uzbek Red Book: can be found at the Ustyurt Plateu, spread at the Eastern and Southern Aral Sea region, former bottom of the Aral Sea. It inhabits semi–desert and desert zones. In the past, it was numerous. From the 1990, the number reduced by 99,5%. In 2016, the total number of the transboarder ustyurt population (Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan) estimated 1900 specimens; the number of migrating species depends on weather conditions. The number of resident groups in the Aral Sea region and former bottom of the Aral Sea is about 200 individuals.
Marbled VU VU:D N Y Global population figures unavailable. Due to the lack of data available for the Marbled Polecat Polecat it is a challenge to assess this species (ic) Local population: ~5,000 against IUCN thresholds. Listed by the IUCN as VU Vormela due to population reduction over the last 10 years peregusna Current population trend: decreasing. through habitat loss. Guldenstaed t, 1770 Estimated global EOO: >20,000 km2 Considering the vast range over which the species can occur, the natural sparsity with which it does Project EcAoA for Marbled Polecat: 2,500 km2 occur within its ranges and the relatively small EcAoA of 2,500 km2 it is considered very unlikely Inhabits desert, semi-desert and steppe habitats. Tends to occur rarely that the loss of the species numbers from within the throughout much of its range, apparently naturally so. EcAoA would meet IFC Criterion ib.
Occurs over a vast range from south-east Europe through Asia Minor, the The project EcAoA is therefore not considered Middle East, the Caucasus, and Central Asia, to northern China critical habitat for the Marbled Polcecat
Inhabits the sand islands in Ustyurt with interrupted haloxylon forest and hunts Great Gerbils and Souslik.
Uzbek Red Book: Mosaically distributed, naturally rare species. It is spread at the Kyzylkum desert, the Ustyurt Plateau, the Hungry and Karshi semi-arid deserts, the foothills and upper altitude of the Wester Tien-Shan and Pamir- Alay, the lower part of Surkhandarya. In the upper part of the Ahangaran River there is an isolated high mountain area. The number is about 5 thousands animals.
86
APPENDIX F: PHOTOS OF THREATENED SPECIES THAT MAY OCCUR IN THE PROJECT AREA
87
Figure F.1: Agrionemys horsfieldii (Gray, 1844), Central Asian tortoise, VU (IUCN)13
Figure F.2: Elaphe sauromates (Pallas, [1814]), Blotched snake, VU:R (Uz RDB)14
• Falco cherrug (J.E. Gray, 1834), Saker Falcon, EN (IUCN) NT (Uz RDB)
13 https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/42694254 14 https://www.inaturalist.org/photos/35377742 88
Figure F.3: Falco pelegrinoides (Temminck, 1829) Barbary Falcon VU:R (Uz RDB)15
Figure F.4: Neophron percnopterus (Linnaeus, 1758), Egyptian Vulture, EN (IUCN)16
15 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/45354964/95143387#external-links 16 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22695180/118600142 89
Figure F.5: Circaetus gallicus (J.F. Gmelin, 1788), Short-toed Snake-eagle/Short-toed Eagle, VU:D (Uz RDB)17
Figure F.6: Aquila nipalensis (Hodgson, 1833), Steppe Eagle, EN (IUCN), NT (Uz RDB)18
17 https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/27228896 18 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22696038/118576408 90
Figure F.7: Aquila heliaca (Savigny, 1809), Eastern Imperial Eagle, VU (IUCN), VU:D (Uz RDB)19
Figure F.8: Aquila chrysaetos (Linnaeus, 1758), Golden Eagle, VU:R (Uz RDB)20
19 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22696048/117070289 20 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22696060/93541662 91
Figure F.9: Chettusia gregaria (Pallas, 1771), Sociable Lapwing, CR (IUCN), VU:R (Uz RDB)21
Figure F.10: Larus ichthyaetus (Pallas, 1773), Great Black-headed Gull / Pallas's Gull, VU:R (Uz RDB)22
21 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/22694053/130586388 22 https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/22757759 92
Figure F.11: Vormela peregusna (Guldenstaedt, 1770), Marbled Polecat, VU (IUCN)23
Figure F.12: Caracal caracal (Schreber, 1776), Caracal, CR (UZ RDB)24
23 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/29680/45203971 24 https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/3847/102424310#external-links 93
Figure F.13: Mustela eversmanni Lesson, 1827, Steppe polecat, (VU, IUCN)
Figure F.14: Saiga tatarica (Linnaeus, 1758), Saiga Antilope, or Saiga, CR (IUCN), CR (Uz RDB)25
25 https://www.cms.int/saiga/en/news/signs-hope-saiga-antelope-after-mass-die-2015 94
Figure F.15: Vulpes corsac, Corsac Fox, VU (UZ RDB)
Figure F.16: Felis margarita (Loche, 1858), Sand Cat, NT (Uz RDB)26
26 https://pixels.com/featured/sand-cat-felis-margarita-photostock-israel.html 95
APPENDIX G: RESULTS OF SURVEYS AND CONSULTATIONS
96
First Round of Public Consultations in March 2019
Summary of Consultation Outcome Location Issues / Concerns Response Jaslik 1. Unemployment is major concern 1. With improved roads, newer 2. Absence of public transport opportunities are likely as (buses) greatly affects access to there could be development health care, markets and higher happening along the highway education 2. The people should address the 3. High cost of private bus ticket requirement of public 4. Frequency of private operator transport to the administration very poor 3. With improved road, more 5. Insecure road to the Kungrad private operators may be district as there are no lights interested in operating services 6. Condition of the road is bad and and hence prices could come it takes long time to travel to down Kungrad 4. If more people are commuting and the road is good, chances are there for an increase in services. 5. In the highway lights will not be provided, but the rest areas and junctions at Jaslik and Karakalpakstan will have lighting. 6. Once the road work is completed, you will have a high quality road Jaslik 1. Lack of the regular public 1. The people should address the (Wo e ’s Co ittee, transportation requirement of public kindergarten teachers 2. Lack of the access to healthcare, transport to the administration and Gas Company market, college and univercities 2. Improved road will reduce the employees 3. Lack of ambulance car travel time to Kungrad and 4. Lack of the facilities along the people will have faster and road, no bus stops and no toilet safer access to markets, health care and education. 3. Once the road is developed, some hospital in Kungrad may be asked to provide the services 4. Rest areas and bus shelters have been proposed and these will have separate toilets for men and women. Karakalpakstan 1. Unemployment is high as there 1. Improved road would help in are no opportunities encouraging newer economic 2. No public bus service available activities in the region and 3. High cost for taxi service 4. Accidents on the road
97
Location Issues / Concerns Response thereby there is a possibility of more opportunities 2. The people should address the requirement of public transport to the administration 3. Once the road is improved, there is a possibility that the rates would come down and also more operators could be interested in offering the services. 4. The proposed road with two lanes will result in fewer accidents and there is also a road safety component under the project to create awareness and assess the safety requirement Karakalpakstan female 1. Lack of the regular public 1. The people should address the FGDs transportation requirement of public 2. Lack of the access to healthcare/ transport to the administration hospitals, market, and 2. Once the road is improved, universities access to Kungrad, where 3. Lack of ambulance car healthcare, market and 4. Lack of the facilities along the educational facilities are road available, will be easier and 5. High cost of taxi service faster. 6. Unsafe and poor quality road 3. Once the road is developed, some hospital in Kungrad may be asked to provide the services 4. Rest areas with some shops and bus shelters are proposed under the project 5. Once the road is improved, there is a possibility that the rates would come down and also more operators could be interested in offering the services. 6. Road will become very safe after it is made into a two lane road with shoulders. The quality will be very good
98
Participants in Consultations Numbers of SNo Place Date Photo Participate 1 Jaslik 20.03.2019 17 (Mahalaya) (including 10 women)
2 Jaslik 20.03.2019 24 (Wo e ’s (all women) Committee)
3 Jaslik 20.03.2019 6 (kindergarten (all women) teachers)
4 Jaslik 20.03.2019 5 (Gas Company (including 4 employees) women)
99
Participants in Consultations Numbers of SNo Place Date Photo Participate 5 Karakalpakstan 21.03.2019 24 (all women)
6 Karakalpakstan 21.03.2019 11 (including 4 women)
7 Karakalpakstan 21.03.2019 12 (all women)
99 Total (including 84 women)
100
Results of April 2019 Rapid Survey
A biodiversity site assessment was conducted by a leading ornithologist and zoologist27 in the country between 01-02 April 2019. A preliminary assessment of natural landscapes, fauna and the nearest infrastructure facilities has been carried out along the existing A-380 highway from the 964 km signpost to the Daut-ata customs post (1204 km).
Field research methods and materials obtained
2. Biodiversity has been assessed through a combination of windshield survey, hiking, and stationary observations. Reptiles, birds, and mammals identifications followed the standard in-life method that involved the registration of all terrestrial vertebrates and traces of their activity that includes voices, footprints, excrements, biting marks and scrapes. The research was aided with a Swarovski, 10-fold binoculars; Viking, 80-fold visual tube; Garmin Etrex 10, GPS navigation device; Sony DSC H300, digital camera with 25-fold optical zoom; topographic maps K-40 (A,B,C) and L-40 (B,D) of 1:500000 scale. The exact coordinate and vertical positioning were taken of the field routes and and points of registration. The most significant areas and objects of study were photographed. The bird species were identified through the field guide “Birds of Central Asia” (2019).
3. The study covered 14 points in total along the 204 x 2 km corridor centered along the project alignment and the duration of observations was 12 hours 45 minutes. The succeeding Table presents the coordinates of the research points, animals encountered, and corresponding population and distribution within the corridor of impact for biodiversity.
Research points and distribution of terrestrial vertebrate species within the project area for the period of 01-02 April 2019:
Table G.1: Research points and distribution of terrestrial vertebrate species within the project area
Point Geographical coordinates Elevation Animals found No28. N E above sea
level, (km) meters Route 4 43.40616 058.13257 143 3 Sunwatcher Toad-headed Agama - 1; 14 43.47094 058.11500 147 Crested Lark – 5; Isabelline Wheatear – 1; Small five-toed Jerboa – 1 (burrow); Severtzov's Jerboa – 1 (burrow); Great Gerbil – 6 colonies/hectare. 5 43.64137 057.97344 121 15 Golden Eagle – 3 (VU:R (Uz RDB); Long-legged Buzzard – 1; Eurasian Skylark – 2; Caspian Gull – 1; Large souslik – 2; Great Gerbil – belt of settlement along the route. 6 43.78046 057.79587 122 18 Caspian Gull – 1; Great Gerbil – belt of settlement along the route.
27 Mr. Kashkarov Roman Danilovich, Birds Specialist of Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds an affiliate of the Birdlife International. He is a senior staff of the Academy of Science Institute of Zoo, Republic of Uzbekistan.
101
Point Geographical coordinates Elevation Animals found No28. N E above sea
level, (km) meters Route 7 43.98811 057.50613 125 27 Caspian Gull – 1; Small five-toed Jerboa – 1 (burrow); Great Gerbil – 5 colonies/hectare. Tolai Hare – 1. 13 44.08894 057.35687 119 15 Heuglin's Gull – 1; Large Souslik – 1; Great Gerbil – 6 colonies/hectare; Libyan Jird – 1 + 2 colonies. 8 44.19927 057.18061 131 16 Large Souslik – 1; Great Gerbil – 12 colonies/hectare. 12 44.34208 056.94524 141 22 Western Marsh Harrier – 1; Montagu's Harrier – 1; Black Kite – 1; Caspian Gull – 2; White-winged Lark – 1; Common Wheatear – 3; Isabelline Wheatear – 2; Large Souslik – 4; Great Gerbil – belt of settlement along the route. 9 44.77639 056.21720 120 79 Short-toed Eagle – 1 (VU:D (Uz RDB); Common Kestrel – 1; Heuglin's Gull – 3; Caspian Gull – 1; Common Wheatear – 3; Common Starling – 5; Great Gerbil – belt of settlement along the route. 10 44.83437 056.11838 100 9 Great Gerbil – belt of settlement along the route. 11 44.89055 056.00667 77 10 Long-legged Buzzard – 1; Heuglin's Gull – 1; Pied Wheatear – 1; Great Gerbil – belt of settlement along the route.
102
Results of December 2019 Consultations
Meeting 2 Monday 9th December, Dr. R. Kashkarov (Birds Specialist of Uzbekistan Society for the Protection of Birds, Birdlife International), Institute of Zoology, Tashkent The discussion focussed on the full biodiversity assessment and mitigation for Project produced by Dr Kashkarov in his report for EIA. Specific discussions were had with regards to the following: Impact on Birds Dr. Kashkarov stated that he believes that the road will have very little impact on local birds or migratory species (including trigger species for the IBAs). In particular he felt that:
• Migratory waterbirds would “not be bothered’ by the road • Birds of prey were unlikely to be attracted to road kill • Sociable lapwing had not been recorded in the Project area • However, waterbodies formed from construction is a risk as they might attract birds Mitigation Dr Kashkarov raised the following:
• A significant part of mitigation will be training of construction workers • Signage should be used at saiga crossing points • Retrofitting electricity pylons with bird protection measures would be useful Surveying
• Camera traps wouldn’t work along the road, would get stolen • Ustyurt plateau is flat and wide so very difficult to monitor generally. Bird of Prey migration differs per species, but surveying water birds is easier • Permit needed from local ministry for nature protection
Thursday 12th December Institute of Natural Sciences of Karakalpak Branch, Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan: Attendees were Dr. Svetlana Mambetullaeva, deputy director and Gulara Matekova, researcher Offices of Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan The discussion focussed on the following points: Research and Surveys
• The Institute of Natural Sciences is cooperating with Saigachy reserve for research with visual surveys taking place at present of birds and mammals at 5 sites within the Saigachy Reserve. Further cadastral monitoring is upcoming in Spring / summer / autumn, starting in March/April. • Species lists are available of all species at each of the 5 sites (breeding / nesting) and Svetlana said she was happy to share results of surveying and conclusions via email and species lists. She recommended to link project in with cadastral survey. • Caracal had been spotted near road in the north (and seemed to be spreading north, possibly climate related). • Raptors – single birds are generally seen in the Project area, not migratory flocks.
103
• Houbara bustard is a resident species, not migratory. They were reintroduced for hunting just north of Jaslik but people unsure of what happened to them. • There is a stable population of goitered gazelle in the reserve and population in the southern Aral Sea area also. Impact Assessment
• Where waterbodies are present near the highway, birds and predators are attracted to the water. Small depressions have possibility of holding water for quite a long time after the rains (start in April/May and finish in June/July). They are especially a risk near Jaslik as they will attract poachers, although migrating water birds will typically stop to drink but won’t stop long enough to be a risk of poachers. Consider awareness raising sign near waterbodies. • There is a risk of birds hitting vehicles, although current roadkill they had seen rodents but never seen birds or fox. There had been an increase in roadkill of jackal in the south after road rehabilitation down there due to more vehicles and increased speed. Ornithological Studies
• Raptors: Important nesting site is the haloxyon forest, especially larger more mature trees for raptors. Honey buzzard can nest all along the road, near the sisal forest, while golden eagle nest on artificial structures especially when high up. Steppe eagles only migrates over and Egyptian vultures only recorded in the south. Raptors prefer live kill to road kill. • Waterbodies: If created intentionally could help nesting birds, but they should not be too big, maybe several small ones. Some artificial waterbodies had been created by local chemical factory • Ornithologist ticked off which bird species are present in the Project AoI as per the Uzbek Red Book. Thursday 12th December Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan: Attendees: Myrat Jolybekov, Head of Inspection; Boranbay Ibragimov, Head of Information Centre, Olya Myrzanazarova, specialist of Information Centre; Saigachy Reserve: Rinat Musaev and Nurbek, Offices of the Goscomecology of Karakalpakstan Discussion areas:
• The team were informed that the existing road was built in 04/05, and cut across Saiga migration route. • Important to mitigate impacts of workers during construction especially as poachers is a big problem, and hard to keep on top of. Temporary camps for workers need to be kept away from sensitive sites during construction. • Saigachy Reserve – 13 people manage the reserve (10 rangers and 3 administrative). They have 4 cars, 2 field bases, Reserve gets monitored daily and the most import place for saiga is NE of the reserve. Only 1 herd of saiga remaining (~15 individuals). • Other mammals include goitered gazelle at the western edge of the reserve; 2 herds; 1) 6-7 individuals; 2) 10-15. The project can support the reserve e.g. with the building of a watering hole
104
APPENDIX H: NOISE SURVEY REPORT
105
Noise Survey Report (A380)
The Republic of Karakalpakstan
Republic of Uzbekistan: A380 Road Rehabilitation Project (km964 – km1204)
106
CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 108 1.1. Background ...... 108 1.2. Site Description ...... 108 2. APPLICABLE GUIDANCE ...... 109 3. SURVEY OVERVIEW ...... 109 3.1. Attended Monitoring ...... 109 4. RESULTS ...... 110 4.1. Results of measurements ...... 110 4.2. Attended Short Term Sampling Measurements (0.5-hour) ...... 110 5. SUMMARY ...... 111 6. REFERENCES ...... 111 APPENDIX A ...... 112 APPENDIX B ...... 116 APPENDIX C ...... 119 APPENDIX D ...... 121
107
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Background 1. Uzbekistan is a key transport country in Central Asia for trade among themselves, as well as with the rest of Asia and Europe. Transport plays a key role in promoting regional and internal trade. The proposed investment program (the investment program) rehabilitations the Uzbekistan section in Karakalpakstan Region, which connects Uzbekistan to Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. This rehabilitation will improve connectivity, road safety, and boost domestic and international trade. 2. A glossary of acoustics terminology is provided in Appendix A. 1.2. Site Description 3. The Project involves the rehabilitation of 240 km of the roadway all of which will be funded by the ADB. The project will be confined within the existing right-of-way with no significant changes in alignment except where the standards require it, e.g. road curvatures. Basic elements of the road design include: • The reconstruction of the road will follow the existing road alignment and keep within the right of way. • The road will have a carriageway width between 15 and 22.5 meters (depending upon location) with two shoulders between 1.25 and 3 meters. • Design speeds of 120 km/h will be adopted for flat and undulated terrain and 70 km/h for urban areas. • Traffic safety features such as lighting, pedestrian crossings, road signs, road marking will also be incorporated.
108
Km1204
Km964
Picture 1: Project Area (source: IEE) 2. APPLICABLE GUIDANCE 4. The following guidance is used to inform the survey methodology: • ISO 1996-1:2016 5. Description and Measurement of Environmental defines and prescribes best practice during recording and reporting of environmental noise. 3. SURVEY OVERVIEW 3.1. Attended Monitoring 6. In addition to the two attended 0.5-hour monitoring locations, 2 separate noise sensitive receptor (NSR) locations were chosen for attended noise monitoring, the locations are reported in Table 1. Table 1: Noise sensitive Receptor Locations (Bukhara Province) NSR NSR Location Number 1 “Jashlik” 2 “Karakalpakiya”
109
7. The attended monitoring locations are shown in the noise monitoring plan in Appendix B. 8. Short term sampling measurements were taken at each identified NSR over the course of 0.5-hours between and inclusive of 1th of April 2019. An “Assistant” was used. 9. The short-term monitoring protocol compline 3x1/2-hour non-continuous measurement at each location. 10. For the attended measurement the following statistical parameters were recorded: Laeq, LAmax, and LAmin. The A-weighted frequency network and fast (F) time weighting were used. 11. In accordance with BS7445, the measurement microphone was positioned on a tripod 1.2 m above ground level, well away from vertical reflective facades. Weather conditions were conducive to successful monitoring, with wind speeds of around 6-7 m/s. The ambient temperature was between 17-20 oC. 12. All monitoring was conducted using Class 1 equipment. “Assistant” was calibrated by Uzstandard agency. 13 The calibration certificates for the equipment used are provided in Appendix C. Specific details of the equipment used, including serial numbers and calibration date, are provided on these certificates.
4. RESULTS 4.1. Results of measurements 14. The full set of results recorded in each measurement location is provided on noise monitoring forms presented in Appendix D. 4.2. Attended Short Term Sampling Measurements (0.5-hour)
15. The table 3 present the measured Laeq values at each measurement location for typical week day. Table 3: Noise Measurement Summary Typical Weekday (Average) Measurement Location Laeq ,dB
Location 1 “Jashlik” 64,3 Location 2 “Karakalpakiya” 66,5
110
5. SUMMARY 16. An ambient noise assessment has been undertaken at the closest noise sensitive receptors to the proposed Kungrad city – Karakalpariya Village road to determine existing external noise levels. 17. The measured noise data in this report shall be used to inform the noise assessment for the scheme. 6. REFERENCES 18. ISO 1996-1:2016 “Acoustics -Description, measurement and assessment of environmental noise” 19. Initial Environmental Examination Road Investment Program -Project A380 Road Rehabilitation.
111
APPENDIX A Glossary of Acoustics Terminology
112
Glossary of Acoustics Terminology Decibel (dB) The decibel scale is used in relation to sound because it is a logarithmic rather than a liner scale. The decibel scale compares the level of a sound relative to another. The human ear can detect a wide range of sound pressure, typically between 2x10-5 and 200 Pa, so the logarithmic scale is used to quantify these levels using manageable range of values. Sound The Sound Pressure Level has units of decibels, and compares the Pressure level of a sound to the smallest sound pressure generally perceptible Level (SPL) by the human ear, or the reference pressure. It is defined as follows:
SPL (dB) = 20 Log10(P/Pref) where P=sound Pressure (in Pa)
-5 Pref=Reference Pressure 2x10 Pa An SPL of 0 dB suggests the Sound Pressure is equal to the reference pressure. This is known as the threshold of hearing. Loudness The loudness of a sound is subjective, and differs from person to person. The human ear perceives loudness in a logarithmic fashion, hence the suitability of the decibel scale. Generally, a perceived doubling or halving of loudness will correspond to an increase or decrease in SPL of 10 dB. Note that a doubling of sound energy corresponds to an increase in SPL of only 3 dB. Sound The Sound Power Level defines the rate at which sound energy is Power Level emitted by a source, and is also expressed in dB. It is defined as (SWL) follows:
SWL (dB) = 10 Lod10(W/Wref) where W= Sound Power (in Watts)
Wref = Reference Power 1 picoWatt A-Weighting The human ear can detect a wide range of frequencies, from 20Hz to 20kHz, but it is more sensitive to some frequencies than others. Generally, the ear is most sensitive to frequencies in the range 1 to 4 kHz. The A-weighting is a filter that Equivalent The Equivalent Continuous Level represents a theoretical continuous sound, over a stated time period, T, which contains the same amount Continuous of energy as a number of sound events occurring within that time, or a Level source that fluctuates in level.
113
(Leq,T) For example, a noise source with as SPL of 80 dB(A) operating for two hours during an eight-hour working day, has an equivalent A-weighted continuous level over eight hours of 74 dB, or LAeq, 8hrs = 74 dB.
The time period over which the Leq is calculated should always be stated.
Maximum The maximum sound level, Lmax (or LAmax if A-weighted) is the highest Sound Level SPL that occurs during a given event or time period.
(Lmax)
Minimum Similarly, the minimum sound level, Lmin (or LAmin if A-weighted) is the Sound Level lowest SPL that occurs during a given event or time period. (Lmin)
L90 or LA90 This represents the SPL which is exceeded 90% of the time, expressed in dB or dB(A). LA90 is used to quantify background noise And other levels (see below). Other percentiles exist and are used for various percentile types of noise assessment. These include L01 , L10 , L55 , L99. measures Noise Ambient The totally encompassing sound in a given situation, at a given time, Noise including noise from any source in any direction. Specific A component of the ambient noise, associated with the specific source Noise under investigation Initial Noise Ambient prevailing noise in an area before any changes to the existing noise climate. Residual This is the ambient noise minus the specific noise, i.e. the remaining Noise noise when the specific noise source is removed.
Background This is defined as the LA90 of the residual noise. Noise Noise Any identified receptor likely to be affected by noise. These are Sensitive generally human receptors, which may include residential dwellings, Receptors work places, schools, hospitals, and recreational spaces. (NSRs) Octave In reference to the frequency of a sound, an octave describes the difference between a given frequency and that which is double that frequency, e.g.
Octave/Third A sound made up of more than one frequency can be described using a frequency spectrum, which shows the relative magnitude of the 114
Octave different frequencies within it. The possible range of frequencies is Bands continuous, but can be split up into discrete bands, often an octave or third-octave in width. Each octave band is referred to by its center frequency, generally 63Hz, 125Hz, 250Hz, 500Hz, 1kHz etc. Point A theoretical source of sound, with zero size and mass, often used as Source an approximation to model small sources. Sound from a point source radiates spherically in all directions. Line Source A theoretical source of sound, length only, often used to model long, thin sound sources, such as roads. Area source A real or theoretical source that radiates as a plane. Sound from an area source radiates plane waves rather than spherical waves, particularly if the area source is large relative to the wavelength of the sound produced.
115
APPENDIX B Noise Monitoring Location Plan
116
Noise Monitoring Plan for Short Term
117
118
APPENDIX C Equipment Calibration Certificates
119
120
APPENDIX D Attended Noise Monitoring Forms
121
Noise Monitoring Form Project Location: Jashlik Village Location: 1
Measurement Period Weather Statistical Noise Levels / dB(A) Date and Start Time Elapsed Wind Speed Wind Direction General Lmax Lmin Leq Minutes (m/s) Description April 1, 2019 13:30 30 1,6 N Cloudy 88 35 64
Noise Monitoring Form
122
Project Location: Bukhara Province Location: 2
Measurement Period Weather Statistical Noise Levels / dB(A) Date and Start Time Elapsed Wind Speed Wind Direction General Lmax Lmin Leq Minutes (m/s) Description April 1, 2019 15:15 30 2 N Cloudy 87 46 66
123
APPENDIX I: PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EXISTING ROAD CONDITION
124
# Location Km Photo Comment
1 Start of 964 The road starts in a remote portion of the road A380. The road condition is good (asphalt) and there are no residential areas located in this desert environment.
125
# Location Km Photo Comment
2 No 968 Several open borrow pits were noted in the specific first 20 or so kilometers of this road location section. It is not known who is operating these borrow pits, or if they are licensed.
3 No 978 Most of the pavement along the road has specific cracked, but this does not prevent speeds location of up to 120 km per hour being reached on long sections of the road. Traffic volumes are extremely low. One can drive more than five minutes without seeing another vehicle on the road.
126
# Location Km Photo Comment
4 No 1009 A herd of camels were noted at this point specific of the road. It is unlikely that many location accidents involving camels occur in this section of the road for several reasons, firstly the very low traffic volumes and secondly due to the fact that the road is very flat and straight, which enables the driver to see a long way into the distance and identify any hazards on the road, such as camels.
5 No 1016 The road continues north through the specific desert. location
127
# Location Km Photo Comment
6 No 1049 A rail crossing. specific location
7 No 1081 As mentioned above, vehicle speed can specific reach up to 120 km per hour, but then location suddenly, in some sections, the road deteriorates rapidly with large potholes such as this section around km 1081. Driving speeds are reduced in these areas to around 20-30 km per hour. It was noted that at night time these spots can be somewhat hazardous as the drivers may not see these potholes early enough which can lead to significant damage to vehicles.
128
# Location Km Photo Comment
8 No 1107 A saiga antelope protection outpost is specific located approximately 1km from the left location hand side of the road. This outpost was constructed as part of a GEF program to protect the critically endangered Saiga. According to environmental officials in Nukus, Saiga antelope are present in this part of the project area during May, when they migrate from the north east area of Uzbekistan to feed on the vegetation found in this region.
9 No 1138 Another example of poor road condition. specific location
129
# Location Km Photo Comment
10 No 1152 This photo illustrates the scrub vegetation specific that can be found adjacent to the road. location
130
# Location Km Photo Comment
11 No 1166 Small rodents were noted in burrows specific adjacent to the road side. location
131
# Location Km Photo Comment
12 No 1183 A camel grazes close to a check-point. specific Several houses are located here, none of location which were within 50 meters of the road edge.
132
# Location Km Photo Comment
13 No 1192 Power transmission lines cross the road at specific this point. One of the towers was located location extremely close to the left hand side of the road.
14 No 1201 A small settlement comprising around ten specific properties. All properties were set back location more than 25 meters from the road.
133
# Location Km Photo Comment
15 Border 1203 The end of the road – queues of trucks crossing form at the border checkpoint.
134
APPENDIX J: TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR BIODIVERSITY EXPERTS
135
Biodiversity specialist–fauna (international, 28 pm (4months/year x (1 year pre-construction + 3 years construction + 3 years operation)). The specialist will have: (i) a PhD in ecology or biodiversity; (ii) at least 20 years international experience in biodiversity conservation and ecological research in Ustyurt Plateau region; (iii) expert knowledge of international best- practice and innovative techniques for biodiversity surveys and conservation; (iv) demonstrated experience in environmental impact assessment (EIA) for biodiversity values; and (v) specialist expertise in avifauna and a sound working knowledge of mammals particularly saiga in order to make professional assessments for a range of taxa. The specialist will be responsible for documenting the fauna values of the project area, re-assessing potential impacts of the project to biodiversity, reviewing and developing additional mitigation measures, and concluding whether impacts can be avoided, reduced, mitigated, and/or offset. Working with the other team members, design institutes, executing agency (EA) and ADB, the specialist will do the following during pre-project and project construction stages. (i) Review, revise, update, and implement the Biodiversity Monitoring and Evaluation Program (BMEP) (ii) Prepare the Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) after the implementation of the first year Biodiversity Monitoring prior to the start of construction (iii) Visit all the proposed project sites (road alignment, camp sites, borrow areas, disposal sites, water source, and communities, IBA within the DMU) to be familiar with the project area and gain an adequate understanding of the key ecological issues. Field visits will be timed to coincide with the optimal seasons to collect data on biodiversity of importance are the bird and saiga migration. Include in the visits all IBA in the DMU to help compare the relative importance of the project area. (iv) Develop a workplan that complements the national biodiversity specialist (fauna) and other team members, so that the specialist shares and receives relevant data from these team members in a timely manner particularly in the review and finalization of the BMEP and formulation of the BAP. Review the workplan and draft report of the national biodiversity specialist (fauna) and work closely with them to deliver an integrated report. (v) Review and document the vertebrate fauna (mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish) and their habitats of the project area as provided in the BMEP. This should include: (a) review of available data in reports, journals and other publications; (b) discussions with local, national and/or international experts as necessary; (c) field surveys and rapid assessments as necessary to fill any information gaps for the purposes of competent impact assessment. The objective of these surveys is to focus on species and other issues of potential conservation significance to help confirm project impacts, not to document the complete species richness of the project area. It is anticipated that the national biodiversity (fauna) specialist will lead the majority of fieldwork, under the guidance of the international specialist. (vi) Based on these data, prepare a preliminary inventory of the vertebrate fauna of the project area, again using the EIA report as guide. (vii) Describe and as far as possible quantify the types, extent, and condition of key fauna habitats in the project area and discrete management unit (DMU) including migratory routes, breeding, roosting, feeding, sites. (viii) Prepare maps showing the locations of key species records, assemblages, major habitat types, and migration routes. (ix) Re-confirm the conservation values of the project area, including (a) species protected under provincial or national laws, (b) rare, restricted-range, or threatened species, (c) ‘umbrella’ or ‘flagship’ species (saiga), and (d) distinct ecological assemblages, such as amphibian and/or turtle communities. (x) For each significant species or community, like the EIA summarize the status in the project area, including abundance, occurrence, habitat requirements (type, extent, and condition of feeding, migratory, or breeding habitats available), existing threats, and existing management or conservation measures. 136
(xi) Prior to the start of construction, develop zones of conservation importance for these conservation values and prepare map(s) showing their locations. (xii) Based on these findings, re-evaluate the biodiversity values and conservation importance of the project area. (xiii) Collect additional data as necessary for these conservation values to follow up any information gaps identified in the impact assessment (xiv) Using the information in (i)-(xi), the specialist will do the following.
For biodiversity issues related to construction methods and design of the project components: (a) review the construction methods and design of the project components and provide input on how designs can be improved to avoid or reduce impacts to biodiversity;
(b) develop and continuously update the BAP, based the monitoring findings which will be implemented by the Contractor to benefit native biodiversity and habitats. Discuss and refine these with the team, EA, and ADB. For example, these measures might include, but not be limited to, restoration of habitats for rare or threatened species, removal of invasive species, monitoring, or staff training.
For biodiversity issues related to the project environmental impact assessment: (a) based on more detailed monitoring and review of detailed engineering designs, re- confirm the assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed project activities, including direct and indirect impacts, and cumulative and induced impacts (as defined by the SPS) when considered in conjunction with existing or potential threats;
(b) if necessary, develop mitigation measures to offset potential impacts; and,
(d) assess the net impacts that will remain after mitigation, and whether these are still significant.
For both project design and environmental impact assessment: review and revise when necessary the BMEP to assess the impacts and/or benefits of project construction and operation. The program will: (a) define the specific objectives; (b) focus on a relatively small (manageable) number of key species, habitats and other key values; (c) define the sampling locations, methods, frequency, and times of year; (d) prepare a formatted spreadsheet for data entry and storage; (e) define a set of questions to be answered by the data and the analyses needed to answer these questions; (f) describe the roles and responsibilities of implementing agencies; (g) cover 7 years duration ( 1 year preconstruction, 3 years construction phase and first 3 years of operation); (h) provide an estimated budget; (i) assess the capacity of the agencies that will implement the program and prepare a list of specific training needs tailored to these agencies. The program should be as straightforward and cost-effective as possible and be limited to issues of direct relevance to the project. Include the component on aquatic insects to be provided by the aquatic insect specialist. (xv) Deliverable 1: a written report with maps which consolidates the findings of the international and national biodiversity (fauna) specialists. (xvi) Deliverable 2: provide written inputs to the environmental components of the required ADB reports.
Biodiversity specialist–fauna (national, 56 pm (8months/year x ( 1 year pre-construction+ 3 years construction + 3 years operation))). The specialist will have: (i) a master’s degree in ecology or biodiversity; (ii) at least 10 years national experience in biodiversity conservation and ecological research; (iii) expert knowledge of national techniques for biodiversity surveys and conservation; (iv) demonstrated experience in environmental impact assessment (EIA) for 137
biodiversity values; (v) expertise in birds and mammals (saiga), to make professional assessments for a range of taxa; and (vi) proficiency in spoken and written English. The specialist will work with the international biodiversity (fauna) specialist to document the biodiversity values of the project area, assess potential project impacts to biodiversity, and develop mitigation measures. Working with the other team members, design institutes, EA and ADB, the specialist will do the following. (i) Visit all of the proposed project sites, to be familiar with the project area and gain an adequate understanding of the key ecological issues. Field visits will be timed to coincide with the optimal seasons to collect data on biodiversity of particular importance for the project e.g. waterbird and/or fish migration. (ii) Develop a workplan that complements the international biodiversity (fauna) specialist and other team members, especially the wetland, water resources, and environmental specialists, so that the specialist shares and receives relevant data from these team members in a timely manner. (iii) Based on planning with, and guidance of, the international biodiversity (fauna) specialist, conduct most of the field work needed to document the fauna values of the project area, especially wetland fauna, including: (a) identification of relevant reports and publications in Russian and Uzbek language and discussion of the key findings of these sources with the international specialist; (b) discussions with local, national and/or international experts as necessary; (c) field surveys and rapid assessments as necessary to fill any information gaps for the purposes of competent impact assessment. The objective of these surveys is to focus on species and other issues of potential conservation significance to help determine project impacts, not to document the complete species richness of the project area. (iv) Based on these data, prepare a preliminary inventory of the vertebrate fauna of the project area. (v) Describe and as far as possible quantify the types, extent, and condition of key fauna habitats in the project area. (vi) Prepare maps showing the locations of key species records, assemblages, major habitat types, and migration routes. (vii) Assist the international biodiversity (fauna) specialist in identifying the conservation values of the project area, the local status of significant species and other conservation values in the project area, and development of zones of conservation importance. (viii) Collect additional data as necessary for these conservation values to follow up any information gaps which will hinder impact assessment during the pre-construction and construction phases. (ix) Work with the international biodiversity specialist as necessary to assess potential project impacts, mitigation measures, and net impacts, to these conservation values, and develop a biodiversity monitoring program. (x) Deliverable 1: provide all inputs to the international biodiversity (fauna) specialist as a written draft, in a format agreed upon by both specialists, for review and inclusion in the biodiversity report. (xi) Deliverable 2: support the other tasks of the international biodiversity (fauna) specialist, including preparation of biodiversity information.
138
APPENDIX K: FRAMEWORK PLANS
139
Framework Plans
1. The purpose of these framework plans is to provide further guidance to the borrower, construction supervision consultant, and the contractors to comply with the ADB environmental safeguard requirements by preparing sub-plans on selected areas covered. The framework plans should be considered part of the environmental impact assessment report, environmental management and monitoring plans to allow the preparation of more responsive site-specific environmental management plans. These framework plans were distilled from past experiences in road upgrading and rehabilitation projects and have proven effective in guiding Contractors prepare site-specific environmental management plans. A total of 6 framework plans are provided in this Appendix, these are: • Camp Establishment and Management • Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan • Occupational Health and Safety • Quarry and Crusher Plant • Waste Management • Borrow Pits and Spoils Management
Camp Establishment and Management
Objectives
• Provide safe and healthy accommodation to the staff and personnel; • Prevent or minimize adverse impacts of camp operations on the surrounding environment; • Prevent or minimize the social impacts and possible conflicts of workers within the host community; • Poster a harmonious relationship between the Contractor and its staff and workers with the host community and • Assure the camp is properly permitted and compliant with the local regulations. 2. This framework plan provides the criteria for site selection, the guidelines for permitting, the required environmental facilities and environmental management i.e. liquid waste and solid waste management, sanitation and hygiene requirement for safety and security and abandonment plan. Roles and Responsibilities 3. The project manager has the overall responsibility with the establishment and management of the construction camp. He is responsible for day to day management of the camp. The Contractor’s Environment Officer under the supervision of the CSC Environment Specialist are responsible for overseeing the implementation of the health, safety and environmental guidelines, rules and regulations put in place by the Contractor. The camp occupants are bound to abide by the rules and observe the guidelines and to report to management untoward incidents and prohibited activities. Contractor Construction Camp Location 4. The construction camp is ideally situated distant (at least 500 meters) from existing settlements to avoid possible conflicts and other social impacts. Additionally, it is preferable that the camp does not occupy a productive land including grazing lands or affect productive land and distant to water bodies to prevent pollution. The construction camp should be at least 1 kms from the identified haloxylon forest. Maps showing the proposed locations of camps will be submitted to the CSC-ES for approval, prior to establishment showing distances from the proposed road project, community areas, water bodies, agricultural/grazing areas, and haloxylon forest. The Contractor camp needs to comply with this minimum set of criteria. Permits and Waivers 5. The Contractor needs to secure all the necessary governmental permits and clearances, including signed the agreement with the landowner for using the land as camp site, as the case may be. Camp and Facilities 6. The contractor will prepare a camp site layout showing, among others the location and specification of the following: a) Camp Facilities • Main Office • Dining and kitchen • Contractor’s staff accommodation • Contractor’s local staff accommodation • Water supply system • Wastewater disposal system • Security provision (e.g. fence heights, locations, gated entry, perimeter lighting) b) Stockpile and Plant • Fuel storage • Maintenance shop • Steel workshop • Batching plant • Precast yard HSE Management of the Camp 7. The Health and Safety Plan prepared by the Contractor covers the workers camp. The specific HSE requirement for the workers’ camp includes the following: a) Camp Rules and Regulations 8. The Contractor will impose camp rules and regulations as part of the security arrangement of the camp. The camp rules shall include, among others, the following: • Entry to camp is limited only to workers residing in the camp • Curfew time shall be observed • No consumption of alcoholic drinks and illegal drugs in camp and worksite • No gambling in the camp and work site • Workers are prohibited from keeping wildlife pets • Weapons, guns and bladed weapons are not allowed in camp and worksite • Workers should keep the camp tidy and clean • No fighting b) Perimeter Fencing 9. The camp site is provided with perimeter fencing consisting of 1.8 m high fence. The perimeter fence will have 1 entrance and posted with a 24-hr watchman/security. Perimeter lighting will be provided. c) Fire Safety 10. Firefighting equipment (fire extinguishers) shall be installed in the following parts of the camp (labor camp, batching plant, asphalt plant, quarry and crushing plant). Safety signboards will be posted in designated areas. Safety guidelines for storage of gas cylinders and combustible materials will be posted where they are located. d) First Aid Stations 11. The first aid station at the camp site will be located at the Contractor site office. The first aid station will be supplied with safety pins and dressings consisting of: (a) adhesive dressings individually wrapped; (b) sterile gauze pads; 3 inches square; (c) gauze bandage, 2 inches wide; (d) field dressings, 4 inches square or 2 four-inch sterile bandage compresses, and (e) triangular bandage. In addition, the first aid station will be supplied with spinal board / stretcher, eye wash station and basic medicines for fever, pain, stomach disorder. A list of emergency contact numbers such as ambulance service, emergency hospital, the HSEO and the Project Manager shall be posted at the first aid station and the different bulletin boards at the different facilities, i.e. camp and crushing plant. e) Water Supply and Wastewater Management 12. The camp is expected to have no more than 100 occupants and an estimate of the daily requirement will made by the Contractor. Water supply for the camp will be sourced from nearest railway station. Water will be tested for portability and if needed, treatment, e.g. chlorination will be applied. Camp water will be pumped into overhead steel tank and piped to the toilets, bathroom, kitchen / dining and laundry area. It is estimated that the camp will generate approximately 80% of the total water supplied as wastewater. Water from toilet, bathrooms, kitchen / dining and laundry area will be collected and treated in the septic tank. The Camp will be equipped with several septic tanks. The septic tanks are the standard 3-chamber, with one chamber designed as the leaching chamber. f) Camp Run-off Management 13. The camp will be provided with concrete lined ditches to catch and conduct run-off into a natural drainage channel. g) Solid Waste Management 14. Garbage receptacles will be distributed in different parts of the camp, in the offices, living quarters, dining, kitchen and other common areas. Receptacles shall be provided for recyclable wastes and the other for non-recyclables. The recyclable materials shall be recovered and temporarily stored in the camp. The recyclables will be sold to recyclable materials buyers in the nearest villages. The hauling and disposal of the camp’s solid waste may be contracted to the local government/township waste management department. The wastes are for disposal in the village disposal sites. Monitoring and Reporting 15. The monitoring of the implementation of the Camp Establishment and Management Plan shall be carried out by the Contractor’s Environment Office who is the designated Camp Manager, as part of the regular monitoring. Monitoring will be done on a monthly basis and the report will be compiled by the Contractor’s Environment Specialist together with the other monitoring reports to be included in the overall Monthly Environmental Monitoring Report to be submitted to CSC. Abandonment Plan 16. The detailed abandonment plan of the camp should be prepared by the Contractor and submitted to CSC no later than 6 months prior to issuance of taking over certificate.
Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan
1. The purpose of the plan is to provide a response to spills to minimize: • Hazards to workers and the public; • Pollution of land and water; • The extent of the affected area; • Adverse impacts on the environment, vegetation and wildlife; and • Disturbance during cleanup. 2. The Plan is intended to initiate an immediate response with trained personnel and equipment to clean-up any accidental spill and ensure minimal impact to the land or aquatic environment in the immediate and surrounding area. The Plan includes procedures for cleanup, notification of appropriate authorities when necessary, containment, disposal, and monitoring, including details regarding equipment and personnel allocations. Pre-Spill Preparation 3. Considering that this is a road construction project which involves limited quantities of hazardous materials on site, the possibility of large spills is generally low and a corresponding spill contingency plan is put together. a) Hazard Identification 4. The hazardous materials that will be used and will require storage are: diesel fuel, lubricating materials (petroleum based), prime coat, bitumen and concrete additives. Cement works will be substantial and therefore the additive needed will be in large quantity. Adequate materials storage should be provided. Diesel fuel will be stocked in above ground fuel tanks at the crushing plant site, the batching plant site and the asphalt plant sites. Lubricating oil will be stored in 200-liter steel drums at the equipment maintenance yard. Bitumen and the prime coat shall be stockpiled at the asphalt plant. Bitumen shall be delivered in bulk and shall be contained in reusable tanks. 5. Hazardous waste materials, that are expected to be generated during the road construction, are used oil, oil tainted wastes (fabrics, oil filters, etc.) and bitumen solvents. These shall be stored in a covered and secured storage facility at the plant sites. A Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System sheet will identify all hazardous compounds coming on site and this information will be available to all personnel. Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System training will be provided to all employees. b) Risk Analysis 6. The threat of spill during the construction will be from petroleum products, mainly diesel fuel and the prime coat / tack coat. Spillage of these materials will be contained quickly using the spill equipment kept on site. In the unlikely event of a major spill, emergency response procedures will be activated. This Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan is primarily aimed at hydrocarbon spills due to the large amount of fuel in storage. c) Initial Alerting 7. Timely and accurate reporting of an accidental spill can help to ensure quick and efficient response. This Plan includes detailed information regarding both general and specific notification procedures. d) Spill Prevention 8. The Contractor may maintain diesel fuel tanks in different areas that may include: Camp site, quarry site and asphalt plant. Bitumen and additives will be stored in asphalt plant. The capacities of the fuel and bitumen storage facility will be determined by the Contractor. The equipment maintenance shop will be located within the camp site. For spill prevention, the Contractor shall implement in these sites the following measures: • Single wall above ground fuel tanks shall be provided with hard standing and containment wall. For refueling of vehicles, a fuel pump and refueling station with hard standing will be provided • The equipment of workshop/repair shop shall be provided with hard standing and oil drip pans shall be used during vehicle and equipment repair and maintenance work. Used oil and oil tainted materials shall be collected and contained in appropriate containers and stored in the hazardous waste storage facility. • Bitumen heater, pump shall be installed on hard standing; spilled bitumen shall be cleared immediately; • Empty bitumen drums (if delivered in 200-liter steel drums) be stored properly, the drums shall be stored upright to prevent residual bitumen material from spilling onto the ground. Spilled bitumen should be scraped and stored in drums for disposal. • Hazardous wastes expected to be generated at the asphalt plant site shall include used oil, oil tainted materials and solvents (used for maintaining bitumen distributor); waste bitumen, i.e. bitumen spills. The hazardous wastes shall be temporarily stored in covered and secure facility. It will have containment wall and on hard standing. The hazardous waste shall be disposed through authorized waste disposal companies. Roles and Responsibilities
• Project Manager. Organize the relevant management personnel to establishing a regular meeting system for learning Spill Prevention and contingency plan; • Site Manager. Develop an inventory of all oil/hazardous material stored or used during construction. Prepare a basic facility diagram or sketch for any storage areas, including pipe yards and temporary storage areas. The diagram should include locations of oil- filled containers, direction of run-off, emergency evacuation routes and assembly areas. Provide spill prevention, containment, and clean up equipment, and keep it available on-site. Perform daily inspections of all equipment, storage tanks, and/or container storage areas. Repair all leaking equipment, machinery or tools immediately. If items cannot be repaired, remove them immediately from the project site. Maintain a minimal spill kit (absorbent diapers, plastic bags, gloves, etc.) for each piece of hydraulically operated equipment and personnel vehicles within the project area; • Contractor’s Environment Officer. Establish a regular meeting system for Spill Prevention and contingency plan. Teach awareness-level training at the initial project environmental training session. Ensure further training is available for other new project personnel. Audit training records kept by the Contractor as necessary. Prepare a secondary containment plan for any hazardous material storage within the project area. Perform daily inspections of all equipment, storage tanks, and/or container storage areas; • Other Staffs Cooperate & assist site Engineer and HSE officer to do the daily inspections, make record and immediately inform if anything happened. 9. Standard Procedure for Oil Spill. Consider the safety of all persons first. If any personnel have been affected or injured by the spill, first aid should be applied and medical attention rendered as soon as possible. a) Identification of Spill • All employees must inform the Site Engineer at once, of a spill; • If the employee can safely stop the spill at the source, this should be done. • The Shift Supervisor will investigate and confirm the spill. He will: i. Determine the source, if possible; Assess the size and nature of the spilled material; ii. Mobilize a response team to take immediate action to stop or reduce the spill and contain it, without endangering the health and safety of the workers or local population; iii. Take action to reduce hazards to persons working near the spill; iv. Contact the environment department including the local government where necessary. b) Response 10. Take any actions necessary to prevent the spill from contaminating groundwater or offsite surface water (e.g. clean-up using an absorbent material mixed with sand. When responding, consider the safety of all persons first. • the oil should be prevented from escaping to storm water drains; • collect the oil or soak up material using absorbent material; • once the spill cleanup is completed, place the used absorbent pads or contaminated materials into drums for appropriate disposal; • contaminated soils should be excavated and replaced with clean fill; • oil soaked sand or soil will be removed where necessary. The oil tainted soil will be held in a treatment site where it will be laid out in windrows to allow oxidation of the oil. c) Documentation 11. A daily log will be maintained of the spill cleanup activities The Contractor’s Environment Officer should submit a full Spill Report of the incident as soon as possible and provide copies to the Project Manager and the Engineer. The report will provide the following information: • The date and time of spill; • The name of the personnel involved in initial response; • Location of incident; • The substances involved (estimated quantity); • Actions taken to respond (containment, cleanup); • Government and agency personnel contacted; • Media involvement (if any); • Evaluation of response effectiveness; • Description of ongoing requirements (remediation of soils, monitoring. etc.); • Identification of cause; • Recommendations for prevention of future incidents; and • All reports should include photo documentation • Other relevant information. d) Response Equipment 12. The following items will be contained in each spill kit: • 145-gallon, 16 gauge open top drum, c/w bolting ring and gasket; • Polyethylene disposable bags; • Personal protective equipment packages: gloves, splash goggles, suits and boots; • shovel (spark proof); • Absorbent booms; • Absorbent mats; • Barrier tape; • 1 list detailing contents of spill kit; • 1 set of instructions on use of each item in spill kit Individual Spill Kit; • Absorbent pads; • 2 absorbent socks; • Refuse bags; • Goggles and gloves. e) Training 13. Spill response training will be provided as part of the health and safety program for site personnel. The Contractor’s Environment officer will conduct regular training at site per month. The training will familiarize the staff with the location and use of spill equipment and the need to report all spills. The training will cover the following topics: • Due diligence to prevent spills; • Safety procedures; • Roles and responsibilities; • Spill assessment; • Site security and safety; • Characteristics of petroleum products; • Spill containment and recovery; • Regulatory reporting obligations; • Site restoration; and • Spill documentation. 14. Field demonstrations of correct procedures for spill response and mitigation will be scheduled during mass safety meetings. Monitoring and Reporting 15. The monitoring of the implementation of the Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan shall be carried out by the Environment Officer as part of the regular self-monitoring. Monitoring will be done on a monthly basis and the report will be compiled by the HSEO together with the other monitoring reports to be included in the overall Monthly Environmental Monitoring Report to be submitted to CSC. Review and Updating 16. The review and updating of this plan shall be done as part of the overall review of the site- specific EMP. Amendments will be made as necessary to improve the effectiveness. The amendments that will be instituted shall be subject to approval by the PMU, ADB and the CSC.
Occupational Health and Safety
1. The Contractor’s Occupational Health and Safety Plan shall conform with the requirements of the General and Specific Conditions of the Contract. Withing 30 days of the signing of contract, the Contractor will submit to the Engineer for approval of the CSC- Environment Specialist the following: Administrative section
• Identification and bio-data of the Contractor’s proposed SO and Environment Officer Control Officer; • Administrative responsibilities for effecting the accident prevention plan (identification and accountability of Contractor’s personnel responsible for accident prevention) and EMP; • Local requirements, if any, which must be complied with e.g. noise control, traffic regulations, etc.; • The methods that the Contractor proposes to control and coordinate the work of his sub-contractor; • Safety plans for layout of temporary construction buildings and facilities, including how the Contractor plans to control those of his sub-contractor (include sanitary facilities); • Plan for initial induction, continued safety education, and training for the Contractor’s employees; • Plan for traffic control and marking of hazards to cover haul roads, highway intersections, utilities, bridges, restricted areas, etc.; • Methods for pedestrian road closures and alternate routes foot bridges and barricades, directional signs and warnings and pedestrian traffic control. This plan shall be coordinated with the appropriate community representatives. • Plans for maintaining continued job clean up, safe access and egress; • Plans for fire protection and dealing with emergencies – ambulance service, first aid and medication evacuation); • Plans for inspection of jobsites by competent persons including reports to be kept, results of the inspection and corrective actions taken / particular attention being paid to the utilization of “Safety Violation Report Form”; • Procedures to be used for accident investigation; • Description and sketches of temporary power distribution system; • Description of safe clearance procedures; • Contingency plan for severe weather.
B. Activity Hazard Analysis Section 2. An activity hazard analysis shall be developed for each contract activity and operation occurring in each major phase of work. The Contractor shall develop the plan to identify the sequence of work, the specific hazard anticipated and the control measures to be implemented to minimize or eliminate each hazard. The activity hazard analysis shall be job specific and shall address the following major points: a. Activity being performed (identify major phase) to include but not limited to the following: o Earthmoving equipment operations, backing signals, etc.) o Trenching operation (shoring) o Lifting equipment operations (crane certification, rigging, etc.) o Welding and cutting operations, including protection equipment (PPE)
b. Sequence of work
c. Hazards to be controlled in each activity, and means of control, including but not limited to: o Initial and continuing training o Personal protective equipment o STD and HIV o Drugs and alcohol control
Emergency medical facilities 3. The Contractor will coordinate with local hospitals and police on emergency practices including rescue teams. First aid card containing emergency personal information, vehicle, phone numbers, medications, and manual will be provided at all work sites. The Contractor will ensure that it can provide First Aid. First aid is the assistance given to any person suffering a sudden illness or injury with care provided to preserve life, prevent the condition from worsening, and /or promote recovery. It includes initial intervention in a serious condition prior to professional medical help being available, such as performing CPR while awaiting an ambulance, as well as the complete of minor conditions. Within 14 days of commencement date of the works, the Contractor shall submit for Engineer’s approval the arrangements made for responding to medical emergencies that may cause within the site. The submission shall include the names, address and telephone numbers of medical emergency response units employed by the Contractor; together with the expected response time. Site clean-up 4. Prior to issue of taking over certificate Restoration of land shall be made to original condition or better, to the satisfaction of the engineer. Clean up requirement applies to campsites, quarries, workshops, whether temporary or permanent. All temporary buildings and foundations shall be removed and the ground reinstated to an acceptable condition. a) Introduction 5. The Contractor will implement all reasonable precautions to protect the health and safety of workers. This Occupational Health and Safety Plan is aimed at eliminating the occupational hazards, controlling the hazard at its source through use of engineering controls and minimizing the hazard through design of safe work systems and administrative or institutional control measures and additional measures of providing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) in supplemented by training in the use, and maintenance of the PPE. This plan defines the scope, identifies the roles and responsibilities, identifies the training requirements; provides guidelines for safety at work sites, establishes the emergency response plan, sets out the guidelines for monitoring, recording and reporting of accidents and the review and updating of the sub-plan. Scope of the Plan 6. Covers all the aspects of the construction, all works sited and the facilities of the Contractor and sub-contractor such as the quarry site, borrow pits, plant sites, stockpiles area, casting yard, camp sites, etc. Roles and Responsibilities 7. Based on the Contractor’s organizational set up, the roles and responsibilities for implementing the Occupational Health and Safety Plan will defined by the Contractor to be guided by the following: • Project Manager - Overall in charge of the Construction • Safety Manager - Overall in charge of health and safety aspects of the Project; Prepare safety management plan and oversee the plan’s implementation; Conduct safety inspections and audits; Carry out safety management and trainings; Responsible for reporting on health and safety aspects of the Project • Safety Engineer - Prepare safety management plan and oversees the plan’s implementation; Conduct safety inspections and audits; Carry out safety management and trainings; Responsible for reporting on health and safety aspects of the Project; Construction safety orientation course training for engineers/supervisors/workers; Working at height course training; Confine space course training; Prepare for hot work/cold work permits issues; Lockout / Tagout; Traffic management plan; Liaise with other HSE officers to minimize Health & Safety risk management; Daily general work permit issue to engineers / supervisors / sub contactors; Responsible for supervising the site; Risk assessment/Risk management; Daily toolbox meeting at site; Conduct HSE patrol/engineers/supervisors; Hazardous waste management and spill control; Emergency escape plan/evacuation; First aids/rescue team • Site Manager - Safety inspections during the daily work time; Assist safety engineer to carry out safety management and trainings; Identify the risk before each kind of the work starts and discuss with HSE to carry out better solution; Monitor and confirm all the site workers wear the suitable PPE etc. a) Training and Induction. All workers will undergo HSE knowledge training prior to start of work with the project. The training will cover HSE management system, operation procedure training, HSE risk and prevention measures in working areas, correct wearing of protection articles, usage of special personal protection equipment. The Contractor will conduct at least one occupation health training per month. Three Level (environmental/health/safety) training and education pursuant to relevant documents will be conducted. All equipment operators and drivers must have training with certificates and will be tested prior to assignment. The health and safety training will be done through formal training sessions, HSE induction, toolbox talks, training and awareness and daily pre-start meetings. Training and induction of workers will include topics such as, but not limited to the following: • Camp Rules and Regulations • Sanitation and Personal Hygiene • Health and Safety at Work • Environmental Management • Solid waste management o Wastewater and runoff management o Hazardous waste management and spill control o Ecological protection o Protection of cultural resources • Emergency Preparedness • AIDS/HIV Awareness 8. Outside experts, lecturers and trainers for specialized topics like AIDS/HIV will be arranged as needed. The tentative training and induction schedule are as follows: • HSE Induction – monthly, all site staff and workers • Toolbox talks and training – monthly, all sites and workers • Daily pre-start meeting – daily or random, each working sections staff • HIV/AIDS awareness – monthly, all sites and workers Personal Protection Equipment 9. The Contractor shall: • Work out PPE distribution and annual fund plans to be implemented after approval from the CSC-Engineer. Qualified, enough in quantity, appropriate in quality PPEs shall be provided to all labors, special PPE shall be provided for special type of works; • Conduct daily inspection for appropriate use of PPEs by workers; • Set up effective safety protection facilities pursuant to working condition, environment on site. The Contractor shall provide PPE to workers according to hazards as suggested in the following: o Eye protection – safety glasses with side-shields, protective shades o Head protection – plastic helmets with top and side impact protection o Hearing protection – ear plugs or ear muffs o Foot protection – safety shoes and boots o Hand protection – gloves made of rubber or synthetic materials, leather, steel instating materials o Respiratory protection – face masks o Body protection – insulating clothing, body suites, aprons of appropriate materials Fire Safety 10. As part of fire safety at plant site, workers should: report all potential fire hazards; observe all fire safety rules, procedures; and codes of safe practices on the following: • Firefighting equipment (fire extinguishers) shall be installed in the different facilities; • Safety designated will be posted, i.e. no smoking signs shall be posted particularly in vicinity of fuel tanks • Safety guidelines for storage of flammable materials shall be observed, i.e. fuel depot shall be located far from the perimeter fence; fuel depot shall be secured
Health and Safety at Work Place a. Road Works, Crossings and Bridge Works • Workers shall be oriented on safety during road works during induction with regular reminders during toolbox meetings and start of work briefings; • Workers shall be provided the appropriate PPE; • Safety features (e.g. barriers) shall be installed at road work sites to separate workers from vehicular traffic; • Traffic safety features, e.g. warning signs, barriers, shall be installed at all road work sites; • Nighttime road work sites shall be provided sufficient Illumination; and lighting shall be positioned to prevent glare; • Workers shall be allowed rest periods and at more frequent intervals during inclement weather; during periods of high ambient temperature and during paving of hot mix asphalt; • Ample drinking water shall be provided on site; • Sheltered rest areas with portable toilets shall be provided; • First aid kits shall be stationed in work sites, including emergency contact numbers of safety officers, emergency vehicles, etc. • In case of overwater works, workers shall be given technical and safety trainings for such kind of works; workers shall be provided with the necessary PPEs including safety belts; life-saving equipment like life vests, hoop and line, safety poles shall be deployed at the site;
b. Quarry Site • Quarrying works shall be undertaken in accordance with safe procedures; • Workers shall be provided appropriate PPE; • Workers shall be informed of blasting schedules; • The quarry shall use audible warning signals (e.g. siren) to warn of schedule blasting and to signal to workers when it is safe to work on the blast site; • Workers shall be allowed rest periods; • Quarry works shall be suspended in adverse weather conditions; • First aid kits shall be stationed in work sites, including emergency contact numbers of safety officers, emergency vehicles, etc. • Moving equipment with restricted rear visibility shall be equipped with audible back-up alarms with signal man shall assisting equipment operator as necessary;
c. Plant Sites • Workers shall be oriented on safety works during induction with regular reminders during toolbox meetings and start of work briefings; o Workers shall be provided the appropriate PPE; o Workers shall be allowed rest periods; o Outside works shall be suspended in adverse weather conditions; o First aid kits shall be stationed in work sites, including emergency contact numbers of safety officers, emergency vehicles, etc. o Hazardous materials shall be properly stored and labelled for identification with the Safety Material Data Sheet; o Hazardous areas shall be cordoned with access only to authorized personnel; o Muster points and evacuation routes shall be identified and properly demarcated; o Site visitors shall be accompanied by personnel who shall orient the visitors of the safety precautions for the area of destination and shall be provided with protective equipment like safety helmet, etc.
Emergency Preparedness and Response 11. To scope with major emergency situations, the Contractor shall establish an emergency response team. The emergency response team shall be headed by a command team headed by the Project Manager, with the Construction Manager as the designated deputy assisted by the department managers. The members of the emergency response team shall include all construction management personnel and construction personnel who shall take orders from the emergency command team. The responsibilities of the On-site Emergency Response Command Team are: • Emergency response to any major accident, organize, command and take the lead in rescue activities and meanwhile report the relevant superior department. • Provide necessary manpower, material resources and machineries into the site of accident. Initiate the emergency rescue team to rescue with all strength. When necessary, request adjacent units and departments for support and assistance. • Coordinate with the local, regional, and national authorities to protect the site of accident and conduct analysis and investigation to locate the causes. a) General Procedures for Emergency Response 12. In order to ensure smooth handling of major accidents, a guiding system and overall plan for emergency response shall be established, forming a series of documents such as Emergency Response Procedures for Major Safety Accidents, Liaison for Emergency Response to Major Safety Accidents and Schedule of Rescue Machines and Equipment. After occurrence of an accident, the Emergency Response Command Team shall: • Immediately organize relevant personnel to carry out rescue activities and protect the site to prevent escalation of the accident, ask the nearby medical and hygiene departments for help, and report to the competent authority and relevant units. • Mobilize the emergency rescue team and field machines and equipment to carry out emergency rescue activities and rapidly handling the issue. • Clarify the division of work based on the situation on site and establish the communication and liaison team, technical guidance team, transportation team and first-aid team with composition and division of work. Accidents Monitoring and Reporting 13. The Contractor shall establish procedures and systems for reporting and recording occupational accidents and diseases, and dangerous occurrences and incidents. These systems should enable workers to report immediately to their immediate supervisor any situation they believe presents serious danger to life or health. The Contractor shall encourage workers to report to management all occupational injuries and near misses; suspected cases of occupational disease; and dangerous occurrences and incidents. All reported occupational accidents, occupational diseases, dangerous occurrences, and incidents together with near misses should be investigated.
14. The occupational health and safety plan will be periodically reviewed for its effectiveness and applicability considering the prevailing conditions at the work site. The Health and Safety Officer will revise the plan as needed and submit it to the Contractor management for approval. The monitoring of the Occupation Health and Safety Plan is part of the environmental monitoring plan and shall be carried out by the Contractor. The outcome of the regular monitoring of this sub-plan shall form part of the Contractor’s periodic report submitted to the CSC.
Quarry and Crusher Plant
Introduction 1. The purpose of the plan is to prevent or minimize possible adverse impacts associated with the operation of quarry, and crushing plant. Specifically, the management plan provides the details for mitigation measures addressing the predicted impacts on noise, air quality, soil erosion and siltation, loss of ecological resources, socio-economic impacts (use of community facilities and resources like access roads, water resources), occupational and public health and safety. Roles and Responsibilities 2. The crusher plant shall be under the overall management by the Project Manager. A plant manager shall be designated whose main duty and responsibility is to manage the daily operations. The implementation of the environmental mitigation measures and compliance with the EMP by the plant shall also be among the primary duties of the plant manager. He/she shall be directly responsible to the Project Manager. Controls and Mitigations
3. Protection of adjoining properties from impacts of quarry operations – The quarry area shall be visibly demarcated on the ground, while the crushing plant shall be fenced with gate and security detail. Clearing of the quarry shall be supervised and stockpile area for soil overburden shall be designated. There shall be no stockpiling or parking of equipment in areas outside the quarry leased area. Materials spilled into the adjoining property shall be cleaned immediately and any damage to neighbors’ crops or structures (e.g. fence) shall be compensated and/or repaired immediately by the Contractor.
Ecological Protection:
• To minimize loss of vegetation cover in the quarry site and plant site, clearing shall be kept within the minimum required area; • The quarry and crusher plant are prohibited from using wood fuel and workers shall not be allowed to collect wood from the area around the quarry; • Workers shall be not allowed to catch or disturb wildlife around the quarry; • The Contractor shall rehabilitate the quarry site upon project completion, it shall undertake revegetation of the site using vegetation species found at the site. No exotic vegetation species shall be used for revegetation.
4. Noise Control. Noise generated within the quarry and crusher plant poses health hazards primarily to workers. Noise in the quarry and crusher plant site shall mainly be from operating heavy equipment and rock crushers. All equipment operators shall be provided ear plugs and will be rotated to prevent prolonged exposure to high noise levels. The site office and accommodation facilities shall be located distant from the crusher plant and a noise barrier, e.g. aggregate berm of sufficient height shall be placed between the crusher and the office and accommodation to control noise propagation. The site plan shall be submitted as soon as it is completed. All mobile equipment shall be fitted with noise mufflers and shall undergo regular servicing. Blasting in the quarry, when needed, shall be scheduled and the blasting schedule shall be announced to all workers;
5. Dust Control. Dust in the quarry and crusher plant will be generated during extraction of materials, transport and crushing. The most significant concern with dust is within the plant site where workers will be exposed to health hazards associated with dust. To control dust within the plant site the following measures shall be implemented: • Rock materials shall be watered down prior to feeding into the crushers; • Workers assigned at the crushers will be provided dust masks as part of the PPE; • Aggregate materials smaller than 7 mm being transported shall be covered; • Roads within the plant and access road to the highway shall be watered down during hauling of materials; • A dedicated water truck shall be stationed at the plant site for dust control and firefighting 6. Prevention and control of erosion and siltation. To control erosion and siltation at the quarry and crusher plant site, the Contractor shall implement the following in addition to measures cited in CEMP Section on Erosion and Sedimentation Control: • Interceptor and drainage channels shall be installed around the quarry to prevent surface run-off from flowing through the quarry slopes; • Brush dam and silt curtain shall be installed as needed; • A quarry sump shall be constructed with sufficient capacity to hold surface run-off; water shall be pumped out as needed; water can be used for dust control and other uses suitable to the quality of the impounded water; Pollution Prevention
• The crusher plant shall be provided with septic tank for sewage collection and treatment • Above ground single wall fuel tanks shall be on hard standing and with containment wall and sump for oil-water separation; • Refueling of equipment shall be supervised and on hard standing; • Equipment servicing shall be on hard standing and drip pans used to collect leaking fuel and lubricant; • Storage areas for hazardous materials including waste hazardous materials shall be secured, with roofing, on hard standing and containment wall; • Hazardous materials shall be stored in secure containers and labelled; • Hazardous and non-hazardous wastes shall be disposed in authorized disposal sites; • Occupational Health, Safety and Security; • The crusher plant site shall be fenced with gate and security detail; • Workers shall undergo orientation and knowledge training prior to commencing work at the site; • Only workers, staff and authorized visitors shall be allowed entry into the site; • Curfew shall be imposed for workers residing within the site; • The site shall be provided with sanitation facilities and sufficient water supply; • The site shall be provided with first aid station; • Use of personal protection equipment while on duty shall be strictly imposed; • Access to hazardous areas limited to authorized workers and staff; • Fire-fighting equipment shall be provided in strategic location around the facility; • Muster points and emergency evacuation routes shall be provided; • Emergency procedures shall be established and workers trained on emergency response; • Quarry slopes shall be maintained at prescribed ratio and quarry benches shall be kept at properly heights; • The Contractor should comply with the safety and security requirements for blasting • Only authorized and certified operators shall be allowed to operate heavy equipment and vehicles; • Equipment and vehicles shall undergo regular servicing and maintenance; • Mobile equipment shall be provided with audible backing signals.
Site Plan and Quarry Development Plan 7. As part of its obligation in the management agreement, the Contractor will prepare an aggregate site plan and the quarry development plan. The said plan will have the following scope: a) List of approved quarry sites with respective permits and clearances b) Highlight of consultations with the PMU and host communities with the assurance that potential environmental effects associated with quarrying at the site are appropriately managed and controlled. c) Compliance to all applicable environmental laws and regulations and includes the following information: • demarcation of the area to be quarried; • existing contours; • an indication of final contours and floor levels including the proposals for the coordination of final levels of adjoining land; • proposed ultimate drainage of quarried lands and include any water consents that it may be necessary to obtain; • an indication of the period over which quarrying will continue, and of staged development; • provision for the disposal and/or stockpiling of overburden, waste and quarried material, including the area to be used for stockpiling; • areas for stockpiling topsoil (where applicable); • provision for screening unsightly features from public view and fencing dangerous or potentially dangerous features; • description of methods to be employed to prevent contamination of air or natural water and to comply with the Noise and Vibration provisions of these rules; • an indication of the route by which quarried material is to be removed from the lot; • provision for the progressive restoration of the lot such that the land will be left in such condition as the Council considers suitable for the establishment of those uses to which that land may subsequently be put; and • description of methods to be employed to avoid, remedy or mitigate any adverse effects of quarrying operations on identified significant places and areas. Quarry and crusher plant operation 8. The purpose of the quarry operation is to extract the rock from the ground and process to aggregate products. The process involves stripping of vegetation, soil and low-quality material overlying the rock resource; loosening and fragmenting the rock from the quarry with the use of explosives and/or heavy machinery; excavation by heavy machinery and either stockpiled or transported to the plant for further crushing and screening into various sizes. 9. The Contractor is required to prepare a Production plan that details these processes and will cover: Vegetation removal and site preparation, soil stripping and stockpiling, overburden stripping and disposal, rock removal, safety and environmental management, abandonment plan, monitoring and reporting, and sub-plan review and updating.
Asphalt Mixing Plant
Introduction 1. The purpose of the plan is to prevent or minimize possible adverse impacts associated with the operation of asphalt plant. Specifically, the management plan provides the details for mitigation measures addressing the predicted impacts on noise, air quality, soil erosion and siltation, loss of ecological resources, socio-economic impacts (use of community facilities and resources like access roads, water resources), occupational and public health and safety. Roles and Responsibilities 2. The asphalt plant shall be under the overall management by the Project Manager. A plant manager shall be designated whose main duty and responsibility is to manage the daily operations. The implementation of the environmental mitigation measures and compliance with the EMP by the plant shall also be among the primary duties of the plant manager and supported by the Contractor’s Environment Person. He/she shall be directly responsible to the Project Manager. Controls and Mitigations a) Protection of adjoining properties from impacts of the asphalt plant operations 3. The asphalt plant area shall be visibly demarcated on the ground, while the asphalt plant shall be fenced with gate and security facilities. Materials spilled into the adjoining property shall be cleaned immediately and any damage to neighbors’ crops or structures (e.g. fence) shall be compensated and/or repaired immediately by the Contractor. b) Ecological Protection • To minimize loss of vegetation cover in the plant site, clearing shall be kept within the minimum required area; • The asphalt plant is prohibited from using wood fuel and workers shall not be allowed to collect wood from the wooded area around the area; • The Contractor shall rehabilitate the asphalt plant site upon project completion, it shall undertake revegetation of the site using vegetation species found at the site. No exotic vegetation species shall be used for revegetation. c) Noise Control 4. Noise generated within the asphalt plant poses health hazards primarily to workers. Noise in the asphalt plant site shall mainly be from operating heavy equipment. All equipment operators shall be provided ear plugs and will be rotated to prevent prolonged exposure to high noise levels. The site office and accommodation facilities shall be located distant from the asphalt plant and the office and accommodation to control noise propagation. d) Dust Control 5. Dust in the asphalt plant will be generated during producing asphalt concrete materials and transporting. The most significant concern with dust is within the asphalt plant site where workers will be exposed to health hazards associated with dust. To control dust within the plant site the following measures shall be implemented: a) Workers assigned at the asphalt plant will be provided dust masks as part of the PPE; b) Aggregate materials smaller than 7 mm being transported shall be covered; c) Roads within the plant and access road to the highway shall be watered during hauling of materials; d) A dedicated water truck shall be stationed at the asphalt plant site for dust control and firefighting; e) Prevention and control of erosion and siltation; f) To control erosion and siltation at the asphalt plant site, the Contractor shall implement the following in addition to measures cited in CEMP Section on Erosion and Sedimentation Control; g) Vegetation clearing and removal of overburden shall be kept to the minimum required; h) Interceptor and drainage channels shall be installed around the asphalt plant; i) Brush dam and silt curtain shall be installed as needed; j) Water shall be pumped out as needed; water can be used for dust control and other uses suitable to the quality of the impounded water; e) Pollution Prevention a) The asphalt plant shall be provided with septic tank for sewage collection and treatment b) Above ground single wall fuel tanks shall be on hard standing and with containment wall and sump for oil-water separation; c) Refueling of equipment shall be supervised and on hard standing; d) Equipment servicing shall be on hard standing and drip pans used to collect leaking fuel and lubricant; e) Storage areas for hazardous materials including waste hazardous materials shall be secured, with roofing, on hard standing and containment wall; f) Hazardous materials shall be stored in secure containers and labelled; g) Hazardous and non-hazardous wastes shall be disposed in authorized disposal site;: h) Occupational Health, Safety and Security; i) The asphalt plant site shall be fenced with gate and security facilities j) Workers shall undergo orientation and knowledge training prior to commencing work at the site; k) Only workers, staff and authorized visitors shall be allowed entry into the site; l) Curfew shall be imposed for workers residing within the site; m) The site shall be provided with sanitation facilities and sufficient water supply; n) The site shall be provided with first aid kit; o) Use of personal protection equipment while on duty shall be strictly imposed; p) Access to hazardous areas limited to authorized workers and staff; q) Fire-fighting equipment shall be provided in strategic location around the facility; r) Muster points and emergency evacuation routes shall be provided; s) Emergency procedures shall be established and workers trained on emergency response; t) Contractor should comply with the safety and security requirements for operation; u) Only authorized and certified operators shall be allowed to operate heavy equipment and vehicles; v) Equipment and vehicles shall undergo regular servicing and maintenance; w) Mobile equipment shall be provided with audible backing signals.
Development Plan 6. As part of its obligation the Contractor will prepare the asphalt plant site plan and development plan with the following scope: a) EMP prepared in consultation with representatives of the community and PMU; b) Site Layout; c) Safety and Environmental Management. 7. Management measures to be implemented during the plant operation will include: • Gate access will be maintained to control access; • Portable toilet facilities will be used within the plant site offices. These facilities will be maintained as required. The grey water created will be disposed of into a suitable tank and then pumped out and trucked to the municipal treatment location; • Provide for environmental management in accordance with the sub-plans to be prepared as guided by these framework plans for erosion, sediment control, oil/ water separation, etc. Communications 8. The communications regarding health, safety and environment shall be according to the following arrangements: a) Communications with host village. 9. Communication with the host village regarding project related matters such as progress, work schedule, environmental management matters. The Contractor shall open communication channels with the host community in various forms, including but not limited to public meetings, distribution of flyers and installation of sign boards at the project site. The HSE officer shall also act as one of the contact persons for complaints receiving. b) Communications with Workforce 10. The communication with the workforce shall be done through memoranda, trainings, inductions and safety toolbox meetings. Regular HSE meetings will be held so project manager will have opportunity to raise any HSE issues or concerns that have been brought to their attention. Workers may also access the GRMC should they prefer to. Health, safety and environment issues, warnings, information shall also be communicated through bulletin board postings and designate posted in appropriate sites of the work areas. Abandonment Plan 11. The Contractor will ensure the plant site will appear as close to the natural environmental appearance prior to the plant installation. At least 1 year before the plant closure, air, soil, and as the case maybe water quality will be checked quarterly. • Machine tools and equipment shall totally be moved out; • Waste lubricants and oils including contaminated soils shall be moved out keeping them separated and new soil shall be covered again; • If vegetation is present prior to the installation and operation of the asphalt plant, these shall be replaced by the Contractor at a rate of 1:3 in coordination with the local village to establish post-project responsibilities and provision of adequate funds. Monitoring and Reporting 12. The Contractor will monitor the implementation of the mitigation measures and compliance with the EMP in general. Monitoring shall be carried out by the Environment Person under the supervision of the CSC-Environmental Specialist. The outcome of the regular monitoring of this sub-plan shall be submitted to the CSC as part of the Contractor’s Monthly Progress Report. Sub-Plan Review and Updating 13. This sub-plan shall be subject to regular review and updates will be made as necessary to enhance its effectiveness and ensure its applicability to the changing conditions expected to prevail during the construction period.
Waste Management
Introduction 1. This waste management plan covers the different aspects of the road construction. The plan addresses the waste management needs of the different activities and facilities of the project. The objectives of the plan are to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts associated with generated wastes, both hazardous and non-hazardous, protect public and occupational health, and comply with the ADB safeguards and national environmental regulations. 2. The plan identifies the roles and responsibilities, the waste sources of the Project, the types of wastes expected to be generated, the classification of wastes as to hazardous or nonhazardous; classification of wastes into recyclable and non-recyclable. The plan also presents the system for waste collection, storage and handling and final disposal. Roles and Responsibilities 3. Project Manager. Overall responsibility for implementation and compliance with EMP. 4. Contractor Environment Person and the CSC-Environment Specialist: a) Direct responsibility for implementation of the waste management plan and compliance with the EMP; b) Monitor the Contractor’s compliance with waste management regulations and management plan, issue corrective actions for deficiencies; c) Manage waste management sub-contractor and ensure collected wastes from the project are disposed at designated dump sites; d) Monitor the quality and performance of waste management sub-contractor; e) Responsible for reporting compliance with waste management plan; f) Take the lead in the review and updating of the waste management plan 5. Site Engineers: a) Assist Environment Person to monitor and carry out the waste management effectively; b) Monitor waste management in their respective work sites and ensure compliance with waste management plan; c) Issue orders for corrective actions for non-compliance within his work area. 6. Camp/Plant Managers: a) Assist HSE to monitor and carry out the waste management effectively; b) Oversee waste management at camp sites and ensure compliance with waste management plan; Waste Sources and Expected Types of Wastes
a) Contractor’s Camp and Engineer’s Facilities. 7. Solid wastes from the camp and engineers’ facilities include organic wastes from kitchen and mess hall; plastic packaging of food, condiments, plastic water bottles, aluminum cans, tin cans, waste fabrics; waste papers and plastics from the offices. Waste LED bulbs may also be generated from the camp and facilities. The camp and engineers’ facilities will generate wastewater from the kitchen, toilet and bathrooms. Waste materials from these facilities that maybe considered hazardous include empty / spent aerosol canisters of insect repellent. b) Equipment maintenance shop 8. Solid wastes from the equipment maintenance yard may include packaging materials (cardboards and plastics), plastic containers, waste equipment parts. Worn out rubber tires are other wastes that will come from equipment maintenance. The waste air filters, spent oil filters and oil stained fabrics (rags) are considered hazardous and should be managed as such. Liquid wastes from maintenance yard can include sewage and equipment wash water and the wash water can be oil tainted and will require oil-water separation. Spent solvents and used oil are the hazardous wastes that will be generated by the maintenance shop. Sludge from washing area and oil separator sumps is also hazardous and should be disposed together with the used oil and solvents. c) Asphalt Plant, Crusher plant, Concrete Batching Plant and Casting Yard. 9. The major waste generated at the asphalt plant includes: used 200-liter drum bitumen containers; hazardous wastes materials (e.g. solvents used for cleaning the bitumen sprayer and other equipment), oil stained materials (e.g. rags); and other wastes include waste or worn out equipment parts. For the concrete batching plant, the main hazardous waste is the wash water of the batching plant and the transit mixers (highly turbid, high sediment load and basic or high pH) which will be collected in settling ponds and released after treatment to a quality that complies with national standards. These ponds need to be desalted regularly and silt shall be piled in a location within the batching plant area. Other wastes from the concrete batching plant is rejected concrete mix and will be collected and disposed on site, and worn out equipment parts and unserviceable equipment which will be recycled to the extent possible or disposed in the village approved disposal sites. d) Concrete works 10. Concrete works will generate waste wooden form works and if concrete mixing is done on site, waste cement packaging materials. Waste Management a) Waste Segregation 11. The Contractor will implement waste segregation and recovery of recyclables. Solid wastes shall be classified into hazardous and non-hazardous (general wastes). The non- hazardous wastes shall then be classified into biodegradable and non-biodegradable. All recyclable materials such as plastic bottles, glass bottles, tin cans, metal scraps shall be segregated and shall be sold to buyers of recyclable materials. Residual wastes shall be contracted out to the host villages for collection and disposal at its disposal facility. All hazardous wastes shall be collected in sturdy containers and shall be temporarily stored at the site. Storage facility shall be secured, covered and with containment walls. Hazardous materials shall be labelled. Disposal shall be contracted out to hazardous waste disposal companies. b) Waste Collection and disposal i. General Wastes 12. Waste bins shall be provided for bio-degradable and non-biodegradable materials. The bins shall be placed in various places in all the facilities. The plastic bins shall be marked and color coded for easy identification by the workers. The waste shall be collected every day and shall be temporarily stored in a holding area where it will be collected and hauled by the Contractor. The recyclables will also be stored and sold to recyclers. ii. Hazardous Wastes 13. Hazardous wastes that will be generated during construction will include used oil and solvents; oil tainted materials, e.g. rags, oil filter and sludges. All these will be collected at the site, i.e. equipment service yard / repair shop, fuel depot. These materials shall be stored in 200-liter steel drums or plastic barrels with lid and shall be labelled. These materials shall be stored temporarily in a storage area in the camp. The storage shall be roofed, with concrete flooring and containment wall. It will also be fitted with a floor sump for oil and water separation. The final disposal of the hazardous waste shall be at a disposal site, if not at the host village disposal site as recommended by the EIA. Wash water from casting yard and concrete batching plant shall be collected in settling and retention ponds within the casting yard and batching plant and the water can be re-used for dust suppression of materials stockpiles. Monitoring and Reporting 14. The implementation of the waste management plan shall be monitored and documented by the Environment Person. Disposal of hazardous wastes through a service provider should be documented with a chain of custody receipt acknowledged by the Contractor. Sub-Plan Review and Updating 15. This Sub-Plan will be subject to regular review and updates will be made as necessary to enhance its effectiveness and ensure its applicability to the changing conditions expected to prevail during the construction period.
Borrow Pits and Spoils Management
Background 1. The reconstruction and upgrading of the Project Road will require borrow materials for the construction of the road embankments. The sources of borrow materials can either be within or outside the project alignment, provided the site is approved by the Engineers. This particular plan pertains to borrow pits outside the project right of way. Additionally, the Contractor will also require spoils disposal sites. But it is anticipated that spoils (unsuitable materials) will be not be of significant volume since the unsuitable materials will have other possible uses in the road construction. The unsuitable materials can be used as cladding for the road embankment or used as covering of shoulders prior to the grassing. This sub-plan provides the required environmental management for borrow site selection, excavation and rehabilitation and spoils disposal site management. a) Description 2. As earlier mentioned, borrow materials can be extracted from source within and outside the project right of way. To minimize the need for opening outside pits and thereby minimizing environment impacts, borrow materials may be sourced from the project right of way by widening ditches and widening cuts provided materials are classified as suitable and approved by the Engineer. 3. The development of the borrow pit will entail the removal of the top soil and a layer of overburden, (unsuitable material). The borrow material will be excavated using a backhoe excavator and loaded on trucks for hauling to work sites. Depending on the site, construction of access road may also be necessary. Once extraction of material is completed, the borrow pit will be rehabilitated prior to abandonment. Selection of Borrow Pits and Spoils Disposal Sites 4. Key considerations in the selection of borrow pits and spoil disposal sites are: • Avoid productive agricultural lands and ecologically important places like forest; • Prefer sites which are covered, outside view corridors to maintain scenic view quality of the landscape; • Choose sites that are distant from settlements and away from ecological impact receptors like surface water bodies, forested areas and the like • if borrow pits are to be opened in an area to provide a dam, fish pond or for any other use for the local residents of the area and after removal of the agreed quantities of material, the size and location of the borrow pits should be such that they suit the local requirements and are to be approved by the Engineer. Environmental Management Measures 5. The potential impacts of the borrow pit operations are noise and fugitive and dust, loss of productive land, threat to public safety, potential impact on community road. The following mitigation measures are recommended: • Site borrow pits and spoils disposal sites outside residential areas and away from water bodies; • Only licensed quarries and crushers will be used; • Project-specific quarries and crushers will be located at least 500 meters of any urban area or sensitive receptors; • Pit restoration shall follow the completion of works in full compliance with the Borrow Pit and Spoil Management Plan and shall be required before final acceptance and payment under the terms of contracts; • Upon completion of extraction activities, quarries and borrow pits will be dewatered, fences and warning signs will be installed, as appropriate to avoid impacts to public health and safety; • The top soil of the borrow area should be stockpiled together with the overburden for use during the rehabilitation. Alternatively, these materials can be used for topping embankment slope during the landscaping stage; • Hauling of the borrow materials will likely use village roads. The use of the road by the Contractor should have express consent from the host community. The Contractor is responsible for maintaining the road, damages shall immediately be repaired by the Contractor; • The Contractor should undertake dust suppression of the haul roads as necessary; • Management of hazardous materials and other wastes generated at the borrow pit shall conform with the pertinent CEMP sub-plans; • Spoils should be graded and spread out as part of the site rehabilitation. • The Contractor shall submit to the CSC for approval a final rehabilitation plan 6 months prior to the issuance of a taking over certificate. Rehabilitation shall be completed by the Contractor within the defects liability period. Development plan of Borrow Pit 6. The borrow pits is an important element in the proposed rehabilitation and upgrading of the proposed project. The detailed designs for the borrow pits will therefore be developed in parallel with the detailed design and subject to the same approvals and timeframes. The designs for the restoration of certain borrow pits must deliver essential mitigation for ecological purposes by way of compensation for the predicted significant adverse effects of the Project on nature conservation. Design considerations for the establishment of borrow pits include: • slope profiles and gradients which will not be known until well into the construction period as it is dependent on the actual ground conditions encountered; • Restoration of landforms and landscape planting and seeding will be refined during detailed design in response to final excavation design, volume of materials available for restoration and further information on after use. Restoration plan 7. The material from the borrow pits will be excavated by the main Contractor as necessary to meet the construction programme. In some cases, this will mean excavation and restoration are phased during construction. Timing its borrowing activities will take account of seasonal constraints on earth moving, and for landscape works. After engineering soils have been removed, the borrow pit profile will be modified to re-shape the perimeter and reduce the side slope angles to better integrate the profile into the landscape and for health and safety purposes. The borrow pit profiles will also be modified to provide conditions for the establishment of wetland habitats suitable for the essential ecological mitigation. Restoration plans and all restoration work will be delivered by the Contractor to the CSC for review and approval. The restoration plans will consider, among others: • The restoration works necessary post excavation to prepare the site for the proposed after use; • The management and development works during aftercare to be undertaken over a 3 year period post restoration to establish the landscape treatment including provision for new habitats, when necessary; • The proposed after use and ongoing management; • Liaison with stakeholders and landowners; • Timescales; and • A monitoring program. Restoration operations and techniques 8. The contractor will provide details of the operations and techniques to be guided by the following factors: • management of stored over burden and soils for restoration purposes; • ground shaping to final levels following completion of excavation, including floodplain compensation areas; • degree of compaction; • removal of soils from storage and placing; • treatment of placed soils prior to cultivation; • removal of obstructions/stone picking; • habitat creation when necessary; • drainage; Public Health and Safety 9. Specific health and safety conditions that should be considered are: • All areas being worked shall be drained. Where a quarry or borrow pit has been excavated so that it will not drain naturally, it shall be kept pumped dry while being used. • The Contractor shall confine his operations solely to the areas provided or acquired by the Contractor and shall demarcate the boundary of the areas and erect temporary or permanent fencing as instructed by the Engineer. • Where the height of any face exceeds 1 meter. The Contractor shall provide, erect and maintain at his own expense, stock proof fencing and gates to prevent unauthorized access to the top of the working face. • On completion of work all faces shall be neatly trimmed to a slope flatter and 1in 4. Where this is impracticable or where the working face is to be left exposed, the edge shall be permanently fenced, as instructed by the Engineer. • On completion of work temporary fences and all temporary structures shall be demolished and removed, and the site top soiled and left neat and tidy. Roles and Responsibilities a. Contractor
10. The selection of the borrow pit is the responsibility of the Contractor and Committee for Roads and should comply with the EMP conditions for siting borrow pits. The day to day management of the borrow pit is the responsibility of the Contractor which includes the health and safety and compliance with the EMP. This function is carried out by the Contractor’s Environment Person and Safety Person who are directly responsible for regular HSE monitoring of the borrow pit. In addition, it is their duty to induct and orient the heavy equipment operators and truck drivers on safety and environmental management. They are also responsible for reporting on the status of HSE compliance of the borrow pit operations. b. Construction Supervision Consultant (CSC)
11. The CSC is responsible for approving the borrow pit site. The monitoring of the EMP compliance shall be carried out by the CSC-Environment Specialist. The pit shall be regularly monitored by the NES and corresponding report shall be prepared. The EMP monitoring schedule requires a weekly monitoring. The weekly monitoring shall be consolidated for submission to the client on a monthly basis as enclosure to the CSC’s monthly progress report. c. Monitoring and Reporting
12. Monitoring of the implementation of the Borrow Pits and Spoils Management plan shall be carried out by the Environment Person as part of the regular self-monitoring. It will be done on a monthly basis and the report will be compiled together with the other monitoring reports to be included in the overall Monthly Environmental Monitoring Report to be submitted to CSC. Sub-Plan Review and Updating 13. This sub-plan shall be reviewed on a regular basis by the CSC and the Contractor and will be updated as necessary in accordance with changes in the project implementation, requirements and/or working conditions. Abandonment Plan 14. Considerations in the preparation of the abandonment plan are as follows: • No potentially dangerous slopes, pits, or toxic substances shall be remained at the site. • Advise land-users that water holes may be a health risk (breeding ground for disease and disease carrying insects) and this factor may outweigh any positive benefits. • Ideally borrow pits shall be reinstated as closely as possible to their original ground level. • Avoid permanently changing the landscape and altering local drainage patterns. • Excavated gravel can be replaced with spoil materials derived from road construction or improvement works. • Backfill materials should not contain waste oils and toxic materials that might migrate and pollute ground water. • Provision of drainage structures may be necessary to prevent the erosive action of surface water and /or ponding. • Provide, as necessary, safe/stable slopes along cuts and depressions and restore the disturbed natural drainage to area. • Test soils and granular materials for hydrocarbon content; contaminated soils will be remediated. • The impacts on flora will be mitigated through replacing at 1:3 compensation rate.