Policy Report

EIA Policy and Process in Georgian Hydropower Development

May, 2014

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Citation of Report: Guledani, M. 2014. EIA Policy and Process in Georgian Hydropower Development. Sustainable Hydropower Development in Georgia. Report No.1 (76 pages), Norsk Energi, Oslo. ISBN: 978-82-7252-206-2. Available from: http://www.energi.no/en/projects.

EIA Policy and Process in Georgian Hydropower Development

For the Program: Sustainable Hydropower Development by Norsk Energi

Prepared by:

Marina Guledani, Legal Expert Telephone: + 995 599 94 70 79 (mob) + 995 32 255 99 00 (office) Email: [email protected] Address: 154 Agmashenebeli Ave. Tbilisi, Georgia

Edited by: Dr. Shivcharn S. Dhillion, Editor, ENVIRO-DEV Checked by: Endre Ottosen, Project manager, Norsk Energi

Project Management: NORSK ENERGI

Funded by: THE NORWEGIAN MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

May 2014

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank BOO Build Own Operate CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CDM Clean Development Mechanism CMS Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals DNA Designated National Authority EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIP Environmental Impact Permit ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment EU European Union GoG Government of Georgia HPP Hydropower Plant IFI International Financial Institution LEE Law on Ecological Expertise LEP Law of Environment Protection LEIP Law on Environmental Impact Permit MoU Memorandum of Understanding MoE Ministry of Energy MoESD Ministry of Economic and Sustainable Development MENRP Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia NEPAP National Environment Protection Action Program NBSAP The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan RFA Request for Applications SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SNIP Construction Norms and Rules SanPin Sanitary Rules and Norms SHPD Sustainable Hydropower Development SSD Strategy for Sustainable Development TCSA Technical and Construction Supervision Agency UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe WCD World Commission on Dams

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

FOREWORD

The timely development of hydropower in Georgia is seen as one of the main vehicles to development and accession to the European Union. Parallel to this is the legislative enhancement called for by the EU and international actors for the documentation, handling and monitoring of environmental and social infringements. Particularly sensitive themes are those related to large infrastructure developments. Georgia inherited a soviet legacy of environmental handling which she has been slowing unraveling to meet newer international requirements for EIA and minimizing environmental liability. Recent years have shown significant strides into enhancing the entire process of hydropower development where EIA has been central. The changes in progress are rapid and span the processes of permitting (licensing), EIA and monitoring. As most young nations there is a need for constant study and evaluation of systems in place, as steady learning (and change) requires some degree of systemic recognition. This report charts out the EIA policy and process as related to the development of hydropower, as a case, with a fair dose of historical and semantic clarifications for elements present. It also shows the dynamic changes that have taken place and those that are prompted. Guledani has been able to skillfully tease out the essential elements in light of inherent Georgian understanding and international practice. In her analysis, Guledani has made a key contribution to the current status of EIA in Georgia. Her contribution is part of the Sustainable Hydropower Development (SHD) Project, a description of which follows.

Shivcharn Dhillion, Ph.D. Lead International Consultant, SHD Project, Norsk Energi Managing Director and Researcher, ENVIRO-DEV May 30, 2014

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

BACKGROUND

The report “EIA policy and process in Georgian hydropower development” is developed under the Norwegian-Georgian cooperation program Sustainable Hydropower Development in Georgia. The program is financed by Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and implemented in close cooperation with Government of Georgia. The goal of the program is assist the development of an environmentally and socially sustainable hydropower sector in Georgia.

The Program consists of three main components:

1. Public Participation: Aiming to make the civil society and local population affected by hydropower development better equipped to engage in public consultation processes. The work included development of a Citizens Guide and implementation of a Training of Trainers Program. 2. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment: A review of policies and guidelines relevant to ESIA and hydropower in Georgia was conducted (this report). This was followed by an analysis of EIA/ESIAs for hydropower projects in Georgia, aiming to identify incongruences between current Georgian practices, and the Georgian ESIA requirements as well as international standards. A Stakeholder Working Group (SWG), consisting of representatives from the Government of Georgia, civil society and academia was set up to provide recommendations for how to strengthen the practice for EIA/ESIA for hydropower. The outcome of the SWG process is presented in a separate report. 3. Sustainable Hydropower Development: A set Knowledge Sharing Workshops aiming to increase capacity among stakeholders in governmental and non-governmental sector as and private sector on sustainable hydropower development. Topics include Environmental flow and cumulative impacts, Communication documents and Environmental and Social Management Plans.

This report describes the policies and guidelines relevant to ESIA and hydropower in Georgia; the GoG’s international and regional obligations under multilateral agreements and conventions, linked to national ESIA policy and process; gaps and inconsistencies in relation to the best international practice, which can be improved through respective legal amendments to these instruments or creation of additional legal safeguards.

The program “Sustainable Hydropower Development in Georgia” is implemented by a consortium of partners managed by Norsk Energi, with ENVIRO-DEV as Lead International Consultant and Gross Energy Group as Local Partner. This report was prepared Ms. Marina Guledani, with editing by Dr. Shivcharn S. Dhillion.

Endre Ottosen, Norsk Energi Project Manager Sustainable Hydropower Development in Georgia [email protected] // +47 959 01 295

May 30, 2014

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

AKNOWLEDGEMENT

I have taken efforts in preparation of the report. However, it would not have been possible without the kind support and help of many individuals, organizations and representatives of state bodies I have had the opportunity to meet, interview and discuss matters of relevance. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them.

I am highly indebted to Norsk Energi and its representative Mr. Endre Ottosen for their guidance and constant supervision as well as for providing necessary information regarding the project & also for their support in completing the project. I am highly idebted to Mr. Shivcharn S. Dhillion of ENVIRO-DEV for his continuous guidance and mentoring throughout the whole study. Without his direction my work and completion of this document would have not been possible.

Marina Guledani Legal Expert

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...... 3 1. SUMMARY ...... 8 2. BACKGROUND ...... 8 3. SCOPE OF THE REPORT ...... 9 4. HYDROPOWER POLICY OF GEORGIA ...... 10 5. IMPLEMENTING HYDROPOWER PROJECTS ...... 12 6. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDELINES ...... 21 7. EIA UNDER GEORGIAN LEGISLATION ...... 26 8. EIA PROCESS IN PRACTICE ...... 32 9. INTERNATIONAL E(S)IA POLICY, GUIDELINES AND PRACTICE ...... 35 10. ANALYSIS ...... 50

ANNEX I. MATRIX ...... 61 ANNEX II. LIST OF POTENTIAL RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES (HPP Sites) ..... 62 ANNEX IV. EIA Report under EU EIA Directive ...... 68 ANNEX V. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability ...... 70 ANNEX VI. LIST OF USED INFORMATION, DATA, MATERIAL AND LITERATURE (May 2014) ...... 72

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

1. SUMMARY

One of Georgia’s major export potential is its hydro resources. Stimulating investments into the hydropower sector has been a high priority on Government’s agenda for past several years. While investments into the hydropower sector should have positive effect on country’s economy, it has to be ensured that their environmental effect/impact is revealed and treated in the best posssible manner, in compliance with the best international practice reflected in the international standards and guidelines.

Environmental and social impact is normally disclosed through environmental impact assessment process, which is the key tool for ensuring that any otherwise (tehcnically and financially) viable project is environmentally sustainable as well.

The present report (Report or Policy Report) aims to diagnose/identify the level and quality of the environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) processes designed to ensure environmental soundness of the HPP projects through review and gap analysis of all applicable legal instruments pertaining to environmental imapct assessment policy, guidelines, rules and/or norms. Analysis of these legal instruments aims to identify gaps and inconsistencies in relation to the best international practice and can be treated through respective legal changes/amendments to these instruments or creation of additional legal safeguards. In particular, existing policies, guidelines, laws and regulations shall be studied against the selected internationally recognized standards and guidelines.

Present Report primarily reviews Georgia’s new hydropower development policy and elaborates on hydropower investment project implementation processes covering standard procedures for environmental and construction permitting. The Report then focuses on the sources of ESIA policies and guidelines and in the absence of articulate documents of the kind, attempts to specifically locate/identify these in the existing legislation and international instruments to which Georgia has acceded as of the date of the Report (May 2014). Further, Report provides a detailed overeview of the ESIA related legislative and sublegislative acts, which contain or reflect involved standards and processes. Finally, Report provides a gap analysis of the Georgian ESIA policies (as reflected in the environmental legislation of Georgia) and guidelines vis-à-vis the best international practice. Since the latter is reflected in various documents, the Report adopts an aspect based approach and sources best practice or standard for each particular issue/aspect of the ESIA1 process on a stand-alone basis.

2. BACKGROUND

In the aftermath of the Rose Revolution of Novemner 2003 and on its track of post-Soviet economic development in general, Georgia has declared hydropower as one of its strategic resources. Importance of hydropower development in Georgia is explained by the resulting energy security as well as enhanced export potential.

1 In relation to the environmental and social impact assessment practice in Georgia, the present Report applies the term EIA whenever the term is used as a formal name of the respective legislative act or the document (EIA Report) as opposed to ESIA – the term used to describe environental and social impact assessment as a general and globally recognized standard process. Meanwhile, Georgian environmental legislation does not articulate social impact by allevating the term “Social” to the formal name of the process (EIA), but instead envisages some social aspects in the environmental impact assessment processes.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

A host of constitutional, institutional and legislative changes took place since 2004 reflecting government’s priority of reforming the economy to achieve tangible growth. Policy documents and legislative changes applicable to hydropower sector are also reflective of targetting foreign investments into the hydropower development.

According to various references, from an estimated 68 terawatt-hours (TwH) of hydroelectricity which is technically feasible, approximately half (32 TwH) is estimated to be economically feasible2. While it is estimated that only 11 percent of the referred capacity has been developed, environmental feasibility of this share has never been studied.

Any attempt to conduct environmental feasibility study of Georgia’s hydropower potential would be impossible without an energy balance – a study of emergence, transformation and use of energy sources available within Georgian territory. Such study of energy balance should serve as a statistical foundation for elaboration of an environmental strategy3 as well as energy policy and energy management decisions. In the absence of an overall comprehensive picture of the available environmental resources of the country, its environmental resource management system may not be dictated by the clearly defined environmental priorities, goals and objectives. In the absence of these priorities and objectives, the procedures pertaining to environmental and social impact assessment (also applicable to HPPs) shall lack a clear policy dictation from the perspective of environmental feasibility.

3. SCOPE OF THE REPORT

The Policy Report is commissioned under the three-year program Sustainable Hydropower Development (SHPD) managed by Norsk Energi in dialogue with the sector stakeholders, including the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia (MENRP).

SHPD supports increased involvement and influence from civil society in decision making related to hydropower development, by promoting public participation, environmental and social impact assessments and sustainable hydropower development. One of the initial tasks of SHPD has been commissioning a gap assessment of the hydropower project related EIA/ESIAs in Georgia. This would help identify shortcomings and in-congruencies between the environmental policies & guidelines and ESIA practices in Georgia. For these purposes, as a baseline document, the present Report aims to identify and articulate environmental policies and guidelines as well as multilateral and legislative requirements applicable or relevat to the hydropower sector development and respective EIA processes. Importantly the Policy Report will also point to broad inconsistencies or gaps in the policies and ESIA practices in Georgia. Thus, the Policy

2 Statistical data on Georgia’s hydropower potential are very general and inconsistent. According to the general information posted on the website of the Ministry of Energy of Georgia (www.energy.gov.ge), total potential annual capacity of Georgia’s over 300 rivers is equivalent to 15,000 MW, while the average annual production equals to 50 bln. KWh. Under the studies presented at the conference organized by the USAID funded Hydropower Investment Promotion Program (HIPP) it has been suggested that an estimated 68 terawatt-hours (TwH) of hydroelectricity is technically feasible – 32 TwH of which is estimated to be economically feasible – but currently only 11 percent has been developed (ISET conference mulls over Georgian hydropower potential, Tamar Khurtsia, 31 May 2012, at http://www.georgiatoday.ge/article_details.php?id=10169); Under the brief description prepared for and issued on behalf of the Ministry of Energy of Georgia by HIPP, Georgia’s at least 200 rivers are capable for providing excellent opportunities for hydropower and Georgia’s estimated hydropower potential is 20TWh per year, up to 80% of which remains to be harnessed (http://hydropower.ge/user_upload/Hydropower_Reusorces_in_Georgia.pdf). 3 Policy Report discusses Strategy for Sustainable Development (SSD), which is prescribed by the Law on Environmental Protection but is instead substituted by other types of normative acts, including an environmental action plan.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Report is also devised as a source tool for environmental and social experts conducting gap analysis and assessment of EIAs of Georgian hydropower projects.

Content of the Report has been pre-designed by the correpsonding RFA4 and inception report. Designed as a source tool, Policy Report covers: a) all existing and draft environmental policies and guidelines elaborated in Georgia as of the date of the Report with relevance to hydropower; b) all multilateral agreement and conventions in effect in Georgia and with relevance to the hydropower; c) available literature to document chronology of development of policy and ESIA guidelines with relevance to ESIA processes; d) inconsistencies between Government of Georgia (GoG) policy/guidelines and EIA practices in Georgia; e) international standards applicable to ESIA processes and gap analysis of the Georgian practices.

Georgian ESIA regulations shall be covered from hydropower perspective based on the review of the relevant multilateral and regional agreements and conventions in effect in Georgia, all legal and sub-legislative acts pertaining to the ESIA policies and guidelines, best international ESIA policies and guidelines, complementary documents and reports prepared on any of the issues/aspects/topics pertaining to the subject matter of the Policy Report. Legal gap analysis shall also be supported by the information collected over the interviews conducted with the individuals representing Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection, NGO sector and ESIA consultanting firms.

4. HYDROPOWER POLICY OF GEORGIA

Hydropower has a dominant position in the structure of Georgia’s power system. Share of electricity generated by Hydro Power Plants (HPP) amounts to 85% of annual generation. Under the state Energy Policy adopted in 2006 5 (Energy Policy) Georgia has declared maximum utilization of the energy resources and respectively enhancing energy security through meeting internal electricity demand on the account of domestic hydropower resources, as one of the key long-term goals. To achieve these strategic objectives, Energy Policy declares importance of attracting investments to the sector, calls for reduction of bureaucratic burdens for local and foreign sector participants, deregulation of new hydropower plants, harmonization of sector legislation, expansion of interconnections (Europe-Asia, East-West and North-South).

Ministry of Energy (MoE) is the policy-making institution for the power sector. Its involvement is limited to promotion of medium and long-term investments in the sector, rehabilitation and development of the energy sector, participating in the development of an appropriate legal and regulatory framework, supporting development of transit and import/export relationships in the electricity sector and implementing state programs to increase energy efficiency. MoE has no ownership of assets or operational or regulatory functions in the electricity sector. MoE approves annual electricity (capacity) balances, Market Rules & the Rules of Operation.6

New Hydropower Regulation To support hydropower as a source of renewable energy, in 2008 GoG endorsed a special legal framework to promote development of new hydropower through endorsement of GoG Resolution No 107 on Approval of the Rules of Support of Construction of New Sources of

4 Norsk Energi, January 18, 2013, call for the Consultancy on Policy, Guidelines, ESIA and Hydropower in Georgia: theory and practice. 5 Main Directions of the State Policy in Energy Sector of Georgia, Resolution of the Parliament No 3259-Is. 6 Article 3 of the Law on Electricity and Natural Gas, June 27, 1997 N816IIS, as amended.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Renewable Energy of Georgia (GoG Resolution No 107). In August 2013, in conjunction with the changes affected to GoG Resolution No 107, a new GoG Resolution No 214 was adopted on the Rules of Expressing Interest regarding Technical-Economic Study, Construction, Ownership and Operation of the HPPs in Georgia (further GoG Resolutions No 107 & No 214 jointly – the State Renewable Energy Program).

Under its latest edition, Renewable Energy 2008 sets conditions which should be observed by the developer interested to construct, operate and own an HPP, while new Resolution No 214 spells out specific rules for expressing interest to study, construct, own and operate an HPP. Both resolutions apply to the development of HPPs of any size (with some variations related to plants with the installed capacity exceeding 100MW), provided that these HPP sites are included in the list of sites adopted/approved by the MoE.

State Renewable Energy Program (Resolutions No 107 and No 214) A time-window for expressing interest to develop a particular HPP site/project is announced by the MoE through issuance of an individual administrative act. MoE’s announcement may be motivated by the application/request of an interested investor.

By the time expression of interests is announced by the MoE, it already contains a number of significant details such as: a) name of the power plant, estimated location, tentative scheme and basic technical parameters; b) timeframe (deadlines) for completion of feasibility study, commencement of the construction (subject to construction permit and commissioning of the power plant; c) estimated volume of investment in construction of the power plant; d) qualification requirements and criteria for revealing best application, indicating maximum amount; e) draft of the memorandum to be concluded with the winner of the bid.

To qualify for participation in the competition, an applicant must commit (consent) in the application to conduct feasibility study, construct the power plant, own the plant and operate it (BOO model (Build Own Operate)). Winner of the competition (if more than one bidder exists) is an applicant who shall commit to the lowest price of electricity for the sale to Electricity Sector Commercial Operator (ESCO) under the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). Execution of PPA with ESCO for sale of 20% of annually generated power during 10 years from commissioning of the power plant is a mandatory requirement imposed on the investor interested to develop an HPP in Georgia under State Renewable Energy Program (Resolutions No 107 & No 214).

Qualified competitors are required to furnish a preliminary guarantee to secure conduct of feasibility study, preparation of Environmental Impact Assessment Report and furnishing construction guarantee envisaged by the memorandum. Preliminary guarantee is required in the amount of USD 5,000 or its equivalent in Euro for each MW of installed capacity of HPP to be issued by a bank of an OECD country or one licensed in Georgia.

Memorandum signed with the investor defines the period of the year over which 20% of the annually generated power should be sold to ESCO. Memorandum divides the project development process into the stages of pre-construction and construction. The pre-construction stage envisages conduct and completion of technical and economic feasibility studies as well as conduct of ESIA and completion of the EIA Report. The construction stage envisages acquisition of plant related land rights, procurement of construction permit, launching and completion of construction, commissioning the power plant. During the construction stage the developer is required to furnish the construction guarantee in the amount of USD100.000 for each MW of installed capacity or its equivalent in Euro for the plants with the installed capacity below

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

100MW7.

In relation to HPP investors/developers, MoE acts on behalf of the GoG, engages in negotiations and signs MOU and other applicable documents. List of the HPP sites nominated for BOO investments are provided on the MoE’s website.

5. IMPLEMENTING HYDROPOWER PROJECTS

Developer selects the site for an HPP either from the list of potential sites approved and revised from time to time by the MoE of Georgia8 or may solicit the interest to develop a site which is not provided in the approved list, subject to meeting additional requirements imposed under the MoE Order No 40 on soliciting interest to develop, construct and operate a new HPP on the site not included in the list of potential sites approved by the MoE. In latter case, developer is obligated to file together with application, pre-feasibility study of the site/project, which should include preliminary EIA report.9

Developer who initiates and wins the right to develop a selected HPP project under any of the above defined modes,10 enters into the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the GoG. Under an MOU developer’s commitments to particular dates of acquiring construction permit, conduct of construction, completion and launching of a plant and volume of the investment contained in the application are reinforced, further formalized and backed by the bank guarantee.

Because of the design of the standard process11 under which GoG enters into an MOU with the investor 12 – the process which precedes the actual environmental and construction permitting, investors are forced into the environmental and construction permitting processes with very little leverage and flexibility in terms of location and size of the plant, timing and alternatives of construction, size of the investment.13 Hence, in the conditions of imposing the terms (timing, size, location) under which the State is interested to attract HPP investors/investments, environmental and social impact assessment processes preceding construction permitting of HPP become a rather formal burden.

On the other hand [differentiate with No 40 requirements – preliminary feasibility study – this notion is not defined under the Georgian law and it is not clear what should be the standard applicable to such document. On the other hand, decision of the ministry is based among other documents, on this document submitted by the potential developer to the MoE].

Following describes environmental and construction permitting processes applicable to the HPP

7 For larger plants the amount of guarantee is USD50,000 or its equivalent in Euro. 8 Latest list is presumably contained in the MoE Order No 125 of August 22, 2014 not available under Public Domain documents, but referenced in other normative act (MoE Order No 40 of April 10, 2014). Latest available version of the list is appended to the Report as Annex II. 9 Standard of such document is not regulated by the Georgian legislation. 10 In first case, there could be a competition between potential developers, while in second case, decision on granting the right to develop a project is at the discretion of the GoG. 11 Prescribed by the State Renewable Energy Program. 12 Although amended recently to alleviate pressure of the bank guarantee on the investor, State Renewable Energy Program still envisages imposing binding obligations on the investor under the MOU in relation to the size, location (latitudes), amount of investment and timing for the procurement of permits, construction and launching. 13 All of these parameters are predetermined and communicated by the MoE upon publication of expression of interests.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM projects in Georgia.

Permitting Construction of an HPP with the installed capacity above 50kWt14 can not be implemented without a construction permit. Construction of an HPP is also subject to environmental impact permitting if the size of HPP exceeds 2MW 15 (Table 1). HPP projects which require only construction permit go through such permitting process with the Technical and Construction Supervision Agency (TCSA) – authority responsible for issuance of construction permits if the installed capacity of an HPP exceeds 50 MWt or the local municipalities16 if the capacity of HPP is below 50 MWt. If the size of HPP exceeds 2 MW, environmental impact permitting is incorporated into the process of construction permitting as TCSA or local municipality operates under one stop-shop principle for the investor/developer of the HPP project.17

The depth and volume of documentation required for obtaining construction permit depends on the qualification of an HPP under the classes and categories established by the GoG Resolution No 57 on Rules of Issuance of the Construction Permits and Permit Conditions (Construction Resolution No 57, 2009). Construction Resolution No 57 provides for five classes of construction buildings18 and allocates HPPs by size to some of these classes, at the same time categorizing them into five groups19.

HPPs below the installed capacity of 50kWt belong to the construction objects of Category V under Class I. HPPs above the installed capacity of 50kWt but below 1MWt belong to Category IV under Class III. HPPs above 1MWt but below 10MWt belong to Category III under the same Class III. Within this category comes the threshold for the environmental impact permit/clearance requirement as indicated above. HPPs above the capacity of 10MWt but below 50MWt belong to Category II under Class IV. HPPs with the capacity over 50MWt qualify as Class V Category I construction objects. Table 1 below reflects qualifications of the HPPs by their size under Construction Resolution No 57.

Table 1. Environmental Impact and Construction Permitting Construction Issuing Size EI Permit Issuing Authority Permit Authority < 50 kWt N/A N/A N/A N/A I Class, V Category > 50 kWt < 1 MWt Local √ N/A N/A III Class, IV Category Municipality > 1 MWt < 10 MWt Local √ √* Ecological Expertise III Class, III Category Municipality > 10 MWt < 50 MWt Local √ √* Ecological Expertise IV Class, II Category Municipality

14 Under Article 65.e of GoG Resolution No 57 on Rules of Issuance of the Construction Permits and Permit Conditions (24 March 2009, amended as of May 22, 2014), HPPs above 50 kWt (plants below the installed capacity of 50kWt qualify as Category V construction objects under Class I) are subject to construction permit. 15 Article 4.l of the Law on Environmental Impact Permit (14 December 2007, N5602RS, as amended) provides the list of activities which require ecological expertise – the process which precedes and substantiates issuance of Environmental Impact Permit. 16 Article 16.2(m), Code of Local Self-governance (February 5, 2014, as amended). 17 As shown in the Table 1, because size of the HPP requiring environmental impact permit (2 MW) exceeds the size of the HPP requiring construction permit (50kWt), environmental impact permitting process is always handled under one stop-shop principle by TCSA or local municipality. 18 Class I envisaged for most simple structures which do not require construction permit and Class V for most difficult and complex structures with increased risk factor. 19 Category V being the smallest size HPPs and Category I largest.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

> 50MWt √ TCSA √* Ecological Expertise V Class, I Category * Conclusion of Ecological Expertise is sent by MENRP to respective authority (Municipality or TCSA) to become part of the Construction Permit (if the capacity exceeds 2MWt).

Construction Permit Construction is regulated by three main normative acts under Georgian legislation. These are:

 Law of Georgia on Construction Activities (2000);  Law on Product Safety and Free Movement (LPS, 2012); and  Construction Resolution No 57.

Generally, the process of obtaining construction permit covers three stages, each of which is followed by respective administrative act issued by the relevant administrative authority. These stages include:

I. Defining terms for urban development; II. Approval of construction design;20 III. Issuance of Construction Permit.

Environmental Impact Permit When the Environmental Impact Permit (EIP) is related to the project requiring construction permit, under the Law on Environmental Impact Permit (LEIP), the environmental impact permitting process generally implemented by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection (MENRP), becomes part of the construction permitting process undertaken by TCSA or the local municipality under one stop-shop principle. Therefore, an application submitted for the construction permit should also comply with the requirements of LEIP.

Construction Resolution No 57 defines21 that following additional documents must be submitted to construction permitting authority when EIP is also required:

1) Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIA Report) compiled in compliance with the Georgian legislation (as described in Part 8 of this Report on EIA)22; 2) Estimated types and volumes of emissions; 3) Short description of the activities (non technical resume); 4) Statement on any confidential part of the submitted documentation.23

Preparation of EIA Report is governed by the environmental legislation. The EIA process and substance of the EIA Report are discussed in detail in Parts 7 and 8 of the present Report. EIA process is completed by the process Ecological Expertise (EE), 24 which is the process of evaluating the content of the EIA Report and its compliance with the applicable environmental

20 As described in the respective part of the Report dedicated to Environmental Impact Permit, conclusion of Ecological Expertise is submitted to TCSA or the local municipality for this stage. 21 Article 51. 22 Most of the HPP projects require raising international capital, which often involves donor organizations, or IFIs whose portfolios are tuned to taking emerging market risks. In such circumstances, requirements imposed on EIA Reports are usually more stringent than those imposed by the Georgian legislation. 23 Article 51 of the Construction Resolution No 57. 24 Under Georgian legal parlance the term expertise is applied in the context of examination, study or assessment, as a verbal noun. To avoid confusion, this term is imported from Georgian with identical phoenetical resemblance and refers to the same.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM legislation.

The process of Ecological Expertise is concluded by the positive or negative conclusion of the commission of ecological experts teamed by the MENRP individually for each process of ecological expertise of any given project and EIA Report. Conclusion of Ecological Expertise, which is generally a part of the EIP issuance process25 is delivered in the case of HPPs to the TCSA or local municipality in the form of an administrative legal act on the II stage of the construction permitting process and thus later constitutes integral part of the construction permit.26 For the applicant of the construction permit therefore, observance of the terms of the conclusion of an Ecological Expertise is mandatory, since these constitute conditions of the construction permit. Following Chart 1 provides a schematic view of environmental impact permitting process.

25 HPPs with the capacity over 2 MW require ecological expertise under the Law on Environmental Impact Permit. EIP is required for the projects which require Ecological Expertise. Therefore, conduct of Ecological Expertise and its positive conclusion is the basis for issuace of Environmental Impact Permit. 26 Paragraph 5 of Article 4 of the LEIP.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Chart 1. EIA Process Steps and Timeframe27

Developer contracts an EIA Consulting Firm

Consulting firm preprares EIA report

Developer submits final verion of EIA report to Develper publishes information MENRP with application about planned activity and for permit, also filing public hearing of EIA report comments received 1 through public hearing week

50-60 days Developer submits initial EIA report to MENRP 20 days

MENRP (State Developer holds public hearing Ecological Expertise) of EIA report reviews EIA Report Public Hearing

Decision Making Y/N

MENRP Issues MENRP does EIP* not issue EIP

Developer commences construction (provided it has obtained construction permit from relevant authority

Under the framework described above, construction of HPPs with the installed capacity of over 2MWt may be carried out only after an EIA Report has been compiled and the Ecological Expertise (EE) has expressed a positive judgment concerning the EIA Report and respectively the project.

EIP is transferable subject to a joint written application of the EIP holder and assignee to the MENRP. Permitted activities may be undertaken only after the review of the application and issuance of the new permit with relevant amendments by MENRP. A new EIP holder shall be obliged to observe all permit conditions. Control of the EIP conditions is implemented by MENRP. Control and enforcement (liability for breach) is implemented under the Law on Licenses and Permits.

27 HPPs requiring EIP by default require construction permit as well. Therefore, instead of issuing an independent EIP, MENRP sends positive conclusion of an Ecological Expertise to the construction permitting authority. The latter may not issue construction permit without positive conclusion of the Ecological Expertise.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Water Rights Georgia’s water resources are comprised of rivers, lakes, natural and artificial reservoirs, canals, ponds, underground water, glaciers and wetlands. MENRP has the principal jurisdiction to protect, manage, control and monitor water resources.

Currently, the water sector is governed by the Water Law of 1997, which categorizes water into three types of (a) special state importance; (b) state importance and (c) local importance waters. Category (a) has full or partial restriction on water use and its limited uses do not include hydropower development. Requirements related to waters of state importance and local importance are linked to certain environmental and safety aspects and are subject to corresponding regulations implemented by MENRP. All of these issues fall under the environmental impact permitting and observance of the terms of respective EIP.

No licensing or permitting is required for water abstraction or discharge in connection with process of obtaining regulatory clearances required for electricity generation. Right to water use is subject to payment of fees established according to three categories of water: a) Caspian basin rivers, lakes and other water reservoirs; b) Black Sea basin rivers, lakes and other water reservoirs; and c) Black Sea water.28

Environmental Flow The term Environmental Flow , as used in international practice, describes the quantity, timing, and quality of water flows required to sustain freshwater and estuarine ecosystems and the human livelihoods and well being that depend on these ecosystems. Environmental flow requirements for water abstraction and discharge are not directly and specifically regulated or prescribed by either Water Law or any of the laws or normative acts applicable to the EIA processes.29 After the break up of the Soviet Union, Georgia has not adopted new standards and methodologies, which would apply to various environmental aspects of new projects and among them to the environmental flow.

To maintain an identifiable and legally binding grip on the aspect, after a number of years without such source of legal reference, on February 18, 2011 the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia issued an Order No 1-1/251 on application of norms, rules and other documents of technical regulations in effect in the areas of technical supervision and construction on the territory of Georgia prior to 1992 (Order 251). Under Order 251, prior to adoption of the construction norms and rules, as well as other relevant acts, in the course of construction on the territory of Georgia, the norms, rules and other documents of technical regulations listed in the order, or their parts thereof, which do not contradict Georgian legislation in effect, applicable prior to the year 1992 shall be applied where no alternative is available in the form of national construction norms30, rules or normative acts.

The list appended to the Order 251 covers 173 norms, rules and technical regulations31 and

28 GoG Resolution No 133 of April 5, 2012 on Fees for Usage of Natural Resources. 29 LEP, LEIP, LEE, MENRP Order No 31 on Provisions of Environmental Impact Assessment. 30 It is not clear, whether such formulation imperatively imposes application of these norms, while these are qualified as voluntary norms in the jurisdiction of their origin. 31 These norms, rules and regulations (which largely included SniPs (as defined under footnote No 30 below)) were adopted by the various bodies of executive branch in the Soviet Union and were applied on the whote territory of USSR. System of normative documents in the construction on the territory of USSR (SNiPs) operated in parallel with the system of standartization. Since 1995, SniPs (Building Codes) became private technical regulations. In 2010 existing SniPs were recognized as codes.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM includes the so called SNiP 32 2.01.14-83 on Determining Calculations of Hydrological Characteristics adopted in 198533. In terms of classification, SNiP 2.01.14-83 falls under the category of a building code (norms) for project design. SNiP 2.01.14-83 provides for the rules of calculating/deriving hydrological data as a result of annual observation or in case of lack of such data.

There are ten SNiPs under the classification of Hydraulic Structures34. Of these, SNiP issued in 1988 on Hydraulic Structure. Basic Statements [of Project Design] – is not included in the list approved under Order 251. It is not clear whether this is a deliberate or accidental omission.35 It is possible, that due to involvement of international developers and consultants in the process of HPP project design, this process is left for free float and coverage by contemporary international standards. Other 9 (nine) SNiPs are included in the list provided by Order 25136.

The list endorsed by the Order 251 however does not include the so called SanPins (Sanitary Rules and Norms37). In fact, it derives from the Order 251, that it does not intend to vindicate sanitary norms applicable prior to 1992 on the Georgian territory in general. Most relevant SanPin that would be applicable to HPP projects is SanPin 3907-85 on Sanitary Rules for Project Design, Construction and Exploitation of water reservoirs. SanPin 3907-85 does not provide for a particular rate/figure for minimum sanitary flow38, but defines general rules and requirements in relation to a proposed sanitary flow level.39 No specific methodology for calculation of the sanitary flow is proposed by SanPin 3907-85. One of the origins of the frequently applied 10% rate of sanitary flow can be found in Standard Instruction for Exploitation of Water Reservoirs with the Volume of 10M m3 for the Purposes of Irrigation.40 Another SanPin deals with the rules and norms on protection of surface waters from pollution.

While over 200 methodologies are identifiable globally to calculate the level of environmental flow under different approaches,41 Georgian EIA legislation is missing a clearly defined and appropriate approach to the issue of environmental flow.

32 The term SNiP here is used as phonetically identical acronym for Construction Norms and Rules in Russian (Санитарные Нормы и Правила - СНиП). Equivalent in English would be the Building Code. 33 In Russian: “Определение Расчетных Гидрологических Характеристик”. 34 In Russian: “Классификация Гидротехнических Сооружений”. 35 An updated version of the document is in effect in Russian Federation since 01.01.2013. 36 These include (unofficial translation): SNiP 2.06.03-85 Amelioration systems and structures; SNiP 2.06.04-82 (1989, amended in 1995) Load and influence on hydraulic structures (from tides, ice and vessels); SNiP 2.06.05-84 (1990) Dums from ground (грунтовый) material; SNiP 2.06.06-85 (amended in 1987) Concrete and reinforced concrete dams; SNiP 2.06.07-87 (1989) Retaining walls, shipping locks, fish passage and fish protection structures; SNiP 2.06.08-87 Concrete and reinfoced concrete structures of hydraulic structures; SNiP 2.06.09-84 Hydraulic Tunnels; SNiP 2.06.14-85 (amended in 1989) Protection of mountain minerals from surface and underground waters; SNiP 2.06.15-85 Engineering protection of territory from flooding and heating. 37 Instead of the term Environmental Flow which is more comprehensive and inclusive, the term Sanitary Cost of Water is applied in Georgian EIA practices as a result of the Soviet legacy. 38 It should be noted that the term sanitary flow (sanitary cost [of water]) under the SanPin 3907-85 refers to “the minimum amount (cost) of water which shall (should) ensure normative quality of water and favorable conditions for water use in the lower bief (canal pound) of the water reservoir, while the term “environmental flow” as used in international practice, describes “the quantity, timing, and quality of water flows required to sustain freshwater and estuarine ecosystems and the human livelihoods and well being that depend on these ecosystems”. 39 Article 4 of the SanPin 3907-85 on Requirements Applicable to the Regimes of Operation of Water Reservoirs. 40 Instruction # ВСН 33-3.02.01-84 adopted on April 16, 1984 by the Ministry of Amelioration and Water Management of USSR. 41 Arthington A.H., Tharme R.E., Brizga S.O., Pusey B.J. and Kennard M.J., Environmental Flow Assessment With Emphasis On Holistic Methodologies at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/ad526e/ad526e07.htm; last visited April 30, 2014.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Thus, in the absence of a particular normative act or rule on environmental flow and calculation of its level, preliminary studies and calculations applied to the HPPs offered to the investors under BOO model, 42 envisage a standard 43 10% rate of sanitary flow without a particular individual insight into the specifics of any individual project.44 Nothing precludes consulting companies from applying a different standard, rule or methodology for calculating environmental flow. However, in undertaking EIA processes and compiling EIA Reports they mostly apply this figure as a rule of thumb. This at the same time is an inflicted figure suggested by the project design developed by the investor based on preliminary studies and commitments undertaken under already signed MoUs.45 Consulting firms may also apply those methodologies which are dictated by the investor/developer due to the source of financing.46

Land rights Land is an important asset for an HPP project. It is critical that such land be transferred to investor/project entity with clear title as both construction permit as well as generation license require evidences of rights to the assets used for construction and operation of the HPP. Under Georgian law, any improvement on the land belongs to the owner of the land.

Various types of rights to the land are envisaged by the Georgian law. Any investor shall seek to obtain ownership rights to the land plots involved in construction to have clear title to any improvements made on such land.

State owned land Situations with the land plot needed for construction of an HPP are different. If the needed land is owned by the State, investor needs to go through privatization process as prescribed by the legislation. Often the parcels needed for the projects are traditionally occupied/used by the local population for generations, without official registration in the registry. Under the principle of ownership of non registered land, the plots which are not registered in general, belong to the

42 Those potential sites which are specifically listed in the respective normative act issued by the MoE. 43 The terms standard here is used to describe the practice of consistently or frequently applying a specific figure rather than any recognized or a formally adopted particular standard rate. 44 MoE website redirection to preliminary studies performed on behalf of MoE under USAI/HIPP project (at: http://hydropower.ge/eng/35). In the process of sampling, following has been identified as a standard passage on sanitary flow: “Sanitary or environmental bypass flow (assumed): 10% of mean monthly flow during low-water season and 10% of mean annual flow for the rest of the period” (p.3 of the Pre-feasibility Study on Tskhenistskali 1 HPP, Upper Tskhenistskali River Basin, December 27, 2012 (http://hydropower.ge/eng/152)); P. 18, Ibid.: “Georgian regulations require a part of the total flow in a stream to remain in that stream when water is diverted for hydroelectric power generation, irrigation, water supply, or other use. This bypass flow is often referred to as a “sanitary” flow, since a major purpose of the rule is to ensure that human and other waste products entering the stream bypass reach are diluted. In practice, sanitary flow is set as a 10 percent of the mean annual flow for the majority of studies in Georgia. Modern hydroelectric practice considers biological habitat needs (and, sometimes, aesthetic and recreational concerns) when determining bypass flow. In-stream flow requirements to maintain healthy conditions for fish and other inhabitants are generally higher than the sanitary flows. They must generally be determined by environmental studies conducted during the feasibility or design stages of project development. In this study, assumed levels of bypass flow that vary from month to month have been adopted to estimate the flow actually available for the power generation. During low flow season, sanitary flow is set at 10% of the mean monthly flow, while for the rest of the period sanitary flow could be calculated as 10% of the mean annual flow, as is shown in Table 8. In practice, sanitary flow would probably be higher between the intake structure and the powerhouse due to the added inflow from the tributaries. However, it is recommended to carry out further detailed study of the bypass flow during the Feasibility Study.” 45 List of the projects and committed dates and investments is provided in Annex II of the Report. 46 For example, representative of Gamma Consulting, LLC indicated that the firm often applies Swiss standards when it works under its contracts with Stucky; EBRD or IFC when it works on large projects involving IFI financing.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM state.47

Law of Georgia on State Property, as well as the Law of Georgia on Recognition of Land Rights of Legal and Natural Persons in Possession of the Land Plots,48 limits privatization/ownership of certain types of land, including the land plots adjacent49 to the rivers which are tendered for construction of HPPs. Exceptions are allowed in relation to agricultural land under solicitation of the Ministry of Economy to the GoG for important projects.50 For other cases investor shall need to enter into long-term lease agreements unless amendments are introduced into the State Property Law.51

In combination, these restrictions and failure of the local communities to timely and effectively register the ancestral land plots de facto occupied and used for economic purposes long before any project is introduced, can lead to the disregard of their social and economic interests, particularly, as discussed elsewhere in the Report, in the formal absence of the social impact assessment component in the E(S)IA process in general.

Privately owned land If the land plot required for construction of an HPP is privately owned, investor shall need to enter into negotiations with a private party. Georgian law also envisages eminent domain procedures for the projects of public need. Expropriation of the property for the public interest is allowable under Article 21 of the Constitution of Georgia. Eminent domain issues are governed by the Law of Georgia on Expropriation of the Property for Indispensable Public Need. Right to expropriate property is assigned only under the decision of the court and the Eminent Domain procedures envisage remuneration of the land owner with the market price of the plot.

The term Indispensable Public Need is not defined, however, Article 2 of the law provides a list of the works, which may qualify. List does not specifically cover HPP, but includes under Paragraph 2.h. Construction of structures and objects indispensable for public importance/need. As of the date of the present Policy Report, no cases of eminent domain related to an HPP have been known.

Land issues and social & economic issues are very intertwined. Under international standards, resettlement and land related economic issues are always covered by the ESIA reports. However,

47 Under the Law of Georgia on Recognition of Land Rights of Legal and Natural Persons in Possession of the Land Plots (11 July 2007 N5274RS, as amended), the land plots on which hydro technological buildings/structures or their sanitary protection zones are located may not be subject to recognition of ownership by possessors. While the text of the law indicates that restriction applies to the land plot if the referred buildings/structures already exist, if the land plot is factually possessed but not registered, and HPP is built over the period of possession (provided relevant land rights are obtained prior to obtaining construction permit from the State), population using such land plot shall have restricted its rights generally granted under the law. 48 This law also applies to those legal and natural persons who occupied the land plots owned by the State deliberately, without permission. 49 The term adjacent is not defined in the Law on State Property. X and Y coordinates of the land plots adjacent to the rivers listed in the Law on the State Property (reflecting the rivers with HPP potential under respective lists elaborated by MoE) should be approved by the Order of the MoESD of Georgia, as prescribed under Paragraph 1 of the Article 4 of the Law on the State Property. Since the Order of the MoESD is a normative act which should be publicly available and such normative act could be located from publicly available resources/legal database, it should be presumed that such normative act has never been adopted by the MoESD. 50 Such restriction is apparently aimed at safeguarding land plots adjacent to the rivers and critical to the HPP projects offered to the investors under BOO model, from such privatization which may not be motivated by the intention to implement HPP projects. 51 Other relevant limitations/restrictions on privatization of the land under Georgian legislation include cultural, recreational and sanitary, which need to be cleared prior to acquiring rights to such land plots.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM as it is also evident from the terminology applied in the Georgian legislation52, although EIA process and EIA Reports should cover issues such as potential impact of the project on the (a) living conditions, (b) health of the affected population, (c) social economic conditions and (d) directions of development53, EIA is not meant to cover issues of resettlement and expropriation. In other words, these issues, although usually partially and superficially covered by the EIA Reports, can not be acted upon by the MENRP in the process of Ecological Expertise. Rather, discussing living conditions, health and social & economic aspects in compliance with the EIA Order No 31 on Environmental Impact Assessment imply simply commenting on these aspects in relation to the population remaining on the site.

6. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND GUIDELINES

One of the main tasks of the Policy Report is to review and discuss environmental impact assessment policies and guidelines of Georgia. To source these, primary look should be taken at country’s environmental protection policy and its sources in general. Following paragraphs identify and describe all legal primary and secondary sources of environmental protection and respectively EIA.

Constitution Constitution of Georgia (1995) establishes basic rules for environment protection and use of natural resources. Under Article 37 of the Constitution: “Everyone shall have the right to live in a healthy environment and enjoy natural and cultural surroundings”. The Constitution also obligates everyone “to care for the natural and cultural environment.” This Constitutional formulation should be understood as a first and primary guiding principle to be implemented and enforced through all governmental efforts and endeavors in the field of environmental protection.

National Security Concept Periodically, Parliament of Georgia adopts National Security Concept of Georgia 54 , which includes Chapter 14 on environmental (ecological) security policy. A relevant excerpt from Chapter 14 reads as follows:

“From security perspective, environmental security policy of Georgia protects people and the environment by reducing the use of natural resources and the prevention of environmental damage caused by natural and manmade crises. Special attention is paid to such disasters as floods, landslides, avalanches, and earthquakes, as well as industrial accidents, etc.

52 Georgian legislation envisages the process of Environmental Impact Assessment as opposed to the international practice of Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, which explicitely covers social issues, including resettlement actions plans (RAP). 53 All of these aspects (living conditions, health and social economic conditions and directions of development) are listed in the EIA Order 31, Paragraphs 2.f.a and 2.f.c of Article 5 which deals with scoping of the Environmental Impact Assessment, however, these are not defined or explored any further and more specifically elsewhere in the same or other normative acts. 54 The National Security Concept of Georgia, adopted by the Resolution of the Parliament No 5589 on December 23, 2011. National Security Concept is the basic document that explains fundamental national values and national interests, the vision of the nation’s secure development, threats, risks and challenges, and establishes the main directions for national security policy. The Government of Georgia develops, and the Parliament of Georgia ratifies, the National Security Concept. Based on the National Security Concept, the Government of Georgia implements measures to ensure the protection of fundamental national values and the advancement of national interests, and to respond adequately to the risks, threats, and challenges facing the country. The National Security Concept creates the basis for the development of specific strategies and plans that are updated along with changes to the National Security Concept.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

The goal of Georgia’s environmental policy is to develop and implement efficient measures to prevent pollution of all kinds of air, water, and earth to protect forest resources and the Black Sea, and to manage radioactive and other hazardous materials on the territory of Georgia.

The Government of Georgia is aware that the country’s environmental security demands close regional and international cooperation. The participation of international organizations in preventing the further deterioration of the environmental situation in the Russian-occupied territories of Georgia is important.”

Environmental Protection Policy Under standard legal practice, state policy is elaborated by the relevant ministry and approved/adopted by the Parliament. In this regard, no one particular and explicit policy document can be located on the environmental protection policy in Georgia. Instead of being reflected in a single policy document, it can be concluded, that Georgia’s environmental protection policy is decentralized and reflected in Georgia’s national environmental action plans, general environmental and sector specific legislation and international instruments to which it has become a party. Meanwhile, the need for a an integrated environmental protection and developmental policies has also been recognized.55

Environmental Protection Policy through Multilateral/Regional Treaties and Conventions Environmental protection policy of Georgia is also shaped by a number of international obligations (which by legal force supersede legislative acts56). The intention of the GoG to synchronize its legislation with that of the European Union (EU) has been officially declared several times.

Currently, Georgia is party to about 50 multilateral and bilateral environmental treaties, which impose specific requirements on member countries. An extended list of selected and relevant international multilateral treaties and conventions to which Georgia is a party is provided in the Table 2 below.

Table 2. International instruments to which Georgia has acceded Year Name of the Instrument Date of Signing Status 1971 RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands of International 1996 Ra Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat 1982 (PARIS) Amendment 1987 (REGINA) Amendments

1972 (PARIS) Convention Concerning the Protection of the 1993 Si World Cultural and Natural Heritage

1973 (WASHINGTON) Convention on International Trade in 1996 Ra Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 1979 (BONN) Amendment 1983 (GABORONE) Amendment

55 II NEPAP, Chapter on Policy Integration. Lack of scientific and statistical data on the natural/environmental resources of Georgia is considered as one of the impediments to introducing an efficient Strategy for Sustainable Development (SSD) and respectively environmental policy in Georgia. As of the date of the present Report, no particular plans or projects are working towards mitigating/eradicating this gap. This has been stated and confirmed by several interviewees, including Ms. Tamar Sharashidze, Head of Ecological and Inspection Department of the Ministry of Environment Protection. Lack of financial and other resources has been named as a main problem. 56 Article 6 of the Constitution, also, Law on International Treaties.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

1979 (BONN) Convention on the Conservation of Migratory 2000 Ra Species of Wild Animals 1991 (LONDON) Agreement Conservation of Bats in Europe 2001 Ra 1992 (NEW YORK) Agreement on the Conservation of Small 2001 Ra Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas (ASCOBANS) 1995 (THE HAGUE) African/Eurasian Migratory Waterbird 2001 Ra Agreement (AEWA) 1996 (MONACO) Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans 2001 Ra of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic

Area (ACCOBAMS)

1979 (BERN) Convention on the Conservation of European 2008 Ra Wildlife and Natural Habitats

1979 (GENEVA) Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air 1999 Ra Pollution (None of the 8 protocols have any status)

1985 (VIENNA) Convention for the Protection of the Ozone 1996 Ra Layer 1987 (MONTREAL) Protocol on Substances that Deplete the 1996 Ra Ozone Layer 1990 (LONDON) Amendment to Protocol 2000 Ra 1992 (COPENHAGEN) Amendment to Protocol 2000 Ra 1997 (MONTREAL) Amendment to Protocol 2000 Ra 1999 (BEIJING) Amendment to Protocol 2000 Ra (ESPOO) Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment 2003 Si in a Transboundary Context 2003 (KIEV) Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment 1992 (RIO) Convention on Biological Diversity 1994 Ra 2000 (CART AGENA) Protocol on Biosafety 2008 Ra 1992 (NEW YORK) United Nations Framework Convention on 1994 Ra Climate Change 1997 (KYOTO) Protocol 2005 Ra 1994 (PARIS) United Nations Convention to Combat 1999 Ra Desertification 1998 (ROTTERDAM) Convention on the Prior Informed Consent 2007 Ra Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade

1998 AARHUS Convention on Access to Information, Public 2000 Ra Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters 2003 (KIEV) Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Register 2000 (FLORENCE) European Landscape Convention 2011 Ra Si = Signed; Ra = Ratification.

Major environmental conventions and protocols which bear relevance to the E(S)IA processes for hydropower sector are described in more detail in the Annex III of this Report. Instruments further detailed in the Annex III include conventions and treaties covering topics such as biodiversity, climate change, wetlands, desertification, conservation of wildlife, EIA in transboundary context (Espoo).

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

EIA related EU Legislation EU-Georgia Association Agreement and Approximation One of the topics covered by EU-Georgia Association Agreement is environmental protection. Draft association agreement envisages a number of activities in this field promoting not only improvement of environment for people and ecosystems, but also better environmental governance and effective decision-making on environmental issues. Promotion of sustainable development, including protection of the environment, is a priority area No 3 under ENP AP Implementation Plan 2012.57 Objectives envisaged under this priority area include developing framework legislation and basic procedures and ensure planning for key environmental sectors, air quality, water quality, waste management, nature protection for which suggested activities include: 1. Work on the issues of conformity to obligations envisaged under the UNECE convention: (protection and use of trans-boundary water sources and international lakes; environment impact assessment in the trans-boundary context); 2. Third national notification to the Climate Change Framework Convention by Georgia; 3. Review of the strategy and action plan on protection of biodiversity. Ultimately, Georgian legislation should be approximated with EU legislation, which shall also imply import of EU environmental policy aspects into the Georgia normative acts.

To further its EU integration process, the MENRP continues to work on over ten other international agreements which in the context of EIA processes also include Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment.58

EU legislation is also used as a benchmark for environmental sector amendments as well. Most notably, EU Water Directive59 serves as an important platform for planning in water sector. Changes to the Law of Georgia on Water are underway, although no draft is available in public domain to comment on the level of harmonization with EU Water Directive.60

EU EIA Directive One of the most important and relevant acts in the area of EIA under EU acquis is EU EIA Directive 85/337/EEC adopted in 1985. Since 1985 the EIA Directive of 1985 has been amended three times and is currently codified under Directive 2011/92/EU of 13 December 2011 (EIA Directive).61 EIA Directive applies to a wide range of defined public and private projects, which

57 The European Neighboring Policy Georgia – EU Action Plan 2012 (ENP AP 2012), which sets strategic objectives for cooperation between Georgia and the EU is another official document aimed at shaping environmental policy in Georgia. 58 Visit: http://aarhus.ge/index.php?lang=eng&page=157 and http://aarhus.ge/index.php?page=156&lang=eng last visited on June 7, 2013. 59 Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council 2000/06/EC establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. 60 Over the interview at MENRP, it was indicated, that the new draft law on water is under final elaborations with the working group/team of experts. 61 1997 changes brought the EIA Directive in line with the UNECE Espoo Convention on EIA in a Transboundary Context and widened its scope by increasing the types of projects covered, and the number of projects requiring mandatory environmental impact assessment (under Annex I). It also provided for new screening arrangements, including new screening criteria (at its Annex III) for its Annex II projects, and established minimum information requirements. Directive 2003/35/EC was seeking to align the provisions on public participation with the Aarhus Convention on public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM are categorized into Mandatory EIA (Annex I projects) and Discretion of Member States (screening) (Annex II projects) types. Annex I projects are considered as having significant effects on the environment and require an EIA. For Annex II projects Members States may decide whether EIA is needed at their discretion. This is done through the "screening procedure", which determines the effects of projects on the basis of thresholds/criteria or a case-by-case examination. Still, the national authorities must take into account the criteria laid down in Annex III, which deals with screening criteria.

The EIA procedure under EIA Directive can be summarized as follows: the developer may request the competent authority to indicate what should be covered by the EIA information to be provided by the developer (scoping stage); the developer must provide information on the environmental impact (EIA report – Annex IV); the environmental authorities and the public (and affected Member States) must be informed and consulted; the competent authority decides, taken into consideration the results of consultations. The public is informed of the decision afterwards and can challenge the decision before the courts.

Currently, Georgian environmental legislation is not harmonized with EU EIA Directive. Concepts of screening and scoping are not adopted by the Georgian EIA system62 and further approximation efforts in the area of environmental protection are ahead.

Environmental Protection in Normative Acts of Georgia Environmental protection system is based on a number of laws and sub-legislative acts. The framework Law on Environmental Protection (LEP) recognizing complexity of environmental aspects and creating platform for environmental protection and management of environmental resources was adopted in 1996. LEP also introduced environmental protection planning system, which envisages following planning actions: a) long term strategic planning (Strategy for Sustainable Development (SSD)); b) five year plan (National Environment Protection Action Program (NEPAP)); c) environment protection management plans by activities.

Strategy for Sustainable Development (SSD) Sustainable development is defined as such system of development of society, which envisaging the economic development and environmental protection interests of the public ensures improvement of level of quality of human life and rights of future generations to benefit from the natural resources and environment safeguarded from the irreversible quantitative and qualitative changes. 63 Principles of sustainable development are defined under LEP as those principles integrated in Rio Declaration adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992.64 LEP prescribes that SSD should be elaborated by the MENRP with participation of public and should be approved by the Parliament of Georgia. SSD is the strategy compiled based on the principles of sustainability, which ensures balance of economic development and environment protection interest. As of the date of the Report no SSD has ever been enacted in Georgia.

National Environmental Protection Action Program (NEPAP)

Directive 2009/31/EC amended the Annexes I and II of the EIA Directive, by adding projects related to the transport, capture and storage of carbon dioxide (CO2). 62 At an interview (22 March, 2013), the Head of Ecological and Inspection Department of the MENRP Ms. Tamar Sharashide indicated, that MENRP is planning on introducing screening and scoping system into the EIA procedures. Drafts of such acts are not available as of the date of the Report. 63 Article 4.j of LEP. 64 Article 4.k of LEP.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

MENRP is responsible for elaboration of NEPAP, which is a part of the indicative plan of social economic development. NEPAP is approved by the Order of the GoG. Under LEP drafting process of NEPAP is organized by the MENRP based on the Strategy for Sustainable Development, which as noted above, has never been developed in Georgia. NEPAP 265 was adopted under the GoG Order No 127 on January 24, 2012 for the period of 2012-2016.

NEPAP 2 is an official document representing Georgia’s agenda for environmental actions for 2012-2016. Function of NEPAP 2 is to modify and strengthen legal, administrative and institutional framework at all levels and create an appropriate platform for EU approximation processes. NEPAP 2 covers 11 sectoral chapters dealing with different environmental categories. 66 Additional chapters identify cross-cutting issues common to all environmental sectors and consider the complex and inter-sectoral nature of environmental problems acknowledging the need for policy integration.

Other normative acts Many sector-specific environmental laws are also in place. However, most of them establish general legal norms that are not developed sufficiently in subordinated normative acts. A list and description of key legislative acts pertaining to the EIA and environmental permitting specifically, is provided in the Part 8 of the present Report.

7. EIA UNDER GEORGIAN LEGISLATION

Below is the list and brief descriptions of the key legislative and sub-legislative acts pertaining to EIA, EIA Reports, EE processes.

 Law on Environmental Protection (LEP) LEP was adopted on December 10, 1996. Despite numerous changes, it remains up to date a fundamental/core legislative pieace which serves as a framework for other legislative and sub- legislative acts in the area of environmental protection.

LEP defines the framework of environmental protection and provides for general but particular areas pertaining to environmental protection such as: rights and obligations of citizens in the area of environmental protection, education and research in the area of environmental protection, state management of environmental protection, economic mechanisms in the area of environmental protection, information on environmental protection, norms of protection, ecological requirements for waste, environmental requirements related to decisionmaking on initiation or implementation of an activity, ecological emergency, protection of natural ecosystems, protected areas, global and regional management of environmental protection, international cooperation in the area of environmental protection, state control in the area of environmental protection and use of natural resources, imposing liability for damages caused to environment and compensation of such damages, agreement in the area of environmental protection and use of natural resources.

65 NEPAP 1 was adopted in May 2000 under Presidential decree and covered period of 2000-2004. NEPAP 1 was termed as a policy document rather than action program, as many of the activities were already implemented and predetermined content of the document. Next NEPAP for 2008-2012 was prepared but never officially approved due to the heavy criticism from NGO sector and experts. 66 These include: water resources, ambient air, waste, black sea, biodiversity, protected areas, forestry, land resources, mineral resources, natural and manmade disasters and industrial accidents, radiation and climate change.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

In general, environmental protection is implemented and enforced by MENRP through its central office. Regional offices of the MENRP were abolished after reorganization of the MENRP structure in 2010. However, in May 2013, a subordinated entity Environmental Supervision Department emerged with the regional offices. Department is responsible for control of compliance of environmental protection requirements and observance of the conditions of issued licenses and permits.

EIP is issued by the MENRP and it also controls mitigation activities implemented by construction companies, obtains complete information from construction companies regarding utilization of natural resources, monitoring systems, waste management and other issues.

LEP regulates the legal aspects of relations between State agencies and individuals or legal entities in environment protection and natural resource utilization matters across the whole territory of Georgia. The law covers different aspects of protecting natural eco-systems, protected areas, global and regional management issues, bio-diversity and international cooperation matters. Further, specific pieces of legislation regulate or relate to the issues/fields such as: environmental permits, ecological examination, water protection, forests, tourism and recreation, wildlife, sanitary protection, resort areas and biodiversity.

Issues related to EIA and EIP are governed by Chapter X on environmental requirements related to decisionmaking on initiation or implementation of an activity. Chapter X covers Articles 35 through 41. Article 35 is the primary legislative source qualifying obtaining EIP as a mandatory step prior to engaging into an activity (as defined under Article 4.g of LEP as activity subject to EE under the LEIP). Paragraph 2 of the same Article nominates LEIP as the law governing rules for issuance of EIP. Article 37 further details that EIP can not be issued without conduct of an EIA and that the applicant shall reflect results of EIA in the EIA Report.

Very importantly, Article 5 of LEP lays out principles of environmental protection for those interested to engage in activities. In the absence of an articulate environmental policy or detailed mandatory description/content of the EIA Report, other than that provided in EIA Order#14 on Environmental Impact Assessment, these principles should serve as guidelines for the conduct of EIA as well as EE of the compiled EIA Report. Below is the list of the principles endorsed under Article 5 of LEP with corresponding definitions provided by the law:

1. Principle of risk minimization: in the course of planning and implementing activity, the subject of the activity is obliged to take appropriate measures in order to reduce or prevent all adverse effects on human health and on the environment; 2. Principle of sustainability: such use of the environment and natural resources, when public development is not endangered and protection of environment and natural resources from irreversible quantitative and qualitative changes is ensured; 3. Principle of prioritization: the action, which is likely to have adverse effect on the environment and human health may be replaced by other, less risky action (even if this is more expensive). Priority is given to the latter, if its costs do not exceed the costs which would compensate ecological damage, resulting from the less expensive action; 4. Principle of fee based use of natural resources: the subject of the activity is obliged to pay for the use of land, water, forest, flora, fauna and subsoil resources; 5. Principle of polluter pays: the subject of the activity, as well as the natural person or legal entity is obliged to compensate for the damage caused to the environment; 6. Principle of conservation of biodiversity: the activity must not lead to the irreversible degradation of biological diversity;

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

7. Principle of minimization of waste: in the course of implementation of the activity priority is given to such technology, which ensures minimization of waste; 8. Principle of Recycling: in the course of implementation of the activity priority is given to such materials, substances and chemical compounds, which may be reused, reprocessed, decomposed or degraded biologically without damaging the environment; 9. Principle of Restitution: the environment degraded as a result of the implementation of the activity, must be restored to a form, which must be as close to its initial state as possible (restitutio in integrum); 10. Principle of the environmental impact assessment: in the course of planning and designing activity, as prescribed by the law the subject of the activity is obliged to take into consideration and assess possible effects on the environment, which may be caused by the activity; 11. Principle of participation: participation of the public in important decision-making, related to the implementation of the activity is ensured; 12. Principle of access to information: information about the state of the environment is transparent and available to the public.

In the course of planning and implementation, state bodies, natural and legal persons (regardless of organizational-legal form) are obliged to apply these guiding principles.

National Environmental Protection Action Programme as a source of EIA policy and guidelines

Although in compliance with LEP, from time to time, MENRP adopts National Environmental Protection Action Programme, this document does not qualify as a policy document. While NEPAP deals with the particular environmental sectors such as natural resources, ambient air, water, forest resources, wates, Black Sea, biodiversity and protected territories, soil, minerals, nuclear saftey and climate change,67 overall, it remains an internal document of MENRP to be applied in the course of more detailed planning and designing of furhter actions in the respective areas of environmental protection and management.

In sum, NEPAP is a document providing a roadmap/guidance to the GoG on a very general footing. NEPAP aims at changing the legislation itself and can not be viewed as a document substituting policy or a sectoral guidline related to environmental protection.

 Law on Environmental Impact Permit (LEIP) LEIP was adopted on December 14, 2007. LEIP defines the list of the activities subject to mandatory EE as well as the legal basis for participation of the public in EIA processes.

LEIP defines activities which are subject to ecological expertise. Positive conclusion of ecological expertise then constitutes a legal basis for issuing EIP. LEIP defines principles and rules of the conduct of ecological expertise, involvement (and informing) of the public in the process of environmental impact assessment and EIP issuance. LEIP is further complemented by the Law on Ecological Expertise (LEE) and MENRP Order on the Environmental Impact Assessment68 which detail the content (scope) of EIA, as further described below.

Prior to issuance of the EIP, MENRP conducts ecological examination of the project based on the respective documentation. Review is implemented by an ad hoc commission of ecological

67 Each of the chapters dealing with a particular environmental sector outlines the issues and problems in the sector, defines framework and future plans for the management of the respective environmental resource of issue. 68 MENRP Order 31 of May 15, 2013 on approval of the Provision on Environmental Impact Assessment.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM experts established by the MENRP.69 Commission may also include independent experts. Form of the Permit is endorsed by the Minister of Environmental Protection. EIA regulations do not distinguish particular specializations of the experts.

EIP is issued under simplified administrative procedure envisaged by the chapter VI of the General Administrative Code of Georgia as prescribed by the Law of Georgia on License and Permits within 20 days70 from the registration of the submitted application in accordance with the Law on Licenses & Permits. This should not be confused with the process of EE, which should take no less than 10 and no more than 15 days.

 MENRP Order No 31 on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA Order 14) EIA Order 14 is a sub-legislative act adopted by MENRP and regulating legal aspects of EIA. EIA Order 14 lays out principles of environmental impact assessment, which are following: a) Complex (integrated) review of the technical, technological, ecological, social and economic indicators of the project design decision for the planned activity; b) Review of alternatives of project design decisions to ensure observance of requirements of environmental norms; c) Consideration of all local factors as a whole; d) Publicity and public participation; e) Appropriateness of the methodologies applied in the course of EIA process; objectivity and justification of the procured information as well as of the conclusions.

EIA Order No 31 outlines that the direct or indirect effect on the following areas should be studied in the process of conduct of EIA71: a) Human living condition and human health; b) Flora and fauna; c) Landscape; d) Air, water, soil, climate; e) Historical monuments and cultural values; f) Social-economic factors; g) Existing geological and hydrological environment and expected risks.

EIA Order No 31 divides EIA process into seven stages and defines activities under each of the stage. Table below describes these activities, which may qualify as EIA scope. Respectively, content of EIA Report is provided in the Part 12 of the Report and reflects/follows requirements of the EIA Order No 31 listed below.

Scope of EIA Process under EIA Order No 3172 First Stage a Collection of exhaustive information on existing environmental conditions Defining quantities and qualities of various possible emissions and wastes for the b various periods and loads/regimes of operation of the object, elaboration of the plan for

69 A number of sub-legislative acts regulate composition, remuneration and process of EE: 1. Remuneration of Independent Experts, MENRP Order No 33, 15.05.2013; 2. Provision on the Registry of Independent Experts, MENRP Order No 32, 15.05.2013; 3. Rules of Conduct of Ecological Expertise, MENRP Order No 28, May 14, 2013. 70 Article 26 of the Law of Georgia on Licenses and Permits (2005). 71 Paragraph 3 of Article 3 of the EIA Order No 31. 72 Article 5 of the EIA Order No 31.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

their transportation, placement, utilization and elimination

Study and analysis of the various components of environment (air, water, soil, flora, c fauna, geological structure, climate, protected territories and other) in the context of expected impact on them Analysis of the socio economic condition of the location of activity/object placement and d forecast of the possible changes of the environment caused by the planned activity Second Stage. Identification of effect of the alternatives Based on the available information, identification of the sources, types and objects of a environmental impact under various alternatives of the planned activity Third Stage. Quantitative and qualitative assessment a Probability of impact b Impact factors c Main subjects of impact (population, natural resources, landscape, eco system, bio diversity, historical and cultural heritage etc.) d Scale of impact e Geographic dissemination of impact f Impact in times g Types of impact (direct, indirect, cumulative73 and other) h Forecast of the new condition of the environment caused by the impact Fourth Stage. Identification and assessment of potential disaster, which includes: a Analysis of the probability of disaster and development scenarios b Possibilities of localization and liquidation of the results c Action plans for liquidation and mitigation of the results of the impact Fifth Stage a Impact mitigation opportunities b Opportunities for best available technology implementation c Means of minimization, management and utilization of all forms of emission and waste d Suggested compensation measures Sixth Stage. At this stage EIA process should reveal possible results of the project implementation: a Living environment and health b Particular aspects of environment c Social economic condition of the society and directions of development

73 Cumulative here implies residual, as it has been used in such context in a different provision of the same regulation.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Seventh Stage a Impact control and monitoring methods are defined Plan for the mitigation or elimination of the identified and potential environmental b impact Elaboration of the plan for environmental protection strategy for each stage of the c activity

 Law on Ecological Expertise (LEE) LEE was adopted on December 14, 2007. It defines the framework and rules for the conduct of EE, identifies those responsible for the conduct of EE and competencies of such parties. LEE also sets out following principles for EE process: a) Assessment of potential ecological risk74 related to an activity; b) Collective 75 ssessment of potential environmental impact of an activity, prior to commencement of such activity; c) Conformity with environmental requirements and norms;76 d) Unrestricted implementation of experts’ competencies (authorizations); e) Grounded substantiation and legality of concluson of EE77; f) Envisaging public interest.78

LEE qualifies conclusion of EE as a part of the EIP and obligation of the EIP holder to conduct activity in compliance with conclusion of EE.

 MENRP Order No 28 on the Conduct of Ecological Expertise (EE Order No 28) EE Order No 28 spells out principles based on which EE should be conducted.79 These include: a) Assessment of potential risk of ecological threat of the activity; b) Integrated assessment of the activity’s impact on the environment prior to commencement of activity; c) Consideration of environmental requirements and environmental protection norms; d) Unrestricted implementation of the competencies of experts and independent experts; e) Justification and legality of the EE conclusion; f) Consideration of public interest.

EE commission is created for each particular case individually under the order of the MENRP. Upon review of the EIA Report, conclusion of EE should either issue negative ruling or confirm compliance of the activity with the requirements of the Georgian legislation and prescribes measures and conditions for mitigation or elimination of the discrepancies, if any. Observance of an imposed condition, if such exists, is mandatory, and failure to observe it constitutes breach of permit conditions (either EIP or Construction permit respectively). Copies of ecological expertise are normally available at the MENRP website.80 In general, conclusion of EE as well as other

74 The term ecological risk is not specifically defined in the legislation. 75 In this context, the term collective means/implies taking into consideration all aspects as a whole/together. 76 This implies legislation as a whole without reference to any particular set of rules and norms. 77 Conclusion of EE should be argumented and legally sound, i.e. it should be compliant with the legislaooin. This should also mean that EE should ensure that EIA Report is complete and meets requirements of the law. 78 Implies general public interest vis-à-vis the interest of people affected by the project. 79 Article 2 of the EE Order 28. 80 Visit: http://moe.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=GEO&sec_id=13 .

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM documents pertaining to EIA process are public and are available subject to general administrative code procedures related to public information.81

8. EIA PROCESS IN PRACTICE

In practice, environmental impact assessment process includes following general steps and procedures:

EIA Steps & Procedures 1 Developer/investor applies to the EIA consulting company for preparation of the EIA report with specific scope; EIA study and the preparation of the EIA Report take approximately 2-3 months, and the costs are covered by the developer/investor. * Article 11 of the LEIP provides for exceptions from EIP. Exceptions are allowed if the project/activity to be implemented is of state importance and decision on commencement should be adopted timely. In such instance, Minister of Environment Protection creates a special council, whose decision is used as a basis for approval of the exemption by the MENRP.

Law on State Support of Investments provides for the possibility of obtaining preliminary permit. However, this does not exempt investor from the obligation to comply with EIA procedures, but only gives comfort and ensures him that if the requirements of the law are met, the permit shall be granted.

Law on Licenses and Permits – legislative piece which is single source of authority for imposing a license or permit on any activity undertaken on the Georgian territory does not extend to the activity undertaken by the Ministry of Georgia or any LEPL under the Ministry.82

LEIP was adopted in December 2007. Transitional provisions of LEIP (Article 22) endorse the rules, which spell out the compliance requirements for the activities/projects which either had obtained EIP prior to enactment of LEIP, but undergoing EE, or have not obtained EIP. In the former case, LEIP declared legal effect of EIP without additional requirements. In the absence of EIP for the activity subject to EE under LEIP, EIP should be obtained prior to January 1, 2010 pursuant to the plan (program) agreed with MENRP. EIA Reports for such activities had to cover analysis of the existing condition of the environment (ecological audit) as well as mitigation plan for the environmental impact caused by the current activities.

2 Once the EIA Report is ready, prior to submitting it to MENRP or TCSA, developer/investor is required to make EIA Report publicly available for the purposes of conducting public hearing on the EIA.83 3 Announcement on public hearing is placed in central and local newspapers and should include: goals of the planned activity, project title and location, the precise address where the public can access the EIA Report, a 45-day period for stakeholders to submit written comments and recommendations to the investor and information about the location, date and time of the public hearing. 4 EIA Report is then submitted to MENRP within a week from publishing announcement on public hearing.

81 Except for the cases defined by LEIP (currently LEIP does not contain any restrictions). 82 Article 1, Paragraph 2 of the Law of Georgia on Licenses and Permits. 83 Public hearing of EIA Report is governed by Article 6 of the LEIP.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

5 The public hearing is arranged in the administrative center of the region where the project will take place, between 50–60 days after the announcement is published in the newspaper. 6 At the public hearing, the investor is obliged to draft a protocol where all comments and recommendations expressed during the hearing are reported within five days. The protocol must be signed by the investor, EIA reporter, the representative from the municipality, and the representative from the MENRP. According to LEIP 84 , the investor should incorporate received comments in the final EIA Report or present a written explanation for not doing so, which should be sent to all authors of the comments. This explanation, together with the comments, should be submitted to the MENRP (together with the public hearing protocol and other documents). 7 After completion of the public hearing procedures, the EIA Report and project documentation is submitted/subjected to EE process. Responsibility for the conduct of EE is vested with MENRP. According to the MENRP Order No 28 of March 13, 2012 on Rules for Conducting Ecological Expertise, a commission of experts is formed for each case individually (Ecological Commission). Ecological Commission drafts the final conclusion on the basis of summarized single experts’ statements. EEs should be performed in not less than 10 and not more than 15 days after submission of the EIA Report and the project documentation. The EE must express a positive judgment for an environmental impact permit to be issued. 8 Once the EIP/Construction Permit is issued, MENRP and the Agency of Natural Resources (LEPL under the MoE) are responsible for control of observance of the terms of the permit. If environmental violation is identified/revealed, the controlling body (MENRP) issues an individual administrative act on a respective sanction, which is enforceable under Georgian legislation. Such an act can be appealed in the court.

EIA Report Preparation of EIA Report in compliance with the Georgian legislation is one of the fundamental requirements for obtaining EIP, or construction permit consolidating EIP.85

Standard EIA Report There is no approved standard content for EIA Report in Georgia, i.e. no particular requirement is imposed as to the formal side/form of the EIA Report. Instead the LEP, LEIP, LEE, EIA Order No 31 and MENRP Order No 28 provide narrative definitions and criteria to be followed by contracted experts conducting environmental impact assessment.

What should be covered by EIA is briefly described in definition of EIA under LEIP86, following parameters/aspects should be covered:

- Protection of particular aspects/components of environment, humans, landscape and cultural heritage;87 - Disclosed description of direct and indirect influence of the activity on the human health and safety, on biodiversity, soil, air, water, climate, landscape, ecosystem, historic monuments or

84 Article 7 of the LEIP. 85 Article 37 of the LEP. 86 Article 3.d of LEIP. 87 Here, the LEP does not articulate or provide an exhaustive list of such aspects.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

on unity of all of the listed aspects, including effect of such factors on cultural values (cultural heritage) and social and economic factors; - Emergency/disaster management.

EIA Order No 31 provides for the general procedural scope of the EIA process and hence EIA Report, detailed in Part X in the present Report dealing with the EIA Order No 31.88

Article 6 of the EIA Order No 31 spells out what should be included in the EIA. Content of this Article may qualify as minimum standard for the content of the EIA Report. It derives, that failure to provide information required under Article 6 of the EIA Order No 31 would lead EE to negative conclusion.

Content of sample/standard EIA Report matching requirements of Article 6 of the EIA Order No 31 is provided in the table below.89 Requirements of the Article 6 resonate with the results of the stages of EIA processes prescribed under Article 5 of the same EIA Order No 31.

Content for EIA Report under Georgian Law90 1 Analysis of the existing environmental conditions 2 Identification of sources, types and objects of environmental impact caused by activity Forecast of changes of qualitative and quantitative characteristics of the environmental 3 conditions 4 Identification of the probability of disaster and assessment of expected results 5 Assessment of the ecological, social and economic results of the planned activity Ways of minimizing and circumventing adverse effect on the environment and human 6 health, in case of need, identification of compensation schemes 7 Identification of residual (cumulative) impact, its control and monitoring methods; 8 Conduct of ecological-economic assessment of the projects Identification of the alternatives of project location, also alternatives of the technology 9 involved In case of termination of the entrepreneurial or other activity, identification of the ways 10 and possibilities of restoring environment to its original condition 11 Public (disclosure of) information and study of the public opinion 12 Plan of the analysis of the situation after implementation of the project 13 Identification of expected emission types and quantities Analysis of the risks associated with the planned activity (at construction and/or 14 exploitation stage Description of the technological cycle of the planned activity (including based on the 15 technical passport data of the equipment) 16 Forecast of the expected condition of the environment as a result of identified

88 Article 5 of MENRP Order 31 on Environmental Impact Assessment of May 15, 2013. 89 Content is based on the actual EIAs prepared for larger HPP projects in Georgia. 90 Content v. Table of Content, since Article 6 provides for the substance of EIA Report rather than dictating its formal shape.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

environmental impact For the period of implementation and flow of the activity, elaboration of the 17 environmental monitoring plan, where self-monitoring program of environmental safety shall be envisaged

EIA Report should be appended with the following documentation: 1. Documents evidencing any agreement/consent of any administrative body responsible for decision-making in respect to various aspects of project implementation stages; 2. Reflecting public participation and any negative comments received in relation to the project; 3. Action plans for environmental management and impact mitigation; 4. Disaster management action plan; 5. Names of the consulting firms involved in the conduct EIA; 6. Description of the project objectives and justification; 7. Criteria for selection of the site envisaging alternatives; 8. Short description of the condition of the environment which is under impact; 9. Geographic System (GIS) coordinates, situation map and master plan, where construction site, temporary building structures, communications and impact sources shall be reflected; 10. Literature used in the course of elaborating project design decisions (indicating sources); 11. List of legislative and sub-legislative normative acts.91

In sum, these two lists could be considered exhaustive lists of information/content of the EIA Report and associated documents.

9. INTERNATIONAL E(S)IA92 POLICY, GUIDELINES AND PRACTICE

Environmental Impact Assessment is an integral part of the consent process for major development projects with most International Finance Institutions (IFIs) requiring applicants to submit an EIA Report in support of applications for funds. Most IFIs have developed guidelines on what they expect of an EIA, and recipients are required to comply with these. The various guidelines are broadly similar in their content and advice, and all stress the continuing and contributory nature of environmental impact assessment with other components of project appraisal as part of a comprehensive process of project preparation implementation and operation.

Thus, instead of importing and reviewing any one particular EIA or EIA Report related guideline or a standard endorsed by one particular IFI, present Policy Report adopts an aspect based approach, which implies coverage of best standards and safeguards for key aspects of EIA process as well as scope and standard content of EIA Report as an instrumental tool for achieving environmental protection goals. For this purpose the Report covers number of aspects pertaining to the quality of the EIA process grouped under the following headings: (1) EIA Policy and Objectives; (2) EIA Principles; (3) EIA System; (4) Indicative Structure of EIA Report; (5) Sector Guidelines.

91 Paragraph 3 of Article 6 of EIA Order 31. 92 The term ESIA means the process which includes social impact assessment as part of the study and most commonly required in combination with the environmental impact assessment in best practice.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

The gap analysis provided on the next part of the Report is built on the cumulative benchmarks blended for each of the headings based on the advanced EIA frameworks elaborated by international financial institutions or legislations of foreign developed countries. In particular, best international EIA practices used to develop composite benchmarks for the gap analysis are sourced from the legal frameworks of the following institutions: (1) EU93; (2) WB, IFC94; (3) EBRD95; (4) KfW96, (5)IAIA97.

1. ESIA Policy and Objectives under best practice Best E(S)IA practices are always built on articulate environmental protection objectives. The following objectives of environmental protection can be qualified as universally sourced from the above listed institutions:

 To ensure that environmental considerations are explicitly addressed and incorporated into the development decision making process;  To anticipate and avoid, minimize or offset the adverse significant biophysical, social and other relevant effects of development proposals;  To protect the productivity and capacity of natural systems and the ecological processes which maintain their functions;  To promote development that is sustainable and optimizes resource use and management opportunities;  To identify and assess social and environment impacts, both adverse and beneficial, in the project’s area of influence;  To avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts on workers, affected communities, and the environment;  To ensure that affected communities are appropriately engaged on issues that could potentially affect them;  To promote improved social and environment performance of companies through the effective use of management systems.98

2. E(S)IA Principles There are two sets of principles applicable to EIA: (a) Basic Principles and (b) Operating Principles.99 Basic principles apply at all stages of EIA. Basic Principles should be applied as a single package, recognizing that the Principles included are interdependent and, in some cases, may conflict. A balanced approach is critical when applying the Principles to ensure that environmental impact assessment fulfills its purpose and is carried out to internationally accepted standards. EIA thus produces both complete analyses and the means of reconciling apparently conflicting principles.

Operating Principles describe how the Basic Principles should be applied to the main steps and specific activities of the environmental impact assessment process. such as screening, scoping, identification of impacts, assessment of alternatives.

93 EU EIA Directive. 94 IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability, 2012. 95 EBRD Supporting Tool: Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. 96 KfW Guidline for conducting business in an environmentally, socially and climate friendly manner ("Sustainability Guideline"), January 2011. 97 International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). 98 IFC Guidance Note 1, 2012 99 International Association for Impact Assessment. Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice, 1999.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Basic Principles of E(S)IA Following principles fall under the category of Basic Principles of E(S)IA:

Purposive The process should inform decision-making and result in appropriate levels of environmental protection and community well being. Rigorous The process should apply “best practicable” science, employing methodologies and techniques appropriate to address the problems being investigated. Practical The process should result in information and outputs, which assist with problem solving and are acceptable to and able to be implemented by proponents. Relevant The process should provide sufficient, reliable and usable information for development planning and decision-making. Cost-effective The process should achieve the objectives of EIA within the limits of available information, time, resources and methodology. Efficient The process should impose the minimum cost burdens in terms of time and finance on proponents and participants consistent with meeting accepted requirements and objectives of E(S)IA. Focused The process should concentrate on significant environmental effects and key issues; i.e., the matters that need to be taken into account in making decisions. Adaptive The process should be adjusted to the realities, issues and circumstances of the proposals under review without compromising the integrity of the process, and be iterative, incorporating lessons learned throughout the proposal's life cycle. Participative The process should provide appropriate opportunities to inform and involve the interested and affected publics, and their inputs and concerns should be addressed explicitly in the documentation and decision-making. Interdisciplinary The process should ensure that the appropriate techniques and experts in the relevant biophysical and socio-economic disciplines are employed, including use of traditional knowledge as relevant. Credible The process should be carried out with professionalism, rigor, fairness, objectivity, impartiality and balance, and be subject to independent checks and verification. Integrated The process should address the interrelationships of social, economic and biophysical aspects. Transparent The process should have clear, easily understood requirements for EIA content; ensure public access to information; identify the factors that are to be taken into account in decision making; and acknowledge limitations and difficulties. Systematic The process should result in full consideration of all relevant information on the affected environment, of proposed alternatives and their impacts, and of the measures necessary to monitor and investigate residual effects.

Operating Principles of E(S)IA100 Operating principles are relevant to the E(S)IA process and should be applied:  To all proposals likely to cause potentially significant adverse impacts or add to actual or potentially foreseeable cumulative effects;

100 UNEP, EIA Training Resource Manual, Introduction and Overview of EIA, Second Edition 2002

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

 So that the scope of the review is consistent with the size of the proposal and commensurate with the likely issues and impacts;  To provide timely and appropriate opportunities for public and stakeholder involvement, with particular attention given to indigenous peoples and other vulnerable minorities whose cultural traditions and way of life may be at risk; and  In accordance with the legislation, procedure and guidance in force and with reference to international standards of E(S)IA good practice.

E(S)IA should be undertaken:  Throughout the project cycle, beginning as early as possible in the pre-feasibility stage;  With explicit reference to the requirements for decision-making and project approval and authorization consistent with the application of ‘best practicable’ science and mitigation techniques;  In accordance with proposal-specific terms of reference, which should include clearly defined tasks, responsibilities, requirements for information and agreed timelines for their completion; and  To gain the inputs and views of all those affected by or interested in the proposal and/or its environmental impacts.

E(S)IA should address, as necessary and appropriate:  All relevant environmental impacts, including land use, social, cultural, economic, health and safety effects;  Cumulative effects and area-wide, ecosystem-level and global changes that may occur as a result of the interaction of the proposal with other past, current or foreseeable activities;  Alternatives to the proposal, including design, location, demand and activity alternatives;  Mitigation measures for each of the main impacts identified; and  Sustainability considerations, including the effects of depletion of non-renewable resources, of exceeding the regenerative and assimilative capacity of renewable resources and of reduction of biological diversity, taking account of relevant international agreements and commitments.

E(S)IA should result in:  Systematic identification of the views and inputs of those consulted, including the balance of opinion on major issues and areas of agreement and disagreement;  Comparison of the impacts of the main alternatives considered with an environmental justification for the preferred option;  Best estimate prediction and evaluation of the potentially significant residual effects that cannot be mitigated;  Feasible, cost-effective measures to mitigate the main impacts identified (often called an environmental management plan);  Preparation of an EIA report that presents this information in form that is clear, understandable and relevant for decision-making, noting any important qualifications for the predictions made and mitigation measures proposed; and  Resolution of problems and conflicts during the E(S)IA process to the extent this is possible.

E(S)IA should provide the basis for:  Informed decision-making and project approvals, in which the terms and conditions are clearly specified and implemented;  Design of environmentally sound and acceptable projects that meet health and environmental standards and resource management objectives;

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

 Appropriate follow-up, including monitoring, management and auditing, to check for unforeseen impacts or mitigation measures that do not work as intended; and  Future improvements in EIA process and practice, drawing on the information from follow up activities.

More specifically, as a process, E(S)IA should provide for:

Screening To determine whether or not a proposal should be subject to EIA and, if so, at what level of detail. Scoping To identify the issues and impacts that are likely to be important and to establish terms of reference for EIA. Examination of To establish the preferred or most environmentally sound and benign option Alternatives for achieving proposal objectives. Impact identification To identify and predict the likely environmental, social and other related and analysis effects of the proposal. Mitigation and Mitigation and impact management - to establish the measures that are impact management necessary to avoid, minimize or offset predicted adverse impacts and, where appropriate, to incorporate these into an environmental management plan or system. Evaluation and To determine the relative importance and acceptability of residual impacts significance (i.e., impacts that cannot be mitigated). Preparation of EIA To document clearly and impartially impacts of the proposal, the proposed report measures for mitigation, the significance of effects, and the concerns of the interested public and the communities affected by the proposal. Review of EIA To determine whether the report meets its terms of reference, provides a Report satisfactory assessment of the proposal(s) and contains the information required for decision making. Decision making To approve or reject the proposal and to establish the terms and conditions for its implementation. Follow up To ensure that the terms and condition of approval are met; to monitor the impacts of development and the effectiveness of mitigation measures; to strengthen future EIA applications and mitigation measures; and, where required, to undertake environmental audit and process evaluation to optimize environmental management. The above described principles are recognized and promoted by all major IFIs and developed nations. For instance, IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability provide for 8 Performance Standards in the area of environmental and social sustainability. Performance Standard No 1 deals with the assessment and management of environmental and social risks and impacts which fully reflect the principles listed above. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability are provided in the table appended to the Report as Annex V. Similarly, Annex IV provides excerpts from EU EIA Directive reflecting the same principles.

3. EIA System EIA system consists of steps, measures and processes which meet EIA objectives observing the Basic and Operating Principles described above. Following Diagram 1 shows main components of EIA system. As an articulate sample, it is only provided as an appropriate example of the system which can be adapted into an implementable process in any given jurisdiction.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Diagram 1. EIA System

Source: Environmental Impact Assessment and Management, WB101 4. Indicative Structure of E(S)IA under Performance Standards and Guidelines102

101At: http://www4.worldbank.org/afr/ssatp/Resources/HTML/rural_transport/knowledge_base/English/Module%205%5C 5_4a%20Environmental%20Impact%20Assessment.pdf last visited on May 6, 2013.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Following Table 3 provides/outlines an indicative structure and content of the E(S)IA Report and technical requirements imposed on each item based on best international practice. Gap analysis in relation to the structure and content of the E(S)IA report is provided in the relevant part of this Report.

Table 3. Indicative Structure of E(S)IA Report under IFC and EBRD Performance Standards and Guiledines

Requirements under Georgian Heading Content environmental legislation

Non-Technical Concise summary description of the proposed Georgian legislation does not require Summary project, its rationale, the existing environment, the non-technical summary of the project area of influence, significant environmental and to be included in the EIA report. social impacts, issues and opportunities, summary of LEIP requires submission of a short key aspects of the Environmental and Social Action technical annotation together with Plan, residual risks/issues, nature of the projects’ the EIA report as opposed to systematic approach to managing the environmental requiring it within the report itself. and social aspects of the project including monitoring activities. Material information gaps or the need for further studies should be highlighted. Project Precise up-to date description and delineation of the Georgian legislation does not Description proposed project within its geographical, articulately require such description environmental and socio-economic context. This to be included in the EIA report. should include information on whether and how the More so, as the wider development project is part of a wider development programme programme and/or the concept of including land use planning. Project alternatives land use planning are not in place. could also be considered on a consolidated basis in this section or else treated in later sections of the report. Description of A description of relevant aspects of the physical and In relation to the assessment of the the Existing natural environment, social and socio-economic general situation on the site, Environment conditions in the projects’ area of influence, which Georgian legislation requires will serve as the baseline for impact assessment. “collection of full information on 103 Existing receptors and sources of impact should be environment” and “analysis of the described as appropriate. existing environment” 104 without provision of any additional specifics. More precisely, following aspects should be While the term full is quite general covered: and in good faith would cover 1. Climatic Conditions everything, in practice, thoroughness 2. Geomorphology and Geology of the information provided in the 3. Land Use and Settlement Patterns reports can become arbitrary. In 4. Water Resources (Surface, Groundwater) general, the approach of 5. Biological and Ecological Resources (Key Flora systematization of the environmental and Fauna Protected, Listed or Endangered data/parameters is not available. Species Habitats Ecosystem Issues Existing Environmental Pressures (incl. Climate adaptation)) 6. Landscape and Visual Issues (incl. light impact if appropriate) 7. Air Quality and Existing Emissions Load 8. Noise and Vibration

102 EBRD and IFC Performance Standards are used as a reference. International Finance Corporation’s Guidance Notes: Performance Standards on Social & Environmental Sustainability, 2012. 103 Article 5.1 (a.a) of the EIA Order 31 104 Article 6 .2(a) of the EIA Order 31.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

9. Social and socio-economic issues a. Demography (population, trends, age/gender profiles, migration) b. Social Composition (ethnicity, clan/tribal structure minority groups) c. Power Relationships and Governance Issues d. Conflict and Social Tension e. Land Ownership and Tenure, f. Economic Activities (formal and informal sector) g. Education h. Population Health Profile i. Gender Issues j. Vulnerable Groups k. Cultural Heritage l. Community Health, Safety and Security 10. Occupational Health and Safety 11. Labor Issues and Working Conditions Potential Identify the potential environmental and social No performance standards or Impacts impacts that could be associated with the proposed additional guidelines exist in relation project and its feasible alternatives including those to the identification of impacts, of an indirect and cumulative nature. Through a discussion of feasible alternatives or process of reasoned argumentation, impacts which inventory and characterization of are unlikely to arise or be insignificant should be impacts. discounted. This part should elaborate on potential impacts from local, national, trans-boundary and global perspectives.

Analysis of A systematic comparison of feasible alternatives to Some but not exhaustive guidance on Alternatives the project in terms of location, project technology identification of the alternatives of or design in terms of potential environmental project location, also alternatives of impact. This should include the ‘do-nothing’ (‘zero the technology involved is required alternative’) option. Where appropriate, a least-cost under EIA Order 31. No analysis of analysis of alternative forms of production should be “do-nothing” alternative is required. conducted (for energy generation projects).

Characterization This section should identify and characterize of Impacts and positive and negative environmental impacts in

Issues terms of magnitude, significance, reversibility, extent and duration. The possibility for cumulative impacts should also be considered. Quantitative data

should be employed to the extent possible. The chapter should also identify opportunities for environmental enhancement and identify key uncertainties and data gaps. Environmental and social impacts should be identified and characterized for relevant stages of the project cycle such as:

 Pre-construction phase

 Construction  Operation & Maintenance  Decommissioning or Closure and Reinstatement

Where third parties such as contractors are

involved, their roles and capacity and the degree of control the project can exert over them should be considered.

Supply chain issues central to the project’s core

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

functions should be considered where the resource utilized by the project is ecologically sensitive, or

where low labor cost is a material factor related to project competitiveness. Environmental Impacts and Issues  Pollution  Biodiversity

 Sustainable Natural Resources Management  Regional and Trans-boundary impacts  Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Climate Change and Adaptation

Social Impacts and Issues

Community health and socio-economic impacts and issues are likely to occur over different time scales Particularly deficient is the part on and may well be inter-related with each other and the social impact assessment. Only environmental ones; hence the need for integrated two parameters of (1) impact on impact assessment. living conditions; and (2) social economic conditions and directions Labor and Working Conditions of development. No additional Population movements specifications are provided. In general, as commented elsewhere in  Temporary or permanent acquisition of land, the Report, EIA process is not property, economic assets (see Involuntary designed to extensively cover such Resettlement Guideline). social issues, which bear  Migration into or out of area. material/financial importance and are left at the discretion of the market. Economic  Impact on economic assets including land  Loss of employment  Employment creation – temporary as a result of construction, or permanent during operations  Potential indirect employment creation, for example through sub-contracting It is particularly important to look carefully at the potential impact on the informal sector. The informal sector is important as changes in this area can have significant consequences on the livelihoods of vulnerable people. Community Health, Safety and Security The E(S)IA may need to identify how the Project could influence the health of the affected communities. There are a number of effects that need to be considered:  Potential for increased incidence of communicable diseases.  Environmental conditions created by Project which may lead to deterioration in health.  The impact of the Project on access to health care. Would the project lead to severance from health care facilities. It is important that there is initial baseline information on the health situation of the community within the area of impact. This will enable changes in health condition to be more accurately measured and attributed.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Education Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) The impact of the Project on access to education facilities. Would the project lead to severance from education facilities. Are there opportunities for education facilities to benefit from the Project? Social Conflict Projects related to the development and use of resources can often lead to creation of tensions within and between communities; particularly in situations where the affected population is characterized by low levels of economic development and there is a struggle for access to resources. Using the information on socio-economic characteristics and social dynamics, the base line should look at whether there is a need to carry out a detailed conflict analysis. Issues to consider include:  What interests do the different stakeholders have and what are their relations to each other.  Potential sources of conflict between different stakeholders.  Will the project have an impact on the distribution of resources? The SIA needs to aware of existing social and economic tensions and the potential for the project to create a situation where these tensions may be exacerbated leading to creation of conflict. Gender Social impacts are often experienced very differently between men and women. Rather than carry out a separate gender analysis, the aim of the SIA should be to mainstream gender so that it is considered in all stages of analysis. In certain circumstances a project may adversely impact men rather than women, due either to the nature of the project or the socio-cultural and economic context of a society. What is important in a gender analysis is to understand the differential impact on men and women. Questions that need to be asked include:  What are men and women’s social and economic roles in the impacted area?  Will the project impact adversely on men and women’s social and economic roles.  What institutional arrangements have been made for consulting with women?  Are there equal opportunities for both men and women to benefit from the Project?  Are there barriers to women’s participation and how can they be overcome without creating tensions within the community. Indigenous Peoples If the scoping study shows the presence of indigenous peoples, then the detailed information in

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

the baseline should determine whether an indigenous peoples plan is required. Mitigation and This section should outline feasible cost-effective EIA Order 31 indicates that the Plan Management of measures to prevent or minimize environmental for mitigation or elimination of Impacts and impacts to acceptable levels and address other adverse environmental impact should Issues environmental issues such as the need for worker be elaborated and provided in the health and safety improvements, inter-agency EIA report. Methods for control and coordination, community involvement, institutional monitoring of impacts should also be strengthening or training within the executing provided. No specific guidance agency/ governmental agencies/project sponsor or at exists in relation to the mitigation of the community level. It should also outline measures social issues and it is unclear which would enhance environmental aspects within whether the general mitigation action the area affected by the project. The chapter should plan should cover social issues in the characterize the nature of any residual absence of general social impact environmental impacts or issues that have not been assessment context of the EIA report addressed. Financial provisions for potential risks itself. should also be described (for example escrow accounts and insurance cover to provide for inter alia abandonment and decommissioning, site remediation and oil spills and other emergencies).  Pre-Construction Phase  Construction Phase  Operation and Maintenance  Decommissioning or Closure and Reinstatement With regard to social issues, mitigation measures should be developed in relation to policy frameworks, both domestic and/or international. Domestic policy frameworks could be national or local government level, for example where a country has a poverty reduction strategy in place, or where policies are being developed with regard to agricultural development. It may relate to development of other infrastructure such as roads or energy supply improvements. Particularly in the case of education and health it is important that mitigation measures are linked to public sector provision in order to maximize positive impact and ensure sustainability. Residual The nature of key residual impacts should be EIA Order 31 requires identification Impacts and described and the significance assessed. of residual (cumulative) 105 impacts, Risks as well as determination of methods Environmental risks such as the potential for of their control and monitoring. accidents and incidents (such as oil spills, explosions, contaminant release, dam failure etc.) to arise should be considered. Proposed contingency planning and measures should be described and their adequacy evaluated. Social risks are very context specific and could include factors such as:  Economic changes such as inflationary trends.  Political changes which may make it difficult to implement particular mitigation measures.  Unforeseen events such as natural disasters.  Lack of skilled people to implement mitigation

105 EIA Order No 31 uses these two terms as interchangeably. However, under international practice, these two terms have different meanings.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

measures. Environmental Environmental Georgian legislation does not require and Social Inter alia: EIA report to include such chapter. Opportunities  Habitat enhancement for Project  Set-aside Enhancement  Site Remediation and Clean-up  Energy and Resource Efficiency  Cleaner Production  Institutional Strengthening  Capacity Building

Social Whilst social impact assessments are generally concerned with mitigation of negative impacts, they also present an opportunity for impacted people to take advantage of and benefit positively from the Project. Areas of benefit may include:  temporary and permanent jobs within the Project  opportunities for local firms to sub-contract services  opportunities for local firms to supply goods  in cases where relocation is required there may be opportunities to improve the housing condition of people relocated.  project may be able to link up with local schools to create opportunities for learning Each project will have its particular opportunity for facilitating development gains and these need to be considered carefully in consultation with the community. In exploring the strategy for development opportunities, particular attention needs to be given to vulnerable categories within the area of impact. Unless very specific measures are taken, they are likely to be excluded from development gains. Annex A on vulnerable people assessment considers this in more detail. It is important to remember that particularly with this group of people, participatory or community demand driven approach to will not necessarily ensure that they are included in the benefits. Moreover, special measures may be required to enable certain categories to take part in activities, for example employment of disabled people may require the setting of special facilities. Action Plans and Management plans, programmes and systems to EIA Order 31 very briefly requires Management address in an integrated and comprehensive fashion inclusion of the plan for mitigation Systems environmental and social impacts, issues and or elimination of adverse opportunities should be established with clearly environmental impact should be stated outcomes or targets, timeframes, elaborated and provided in the EIA responsibilities and resources required. The Bank report. has issued a Guidance Note on Environmental and Social Action Plans which can assist in this respect. The Plan needs to embrace adaptive management and include appropriate monitoring activities to ensure that:  mitigation measures are effective  unforeseen negative impacts or trends are detected

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

and addressed  expected project benefits or opportunities are achieved Monitoring should focus upon key indicators of project performance and social and environmental impact. Indicators should be aligned to elements of the existing pre-project baseline and be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and conducted at an appropriate frequency. Provision also needs to be made for:  capacity building such as training of project staff or third parties (if appropriate)  contingency and emergency response plans and measures (including adequate resourcing) Appendices  Names of those responsible for preparing the EIA  References and Sources of Information  Records of public meetings and consultations held  Supporting Technical Data

5. Sector Guidelines Hydropower raises specific environmental issues, related to the transformation of land use and of river flow patterns. These issues vary substantially from one geographic context to another. Every hydropower plant has unique characteristics: It may be located in desert or semi-desertic ecosystems, in high mountain areas, in tropical forests, in agricultural valleys or urban areas. It may be in a populated or unpopulated area, it may have a large or small reservoir, or none at all. Examples of major concerns include involuntary population displacement, the flooding of natural habitats, or the threat of increased water-borne diseases.

General guidelines usually cover a multitude of aspects. For example, objectives of IFC Performance Standard 1 on the Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts include following:

 To identify and evaluate environmental and social risks and impacts of the project;  To adopt a mitigation hierarchy to anticipate and avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize, and, where residual impacts remain, compensate/offset for risks and impacts to workers, affected Communities, and the environment;  To promote improved environmental and social performance of clients through the effective use of management systems;  To ensure that grievances from affected Communities and external communications from other stakeholders are responded to and managed appropriately;  To promote and provide means for adequate engagement with affected Communities throughout the project cycle on issues that could potentially affect them and to ensure that relevant environmental and social information is disclosed and disseminated.

IFC Guidance Note 1 106 on IFC Performance Standard 1 (Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts) provides a comprehensive overview of this

106 Guidance Note 1 o. Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts, January 2012 at: http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/b29a4600498009cfa7fcf7336b93d75f/Updated_GN1- 2012.pdf?MOD=AJPERES , last visited on June 6 2013.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM performance standard and gives additional insight into how these objectives should be met. For this, Guidance Note 1 elaborates on the scope of application of the standard, requirements imposed on the developer, policy to be adopted by the developer, management programs to be established by the developer and more.

In relation to hydropower development, apart from general guidelines and performance standards described above, best E(S)IA practices also envisage/include specific, sector E(S)IA guidelines. Several guideline documents have been developed and applied by various institutions to increase efficiency of E(S)IA in relation to hydropower development.107

Apart from general objectives which are normally covered by general E(S)IA guidelines, objectives of the hydropower sector guidelines would include the following:108  Improve environmental performance in the energy sector;  Improve E(S)IA document quality and quality of E(S)IA decision making for the Energy Sector;  Improve efficiency and effectiveness of the E(S)IA process for the energy sector by clarifying expectations, providing detailed guidelines and aligning preparation and review;  Tailor guidelines to the needs of a given country/jurisdiction;  Provide technical guidelines for the identification of environmental, social and economic impacts of the energy sector activities;  Identify potential for avoidance and measures for adverse environmental, social and economic impacts from the energy sector in relation to established requirements of law, industry best practice to empower options for consideration by industry and government officials;  Encourage public participation throughout the process.

Scope and content of the hydropower sector guidelines would address:  The full scope of energy generation and transmission activities, including site selection and development, alternative technologies for generating electricity, distribution through transmission lines, and closure of the facility;  Identifying and evaluating the potential environmental impacts, including the physical, biological and social‐economic‐cultural impacts;  Evaluating the full range of sustainable environmental measures to prevent, reduce and/or mitigate impacts;  The need for enforceable and auditable commitment language in an EIA to ensure that promised actions will be taken by the project proponent and that their adequacy can be determined over time;  Model terms of reference for development of renewable energy sources that are cross‐linked to the details provided in the guidelines.

107 Manual for Preparing Scoping Document for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Hydropower Projects, 2001 at: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADR168.pdf , last visited on May 10, 2014. Report on Hydropower and the Environment: Present Context and Guidelines for Future Action, International Energy Agency, 2000 at: http://www.ieahydro.org/reports/HyA3S5V2.pdf 108 EIA Technical Review Guidelines: Energy Generation and Transmission, USAID Environment and Labor Excellence for CAFTA-DR Program, 2011 at: http://www.epa.gov/international/regions/lac/eia- guidelines/energyvol1.pdf

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

The guidelines are normally organized around each aspect typically required in an E(S)IA document. As a result, the guidelines are divided into various sections with accompanying appendices. Further, more technical standards for issues such as erosion and sediment control, sampling and analysis plan would be provided.

10. ANALYSIS

Parts 7 and 8 of the Report provide overview of legal framework of environmental impact assessment from legislative as well as practical perspective. Part 9 of the Report provides an overview of best international practice of E(S)IA which also reflect substance of those international conventions, treaties and agreements involving environmental aspects to which Georgia is a party. In the absence of a stand-alone environmental protection policy document, accession to these instruments have marked Georgia’s express interest to rely on these policies and guidelines embodied and reflected in these instruments into the domestic jurisdiction. In part, larger HPP projects which involve IFI financing commission EIA Reports with the scopes beyond requirements of the Georgian legislation.

This part of the Report compares Georgia’s EIA legal framwork with the best international practice and provides a legal gap analysis.

In the context of environmental protection policies, guidelines and practices, EIA related issues and problems can be systematized into three categories:

1. Policy level legal gaps. Under this category, gaps and problems discussed deal whith higher level issues such as missing principles, failure to reflect EIA objectives proclaimed by international instruments in the policy level documents which should serve as a foundation for the next level EIA regulation.

2. Guidline level legal gaps. Under this category, gaps and problems discussed deal with eihter (a) issues which directly result from the first level (policy) gaps leading to the logical defficiency on the next (guidline) level or (b) issues which although covered under first (policy) level require further guidance to ensure efficiency of the EIA processes (practical inconsistencies).

3. EIA Process and EIA Report Content Gaps. This part provides results of comparative analysis of the Georgian EIA process and EIA Report content with the standards endorsed under best practices.

Each of the categories of the gaps are discussed below.

Policy Gap Analysis

Environmental Protection Policy Experience across countries and over time shows that the existence of a national strategy for sustainable development is a prerequisite for the effective integration of environmental policy into other economic sectors and for adequate environmental protection both nationally and internationally. To top the list of policy related issues, a fundamental theme is the development of strategies and policies also required due to the participation of Georgia in various international environmental instruments. Despite its participation in the international efforts to promote sustainable development, Georgia does not yet have a national sustainable development strategy

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

(SSD) and there is no evidence that the country intends to develop and adopt one. This fact undermines Georgia’s efforts to promote environmental, socio-political and economic sustainability and has attracted the attention of Georgia’s key international partners, including the EU, who have repeatedly encouraged the country to develop and adopt a strategy as part of their assistance frameworks.

State Renewable Energy Program In general, the process for identification and investment decision making suggested under the GoG Resolutions No 107 and No 214 undermine the importance of ESIA processes transforming them into a mere formality. By the time developer/investor files for the EIP, it has long before committed to a particular location and fixed dates for completion of the project.

Due to the above and many other factors, the quality of EIA reports is not high. One of the major problems is the standard of the findings and conclusions contained in the EIA Reports as the consultants base their conclusions on the outdated statistical data, which have not been tested/validated for over 2 decades (hydrology, fauna etc.). Failure to contain environmental management plans and clearly defined implementation plans for mitigation measures, which are key factors on the stage of post decision-making EIA monitoring are named as key shortcomings as well.109

Environmental Protection by HPP Size Georgian environmental legislation does not differentiate between the HPPs depending on their size and/or involvement of a dam construction. Best practice and guidance on dams draws additional recommendations and safeguards against associated higher environmental risks. IFC Guidance No 4 110 provides for additional specific risk-based criteria for assessment of the dams.111 The World Commission on Dams has elaborated key recommendations,112 which are not explicitly reflected in the applicable normative acts. None of the rights reflected in the WCD recommendations113 are guaranteed under the Georgian legislation with very few exceptions, which apply to any EIA process regardless of the size and nature of the HPP project itself. Due to Georgia’s landscape and nature of hydro resources, as well as structure of the energy balance characterized with the seasonal deficits and resulting energy security issues, HPPs with large dams with regulatory capacity shall always be on the agenda of the country. Therefore, policy level and regulatory differentiation of HPP projects by size and involvement of dams should be considered.

109 Aarhus Centre Georgia. Observer Report. Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment. Tbilisi, 2009. 110 IFC 2012 Guidance Notes at: http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/Topics_Ext_Content/IFC_External_Corporate_Site/IFC+Sustainability/Susta inability+Framework/Sustainability+Framework+-+2012/Performance+Standards+and+Guidance+Notes+2012/ Last visited on June 7, 2013. 111 Such criteria include: Design flood; Design earthquake (maximum credible event); Properties of construction process and properties of construction materials; Design philosophy; Foundation conditions; Height of dam and volume of materials contained; Quality control during construction; Management capacity of the client/operator; Provisions for financial responsibility and closure; Financial resources for operation and maintenance, including closure when applicable; Population at risk downstream of the dam; Economic value of assets at risk in case of dam failure. 112 World Commission on Dams, Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-Making, 2000 at: http://www.internationalrivers.org/files/attached-files/world_commission_on_dams_final_report.pdf. 113 Such rights include: demonstrated public acceptance, free prior and informed consent from indigenous people, entitlements to affected people to improve their livelihoods and ensure that they receive the priority share of project benefits (beyond compensation for their losses), ability of affected people to negotiate mutually agreed and legally enforceable agreements to ensure the implementation of mitigation, resettlement and development entitlements.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Transboundary Context Georgian environmental legislation does not impose environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context. Despite the fact that under the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) with EU Georgia undertook to implement Espoo Convention, 114 the process of its ratification is lagging. Georgia has signed the Convention’s Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) on May 21, 2003 but has not yet ratified it. In 2006, MENRP implemented a project on the introduction of SEAs in Georgia and established an SEA task force at the ministry. The task force elaborated draft regulation on SEAs, but MENRP did not take any further steps for its adoption. In recent years, any assessment tools, especially those involving public participation in the decision-making are increasingly seen as unnecessarily prolonging administrative procedures and therefore hindering investment in the country.115 Meanwhile, best EIA practices require identification of potential environmental and social impacts that could be associated with the proposed project not only from local and national, but also trans-boundary and global perspectives.

Basic and Operative EIA Principles Principles related to environmental protection are provided in the Georgian legislation only in general context, i.e. without reference to the EIA process specifically. Involvement of an environmental impact assessment process itself is provided in LEP as one of the principles of environmental protection. Still, some of these principles contained in the LEP extend to EIA process and substance as well. To enable principle based gap assessment/analysis, a table below adopts a check-list approach and identifies which principles are covered or partially or fully missing from the EIA legal framework in Georgia. Principles of environmental protection relevant to EIA process and contained in Georgian legislation are imported from LEP, LEIP, LEE, EIA Order 31 and MENRP Order 28.

Some of the principles recognized under best international EIA practice are contained in the Georgian legislation not as an articulate principle, but rather a legal requirement, measure or performance standard. Table 4 below takes into consideration such forms of consistency and provides relevant comments thereunder.

Table 4. Principle based compliance check list

Principle under Best Practice Principle under Compliance Comment Georgian Legislation

Basic Principles Purposive Not provided for explicitly Expressed in objectives of the LEIP and The process should inform LEE (ecological expertise). decision-making and result in appropriate levels of environmental protection and community well- being. Rigorous Under EIA Order 31, One Language of the EIA Order 31 is not The process should apply “best of the principles of EIA is sufficient to ensure observance of this practicable” science, employing appropriateness of the principle. Scope of the EIA Report methodologies and techniques methodologies applied in itself could be limiting application of appropriate to address the problems the course of EIA process the best (internationally) practicable

114 Article 57 on Protection of Environment, Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between EU and its Members on the one hand and Georgia on the other hand, ratified on September 4, 1996. 115 Environmental Performance Review, Georgia, Second Review, UNECE, 2010. ECE/CEP/157.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

being investigated. science, methodologies and techniques Practical Not provided for explicitly LEIP and LEE approaches and The process should result in requirements are quite formalistic. information and outputs which Observance of this principle shall not assist with problem solving and are be ensured until the EIA process acceptable to and able to be becomes an objective process involving implemented by proponents. thorough communication between the stakeholders (developer, public and government) Relevant Not provided for explicitly Required content of EIA Report is very The process should provide general and the standard of its review sufficient, reliable and usable does not guarantee realization of this information for development principle. planning and decision making. Cost-effective Not provided for explicitly Not implied in any of the relevant The process should achieve the normative acts objectives of EIA within the limits of available information, time, resources and methodology. Efficient Not provided for explicitly Not implied in any of the relevant The process should impose the normative acts. Requirements imposed minimum cost burdens in terms of on the EIA report are general and time and finance on proponents and formalistic which cannot ensure participants consistent with meeting minimum cost burdens on the accepted requirements and proponents and participants of the objectives of EIA. process Focused Not provided for explicitly Minimum list of issues is formally fixed The process should concentrate on in EIA Order 31. Observing the significant environmental effects principle is possible only by the EIA and key issues; i.e., the matters that consultant provided that instructions need to be taken into account in come from developer and are financed making decisions. as well Adaptive Not provided for explicitly Not implied under any of the relevant The process should be adjusted to normative acts the realities, issues and circumstances of the proposals under review without compromising the integrity of the process, and be iterative, incorporating lessons learned throughout the proposal's life cycle. Participative Principle of This principle it is not complemented The process should provide participation: and fully implemented under the appropriate opportunities to inform Participation of the public additional legal guarantees and and involve the interested and in important decision- procedures affected publics, and their inputs making, related to the and concerns should be addressed implementation of the explicitly in the documentation and activity is ensured under decision making. LEP and EIA Order 31 Interdisciplinary Not provided for explicitly Not implied in any of the relevant The process should ensure that the normative acts appropriate techniques and experts in the relevant bio-physical and socio-economic disciplines are employed, including use of traditional knowledge as relevant. Credible Under EIA Order 31, One In practice, observance of the principle The process should be carried out of the principles of EIA is depends on the consultant and expertise with professionalism, rigor, appropriateness of the of the members of EE conducting fairness, objectivity, impartiality methodologies applied in ecological expertise and balance, and be subject to the course of EIA,

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

independent checks and verification objectivity and substantiation of the conclusions Integrated Under EIA Order 31, EIA The process should address the principle is to review Observed interrelationships of social, planned activity from economic and biophysical aspects. technical, technological, ecological, social and economic perspectives in combination. Transparent Principle of access to The process should have clear, information: information Observed easily understood requirements for about the state of the EIA content; ensure public access environment is transparent to information; identify the factors and available to the public that are to be taken into account in decision making; and acknowledge Under EIA Order 31, one limitations and difficulties. of the principles of EIA is disclosure116

Systematic The process should result in full Not explicitly provided for Requirements related to the process and consideration of all relevant content of the EIA report are very information on the affected general, not exhaustive. environment, of proposed alternatives and their impacts, and of the measures necessary to monitor and investigate residual effects. Operative Principles Screening Not available. Under To determine whether or not a Georgian legislation proposal should be subject to EIA (LEIP), projects/activities and, if so, at what level of detail. which require EIA are defined specifically, without provision of general parameters which then should be applied in the course of screening. Scoping Not available under To identify the issues and impacts Georgian legislation. that are likely to be important and to establish terms of reference for EIA.

Examination of Alternatives Under EIA Order 31, EIA Under LEP some other principles could To establish the preferred or most report should review be considered as contributing towards environmentally sound and benign alternatives to the project sound alternatives: option for achieving proposal design decisions to ensure Principle of prioritization: The action, objectives. compliance with the which is likely to have adverse effect environmental protection on the environment and human health norms. This does not may be replaced by other, less risky specifically imply “most action (even if this is more expensive). environmentally sound and Priority is given to the latter, if its costs benign option” but rather, do not exceed the costs which would compliant option. compensate ecological damage,

116 EIA Order 31 (Article 2.d) applies the term Publicity.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

resulting from the less expensive action. Principle of minimization of waste: In the course of implementation of the activity priority is given to such technology, which ensures minimization of waste; Principle of Recycling: In the course of implementation of the activity priority is given to such materials, substances and chemical compounds, which may be reused, reprocessed, decomposed or degraded biologically without damaging the environment. Impact identification and Generally covered under analysis EIA Order 31. To identify and predict the likely environmental, social and other related effects of the proposal. Mitigation and impact Principle of risk management minimization: in the Mitigation and impact management course of planning and - to establish the measures that are implementing activity, the necessary to avoid, minimize or subject of the activity is offset predicted adverse impacts obliged to take appropriate and, where appropriate, to measures in order to incorporate these into an reduce or prevent all environmental management plan or adverse effects on human system. health and on the environment. Evaluation and significance Under EIA Order 31, EIA Report To determine the relative should include information on residual importance and acceptability of impacts, identification of methods if its residual impacts (i.e., impacts that control and monitoring. cannot be mitigated). Preparation of EIA report Principle of the To document clearly and environmental impact impartially impacts of the proposal, assessment: In the course the proposed measures for of planning and designing mitigation, the significance of activity, as prescribed by effects, and the concerns of the the law, the subject of the interested public and the activity is obliged to take communities affected by the into consideration and proposal assess possible effects on the environment, which may be caused by the activity Review of EIA Report. Following principles in Under EIA Order 31 EIA report should To determine whether the report relation to the process of enable ecological expertise body to meets its terms of reference, ecological expertise (i.e. correctly assess project design decision provides a satisfactory assessment review of the EIA report) in terms of its ecological safety, to of the proposal(s) and contains the apply: inspect compliance of the project with information required for decision Assessment of potential the legislation and system of the making. risks of the activity; accepted restriction, to compile a Combined assessment of conclusion in relation to reliability117 of the impact on the the information collected in the process environment prior to of environmental impact and decisions commencement of the adopted based on them. activity; Compliance with

117 Article 6.4 of the EIA Order 31 applies the term appropriateness.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

environmental protection norms and requirements; Unrestricted realization of independent experts’ competencies; Envisaging public interest. Decision making. To approve or N/A Procedurally, EE either rejects the reject the proposal and to establish proposal, or may approve it with the the terms and conditions for its conditions for its implementation. implementation. These conditions are mandatory and failure to observe them may lead to revocation of the license.

Follow up Partially covered. To ensure that the terms and condition of approval are met; to monitor the impacts of development and the effectiveness of mitigation measures; to strengthen future EIA applications and mitigation measures; and, where required, to undertake environmental audit and process evaluation to optimize environmental management.

Gap Analysis on EIA Guidelines

Public Participation & Communication Under the latest legislative and institutional analysis of the implementation of Aarhus Convention in Georgia 118 “Analysis of 2007-2010 amendments to the Georgian legislation concerning the protection of environmental rights of the citizens as set out in Aarhus Convention demonstrate that legislation in this field is rather superficial.119 The legislation is not structured and consistent, does not come up with the enforcement mechanisms, procedures, and does not define the specific obligations of the competent authorities, especially with regard to the component of public participation in environmental decision-making. Issues of public participation are regulated only by the LEIP, which is not very articulate and exhaustive.

The existing public participation procedures, factually, could not ensure public participation in decision-making. The public does not have any communication with the decision making body. It remains unclear for the public, whether or not their comments were considered in a due manner. In addition, the public is not informed about the final decision.

In terms of communication, the legal framework does not provide society with the possibility of contributing to and influencing the EIA related decisions, neither at strategic, nor at the lower levels. In the process of decision-making on activities that are able to affect environment, the public consultations are carried out not by decision-making authority, but by the operating entity/developer. Legislation, being in inconsistency with the Aarhus Convention, envisages possibility of releasing activities from EIA in special cases.

118 Legislative and Institutional Analysis of the Implementation of Aarhus Convention In Georgia, Aarhus Centre Georgia, 2011. 119 Aarhus Centre Georgia. Legislative and Institutional Analysis of the Implementation of Aarhus Convention in Georgia. Tbilisi, 2011.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

There are no legal guarantees ensuring participation of the stakeholders and broader public in process of development of environmental plans and programs. Further, with recent amendments to LEIP operating entity/developer is entitled to apply to MENRP with a request of changing permit conditions. 120 Although some preconditions are required for the amendment, this opportunity would still allow ignoring the conditions identified during the environmental examination and agreed with the public.

Disclosure, FPIC Principle of publicity is contained in the EIA legislation, however no specific or articulate procedures are provided in relation to disclosure at earlier stages of the EIA conduct, other than at the stage of public hearing and access to the EIA information submitted by the developer to the MENRP.

Further, EIA legislation does not explicitly recognize or ensure compliance with the principles of Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) required under best international practices of EIA.

Social Impact Assessment When developer selects HPP site from the list of available alternative investment opportunities under the Renewable Energy Program 2008, little, if any work is conducted with the local population at such stage as the legislation does not require interaction with the public until procedures of public hearing of the EIA report are commenced.

EIA Order 31 requires EIA report to provide assessment of (a) impacts on living conditions and health; (b) social-economic condition and directions of development. However, these descriptions are quite broad and fail to capture very important aspects such as timing of disclosure, relocation/resettlement, land issues and expropriation, ancestral land issues etc.

Sector (Technical) Guidelines Absence of more specific, sector guidelines, as well as absence of the formalized procedure of scoping is also negatively affecting quality of EIA Reports. In the conditions of low or insufficiently defined requirements for EIA reports, there is no incentive for improving the quality. There is no mechanism for selection of consulting companies: more developed consulting could be less competitive (unless opted under IFI funded project). Further, well- developed EIA report and better-elaborated plan for implementation of environmental measures, means taking more obligations on the part of a developer. This inclines the developer to try to avoid undertaking a well-designed EIA.

Gap Analysis on EIA Process and EIA Content

The Process of EIA Quality of the EIA process under Georgian environmental legislation can be assessed through the analysis of how it ensures that the objectives of the E(S)IA endorsed under the international standards are met. Present Report shall compare EIA process prescribed by the Georgian legislation with the IFC Performance Standard 1121 further explained in the Guidance Note 1.

120 Article 12.3 of the LEIP. 121 IFC Guidance Note 1. Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts at: http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/b29a4600498009cfa7fcf7336b93d75f/Updated_GN1- 2012.pdf?MOD=AJPERES , last visited on June 6, 2013.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Primarily it should be stressed, that while the EIA process is generally described in the EIA Order 31, there is no additional guidance available on the subject matter. EIA Order 31 merely lists the stages of the process with very brief and general headings, without further elaboration on the precise scope, content, quality or standard of any particular aspect or process to be undertaken. All of these are left at the grace of applicable principles which are scattered in various normative acts. Each of the referred headings are later translated into the respective chapters of the standard EIA Report leaving a great deal of space between the two for both, developer/EIA consultant on the one hand and EE experts on the other for interpretation, leverage and manipulation.

Georgian EIA process is not articulate in relation to recognizing EIA process a part of the Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) as this is suggested by IFC Performance Standard 1. Under IFC Performance Standard 1, developer is expected to establish and maintain ESMS system which is a guiding framework for the conduct of the environmental and social impact assessment.

ESMS system involves following elements: (i) policy; (ii) identification of risks and impacts; (iii) management programs; (iv) organizational capacity and competency; (v) emergency preparedness and response; (vi) stakeholder engagement and (vii) monitoring and review. In combination these elements are aimed at ensuring that the objectives of the IFC Performance Standard 1 on the Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts are met.

None of these elements are appropriately and fully addressed under the EIA process regulated by the Georgian legislation. For example, ESMS system requires extensive stakeholder engagement process with the view of establishing and maintaining a constructive relationship with a variety of external stakeholders over the life of the project. The only interaction with the local communities enforceable under legislation is public hearing of the EIA Report. Obviously, the level of stakeholder engagement IFC Performance Standard 1 suggests is far more reaching and should commence much earlier in the process of project development.

Further, IFC Performance Standard 1 suggests following key process elements of the E(S)IA: i. initial screening of the project and scoping of the assessment process; ii. examination of alternatives; iii. stakeholder identification (focusing on those directly affected) and gathering of environmental and social baseline data; iv. impact identification, prediction, and analysis; v. generation of mitigation or management measures and actions; vi. significance of impacts and evaluation of residual impacts; vii. documentation of the assessment process (i.e., ESIA report).

The breadth, depth and type of analysis should be proportionate to the nature and scale of the proposed project’s potential impacts as identified during the course of the assessment process. The E(S)IA should be developed following principles of good international industry practice.

Georgian EIA legislation does not provide for the process of screening and/or scoping in the form it is accepted under best international practice. Screening is the process designed to evaluate whether a project requires E(S)IA against the applicable laws and regulations. Georgian legislation simply provides a borderline between the projects that do or do not require EIA under predetermined size or hazard related parameters, eliminating discretion to adjust EIA requirement at a later stage on individual basis. Scoping is the process designed to identify the

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM issues and impacts that are likely to be important and to establish terms of reference for E(S)IA. Process of scoping takes place prior to the conduct of EIA and compilation of the EIA report. Under Georgian EIA legal framework such process does not exist. In the absence of sector (technical) guidelines, endorsing the process of scoping would be a significant factor.

Some but not exhaustive guidance on identification of the alternatives of project location, also alternatives of the technology involved is required under EIA Order 31. No analysis of “do- nothing” alternative is required.

Stakeholder identification is not an articulate process endorsed under environmental legislation of Georgia. Nothing in the environmental legislation of Georgia explicitly allows to adjust the breadth, depth and type of the analysis to the nature and scale of the proposed project. Standard of the assessment is uniform and does not enable cost-effectiveness or efficiency of the assessment based on the size and impact of the project.

Content of the EIA Report Content of the EIA report is defined by the EIA Order 31, however, it is clear that additional guidelines and instructions are needed to provide more insight and details as to the content of EIA report and performance standards related to each of the aspects covered. Consultants preparing EIA documents should have a stronger and clearer framework for guidance to ensure that broader environmental goals and objectives are met through the EIA process. This deficiency could/should be eliminated through endorsement of more specific and detailed guidelines and performance standards on EIA related topics. Best international practice could be used as a reference.

Section 4 of the Part 9 of the present Report provides an indicative structure of an E(S)IA, as practiced under international guidelines. Comparison of the referred indicative structure and the standard scope of the EIA report under EIA Order 31 (provided in part 8 of the present Report) reveals significant gaps. Following Table 5 provides outline of the gaps using the indicative structure.

Table 5. Content of E(S)IA

Heading Comparative Analysis Non-Technical Georgian legislation does not require non-technical summary of the project to be Summary included in the EIA report. LEIP requires submission of a short technical annotation together with the EIA report as opposed to requiring it within the report itself.

Project Under this part, precise up-to date description and delineation of the proposed project within Description its geographical, environmental and socio-economic context should be provided. This should include information on whether and how the project is part of a wider development program including land use planning. Georgian legislation does not articulately require such description to be included in the EIA report. More so, as the wider development program and/or the concept of land use planning are not in place. Description of This part requires extensive description of relevant aspects of the physical and natural the Existing environment, social and socio-economic conditions in the projects’ area of influence which Environment will serve as the baseline for impact assessment. There are a lot of headings and subheadings to be covered in this part as shown in the table provided in the Section 4 of the

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

Part 9 of the Report. In relation to the assessment of the general situation on the site, Georgian legislation requires “collection of full information on environment” 122 and “analysis of the existing environment”123 without provision of any additional specifics. While the term full is quite general and in good faith would cover everything, in practice, thoroughness of the information provided in the reports can become arbitrary. In general, the approach of systematization of the environmental data/parameters is not available. No performance standards or additional guidelines exist in relation to the Potential identification of impacts, discussion of feasible alternatives or inventory and Impacts characterization of impacts. No analysis of “do-nothing” alternative is required. Some but not exhaustive guidance is provided in the EIA Order 31, requirements of which are defined in Part 8 of the present Report. Analysis of Alternatives Particularly deficient is the part on the social impact assessment. Only two parameters of (1) impact on living conditions; and (2) social economic conditions and directions of development. No additional specifications are provided. In general, as commented Characterization elsewhere in the Report, EIA process is not designed to extensively cover such social of Impacts and issues, which bear material/financial importance and are left at the discretion of the Issues market.

Mitigation and EIA Order 31 indicates that the Plan for mitigation or elimination of adverse Management of environmental impact should be elaborated and provided in the EIA report. Methods Impacts and for control and monitoring of impacts should also be provided. No specific guidance Issues exists in relation to the mitigation of social issues and it is unclear whether the general mitigation action plan should cover social issues in the absence of general social impact assessment context of the EIA report itself. Residual Impacts EIA Order 31 requires identification of residual (cumulative)124 impacts, as well as and Risks determination of methods of their control and monitoring. Environmental and Social Opportunities Georgian legislation does not require EIA report to include such chapter. for Project Enhancement Action Plans and EIA Order 31 very briefly requires inclusion of the plan for mitigation or elimination Management of adverse environmental impact should be elaborated and provided in the EIA report. Systems

122 Article 5.1 (a.a) of the EIA Order 31 123 Article 6 .2(a) of the EIA Order 31. 124 EIA Order 31 uses these two terms as interchangeable.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

ANNEX I. MATRIX

Legislative & Multilateral/Regional Requirements pertaining to ESIA Policies and Guidelines, Principles and E(S)IA Report

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

ANNEX II. LIST OF POTENTIAL RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES (HPP Sites)125

Average Installed No Name River Region Annual Regulation Type Capacity Generation Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 1 Alapana HPP Rioni 70.6 356.8 Run-of-river Svaneti 2 Amali HPP Amali Mtskheta-Mtianeti 8.3 39.8 Run-of-river 3 Atskuri HPP Mtkvari Samtskhe-Javakheti 10.4 55.5 Run-of-river 4 Avani HPP Avanis Khevi Kakheti 4.6 18.6 Run-of-river 5 Bakhvi HPP 4 Bakhvistskali Guria 1 5.6 Run-of-river 6 Boriti HPP Dumala Imereti 6.4 33.7 Run-of-river Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 7 Cheshura HPP Cheshura 7.5 32.4 Run-of-river Svaneti 8 Chkheri HPP Chkheri Mtskheta-Mtianeti 14.8 68 Run-of-river 9 Didkhevi HPP Didkhevi Kakheti 1.3 7 Run-of-river 10 Digomi HPP Mtkvari Tbilisi 17.5 95 Run-of-river 11 Dolra 3 HPP Samegrelo -Zemo Svaneti 30.0 124.0 Run-of-river Dolra 12 Duruji HPP Duruji Kakheti 1.7 10.6 Run-of-river 13 Dviri HPP Mtkvari Samtskhe-Javakheti 10.4 55.5 Run-of-river 14 Dzegvi HPP Mtkvari Mtskheta-Mtianeti 15.7 82.4 Run-of-river Enguri-shavtskala- 15 Enguri HPP 1 Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 5.5 22.4 Run-of-river Kvishara Enguri/Khaldescha 16 Enguri HPP 2 Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 21.2 90.3 Run-of-river la 17 Enguri HPP 3 Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 12.1 50 Run-of-river 18 Enguri HPP 4 Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 12.7 54.1 Run-of-river 19 Enguri HPP 5 Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 29.2 124.9 Run-of-river 20 Enguri HPP 6 Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 34 143.3 Run-of-river 21 Iori HPP Iori Mtskheta-Mtianeti 9.7 54 Run-of-river Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 22 Jonouli HPP 1 Jonouli 1.1 5.5 Run-of-river Svaneti 23 Jria HPP Kvirila Imereti 9.2 53.1 Run-of-river 24 Khaishi HPP Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 670 1470 Reservoir 25 Khani HPP 1 Khanistskali Imereti 6.2 28.7 Run-of-river 26 Khani HPP 2 Lashura Imereti 4 18.1 Run-of-river 27 Khani HPP 3 Lashura Imereti 6.8 31.2 Run-of-river 28 Khani HPP 4 Khanistskali Imereti 10.1 55.3 Run-of-river 29 Khani HPP 5 Khanistskali Imereti 5.8 31.9 Run-of-river 30 Khani HPP 7 Khanistskali Imereti 6.4 48.1 Run-of-river 31 Kheledula HPP 1 Kheledula Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 18.8 94.4 Run-of-river 32 Kheledula HPP 2 Kheledula Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 21.6 10.3 Run-of-river 33 Kheledula HPP 3 Kheledula Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 44.3 229.4 Run-of-river 34 Khunevi HPP Dzirula Imereti 11 61.6 Run-of-river 35 Kobi HPP Tergi Mtskheta-Mtianeti 3.8 17.5 Run-of-river 36 Kvirala HPP Kviralistskali Guria 8 34.7 Run-of-river 37 Lebarde HPP 1 Lebarde Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 4.6 19.8 Run-of-river 38 Lebarde HPP 2 Tekhuri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 4.2 17.5 Run-of-river 39 Lekarde HPP Magana Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 20 107 Run-of-river 40 Leskhulukhe HPP Tsachkhuru Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 5.7 24.9 Run-of-river 41 Lopota HPP Lopota Kakheti 7 35 Run-of-river 42 Magana HPp Magana Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 20.6 106 Run-of-river 43 Marelisi HPP Bzholiskhevi Imereti 4.6 17.7 Run-of-river

125 Source: MoE site http://www.energy.gov.ge/projects/pdf/pages/The%20List%20Of%20Potential%20Renewable%20Energy%20Sourc es%20435%20eng%20.pdf last visited May 10, 2014. As of May 2014, this link is not available, presumably due to adoption of the new list under MoE Order No 125, which is not available on the respective website and has been identified through a reference contained in a later normative act issued by MoE (Order No 40 issued in April 2014).

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

44 Medani HPP Chanistskali Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 4.4 23.9 Run-of-river 45 Mestiachala HPP 1 Mestiachala Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 23.7 103.5 Run-of-river 46 Mestiachala HPP 2 Mestiachala Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 27 115 Run-of-river 47 Mleta HPP Tetri Aragvi Mtskheta-Mtianeti 1.97 7 Run-of-river 48 Muskhi HPP Injasu Samtskhe-Javakheti 2.04 8 Run-of-river 49 Pari HPP Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 230 780 Reservoir 50 Ponichala HPP 1 Mtkvari Tbilisi 17.5 95 Run-of-river 51 Ponichala HPP 2 Mtkvari Tbilisi 17.5 95 Run-of-river Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 52 Sadmeli HPP Rioni 153 637.6 Run-of-river Svaneti 53 Sakuneti HPP Mtkvari Samtskhe-Javakheti 10.4 55.5 Run-of-river 54 Samkuristskali HPP 1 Samkuristskali Kakheti 4.88 25.7 Run-of-river 55 Samkuristskali HPP 2 Samkuristskali Kakheti 22.6 117.4 Run-of-river 56 Snostskali HPP Artkhmostskali Mtskheta-Mtianeti 22.2 114.4 Run-of-river 57 Stori HPP 3 Stori Kakheti 13.7 60.6 Run-of-river 58 Tekhuri HPPs 1-6 Tekhuri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 19 112 Run-of-river 59 Tergi HPP Tergi Mtskheta-Mtianeti 26.3 136.6 Run-of-river 60 Tobari HPP Enguri Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 250 810 Reservoir 61 Truso HPP Tergi Mtskheta-Mtianeti 8.7 40.9 Run-of-river Tskhenistskali Tskhenistskali/Zes Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 62 212-357 972-1579,9 Reservoir Cascade kho Svaneti Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 63 Tskhenistskali HPP 1 Tskhenistskali 20.4 95.3 Run-of-river Svaneti 64 Uraveli HPP 1 Uraveli Samtskhe-Javakheti 4.3 16.5 Run-of-river 65 Uraveli HPP 2 Uraveli Samtskhe-Javakheti 5.07 16 Run-of-river 66 Zarzma HPP Dzindzistskali Samtskhe-Javakheti 4.3 19.8 Run-of-river Racha-Lechkhumi-Kvemo 67 Zeskho HPP 1 Zeskho/Xoruldashi 25.3 119 Run-of-river Svaneti 68 Zestafoni HPP 1 Kvirila Imereti 10 41.2 Run-of-river 69 Zestafoni HPP 2 Kvirila Imereti 11.9 48.7 Run-of-river 70 Zestafoni HPP 3 Kvirila Imereti 15.9 59.2 Run-of-river 71 Zestafoni HPP 4 Kvirila Imereti 15.9 59.2 Run-of-river Khinistskali, 72 Zoti HPP Guria 48 225.1 Run-of-river Gubazeuli, Kvirala

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

ANNEX III. LIST OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS, TREATIES AND INSTRUMENTS

1. Convention on Biological Diversity Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was enforced on April 21, 1994. Under Articles 14 of CBD, Contracting Parties are obliged to introduce and promote appropriate procedures requiring environmental impact assessment of proposed projects that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity with a view to avoiding or minimizing such effects and, where appropriate, allow for public participation in such procedures. Georgia has taken several steps to implement provisions of CBD. The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) were adopted by the GoG on February 19, 2005. On December 18, 2012 MENRP adopted Order No 262 on Indicators of Unified System of Biological Diversity, Methodologies of their Description and Maintenance.

2. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) UNFCCC and KYOTO Protocol was enforced on October 27, 1994 and May 28, 1999 respectively. Under UNFCCC Georgia reports to UNFCCC. Under Kyoto Protocol Georgia is eligible for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects designed to reduce GHG emissions with participation of investors from countries with emission reduction commitments under the Protocol. MENRP was appointed by the GoG as the Designated National Authority (DNA) for CDM projects in 2005. Under the same resolution126 MENRP was responsible for elaboration of the charter for the coordination council, which consisted of representatives of various state bodies, including MoE. Such charter has not been adopted, while resolution nominated individuals who no longer represent the participant agencies after the parliamentary election of October 1, 2012.

The main obstacles to the implementation of CDM projects appear to be the lack of domestic capacity for adequate project preparation and the overall relatively small scale of potential emission reduction projects, which make it harder to attract foreign private investors. As part of the preparation of the Second National Communication to UNFCCC, a national GHG mitigation strategy was developed for the period 2010-2025 that identifies major measures and targets for emission reductions, involving not only international and bilateral donors/lenders but also CDM as a source of financing.

A number of nationally and internationally funded projects have been implemented in Georgia with a view to studying various aspects of climate change and paving the way for mitigation and adaptation initiatives. During this period, the national greenhouse gases (GHG) inventory has been prepared, future climate change scenarios have been developed, and vulnerability assessments have been undertaken for different ecosystems and economic sectors. At the same time, a number of awareness-building activities have been conducted.

3. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) Ramsar Convention entered into force on June 7, 1997 and is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. The Ramsar Convention is the only global

126 GoG Resolution #172 of September 29, 2005 on Creation of the Council for the purposes of Coordination of Measures aimed at Implementation of Clean Development Mechanism envisaged by the Framework Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM environmental treaty that deals with a particular ecosystem. The Convention's mission is "the conservation and wise use of all wetlands through local and national actions and international cooperation, as a contribution towards achieving sustainable development throughout the world".

The Convention uses a broad definition of the types of wetlands covered in its mission, including lakes and rivers, swamps and marshes, wet grasslands and peatlands, oases, estuaries, deltas and tidal flats, near-shore marine areas, mangroves and coral reefs, and human-made sites such as fish ponds, rice paddies, reservoirs, and salt pans.

At the center of the Ramsar philosophy is the “wise use” concept. The wise use of wetlands is defined as "the maintenance of their ecological character, achieved through the implementation of ecosystem approaches, within the context of sustainable development". "Wise use" therefore has at its heart the conservation and sustainable use of wetlands and their resources, for the benefit of humankind.

Georgia fulfills its reporting obligation under the Ramsar Convention. The Council on Wetlands Management Issues was established in 2006. This body acts as a National Wetlands Committee and prepares recommendation for the Ministry on National Wetlands Policy, Protection and Management of Ramsar Sites and wise use of their resources. Representatives of governmental and non- governmental bodies are represented on the Council.

Although progress has been achieved in the implementation of the Convention, much remains to be done. No wetlands inventory has been drawn up to date in Georgia. Some data are available but they are scattered between different institutions and there is no comprehensive database. More support is needed to ensure effective functioning of the Council on Wetlands Management Issues. There is no monitoring of inland waters biodiversity, as a result of which there is no information available about their state. New potential Ramsar sites in Georgia have not been defined and assessed. This implies that in the course of elaboration of EIA Report, it shall be difficult to fully account for the issues and aspects which covered by Ramsar Convention.

4. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) UNCCD entered into force on October 21, 1999. Established in 1994, UNCCD is the sole legally binding international agreement linking environment and development to sustainable land management and collaborates closely with the CBD and UNFCCC. Georgia fulfills its reporting obligation under UNCCD. The third national report on the implementation of UNCCD was submitted in 2006, with the support of the World Bank. The fourth report was under preparation to be submitted by 2010, however the process was delayed and planned for 2012. Report is still due.

The 2003 National Action Plan for Combating Desertification (NAPCD) identifies the priority regions facing the risk of desertification, defines the main factors resulting in desertification for these areas, and determines short- and medium- term (2003–2007) action measures for combating it, along with setting out an expected outcomes and implementation schedule. Specifically, the Plan proposes scientific research measures as well as biodiversity conservation, public environmental awareness-building, desertification monitoring, and agricultural and international cooperation measures.

NAPCD only envisages funding small-scale pilot projects, limited scientific research, the development of program/plans and measures for carrying out pre-implementation activity. Investment and institutional measures (legislative and structural changes) geared to the reduction or resolution of desertification/land degradation problems are not a primarily focus. The Plan includes very little information on State goals, policies and strategies in the field of combating

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM desertification, and has only been partly implemented (30 per cent) due to a lack of funding.

Some of the measures related to desertification/ land degradation have been included in the various environmental documents developed in Georgia, such as the 2005 Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and the 2009 Second National Communication to UNFCCC.

5. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS or Bonn Convention) CMS was enforced in Georgia on June 1, 2000. It aims to conserve terrestrial, marine and avian migratory species throughout their range. It is an intergovernmental treaty concerned with the conservation of wildlife and habitats on a global scale. Under CMS, Georgia has agreed to “take action whenever possible and appropriate to conserve migratory species” and “shall endeavor to provide immediate protection for migratory species” covered by the CMS and corresponding agreements.

Georgia fulfills its reporting obligation under the Bonn Convention as well under the Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe (EUROBATS), the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA) and the Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area (ACCOBAMS). Of those species, which populate Georgia and are part of Appendix I of Bonn Convention, most are included in the Red List of Georgia.

6. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) Aarhus Convention was enforced in Georgia on February 11, 2000. Aarhus Centre Georgia was established in 2005. It offers access to a specialized library, the Internet, legal expertise and a plethora of environmental information. The Centre organizes seminars and trainings on the Aarhus Convention and different environmental topics. It provides the possibility of disseminating environmental information through the Centre’s website and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) international information portal on the Aarhus Convention (Clearing House).

According to Article 8 of the Aarhus Convention and paragraph 11 of Article 48 of the Regulations of Parliament (Reglament), an individual has the right to make a written application to Parliament and request an invitation to the committee hearing of the draft law and express an opinion after the submission of a draft law to Parliament. Texts of draft laws and the dates of parliamentary hearings are uploaded on the Aarhus Centre’s website. Information on projects that are subject to environmental permit as well as EIA reports and granted environmental permits including permit conditions is also uploaded.

The legislative and institutional analysis of the implementation of the Aarhus Convention in Georgia was prepared in 2011 (for the period of 2007-2010). Conclusions indicated that analysis of the amendments made to the Georgian legislation concerning the protection of environmental rights of the citizens as set out in Aarhus Convention demonstrate that legislation in this field is rather superficial. The legislation is not structured and consistent, does not come up with the enforcement mechanisms, procedures, and does not define the specific obligations of the competent authorities, especially with regard to the component of public participation in environmental decision-making. The legal framework does not provide society with the possibility of contributing to and influencing the decisions, neither at strategic, nor at the lower levels. Legislation, being in absolute contradiction with the Aarhus Convention, envisages possibility of releasing activities from EIA in special cases. There are no legal guarantees

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM ensuring participation of the stakeholders and broader public in process of development of environmental plans and programs.

7. Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention) Espoo was signed in Espoo, Finland, in 1991 and entered into force in 1997. The Convention sets out the obligations of the Contracting Parties to carry out an environmental impact assessment of certain activities at an early stage of planning. It also lays down the general obligation of States to notify and consult each other on all major projects under consideration that are likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact across boundaries.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

ANNEX IV. EIA Report under EU EIA Directive

Substance of EIA Report under EU EIA Directive127 Under Article 5 (3) of the EU EIA Directive 1. A description of the project comprising information on the site, design and size of the project, 2. A description of the measures envisaged in order to avoid, reduce and, if possible, remedy significant adverse effects, 3. The data required to identify and assess the main effects which the project is likely to have on the environment, 4. An outline of the main alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main reasons for his choice, taking into account the environmental effects, 5. A non-technical summary of the information mentioned in the previous indents.

Further, under Annex IV of the EU EIA Directive 6. Description of the project, including in particular: - A description of the physical characteristics of the whole project and the land-use requirements during the construction and operational phases; - A description of the main characteristics of the production processes, for instance, nature and quantity of the materials used; - An estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions (water, air and soil pollution, noise, vibration, light, heat, radiation, etc.) resulting from the operation of the proposed project; 7. An outline of the main alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main reasons for this choice, taking into account the environmental effects; 8. A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the proposed project, including, in particular, population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the inter-relationship between the above factors; 9. A description128 of the likely significant effects of the proposed project on the environment resulting from: - the existence of the project; - the use of natural resources; - the emission of pollutants; - the creation of nuisances and the elimination of waste; and - the description by the developer of the forecasting methods used to assess the effects on the environment; 10. A description of the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and where possible offset any significant adverse effects on the environment; 11. A non-technical summary of the information provided under the above headings; 12. An indication of any difficulties (technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered by the developer in compiling the required information.

Article 10a of the EU EIA Directive spells out standards for public participation/awareness as well. Under this Article:

127 Standard content of EU EIA Report is provided in Annex IV of the EU EIA Directive, at; http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/eia_case_law.pdf . 128 Under Annex IV of the EU EIA Directive, this description should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the project.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

“Member States shall ensure that, in accordance with the relevant national legal system, members of the public concerned: a) Having a sufficient interest, or alternatively, b) Maintaining the impairment of a right, where administrative procedural law of a Member State requires this as a precondition, have access to a review procedure before a court of law or another independent and impartial body established by law to challenge the substantive or procedural legality of decisions, acts or omissions subject to the public participation provisions of this Directive.

Member States shall determine at what stage the decisions, acts or omissions may be challenged.

What constitutes a sufficient interest and impairment of a right shall be determined by the Member States, consistently with the objective of giving the public concerned wide access to justice. To this end, the interest of any non-governmental organization meeting the requirements referred to in Article 1(2), shall be deemed sufficient for the purpose of subparagraph (a) of this Article. Such organizations shall also be deemed to have rights capable of being impaired for the purpose of subparagraph (b) of this Article.

The provisions of this Article shall not exclude the possibility of a preliminary review procedure before an administrative authority and shall not affect the requirement of exhaustion of administrative review procedures prior to recourse to judicial review procedures, where such a requirement exists under national law.

Any such procedure shall be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive.

In order to further the effectiveness of the provision of this article, Member States shall ensure that practical information is made available to the public on access to administrative and judicial review procedures.”

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

ANNEX V. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability129

Substance of the # Objectives of Performance Standard Performance Standard  To identify and evaluate environmental and social risks and impacts of the project;  To adopt a mitigation hierarchy to anticipate and avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize,5 and, where residual impacts remain, compensate/offset for risks and impacts to workers, affected Assessment and Communities, and the environment. management of  To promote improved environmental and social performance of 1 clients through the effective use of management systems. environmental and Social  To ensure that grievances from affected Communities and external risks and Impacts communications from other stakeholders are responded to and managed appropriately.  To promote and provide means for adequate engagement with affected Communities throughout the project cycle on issues that could potentially affect them and to ensure that relevant environmental and social information is disclosed and disseminated.  To promote the fair treatment, non- discrimination, and equal opportunity of workers.  To establish, maintain, and improve the worker-management relationship.  To promote compliance with national employment and labor laws. Labor and Working 2  To protect workers, including vulnerable categories of workers such Conditions as children, migrant workers, workers engaged by third parties, and workers in the client’s supply chain.  To promote safe and healthy working conditions, and the health of workers.  To avoid the use of forced labor.  To avoid or minimize adverse impacts on human health and the environment by avoiding or minimizing pollution from project activities. Resource efficiency and 3  To promote more sustainable use of resources, including energy and Pollution Prevention water.  To reduce project-related GHG emissions.  To anticipate and avoid adverse impacts on the health and safety of the affected Community during the project life from both routine and Community Health, non-routine circumstances. 4 Safety, and Security  To ensure that the safeguarding of personnel and property is carried out in accordance with relevant human rights principles and in a manner that avoids or minimizes risks to the affected Communities.  To avoid, and when avoidance is not possible, minimize displacement by exploring alternative project designs.  To avoid forced eviction.  To anticipate and avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize Land acquisition and adverse social and economic impacts from land acquisition or 5 restrictions on land use by (i) providing compensation for loss of assets Involuntary resettlement at replacement cost and (ii) ensuring that resettlement activities are implemented with appropriate disclosure of information, consultation, and the informed participation of those affected.  To improve, or restore, the livelihoods and standards of living of displaced persons.

129 IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (effective January 1, 2012) at http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/c8f524004a73daeca09afdf998895a12/IFC_Performance_Standards.pdf?MOD =AJPERES .

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

 To improve living conditions among physically displaced persons through the provision of adequate housing with security of tenure5 at resettlement sites. Biodiversity Conservation  To protect and conserve biodiversity. and Sustainable  To maintain the benefits from ecosystem services. 6 management of living  To promote the sustainable management of living natural resources through the adoption of practices that integrate conservation needs and natural resources development priorities.  To ensure that the development process fosters full respect for the human rights, dignity, aspirations, culture, and natural resource-based livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples.  To anticipate and avoid adverse impacts of projects on communities of Indigenous Peoples, or when avoidance is not possible, to minimize and/or compensate for such impacts.  To promote sustainable development benefits and opportunities for Indigenous Peoples in a culturally appropriate manner. 7 Indigenous Peoples  To establish and maintain an ongoing relationship based on Informed Consultation and Participation (ICP) with the Indigenous Peoples affected by a project throughout the project’s life-cycle.  To ensure the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the affected Communities of Indigenous Peoples when the circumstances described in this Performance Standard are present.  To respect and preserve the culture, knowledge, and practices of Indigenous Peoples.  To protect cultural heritage from the adverse impacts of project activities and support its preservation. 8 Cultural Heritage  To promote the equitable sharing of benefits from the use of cultural heritage.

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

ANNEX VI. LIST OF USED INFORMATION, DATA, MATERIAL AND LITERATURE (May 2014)

LIST OF INTERVIEWEES 1. Tamar Sharashidze, Head of Department of Ecological Expertise and Inspection, MENRP 2. Tamar Gugushvili, National Coordinator for Georgia, Reducing Trans-boundary Degradation of the Kura Aras River Basin (former specialist at Aarhus Centre Georgia) 3. Davit Chipashvili, International Financial Institutions Monitoring Program Coordinator 4. Juguri Akhvlediani, Head of Ecological Department, Gamma Consulting

MULTILATERAL AND REGIONAL TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS IN FORCE FOR GEORGIA PERTAINING/RELEVANT TO ESIA/HYDROPOWER 5. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 6. Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat 7. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), KYOTO Protocol 8. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) 9. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) 10. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals

LAWS OF GEORGIA 11. Constitution of Georgia 12. Code of Local Self-governance 13. Law on Environmental Protection 14. Law on Normative Acts 15. Law on System of Protected Areas 16. Law on Wildlife 17. Law on Water 18. Law on Minerals 19. Law on Licenses and Permits 20. Law on Local Self-Governance 21. Law on Ecological Expertise 22. Law on Environmental Impact Permit 23. Law on Recognition of Ownership Rights on Land Plots under the Usage of Physical Persons and Legal Entities of Private Law 24. Law on the Status of Protected Areas 25. Law on Construction Activities 26. Code of Product Safety and Free Movement 27. Code of Spatial and Construction Activities (Draft) 28. Law on Electricity and Natural Gas 29. Regulation of the Parliament (Reglament)

SUB-LEGISLATIVE ACTS OF GEORGIA 30. Main Directions of the State Policy in Energy Sector of Georgia, Resolution of the Parliament No 3259-Is 31. GoG Resolution No 107 State Renewable Energy Program 2008 32. GoG Resolution No 214 on the Rules of Expressing Interest regarding Technical-Economic Study, Construction, Ownership and Operation of the HPPs in Georgia 33. MoE Order No 40, 2014 on Submission of Solicitation to the Ministry of Energy Proposals on Feasibility Study, Construction, Ownership and Operation of those 34. GoG Resolution No 57 on the Rules of Issuance of Construction Permits and Permit Conditions

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

35. GoG Resolution No 488 of December 28, 2012, Technical Regulation on Establishing Marginal Parameters for High Technical Hazard Objects 36. Order No 1-1/1527 of the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development on approval of the Charter of the Technical and Construction Supervision Agency 37. MENRP Order No 31 on Environmental Impact Assessment of May 15 2013 38. MENRP Order No 14 on Environmental Impact Assessment of October 4, 2011 39. Rules of Conduct of Ecological Expertise, MENRP Order No 28, May 14, 2013 40. Rules of Conduct of Ecological Expertise, MENRP Order No 68, March 13, 2012 41. Rules of Remuneration of Independent Experts, MENRP Order No 33, May 15, 2013 42. Provision on the Registry of Independent Experts, MENRP Order No 32, May 15, 2013 43. GoG Resolution No 133 of April 5, 2012 on Fees for Usage of Natural Resources 44. GoG Resolution No 154 of April 24, 2012 on Rules of Executing Agreement in the Area of Environmental Protection and Usage of Natural Resources 45. Order No 1-1/251 of the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia of February 18, 2011 on application of norms, rules and other documents of technical regulations in effect in the areas of technical supervision and construction on the territory of Georgia prior to 1992 46. MENRP Order No 23 of June 15, 2011 on Approval of the Rules for Activities of a Special Environmental Impact Council

NORMATIVE ACTS IN EFFECT ON THE GEORGIAN TERRITORY PRIOR TO 1992 47. SNiP 2.01.14-83 on Determining Calculations of Hydrological Characteristics, State Committee of USSR on Construction Matters 48. SNiP 2.06.04-82 (1989, amended in 1995) Load and influence on hydraulic structures (from tides, ice and vessels) 49. SNiP 2.06.03-85 Amelioration systems and structures 50. SNiP 2.06.05-84 (1990) Dams from ground (грунтовый) material 51. SNiP 2.06.06-85 (amended in 1987) Concrete and reinforced concrete dams 52. SNiP 2.06.07-87 (1989) Retaining walls, navigation locks, fish and fish protection structures 53. SNiP 2.06.08-87 Concrete and reinforced concrete structures of hydraulic structures 54. SNiP 2.06.09-84 Hydraulic tunnels 55. SNiP 2.06.14-85 (amended in 1989) Protection of mountain minerals from surface and underground waters 56. SNiP 2.06.15-85 Engineering protection of territory from flooding and heating 57. Instruction No ВСН 33-3.02.01-84 adopted on April 16, 1984 by the Ministry of Amelioration and Water Management of USSR 58. SanPin 3907-85 on Sanitary Rules for Project Design, Construction and Exploitation of water reservoirs

SOURCES AND MATERIALS Material from Georgia: 59. Aarhus Centre Georgia. Legislative and Institutional Analysis of the Implementation of Aarhus Convention in Georgia. Tbilisi, 2011 60. Aarhus Center Georgia. Observer Report Barriers for Public Participation. Tbilisi, 2011 61. Aarhus Centre Georgia. Observer Report Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment, Tbilisi, 2009 62. Green Alternative. Memorandums of Understanding and Agreements Concluded for Implementation of Energy Projects in Georgia - Legal Analysis, Tbilisi, 2012 63. Green Alternative. Environmental Policy, Institutional and Regulatory Gap Analysis. Tbilisi, February 2012 64. Green Alternative. Does the Georgia Legislation Provide the Protection and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity?, Policy Brief, July 2011 65. Green Alternative. Georgian Energy Sector Development Prospects, Policy Brief, May 2011 66. Green Alternative. The Assessment of Implementation of the ENP EU-Georgia Action Plan, Environmental and Sustainable Development

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

67. Green Alternative. Implementation of Aarhus Convention in Georgia, Alternative Report, 2011. 68. European Environment Agency. European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument – Shared Environmental Information System. 2011 69. Green Alternative. ENP Implementation Report Georgia. 2009 70. Green Alternative. Preconditions for Development of Sustainable Energy in Georgia. Tbilisi 71. Green Alternative. Protection and Management of Biodiversity in Georgia. Tbilisi, 2007 72. Green Alternative. Water infrastructure of Georgia – Problems and Solutions. Tbilisi 2007 73. UNECE, Environmental Performance Reviews, Georgia, Second Review, New York and Geneva, 2010 74. Civil Environmental Monitoring System, Temur Vekua, Ecotech 75. Climate Change, Challenges of the Energy Sector in Georgia and Their Solutions, Medea Inashvili, MoE 76. Sustainable Development and Reforms in Georgia, Lia Todua, Shota Murghulia, CSRDG 77. Renewable Energy Development and Use Policy in Georgia and European Integration of Georgia, Vakhtang Zarkua, Energy Efficiency Foundation

Regional and International Institutions: 78. IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (2012) 79. IFC. Performance Standard 1, Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts. 2012 80. EIA Technical Review Guidelines: Energy Generation and Transmission, USAID Environment and Labor Excellence for CAFTA-DR Program, 2011 81. KfW Guideline for conducting business in an environmentally, socially and climate friendly manner, 2011. 82. EBRD. Finance of Investment Projects: ESIA and public consultation. 83. Commission Staff Working Paper, Impact Assessment Accompanying the Document, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. 84. EIAs in Practice: Potential Lessons for Human Rights Impact Assessment, June 2010. 85. Assessing Implementation of the ENP Action Plans. The progress in implementation of the EU- Georgia Action Plan Environment and Sustainable Development, Executive Summary, Tbilisi, 2009. 86. UNEP. Resource and Guidance Manual for Environmental Impact Assessment. Desalination. 2008. 87. UNEP, EIA Training Resource Manual, Introduction and Overview of EIA, Second Edition 2002. 88. ENVSEC Program. UNECE-OSCE Project. Assessment of the Legal and Institutional Needs for Implementation of the UNECE Water Convention by Georgia. June, 2009. 89. European Commission. European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument, Georgia Country Strategy Paper, 2007-2013. 90. European Neighborhood Policy. Action Plan 2012. 91. Georgia Environmental and Climate Change Policy Brief, 2009. Prepared for SIDA by University of Gothenburg. 92. Report of the United Nations Secretary General. Climate change and its possible security implications. September 11, 2009. 93. Georgia: Strategic Environmental Assessment of Power Sector Development, Final Report, 2007. Prepared for World Bank Group by South East Europe Consultants. 94. UNECE. Communication to the Aarhus Convention’s Compliance Committee from Caucasus Environmental NGO Network (CENN). ACCC/C/2008/35. 2009. 95. UNECE. Environmental Performance Reviews - Georgia. New York and Geneva, 2003. 96. ADB. Environmental Assessment Guidelines. 2003. 97. UN. An Overview of the Principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent and Indigenous Peoples in International and Domestic Law and Practices, Workshop on Free, Prior and Informed Consent (NY, 2005) 98. EC, Guidance on EIA, Scoping (2001) 99. EC, Guidance on EIA, Screening (2001) 100. Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

(codification). 101. Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment: towards an integrated approach. UNEP, 2004. 102. International Association for Impact Assessment. 103. Manual for Preparing Scoping Document for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Hydropower Projects, 2001 104. Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice, 1999.

Ministries and Governmental Organizations: 105. First National Environmental Action Plan, 2000. 106. Government of Georgia. Rio +10: Georgian National Assessment Report for Sustainable Development. 107. Ministry of Environment Protection. 2007 Annual Report. Tbilisi 2007. 108. Ministry of Environment Protection. Aarhus Convention Implementation Report II. Tbilisi, 2007. 109. Ministry of Environment Protection. I National Environment Protection Action Program, 2009. 110. Ministry of Environment Protection. II National Environment Protection Action Program 2012- 2016. Tbilisi , 2012. 111. Ministry of Environment Protection. II National Environmental Action Program, English version. Tbilisi, 2012. 112. Ministry of Environmental Protection. Second Implementation Report under the Aarhus Convention. 2007. 113. Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources. Second National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2008. 114. Ministry of Environmental Protection. Strategy of Environmental Compliance Assurance in Georgia (2007-2010). Tbilisi, 2007. 115. Ministry of Environmental Protection. Third National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2009.

Websites: 116. Caucasus Environmental Network http://www.cenn.org/wssl/index.php?id=53 117. CBD. Georgia http://www.cbd.int/countries/?country=ge 118. Convention on Biological Diversity http://www.biodiv.org/ 119. Convention on Biological Diversity. Reports and strategies http://www.cbd.int/reports/list.shtml?type=all&alpha=K 120. European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/ 121. EBRD. Country Strategy http://www.ebrd.com/country/country/georgia/index.htm 122. EEA. European Environmental Agency http://www.eea.europa.eu/ 123. Energy Information Administration: Georgia http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/country_energy_data.cfm?fips=GG 124. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development http://www.ebrd.com 125. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD): Projects and Investments http://www.ebrd.com 126. European Commission http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm 127. European Commission. External relations. Georgia http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/georgia/index_en.htm 128. Georgia. Environment Protection Division. State of the Environment Report http://www.gaepd.org/Documents/soe2009.html 129. Georgian government http://v1.georgia.gov.ge/?lang=2&event=pdf&topid=5&botid=0&page=1 130. Georgian Parliament. Legislation http://www.parliament.ge/index.php?lang_id=ENG&sec_id=69 131. Green Alternative http://www.greenalt.org/?lng=en_ 132. Ministry of Economic Development http://www.economy.ge 133. Ministry of Economic Development http://www.economy.ge/?lang=eng 134. Ministry of Energy http://www.energy.gov.ge 135. Ministry of Environment Protection http://www.moe.gov.ge 136. National Environmental Agency http://www.nea.gov.ge 137. Official Legislative Bulletin “Matsne” http://www.matsne.gov.ge

Report #1: EIA Policy and Process in SUSTAINABLE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT Georgian Hydropower Development A NORWEGIAN-GEORGIAN COOPERATION PROGRAM

138. RAMSAR Convention http://www.ramsar.org/ 139. UNCCD http://www.unccd.int/main.php 140. UNECE. Conventions http://www.unece.org/env/environment-conventions.html 141. UNECE. Working Group for Environmental Monitoring and Assessment http://unece.unog.ch/enhs/wgema/ 142. UNFCCC http://unfccc.int/2860.php 143. UNFCCC. National reports http://unfccc.int/national_reports/non- annex_i_natcom/items/2979.php 144. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_balance_(energy_economics) 145. World Commission on Dams. http://www.internationalrivers.org/campaigns/the-world- commission-on-dams 146. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/IA%20SWD-2012-355.pdf 147. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0JASO2kdlBsJ:www.un.org/esa/socdev/u npfii/documents/workshop_FPIC_tamang.doc+An+overview+of+the+Principle+of+Free,+Prior+an d+Informed&cd=1&hl=ka&ct=clnk&gl=ge 148. http://www.ciel.org/Publications/EIA_Brief_Jun10.pdf 149. http://www.ebrd.com/environment/e-manual/r16eia.html 150. https://www.kfw.de/Download-Center/Konzernthemen/Nachhaltigkeit/Umweltrichtlinie-FZ- 2011_E.pdf 151. http://www.iaia.org/publicdocuments/special-publications/Principles%20of%20IA_web.pdf 152. http://www.unep.ch/etu/publications/EIA_2ed/EIA_E_top1_hd.PDF 153. http://www.unep.org/Themes/Freshwater/PDF/Resource&GuidanceManualforEIAs.pdf 154. http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/3be1a68049a78dc8b7e4f7a8c6a8312a/PS1_English_2012.p df?MOD=AJPERES 155. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADR168.pdf 156. http://www.epa.gov/international/regions/lac/eia-guidelines/energyvol1.pdf4 157. http://www1.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/7540778049a792dcb87efaa8c6a8312a/SP_English_2012.pd f?MOD=AJPERES 158. Arthington A.H., Tharme R.E., Brizga S.O., Pusey B.J. and Kennard M.J., Environmental Flow Assessment With Emphasis On Holistic Methodologies at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/ad526e/ad526e07.htm