Environmental Impact Assessment

Final Report January 2013

KAZ: CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Section) Tranche 2

Prepared by Ministry of Transport and Communications for the Asian Development Bank.

Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... 5 A. Introduction ...... 5 B. Project Description ...... 5 C. Existing Conditions ...... 5 D. Alternatives ...... 7 E. Consultations ...... 7 F. Impact Identification & Mitigation ...... 7 G. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 10 I. Introduction ...... 11 A. Background ...... 11 B. Objective ...... 11 C. Proponent ...... 11 D. Programmatic Context of the Proposed Actions ...... 11 E. Location and Nature of the Project ...... 12 F. Scope of the EIA ...... 12 G. Methodology ...... 13 H. Structure and Contents of the EIA ...... 14 II. Legal and Administrative Framework ...... 15 A. Regulations ...... 15 B. Environmental Category of the Project ...... 16 C. Asian Development Bank Safeguard Policies 2009 ...... 17 III. Description of Project and Alternatives ...... 20 A. Need and Justification for the Project, and Expected Benefits ...... 20 B. Identification of the Project and Project Components ...... 22 C. Scope of Civil Works, and Materials Required ...... 24 D. Anticipated Schedule of Implementation and Life Span ...... 26 E. Project Layout and Work Components ...... 26 F. Analysis of Alternatives ...... 27 IV. Description of the Environment ...... 30 A. Physical Environment ...... 30 B. Biological Resources ...... 36 C. Socio-economic Conditions ...... 41 V. Potential Impacts and Mitigation ...... 48 A. Preliminary Environmental Screening Results ...... 48 B. Issues being addressed during the Pre-Construction Phase ...... 48 C. Anticipated Impacts & Mitigation during the Construction Phase ...... 54 D. Addressing Potential Impacts during the Operational Phase ...... 66 E. Assessment of Potential Cumulative Impacts ...... 69 VI. Environmental Management Plan (EMP) ...... 71 A. Objectives and Summary of the EMP ...... 71 B. EMP Responsibilities ...... 71 C. Environmental Management and Environmental Monitoring Plans ... 72 D. Environmental Costs ...... 99 VII. Public Consultation and Information Disclosure ...... 102 A. Public Meetings ...... 102 B. Issues Discussed and Suggestions Forwarded ...... 102 C. Use of Consultation Results and Information Disclosure ...... 103 D. Grievance Redress Mechanism ...... 104 VIII. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 106

2 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

A. Summary Conclusions ...... 106 B. Overall Conclusions ...... 107 Appendix A: Stakeholders met during the Mission ...... 108 Appendix B: Legislation and Regulations on the Environmental Assessment Review in Kazakhstan ...... 109 Appendix C: Meteorological and Hydrological Data ...... 111 Appendix D: Due Diligence of the Associated Facility (Kyzylsai Regional Nature Park) ...... 118 Appendix E: Statistical Socio-Economic and Public Health Data of Mangystau Oblast ...... 136 Appendix F: Scope of Works for Ecological Study of the Kyzylsai Regional Nature Park...... 140 Appendix G: Minutes of the Public Consultations ...... 142 Appendix H: Survey Photos along Road Alignment Tranche 2 ...... 148 Appendix I: Baseline Monitoring of Physico-Chemical Parameters ...... 153 Appendix J - Project Road Strip Maps ...... 166 Appendix K - Permits and Approvals for Water Supply ...... 168

3 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Currency Equivalents (as of 21 November 2012)

Currency unit – Tenge (KZT) KZT1.00 = $0.0066 $1.00 = KZT150.32

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank Akimat Town Mayor Office AMP Asphalt Mixing Plant CAREC Central Regional Economic Cooperation Program CEAP Construction Environmental Action Plan Ch km Chainage kilometer CL Center Line (of carriageway) CFH MOA‟s Committee for Forestry and Hunting CR MOTC‟s Roads Committee dBA decibel DOE Department of Environment (Oblast level) EA Executing Agency EARF Environmental Assessment and Review Framework EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Management Plan ES Executive Summary FS Feasibility Study GoK IFI International Financing Institution IEE Initial Environmental Examination KAZNIIPIDORTRANS (DORTRANS) Design Consultant km Kilometer LARP Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plan MFF Multi-tranche Financing Facility MOEP Ministry of Environmental Protection MOH Ministry of Health MOTC Ministry of Transport and Communication NGO Non-Governmental Organization Oblast Province OM Operational Manual (of ADB) PC Public Consultation PEIA Preliminary EIA (of DORTRANS, 2010) PMU Project Managing Unit PPTA Project Preparatory Technical Assistance (Concept Paper) Rayon District RE Engineer RoW Right of Way SES Sanitary and Epidemiological Services of MOH STD Sexually transmitted diseases (such as HIV/AIDS) ToR Terms of Reference WB World Bank

4 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Executive Summary

A. Introduction

1. The Republic of Kazakhstan (RoK), acting through the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC) proposes to undertake the upgrading of the – Beineu Road. The works are divided into two „Tranches‟ both funded through the Asian Development Banks (ADB) Multitranche Financing Facility for the Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) (Mangystau Oblast Sections) Investment Program. This Report focuses on Tranche 2 of the Aktau – Beineu Road, some 168 kilometres of road between Aktau and Shetpe.

2. This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is the second updated version of the of the EIA prepared by the project preparatory technical assistance consultant on behalf of the Ministry of Transport and Communication (MOTC) and its implementing agency, the Committee of Roads (MCOR) of Mangystau Oblast.

B. Project Description

3. The Project will comprise upgrading of a 168 km section (Tranche 2) of the national highway A-380 between Aktau and Shetpe. Located within a steppe- environment, the project will not involve realignment and will be confined within the right-of-way (with the exception of the construction of bypasses around both the towns of Zhetibay and Shetpe en route). The Project consists of two sub-sections (Figure ES-1):

Sub-Section 1 (km 632-720) includes upgrading the road from Category III to Category II and construction of two bypasses around Shetpe and Zhetibay, Sub-Section 2 (km 720-802) involves upgrading of an 88 km section of the existing road between Zhetibay and Aktau, from Category II to Category I

C. Existing Conditions

5. Typical for vast desert and semi-desert zones, the main climatic features are (moderately) cold winters and hot summer periods. The amount of in the Project Area usually does not exceed 150mm per year. Precipitation mainly falls as rain, and during winter, less pronounced, as snowfall. Complete snow cover of large areas is usually lasting only for few weeks during winter time (January to March). Thus driving conditions in this road sections are, from climatic point of view, relatively good throughout the entire year. However, during the winter months some locations with steep ascends pose considerable problems for drivers as road surface becomes icy and difficult to manoeuvre.

6. Within the urban areas of Zhetibay and Shetpe dust is a common problem that results from the soil and climatic conditions of the region. Consultations with villagers in Zhetibay revealed that they did not feel that dust from construction activities would impact upon them significantly, due to the fact that the existing naturally induced dust issues were considerably more of a problem than construction impacts would be. They also noted that construction would be occurring in bypass locations outside of the , thereby reducing further dust impacts to villagers. In addition, more than 90% of the road is uninhabited steppe. Dust impacts and air quality issues will not play any significant role in these uninhabited areas.

5 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

7. Although geological mapping shows two tectonic lines converging South-East of the town of Shetpe the seismic zoning expertise quoted by the Preliminary EIA (PEIA) denominates the entire area as 'seismically inactive'. The Projects Technical Design experts also believe that seismicity is not a significant concern for this road construction project, stating that the only locations for bridges are far away from the above identified tectonic faults.

8. Along the entire road corridor only one perennial surface water course can be observed; the Ashyagar Creek (km 755). A bridge, approximately 30 meters in length crosses the river, which dries out during extreme hot summer months. Current plans envisage that the river will not be used as a source of technical water for the Project. Groundwater is generally available only from medium to deep aquifers, which is exploitable at certain locations located throughout the Road Corridor. This groundwater is often saline and there are currently no plans to extract ground water for Project use. Technical water will be sourced from piped potable supplies from Aktau and Zhetibay. Tanker trucks will deliver water from the pipelines to the relevant construction sites. Potable water will be provided by five litre bottles of spring/mineral water. Other potable water supplies exist but it is unlikely that they will be used as drinking water. The Contractor is responsible for locating sites for other non-technical water and obtaining permits for extraction.

9. Noise monitoring was undertaken at three locations during October 2011. The results allow the following conclusions: Nowhere at the tested locations do the current noise level exceed the allowable standard norm levels of Republic of Kazakhstan (RoK). In addition, the initially identified spots where noise could play a negative role (Zhetibay: Central Hospital) are now out of concern due to the incorporation of the bypass round Zhetibay which passes through uninhabited steppe and pasture terrain. The area where noise could have played a significant role at the Primary School in Shetpe bypass (location km 630) is no longer valid, as the school will be removed before construction work starts.

10. According to the Archaeological Expertise published in the PEIA there are few, rather insignificant archaeological/historical assets located near the Right of Way (RoW). Due to their distance to the road shoulder, none of these items is likely to be damaged or otherwise affected by the foreseen project works.

11. Due to the low precipitation, high evaporation rates and relative high salt concentration in surface soils the capacity for continual vegetation cover is limited all along the road corridor. Wildlife along this road corridor is typical for a steppe-desert ecosystem.

12. The Karagie-Karakol State Game Reserve (KKSGR), is a game reserve (IUCN Category 4), located in Karakiyanskiy and Munaylinsky Districts of Mangystau Oblast. The Reserve occupies the whole area of the depression, the Aschy River valley, as well as maritime costal zones south of the city of Aktau. For about 36 km its Northern boundaries run parallel to the Project Road running from Aktau in direction of Zhetibay. It is important to note that the A380 does not enter the KKSGR boundaries at any point, but is within 100 meters of the northern boundary of the KKSGR. Within the KKSGR there are a large number of plant (20) and animal (300) species, of which 4 plant species and 24 animal species are included in the Red Book of Kazakhstan. Most of the rare and endangered animals are large predatory birds and rare shore birds near the Caspian seashore areas, which is not in close proximity to the Project. The existing KKSGR is currently not well recognizable for road users passing by this area. Specific signboards and markings are absent, and

6 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 at the pass section km 755 the Reserve is in a poor condition as portions of the roadside slopes are littered with rubbish.

D. Alternatives

13. Several alternatives have been assessed as part of the EIA, including:

14. “No Project” Alternative - This alternative has been ruled out on the basis that good road connectivity is the key to economic development and reduction of poverty. A "No-Project" alternative would therefore be regarded as counter-productive to such goals.

15. Alternative Transport Modes - Given the importance which the GoK attributes to improve this road connectivity, the PEIA (2010) reflects the conclusion encountered in all meetings held during this EIA process, that there are currently no technical and economical appealing alternative solutions other than the proposed Project. The economic analysis undertaken in May 2010 by ADB's Transport Economist also came to the conclusion, that the cost-benefit ratio of this project would justify proceeding with the Project, and that alternate modes of transport are not viable at the moment.

16. Alternative Alignments – The direct existing road connection between Shetpe and Aktau (via ) has been disfavored due to technical and economic reasons, as this road is relatively narrow and winding through partly mountainous terrain. The chosen alignment via Zhetibay, however, passes through predominantly flat terrain, with no major obstacles for road widening measures.

E. Consultations

17. Four Public Consultation Meetings were conducted during the project preparation period. There were no crucial issues or objections received during any of these meetings. In fact, all participants at the meetings appreciated the anticipated benefits and they agreed to swift implementation of the proposed Project. The project proponent (MOTC/MCOR) informed participants of the meeting of the pertaining grievance mechanisms and locations/offices where complaints and requests can be forwarded by any stakeholder affected by this Project.

F. Impact Identification & Mitigation

18. In general, the ecological conditions along the alignment of Tranche 2 give little reason for concerns of becoming potentially damaged by the foreseen Project activities. The vast majority of terrain adjacent to the road alignment (outside the lands belonging to the protected areas) is semi-desert, desert and steppe, often with only sparse vegetation due to the high salt content of the soil and absence of sufficient rainfall. In the Zhetibay region, the landscape is largely subjected to fundamental alterations due to the ongoing oil exploitation. In addition, items of significant archaeological and historical importance do not appear within the RoW.

19. Project works are likely to cause only short-term and locally confined impacts - mainly associated with the preparation of asphalt, earth works, stockpiling and movement of heavy construction vehicles. All site preparation works, excavation works, particularly at quarrying sites, will cause a localized dust and noise impacts. Precautionary measures are sufficiently described in the EMP to mitigate these impacts.

7 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

20. The Project is expected to create some resettlement issues, but these are reduced by incorporation of bypasses around the urban area of Shetpe and Zhetibay. Issues of resettlement are dealt with by the Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plan (LARP)

21. Notwithstanding the above, the potential exists for significant negative impacts to the Karagie Karakol State Game Reserve (KKSGR). Inappropriate design and construction techniques could lead to impacts such as degradation of habitat and direct impacts to the rare species within this area. Accordingly, a number of mitigation measures are recommended for the protection of this site as follows:

22. KKSGR Design Mitigation:

During the designing of the reconstructed road between km 739 to 711 the road should follow the existing road and pull offs and areas for short-term rests. Widening of the road to be on combined subgrade with minimum permissible parameters of transverse profile /cross- section (road width and curbs/shoulders) for I –II category roads in accordance with Sanitary norms and rules 03..09-2006 “Automobile roads”. All parameters (longitudinal slope of the radius of vertical curves) shall be aligned with Sanitary rules and norms 03.3.09-2006 “Automobile roads” for I and II category roads on the surface curve designing phase. Specified requirements shall be made for speed limits. Installation of a barrier fence with high protection on both shoulders all along the road section from 739 to 771 km, which will help to hold the vehicle on the road in case of emergency situations and will prevent animals from passing the road. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules.

23. In addition to the design phase mitigation, the Contractor shall also be responsible for implementing construction phase mitigation at the KKSGR. This includes:

No construction camp, temporary or permanent is located within the KKSGR. Signposts shall be placed along the boundary of the KKSG to inform workers and machine operators not to enter this area. Decrease the construction period in these areas. Use efficient road construction equipment with minimal parameters of emissions and noise level. Construction sites for basing of road building equipment and storage of road building materials to be placed outside of protected areas. Provide dust suppression during the road coating and preparation of road pavement basis layers from macadam and gravel. Temporary bypasses should be placed outside of protected areas. Collection and utilization of wastes from asphalt concrete mix used for road coating on outside territory of protected areas. Maintaining of manufacturing operations with bitumen materials strictly in the project within the roadway.

8 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure ES-1: Project Overview

9 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

24. It should be noted that the project will result in a number of positive environmental impacts including (i) improvement of air quality by reducing dust development and vehicular emissions, (ii) rising public environmental awareness by the installation of environmental signboards relating to roadside protected areas and biodiversity values, and (iii) decreasing road safety risks by substantially improving the road conditions.

G. Conclusions and Recommendations

25. The overall conclusion of this EIA is that the proposed environmental corrective and mitigation measures, in junction with the recommended supervision and monitoring activities are sufficient and appropriate to fully ensure the protection and preservation of the environmental assets and social integrity associated with this Project.

10 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

I. Introduction

A. Background

26. The Republic of Kazakhstan (RoK), acting through the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC) proposes to undertake the upgrading of the Aktau – Beineu Road. The works are divided into two „Tranches‟ both funded through the Asian Development Banks (ADB) Multitranche Financing Facility for the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) (Mangystau Oblast Sections) Investment Program. This Report focuses primarily on Tranche 2 and comprises rehabilitation of the road between Shetpe and Aktau and construction of two new bypasses (approximately 12 km of bypass around Shetpe, and about 8.5 km bypass around Zhetibay). This Report also describes a due diligence of the national environmental assessment for a portion of the Aktau – Beineu road financed by the Government. The civil works include road widening, shoulder improvement, pavement strengthening and drainage upgrading, reconstruction of culverts and one bridge. All construction and rehabilitation activities will be carried out within a 100 meter wide Right of Way (RoW) (with the exception of the bypasses).

B. Objective

29. The objective of this Report is to complete an environmental assessment of the Project in accordance with the requirements of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2009. Additionally, the Report includes a due diligence of the environmental assessment for the Project‟s associated facility.

C. Proponent

30. The proponent for this Project is the RoK acting through its Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC), and the Implementing Agency (IA) being the Committee of Roads (MOCR) Mangystau Section. The MOTC has developed the Project within the framework of the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) (Mangystau Oblast Sections) Investment Program.

D. Programmatic Context of the Proposed Actions

31. The Project is part of a larger program involving various international financing institutions (IFIs) such as ADB, the World Bank, European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), Islamic Development Bank and others who, together with affected countries, have identified six road corridors extending from the border with China on the east to the border with the Russian Federation on the west as warranting improvement. The corridor in which the Project is located is part of one of these six corridors and is referred to as the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) Transport Corridor 2. Loans for this Investment Program are made by using a financing instrument referred to as a Multi-Tranche Financing Facility (MFF). The tool allows ADB to provide for smaller incremental loans referred to as "Tranches" rather than one large loan to finance all of the actions in the corridor at one time. The overall Program is referred to as the MFF Investment Program. In this case the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) (Mangystau Oblast Sections) Investment Program consists of the following projects:

Tranche 1: km 372.6 – 514.3, and km 574 – km 632.3, financed by ADB Tranche 2: km 632.3 – km 802, financed by ADB (the Project Herewith) Project: km 514.3 – 574, financed by the Government

11 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

E. Location and Nature of the Project

32. The road sections of this Tranche are part of the East-West National Road Corridor, linking major economic areas with and the People‟s Republic of China. The road sections examined hereunder pass through three Rayon‟s (Districts), from East to West being Munaily, Karakiya and Mangystau Rayon. This Project itself is located within Mangystau Oblast bordering the (Figure 1-1). The end point of this road project is the city of Aktau, an important economic hub and port for export goods, including a terminal for pipelines delivering the regional oil products as far as Western Europe.

33. The Project will comprise upgrading of a 168 km section (Tranche 2) of the national highway A-380 between Aktau and Shetpe. Located within a steppe-desert environment, the project will not involve realignment and will be confined within the right-of-way (with the exception of the construction of bypasses around both Zhetibay and Shetpe en route). The Project consists of two sub-sections (Figure ES-1):

Sub-Section 1 (km 632-720) includes upgrading the road from Category III to Category II and construction of two bypasses around Shetpe and Zhetibay, Sub-Section 2 (km 720-802) involves upgrading of an 88 km section of the existing road between Zhetibay and Aktau, from Category II to Category I

F. Scope of the EIA

34. The boundaries used in this EIA are shown in Table 1-1. The selected boundaries consider the distance from the Center Line (CL) of the road up to areas where potentially significant environmental effects are possible under standard conditions as observed for similar road projects. The distances are based on the expert‟s experience in relation to the sensitivity of roadside features in response to road construction works.

Table 1-1: Assessment Boundaries adopted for this EIA Terrestrial Aquatic Air Shed Acoustic Environment Environment Environment 200 m on either 50 m upstream 200 m from CL of 200 m from CL of side of the road. and 100m carriageway [and road and extended downstream of rising 100 m from on sensitive areas any project road the road such as towns and crossing a river centerline] viaducts over settled areas Note: For any nationally significant or protected site, the impact zone extends to 1 km on either side of the carriageway centerline.

12 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure 1-1: Project Location 35. The selected boundaries are valid for sections where the field survey, public consultations and the assessment do not indicate that there are sensitive habitats, endangered species, or cultural features located within close distance to the planned road works. In such sections particular safeguard measures apply.

G. Methodology

36. This EIA report has been prepared by environmental consultants on behalf of the MOTC. The document is based on information obtained from the Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (PEIA), prepared in 2010 by a government consultant (KAZDORTRANS), which is based on a pre-Feasibility Study (2010) made by the same institution, the IEE for the Tranche 1, CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections) Investment Program, and the EARF which established the environmental assessment protocol used by MFF Projects. In addition, supplementary information has been retrieved from various sources, as quoted in the IEE. Such sources of information included:

Studies of topographic, geological and thematic (GIS) maps of Mangystau Oblast; Consultation of the National Atlas of Kazakhstan Rep., published by the Min. of Environment /Geographic Inst. of Science Academy, , 2007; Direct consultations with local government agencies; Research results obtained from the domestic environmental consultant, relating to previous ecological studies in Mangystau Oblast; Information retrieved from internet sources and from local newspapers; Review of documents and statistical material retrieved from line agencies;

13 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Visual inspection of the road alignment between Aktau and Shetpe (2009-2012). Efforts were made to document as much as possible the environmental conditions during site inspections (Appendix H)

37. The EIA takes into account the normative approaches prescribed by the Kazakhstan Legislation, following a series of the regulations and standards. The main principles and applicable norms are summarized in Appendix B. Notwithstanding this document follows for the most part the prescribed format for an environmental assessment as used by the Asian Development Bank1. This prerequisite applies for all activities for construction works and environmental safeguard measures, as adopted in the Environmental Management Plan (Section 6).

H. Structure and Contents of the EIA

38. The following summarizes the structure and contents of the EIA:

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background Information. Chapter 2: Legal and Administrative framework of the Project. Chapter 3: Project Description and assessment of alternatives. Chapter 4: Description of the Environment. Chapter 5: Assessment of Potential Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Measures. Chapter 6: Environmental Management Plan and Cost Estimates. Chapter 7: Public Consultation and Information Disclosure. Chapter 8: Conclusions and Recommendations.

39. The EIA includes the following appendices:

Appendix A: Persons and Institutions Met. Appendix B: Legislation and Regulations Governing the Environmental Assessment and the Environmental Review Procedures in Kazakhstan. Appendix C: Meteorological and Hydrological Data relating to the Project Area. Appendix D: Due Diligence of the Associated Facility (Kysylsai State Regional Nature Reserve). Appendix E: Selected data on socio-economic conditions in the Project Area. Appendix F: Ecological Study Scope of Works Appendix G: Public Consultation Protocols. Appendix H: Field Survey Photographs. Appendix I: First Baseline Study Results (physic-chemical parameters). Appendix J: Project Road Strip Maps Appendix K: Permits and Approvals for Water Supply. Appendix L: Proposed Locations of Animal Fences

40. This EIA does not contain components for Institutional strengthening, as these have already been elaborated within the framework of the former IEE (2010), and are therefore reference is made to this document.

1 Asian Development Bank, Safety Policy Statement, approved July 2009, effective from February, 2010

14 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

II. Legal and Administrative Framework

A. Kazakhstan Regulations

41. In Kazakhstan environmental protection is administered by the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) that established an Environmental Code on 9th January 2007. Three main laws (the Law on Environmental Protection, the Law on Ecological Expertise and the Law on Air Protection) were abrogated subsequent to their integration into the Environmental Code. In recent times, some 80 normative legal acts were abrogated after the adoption of the Environmental Code. The country‟s basic legislative framework for specially protected national territories is documented in the Law No. 175, dated July 2006, and in the Decree on Approval of Land Lots‟ Reservation for Creation and Further Territorial Development of Specially Protected Natural Territories of Republic and Local Importance, dated September 29, 2006. More details on environmental protection are given in Appendix B.

42. The Environmental Impact Assessment and the permitting system („Environmental Certificate‟) are an inherent component of the environmental legislation (see details, Appendix B). Under Kazakhstan law the Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment (PEIA) is a mandatory document in the scope of the environmental assessment program and passes a number of expertises2 carried out during the Feasibility Studies development stage3. The PEIA follows the format and requirements laid out in the „Instruction on the assessment of the impact of proposed activities on the environment in the development of pre-planning, design and project documentation for ultimate approval of the Ministry of Environment of the Rep. of Kazakhstan.

43. The main objective of the PEIA is to determine all likely environmental and social impacts associated with the proposed economic activity, and to make recommendations on how to avoid environmental degradation and other adverse impacts. In the context of road construction projects, the PEIA is required to incorporate information and examine the measures to address technical aspects and outputs such as:

(calculated) air pollution from motor vehicles; predicted/modelled pollution on local water sources; Protection of settlements from the impact of (modelled) traffic noise; Soil protection and rational use of land; Conservation and protection of flora and fauna; Avoidance of road impacts on the socio-economic conditions of the local population; Retrieval of Environmental Impact Statement Certificates on the stage of Feasibility Studies („Expertises‟).

44. The PEIA is a mandatory document on the pre-feasibility study design stage. It defines the main mitigation and monitoring actions for predicted environmental impacts. According to Article 36 of the Environmental Code the “Development of an Environmental Impact Assessment is obligatory for all types of activities that can have

2 The PEIA refers to the following State Expertises: (1) Environmental Expertise № 05-06/251 from 28.02.2007, and (2) sanitary-epidemiological expertise № 41-02/2-956 from 21.02.2007) 3 The Instruction on EIA of 2007 gives a clear picture of all project stages and correspondent environmental documents. 1 stage is Declaration of Intent 2 stage is Preliminary Environmental Assessment (pre-Feasibility Study), 3 Stage is Environmental Assessment (Feasibility Study), 4 Stage – Section Environmental Assessment (Detailed Design). State Environmental Review should approve each of those stages.

15 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 a direct or indirect impact on the environment or health of the people”. Permits for the proponents are now valid for three years rather than only one year as was the case before the Code entered into force.

45. There are four different categories of activities subject to permits: Their categorization largely follows the sanitary classification of industrial activities established by the Ministry of Health Care under the 2005 ministerial order “on sanitary-and-epidemiological rules and norms”, „Sanitary-and-epidemiological requirement activities falling under danger classes 1 and 2, and also investigation and extraction of minerals, except for common minerals. Activities of danger class 3, extraction of common minerals, all kinds of forest activities and special water use fall under category II. Category III covers activities of danger class 4. Danger class 5 and use of fauna except for amateur (sports) fishery and hunting, fall under category IV. The MEP delivers permits for category I. Permits for the other three categories are issued by local government representative units.

46. The contractor must obtain a clearance permit to carry out any work where environmental effects are likely, such as tree removal, vegetation clearing, removal of soils, culvert replacement, deviation of natural water ways, etc. These permits can only be issued once the contractor has prepared an environmental work plan or Construction Environmental Action Plan (CEAP) showing how the mitigation and monitoring actions defined in the EMP will be implemented. The preparation of the CEAP requires a licensed person or company, thus the contractor must retain expertise to do this work and must keep that person/company to oversee the operation throughout the contract period. Compliance monitoring is undertaken by the Inspection Unit of the Oblast Environment Department, which has enforcement and fining powers. Inspection occurs once per year and the contractor must receive at least a two-week notice prior to the inspection visit.

47. One year into the operating period there is a final inspection and contractor‟s final payment is released only after a fully compliant audit is recorded. Any issues arising during the audit must be addressed before release of final payment.

48. Concerning Right of Way aspects, the Republic of Kazakhstan has an acknowledged “protection” zone along national motorways (equalling a restricted RoW zone). For the planned categories of the new rehabilitated highway this corresponds to 50m extending from the centre line of the carriageway. Within this zone no land use such as settlement, construction of buildings, farming, animal grazing, vending stalls or small business operations is permitted. Other reasons why the GoK has launched such „protection zone‟ is to reduce accidents (fatalities and injuries) and limit health and environmental risks resulting from accidents followed by spillage of hazardous pollutants.

B. Environmental Category of the Project

49. The project was categorized as A for environment based on the following points:

The alignment is adjacent to the northern boundary of Karagie-Karakol State Game Reserve (km 760-780) (Photos 3 and 4, Appendix H). The project includes construction of two new bypasses (approximately 12 km of bypass around Shetpe, and about 8.5 km bypass around Zhetibay).

50. It should be noted that:

16 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

With the exception of the Karagie-Karakol State Game Reserve the alignment does not run through or near any environmentally sensitive areas, such as a wetland or a recognized area of special biodiversity. The entire road corridor outside the few settlements is predominantly desert, semi-desert and barren land. It is forest-free terrain, therefore it will not involve deforestation or removal of sensitive natural vegetation. The project does not interfere in negative ways with local economics or availability of natural resources. The project has low risk to affect few archaeological, historical or cultural assets. Retrieval of material is only from proven and authorized sources (quarries) that are within close reach of the construction alignment, and outside from the designated Nature Reserves. Handling and processing of construction-related material is unlikely to cause any non-manageable environmental impact, as long as construction activities are carried out in line with the EMP and the Technical Specifications describing environmental safeguard measures are followed. The contractors will have to strictly follow the regulations stipulated in the approved CEAP. None of the planned project activities were of concern to Project Stakeholders during the Public Consultations in 2010 (Aktau, Shetpe and Zhetibay), and one in 2011 (Aktau). Specific concerns and remedial proposals forwarded by the participants were duly recorded and integrated into the planning process. Details of all these meetings are documented in Appendix G.

C. Asian Development Bank Safeguard Policies 2009

51. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has three safeguard policies that seek to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse environmental impacts and social costs to third parties, or vulnerable groups as a result of development projects 4 .The current generation of safeguard policies was designed when direct project lending was the dominant modality for development assistance. New lending modalities and financing instruments, such as the Multitranche financing facility (MFF), have increased the complexity of applying safeguard policies and ensuring compliance. The new modalities and the likelihood of continued innovation, as well as changing client circumstances, suggest a need to enhance the relevance and effectiveness of ADB‟s safeguards, which has been reflected in an update of the Safeguard Policy by 2009, announced through the Safeguard Policy Statement 2009.

52. According to the newly revised and published Safeguard Policies in 2009 (SPS 2009) of ADB, ADB‟s overarching statement on its commitment and policy principles are:

ADB affirms that environmental and social sustainability is a cornerstone of economic growth and poverty reduction in Asia and the Pacific. ADB‟s Strategy 2020 therefore emphasizes assisting Developing Member Countries (DMCs) to pursue environmentally sustainable and inclusive economic growth. In addition, ADB is committed to ensuring the social and environmental sustainability of the

4 ADB. 2009. Safeguard Policy Statement, Manila

17 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

projects it supports. In this context, the goal of the SPS is to promote the sustainability of project outcomes by protecting the environment and people from projects‟ potential adverse impacts.

53. The objectives of ADB‟s safeguards are to:

i. avoid adverse impacts of projects on the environment and affected people, where possible; ii. minimize, mitigate, and/or compensate for adverse project impacts on the environment and affected people when avoidance is not possible; and iii. help borrowers/clients to strengthen their safeguard systems and develop the capacity to manage environmental and social risks.

54. Since the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement had been approved it supersedes the Involuntary Resettlement Policy (1995), the Policy on Indigenous Peoples (1998), the Environment Policy (2002), and the second sentence of para. 73, and paras. 77– 85, and 92 of the Public Communications Policy (2005).

Safeguard Requirements 1: Environment.

55. The objectives are to ensure the environmental soundness and sustainability of projects, and to support the integration of environmental considerations into the project decision-making process. 56. The requirements apply to all ADB-financed and/or ADB-administered sovereign and non-sovereign projects, and their components regardless of the source of financing, including investment projects funded by a loan; and/or a grant; and/or other means, such as equity and/or guarantees. Mechanisms such as Public Consultation, Identification of potential impacts, elaboration of adequate mitigation measures and impact monitoring as well as implementation of an appropriate environmental management plan remained mainly unchanged referring to the former Environmental Safeguard Policy. 57. Special attention has been put on the Grievance Redress Mechanism, securing that the borrower/client will establish a mechanism to receive and facilitate resolution of affected peoples‟ concerns, complaints, and grievances about the project‟s environmental performance. The grievance mechanism should be scaled to the risks and adverse impacts of the project. It should address affected people's concerns and complaints promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that is gender responsive, culturally appropriate, and readily accessible to all segments of the affected people at no costs and without retribution. The mechanism should not impede access to the country‟s judicial or administrative remedies. The affected people will be appropriately informed about the mechanism. 58. Guidelines provide a rational approach for determining environmental category of the Project, the need for public consultation and disclosure, environmental management planning, and resolving involuntary resettlement, indigenous people and gender issues.

Safeguard Requirements 2: Involuntary Resettlement.

59. The objectives are to avoid involuntary resettlement wherever possible; to minimize involuntary resettlement by exploring project and design alternatives; to enhance, or at least restore, the livelihoods of all displaced persons1 in real terms relative to pre-project levels; and to improve the standards of living of the displaced poor and other vulnerable groups. The safeguard requirements underscores the requirements for undertaking the social impact assessment and resettlement planning

18 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 process, preparing social impact assessment reports and resettlement planning documents, exploring negotiated land acquisition, disclosing information and engaging in consultations, establishing a grievance mechanism, and resettlement monitoring and reporting. 60. The involuntary resettlement requirements apply to full or partial, permanent or temporary physical displacement (relocation, loss of residential land, or loss of shelter) and economic displacement (loss of land, assets, access to assets, income sources, or means of livelihoods) resulting from (i) involuntary acquisition of land, or (ii) involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to legally designated parks and protected areas. Resettlement is considered involuntary when displaced individuals or communities do not have the right to refuse land acquisition that results in displacement.

Safeguard Requirements 3: Indigenous Peoples.

61. The objective is to design and implement projects in a way that fosters full respect for Indigenous Peoples‟ identity, dignity, human rights, livelihood systems, and cultural uniqueness as defined by the Indigenous Peoples themselves so that they (i) receive culturally appropriate social and economic benefits, (ii) do not suffer adverse impacts as a result of projects, and (iii) can participate actively in projects that affect them.

62. For operational purposes, the term Indigenous Peoples is used in a generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural group possessing the following characteristics in varying degrees:

i. self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; ii. collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; iii. customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and iv. a distinct language, often different from the official language of the country or region.

63. In considering these characteristics, national legislation, customary law, and any international conventions to which the country is a party will be taken into account.

64. Guidelines provide a rational approach for determining environmental category of the Project, the need for public consultation and disclosure, environmental management planning, and resolving involuntary resettlement, indigenous people and gender issues.

65. Activities carried out under the project needs to conform to current laws in Kazakhstan and sound social and environmental principles. In general, the project activities will not trigger serious impacts on physical and human environment.

19 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

III. Description of Project and Alternatives

A. Need and Justification for the Project, and Expected Benefits

66. The Project is part of a road network that has both national and international importance, both in economic and strategic terms. Aktau city, the end point of this part of the CAREC road network, serves as a gateway for trading local oil and oil products to other countries, and acts as a transit hub to distant markets.

67. While upgrading and rehabilitating this road to the intended standards, the concept is to improve business and employment opportunities in Mangystau Oblast, improve economic outlets via the seaport of Aktau, and provide a wider selection of social services in Aktau, Zhetibay, and Shetpe. The underpinning idea for accruing benefits from the rehabilitated and upgraded A380 to higher category is based on the assumption that a higher road category enables improved and safer riding quality and lower vehicle operating costs.

68. Currently, the existing road does not meet conventional international technical road standards; neither does it conform to the national regulatory requirements. The existing road pavement of Tranche 2 has substantial defects over much of its 168 km length. The remaining top structures of the entire Tranche 2 are marred with cracks, rutting, corrugation, deformation, fractured edges, and potholes of various shapes and sizes. The Manata Pass is also considered a prominent „black spot‟ by the local police authorities, known for frequent and severe accidents (personal communication, Traffic Police Chief, Shetpe). The Pass becomes difficult to pass during unfavourable weather or in winter. The rough surface and the intense dust development further contribute to the highly risky driving condition along most of the mentioned road sections. Summing up, the principal structural defects and inadequacies of the existing road of Tranche 2 include:

Steep slopes making many sections impassable or extremely difficult and risky, especially for heavy vehicles, and under rainy or icy conditions; Much of the embankment subgrade does not meet the parameter requirements of the technical specifications for a national motorway of category II; The existing junctions and intersections do not meet technical requirements, and are viewed as 'black spots'; Traffic congestions in Shetpe and Zhetibay due to lack of bypasses; Poor traffic signage all along the entire road corridor; No provision for a local bus transport system.

69. The Projects Feasibility Study as well as social studies' information anticipate a number of positive impacts and benefits attributable to the rehabilitation and full functionality of the Aktau-Beineu Motorway connection, such as:

Promotion of institutional strengthening for the road authorities5

5 The IEE (2010) includes a comprehensive institutional strengthening program for the RC of MOTC, and other relevant institutions. Training schedules were elaborated which included the following topics: - Practical experiences addressing environmental issues related to road construction projects; - Sources, tools and methodologies for impact assessment; - Identification of feasible and practical mitigation measures to encounter potential impacts; - Parameter sampling techniques; - Monitoring techniques, compliance and effect monitoring; - Public Consultation;

20 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Improving the cultural values and demographic values of the regional population Providing job6 and skill development opportunities for local residents to become employed in construction works, ultimately also improving the situation for many jobless people in the region; Alleviation of hindrances and safety risks for the public general due to traffic congestions in Shetpe (and partly in Zhetibay) Participation of local people in technical skill development programs through job opportunities in construction works; thus, the project will directly and indirectly contribute to poverty reduction in the rural areas of Mangystau Oblast; Improvement of the general environmental and safety awareness among both local residents and the work forces; Improvement of the ambient air quality by reducing dust and other harmful emissions due to poor road conditions; Improvement of the overall road safety and driving discipline, not only in this road corridor but nation-wide; Reducing the number of killed and injured people involved in road accidents, and thus reducing the economic burden for medical care expenses. Attracting foreign and national investors to the region, by rendering transport access easier and more economical; Enhance protective measures for rare and endangered species occurring in the protected areas along the road corridor; Improving trade links with neighboring countries, Europe. South and East Asia; Local improvement of the restrained water supply situation; Improvement of public health services, particularly in cases of emergencies after road accidents; Improvement of accessibility to markets, cultural and education facilities; Reducing significantly travel times and personal impediments in this corridor due to better and safer connectivity; Introduction of a regional bus transport service, and possibly outsourcing these enterprises to the private sector; Reducing costs for transporting goods, and for passengers using public transport.

70. The GoK anticipates a number of economic spin-offs from the project and from the improved regional connectivity. Plans until 2015 foresee to develop a net of transportation-logistics centers in the Oblast, new construction of local schools in the new micro-regions along the road, and facilitate the general road transport of bulk goods and minerals via the road towards the seaport of Aktau. In the periphery of Shetpe a new health center has recently opened. In addition, an ambitious power supply network is planned in near future, as well as an extensive housing program (Source of information: Akimat meetings, and MOTC, 2010).

- Reporting requirements and procedures; - Cost estimates for proposed monitoring activities. 6 According to the Feasibility Study this project is likely to create employment for up to 300 local people, which will benefit the livelihood of about 1200 people over a period of 3 years. As for maintenance and winter services for this road, it is assumed that 30-40 local people will find permanent jobs in the coming years.

21 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

B. Identification of the Project and Project Components

71. The Project supports the national and international transport sector in Central Asia, focusing on national networks that are critical and important to economic development. The underlying rationale of the project is to make this specific road larger, technically better, more accessible, more affordable, more efficient, safer and more environmentally friendly. All of the above objectives are concomitant with the political development targets of the Government of the Rep. of Kazakhstan who sets high priority for implementing such infrastructure projects. The capital investment for the rehabilitation of the Beineu-Aktau road totals 97,851 billion Tenge, or 675 million USD (FS, 2010).

72. Figure 3-1 provides an overview of Tranche 2 and its components, such as specific road sections along defined chainages, and the two new bypasses. The map also shows the only surface water crossing the road (Ashyagar, km 755) and the location of the two protected areas.

22 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure 3-1: Overview of Project Components

23 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

C. Scope of Civil Works, and Materials Required

73. The different sections to be rehabilitated will require different quantities of material, depending on the quality and re-use of the existing sub-base (Table 3-1). Based on the designers‟ proposal, the reconstruction works will mainly rely on materials excavated from side reserves along the road alignment (Table 3-2). The designers also have pre-selected a number of licensed quarries off the road alignment that would provide sufficient and suitable materials. None of the future quarry operations is believed to pose environmental problems as long as the Contractors will follow the recommendations given in the EMP, Section 6, and in the Technical Specifications included in the contracts.

Table 3-1: Materials and estimated quantities for the rehabilitation of Tranche Type of Material Unit Quantities m3 large stones, boulders 593 m3 aggregates /crushed stones 598,928 m3 small aggregates, gravel 1,946,133 m3 fine sand 88,936

bitumen t 2,562 m3 concrete 227,950

asphalt-concrete t 1,417,967 [Source: Engineering Consultant Astana LLP, August 2011]

74. For permanent land requirement (e.g. for bypass constructions) a total of approximately 29 hectares will be required (the precise figures can be found in the Project LARP). The construction camps for the civil works will require an allocation of approximately 14 hectares. The exact locations for the Construction Camps will be determined by the Contractor in conjunction with the MCOR. Consultations with MCOR during site visits in 2012 revealed that the recommended locations for constructions camps (the Project will be implemented in two lots, thereby requiring two construction camps) were between Zhetibay and Shetpe. Site surveys of this area revealed a complete lack of any residential, commercial or agricultural lands, thereby reducing any construction camp related socio- environmental impacts. There is also the possibility of siting a camp to the west of Zhetibay, but to reduce potential impacts to Protected Areas, this should not be located within two kilometers of the eastern boundary of the Karagie – Karakol State Game Reserve. 75. 1. Sources for Construction Material

76. Local sources for suitable road-building materials along the construction corridor are shown in the following table:

24 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table 3-2: List of Quarries and Asphalt or Concrete Mixing Plants along the Road Corridor, suitable for obtaining good quality road construction material Type of quarry, Name (“Owner Means of Available Potential Supply, in or plant”). Ch material Status 3 Material thousand m km, side, delivery distance Unpaved 3 > 200,000 m Gravel, "Ustup", road Partly Sand, Supply can be increased 563+300, left 2.7 km to operative gravel, due to extending area 2,7km road from quarry pebble and depth of mining Beineu Unpaved 3 Gravel, > 300,000 m road 100m "Pritrassovoe", Gravel, Supply can be increased to road Pasture km 580+700 – pebble due to extending square from 581+200, Left and depth of mining Beineu Quarry “Janarpinskoe” Open borrow pit Unpaved Mangystau road industrial complex Crushed actually Existing On request, estimated as of road stone adjacent quarry “unlimited supply” construction and gravel to planned materials bypass (Shetpe) >1 km km 644 left, at bypass Quarry Crushed Shetpinskoe Unpaved stone, Open borrow pit road Existing pebble, Unlimited supply LLC “Myrzabek By road or quarry sand Altynas Group” by rail

644right, 97 km Quarry Asphalt "Zhanorpa" Existing road, 89 Sand Unlimited supply Shetpe district, quarry km km 644 Asphalt concrete mix, Asphalt Concrete Asphalt Existing Gravel On request, estimated as Plant of Zhetybai, road, 26 plant mastic “unlimited supply” km 721 km asphalt, bitumen emulsion Sand, Quarry «Tomak» Asphalt sand- Mehstroi LTD, km road, 47 n.a. n.a. gravel 755 km mixture

25 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Quarry “North- 3 171,000 m East” Open Unpaved Sand, Supply can be increased borrow pit № 4 road Existing sand- upon demand by Aktau, km 0,8 km. By quarry gravel extending depth of 773+500 road mixture mining right 0,8 km Quarry “Oskuduk” km Paved 792+700 right – road – 20 Sand- Existing 3 20km km, Aktau gravel 11 million m quarry Aktau/Airport road to mixture Owner – LLC airport “UPP” Mastic Asphalt/Concrete Paved asphalt/, Plant km 800 road Existing concrete On request, estimated as right – 18km access plant mixes, “unlimited supply” Aktau 18 km, bitumen

emulsions [Source: Technical Designers estimates, Engineering Consultants Astana, August 2011]

77. Locations of borrow pits and quarries are provided by the strip maps found in Appendix K.

2. Sources for Technical Water Supply

78. The reconstruction works will require specific amounts of (technical, but salt-free) water, which will be sourced from company owned potable piped water supplies in Aktau and Zhetibay. The permits and approvals for the use of water from these locations can be found in Appendix L. Accordingly, there will be no need to extract technical water from village wells such as the well in Zharmysh, the Prokhlada Spring or the Ashyghar River and there will be no impact to local water users resulting from technical water requirements.

D. Anticipated Schedule of Implementation and Life Span

79. The civil works for Tranche 2 are anticipated to start in early 2013 and shall be completed in late 2015. In specific, the expected period for construction works for the three different sections are:

Sub-section 1: km 719 – 632, a works duration of 28 months Sub-section 2: km 802 – 719, a works duration of 30 months

80. The expected operational life span of the rehabilitated highway is 20 years.

E. Project Layout and Work Components

81. Table 3-3 provides technical information of the project features and components of Tranche 2, and the anticipated quantities:

26 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table 3-3: Technical features for the road rehabilitation project Beineu-Shetpe- Aktau, Tranche 2 Total Length of Tranche 2 168 km Category (KAZ highway category Km 514 - km 719 - II category norms) Km 719 - km 802 - Ib category Calculated permissive velocity 120 km / h Width subgrade 28,5 and 15 m Width of the carriageway (2x7, 2x3 and 5m, 75m) Hard shoulder width 0,75 m Width of RoW 2 x 3, 75m Width of central strip (2 lanes) 6 m Smallest radius of curves 800 m Design of road surfacing Asphalt pavement , and asphalt- concrete in the location of Manata Pass Intersection / interchange Three intersections at: km 644, South start point of Shetpe bypass km 719, South of Zhetibay (roundabout) km 746, West of Aktau Intersections with railways, leveled 2 pcs. at kms 632, and 720, Intersecting roads of regional Intersections with secondary roads - importance 71 pcs Reconstruction of bridges - small and One at km 755 (Ashyagar Creek) medium-sized One at km 635 (Re) construction of reinforced culverts 98 pcs. of different diameter (1.0, 1.5 (single or double) and 2.5 m) Animal passages for herds 5 pcs. between Aktau and Zhetibay 5 pcs. between Zhetibay and Shetpe Bypasses (2) At Zhetibay, (8 km), and a Shetpe (9 km) Street lighting Wherever the road passes settlements and intersections Safety Barriers 154 km in section km 719-802 48 km in section km 632-719 Replaceable protection fences 0.32 km in section km 719-802 Livestock protection fences 1.82 km in section km 719-802 8.30 km in section km 632-719 Noise protection walls 2.70 km in section km 632-719 (at Shetpe bypass) Rest / picnic places (t.b.d.) Bus stops with sidewalks and toilets 26 pcs. (AP-6 type) [Source: Engineering Center Astana, communication August 2011]

F. Analysis of Alternatives

1. Alternative Transport Modes

82. The rehabilitated road will provide suitable connectivity for transporting goods by road between the Caspian seaport town of Aktau and Atyrau, a hub linking Kazakhstan with

27 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 the Russian Federation and further on with Europe. Alternatives that might be considered include those related to alternative routes, railways or air travel and transport. Given the importance which the GoK attributes to improve this road connectivity, the PEIA (2010) reflects the conclusion encountered in all meetings held during this EIA process, that there are currently no technical and economical appealing alternative solutions other than the proposed Project. The economic analysis undertaken in May 2010 by ADB's Transport Economist also came to the conclusion, that the cost-benefit ratio of this project would justify proceeding with the Project, and that alternate modes of transport are not viable at the moment. This assessment came to the conclusion to rule out a railway as a viable alternative, as this would not provide a competitive and viable alternative to the road, for both goods and passenger transport. In this context it also needs to be taken into consideration that the local authorities plan to promote and expand a full bus service between the settlements linking between Aktau and Beineu once the road will be fully rehabilitated (MOTC, pers. communication).

83. There is no air transport infrastructure available within the entire corridor of this CAREC Region that could accomplish economically viable alternatives to road transport. Aktau International Airport, the only large airport in Mangystau, has no cargo facilities that could cope with the type and amount of goods that are, at present and in near future, transported over land. A major obstacle for transporting goods by air cargo is that there is a high daily charge for cargo storage. Custom clearance procedures at Aktau Airport take 2-3 days and are complicated. The other air connection in the region, Beineu, has only a small airstrip with almost no auxiliary facilities.

84. Although being of growing importance for the regional traffic, the sea transport routes are not posing an alternative to land connectivity to reach other destinations in Central and East Asia. At the time of inquiry it was affirmed that passenger ferries departing from Aktau to reach neighboring destinations across the Caspian Sea are limited.

2. Alternative Alignments

85. The Environmental Team consulted MCOR to find out conclusive arguments for the actual alignment selection, and reasons to reject some alternatives: The decision 7 to rehabilitate the Beineu-Aktau road while passing through the oil fields region near the settlement of Zhetibay is economically motivated, recognizing the anticipated economic and development potential of this important region. The oil fields of Zhetibay and a steady increasing population in this area may have acted as main drive to link this hub via the newly rehabilitated road. The direct existing road connection between Shetpe and Aktau (via Aktau Airport) has been disfavored due to technical and economic reasons, as this road is relatively narrow and winding through partly mountainous terrain. The chosen alignment via Zhetibay, however, passes through predominantly flat terrain, with no major obstacles for road widening measures.

86. The selected alternatives for both bypass solutions were screened for their anticipated benefits, potential impacts and technical feasibility. Given the forecast traffic volume for this road, the Feasibility Study came to the conclusion that the selected variants for bypasses for both Shetpe and Zhetibay would benefit best the environmental conditions of the two settlements, easing traffic congestion, accident risks and local air/noise pollution impacts.

3. Technical Alternatives

7 Decision made following the recommendations of the Feasibility Study, 2008

28 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

87. Several technical alternatives were considered and have been incorporated into the Project design, they include the incorporation of adequate fencing along the proposed animal underpasses and the solution for using an asphalt top layer in sections which are exposed to extreme climatic conditions and tear and wear caused by heavy loaded trucks. It was therefore recommended that cement-concrete or concrete top layers with bituminous treated base be used in this location. Such alternative solution would be likely to withstand the anticipated vehicular impacts better, and would not pose additional safety risks. Similarly, other sections in hilly and steep environment would also call for a more rigid pavement with enhanced heavy-duty surfacing. The suggested alternatives would also reduce repair and maintenance costs.

4. The "No-Project" Alternative

88. This alternative can equally be ruled out for the following reasons:

Accepting the MFF Program as the most reasonable alternative, and appreciating the strategy and political decision of the GoK, it appears that there is no such "No-Project" alternative. Such decision would be neither welcome by the official partners, nor be prudent in the light of the preparative work undertaken to improve and expand the national road network, aiming to good connectivity to abroad markets at the earliest time possible. It is appreciated that good road connectivity is the key to economic development and reduction of poverty. A "No-Project" alternative would therefore be regarded as counter-productive to such goals. Moreover, there is no viable competitor to the 188.000 km network of Kazakhstan‟s roadways. The former analysis of a Transport Economist contracted by ADB (May 2010) came to the conclusion, that the cost-benefit ratio of this project would justify proceeding, hence, there would also be no justification to adopt a "no go" alternative for this project;

89. The "No-Project" alternative has been determined not to be in the interest of Kazakhstan and its people, and therefore has been rejected.

29 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

IV. Description of the Environment

A. Physical Environment

90. The described parameters relating to the environmental conditions of the Project Area are based on local records, information material provided by local authorities and site visits to the Project Area.

1. Climate

91. The meteorological conditions 8 of the Project Area are characterized by a pronounced continental climate pattern. Typical for vast desert and semi-desert zones, the main climatic features are (moderately) cold winters and hot summer periods, with high daily temperature fluctuations and annual amplitudes.

92. The mean annual temperature in the region is +9.6 С°. Absolute maximum values of air temperatures above 50С° may occur in July-August, while absolute minimum temperatures reaching -30°C to -34С° in January in the section between Shetpe and Sai Utes.

93. The amount of precipitation usually does not exceed 150 mm per year. Precipitation mainly falls as rain, and during winter, less pronounced, as snowfall. Complete snow cover of large areas is usually lasting only for few weeks during winter time (Jan.-March). Thus driving conditions in this road sections are, from climatic point of view, relatively good throughout the entire year. The low amount of precipitation in the Project Area results in extreme dryness during the summer months. However, the long duration of the warm period is favorable for carrying out civil works during most times of the year.

94. The main wind directions in winter and summer are from eastward and south- eastward directions. Hail, snow and sand storms are rare. Climatic data including wind roses can be found in Appendix C.

2. Air Quality

95. Air quality within the Project Area should be discussed under two separate headings as follows:

Urban Locations – Within the urban areas of Aktau, Zhetibay and Shetpe dust is a common problem that results from the soil and climatic conditions of the region. Consultations with villagers in Zhetibay revealed that they did not feel that dust from construction activities would impact upon them significantly, due to the fact that the existing naturally induced dust issues were considerably more of a problem than construction could ever be. They also noted that construction would be occurring in bypass locations outside of the village, thereby reducing further dust impacts to villagers. Notwithstanding the above, they still welcomed the idea that dust suppression methods would be used during construction. The fact that the Project bypasses these two urban locations also reduces the potential air quality impacts associated with vehicle emissions. Table 4-1 below was extracted from the PEIA undertaken in 2010 and shows calculated ambient air quality. Elevated levels of NOx can be observed, but as stated above these impacts are reduced by the location of the bypasses.

8 The meteorological information recorded for the Project Area is based on long-term records taken by meteo- stations Tuchibek, Duken, and Aktau (3).

30 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Rural Locations – More than 90% of the road is uninhabited steppe. Dust impacts and air quality issues will not play any significant role in these areas.

Table 4-1: Calculated Ambient Air Quality within 10 and 50 m from Road Shoulder; (all units in mg/m³) Kazakhstan 10 m distance 50 m distance Environmental from road from road Parameter modeled Standard Limits shoulder shoulder Carbon Monoxide 3.0 2.44 1.11 Oxides of Nitrogen 0.04 0.51 0.07 Hydrocarbons 1.5 0.29 0.10 Soot (TSP) 0.15 0.036 0.016 [Source: PEIA Study of KAZDORPROJECT, 2010; calculations based on CREDO Model estimates]

96. Air quality baseline measurements were conducted in the urban and rural locations of the Tranche 2 in September 2011 as detailed in Appendix I. Among parameters measured were carbon monoxide (СО), nitrogen oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), hydrocarbons (СН), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and suspended particles. It was found that no one parameter exceeds the maximum allowable concentrations of any test locations.

3. Topography, Geology and Soils

97. The geomorphologic terrain where the road corridor for Tranche 2 is located is the Pre-Ustyurt (region close to the Caspian Sea) and, to lesser extent, the While the first is composed of Meso-Kaenoziocum sediments containing larger amounts of shelly limestone and clay deposits, the latter is older, with different limestone and marl formations. The Ustyurt Plateau has a marked number of erosion-formed canyons sometimes exceeding the depth of 200 m.

98. In geological terms, the surface soils mainly consist of brown and gray-brown desert soil types (Figure 4-1). Topsoils are generally poor in humus. Salt crusts often appear at the soil surfaces. In the entire road corridor there are deposits of quaternary age, covering deposits of few tens of meters close to the surface. Among the quaternary deposits there are a variety of alluvial deposits of sand (from silt to gravel), sandy loam and clay. All such soil types provide suitable and nearby material sources for road construction works.

99. On the territory of the Oblast there are rich deposits of various underground minerals and ores. In the beginning of 1950s, lucrative deposits of uranium and rare earth elements were discovered. Reserves of minerals are generally unique by their variety, deposit thickness, and relative easy access for exploitation. The region‟s richness in mineral deposits determines to large extent the economic prosperity and development.

31 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure 4-1: Regional Soils Map

4. Seismicity

100. Although the geological thematic map below shows two tectonic lines converging South-East of the town of Shetpe (Figure 4-2), the seismic zoning expertise quoted by the PEIA denominates the entire area as 'seismically inactive'. On the other hand, seismic events up to grade 5 on the open Richter scale have been recorded near Shetpe during the past decades (Mangystau Territorial Department of Environment under the Ministry of Environmental Protection Aktau, pers. communication). The Projects Technical Design experts also believe that seismicity is not really a concern for this road construction project, arguing that the only locations for bridges are far away from the above identified tectonic faults.

Figure 4-2: Main Tectonic Lines

5. Surface Waters

101. Along the entire road corridor only one perennial surface water course can be observed; the Ashyagar Creek (km 755). A bridge, approximately 30 meters in length crosses the river, which dries out during extreme hot summer months. The bridge will be replaced as part of Project works. Current plans envisage that the river will not be used as a source of technical water for the Project. The Project Road also crosses a small canal at km 635 and a bridge 15 meters in length will be constructed over this canal, which at the time of site visits in October 2012 was empty.

32 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure 4-3: Ashyagar Creek

6. Ground Water - Quantity and Quality

102. Groundwater is generally available only from medium to deep aquifers, which is exploitable at certain locations located throughout the Road Corridor (Figure 4-4). This groundwater is often saline and there are currently no plans to extract ground water for Project use. The Prokhlada Spring can be found at km 750 approximately 300 meters to the north of the road. The small spring provides a very limited water supply and will not be used by the Project. In addition, spring water can be found at Zharmysh village in small quantities. There is no permit or agreement to extract water from this source and it is unlikely that the Project will use water from this location.

103. Total technical water use in Sub-sections 1 & 2 will be 1,446,770 m3 for the entire construction period (30 months). As stated in Section 3, above, this technical water will be sourced from piped potable supplies from Aktau and Zhetibay. Tanker trucks will deliver water from the pipelines to the relevant construction sites. This may require an additional 15- 20 truck movements on the road per day, this is not considered a volume that will significantly increase noise, air quality, etc. The fact that this water is potable mitigates the issue of potentially saline technical water. Notwithstanding this issue, the PMC should undertake periodic tests to ensure that salinity levels for technical water stays below 3,000 milligrams per litre. It may however be above this limit for dust suppression, on the condition that spraying is limited to construction areas.

104. In addition to technical water, there will also be the requirement for potable water and water for washing, cleaning, etc at construction camps (temporary and permanent). Potable water will be provided by five liter bottles of spring/mineral water. Other potable water supplies exist at the locations below (Table 4-2) but it is unlikely that they will be used as

33 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 drinking water. The Contractor is responsible for locating sites for other non-technical water and he may choose the locations identified within Table 4.2 subject to obtaining appropriate permits and agreements. Based on a formula provided by the feasibility study (the formula assumes a daily water use per capita of 0.013m3 per day), and assuming that one construction camp has a staff of 300 (based on figures discussed with the existing Contractor on Tranche 1), approximately 3.9m3 of water will be required per day for each construction camp (assuming two, one for each Lot).

Table 4-2: Potential Potable Water Supplies along Tranche 2 Water Supply Type of Water Quality Location at Distance to Specification Points: Ch km Highway access

Quality of the water Zharmysh km 616+700 asphalt conforms to GOST village, spring 2.5 km +concrete 2761-84 and GOST water to the left 2874-82

Quality of the water km 675+500 conforms to GOST Bekee village 0.5 km earth road to the right 2761-84 and GOST 2874-82

34 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure 4-4: Regional Water Sources

105. The Project Area is characterized by short but intensive periods of rainfall. In such circumstances there is a risk that runoff storm water may cause local soil contamination of the embankment areas with , phenol and possibly other harmful substances. With the exception of the bridge location over the Ashyagar River and the bridge at km 635, storm water runoff does not flow directly into streams or other surface waters and will gradually percolate into the soil and possibly into a groundwater aquifer. During this process, however, it is likely that the sandy and clayey sub-sediments will absorb almost all such substances. Therefore it is predicted that the deep groundwater aquifers will not be significantly affected.

7. Noise

106. Noise monitoring was undertaken at three locations during October 2011:

Manta-Ata Monument Near to Shetpe Near to the Hospital, Central Street, Zhetibay

107. The results (see Appendix I) allow the following conclusions: Nowhere at the tested locations does the current noise level exceed the allowable standard norm levels of RoK. Equally, the obtained results exceeded anywhere at any time the allowable maximum noise level (GOST 12.1.003-83 Noise General Safety Requirements). 108. However, with the possible increase of traffic pressure on the motor road, connecting with growth of traffic volume after reconstruction of the road, and also with the likely technical modifications of transportation vehicles in the future these limit levels might be met. On the other hand, mitigation technical measures, better road surfaces and speed limits may positively reduce the local on the noise development.

35 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

109. However, since the monitoring was undertaken several issues have come to light that reduce the potential impacts to less than significant:

The initially identified spots where noise could play a negative role (Zhetibay: Central Hospital) are now out of concern due to the incorporation of the bypass round Zhetibay which passes through uninhabited steppe and pasture terrain. The spot where noise could have played a significant role is the location of the Primary School in Shetpe bypass (location km 630). However, this risk is no longer valid, as the school will be removed before construction work starts. In addition, noise barriers will also be located in this area where residential properties will be affected. The bypass around Shetpe ensures that the Project will not have significant noise impacts within Shetpe.

110. No other sensitive noise receptors have been identified within the Project Area.

B. Biological Resources

1. Ecological Zones, and Characteristic Vegetation

111. Due to the low precipitation, high evaporation rates and relative high salt concentration in surface soils the capacity for continual vegetation cover is limited all along the road corridor. Desert shrubs and grassy plants rarely reach a height exceeding 20 cm (e.g. Photos 7, 9, 16 Appendix H). The rather sparse steppe vegetation is dominated by the wormwood, where Anabasis salsa is the dominant species. Other plant species often form small biological complexes with the wormwood. Grasses are rarely occurring.

112. The road corridor for Tranche 2 lies in different ecological macro-zones which are classified as follows:

i. Very low ecological value: Rather common zone in the coastal parts of the Project Area, with almost no records for rare or endemic plants. Mostly desert and semi-desert, sometimes patched with salty crusts, this eco-zone harbors a high portion of halophytic (salt-tolerant) plants9. Depressions and basins below sea level are common geomorphologic features of these zones, such as the vast Karagie-Karakol Depression between Zhetibay and Aktau. ii. Low ecological value: Generally ascribed as all terrains on the Ustyurt Plateau, i.e. steppe and semi-desert terrain, with no or few endemic plants. Most of the road corridor continuing to Beineu after Sai Utes falls under this zoning category. Humus is rather thin or completely absent in case where salt crusts reach the soil surfaces. Plant associations, like localized deciduous shrub communities developing around wormwoods and sagebrush are characterized by a variety of lichens and sageworts. Wherever the terrain profile show small depressions or at places where soil erosion has left small trenches, salt cedars, also known as tamarisks, develop small groves and represent refuges for local bird life. iii. High value biotopes: Kazakhstani botanists include under this category a number of habitats that are characterized by occurrence of rare and endangered species, or form a „complex‟ of highly specialized plants and animals. Such communities typically develop in the vicinity of the unique by limestone cliffs or deep erosion ravines or tectonic canyons (Photos 14, 15, 16, 19, Appendix H). Sagebrush communities and a variety of ornamental

9 Typical and predominant plants are wormwoods and sagebrush (Artemisia sp.), saltworts (Anabasis salsa, Salsola arbusculiformis and S. orientalis), small shrubs (Calligonum polygonoides) and salt cedars (Tamarix).

36 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

plants10 dominate such habitats, together with wormwoods and sedges and other grassy plants. Such places may also include a number of small tree species adapted to dry conditions, such as Buckthorn, sand acacias and tamarisks11. Due to the presence of various grassy and other forage plants, these habitats are also preferred grazing grounds for nomadic shepherds. In ecological terms, such highly structured biotopes are important habitats as stopover sites for migrant birds.

2. Flora and Fauna, Rare and Endangered Species in the Project Area

113. Flora. The area where the road corridor Aktau – Shetpe - Beineu is located, is dominated by perennial saltworts (62%) - Anabasis salsa, Salsola arbusculiformis, Nanophyton erinaceum, Salsola orientalis, and by wormwood - species such as Artemisia terrae-albae, and A. turanica. On sands substrates, common are halophytes, mainly species of the genus Haloxylon (Haloxylon aphyllum, N. persica); otherwise, characteristic are psammophilous (sand-loving) bushes and shrubs are abundant, among them Calligonum, Ephedra, Ammodendron, Ceratoides papposa, Salsola arbuscula) and wormwood (Artemisia santolina, A. kelleri, A. songarica, A. terrae-albae). Sturdy grasses such as Agropyron fragile, Stipa caspia, and S. hohe-nackeriana occur in communities on the sandy elevations. The latter plant communities are also typically found in sandy depressions, for instance in the Karagiye-Karakolsky Depression.

114. The western parts of Tranche 2 corridor is a part of the Southern Desert, occupying therein the southern parts of the Ust-Urt and Kyzyl Kum. Prevailing soil layers are gray- brown sediments. Such periods are only short-termed, and the freeze layer does not reach great depths. Accordingly the plant communities adapt to such conditions. These areas are also characterized by a sharp increase in heat and dryness, with sometimes strong diurnal fluctuations. The Southern Desert is dominated by shrubs and bushes, with varying species compositions. Predominant plant communities are composed of Salsola gemmascens and wormwood Artemisia kemrudica, and A. diffusa. Of minor importance are plant communities associated with Salsola arbusculiformis, A. terrae-albae, typical for northern and central . On freshly developed sand patches A. dimoana, as well as Mausolea eriocarpa grow.

115. The latter species form a community of sand-loving shrubs and „shrubs under shrubs‟, such as Ammodendron, Atraphaxis, Astragalus and a variety of small grasses (Echinops ritro, Eurphorbia seguieriana, Syrenia siliculosa), found all along the road corridor. On patches with less cohesive sandy surface Artemisia tschernieviana is usually abundant, on patches where surface sands are frequently blown away, In such habitats, the typical plant is known as Kiyak (Leymus racemosus).

116. The Map D-1 shows the ecological basis for relatively high occurrence of micro- habitats, and correspondingly high biodiversity, both reflected in plant and animal species.

10 e.g. Siberian Peashrub (Caragana grandiflora), bindweeds (Convolvulus sp.), knotweeds (Atraphaxis sp.), tumbleweeds (Salsola sp.) tulips and small lilies. 11 Among them is a highly endangered species, the Androsow Salt Cedar (Tamarix androssovii)

37 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Map D-1: Vegetation Zones of Mangystau Oblast Project Area

117. Fauna. The Desert Zones surrounding the Caspian Sea are reported to be inhabited by 56 species of mammals, 278 species of birds and 18 species of amphibians and reptiles. Many species are classified as rare and endangered and therefore require special protective measures. Among them, 7 species of mammals, 36 species of birds and 1 species of reptiles are listed in the Red Book of Kazakhstan. Among hunted animals, the Saiga Antelope has a significant position in the national hunting customs.

118. Mammals. The ground-dwelling coastal fauna of the Caspian Sea shore regions is also rather diverse and includes 56 species, of which 7 species of rare and endangered in the Red Data Book of Kazakhstan. The latter category includes species like fox, steppe polecat, wolf, saiga, and the Eversmann hamster. In total, more than 30 species are common in the region, and the rest in a small number found in the desert landscapes in the wider Caspian region. There are also some endemic species recorded, such as the long- spined hedgehog, the Ustyurt mountain sheep, sandstone rabbit, honey-eater, and the Caspian seal.

119. Of the commercially used / hunted species the most common are: red fox, steppe polecat and the Saiga Antelope. Other species, being rarer and confined to local habitats, include wild boar, otter and raccoon dog.

38 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

120. Avifauna. In general, the Ustyurt desert region is characterized by a fairly large number of birdlife 12 : Among the prominent predatory and larger species are: Zmeed (Circaetus gallicus), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), buzzard (Buteo rufinus), steppe eagle (Aquila nipalensis), vulture (Neophron percnopterus), saker falcon (Falco cherrug), Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni) , stone partridge (Alectoris chukar), bustard (Chlamydotis undulata), avdotkat (Burhinus oedicnemus), bolsheklyuvy plover (Charadrius leschenaultii), Caspian plover (Charadrius asiaticus), turtle dove (Streptopelia turtur), black sandgrouse (Pterocles orientalis), and common owl (Bubo bubo).

121. Among the insect-eaters, notable bird species are: white-breasted swift (Apus melba), green bee-eater (Merops superciliosus), desert raven (Corvus ruflcollis), desert jeer (Hippolais languida), southern chat (Hippolais rama), desert warbler (Sylvia nana), skototserka (Scotocercs inquiela), Black-necked Finch (Oenanthe finschii), Spanish wheatear (Oenanthe hispanica), desert wheatear (Oenanthe deserti), Bactrian nightingale (Erythropygia galactotes), dun reel (Rhodospiza obsoleta), and various larks (Galerida cristata, Eremophila alpestris, Melanocorypha bimaculata, Calandrella brachydactyla,). Along the Caspian Sea shores, the whooper swan (C.rufescens) is a common sight.

Figure 4-5: Karakie – Karakol State Game Reserve

3. Sensitive Habitats and Protected Areas

122. KKSGR Overview. The Karagie-Karakol State Game Reserve (IUCN Category 4) is located in Karakiyanskiy and Munaylinsky Districts of Mangystau Oblast. The Reserve occupies the whole area of the Karagiye depression, the Aschy River valley, as well as maritime costal zones south of the city of Aktau (Karakol Lake). For about 32 km its northern boundary run parallel to the National Highway A380 running from Aktau in direction of

12 Source: http://www.birds.kz

39 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Zhetibay. The area of the reserve amounts to 137,500 hectares of which 25.500 ha are classified as agricultural land (see Table 4-3), while the rest is public land without any assigned functional zoning use, but just protected land. The location of the Reserve is shown in Figure 4-5.

Table 4-3: Area of Karagie Karakol State Game Reserve Areal extent: Agricultural lands Government, public District Square within the reserve( in reserve land Administration thousand ha thousand ha) thousand ha Munailinsky 2.5 Rayon Karakiyansky 23.0 Rayon Total 137.5 25.5 112

123. Karakol Lake – is an artificial lake with numerous islands, located in 40 km to the south of Aktau. It is a part of Karagie – Karakol Game Reserve since 1986. In 2007, it became an Important Bird Area.

124. The Reserve is regarded as part of a national network of reserves in the region of the Ustyurt Desert. The area is a legally established State Natural Sanctuary of national importance, described as “Zoological Reserve”. It has been created by the Council of Ministers of the Kazakh SSR № 96 dated 13.03.1986, following the Government Resolution № 877 from 27.06.2001, the Government Resolution № 746 from 19.07.2005, and the Government Resolution № 1074 of 10.11.2006. The duration of its protection status is unlimited.

125. Flora. The main vegetation in the Reserve are anabasis-salsa associations with Artemisia spp., ephemerals, Salsola spp. and strips of bushes – Tamarix, Haloxylon (Saxaul) and Eurotia. Approximately 20 species of plants of which 4 Red Book listed are reported inhabit the Reserve. The passport of the Reserve mentions the following indicator flora species (those defining condition of the Reserve‟s flora):

Crataegus ambigua Artemísia sp. Halimodendron halodendron Kochia

126. Fauna. Within the Reserve there are a large number of and animal (300) species, of which 24 animal species are included in the Red Book of Kazakhstan. Most of the rare and endangered animals are large predatory birds and rare shore birds near the Caspian. Key species inhabiting the Karagie – Karakol Game Reserve are shown in Table 4.3 and Table 4-4.

Table 4-3: Key Mammal Species inhabiting Karagie Karakol Reserve Species IUCN 3.1 Kazakhstan Red Book 1999 Manul cat (Felis manul) Near threatened Listed Desert lynx (Lynx caracal), Least concern Listed Goitered gazelle (Gazella Vulnerable Listed subgutturosa) Arkal (Ovis orientalis arkal) Vulnerable Listed Table 4-4: Key Bird Species inhabiting Karagie Karakol Reserve

40 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Species IUCN 3.1 Kazakhstan Red Book 1999 Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) Endangered listed Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus listed gallicus) Least concern Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) Least concern listed MacQueen's Bustard (Chlamydotis - listed macqueenii) Black-bellied Sandgrouse (Pterocles Least concern listed orientalis) Eurasian Eagle-Owl (Bubo bubo) Lest concern listed

127. The Karagie – Karakol State Game Reserve is currently not well recognizable for road users passing by this area. Specific signboards and markings are absent, and at the pass section km 755 the Reserve is in a poor condition as portions of the roadside slopes are littered with rubbish, in particular, for old tires scattered over the canyons (photo 3, Appendix H). The project shall therefore aim, in close collaboration with the responsible agencies (MoA/CFH), to assist in compelling measures to better and more effective protection of this site. The EMP provides a number of provisions and recommendations to meet such objectives.

128. Responsibilities. The Protection of this Reserve is assigned directly to the Mangystau Oblast Authority for Protected Areas, in Zhanaozhen, which also manages "Ustyurt" State Reserve, under the Committee of Forestry and Hunting (CFH), an agency administratively subordinated to the Ministry of Agriculture. At present, the CFH does not engage in regular controlling or patrolling the area. Due to lack of funds, there are no specific tourist spots (viewpoints) developed, and no specific signboards or waste collection management is in place. There is hardly any public information (leaflets, brochures) available at Aktau to serve as basic information source for interested visitors.

C. Socio-economic Conditions

1. Demography and Settlements

129. With a total of about 450,000 people Mangystau Oblast is the least populated region in Kazakhstan, with an average of two people per km³. Every second person of the Oblast lives in urban settlements most of them in the seaport city of Aktau (165,000 inhabitants), Zhetibay (11,600), Shetpe (13,000)13. As for selected socio-economic data for the Project Rayons, reference is made to Appendix E. The demographic structure in all rayons passed by the project road Tranche 2 is rather dynamic due to a distinct exodus trend from rural areas. The rate of urban growth is therefore significantly higher than in rural areas. For example, Aktau founded only 40 years ago, and is now the largest city in the Oblast. On the contrary, the vast steppe lands of Ustyurt Plateau are extremely sparsely inhabited by permanent settlements.

2. Ethnic and Religious Groups

130. Ethnic groups in the sense of indigenous minorities who preserve their own cultural system and habits do not exist in the Project Area. All ethnic immigrants (partly from remote regions of the former , partly being deported during World War II and afterwards, such as and German descendents, partly those originating from Turkmenistan14)

13 Source: Statistical Bureau of Mangystau, Aktau (2011) 14 Turkmen immigrants in the late 50‟s are said to have founded Shetpe, while Sai Utes was established during World War 2 as a prisoner camp site.

41 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 have been fully integrated in the Kazakh society, and do not live in ethnic enclaves. There are no longer classical nomads wandering over the steppe with large herds of camels and horses.

131. Historically and currently, the region is inhabited by a variety of ethnic origins, such as Kazakh (89%), Russian (8%), Turkmen, and (1.5%), Ukrainian (0.8%), (0.3%) and other minor but well-integrated groups, totaling 2.3%. The latter group includes descendants or deported people from Caucasian countries, Byelorussia, Korea and Germany.

132. The large majority (about 85%) of local residents, both urban and rural, are Muslims. Minor ethnic groups have their particular beliefs being orthodox, catholic and Jewish.

3. Quality of Life Values

133. Daily life in the settlements within the Project Area is harsh and modeled by the severity of the environment. Most households have no proper heating system, no piped drinking water, use outdoor pit privies, and in winter there is no service for snow cleaning or maintenance of the communal dirt roads. Education and health facilities are limited. Recreational facilities are absent along the road alignment. Life quality is also severely affected by numerous diseases and ailments typical for that region, as indicated in Table E-1 of Appendix E. Mangystau is characterized by significant high rate of divorce rate, with almost every fifth marriage becoming separated during the past six years.

134. As a consequence of the shortcomings and economic setbacks, poverty is a commonplace in the region. The official statistics mentions 49 rural in Mangystau Oblast, most of them ranked as „poor‟. Appendix E gives further information on related social parameters and poverty issues.

4. Public Health Conditions and Common Diseases

135. Due to low living and life quality standards, limited health services in some areas, and rather uniform diets people‟s health conditions are generally poor in almost all rural areas of Mangystau Oblast. Information available from 2007 and 2008 indicate a high infant mortality, being about 1.7% for infants during their first year of life.

136. According to local health administration services (S.Shakirova, pers. communication) Mangystau Oblast has an extremely high maternal and infant mortality, being 74.4 per thousand women giving birth15. Maternal mortality rates are in some locations reported to exceed 50%. Main causes for such incidence among pregnant women and children under five are related to anemia, respiratory ailments and acute intestinal infections (Appendix E).

137. The number of hospitalized patients, as well as the number of visits to outpatient organizations in 2007 decreased compared to 2005. The number of physicians of different types of specialization increased in 2008 compared with 2005 from 1.189 to 1.586 people (Table E-2, Appendix E). The health information obtained from various sources during former field surveys in 2010 indicate a number of ailments common under such conditions, like high incidents of tuberculosis, high blood pressure, intestinal disorders and sexually transmitted diseases. There is a significant high incidence of sexually transmitted diseases (Syphilis) in some rural areas such as Sai Utes. In this context it needs to be noted that official data concerning HIV/AIDS were not provided.

15 In sharp contrast, the national average is only 31.2 per thousand women dying in childbirth.

42 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

138. It appears that the official statistical disclosed data for road accident victims are highly underestimated, according to the (verbal) information obtained from road traffic police units. The relative high number of death incidents recorded in the official statistics, especially those attributable to „poisoning‟ could not been explained.

5. Gender Issues

139. The statistical data sources for Mangystau Oblast (2010) are not segregated in a manner that would allow specific gender information, although women make up a major portion particular in rural areas, which account for 47.3% of the entire population of the region. An example for the shortcoming of no gender-specific information is reflected in the numbers of employment/unemployment which refer to men only. Gender inequities seem to be a common taboo within Kazakh communities, while such inequities seem common in the distribution of the family budget. On the other hand, decisions of spending family resources remain the domain of women (S.Sharikova, pers. communication).

140. UNDP reports that social services are gender-biased, less efficient and have fewer funds available during the past years16. At least in rural areas of Mangystau, there seem little change to that situation.

141. Gender inequities are particularly transparent when comparing salaries or participation in higher education. Data available indicate that the average nominal salary for women is about half when engaged in comparable jobs for men. Avoidance of such inequities needs duly be observed in work contracts foreseen in the planned road rehabilitation activities.

142. No specific information could be retrieved for the percentage of women who live below minimum existence level. Rural women constitute a group with higher poverty risk (UNDP, 2002), and they prevail as recipients of state social allowances. Reasons for the low availability of funds for women being classified as poor, particularly married women in rural areas of Mangystau, are assessed by UNDP (loc.cit.) as:

General inaccessibility for women to well-paid jobs, and national cuts in budgets for social services, formerly a female domain; Limited opportunities for selling agricultural or homestead gardening products -commonly a marketing domain of women; This lack of opportunities is significantly caused by poor road connectivity and absence of a reliable bus transport system; Limited opportunities for employment in food and catering business (e.g. lack of cafes and restaurants alongside the road); Over-occupation with household works and care for children17; Heavy burden with respect to medical care, as such services are limited in some rural areas; Restricted access and benefits from social services; Lack of awareness of people‟s legal rights in a man-dominated society.

143. On the other hand, women in Kazakhstan have the reputation of better abilities to overcome institutional, social and cultural barriers, and commonly develop better tactics for the family‟s survival than men. Women are also appearing less in statistical records accounting for alcoholism, drugs, violence and other criminal acts. Yet, women, particularly young rural girls in remote areas of Kazakhstan, are increasingly targeted by human

16 UNDP, 2002. “Development of Rural Areas in Kazakhstan – Problems and Perspectives” National Report on Human Development 17 More that 10,000 mothers in Mangystau have four or more children

43 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 traffickers and get involved in prostitution 18 , often linked to highway development and facilities as points of transmission for STDs (e.g. at prominent transit crossover points in Beineu).

6. Land-uses and Agricultural Activities

144. Agricultural land-uses are limited in the entire road corridor due to the harsh environmental conditions and the general lack of suitable water for irrigation. Groundwater tables are mostly deep, and quality is poor due to salt intrusion. Agricultural cropland is nowhere recorded or visible along the entire road. In the vicinity of homes adjacent to the newly planned bypasses (Shetpe and Zhetibay) there are few instances where simple homestead gardens are developed within the fenced boundaries of private properties, as much as local water sources from hand pump wells allow a modest growth of plants. Almost all fruits and vegetables consumed in the rural areas along the road corridor need to be imported.

145. The prevailing non-industrial land-use is cattle grazing, as there is almost unlimited terrain of steppe. However, in most instances the quality and availability of pasture land and fodder plants is low (photos 7, 8, Appendix H). In the Zhetibay region, the prevailing form of land-use is dedicated to the exploration of oil and gas resources (photo 5, Appendix H). Within Karagie – Karakol State Game Reserve approximately 25.5 thousand hectares of agricultural land belong to farmers who are involved in nature protection.

7. Markets and Economically Active Sections of Population

146. Market structures, such as public markets or food stalls where food, drinks, vegetables and fruits are sold are seen in small numbers outside Aktau City. In contrast to the vast pasture and livestock resource, there are relative few milk products available on local markets. Bread is baked locally in all settlements along the road, but staple goods commonly are transported to site via Aktau. Local markets have no whatsoever luxury item to offer. Cell phones are on sale throughout all places.

147. As for the economically active part of the population in Mangystau, the statistical data show that the majority of people (39%) are employed in the industrial sector (mainly oil and mining) and in the general service sector (57%). Unemployment rate is particularly high in rural areas where no mineral industries are nearby. The relative low number of persons (5%) actively involved in the agriculture sector indicates the low income opportunities associated with farming and livestock rising, as discussed in the previous section.

8. Housing Development and Communication Facilities

148. Considerable increase in housing construction volume is planned for the next years all over the Mangystau Oblast, focusing on expansion of the existing urban areas: In 2008, 467,600 m² of housing facilities on lease basis were commissioned. Facilities for modern communication are mainly restricted to urban households. The statistical bureau provides information as shown in Table E-6, Appendix E. Meanwhile, almost every second urban resident has cell phone, TV and PC. No data are available for rural areas, although the use of cell phones and signal coverage seems good all over Mangystau Oblast.

9. Water Supply, Sewerage, and Waste Facilities

149. The local residents of the major settlements along the road obtain their drinking water from local wells and boreholes. Outside of Aktau city, piped water is an almost non-

18 ADB, 2006. Kazakhstan - Country Gender Assessment

44 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 existing commodity in rural areas, with the exception of the private company pipelines (Kaztransoil, MAEK-Kazatomprom, TVS). In Shetpe, tank trucks import drinking water over a distance of 80-120 km from sources in Mangishlak. The Sanitary and Epidemiology Units of Shetpe (pers. communication) estimated that only half of the rural population along this road corridor does avail safe water in their homes. In many areas artesian groundwater of rather poor quality is the primary source of drinking water. About 90 % of the rural households in the corridor rely on outdoor plumbing, while during winter they must haul and heat water for consumption, cooking and washing. Firing material, however, is equally a rare resource in most rural areas, due to the shortage of burnable material.

150. The vast majority of sewage treatment within the human settlements is via pit privies and septic tanks, with much of the waste being disposed of manually after cleaning of the privy storage tanks. Sewage is usually buried. There is no tradition, and little opportunity of using these materials as fertilizer. None of the minor settlements between Aktau and Sai Utes has a drainage system.

151. There is no solid waste collection or disposal system in place; therefore, most areas around settlements along the road are littered with plastic, household debris and glass bottles or broken glass. Burning heaps of garbage is a common sight along the road corridor. In farther distance to the settlements, the roadsides are for the most part litter free, but several unauthorized dumpsites occur in the neighborhood of Shetpe, although there is an official landfill site available.

10. Education Facilities

152. Since Soviet times, the school system is relatively well developed and diversified in the entire region, ranging from pre-schools/kindergarten and primary schools to secondary school types. School attendance is obligatory until the age of 18.

153. Higher education facilities include colleges, universities and vocational training centers. The majority of all higher education opportunities are concentrated in Aktau City. There is a marked decline in university students during the past 6 years, whereas the number of students attending vocational training centers increased. Further details are provided in Appendix E. The Project Road passes a school on the southern outskirts of Shetpe (approx. km 644), the school is set back from the road more than 75 meters. As stated above, one other school, located at km 640 (Kosbulak Village), will be removed due to its close proximity to the Project Road. The Project LARP contains provisions relating to the replacement of this school.

11. Oil and Mineral Resources

154. The mining industry is ranked third in the Republic by the total volume of their economic output, whereby oil and gas are the principal products, being an annual amount of 17 bln tons of oil in 2008. Most fields are concentrated in the vicinity of Novuy Uzen and on . 59 oil and gas fields are explored on the territory of Mangystau Oblast. Explored oil reserves are assumed to produce more than 3 billion tons. Besides, geologists presume that there are still significant oil reserves to be found on the shelf of Caspian Sea. 155. The produced oil is delivered through pipes both to local market (Atyrau Oil Refinery) and for export (through the pipeline Aktau- and by sea through Aktau Port). The Mangyshalk Atomic Power Industrial Complex, a subdivision of «KazAtomprom» provides autonomous power and water supply of the region, and includes a water distillery complex.

156. Shell limestone used for construction purpose is widely found in the Oblast: About 30 deposits are currently explored, with total balance reserves of > 200 mio m3. In Mangystau territory there are also 7 high-quality limestone deposits (chalk) with total approved reserves

45 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 of > 10 mio tons. Chalkstone is used in construction, agriculture, animal feed, preparation of paint, putty paste, drilling sludge and other purposes.

157. Five shoals of brown coal are known on territory of the oblast. The characteristic feature of coals is elevated concentration of Germanium – up to 20 grams per ton – and other rare trace elements.

158. Mangystau Oblast is rich in rare minerals and ores: is one of the few regions in the world with considerable sources of high-quality strontium19. Deposits of phosphate rocks and iron ores are explored in mountainous regions in vicinity of the Project Road. These mountainous regions also include one manganese deposit with a prospected production of 2.7 mio tons of copper and various rare mineral salts (mirabilite, thenardite).

159. Mangystau‟s processing industry, predominantly located in urban centers, includes processed food (milk products) textile and clothing industry, rubber and plastic articles, engineering industry, chemical industry, production of other non-metallic mineral commodities and other industrial sectors. In recent years, the annual volume of these industrial products altogether was about 600 bln KZT. In rural areas such as Shetpe, the basic local industrial product is high quality brick, characterized by its pink color.

12. Development Plans

160. The local Government‟s and the national plan aim to ensure a steady socio- economic development of Mangystau oblast in the next 3 years. A viable motor road infrastructure development program in the region is seen vital to expand a network of transport-logistic centers, and linking the territories vast mining fields with the export (harbor) facilities at Aktau. On local (district) level, the plan foresees better connectivity bus connectivity serving schools, kindergartens, additional public health facilities, and general improvement of the electric power infrastructure 20. 161. In view of the regional development plans mentioned above, key sectors like the mining, construction and service industries will be developed and benefit from better road conditions and connectivity. Therefore, the rehabilitation of the Tranche 2, together with other parts of the “Beineu-Aktau” section of “Atyrau-Aktau highway will be both the stimulus and the vector to promote economic activities in the region and to attract further investment. At the same time, better road connectivity will positively influence the socio-economic gains and living standards of the local population.

13. Other Transport Facilities

162. The Kazakhstan Railway network is well developed both at national and at oblast level, but according to previous studies carried out by ADB's transport experts in 2010 it is in need for overhauling and renovation. One major railway link runs for a long distance (Shetpe-Sai Utes and further to Beineu) parallel to portions of Sub-section 3 of the Project Road. Rail transport is reportedly expensive, slow and impeded by substantial bureaucratic hurdles, particularly when considering transboundary transport of industrial cargo. International transport on rail is also impeded by the use of ill-functioning border crossing facilities and procedural barriers, and the use of a wider railway track than in countries outside the former Soviet Union. As a result of these compounding factors, border crossing procedures, reloading cargo and custom checks and change of cargo into wagons with suitable track width usually cause several days of delays. These shortcomings add

19 The average strontium content in local ores is up to 20%. 20 According to the regional development plan for 2009-2011, the decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, stipulates the construction of new electrical grid facilities for the entire Mangystau Oblast.

46 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 substantially to additional costs and time losses as it is either necessary to change the wheel-sets or completely reload the wagons. Taking all facts and aspects into account, rail transport is not a competitor for the Beineu-Aktau highway, with exception to bulk cargoes like ore, coal, construction materials and oil.

163. Water transport: Due to its advantageous geographic position at the Central Caspian Sea, Aktau Seaport plays an important role as a point of transit for both passengers and goods to the Caucasian countries, and to SE Europe. Although being of growing importance for the regional traffic, the sea transport routes are not posing an alternative to land connectivity to reach other destinations in Central and East Asia. At the time of inquiry (May 2010) it was affirmed that passenger ferries departing from Aktau to reach neighboring destinations across the Caspian Sea are limited.

164. Air transport: Mangystau has only one major airport 30 km N of Aktau, and the air cargo capacities are limited and presently cannot compete with road transport infrastructure and tariffs.

14. Archaeological and Historical Heritage

165. According to the Archaeological Expertise published in the PEIA there are few, rather insignificant archaeological/historical assets located near the RoW. Due to their distance to the road shoulder, none of these items is likely to be damaged or otherwise affected by the foreseen project works.

166. Objects of archaeological interest in vicinity of the road alignment are (i) a roadside assembly of old graves at km 548, 574, 621, and (ii) a small commemorative monument at km 612. None of the observed items are within distance closer than 100 m to the existing road shoulder. Thus, these monuments will not be affected by the future road rehabilitation works.

167. Along the road there are few memorial plates referring to road accident victims. In cases where these roadside monuments become located inside the boundaries of the road widening they would require relocation in close consultation with the relatives of the victims. A special compensation analysis (outlined within the Project LARP) will then address the necessary procedures for such cases.

15. Cultural Events and Recreational Facilities

168. Recreational opportunities and tourist attractions and overnight facilities along the Project Road are absent. Such opportunities are only available at Beineu and Aktau, with variable level and quality and services.

169. To improve the image of the Oblast and to attract tourism, the local authorities plan a number of cultural events, including an international festival21 a republican competition of traditional musicians 22 in Aktau, and specific culture days at various rayons and towns performing an artist competition event23. During the 10th anniversary of the capital Astana there were creative parties of prominent artists and theatre groups from Mangystau Oblast.

21 The “ – Sea of Friendship Event”, 22 The “M. Oskenbaiuly Event“ 23 Known as the “Mangystau Zhuldyzdary” Event.

47 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

V. Potential Impacts and Mitigation

A. Preliminary Environmental Screening Results

170. The Environmental Team undertook, in close consultation with the Design Engineers and in dialogue with a number of local agencies (Appendix A) a preliminary environmental impact screening. The result of this exercise is included in the 2010 IEE for Tranche 1. The IEE concluded that much of the terrain adjacent to the road alignment is either barren or covered with sparse vegetation (grasses) that are used by grazing animals (horses, cattle, sheep, goats and camels) and that given the vastness of the land available for pasture and raising livestock, there is little concern that the future rehabilitation works will affect the livelihood and income of local residents.

171. Section 5 aims to re-visit these conclusions and assess impacts specific to the three project sub-sections.

B. Issues being addressed during the Pre-Construction Phase

172. During this initial phase of the Project the Design Planners took a number of potential impacts into consideration, such as: topographic changes, clearing of roadside vegetation, land-acquisition and demolition/dysfunction of existing structures and utilities, passages for herds and agricultural machinery, potential changes in local flora and fauna, campsite location, potential hydrological changes, potential edaphic changes, quarry site selection and preparative measures, construction of access and diversion roads, public and traffic hindrances due to restricted access, social conflicts and imbalances due to foreign labor influx, noise and air pollution from nearby/new bypass alignments, change in local land values, potential impacts on social and religious life, potential impacts on archaeologically or historically significant objects. The Environmental Team also discussed provisions for not overburdening local health facilities and markets with the presence of relative large numbers of external workers residing in the area.

1. Institutional Issues

173. Issues can potentially arise if the bidding documents are prepared without access to or use of this EIA and particularly the EMP in a translated version. As such, it is recommended that no bid documents will be prepared without the authors having incorporated a (Kazakh/Russian) copy of the mitigation and monitoring plan EMP, which shall be included in the safeguard clauses of the Technical Specifications in the contracts.

2. Physical Impacts & Mitigation – Soils & Geology

174. Sand, aggregates, gravel and bitumen24 are available in sufficient source quantities and qualities at several locations along the Project Road especially in the Shetpe and Aktau regions. For detailed pre-analysis of adequate materials and their distance to nearby quarries in Mangystau reference is made to Section 3.3.1 and Table 3-2.

175. Reinforced concrete products and pre-cast structures (such as pipe culverts) and other more special road construction materials will need to be transported by rail from specialized enterprises in Kazakhstan, and possibly from . A railway line runs through Shetpe and Aktau providing good access for these materials to the Project Area.

176. The selection and operation of borrow pits and quarries needs to be carried out with all due considerations to avoid any impact on the existing natural and human environment,

24 A new bitumin plant is currently being constructed in Aktau. The plant is due to be completed early 2013.

48 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 and to make provisions that no secondary impacts such as soil and aquifer pollution will occur. As stated above initial assessments have indicated the potential locations of these proposed facilities and Appendix K indicates their locations on a strip map. The final choice of the location of the borrow pits and the quarries used will be confirmed with the Contractor and the PMC. Contract provisions shall specifically prohibit new borrow pits and quarries within one kilometer of the Protected Areas. The Contractor shall also be responsible for preparing a borrow pit management plan as part of his CEAP.

177. In case new hauling roads need to be constructed, the Contractors shall detail all particulars and precautionary measures within his CEAP. This event is however unlikely and can only be envisaged where access routes to the railway line are required.

3. Physical Impacts & Mitigation - Air Quality

178. The final site selection of the camp sites (two permanent camps are envisaged as two construction lots are planned), and particularly the positioning of impact-generating machineries like the Asphalt Mixing Plant, crushers and concrete batchers should follow a careful consultation of the local wind conditions (see wind roses, Appendix C), in order to choose locations that are always in sufficient distance on the leeward side of the prevailing local winds. The final approval of the construction camp locations should be determined by the PMC in conjunction with MCOR. Siting work camp sites, both temporary and permanent, or emission-generating machineries and yards in a distance shorter than 500m from sensitive spots like schools, hospitals and recreational facilities, and the Game Reserve should be prohibitive.

4. Physical Impacts & Mitigation – Water Quality

179. Construction works require large amounts of water, both for supply of drinking water for the labor forces and the operation of the camp sites, and for all technical purposes relating to construction activities. As noted above in Section 3, drinking water for construction workers will be provided by bottled water. Technical water will be provided by the piped water supplies in Aktau and Zhetibay. The Contractor will be responsible for sourcing other water for general construction camp use, such as washing, cleaning, etc (estimated to be around 4m3 per day per camp). The Contractor may choose to source this water from a local water supply such as those listed in Table 4-2 above. If the Contractor is to use these sources he must first obtain a permit / approval from the relevant authority to utilize these sources. The PMC and MCOR should review the permit/approval before any water extraction begins. Non-approved extraction of large amounts of water from the local aquifer may result in a number of secondary impacts, most of them prone to cause ecological issues and social conflicts, as well as delays for the project. Therefore, the extraction permits/approvals need meticulously be observed and monitored.

5. Physical Impacts & Mitigation – Topography

180. The visual appearance of the landscape along the Project Area will change to some extent because of construction of structures such as (elevated) embankments, interchanges, culverts, crossway passages, roadside plantations etc. Visual changes to the topography will be of permanent and minor negative in nature and do not require mitigation measures, except that the Project design should consider aesthetic concerns. The latter refers particularly to roadside plantations and re-installation of borrow sites, as and if applicable. However, many of the anticipated quarry sites are already long-time in operation, so there will be hardly any need to further aim for specific mitigation measures in these sites. The selected quarry sites are all located more than 500 meters away from human settlements.

49 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

6. Biological Impacts & Mitigation - Flora and Fauna

181. Flora - Roadside shelterbelt areas are a rare and valuable natural asset in the generally uniform steppe landscape dominating the road corridor. Because of their intrinsic ecological benefits and values, roadside plants (especially large bushes) should be maintained to the maximum extent possible, as they act as natural barriers absorbing sand and dust impacts, as well as natural barriers against snow storms, sand storms and noise. Roadside vegetation significantly enhances natural micro-habitats in an otherwise largely uniform and treeless landscape, whereby both birds and insects will be the major beneficiaries because of additional food, shelter and roosting possibilities. Roadside plantations will also contribute to a year-round aesthetical improvement of the landscape. Within the Project corridor there is very little notable vegetation, small pockets exist especially around the area of the Prokhlada Spring. Both authorized and un-authorized cutting of roadside vegetation in this area will have minor effects on the local ecological properties, expressed in habitat degradation and biodiversity losses. It will be medium- termed and moderate given the fact that the vegetation is relatively sparse and mostly set back more than ten meters from the edge of the existing roadway. No tree re-planting is required, as no trees have been identified for felling.

182. Fauna - Along certain sections of the road, particularly in the vicinity of human settlements domestic animals can be noted. Road accidents caused by collisions with livestock animals (camels and sheep) are among the major concerns of both Traffic Police and Road Managers. The problem is primarily due to unattended large herds or single animals crossing the road (see photos 6, 8 and 10, Appendix H), whereby the accident risk increases during nighttime. In the open terrain, shepherds commonly cross the roads with their herds without taking specific preventive care. Frequent movement of animals over the carriageway will further result in surface and embankment damage and soiling of the pavement, which eventually contributes to increased driving hazards.

183. To address such risks and subsequent problems, the road designers have incorporated suitable animal passages in the design at locations known for regular animal crossing. According to Design Engineers the location of all animal crossings have been consulted to local population. The locations are noted as follows:

Sub-section 1 - Km 632.7 - Km 663.3 - Km 674 - Km 683.7 - Km 704 Sub-section 2 - Km 740 - Km 750 - Km 758 - Km 765 - Km 773

184. Adequate dimensioning and lateral fencing are of paramount importance, as under- dimensioned underway passages being less than 2m in width are usually not accepted by most domestic animals, resulting in escapes to the adjacent embankment and road surface. It is therefore mandatory to include a sufficiently dimensioned fence of a minimum length of 150m on each side along the embankment, guiding the animals safely into the proposed passage. The proposed locations of the animal fences are provided by Appendix M and include areas adjacent to the Karagie Karakol State Game Reserve.

50 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

7. Biological Impacts & Mitigation - Protected Areas

185. KKSRG - It is anticipated that during pre-construction stage the road will continue to have from minimum to moderate adverse impact on the Karagie Karakol State Game Reserve. Consultations with the Administration of the Game Reserve in 2010 revealed that due to road-related physical disturbance of wildlife for many years and growing traffic wildlife prefer to concentrate in the southern part of the Reserve, away of the alignment. Nevertheless, to further minimize those impacts the Design Engineers in consultation with the Administration of the Game Reserve worked out the following environmental protection measures:

During the designing of the reconstructed road between km 739 to 771 which goes along the territory related to the Reserve (Decree of RoK Government dated 10 Nov 2006, #1074) the road should follow the existing alignment and pull offs and areas for short-term rests. Widening of the road to be on combined subgrade with minimum permissible parameters of transverse profile /cross-section (road width and curbs/shoulders) for I –II category roads in accordance with Sanitary norms and rules 03..09-2006 “Automobile roads”. To make sure that all parameters (longitudinal slope of the radius of vertical curves) are aligned with Sanitary rules and norms 03.3.09-2006 “Automobile roads” for I and II category roads on the surface curve designing phase. Specified requirements causes conditions for optimum speed limited vehicles passed with minimal impact to environment from engine noise and emissions of exhaust gases. Installation of barrier fence with high protection on both shoulders all along the road section from 739 to 771 km, which will help to hold the vehicle on the road in case of emergency situations and will prevent animals from passing the road (see the typical cross-section below). Agreement of Inspection to determine the locations for artificial constructions of animal underpasses, to use for this purposes culverts and bridges. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules.

186. The due diligence (Appendix D) justified implementation of these mitigation measures.

Design of the alignment at the area adjacent to the Reserve (L=32.08 km)

187. All the above mitigation measures can be assessed as adequate. Additionally, it was found that the capacity of administrating of the Reserve to undertake responsibilities for carrying environmental management and monitoring is limited. Thus, it will be necessary to embody a program of institutional strengthening and training through the provision of technical assistance. The training program will cover issues of wildlife management and poaching.

51 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

8. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation - Health and Safety

188. At this stage of the Project, the Design Engineers have taken preparative measures to make provisions for increasing the general traffic safety for the new/rehabilitated road. In specific, the following measures were taken to address the present and future risks for traffic accidents:

Identification of accident-prone localities („black spots‟) all along the alignment; Check of the existing highway parameters for their compliance with valid norms and standards; Adopted proven safety design measures as they have been successfully included in other (similar) road projects, namely in other CAREC sections; Addressing special accident risks associated with the collision danger involving animals on the road, and designing adequate animal underpasses; Analysis of the suitability25 of existing and commendable signage and road markings for adopting a better design; and Taking the concerns and recommendations of the participants of Public Consultations into the design considerations.

189. Generally, the design makes provisions for bypassing the highway traffic to ensure that local residents do not come in direct contact with traffic movements. Bus stops near settlements shall be planned on the side of carriageway where most people would access. In case human settlements are on both sides of the road alignment a well-marked pedestrian overpass or underpass must be incorporated in the design. Additional fencing at all sides of such pedestrian crossover facility need also be considered. There is a need to include adequate warning signage and speed limits at all sections where pedestrian crossing facilities are planned. Pedestrian crossings need to incorporate structures that allow the use of prams, wheelchairs, bicycles and pushcarts.

9. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Construction Camps

190. The location of the Constructor‟s campsite is often crucial in planning for environmental safeguards, particularly in view of protecting the public general as well as the work force from adverse impacts, nuisances and health hazards. In addition, the location of construction camps within or in vicinity to an existing settlement (like in Zhetibay and Shetpe) can result in a number of other impacts and conflicts, such as shortage and competition for amenities, food and water.

191. Construction camps can evoke short to medium-term impacts, although most of these impacts are manageable. For establishment of work campsites, most if not all of the potential impacts can be set off by choosing a location in sufficient far distance from existing settlements, as long as electricity and water supply can be managed. As stated above, the location of the camps is the decision of the Contractor, however this should be approved by the PMC and MCOR to avoid potential social conflicts over land use, resources and labour.

192. All planned and ongoing activities associated with construction camps, including storage facilities, workers dormitories, sanitary instalments and safety measures are subject to the recommendations presented in the EMP. This is particularly the case if construction camps are to be set up within or nearby existing settlements. In line with the Kazakhstan legislative framework the principal tool to ensure an environmentally sound execution of all construction works, including the provision for work camps and facilities, is the preparation of a site management plan – in Kazakhstan terminology recognized as „Construction

25 An example for poor road signage is shown in photo 6 of Appendix H

52 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Environment Action Plan (CEAP)‟. This CEAP, subject to approval by various agencies, is the essential warrant that all work activities will be carried out in an environmentally sound manner, aiming at eliminating or minimizing potential impacts identified in this document. Compliance will be strictly monitored by the PMC, and the Contractor will be held liable for any non-compliance.

10. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Traffic Diversions and Hauling

193. Temporary land losses of private or leased property for either widening the existing carriageway or creating a new road formation along the proposed bypass sections will be within tolerable limits and not create public disagreement as long as due compensation payments are in place. This issue is addressed in detail by the Project LARP. The bypasses will not separate or dissect existing communities as they bypass residential areas.

194. Provision for suitable signage is an important planning tool for addressing potential accident risks. In addition, hauling and other access road to construction sites shall be planned to cause minimal hindrance and/or nuisance to public life. This is particularly important in locations with sensitive structures, such as schools and hospitals.

195. Special planning needs to be devoted to ensure that the local railway lines (e.g. at Shetpe bypass construction) will not be interrupted without liaising with the railway authorities.

11. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Changes in Local Land Values

196. The proposed Project is expected to increase the local land values, especially in areas where actually no road infrastructure is present i.e. in the Zhetibay and Shetpe bypass sections (photos 6, 9,10, 11, Appendix H). Landowners will have an opportunity to sell their land at increased prices. Basically, this impact is estimated as a major long-term positive one that needs not be mitigated. The issue of land values is discussed in detail within the Project LARP.

12. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Indigenous & Vulnerable People

197. The Mangystau Oblast population is an overwhelming Kazakh majority, with occurrence of several minor ethnic groups that are all fully integrated in the social fabrics of Kazakhstan. No people living in the Project Area would fit into ADB‟s definition of indigenous people who might be negatively affected by the Investment Program.

198. A large portion of the local (rural) population is classified as „poor‟ and therefore considered as vulnerable to some extent.

199. With respect to address vulnerable groups, reference is made to Section 4.3.5 which discusses a number of issues relating to gender inequities. The Contractors shall be obliged to pay special attention to common gender issues, and to overcome disproportional discriminations of women by the provision of sufficient and fairly-paid work contracts.

200. The potential risk of human trafficking, often associated with large-scale road construction projects, is equally addressed in the EMP.

13. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Infrastructure

201. Prior to the start of construction works existing structures may need to be demolished and utilities removed or replaced. The Contractor shall ensure that all demolition waste be disposed of at certified dump-sites. In addition, a work plan for timely and fully functional

53 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 substitution for any public utility that needs to be removed shall be prepared by the Contractor including any required certificates or permits from local authorities / utilities.

C. Anticipated Impacts & Mitigation during the Construction Phase

1. Institutional Issues

202. If the Contractor fails to retain an environmental specialist to prepare the CEAP and to implement all mitigation and monitoring measures as specified in the EMP the Contractor will have severe difficulties ensuring all of the environmental provisions are adequately managed and monitored. As specified by law, the Contractor will be required to employ a licensed expert to prepare the CEAP and obtain all relevant permits. The contractor will not be permitted to mobilize workers without an approved CEAP and the appropriate permits in place.

203. To ensure that the Contractor and his environmental specialist are capable of implementing the CEAP, an environmental training program is recommended to be provided to the Contractor. The training shall be undertaken by an International Environmental Specialist over a period of two man-months and shall include at least the following:

Preparation of a CEAP. Understanding the environmental impacts of construction. How to monitor environmental impacts. Training for construction staff and sub-contractors. Reporting on environmental issues.

2. Physical Impacts & Mitigation – Soils

204. Borrow Pits – Borrow pit sources have been pre-defined (See Appendix K). Unauthorized extraction at other sites or deviating from established extraction quota would be subject to withheld payments and to penalties.

205. In case borrow sites are required outside long-established quarries, the potential site will require mitigation measures to be applied, as follows:

Avoid sites with known contamination and/or erosion problems; Avoid to generating steep cut slopes; Provide suitable locations for storage of the excavated material, ensuring that the local drainage will not be hampered and no excessive siltation may occur; Install adequate fencing to prevent unauthorized access and intrusion by livestock; Avoid damage to adjacent lands while providing for haulage roads; Store, protect and re-use topsoils for re-instating the pit. Shape and compact slope before applying former topsoil layers; Develop a Management Plan for the borrow pit operation, including all planned operations, quantities, hauling arrangements and security precautions. The plan shall provide full details on environmental protection measures, especially in view of protecting local water resources and proper decommissioning the sites. This Management Plan shall also describe the intended reshaping and re- installation of the pit. Rehabilitation options may include revegetation of the site as specified by the Forest and Hunting Committee of Mangystau, using local herbaceous plants and shrubs that fulfill soil stabilizing functions and

54 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

prevent further erosion washouts; choose the right season and methods to ensure good revegetation, and use bio-engineering solutions as applicable. Explore opportunities to enhance the site when decommissioning for other uses (e.g. landscaping into roadside picnic areas, small reservoirs, wetland biotopes);

206. Given the generally uninhabited nature of the Project Area it is considered unlikely that the selection and operation of borrow pits may result in land disputes or major losses of agricultural or ecologically valuable land. Local authorities may consider the further use of dry borrow pits as sanitary landfill sites, or ask to restore them to serve any other purpose.

207. Quarries – Existing licensed quarry sites have been identified and are listed within Section 3. No specific mitigation or management actions are recommended for these facilities as long as they operate within the terms of a valid license.

208. Soil Erosion – All rehabilitation and rectifying works on embankments, as well as cut and fill operations, shall be strictly adhere to the longitudinal and cross-section profiles described in the Technical Drawings. All excavation activities are subject to directives and approvals (Environmental Clearance Certificate) by the PMC.

209. In addition, during construction, the Contractor will be responsible for ensuing material that is less susceptible to erosion will be selected for placement around bridges and culverts. In addition he shall ensure re-vegetation of exposed areas including; (i) selection of fast growing and grazing resistant species of local grasses and shrubs (see Table E-1); (ii) immediate re-vegetation of all slopes and embankments if not covered with gabion baskets; (iii) placement of fiber mats to encourage vegetation growth. The PMC and the Contractor will both be responsible for ensuring that embankments are monitored during continuously during construction for signs of erosion.

210. Soil Contamination – Potential soil contamination is a possibility resulting from poorly managed fuels, oils and other hazardous liquids used during the project works. Accordingly, the Contractor, with oversight from the PMC, shall ensure that:

All fuel and chemical storage (if any) shall be sited on an impervious base within a bund and secured by fencing. The storage area shall be located away from any watercourse or wetlands. The base and bund walls shall be impermeable and of sufficient capacity to contain 110 percent of the volume of tanks. The construction camp maintenance yard shall be constructed on impervious hardstanding with adequate drainage to collect spills, there shall be no vehicle maintenance activities on open ground. Filling and refuelling shall be strictly controlled and subject to formal procedures. Drip pans shall be placed under all filling and fuelling areas. Waste oils shall be stored and disposed of by a licensed contractor. All valves and trigger guns shall be resistant to unauthorized interference and vandalism and be turned off and securely locked when not in use. The contents of any tank or drum shall be clearly marked. Measures shall be taken to ensure that no contaminated discharges enter any soils. No bitumen drums or containers, full or used, shall be stored on open ground. They shall only be stored on impervious hardstanding. Areas using bitumen shall be constructed on impervious hardstanding to prevent seepage of oils into the soils.

55 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

211. Under the local circumstances, earthworks may also include potential health risks for both the labor forces and the public general when considering residual lead-contamination in the embankment spoils to be re-used. The PMC shall give only approval of the re-use of embankment material when corresponding soil tests (as proposed in Appendix F) would reveal no levels of harmful lead concentrations. Otherwise, swift arrangements need to be in place for safe delivery and deposit on prescribed sites that will be reported to and monitored by the Oblast‟s Sanitary and Epidemiological Control Department. In this context it will be necessary to mention that the lead contamination risk is considered very low to probably non-existing with the main reasons for this assumption being:

Historically low traffic volume along this road corridor, Phasing out of sale of leaded fuel since 4 years, Extreme low precipitation in the entire region, and Very deep aquifers indicate low risk of soil and groundwater pollution originating from leaded fuel sources.

In addition results of soil samples taken in October, 2011 (at three locations along the Project Road (Figure 5-1)) revealed chemical analysis showing that no lead contamination exceeding allowable concentrations in soil was found anywhere within the tested locations (see Table 5-1) and that according to the ecological requirement in the area of Environmental Protection and Land Use (including agricultural lands) (Astana, 2005) all tested levels of potential chemical pollution, including potential lead contamination, are within allowable ranges, and no specific countermeasures are necessary when considering rehabilitation works of the said motorway. The results, in full, can be found in Appendix I.

56 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Figure 5-1. Soil Sample Locations

Table 5-1: Soil Sample Results Lead contamination Depth of soil Test site number % of MAC sampling mg/kg limit №3 – Zhetibay settlement, 0-5 см 10,05 0,31 hospital 5-20 см 7,08 0,22 №4 – road sign at km 644, 0-5 см 6,25 0,20 Shetpe settlement 5-20 см 6,65 0,21 №6 – road sign at km 555, 0-5 см 9,55 0,30 before pass elevation 5-20 см 8,68 0,27 MAC standard26 32

212. Notwithstanding the results above and the relatively low risk of lead contamination, it is considered prudent for additional limited testing to be undertaken during the pre- construction phase to confirm these results and ensure that lead contamination is not present in soil samples.

3. Physical Impacts & Mitigation – Hydrology

213. Technical water for construction works will be supplied via company owned piped water supplies in Aktau and Zhetibay. As stated in Section 4, permits and approvals have been provided by these private companies for the use of their water supply during the construction period. Accordingly, there will be no impacts to local water supplies resulting from technical water needs.

214. For the extraction of water for construction other purposes, the intake from ground water will require prior permission of the District Authorities in charge of the water source.

26 The obtained results were compared with the actual standard limits identified by the MAC, following the Decree N 99 on approval of Norms on Maximum Allowable Concentrations of Harmful Compounds, Harmful Microorganisms and other Biological Substances Polluting Soils of Health Ministry and Ministry of Environmental Protection of Republic of Kazakhstan, dated January, 30 2004.

57 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

The potential sources are identified by Table 4-2. The PMC will be responsible for reviewing permissions before water extraction can begin. 215. There are no plans to extract water from either the Ashyghar Creek or the Prokhlada spring at this time. As such no impacts from over extraction of these resources are anticipated. The Project Road does however cross the Ashyghar Creek and also a canal at km 635 as described in Section 4. To avoid impacts to the creek and canal during construction the Contractor shall ensure that:

All construction materials in a channel with flowing water must be removed so as not to provide any obstruction. Maximum care is taken to avoid degradation of the river, stream shore and to undertake excessive excavation in the water. Demolition must be done in a way that prevents large junks of material from falling into the river. Stabilization of disturbed crossing banks must take place as part of the construction work and include filter fabric, gabions and preferably bioengineering techniques.

216. In addition, it is recommended that bridge works and culvert removal and replacement are undertaken during the during the dry summer months.

217. To prevent impacts to surface and ground waters in the event of accidental spills or leaks, the Contractor shall ensure:

All fuelling to be done on a concrete surface provided with spill catch tank that can be cleaned and all spilled fuel recovered and recycled based on discussions with fuel supplier. All repair and maintenance work must either be done on a concrete surface with oil spill catch basin or oil catch pans must be provided at all service areas and training provided to all „mechanics‟. All fuel use areas where spills and leakage is possible, e.g. the generator, must have drip basins installed to pre-vent leakage. All recovered materials must be recycled. A fuelling areas must be equipped with proper fuel nozzles and means for preventing accidental spills. All bitumen handling must not permit any material from leaking to the ground, including transfer areas and any areas where bitumen is transported in drums. Bitumen drums must be stored in a dry covered secure place where no leakage to water or ground is possible. Drums must be recycled at least once/yr. Any spills must be cleaned up according to GoK norms and codes within 24 hours of the occurrence, with contaminated soils and water treated according to GoK norms and codes. Records must be handed over without delay to the PMC.

4. Physical Impacts & Mitigation – Air Quality

218. Air pollution is likely to occur in this Project during the construction phase, originating from a variety of sources:

Work shops, stone crushers and asphalt mixing plants; Frequency and magnitude of movements of construction machinery; Dust emissions due to various construction and borrowing activities;

58 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Uncontrolled burning of waste.

219. Air pollution is known to cause a variety of health risks to both the workers and the public general. Emissions from crushers and quarry sites can cause health impacts ranging from coughing, influenza, respiratory ailments, to irritation in eyes and reduction in visibility. Children are at particular risk for such negative impacts which, however, are most of the time temporary and localized.

220. The Contractor shall include all necessary measures to reduce air pollution and dust development that would impact the public health, by:

Providing dust masks to operating personnel; Regular water spraying at hauling and access roads to borrow pits; Equipping asphalt, hot mix and batching plants with fabric filters and/or wet scrubbers to reduce the level of dust emissions; Mounting protective canvasses on all trucks which transport material that could generate dust; Building access and hauling roads at sufficient distances from residential areas, particular, from local schools and hospitals; and Ensuring no burning of debris or other materials will occur on the Site without permission of the Engineer. Construction vehicles and machinery shall be kept in good working order, regularly serviced and engines turned off when not in use. Vehicles with an open load-carrying case, which transport potentially dust- producing materials, shall have proper fitting sides and tail boards. Dust- prone materials shall not be loaded to a level higher than the side and tail boards, and shall always be covered with a strong tarpaulin. In periods of high wind, dust-generating operations shall not be permitted within 200 m of residential areas. Special precautions need to be applied in the vicinity of sensitive areas such as schools, kindergartens and hospitals. Unauthorized burning of construction waste material shall be subject to penalties for the Contractor, and withholding of payment.

5. Biological Impacts & Mitigation – Flora and Fauna

221. Large and long linear structures like highways are often the reason for separating animal populations and their habitats. In addition, loss of roadside vegetation may result in habitat changes and losses in local flora and fauna. Careful planning and execution of works are essential in minimizing undesired effects, particularly on the local fauna.

222. Disturbance to local wildlife, such as illegal hunting activities by work forces are common problems associated with road construction projects in remote areas. The EMP therefore provides a number of mitigation measures to address such likely impacts. Equally, the (non-permissive) collection of wild plants is addressed in the EMP.

223. Local wildlife and plants along the road embankment are seasonally impaired by the application of relative high doses of de-icing chemicals during winter conditions – especially in the vicinity of steep pass sections. Not only the structure and properties of soils and plants are impacted by such procedures, many animals along the roadside are killed as a result of salt poisoning. It is therefore recommended to eliminate further use of salt during winter conditions and replace these applications with fine and environmentally neutral friction materials.

59 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

224. To limit the Contractors impacts to vegetation they will be required to develop a sketch map of the location number and species of vegetation along the roadside that they intend to cut. Such plan needs to be approved by the PMC. The Plan must also include recommendations for replacing any important vegetation, and engage the CHF in the intended replanting scheme, describing: species selection, minimum size, maintenance for a specified time and replacement of unsuccessful replantation.

6. Biological Impacts & Mitigation – Protected Areas

225. To reduce impacts to the KKSGR the following mitigation measures shall be followed:

Construction mitigation The Contractors EMP will be reviewed by both Project Management Consultant, and Administration of the reserve. No construction camp, temporary or permanent is located within the reserve. No project-related facilities such as concrete batching plants, asphalt plants, bitumen mixers, or storage yards are located within the reserve. No blasting works are allowed. Noise, dust, and vibration impacts to the protected area should be minimized. No construction waste is allowed in the area near or within the Reserve. All spills should be quickly removed. Sign posts shall be placed along the boundary of the reserve/park to inform workers and machine operators not to enter this area. Decrease the construction period in these areas. Use efficient road construction equipment with minimal parameters of emissions and noise level. Construction sites for basing of road building equipment and storage of road building materials to be placed outside of protected areas. Provide dust suppression during the road coating and preparation of road pavement basis layers from macadam and gravel. Temporary bypasses should be placed outside of protected area. Collection and utilization of wastes from asphalt concrete mix used for road coating on outside territory of protected areas. Maintaining of manufacturing operations with bitumen materials strictly in the project within the roadway.

Contractor Obligations The Contractor should be warned that road section on km 739-771 is adjacent to the area of Karakiya-Karakol game reserve. Also general schedule of reconstruction works and obtaining of permission for special works (drilling works for installation of bridge foundation, blasting works for excavation units ,etc). Instructions of all specialists of road departments and their subcontractors on working in accordance with Environmental protection and Flora and fauna protection requirements on territory of wildlife sanctuary. General contractors should be warned about responsibilities and compensation amounts for violation of RoK law “About special protected natural territories”

Tender Documents In condition of tendering documentation explanatory note general contractors must implement monitoring and notification of Inspection about appearance of wild animals birds and other fauna during the construction works notification about animals or plants death, etc.

60 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

7. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Public Access, Utilities and Services

226. Temporary diversions, continual generation of noise and dust on hauling routes, and general hindrance to local accesses and services are common impacts associated with construction works within or nearby local settlements. To alleviate such impacts and temporary nuisances, the Contractor shall engage good practices for traffic management, and work closely with the local communities and the Traffic Police to keep everybody aware of potential hindrances. He shall make public all efforts undertaken for mitigation.

227. Traffic delays with traffic lights or flagmen shall be kept at reasonable periods (max. 10 min), and diversions shall be well-illuminated, furnished with drainage structures, and fenced with marked barriers27. Where applicable, for example at sites where school children approach the work sites, flagmen need to be present during critical hours. Any hindrance and obstacles for maintaining free access of the public general to local utilities, social gatherings and to public transport facilities should be avoided. The Contractor shall also maintain work hours and public holidays in accordance with schedules agreed by the local authorities and determined in the Technical Specifications. Such schedules shall be made public in due time.

228. It is the Contractor‟s responsibility to locate and confirm the details of all public services and that may potentially be affected by the works. This is particularly important in view of public utilities (water pipes, gas pipes, electric cables, phone lines) which may need to be removed due to widening the carriageway, or for any other construction reason. All utilities subject to removal need to be fully replaced 28 before disconnecting the existing service. The PMC shall give written approval in this regard, and the local authorities shall be fully informed well ahead of time before the actual commencement of site works.

229. Therefore, best practice for alleviating any forthcoming problems with local residents include (i) timely public announcement of near-future planned construction activities (ii) strict observance of working hours and speed limits as determined in the Technical Specifications, and (iii) involving as much as possible local residents in work contracts to secure their satisfaction and community support.

230. Any damage or hindrance/disadvantage to local businesses caused by the premature removal or insufficient replacement of public utilities is subject to full compensation, all at the full liability of the Contractor who caused the problem. The Contractor shall also maintain unhindered access and use of social, cultural and religious sites (e.g. mosques, cemeteries, cultural gathering places, sports facilities). Should damage to private properties occur, including livestock and homestead gardens, the Contractor will be held fully liable to compensate and rectify the inflicted damage.

8. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Construction Camps

231. Temporary and permanent camps can often be poorly maintained, lack proper sanitary facilities, are marred with stagnant waters and poor waste management, thus providing ideal conditions for vermin and other vectors of diseases, which multiply and infect both workers and the surrounding local communities. Therefore, the Contractor shall meet all requirements to prevent such conditions and observe the following standards, to be regularly monitored by the PMC. Mandatory mitigation actions, many of them also aiming to avoid conflicts with local systems and resources, include:

27 All signage need to be in conformity with the National Standards. 28 In most cases the Contractor needs to employ specialist enterprises with proven skill and technology to carry out such works

61 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

All contracted labor shall undergo a medical examination which should form the basis of an (obligatory) health/accident insurance and welfare provisions to be included in the work contracts. The Contractor shall maintain records of health and welfare conditions for each person contractually engaged. The contractor shall seek his own electric supply system, preferably separated from the public grid. The Contractor shall provide adequate and functional systems for sanitary conditions, toilet facilities, waste management, labor dormitories and cooking facilities. To the extent possible, he shall provide imported food items for the workers to alleviate potential burdens from scarce local market resources. Work camps should also adhere to basic principles of aesthetics and landscaping. They equally shall include sport facilities for managers, foremen and laborers. The camp sites and particularly the fuelling area shall be equipped with special wastewater collectors combined with separator basins. The camp site needs to have its own sealed containers for sludge disposal from septic tanks. The problem of overburdening the local health facilities can be best solved by organizing a well-equipped own ambulance station at the camp sites, and to engage qualified medical personnel for the entire duration of the work phase. Such personnel should also be trained in conducting regular awareness campaigns among the workers, focusing on the prevention and control of communicable diseases (e.g. STDs) and drug abuses. The camp site should be secured against unauthorized access. Special precaution measures are required for securing and storing hazardous materials. The Contractor shall construct, maintain and completely remove after work completion his own sewage management system. He will also be fully responsible for safe transport, storage and security to dispose all hazardous materials used in work processes. To encounter possible social conflicts, the Contractor shall seek good relationship with the local communities and engage in local social welfare and education programs. He shall offer, to the maximum possible, employment opportunities to local residents, particularly for unskilled labor. The Contractor shall reinstate the land provided for diversions to a condition similar to that prior to the commencement of construction. Photographic records may be used by the PMC to determine if the reinstatement of diversions has been satisfactorily carried out.

9. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Health and Safety

232. The Contractor will be requested to prepare an approved Construction Environmental Action Plan (CEAP), which will, among others, delineate all work safety aspects he intends to apply. Focal points of the CEAP will relate to means, type and number of protective clothing, safety precautions at specific work sites, first aid, rescue plans, work hours, and all intended measures for avoiding or proper clearance of hazardous substances, including fueling operations, transport and handling of hazardous materials and explosives, securing measures etc. The CEAP will further explain methods and volumes for using any local resource, and how to address common risks associated with public safety, crimes, STDs and prostitution.

233. Construction works and activities bear frequent accident and health risks for both the laborers and the public general, with varying direct and indirect consequences. Therefore, the CEAP needs to make provision for specific medical services, workers insurance policies

62 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 and indemnities, emergency provisions and a rescue/evacuation plans in case of major accidents.

234. The Contractor will be obliged to carry out, at regular intervals, training sessions with all work forces addressing the following aspects:

General aspects on work safety and environmental awareness building; Worker‟s responsibilities in case of emergency and spills; General work safety in relation to common work risks, demonstration and use of protective equipment (first aid, fire extinguishers, handling explosives); Work hours and speed limits, environmentally harmful activities; First aid assistance and medical assistance in emergency cases; Emergency/rescue action training, incl. use of towing equipment; Alerting on the problem of conveying sexually transmissible diseases (e.g. Syphilis and HIV/AIDS) between work forces and local residents; Avoidance of conflicts with local communities, maintaining good relationship with local residents and authorities; Actions required in case of detecting archaeological or historical items during work.

10. Socio-Economic Issues – Noise and Vibration

235. The impact of construction noise upon sensitive receptors is limited due to the fact the road traverses uninhabited land for almost its entire length with the exception of Shetpe and Zhetibay. However, construction works in these areas will be confined to the bypass locations which, as the name suggest, generally bypasses the urban areas as such no sensitive receptors are located in these areas. The only exception is the school located in Kosbulak Village close to Shetpe. However, this school will be demolished due to its close proximity to the bypass and will be replaced by a new school elsewhere in the village. Notwithstanding the above, the Contractor shall make all possible efforts to keep the noise production at the lowest possible level when carrying out his works in the vicinity of such sensitive spots.

236. Mitigation measures against excessive noise include, but are not limited to the following:

Selection of modern and well-serviced equipment and plants with reduced noise level ensured by suitable in-built techniques and appropriate silencing devices; Confining excessively noisy work and movement of heavy machinery to specified daytime working hours (this relates especially to stone crushers, percussion hammers and pneumatic drills); Work hours need observe special restrictions near residential and sensitive areas; Providing the construction workers with suitable hearing protection (ear muffs); Avoid vehicle idling.

237. Public consultation and information is required wherever works take place in close vicinity to existing settlements. This refers particularly to the operation of bulldozers, scrapers, pneumatic hammers, crushers, loaders, and compaction loaders. Most if not all of such activities produce excessive noise and vibration. It will be therefore the full responsibility of the Contractor to alert the public general for unavoidable noise development, the anticipated level of nuisance, and explain the planned measures to minimize the effects

63 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 in case of unavoidable emissions. Practical advices should be given to the public general, such as avoiding the approach of work sites (especially in case of children), and how to cope with the work schedule. As rule of good practice, no construction activity should be carried out near human settlements that would exceed 90 dBA for more than one continual hour.

238. Unbalanced driving habits are identified as main sources of vibration impacts on structural objects, including humans. As above, the Contractor shall make provision for adequate compensation in case of damages to privately owned infrastructure in case of proven and testified vibration effects. As for construction machinery, good driving practices are within the obligations of the Contractor for guiding and training his work forces. Otherwise, timely road surface compaction, smooth surface granulometric composition and speed control are proven means of containing such impacts.

11. Potential Impacts related to Specific Construction Activities

239. The operation of asphalt mixing plants (AMP) frequently causes a number of environmental impacts. Although short in time, the corresponding impacts may result in substantial health risks for the public general and for the workers. Main concerns relate to the plant‟s smoke development containing a variety of carcinogenic substances, and causing irritations in the respiratory system.

240. The best mitigation measure is to pre-select the site for installing the AMP at a location in sufficient distance (2-5 km) from any residential settlement. Of particular importance for an appropriate site selection is the consultation of the local meteorological station that will reveal the likelihood of carrying the smoke plume in distinct directions. In the cases of Shetpe placing of the asphalt mixing plant in the South-Western periphery of the town indicates that such siting would be sub-optimal, as about 50% of the locally prevailing winds would blow harmful smokes and air-polluting substances into the residential settlement. For the sake of public health it is therefore strongly recommended to consider the siting of the AMP at good distance to the north east of Shetpe and towns. Equally, the placing of an AMP near the Zhetibay junction would have detrimental consequences for nearby residents.

241. Bitumen Works: Such works, including coat layering with asphalt concrete, may cause a number of risks and impacts that need to be addressed in the mitigation framework. The prime risks are associated with work safety and ambient pollution. Bitumen works cause a number of health and safety concerns for both the public and the laborers. Bitumen is highly flammable and great care is required when utilizing rapid-curing cut-back bitumen together with volatile solvents. The latter rank among highly hazardous pollutants, especially when getting in contact with humans and with water resources.

242. Precautionary measures, being the full responsibility of the Contractor, include: Hot bitumen shall not get in contact with water and dust, bitumen and solvents shall not be spilled on ground, ditches or water courses. If this happens, spills need to be removed immediately and disposed in a safe site that is protected from public access. No waste material shall be burned in connection with hot bitumen. All manual works while handling bitumen require special protective clothing (boots and gloves). Bitumen works shall not be carried out in winter, rainy or stormy weather conditions. Trucks used for hauling asphalt mixture shall be adequately equipped. Surfacing works should not occupy more than one single traffic lane at a time.

243. Concrete Works: Concrete is prone to become damaged when cast at unsuitable ambient temperatures. This refers particularly to the maintenance of minimum safety standards for bridge constructions where concrete will be the predominant material. Casting concrete structures such as culverts at site may cause spread and contamination by cement

64 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 dust, which in turn will negatively affect soil and surface water qualities. It will also result in detrimental effects on the surrounding vegetation. Similarly, the application of asphalt- cement surface layers, such as at steep pass sites, requires careful planning for watering activities.

244. Mitigation actions will be particularly important to observe while carrying out concrete works in vicinity of the protected area. The following recommendations need to be taken into full consideration to avoid any undesired effects on the Reserve. Thus, restrict concrete works at site to the right weather conditions, i.e. avoiding particularly windy, icy or very hot conditions. If feasible, pre-cast solutions should be given preference. Dust development at site shall be managed by suitable covers (canvas) and/or regular water spraying. When casting concrete structures under water, provisions shall be made to utilize cofferdams. Spray waters used for slowly curing the new-cast concrete structures shall not contaminate adjacent surface or groundwater resources. Proven protective methods shall be explored as feasible, including (i) collection of excessive spray waters and safe disposal, (ii) covering the newly cast concrete surface with waterproof sheet material or sand to prevent moisture losses, and (iii) accelerating the curing process by using steam or radiant heating. When working with additives (e.g. anti-corrosive mixtures) special care needs to be applied, following the general and specific precaution prescriptions described in the Contractor‟s work safety guidelines.

245. Stockpiling: Stockpiles of materials, if wrongly sited and/or protected, may cause long-term environmental problems in terms of dust development, leaching of harmful substances into soil and water resources, erosion and siltation. Therefore, stockpiles shall be short-termed, and placed in sheltered and guarded areas near the actual construction sites or within the fenced camp sites. Placing shall be at minimum distances specified by the PMC, away from sensitive areas and residential areas. Stockpiles of friable material shall be covered with clean tarpaulins, and spray water shall be applied during dry and windy weather conditions. Stockpiles of material or debris shall be dampened prior to their movement, unless otherwise specified by the PMC. Stockpiles shall not contain any harmful soluble substances.

12. Socio-economic Impacts & Mitigation – Waste Management and Disposal, Hazardous Materials and Explosives

246. Construction works include transport, handling and storage of a number of hazardous materials, some of them bearing critical health risks for humans, drinking water and food items when being contaminated. In this project, commendable countermeasures include:

Development of a waste management plan; Development of a management plan for transport 29 , handling and storing hazardous material; Preparation of a contingency plan 30 in the event of an accident involving hazardous material. Such emergency plan needs to be consulted and coordinated with the local health facilities.

247. All mentioned risk management plans need to be approved by the PMC.

248. Explosives may be needed for blasting, especially in the location of the bypass around Shetpe. They need be treated with specific care and arrangements for restricted

29 Adhering to the national regulations, restrictions and required permits 30 Plans usually cover also natural disaster events, fire, earthquakes, flooding, and include respective evacuation and medical care plans.

65 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 uses and safety measures. The responsibility for devising management plans for the use of explosives lies in the hands of the Contractor and will be subject to meticulous monitoring by the PMC.

13. Socio-economic Issues & Mitigation – Decommissioning of Work Sites

249. The EMP makes particular reference to prescribe good practices for the decommissioning of work sites, both the construction sites, the work camp, storage and stockpiling facilities, and the borrow pits. To achieve proper decommissioning of all work sites, the Contractors will be obliged to present their activities and solutions on the proper execution of such tasks as outlined in the CEAP. It is also strongly recommended that both the PMC and Contractor keep photographic records of each work site before commencement of works. These photographic evidences shall serve as basis for the later approval that the respective sites have been re-instated to satisfactory conditions. If necessary, the Contractor may be requested to include additional enhancement or rehabilitation activities, such as slope compaction and stabilization with recommended plants, landscaping, special protection of local water resources, and safe disposal of all hazardous material, including the excavation of soil patches contaminated with fuel and lubricants.

250. The Contractor shall ensure tidy clearing of all sanitary and waste management facilities, removal and excavation of oil-contaminated patches, grading the soil to natural ground levels, re-establishment of natural vegetation. Otherwise, such sites often remain a long-lasting source of environmental problems, and a public eyesore. Options need to be explored which would allow the use of workers dormitories, fuel station, workshops, drainage facilities etc. for later and other purposes, as suggested by local leaders.

14. Socio-economic Issues – Historical and Cultural Heritage

251. Given the fact the Project is rehabilitation of an existing roadway the risk of loss of historical or cultural relics is highly unlikely. However when constructing bypasses in Shetpe and Zhetibay Contractors will have to meet with local Akims to consult about any possible past relics or foundations of old buildings along the road. Any finds must be reported to the PMC, to the Oblast Cultural Heritage Department and all construction work stopped until authorities have issued clearance to go on.

252. Within the Project Road in general, wherever roadside markers of accident victims are along road sections, grave removal requires a process of consultation with the local Akim as well as the victim‟s family to possibly move the grave to another appropriate site.

D. Addressing Potential Impacts during the Operational Phase

1. Institutional Issues

253. To ensure that all design and construction related mitigation has been implemented and is fully functional the owner of the road (MOTC) shall organize and undertake a complete environmental audit of the project. This audit is to be undertaken by the Oblast- level DOEP. Findings must be reported within fifteen days of completion of the field inspection and actions to repair any non-compliance conditions started within five days of notification by the Inspection Department. All actions must be completed within thirty days.

2. Physical Impacts – Air Quality and Noise Pollution

254. Traffic-generated air and noise pollution is inherent to road projects, and can cause substantial health and other impacts on both the local human and biotic environment, many of them with potential for cumulative negative effects. On the other hand, the improved road

66 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 condition and smoother traffic flow will result in less wear and tear to vehicles. This will, in turn, also result in less fuel consumption and emissions.

255. Due to the anticipated increase in traffic volume, air pollution and noise is expected to increase at locally confined zones. This impact is permanent and negative, but its significance is reduced due to the realignment of the road around the main villages by two bypasses.

256. To address such potential impacts in future, possible mitigation measures include:

Setting up a system to monitor air quality along the Project Area close to any residential areas, and adjust driving speeds in accordance with needs and acceptable standards; Provision of adequate noise barriers such as hedges and indigenous tree species will reduce the noise in those areas where human settlements are in close vicinity (e.g. in some sections of bypasses). Where the planting of such natural noise barriers may be impossible, structured noise barriers and shields may be considered as alternatives. Enforcing the traffic laws and regulations to curb speeding and getting the vehicles tested, on noise (and gaseous) emissions, followed by mandatory technical clearance certificates. Strict enforcement of the regulation that no economic or settling activity takes place within the demarcated boundaries of the RoW. This refers particularly to the potential establishment of roadside vending shops and facilities31.

3. Biological Impacts – Fauna and Flora

257. Intensive salt applications in winter months for deicing the road surface will invariably result in additional salt deposits along the roadside, hampering vegetation growth and potentially killing existing plants32 that are essential for slope protection, which in turn may result in embankment erosion damages. It is therefore recommended to consider the use of environmentally neutral friction material in case of adverse winter conditions on the road, and to consider bio-engineering methods in locations where embankment protection will be required with local species tolerant to the dry summer conditions. In addition, it is possible that increased traffic volumes may lead to increased accidents involving camels. To reduce this impact it is recommended that protective fences are placed in areas where camels are present in high numbers and that warning signs are placed along the road to make road users aware of the risk of collisions with camels. These actions, combined with enforcement of speed limits should reduce the potential for vehicle collisions with camels.

4. Socio-economic Issues – Traffic Safety

258. In Kazakhstan, there is a high risk of severe accidents (23 death cases per 100 road accidents (PEIA, 2010)). The MOTC records on roads between 2006 and 2010 show that there were more than 57,000 accidents, which killed over 13,000 and wounded 69,000 people. Road safety is therefore a major concern for everyone involved in the Kazakhstan road transport sector.

259. According to an internal analysis of the Dept. of Road Police (2009) the causes for such high accident level in the country are:

31 The establishment of petrol stations and roadside restaurants may be considered as an exception to this rule, however they must remain subject to reliable permit issuing processes. 32 As an example serves photo 17 of Appendix I, where most roadside vegetation is dead due to application of large quantities of salt during winter.

67 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Poor road conditions causing hazardous driving conditions33; Lack of drivers‟ awareness for perils, resulting in risky driving habits and pervasive non-observance of traffic rules; Inadequate training of drivers, resulting in inexperienced drivers; Poor vehicle condition and maintenance status, particularly in older vehicles; Inadequate (modern) traffic control equipment; Inadequate drivers license controls and penalties for traffic rule violators; Driving under influence of alcohol and drugs; Inadequate signage and warning systems in case of hazardous road conditions. Unexpected road crossing of large herds of domestic animals (photos 6, 8, 10, Appendix H) Inadequate and insufficient medical and ambulance facilities along the road.

260. To meet modern and efficient requirements and to curb the high accident ratio in Kazakhstan, the Ministry of Education and Science jointly with the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Health requested in 2009 to develop and include in the state standards into the general education courses required for drivers and include therein training in basic emergency medical care.

261. In line with the governmental stipulations the Project PEIA discusses various means of how to address road safety issues and how to curb the currently high accident rates. Appropriate road signage, traffic monitoring and control, human capacity development, review of the driving license issuing system and a wise application of penalties seem to be the most likely responses. The installation of an early warning electronic and radio system in case of bad road conditions ahead may also considerably contribute to improve the road safety. At this stage, however, it is proposed to plan for a workshop immediately after road completion with key stakeholders to discuss feasible, realistic and cost-effective means to reach the said objectives.

262. Spontaneous roadside vending should be prevented even at small initial stages, as the presence of street vendors adjacent to the road shoulder will invariably contribute to safety issues and accident risks. In cases where local street vending activities may be developed, and where the topographic situation permits (e.g. at bypass sections of Zhetibay and Shetpe), special roadside bays may be introduced. Such bays need to have safe access, signage, and should be equipped with basic toilet facilities, segregated for gender. Ideally, such vending sites might be combined with local bus stops.

5. Socio-economic Issues – Social Integrity and Public Health

263. The development of long-term transit routes bears specific risks affecting the social fabrics and the public health of the entire Project Area. Increased traffic movements will likely entail an increase in the transmission and spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including amongst others, HIV/AIDS. The potential impacts are permanent and negative in nature. Local public awareness campaigns, information leaflets, media programs etc. focusing on STD transmission need to be considered as counteractive measures. These initiatives are best carried out in concerted efforts involving a number of governmental and non-governmental agencies.

33 The PEIA (2010) indicates that about one third (38,000 km) of Kazakhstan‟s highway net is in poor road condition.

68 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

264. Kazakhstan is reported as a source, transit, and destination country for human trafficking34. Evidence of internal rural–urban trafficking is growing. The Investment Program is not likely to affect current trafficking patterns materially, as the investments themselves will not remove any significant transit barriers. However, once work on the full connectivity to the rest of the country and beyond its borders will be completed, the improved corridor may be seen by both human and drug traffickers as an attractive route. To deter such a transition, a public awareness program is proposed focusing on human and drug trafficking, aimed at raising public awareness and encouraging civil society engagement to protect potential victims of trafficking and aid efforts to detect and scare off traffickers. As with the STD awareness program these initiatives are best carried out in concerted efforts involving a number of governmental and non-governmental agencies.

6. Socio-economic Issues – Hazardous Material

265. Although the risk is extremely small since most such materials are transported by rail, it is possible that there may be an increased risk of hazardous material spills due to increased traffic volume and provision of larger capacity bridges and stronger road surfaces, inviting large trucks to use the road. Methods to mitigate this risk include:

Insure that all trucks carrying hazardous materials are marked according to GoK norms; Enforce traffic controls; Set speed limits for trucks carrying hazardous material to maximum 85kph or according the GoK norms and codes; Restrict all truck carrying hazardous material from passage through towns and villages where bypasses exist; and Assist Mangystau Oblast to prepare a rapid spill response and clean up protocol so that in the event of a spill, the appropriate people and equipment are quickly notified and action can be taken.

E. Assessment of Potential Cumulative Impacts

266. The Tranche 2 Project is part of a larger strategic plan in the context of the CAREC program to transport needs in Kazakhstan. It therefore needs to be viewed in conjunction with other road improvement projects and regional development activities to which this Tranche is a link. The concept of Cumulative Impacts, however, goes beyond such strategic considerations and includes impacts on the environment that result when the effects of implementing this Project‟s activities and adding them to effects of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Cumulative impacts are important because impacts of individual projects may be minor when considered in isolation, but significant when the projects are viewed collectively.

267. Apart from programs aiming at improvement of the national and regional road net, key industrial sectors (mining, oil, construction and services) and regional housing programs are likely to grow which will, on one hand, benefit from better road conditions and connectivity, on the other hand will curb certain risks and impacts associated with road development. 268. Given the prospected regional development activities summarized in Section 4, a number of residual impacts may pertain, some of which have cumulative potential, such as:

Cumulative Positive Impacts Relating to Social Conditions. Almost all of the long-term beneficial impacts analyzed in Section 3 will result in secondary benefits for the social fabrics, including public health conditions, be it in

34 ADB, 2006. Kazakhstan - Country Gender Assessment

69 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

association with locally improved road conditions and connectivity, better ambient air quality, noise reduction, access to services and markets, facilitating social connections, swifter emergency response, and improved road controls. Some landowners possessing private land near the new bypass alignment will benefit from increased land prices. Induced Development. An improved and more efficient transport will invariably trigger the expansion of local industries and the expansion of existing markets for local products. With increasing traffic volume and expanding economic opportunities it is assumed that additional development may be attracted to the area. This is even more the case in view of the expansion potential for the oil industries in and around the region of Zhetibay. Environmental Awareness. With implementation of the planned environmental awareness campaigns among labor force and in addressing the public general, the Project is likely to result in various secondary and cumulative benefits by enhancing public behavior toward general environmental safeguard principles, waste avoidance and management, and protection of

269. On the negative side, cumulative effects need to be addressed in the following aspects:

Curbing Accident Rates. The proposed safeguard actions, warning systems, training and awareness programs aiming at decreasing the current road accident rates will have multifold beneficial consequences, reflected in medical costs, insurance costs, expenditures on rescue operations, environmental compensation costs, easing individual suffering and human losses. The proposed animal underpasses, in junction with adequate roadside fencing, will substantially reduce accident risks caused by collisions with livestock and wild animals. Disturbance of the Social Fabric of the Roadside Communities. Given the sparse population in the Project Area social tensions, if appearing at all, are unlikely to persist beyond the construction period. Attraction of new industrial complexes and in-migration of various businesses to the newly established road corridor could result both in positive and negative side-effects if not effectively addressed. Successful mitigation must include thoughtful planning in close consultation with the local authorities, as outlined in the EMP. Once the proposed planning, monitoring and policing actions are implemented, there remains little if any residual impact risk for adverse spin-offs.

70 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

VI. Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

A. Objectives and Summary of the EMP

270. The Environmental Management Plan, presented in tabular form in this Section, aims to assist MOTC and MCOR in (1) adequately addressing the foreseen adverse environmental impacts of the Project, (2) enhancing the Project‟s overall benefits and (3) introducing standards of good environmental practices. The primary objectives of the EMP are therefore to:

Pre-identify and scope all potential (positive and negative) impacts associated with the road construction and rehabilitation activities, in sequence with the project phases; Define the responsibilities of Project proponents in accordance with the Project phases; Providing technical details of each project-related impact, and proposing an implementation schedule of the proposed mitigation measures; Define a monitoring mechanism and identify monitoring parameters to ensure that all proposed mitigation measures are completely and satisfactorily put into action; Identify the resources required to implement the EMP and outline corresponding financing arrangements for all proposed actions which are not included yet in the overall engineering budget for civil works; Providing a cost estimate for all proposed environmental mitigation and monitoring actions.

271. The EMP makes special provisions to address and mitigate potential impacts that might affect the existing areas of special protective legal status. It is also important to make the EMP fully available to the prospected Contractors. Therefore, the EMP (translated into Kazakh/Russian) shall be included within the Technical Specifications, both in the bidding documents and in the work clauses of the Contracts. The EMP shall also serve as guiding basis for the elaboration of the Construction Environmental Action Plans (CEAP) for which the contractors have a contractual obligation.

B. EMP Responsibilities

272. The EMP will be implemented by the Detailed Design Consultant and the Contractor. As stated above, the EMP shall be incorporated within Technical Specifications for the Contractor, and should also be made available to the Detailed Design Consultants to ensure all pre-construction mitigations are included within the Projects final design. The Project plans to engage a Project Management Consultant (PMC) to assist MOTC and MCOR with the Project implementation. The PMC will engage a full time national environmental specialist to undertake monitoring of the Project over a period of 24 months. This specialist will be assisted by an International Environmental Specialist who will assist the national specialist on an intermittent basis. It will be the responsibility of the PMC to monitor all environmental aspects of the project on behalf of MOTC and MCOR and report and non- compliance directly to MOTC / MCOR.

273. The successful bidder for the individual sub-section contracts are required to submit Contractor Environmental Action Plans (CEAP) to further detail and commit contractors to the stipulations of the EMP on a site-specific basis. To meet this end, contractors are requested to employ an Environmental Specialist to prepare the CEAP and to submit that expertise to the overseeing authorities. This specialist will also prepare, on behalf of the

71 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Contractor, regular environmental monitoring and compliance reports to be submitted to the PMC and MOTC.

C. Environmental Management and Environmental Monitoring Plans

274. The Tables A.1 – A.3 provide the environmental mitigation plan for the Project during the design, construction and operational phases of the Project. Environmental monitoring is outlined in Tables B.1 – B.3.

72 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

PART A: Environmental Management Plan

A.1: PRE-CONSTRUCTION (DESIGN) PHASE EMP Responsibility Environmental Impact/ Time Implementatio Supervisio Costs / Mitigation Measures Location Issue Frame n n / Budget Monitoring A.1.1 Bid documents 1. No bid documents will be prepared without Aktau, availability of Before bid Detailed Design PMC with Included in prepared without access the authors having incorporated a documents at documents Consultant and advice from the Project to or use of the EIA and (Kazakh/Russian) copy of the mitigation and MCOR. are MOTC MOEP Costs. particularly this EMP in a monitoring plan EMP, which shall be completed. translated version. included in the safeguard clauses of the Technical Specifications in the contracts. A.1.2 Incomplete or no N/A Prior to the Contractor. MCOR / Included in 1. Review and approve Contractors CEAP. CEAP. start of PMC the Project construction Costs. A.1.3 Site Selection for 1. Contractor to prepare a Borrow Pit Plan. N/A Prior to the Contractor. MCOR / Included in Borrow pits. 2. No borrow pits to be located within start of PMC the Project Karagie Karakol State Game Reserve. construction Costs. A.1.4 Poor landscape 1. Consider aesthetical roadside plantations Along bypass At early Detailed Design MCOR / Included in aesthetics due to Design. as much as environmental conditions (e.g. sections near design Consultant. PMC the Project water supply and availability of plants) allow. settlements. stage. Costs. A.1.5 Site selection for 1. Proper site selection, observing criteria 1. At selected camp At early Contractor. MCOR / Included in large construction camps, which primarily protect the public general, / plant locations. design PMC the Project asphalt plants and including: stage. Costs. concrete batching Observe a minimum distance of one facilities. kilometer between campsite and nearest residential area. Observe local wind conditions to reduce nuisances. Planning for independent water and electric supply and a medical service station at the site. 2. Completion of a Site Management Plan as part of the CEAP.

73 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

A.1.6 Site selection for 1. Ensure activities are approved by At selected camp / At early Contractor. MCOR / Included in temporary construction landowner. plant locations. design PMC the Project areas. 2. Observe local wind conditions to reduce stage. Costs. nuisances. A.1.7 Sourcing of water Prior approval for water extraction should be At all new water During the Contractor to MCOR and Included in and impacts to local water given by the relevant authorities. Permits extraction points. detailed obtain licenses PMC. the Project supply. shall be reviewed by MCOR and PMC. design and permits Costs. stage. from relevant department. A.1.8 Planning for 1. Provide for adequate and safe removal of At all demolition At early Contractor Local Included in structure demolishing and demolished structures in certified dump sites and all design Authorities the Project removal of utilities for sites. locations where stage responsible Costs widening the RoW 2. Plan for timely and fully functional utilities need to be for utilities substitution for any public utility that needs to removed and and be removed. substituted. oversight 3. Obtain certificates from local authorities. from PMC. A.1.9 Road safety issues 1. Planning for safe and adequate pedestrian 1. At bypass 1. At early Detailed Design MCOR and Included in associated with pedestrian crossing facilities, which will be in most sections Shetpe design Consultant PMC the Project crossing cases over passages equipped with ramps stage Costs and structures that allow the use of 2. Public Meetings 2. Shortly wheelchairs, pushcarts, bicycles and prams. at Aktau (2), before Environm. 2. Planning for public awareness meetings Shetpe, Zhetibay works start Budget 2.1 A.1.10 Addressing black 1. Provision of adequate type and number 1. At all sites where During pre- Contractor PMC Env. spots in landscape where (20) garbage bins at selected sites along the illegal dumping design Budget 3.2 significant littering and road. occurs and at each phase Project illegal dumping of waste rest site (bay, café) Costs / material takes place, e.g. along the entire at Karagiye Reserve, near road section km 740 and Ashyagar River crossing km 755

74 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

A.1.11 Use of contaminated 1. MOTC in cooperation with the SES of the At locations where During the 1. MOTC and PMC To be soil: Failure to carry out a Ministry of Health need undertake a selective roadside material detailed SES of Ministry included in roadside soil testing roadside soil sampling program (between will be re-used. design of Health and the program to establish Aktau and Zhetibay) for potential lead Selective testing stage Contracted Project possible lead contamination, establish the distance from must take place on laboratory. Costs / contamination of material the pavement edge and depth of dangerous both sides of the Civil Wor to be re-used. concentrations including a treatment plan road, and to 2. Contractor to and map of locations and depths. specified depths. dispose of soil. Env. Budget 2. In case soil tests indicate lead 1.2 contamination higher than permissive level, safe excavation and deposit of spoils need to be arranged. A.1.12 Gender Issues The Contractor shall be obliged to pay N/A Prior to the Contractor PMC Included in special attention to common gender issues, start of the Project and to overcome disproportional construction Costs. discriminations of women by the provision of . sufficient and fairly-paid work contracts. A.1.13 Traffic diversions Hauling and other access road to For the entire During Contractor to MCOR and Included in and Hauling construction sites shall be planned to cause project alignment. detailed prepare traffic PMC. the Project minimal hindrance and/or nuisance to public design. management Costs. life. This is particularly important in locations plan. with sensitive structures, such as schools and hospitals. Special planning needs to be devoted to ensure that the local railway lines (e.g. at Shetpe bypass construction) will not be interrupted without liaising with the railway authorities. To ensure these issues are managed, the Contractor shall prepare a traffic management plan specifying methods to manage existing traffic, including signage, haul routes and methods to reduce impacts to existing infrastructure including the rail line. A.1.14 Impacts to Detailed designs should ensure During Detailed design PMC Included in Sub-section 1 - domestic animals. incorporation of the proposed animal detailed consultant. the Project

75 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

crossings. Km 632.7, Km design. Costs. 663.3, Km 674,

Km 683.7, Km 704 Sub-section 2 - Km 740, Km 750, Km 758, Km 765, Km 773 Detailed designs should ensure During Detailed design PMC Included in incorporation of the proposed protective At locations detailed consultant. the Project fences. specified in the design. Costs. project feasibility study. Designs should include provisions for During Detailed design PMC Env. Budget warning signs indicating presence of Along entire detailed consultant. domestic animals Project route at design 1km intervals A.1.15 Impacts to Karagie During Detailed design PMC Included in Karakol State Game Field verification of the mitigation Between km detailed consultant. the Project Reserve measures agreed by the Administration 739 to 771 design Costs. of Game Reserve and Design Engineers Between km 739 to 771 the road should Field follow the existing alignment and pull offs verification and areas for short-term rests. Widening and barrier of the road to be on combined subgrade fencing via with minimum permissible parameters of Env. Budget transverse profile /cross-section (road width and curbs/shoulders) for I –II category roads in accordance with Sanitary norms and rules 03..09-2006 “Automobile roads”. To make sure that all parameters

76 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

(longitudinal slope of the radius of vertical curves) are aligned with Sanitary rules and norms 03.3.09-2006 “Automobile roads” for I and II category roads on the surface curve designing phase. Specified requirements causes conditions for optimum speed limited vehicles passed with minimal impact to environment from engine noise and emissions of exhaust gases. Installation of barrier fence with high protection on both shoulders all along the road section from 739 to 771 km, Agreement of Inspection to determine the locations for artificial constructions of animal underpasses, to use for this purposes culverts and bridges. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules.

A.1.16 Impacts to Kyzylsai Ecological Detailed design PMC Included in State Regional Nature Undertake baseline ecological survey of Within the area survey - in consultant. the Project Park the park (in accordance with Appendix F) of Kyzylsai March 2013 Costs. State Regional The surveyors Ensure that all parameters (longitudinal Nature Park slope of the radius of vertical curves) are During are a team of Env. Budget aligned with Sanitary rules and norms detailed national 03.3.09-2006 “Automobile roads” for I design biologists. and II category roads on the surface curve designing phase. Specified requirements causes conditions for optimum speed limited

77 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

vehicles passed with minimal impact to environment from engine noise and emissions of exhaust gases. No changes to alignment shall occur and all construction works limited to the right of way. No construction camp, temporary or permanent No borrow pits or quarries. No blasting Construction sites for basing of road building equipment and storage of road building materials to be placed outside of protected areas. Constructions of underpasses for rodents and reptiles. These underpasses can be simple pipe culverts at two kilometer intervals, but they should be small enough to prevent larger animals, such as sheep, attempting to access these areas. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules and of the possibility that animals maybe crossing the road in these areas. Speed limits within the entire buffer zone area (recommended 50km per hour)

78 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

A.2: CONSTRUCTION PHASE MITIGATION Environmental Impact/ Location Time Responsibility Mitigation Measures Costs / Issue Frame Implementati Supervision Budget on A.2.1 Contractor fails to Entire contract Prior to the 1. Contractor 1. As specified by law, contractor will be PMC 1. To be retain a ecological expert to section for which the start of the 2. International required to employ a licensed expert to included in prepare the CEAP and to CEAP will be construction Environmental prepare the CEAP and obtain all relevant the implement all mitigation and prepared. work. Specialist permits. The contractor will not be permitted monitoring measures as Project to mobilize workers without an approved specified in the EMP. Costs CEAP and the appropriate permits in place. 2. Env. 2. Training provided to the Contractor and Budget his environmental expert by an International Environmental Specialist. A.2.2 Borrow Pits 1. No borrow pits are allowed within the At potential borrow During Contractor PMC To be protected areas. pit locations construction included in 2. In case borrow sites are required outside the long-established quarries, the potential site will require mitigation measures to be Project applied, as follows: Costs Avoid sites with known contamination and/or erosion problems; Avoid to generating steep cut slopes; Provide suitable locations for storage of the excavated material, ensuring that the local drainage will not be hampered and no excessive siltation may occur; Install adequate fencing to prevent unauthorized access and intrusion by livestock; Avoid damage to adjacent lands while providing for haulage roads; Store, protect and re-use topsoils for re- instating the pit. Shape and compact

79 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

slope before applying former topsoil layers; Develop a Management Plan for the borrow pit operation, including all planned operations, quantities, hauling arrangements and security precautions. The plan shall provide full details on environmental protection measures, especially in view of protecting local water resources and proper decommissioning the sites. This Management Plan shall also describe the intended reshaping and re- installation of the pit. Rehabilitation options may include revegetation of the site as specified by the Forest and Hunting Committee of Mangystau, using local herbaceous plants and shrubs that fulfill soil stabilizing functions and prevent further erosion washouts; choose the right season and methods to ensure good revegetation, and use bio- engineering solutions as applicable. A.2.3 Soil erosion 1. All rehabilitation and rectifying works on 1. At cut and fill During Contractor PMC To be embankments, as well as cut and fill locations. construction included in operations, shall be strictly adhere to the 2. At bridges and the longitudinal and cross-section profiles culverts. described in the Technical Drawings. Project 2. The Contractor will be responsible for Costs ensuing material that is less susceptible to erosion will be selected for placement around bridges and culverts. In addition he shall ensure re-vegetation of exposed areas including; (i) selection of fast growing and grazing resistant species of local grasses and shrubs; (ii) immediate re-vegetation of

80 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

all slopes and embankments if not covered with gabion baskets; (iii) placement of fiber mats to encourage vegetation growth. A.2.4 Inadequate handling 1. Should the tests during the pre- Any road shoulders Prior to any Contractor and PMC and SES See Table of lead-contaminated construction period indicate contaminated where excavation is road shoulder SEC of the expertise as X of EIA roadside soils soils at non-permissive concentrations, and planned in the excavation or Min of Health applicable these need to be excavated, the Contractor vicinity of tested clearing as well as must treat these soils as hazardous terrain. where there MOEP materials, seek proper disposal permits and is risk of soil get expert advice on how and where to contamination dispose or decontaminate these soils. 1. The Contractor will be required to have A.2.5 Failure to properly At all construction Throughout Contractor PMC To be the following spill prevention measures in manage petroleum products sites, and within construction included in place at all work sites: such as fuel, lubricants and camps and storage works, the All fuelling to be done on a concrete bitumen, potentially facilities established including surface provided with spill catch tank Project resulting in spillage and decommissio that can be cleaned and all spilled fuel Costs / contamination. ning phase. recovered and recycled based on Civil discussions with fuel supplier. Works All repair and maintenance work must either be done on a concrete surface with oil spill catch basin or oil catch pans must be provided at all service areas and training provided to all „mechanics‟. All fuel use areas where spills and leakage is possible, e.g. the generator, must have drip basins installed to pre- vent leakage. All recovered materials must be recycled. Fuelling areas must be equipped with proper fuel nozzles and means for preventing accidental spills. All bitumen handling must not permit any material from leaking to the ground,

81 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

including transfer areas and any areas where bitumen is transported in drums. Bitumen drums must be stored in a dry covered secure place where no leakage to water or ground is possible. Drums must be recycled at least once/yr. Any spills must be cleaned up according to GoK norms and codes within 24 hours of the occurrence, with contaminated soils and water treated according to GoK norms and codes. Records must be handed over without delay to the PMC. A.2.6 Water extraction may 1. The Contractor must obtain all necessary At all locations Throughout Contractor Local Water To be lead to conflicts with local permits and approvals for water extraction. where groundwater construction Authorities included in water users extraction is planned works. the PMC Project

Costs 1. The Contractor shall ensure the following: A.2.7 Modification of At the bridge site Throughout Contractor PMC To be All construction materials in a channel surface drainage during the included in with flowing water must be removed so km 755 and km 635. culvert and bridge construction the as not to provide any obstruction. replacement and raising of period Project horizontal road alignment Culvert removal and replacement will be Costs / without repair and done during the dry months. rehabilitation after Demolition must be done in a way that Civil construction is finished prevents large junks of material from Works falling into the river. Stabilization of disturbed crossing banks must take place as part of the construction work and include filter fabric, gabions and bioengineering . techniques as specified by designs. 1. The Contractor shall include all A.2.8 Impacts to air quality. At all construction During the Contractor PMC To be necessary measures to reduce air pollution

82 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

and dust development that would impact the locations construction included in public health, by: period the Providing dust masks to operating Project personnel; Costs / Regular water spraying at hauling and access roads to borrow pits; Civil Equipping asphalt, hot mix and batching Works plants with fabric filters and/or wet scrubbers to reduce the level of dust emissions; Mounting protective canvasses on all trucks which transport material that could generate dust; Building access and hauling roads at sufficient distances from residential areas, particular, from local schools and hospitals; and Ensuring no burning of debris or other materials will occur on the Site without permission of the PMC. Construction vehicles and machinery shall be kept in good working order, regularly serviced and engines turned off when not in use. Vehicles with an open load-carrying case, which transport potentially dust- producing materials, shall have proper fitting sides and tail boards. Dust-prone materials shall not be loaded to a level higher than the side and tail boards, and shall always be covered with a strong tarpaulin. In periods of high wind, dust-generating operations shall not be permitted within 200 m of residential areas. Special

83 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

precautions need to be applied in the vicinity of sensitive areas such as schools, kindergartens and hospitals. Unauthorized burning of construction waste material shall be subject to penalties for the Contractor, and withholding of payment. Along any section Prior to any Contractor, PMC A.2.9 Contractor 1. The Contractors is required to develop a To be of the road were clearing with advice undertakes excessive, sketch map of the location number and included in trees are subject to taking place. from the unauthorized or species of trees along the roadside that he the the Contractor‟s Oblast CHF unnecessary vegetation intends to cut. Such plan needs to be discretion for Project removal or causes screened by the PMC. removal. Costs / damages to ecologically 2. The Contractor must develop a plan for vital vegetation at Civil replacing any removed tree or important construction sites Works vegetation, and engage the CHF in the intended replanting scheme, describing: species selection, minimum size, number of young trees per cut tree, maintenance for a specified time, replacement of unsuccessful replantation 1. The Contractor shall ensure that: A.2.10 Impacts to Karakie- At the Karakie- During Contractor PMC To be The Contractors EMP will be reviewed Karakol State Game Karakol State Game construction. included in by both Project Management Reserve and Kyzylsai State Reserve & Kyzylsai the Consultant, and Administration of the Nature Park State Nature Park Game Reserve. Project No construction camp, temporary or Costs / permanent is located within the reserve. Civil No project-related facilities such as Works concrete batching plants, asphalt plants, bitumen mixers, or storage yards are located within the reserve. No blasting works are allowed. Noise, dust, and vibration impacts to the protected area should be minimized.

84 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

No construction waste is allowed in the area near or within the Reserve. All spills should be quickly removed. Sign posts shall be placed along the boundary of the reserve to inform workers and machine operators not to enter this area. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules. Decrease the construction period in these areas. Use efficient road construction equipment with minimal parameters of emissions and noise level. Construction sites for basing of road building equipment and storage of road building materials to be placed outside of protected areas. Provide dust suppression during the road coating and preparation of road pavement basis layers from macadam and gravel. Temporary bypasses should be placed outside of protected area. Collection and utilization of wastes from asphalt concrete mix used for road coating on outside territory of protected areas. Maintaining of manufacturing operations with bitumen materials strictly in the project within the roadway. A.2.11 Public hindrances 1. The Contractor shall prepare a site- 1. For project Throughout Contractor PMC To be due to traffic diversions and specific traffic diversion management plan, construction the included in

85 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

hauling routes including precautionary measures such as locations. construction the signage, working hours, public awareness, period 2. At the locations of Project preparation of emergency plans, and proper railway crossing Costs / decommissioning of such temporary roads. north of Zhetibay.

2. Liaison with railway authorities. 1. The Contractor shall ensure the following: A.2.12 Potential Impacts At all construction Throughout Contractor PMC Included in Avoid, all time, contact of bitumen with associated with bitumen sites the the water and dust; works construction Project Bitumen and solvents shall not be period spilled on ground, ditches or water Costs courses. If this happens, spills need to be removed immediately and disposed in a safe site that is protected from public access. No waste material shall be burned in connection with hot bitumen. All manual works while handling bitumen require special protective clothing (shoes and gloves). Bitumen works shall not be carried out in winter, rainy or stormy weather conditions. Trucks used for hauling asphalt mixture shall be adequately equipped. Surfacing works should not occupy more than one single traffic lane at a time. 1. The Contractor shall ensure the following: A.2.13 Potential Impacts At all construction Throughout Contractor PMC Included in Avoid concrete works during windy, icy associated with concrete sites the the or very hot conditions. works construction Project Aim at pre-cast solutions. period Dust development at site can be Costs managed by suitable covers (canvas) and/or water spraying.

86 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

While working in streams casting concrete structures utilize cofferdams. Use spray waters for slowly curing and make all precautions to avoid contamination of adjacent surface or groundwater resources. Cover newly cast concrete surface with waterproof sheet material or sand to prevent moisture losses, and accelerate the curing process by using steam or radiant heating. While working with additives (e.g. anti- corrosive mixtures) special care needs to be applied, following the general and specific precaution prescriptions described in the Contractor‟s work safety guidelines. 1. The Contractor shall take all necessary A.2.14 Noise and vibration At all construction Throughout Contractor PMC To be steps to ensure: impacts, generated by sites, especially the included in Selection of modern and well-serviced construction activities, those located construction the equipment and plants with reduced potentially causing health nearby settlements period noise level ensured by suitable in-built Project impacts and damages to techniques and appropriate silencing Costs / structures devices. Civil Confining excessively noisy work and Works movement of heavy machinery to specified daytime working hours (this relates especially to stone crushers.

Percussion hammers and pneumatic drills). Environm. Work hours need observe special Budget restrictions near residential and 2.1 sensitive areas. Providing the construction workers with suitable hearing protection (ear muffs);

87 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Avoid vehicle idling. Timely public announcements of works. 1. The Contractor will adhere to standard A.2.15 Failure to adhere to All work camps, Throughout Contractor PMC To be good house-keeping practices including: construction related good construction the included in Management of construction waste and housekeeping practices, maintenance yards construction the water. including solid and sanitary and any other areas period. Equipment lubricants and fuel, including Project waste management. operated by the Costs / management and collection of waste contractor and oils and fuel particularly related to involved in the Civil refueling depots, maintenance areas project. Works and diesel generator sets. Sewage will require latrines or chemical toilets with complete clean up after the construction is complete. Garbage will be collected and properly disposed, in accordance with GOK norms and codes. The contractor shall orient all construction workers in basic sanitation and health care issues, general health and safety matters, and on the specific hazards of their work and will need to certify to that effect at the start of the construction period. Once the site is no longer needed the contractor must fully decommission it, with emphasis on waste removal /clean up of any spills or hazardous materials plus any necessary revegetation. A.2.16 Loss of cultural or 1. Wherever roadside markers of accident At any markers or 1. During the Contractor PMC and any To be archaeological heritage, victims are along road sections, grave sites that would construction authority included in including cemeteries and removal requires a process of consultation indicate period and issuing a the roadside graves/markers of with the local Akim as well as the victim‟s archaeological/histo ahead of ex- Cultural Project accident victims family to possibly move the grave to another rical items at cavation at Heritage Costs / appropriate site. construction sites, any such site Expertise including newly Civil

88 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

2. Any chance finds must be reported to the established hauling Works PMC, to the Oblast Cultural Heritage roads. 2. Prior to Department and all construction work earth moving stopped until authorities have issued in these clearance to go on. areas 1. It is the Contractor‟s responsibility to A.2.17 Impacts on Public Throughout the During the Contractor PMC To be locate and confirm the details of all public Utilities, Access and Project Corridor construction included in services and that may potentially be Services period the affected by the works. 2. All utilities subject to removal need to be Project fully replaced before disconnecting the Costs / existing service. Civil 3. Any damage or hindrance/disadvantage Works to local businesses caused by the premature removal or insufficient replacement of public utilities is subject to full compensation, all at the full liability of the Contractor who caused the problem. 4. The Contractor shall also maintain unhindered access and use of social, cultural and religious sites (e.g. mosques, cemeteries, cultural gathering places, sports facilities). 5. Should damage to private properties occur, including livestock and homestead gardens, the Contractor will be held fully liable to compensate and rectify the inflicted damage. 1. The Contractor will be requested to A.2.18 Health and Safety of N/A During the Contractor PMC To be prepare an approved Construction Workers construction included in Environmental Action Plan (CEAP), which period the will, among others, delineate all work safety aspects he intends to apply. Focal points of Project the CEAP will relate to means, type and Costs / number of protective clothing, safety

89 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

precautions at specific work sites, first aid, Civil rescue plans, work hours, and all intended Works measures for avoiding or proper clearance of hazardous substances, including fueling operations, transport and handling of hazardous materials and explosives, securing measures etc. The CEAP will further explain methods and volumes for using any local resource, and how to address common risks associated with public safety, crimes, STDs and prostitution. 1. The Contractor shall ensure that all A.2.19 Decommissioning of Construction End of Contractor PMC To be permanent and temporary construction Works Site camps, temporary Construction included in camps are re-instated to the satisfaction of and permanent. the the PMC, including the removal of any contaminated materials. Project Costs / Civil Works 1. The Contractor shall develop a A.2.20 Hazardous Materials N/A During the Contractor PMC To be management plan for transport, handling and Explosives construction included in and storing hazardous material and a period the contingency plan in the event of an accident involving hazardous material. Such Project emergency plan needs to be consulted and Costs / coordinated with the local health facilities. Civil

Works 2. Explosives need be treated with specific care and arrangements for restricted uses and safety measures. The responsibility for devising management plans for the use of explosives lies in the hands of the Contractor and will be subject to meticulous monitoring.

90 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

A.3: OPERATIONAL PERIOD MITIGATION Environmental Impact/ Location Time Responsibility Mitigation Measures Costs / Frame Implementation Supervision Issue Budget A.3.1 Full implementation 1. To ensure that all design and Project road, all After MOTC Oblast-level Project of EMP. construction related mitigation has been locations. completion DOEP Costs implemented and is fully functional the of works. owner of the road (MOTC) shall organize and undertake a complete environmental audit of the project. A.3.2 Concerns related to 1. Recommended actions include: Emergency phone At the start MCOR, in MOTC and Partly in general traffic safety Appropriate road signage, traffic monitoring posts at identified of operations collaboration Traffic Police Env. and control, human capacity development, black spots where with local Budget review of the driving license issuing system regular road Traffic police and a wise application of penalties seem to accidents occur. and local be the most likely responses. The medical installation of an early warning electronic services and radio system in case of bad road conditions ahead may also considerably contribute to improve the road safety. Evaluate the introduction of publicly accessible, well-marked posts containing both an emergency (pay-free) telephone and a first-aid box with medical supplies, stretchers, bandages and other means for first assistance to road victims. To avoid mis-uses, these boxes shall be equipped with an electronic lock that can only be opened by prior telephone contacting to a nearby police station. A.3.3 Increased risk of 1. To manage these problems the operator In every village At the start MCOR, in MOTC and Partly in pedestrian accidents within will enforce speed limits through increased crossed and bypass of collaboration MOE Env. settlement areas due to „radar‟ surveillance, better and more section (e.g. operations, with local Budget improved roads, faster frequent signage and increased speeding Shetpe) at defined Traffic police

91 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

speeds and greater traffic fines. In villages at crossing the owner will schedule and volume improve the signage and include amber Environmental lights were possible. As many town Agencies bypasses as possible are planned and should reduce project generated traffic through towns and villages. A.3.4 Inadequate 1. Adequate signage and awareness Where applicable t.b.d. MCOR, in MOTC MOTC management of traffic- measures forwarded by Traffic Police, to and required, collaboration generated air pollution improve the flow of traffic, reduce nearby human with Environm. deceleration-acceleration cycles and idling settlements Environmental Budget periods, all measures that will lead to the Agencies 2.1 overall reduction in the emission levels, despite the predicted increase in the overall traffic volume. 2. In addition, it is recommended that a system to monitor air quality along the Project Area is established, and enforcing the traffic laws and regulations to ensure vehicles are tested, on noise (and gaseous) emissions, followed by mandatory technical clearance certificates. A.3.5 Traffic-related noise 1. Identify feasible and effective measures Where applicable t.b.d. MCOR, in MOTC MOTC development, affecting to enforce suggested speed limits. and required collaboration nearby human settlements. 2. Within settlement areas, where soil and with Environm. soil humidity conditions would allow, Environmental Budget consider the establishment of natural noise Agencies 2.1 barriers (hedges), based on a specific monitoring program. Where the planting of such natural noise barriers may be impossible, structured noise barriers and shields may be considered as alternatives. A.3.6 Increased risk of 1. Although the risk is extremely small, the Shetpe and Aktau, Within the Road MOTC and MOTC hazardous material spills road operator will: at defined Road first year of Operator, MOE due to increased traffic Insure that all trucks carrying Inspection Sites or the road Traffic Police Environm. volume and provision of hazardous materials are marked Checkpoints being in Budget larger capacity bridges and according to GoK norms. operation 3.1

92 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

stronger road surfaces, Enforce traffic controls. MOTC to inviting large trucks to use Set speed limits for trucks carrying arrange for the road. hazardous material to max. 85kph or District according the GoK norms and codes. Contingency Restrict all truck carrying hazardous Plan material from passage through towns and villages where bypasses exist. Assist Mangystau Oblast to prepare a rapid spill response and clean up protocol so that in the event of a spill the appropriate people and equipment are quickly notified and action can be taken. A.3.7 Increased risk of Enforcement of speed limits should reduce Along entire project Continuous Traffic Police N/A Traffic collisions with domestic the potential for collisions with domestic road. Police animals. animals on the road. Budget. A.3.8 Potential spread of 1. Commendable actions to curtail such In Beineu and Continual SES, Traffic SES SES own STDs and human trafficking impacts are: Aktau activity, as Police budget Public awareness campaigns to required by address risks associated with girl records of trafficking and spread of sexually incidences communicable diseases. Increased controls on highway sections where girl traffickers are reported to operate. Seeking assistance of locally operating NGOs.

93 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

PART B: Environmental Monitoring Plan

B.1 PRE-CONSTRUCTION (DESIGN) PERIOD Monitoring Aspect Monitoring Activity / Details / Outputs Timing Executing Reporting Unit Responsibilit y B.1.1 No provision for translation of Confirm that Kazakh/Russian version of EIA and EMP are with During Detailed MOTC/ RC MOTC EIA and related documents for use the Oblast Inspectors Design Period, at by Oblast Inspectors, and for use in Confirm that bid documents contain environmental clauses the time of Bid documents ( at least this EMP) tailored to the project conditions as well as a copy of the preparing the bid precautionary measures outlined in this EMP documents B.1.2 Failure of designers to include Confirm by reviewing design documents and discussion with During Detailed Detailed MOTC design measures that will prevent design team that Design Period, at Design later impacts such as: livestock 1. livestock crossings in have been addressed the time of Team under crossing management, poor traffic 2. a plan to protect roadside trees as much as possible has been preparing the bid the management and excessive tree prepared; documents direction of removal 3.There is step-by-step protocol for traffic management during MOTC/ RC construction ( as opposed to ad hoc, hap hazard existing system); and 4. an environmentally friendly bridge and culvert replacement guide has been prepared B.1.3 Roadside soil testing program Monitor / verify the testing program for selected soil samples, During Detailed Specialist MOTC and to identify potential levels of lead focusing on the section between Aktau and Zhetibay, together Design Period Laboratory SES of MOH contamination with the SES. contracted by Project B.1.4 Lack of capacity to understand Collect and review written material and expertise indicating that During Detailed Environ- MOTC and implement environmental MOTC has provided instructions for the contractors to use all Design Period, at mental mitigation measures, in particular the information available in and from the EIA. the time of Supervision compliance monitoring procedure Prepare environmental compliance forms together with contract awards Engineer Contractors and Sub-Contractors to secure acceptance MOTC/ RC

94 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

B.2 CONSTRUCTION PERIOD Monitoring Aspect Monitoring Activity / Details / Outputs Timing Executing Reporting Unit Responsibil ity B.2.1 Air and water quality, and Instrumental monitoring of air and water quality, and noise Baseline Contractor PMU noise monitoring – through once before independent construction laboratory Routine monitoring – 1 time per month B.2.2 Availability of ecological Confirm ecological expertise is with contractor at start of At time of each PMU MOTC expertise to prepare the CEAP and construction period: check CV and license certificate(s). contractor to implement all mitigation and Discuss with contractors/sub-contractors the management appointment monitoring measures with contractor implications of all measures included in EMP. B.2.3 Lack of good housekeeping Using agreed monitoring checklists, confirm that the items as Throughout PMU PMU and practices at both camp sites and listed in the CEAP and in the Technical Specifications are fully construction MOTC work sites, including solid and implemented. period, monthly sanitary waste management B.2.4 Tree removal program Inspection of cutting plan and confirmation of consultation with Throughout the PMU Monitor PMU and damaging the old trees and shelter CFH, then review and record re-planting/revegetation efforts. construction with the CFH MOTC belt plantings along roadsides kept period, spot of the Oblast to a absolute minimum. checks and Rayon were cutting is foreseen B.2.5 Earthworks and material Using a checklist confirm the following: PMU handling processes, including 1. haul road upgraded so it becomes an all weather road; Start of aggregate sites, haul roads to B.B.2. speed limit of 30 KMP within 500m of any village and the Construction quarries or processing sites; use of chemical dust suppressants at least on road for 500m on period and PMU and either side of a village is enforced. The same approach is to be thereafter MOTC taken if the other site is used. monthly until use 3. Aggregate sites are operating legally and contractors have of roads/sites is marked the boundaries, work within them, and fully rehabilitate finished. and stabilize the site as part of decommissioning.

95 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

B.2.6 Side borrow operations Undertake inspections to determine the type of borrow Throughout the PMU PMU and potentially causing erosion, operations the contractor is applying and ensure that roadside construction MOTC landslide and destruction of borrowing is not taking place and is always out of the visual field period and landscape from the road. monthly B.2.7 Earthworks - transport and Undertake, as part of the construction inspection, regular Every day, PMU PMU and storage; managing of dust, noise, confirmation that earthworks are handled in an environmentally throughout the MOTC drainage during haulage of acceptable manner and dust control is undertaken at all time, construction materials including the use of tarpaulins by trucks hauling fine materials, period as well as watering along the haul road sections passing near/thru villages, and that a speed limit of 30 km/hr is strictly enforced. Haulage through roadside villages and settlements must be restricted between 07:30 and 17:30.. B.2.8 Erosion control and slope Undertake regular inspection to confirm that slope stabilization Every day, PMU PMU and stabilization to prevent landslip and and standard erosion protection method are being used by the throughout the MOTC chronic erosion at cuts and water contractor for all work where there is clearing of topsoil, cutting construction crossings is being applied. and filling. period B.2.9 Excavation and disposal of The excavation of roadside soils between Aktau and Zhetibay At every PMU PMU and roadside lead-contaminated soils needs to be matched with reasonable proof at selected sample excavation MOTC (see also 1.3) spots that the materials are not significantly contaminated with activity lead; if contamination exists, verify proper handling, treatment and ultimate disposal of such material B.2.10 Potential bitumen/asphalt Confirm that sighting specification for both asphalt and concrete Throughout PMU PMU and and concrete production spills and plants are according to norms and codes but also that are at construction MOTC pollution. least as far away from settlement areas as defined in the period and mitigation table. monthly Bitumen storage and handling is done without spillage B.2.11 Management of petroleum Using the monitoring checklist the 8 specific spill and Quarterly PMU PMU and products such as fuel, lubricants contamination prevention measures listed in item B.B.2.13 of the inspections, MOTC and bitumen, without spills and Mitigation table will be assessed and reported on. Unannounced unannounced contamination being practiced by (spot) inspections at all work sites, work camps. diesel contractor and all subcontractors. generators, technical workshops, maintenance yards and fuel storage facilities Any non-compliance will be rectified immediately

96 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

B.2.12 Potential deficiencies of The PMU will inspect and verify that adequate consideration and 5X during the PMU PMU and surface drainage at construction drainage works and protection have been provided: specifically construction MOTC areas that the 3 mitigative measures defined in B.2.9 of the mitigation period, and 2X table are fully implemented in a timely manner. during each rainy season B.2.13 Construction-related air Using a monitoring checklist confirm that the six mitigation Ongoing PMU PMU and pollution actions defined in B.B.2.9 of the Mitigation Table are being throughout the MOTC implemented project as part of the construction inspection B.2.14 Damage or loss of cultural Confirm that all roadside graves (based on an inventory of sites) Continual checks PMU, PMU and or archaeological heritage, including are dealt with in a dignified and legal manner including viewing each time a new working close MOTC cemeteries and roadside records of consultation with Akims and with family members and construction with local graves/markers of accident victims. reviewing the process being taken for check the possible section starts authorities presence of cultural relics.

B.3 OPERATION PERIOD Monitoring Aspect Monitoring Activity / Details / Outputs Timing Executing Reporting Unit Responsibi lity B.3.1 Post construction The owner of the road shall organize and undertake a complete No more than 13 MOTC, and MOTC and operational audit, 1-year after road environmental audit of the project. This audit is to be months after the MOEP Oblast-level completion undertaken by the Oblast-level Mangistau DOEP. Findings must operating period Department be reported within 15 days of completion of the field inspection has fully started. of Env. and actions to repair any non-compliance conditions started Inspection within 5 days of notification by the Inspection Department. All Unit. actions must be completed within 30 days. B.3.2 Management of traffic- As traffic growth is projected to reach 7%/year, a site-specific Monitoring MOTC in MOTC generated air pollution monitoring at roadside settlements will be required. Parameters 1X/year for two cooperation to be monitored are in line with the norms and codes of the continuous 24 with Environm. national environmental legislation. hour period KAZHYDRO- Budget during the non- MET or other Monitoring Report. winter season at approved t.b.d. sites agency

97 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

B.3.3 Management of traffic- Noise impacts are expected to marginally affect human Monitoring will MOTC in MOTC generated noise settlements due to the remoteness. Near or at settlements take place cooperation (bypasses) noise levels need to be tested to confirm or modify 1X/year during with Ministry of Environm. the measures taken. peak traffic Health‟s Budget Parameters to be monitored are in line with the norms and periods over two Sanitary and codes of the national environmental legislation. 24 hour Epidemiologic monitoring al Service Monitoring Report. periods at t.b.d. sites B.3.4 Risk of road accidents with Report on the effectiveness of proposed measures for Undertake MOTC working MOTC pedestrians and domestic animals pedestrian and animal crossing structures, and make further annual safety with Oblast due to improved roads, faster recommendations to improve road safety with respect to these check and and Rayon Environm. speeds and greater traffic volume. aspects. Modify, as applicable, speed limit signage, pedestrian review statistics level Budget use zones, and provide more cross walk lighting. of pedestrian- authorities Reconsider, as necessary, strengthening and extension of vehicle animal fences along road. Accident Monitoring Report is to be accidents and prepared. address areas where problems occur Monitoring Aspect Monitoring Activity / Details / Outputs Timing Executing Reporting Unit Responsibi lity B.3.5 Risk of hazardous Elaboration of a contingency plan in case of major emergencies, one year after MOTC working MOTC materials spills due to increased and plan responsibilities for different scenarios. operation with Oblast traffic volume and Rayon Environm. level Budget authorities Abbreviations used in the EMP: CEAP - Construction Environmental Action Plan CFH - Committee for Forestry and Hunting, under the Ministry of Agriculture GoK - Government of Kazakhstan MOEP - Ministry of Environmental Protection MOTC - Ministry of Transport and Communication PMC - Projects Management Consultant, Team of consultants working closely with the Implementing Agency, the Mangystau Road Committee (MCOR) MCOR - (Mangystau) Road Committee, under the MOTC SES - Sanitary and Epidemiological Services, under the Ministry of Health t.b.d. - to be determined

98 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

D. Environmental Costs

275. The Environmental Budget includes all mitigation, monitoring and all expenses related to environmental aspects for the anticipated 3-year duration of civil works. The total environmental mitigation and monitoring cost for this Project (Table 6-2) is estimated to be approximately US$ 1,505,700.

276. The cost table contains a number of cost items that are presently not included in the overall construction budget. Similarly, these costs, relating to environmental safeguard activities and structures, are not yet included in the Bill of Quantities and in the provisions made by the Design Engineers. For the sake of environmental protection, however, all the additional costs specified in this section seem indispensable as long as all safeguard and precautionary measures devised in the EMP are to be followed. At the times being it is assumed that all items referred to as environmental fall under this budget, although some of them might be shifted to the civil works budget (such as costs for additional lead contamination tests, fencing, animal passages and other safety-related items.

277. Although the issue of residual lead contamination seems currently of low significance the possible costs related to additional soil tests for potential lead contamination, re-use and safe deposits have been considered (Table 6-4) and will need to be included in the overall Environmental Budget as potential costs. On the other hand, should the soil tests show no contamination, the respective costs would not incur.

278. The provision of an international environmental specialist at the start of the construction period to assist the Contractors with the preparation of their CEAPs is considered indispensable, as (i) local contractors usually lack the experience to elaborate such plans, and (ii) this will significantly improve the chances for satisfactory compliance. The specialist will also provide training programs to the Contractor and his local environmental specialist.

Table 6-2: Project’s Environmental Costs Cost per Amoun Cost per # Activity /Item Unit Activity, Comments t Unit, US$ US$ Environmental Protection Measures Dust 1 days 400 500 200,000 suppression Sub-Total: 200,000 Karagie-Karakol State Game Reserve Protective 2 barrier fencing meters 64,000 10 640,000 (two side) Field verification of 3 the proposed 5,000 mitigation measures included in 4 Animal crossing pcs 10 100,000 1,000,000 construction budget Sub-Total: 645,000 KSRNP

99 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

5 Pipe culvert pcs 14 10,000 140,000 underpass 6 Ecological Report 1 15,000 Survey Sub-total: 155,000 Training and Awareness Public 7 Campaigns, 50 Day event 4 days 1,750 7,000 person Environmental Signboard 8 35 50 pcs 300 18,000 Signage Domestic Warning Approx 9 100 10,000 Animal Signage signs 100 pcs Contractor Man 10 environmental 2 25,000 50,000 Month training Sub-Total: 85,000 Emergency Planning District 11 Emergency Plan 36 1 12,000 Plan Video Cameras Installed 12 4 pcs 48,000 192,000 + box post Emergency Installed 13 37 6 pcs 16,000 96,000 Phones post Electronic Display 14 3 pcs 2,000 6,000 Warning Signs Sign Sub-Total: 306,000 Environmental monitoring costs (see Table 6-3 below) Sub-Total: 43,800 SUB-TOTAL 1,434,800 US$ Contingencies 5% 72,000 Total US$ 1,505,700

35 Signboards, making like traffic signs, each about 2m² in size, metal, painted like traffic sign 36 Addressing major calamities (earthquakes, conflagration, flooding, and spillages) 37 To be established at equal intervals along road, i.e. every 50 km

100 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table 6-3: Environmental Monitoring Costs Locations & Number of Unit Cost, US Activity/Item Frequency Cost, US $ Samples or $ Events Baseline monitoring 3 in a one- Air Quality 15 locations 100 4,500 week period 2 in a one- Water Quality 2 locations 100 400 week period. Zhetybai, Shetpe, 2 in a one- Noise Kyzylsai Game 50 400 week period Reserve Subtotal 5,300 Baseline Routine monitoring Not less than 10 locations * 10 Air Quality once per 100 30.000 months * 3 years month Not less than 2 locations * 10 Water Quality once per 100 6,000 months * 3 years month Not less than Noise once per 5 locations 50 2,500 month Subtotal US $ 38,500 Routine: GRAND TOTAL: US $ 43,800

Table 6-4: Potential additional costs, in case some soil tests for lead contamination are positive Cost Number per Cost per No. Activity /Item Unit of Units Unit, Activity, US$ US$ 1.a Additional Soil Tests Soil sample 20 75 15,000 Potential Removal 1.b and disposal of per m³ 1,00038 20 20,000 contaminated soils

38 Due to the absence of firm data, this cost item assumes the removal/safe disposal of about 1,000 m³ of lead-contaminated soil, at a deposit price of approximately 3,000 KZT/m³.

101 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

VII. Public Consultation and Information Disclosure

A. Public Meetings

279. For this project, two public consultations were held in April 2010: The meetings were held in Aktau (21 April, 2010, in the Conference Hall of the Technical University) and in Shetpe (22 April, 2010, in the Akimat Conference Room). The first event was attended by 29 participants including Government officials, and five national and international specialists on traffic management, engineering, environment, economics and resettlement as well as members of the civil society and one NGO.

280. The second event was attended by 40 participants including Government officials, and three national and international specialists on environment, economics and resettlement as well as members of the civil society. For both meetings, the organization and implementation details are provided in Appendix G. Besides the mentioned consultations there were two more, one in Zhetibay and one in Shetpe in June 2011.

281. The Meetings were carried out by presenting39 (i) engineering details for the road, (ii) prospected schedules, (iii) expected benefits and (iv) anticipated impacts, including proposed mitigation measures. It was also disclosed that there will be a mechanism in place where local citizens and stakeholders affected will have a chance to forward their concerns, complaints at specified offices, and advance compensation claims for lost assets or business opportunities, as applicable. The public discussions involved all registered participants. In specific, the latter were invited to forward suggestions and/or concerns pertaining to the near-future planning and implementation of the project. In all cases, questions were addressed by detailed answers from designers, planners and representatives from the organizing agencies. Minutes of the meetings were taken by both representatives from DORTRANS and the ADB Project Team members.

282. The Project also carried out another Public Consultation Meeting in the Conference Room of the MCOR in Aktau (19 July, 2011). The Meeting was attended by 40 participants. The Environmental Team also participated in this event. The technical features of Tranche 2 rehabilitation work plan were introduced by an Engineer from ENGINEERING CONSULTANT ASTANA LLP.

B. Issues Discussed and Suggestions Forwarded

283. In specific, the following issues have been raised by individual participants in the first Aktau Meeting:

Detailed time schedule for planned diversion of traffic, scheduled priorities and likelihood of hindrances for public movements; Detailed technical parameters for carriageway (allowable axle load, width, durability); Suitability of the road to alleviate traffic congestions; Inclusion of rest areas for road users.

39 Means of presentation included: Speeches, PPT-presentation slide shows, Maps, Photos, Design Drawings

102 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

284. No concerns have been forwarded with respect to environmental impacts or competitive issues affecting the local resources or the social setting. All participants agreed to a speedy execution of the Project.

285. In the Shetpe Meeting, the following issues have been raised by individual participants:

Likelihood of ecological damage generated by this road reconstruction? Means and schedule of delivery for construction materials to the work sites; Allocation of responsibilities for controlling the work‟s performance and quality; Financial control mechanisms planned; Diversion of traffic, scheduled priorities and likelihood of hindrances for public movements in the bypass area; Relocation of the primary school in Kosbulak Village near Shetpe.

286. The participants shared the hope that this Project will not only result in improving the livelihood of many local residents, but will also bring a number of job opportunities to the region which is marred with high rates of unemployment and lack of business.

287. In the Second Aktau Meeting in July 2011, no specific issues were raised by individual participants.

C. Use of Consultation Results and Information Disclosure

288. The organizors of all Meetings encouraged the Design Engineers and other Planners to utilize and respect all suggestions forwarded by the participants, and include them, to the extent possible in the design solutions. This refers particularly to recommendations relating to environmental and public health issues, as well as the objective to observe landscape aesthetics and preservation of cultural assets. Safety measures to curb the high road accident risks shall prevail in all planning considerations.

289. All protocols (minutes) of the public meetings were publicly disclosed, i.e. published in local newspapers. Therein it was stipulated that all forthcoming environmental assessment reports shall be accessible to all interested and concerned/affected parties at the Office of MCOR. The information disclosure included information on contact officers, persons and telephone numbers for anyone who wants to obtain further information or who intends to forward personal claims associated with this Project. All disclosure of information has been given in local language. Special record sheets were provided by the Akimats.

290. The Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan of this EIA takes all suggestions forwarded in the Public Consultation events into full consideration.

291. MCOR intends to establish publicly accessible contact offices in Aktau and Shetpe, where complainants can file their concerns. The procedures for such grievance redress mechanisms are publicly displayed in such office. Further details are described in the Project's Resettlement Documents, available on the website of ADB.

103 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

D. Grievance Redress Mechanism

1. Grievance redresses levels

292. According to the Kazakhstan legal and administrative framework, the implementation of Grievance Procedures is responsibility of the local administrations (Akimats) and representatives of Project Proponent (RC of Manystau region). Appointive officials have been designated at these levels to receive, help resolve, report or forward complaints received from Affected Persons (APs) and the general public. However, due to the lack of capacities at the local level some affected people may still remain dissatisfied. Many grievances at local level arise due to inadequate understanding of project policies and procedures, and can be promptly resolved by properly explaining the situation to the complaining person at the site. The efforts will therefore be to first seek resolution of these grievances at the local level through the mediation by Grievance Coordinators appointed at Construction Supervision Consultant and MCOR, as well as by involving designated officials at local community, rayon and oblast levels. In addition, the NGOs may serve as informal mediators to facilitate grievance resolution process.

293. The Grievance resolution process will follow the steps defined below:

i. First, complaint resolution will be attempted at the level of Construction Supervision Consultant (CSC), which will be required to nominate a Grievance Coordinator to receive complaints, provide explanation to APs regarding their particular case, record complaints in a special forms and attempt to resolve them on spot. If the complaint can be immediately resolved Grievance Coordinator of CSC shall inform aggrieved parties about the development of their grievance and decision made with respect to their case. If the case remains unresolved, it is passed to MCOR for review and resolution. In addition, the APs dissatisfied with the attention paid by Grievance Coordinator of CSC may also refer to the Grievance Coordinator of MCOR to resolve their case. In case, the grievance is related to serious violation of procedures / requirements or is associated with an incident, Grievance Coordinator of CSC shall also immediately notify MCOR in written. ii. At the second level, complaint resolution will be attempted at the MCOR, which will also be required to nominate a Grievance Coordinator to receive complaints, consult with Construction Supervision Consultant and APs and will search for possibilities to resolve the complaint within one-week period. At the end of one-week period Grievance Coordinator of MCOR shall inform aggrieved parties about the development of their grievance and decision made with respect to their case. iii. If the complain remains unresolved after being considered at the MCOR level, APs take their complaints to the head of Local Self- Government (Akimat of Community), who registers the complaint and attempts to resolve it. If the complaint is not resolved in one-week period (with involvement of complaining parties, relevant entities and informal mediators - such as representatives of civil society / NGOs), it is passed to the Rayon Administration. iv. A designated person in the Rayon Administration receives the complaint, registers it and attempts to resolve it. If there is no resolution in two weeks, it is passed to the Oblast Administration / Committee of Roads of the MoTC.

104 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

v. A designated person at Oblast level / Committee of Roads of the MoTC receives the complaint and attempts to resolve it within two weeks. As part of the process of resolving the complaint the Oblast Administration / MCOR must convene a grievance redress committee that includes representatives of Government, professional organizations (design firm, etc.), independent partied (academic organizations, NGOs) as well as a representative of the complaining party. vi. If there is no resolution within two weeks, the case will be presented to a Kazakhstan court and resolved according to Kazakhstan legislation, with the covenant, that for all project related land use, social and environmental issues the specific agreements between Government of Kazakhstan and ADB will supersede national law.

2. Grievance Coordinators and Focal Points, Complaints Recording and Reporting

294. In addition to the appointment of the Grievance Coordinators of CSC and MCOR, Grievance Focal Points will be designated at community, rayon and oblast levels to receive, help to resolve, report or forward complaints received from APs and the general public.

295. APs or other concerned individuals may visit, call or send a letter or fax to any of the Grievance Focal Points to register their comments or complaints related to land use, social and environmental aspects of the project (including but not limited to disturbance created to the traffic, noise, intrusion to the territory, etc).

296. Grievance Coordinators of CSC and MCOR, Grievance Focal Points at community, rayon and oblast levels will maintain a record-book to register complaints, keep track of their status. Complaint forms will be available at these entities to facilitate recording of complaints. The information of grievance resolution will be summarized in progress reports to be submitted to ADB.

3. Disclosure of the Grievance Process

297. All contact details of designated officials and a clear description of the grievance mechanisms will be published in print media, distributed via brochures, posted on the MoTC website. Grievance redress mechanism will also be presented during the public consultations and informal meetings at Project area. Association of NGOs (named “Civil council”) active in the Mangystau Oblast can also serve as a tool to disseminate information about grievance redress procedure and facilitate awareness rising in the Project area. The information on grievance resolution process will also be made available at the CSC, MCOR, as well as at the offices of designated officials at community, rayon and oblast levels.

105 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

VIII. Conclusions and Recommendations

A. Summary Conclusions

300. In general, the ecological conditions along the alignment of Tranche 2 give little reason for concerns of becoming potentially damaged by the foreseen Project activities. This statement, however, does not refer to the two protected areas which require special approach for protective measures and are discussed further below.

301. The vast majority of terrain adjacent to the road alignment (outside the lands belonging to the protected areas) is semi-desert, desert and steppe, often with only sparse vegetation due to the high salt content of the soil and absence of sufficient rainfall. The terrain shows little if any anthropogenic impacts, being mainly caused by intensive grazing of local livestock. In the Zhetibay region, the landscape is largely subjected to fundamental alterations due to the ongoing oil exploitation.

302. Due to the rather uniform and unspectacular environmental and social setting the anticipated reconstruction works are likely to cause only short-term and locally confined impacts - mainly associated with the preparation of asphalt or concrete slabs, earth works, stockpiling and movement of heavy construction vehicles. All site preparation works, excavation works, particularly at quarrying sites, will cause medium to significant and locally confined dust development. Precautionary measures are sufficiently described in the EMP to mitigate these impacts. The EMP addresses problems associated with air, dust and noise pollution, and provides a number of mitigation solutions. Secondary problems often associated with road development are equally addressed in the EMP.

303. There are no intensively farmed croplands near the road alignments that could be affected by fallout pollutants originating from road traffic. It is suggested that most if not all of the predicted impacts relating to air pollutants, noise and vibration will be sufficiently mitigated as long as the EMP is implemented and environmental supervision is in place.

304. The road rehabilitation works are unlikely to change any geomorphologic parameters entailing to habitat degradation. In contrast, the project will result in a number of positive environmental impacts being (i) improvement of air quality by reducing dust development and vehicular emissions, (ii) rising public environmental awareness by the installation of environmental signboards relating to roadside protected areas and biodiversity values, and (iii) decreasing road safety risks by substantially improving the road conditions.

305. The Project is expected to create some resettlement issues, but these are reduced by incorporation of bypasses around the urban area of Shetpe and Zhetibay. None of the pre-identified archaeological and cultural/historical monuments located in close vicinity of the road alignment will be affected by the planned rehabilitation works.

308. It is not predicted that the proposed construction works will seriously and/or irreversibly affect the local biodiversity of the KKSGR, as long as the precautionary measures recommended in the EMP are followed.

309. As for the rest of the road in Tranche 2, additional fencing is recommended at earmarked bypass sections and at sites where animal crossing shall be facilitated by means of underpasses. Such measures are deemed compulsory in view of maintaining public safety, and protecting road users against collisions with livestock.

106 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

B. Overall Conclusions

311. The overall conclusion of this EIA is that the proposed environmental corrective and mitigation measures, in junction with the recommended supervision and monitoring activities are sufficient and appropriate to fully ensure the protection and preservation of the environmental assets and social integrity associated with this Project.

107 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix A: Stakeholders met during the Mission

Date of Name of meeting/ Name of Organization Position Representative Location 18./19.07.11 Mangystau Oblast Road Kazhymurat Deputy Director of Aktau Department under the MOTC Suyubaev Road Committee 19.07.11 Mangystau Oblast Road Tatjana Planning Engineer, Aktau Department under the MOTC Manoshkina Representative of Engineering Consulting Astana LLP 20.07.11 Mangystau Territorial Dorozhkina Environment Specialist Aktau Department of Environment Tatyana under the Ministry of Environmental Protection 20-27.07.11 Ecological Research Gulzhat Director Aktau Laboratory of Mangystau Shalabayeva National Recourses Dept. 20./22.07.11 Mangystau National Orynbasar Director Aktau Resourses Department Abdievich 28.07.11 KAZECOPROJEKT Tleukan Baizakov Director Almaty Consulting 28.07.11 KAZECOPROJEKT Mikhail Nazarehuk Dept. Director Almaty Consulting Ludmila Manager Nazarehuk 2.-4.08.11 KAZECOPROJEKT Mikhail Nazarehuk Dept. Director Almaty Consulting Ludmila Manager Nazarehuk Lab. Director KAZECOLABORATORY Dr Zhannat Zapparova Environmental Nurzhamal Specialist Baizakova

108 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix B: Legislation and Regulations on the Environmental Assessment Review in Kazakhstan

Name of Legislation Date and Number of registration Methodology for Determining Emissions Standards to Approved by the Order of the Minister of the Environment Environment (MEP), 21 May 2007, No. 158-p”. “Instruction on Conducting Environmental Impact Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 28 Assessment of Planned Economic Activity when June 2007, No. 204-p”. Developing Pre-planning, Planning, Initial project and Project documentation, The Amendments to the Order of the Minister of Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 20 Environment Protection of Republic of Kazakhstan on March 2008, No. 62-p”. Approval of “Instruction on Conducting Environmental Impact Assessment of Planned Economic Activity when Developing Pre-planning, Planning, Initial project and Project documentation” Regulations on Conducting State Ecological Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 28 Expertise. June 2007, No. 207-p”.

The Amendments to the Order of the Minister of Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 9 Environment Protection of Republic of Kazakhstan on October 2007, No. 296-p”. Approval of Regulations on Conducting State Ecological Expertise Rules for Conducting Public Hearings Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 7 May 2007, No. 135-p”. Instructions for Qualifying Requirements to Licensed Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 21 Activity on Environmental Design, Regulation and October 2003, No. 239-p”. Development of Environmental Impact Assessment Methodological Guidelines to the Licensed Activity on Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 10 Environmental Design, Regulation and Development February 2005, No. 51-p”. of Environmental Impact Assessment Final Environmental Supervision Experts Opinion on Approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 1 Definite Types of Licensed Works and Services July 2004, No. 192-p”.

Instructions on Negotiation and Permissions to Joint order of the Minister of Health of the Republic Special Water Use in the Republic of Kazakhstan of Kazakhstan dated 24 November 2004 № 824, Minister of Environment of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 1 December 2004 number 309-p, Acting Chairman of the Committee on Water Resources, Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 11 November 2004 number 236-S, Chairman of the Committee of Geology and Mining Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 2 December 2004 number 161-p. Joined by the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan 13 December, 2004 N 3263 The Rules for Licensing and Qualification Approved by the Order of the Government of Requirements to Work Implementation and Delivery Republic of Kazakhstan, MEP, 5 June 2007, No. of Services in the Field of Environmental Protection 457-p”. Environmental Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan MEP, 9 January 2007, No. 212-p”. The normative base of requiring an environmental „Instruction on conducting environmental impact impact assessment assessment of planned economic activity when developing pre-planning, planning, initial project and project documentation, approved by the Order of the Minister of MEP, 28 June 2007, No. 207-p”. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On MEP, 9 January 2007, No. 213-p”. Amendments and Additions to Some Legislative Acts of Kazakhstan on Environmental Issues»

109 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On Ratification MEP, 20 March 2007, No. 239-p”. of the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade» Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On Ratification 7 June 2007, No. 259-p”. of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants» The Concept of Transition to Sustainable The Order of the President of RK, 14 November Development for 2007–2009 (Action Plan) 2006, No. 216-p”. The Concept of Environmental Security of the The Order of the President of RK, 3 December Republic of Kazakhstan for 2004–2015 2003, No. 1241

110 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix C: Meteorological and Hydrological Data

Table C-1: Temperature Data of selected Meteo-Stations in Mangystau Oblast (records dating back to 1983) Location of Meteorological Stations, see Main Report, Map 1 - Station Duken: Located some 100 km East of Sai Utes - Station Tuchibek: Located about 30 km West of Shetpe - Station Aktau: Located within town perimeter a) Mean monthly and annual average air temperature, оС I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Year Duken -7,8 -6,6 -0,2 10,0 18,4 24,0 26,8 25,2 17,5 8,4 0,0 -5,1 9,2 Tuchibek -4,4 -3,2 2,3 11,7 19,2 23,5 26,3 25,3 18,9 10,5 3,7 -1,3 11,0 Aktau -10,4 -9,3 -2,6 8,6 17,4 22,8 24,9 23,2 16,1 7,6 -0,4 -6,2 7,6 b) Records of absolute maximum air temperatures, оС I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Duken 3,1 -1,3 6,1 17,6 26,2 31,5 34,2 33,1 25,8 16,8 5,7 -0,5 Tuchibek 0,5 1,2 7,5 17,8 25,4 29,7 32,5 31,6 25,1 16,0 8,3 2,1 Aktau 7 15 23 32 37 42 45 45 37 29 19 12 c) Records of absolute minimum air temperatures, оС I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Duken -11,4 -10,5 -5,4 3,2 9,2 14,5 17,5 16,0 8,6 1,2 -4,9 -9,0 Tuchibek -7,7 -6,5 -1,6 6,6 13,6 18,0 20,9 19,8 13,6 5,9 0,3 -4,1 Aktau -38 -38 -32 -12 -4 4 8 4 -6 -13 -30 -38

Table C-2: Number of days with extraordinary meteorological conditions at Aktau

Type of extraordinary meteo-condition Average days/year at Aktau

Hail storms 0.4

Foggy conditions 41

Thunderstorm 13

Snowstorm 8

111 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table C-3: Average Height in cm of Snow Cover on the Terrain at Aktau, average values over the past 30 years, and indicative figures on frost periods Meteostation Aktau Month I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Height 6.3 8 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Note: - Maximum snow cover observed in Aktau City, during the past 30 years, was 41 cm; Earliest date of frost: mid September; latest day of frost: mid May; Frost periods: Longest recorded is 197 days, average is 172 days

Table C-4: Calculative depth in cm of freezing for different soil types at 2 different Mangystau conditions (calculated in accord with SNIP 20201-83/ 2-27)

Type of Soil Freezing Depth Freezing Depth at Aktau at Sai Utes clayey 124 107 sand clay, fine and dusty sands 151 131

Gravel sand, coarse and medium-coarse sand 161 140

Coarse waste soils 183 159

Diagram C-5: Annual distribution of Temperature a) Meteostation Duken

40 Mean maximum ср.макс. Mean minimum 30 ср.мин. Highly hot 20 чр.перегр Very hot 10 перегрев Hot 0 жаркие Comfortable комфорт Cool -10 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII прохлад Cold -20 холодные b) Meteostation Tuchibek

40 Mean maximum 35 ср.макс. 30 ср.мин. Mean minimum 25 Highly hot 20 чр.перегр Very hot 15 перегрев 10 Hot жаркие 5 Comfortable 0 комфорт -5 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Cool прохлад -10 Cold холодные

112 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table C-6: Wind Records at selected stations in Mangystau a) Average monthly wind speeds in m/sec I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Year Tuchibek 4,5 5,4 5,2 5,6 5,1 5,0 5,2 4,8 4,8 4,1 4,8 4,4 4,9 b) Number of days/month, with records of high wind speeds I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Year Tuchibek 2,4 2,2 2,3 2,1 1,2 1,1 2,1 2,1 1,9 1,6 2,4 2,3 24 c) Number of days with storm records I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Year Tuchibek 0,2 0,5 0,7 0,4 0,8 0,3 0,9 0,7 0,3 0,2 0,1 5,1

113 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Diagram C-7: Wind Roses of selected locations along the Road Corridor a) Meteo-Station Aktau

114 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 b) Meteo-Station Duken

С 40 Year (average) СЗ 30 СВ 20 год Winter 10 зима Summer

З 0 В лето

ЮЗ ЮВ

Ю

c) Meteo-Station Tushibek

115 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Diagram C-8: Records of unusual/infrequent weather conditions in Mangystau a) Number of days with foggy conditions (monthly averages), Fort Shevshenko and Tushibek

20 Ф.Шевченко 18 среднее 16 Ф.Шевченко 14 наибол. 12 Тущибек среднее 10 8 Тущибек наибол. 6 4 Сам среднее 2 0 Сам наибол. I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII

b) Records of days with snowstorm, Tushibek Station

14 Ф.Шевченко 12 среднее 10 Ф.Шевченко наибол. 8 Тущибек 6 среднее 4 Тущибек наибол. 2 Сам среднее 0 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Сам наибол.

c) Records of days with rainstorms, Fort Shevchenko and Tushibek

10 Ф.Шевченко 9 среднее 8 Ф.Шевченко 7 наибол. 6 Тущибек 5 среднее 4 Тущибек 3 наибол. 2 1 Сам среднее 0 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Сам наибол.

116 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table C-9: Hydro-chemical parameters (in mg/l) of drinking water samples from wells in three villages along Highway A380, Mangystau Rayon [Source: Tests for drinking water properties of local public wells, Sanitary and Epidemiology Unit, Shetpe, Mangystau Rayon, March 2009]

Test locations / Villages allowable Parameter Uchtagan Tuchikuduk Ondy level in KAZ Odor 0 0 0 Flavor 0 0 0 Color 6.4 19.0 9.5 Turbidity 0.2 0.2 - pH 7.4 8.25 7.09 6-9 Calcium 22 35 32 Magnesium 16 11 13 Ammonia - 0.03 - 2 Nitrates 19 0.3 22 45 Total hardness 3.7 5.4 2.7 10 Solids 41 40 90 500 Fluorides 0.63 0.14 0.77 0.7 Bicarbonate 165 146 244

117 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix D: Due Diligence of the Associated Facility (Kyzylsai Regional Nature Park)

D.1 Introduction

The associated facility, which is a part of CAREC 2 Corridor (Aktau – Beineu road) from km 574 to km 514.3, is a Government-financed road improvement project which will rehabilitate the existing, approximately 58.6-kilometer road section, meeting all applicable RoK technical standards. For approximately 35 km the associated facility is located within the buffer area of the Kyzylsai State Regional Nature Park, a newly established protected area of local significance. In 2010, the Government conducted environmental assessment of the road section. The environmental assessment has been reviewed and approved by the Zhayk-Caspian Department of Ecology under the Committee of Ecological Regulation and Control of the Ministry of Environment.

D.2 Background Studies and Documents

The due diligence is based on a number of background studies and documents: Background study i. Feasibility Study for Establishing Kyzylsai Regional Nature Park. TOO Ekoproject. Almaty. 2006. This comprehensive study focuses on economic environmental, social, and cultural aspects of the establishing of the Nature Park. The major focus is on the ecosystems, flora and fauna. The study is based on field ecological surveys (flora and fauna) of the protected area. The Study developed the Map of Complex Assessment and the Map of Functional Zoning. The Map of the Complex Assessment contains detailed information about distribution of habitats of rare and endangered species within the park. Environmental Assessment of Aktau – Beineu Road (km 514 -574) ii. Environmental Assessment of the Detailed Design of Aktau – Beineu Road. 2010. The subject of the Environmental Assessment is the Government- financed road rehabilitation project (km 514 -574). The ecological part of the environmental assessment is based on the above background study. The environmental assessment develops mitigation measures for construction and operation stages of the project. iii. Environmental Impact Statement for the Environmental Assessment of the Detailed Design of Aktau – Beineu Road. State Environmental Review iv. Approval of Environmental Assessment of the Detailed Design of Aktau – Beineu Road by the Ecological Expertise (State Environmental Review). The above Environmental Assessment has been reviewed and approved by the Zhayk-Caspian Department of Ecology under the Committee of Ecological Regulation and Control of the Ministry of Environment. Ecological Study v. Review of existing data was made by a National Ecological Specialist in November 2012. The Ecologist travelled to the Kyzylsai to undertake a brief assessment of the buffer zone, he also met with Park officials in Aktau and reviewed data relating to the site. Based on the existing data and his site visit he made several recommendations for protection of the park during the construction and operational phases of the project.

D.3 Methodology

The due diligence of the associated facility is based on the analysis of the project documentation listed above, as well as field studies of the international and national

118 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 environmental consultants undertaken in 2010, 2011, and 2012. The focus of the analysis was majorly on ecological features of the project including ecological impact assessment and mitigation.

D.4 Project Description

The project is a part of Aktau – Beineu road from km 574 to km 514.3. It is a road upgrading and paving project. The duration of the project is 36 months and its estimated cost - 14.2 billion Kazakh Tenge. The entire project will be designed as a 2- lane road. Other technical characteristics of the project are presented below in Table D-2-1. Table D-2-1. Technical Parameters of the Road

Normatives Road Parameters According to SNiP Adopted 3.03.09-2003 1 Category (KAZ highway category norms) II II 2 Traffic projection (20-year), vehicles/day From 3,000 to 7,000 4,364 Design speed, km/h 120 120 3 allowed in broken terrain 100 100 allowed in mountain terrain 60 60 4 Number of lanes, pcs 2 2 5 Width of lane, m 3.75 3.75 6 Width of the carriageway, m 7.5 7.5 7 Width of shoulder, m 8 Width of earth embankment, m 15 15

D.5 Ecological Baseline

The area of the Kysylsai State Regional Nature Park, including 72,593 ha of uninhabited land, is located in the Mangystau Rayon of Mangystau Oblast, 125 km eastward of Shetpe village. The area is transected by the national highway A-380 from Beineu to Aktau, between km 540 and km 555. At km 551-555 the road runs through a steep and spectacular landscape, the Manata Mountain Range Pass. Most of Nature Park land that is crossed by the national highway A380 lies in the high plateau terrain of the Ustyurt Desert. Due to its remote location and distance to settlements, the entire area has no specific land-uses. Since August 2010, the Nature Park received a legal status of a Regional Nature Park (personal communication with the Head of Mangystau National Resources Department). The duration of the proposed protection status will be unlimited. At present, there are no access routes where unauthorized entering into the reserve could be managed unless by all-terrain vehicles. Moreover, the steep cliffs and canyons represent a natural bulwark to stop any unwanted trespassing by car. The Park Management Directorate will be the responsible government agency who defines all allowable and non-permitted activities within the Nature Park and its determined zones.

119 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Legal Status and likely Future Management - Since August 2010, the KSRNP received a legal status of a Regional Nature Park40. The duration of the proposed protection status will be unlimited. According to these sources of information, the development planning for the next 4 years includes: Allocation of 109 million 185 thousand KZT for infrastructure and management expenditures Information material and various signboards The park will accommodate two open-air museums and a marked footpath net for visitors For management and protection, it is foreseen to employ permanently five security teams and a staff of 65 persons (both at headquarter, and at ranger outposts). The managing this reserve is in accord with the following organization chart:

Director

Legal Finance Security Vice Director

Department Department Department Protection of

Natural Complexes

Material and

Technical

Department

Rangers Services Construction and Maintenance Marketing, Recreation and Excursion Services Souvenir Shop

At this stage, it remains unclear if the Reserve will equally be included in the national network of reserves in the region of the Ustyurt Desert. The administrative task will be entrusted to a newly established regional governmental agency, to become located in Shetpe. Biodiversity and Natural Assets Justifying the New Protection Status - One justification for proposing a protective status to this area is based on the argument, that this represents a (coastal and inland) buffer zone41 of local, regional and national

40 Personal communication, Mr. O.Abdievich, Head of Mangystau National Resources Department 41 In accord with the zoogeographic zoning Atlas of the Kazakh SSR, 1982

120 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 importance. The fauna of the territory combines a large variety of species belonging to different and unique zoogeographic section of this part of Central Asia, including maritime areas, swamp/marshlands and pronounced desert terrains. Landscape- climatic and soil and vegetation characteristics of some habitats (such as the coastal zones of the Gulf of Kaydak, the escarpment (limestone cliffs) along the Manata Mountain Range and some deep erosion trenches in the Ustyurt Plateau are home to a number of rare, unique and endangered fauna and flora. The Map D-2-1 shows the Map of Integral Assessment of the Nature Park and Map D-2-2 ecological zoning. Park Management and Institutional Strengthening. Consultations with the Head of the Department of Protection of Natural Resources of Mangystau Oblast were undertaken in November 2012 to assess the Nature Park management capacity. The following provides a summary of the consultations: Management - The Head of the Department of Protection of Natural Resources (DPNR) of Mangystau Oblast has the overall supervision task to monitor and regulate the park. Other roles include: Manages and oversees the inspection of the Park and its specific ecosystems; Monitors the activities and reports of the Park Rangers, and informs, as applicable, relevant other state and control authorities; and Determines specific measures on rehabilitation of natural complexes. Park Rangers - There are 25 park rangers, which according to the Head of the DPNR is not enough. Generally, the Rangers are responsible for: Controlling compliance with regulations, public behavior; Reporting any observation and/or irregularities occurring in the day-to-day operation of the Park Management, as well as extraordinary events (e.g. deliberate trespassing of regulations, fires and other calamities, damage to established information and safety structures, dysfunctions or damages of Park buildings and utilities, functionalities of established parking lots; Execution of authorized measures to protect or enhance the natural resources and ecological functions within the Park, Registration of daily visitors (approx 10-15 persons per month, mostly local people searching their domestic animals) and escorting of visitors on routes. There are currently no fees to enter the park. Scientific Section - The Scientific Section consists of two people and is responsible for: Issuing licenses for scientific researches and study groups; Carry out the overall /annual planning of ecological enhancement and monitoring programs; Organize and moderate workshops on the Nature Park; Propagate scientific information in scientific journals and on internet pages. Funding – According to discussions with park management there is a budget of 35 million Tenge for three years ($230,000). Funding is planned for the following items: Information material and various signboards; Two open-air museums and a marked footpath net for visitors; For management and protection, it is foreseen to employ permanently five security teams and a staff of 65 persons (both at headquarter, and at ranger outposts)

121 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Map D-2-1: Map of Integral Assessment of the Territory of Kyzylsai State Regional Nature Park

122 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Recorded rare plant species are located majorly in core area and zone of ecological stabilization of the Nature Park. Among them are: Tulipa sogdiana; Malacocarpus crithmifolius; Nitraria schoberi; Salsola arbusculiformis; Salsola chiwensis; Haloxylon aphyllum; Haloxylon persicum; Crambe edentula; Onosma stamineum; Astragalus ustjurtensis; Zygophyllum turcomanicum. Among recorded rare and common animal species inhabiting the whole area of the Natural Park are (principal groups only) are: a) Reptiles Table D-2-2. Reptiles inhabiting the Natural Park Main zones (see Map) Relative Local name Latin name I II III IV V abundance TURTLES Testudinidae Среднеазиатская чере- Agrionemus horsfieldi + + - + + Cm паха GEKKOS Gekkonidae Сцинковый геккон Terаtoscincus scincus - - - - + Rr Геккончик пискливый Alsophylax pipiens + + - + + Rr Серый геккон Tenuidactyla russowi + + + + + Rr Каспийский геккон Tenuidatylus caspius - - + + + Rr LIZARDS Agamidae Степная агама Agama sanguinolenta + + - + + Cm Такырная круглоголовка Phrynocephalus - + - - - Cm helioscopus Быстрая ящурка Eremias velox + + - + + Cm Разноцветная ящурка Eremias arguata + + - - + Cm COLUBRID SNAKES Colubridae Разноцветный полоз Coluber ravergieri + + + + + Rr Четырехполосый полоз** Elaphe quatuorlineata + + + + + Rr ** Узорчатый полоз Elaphe dione + + - + + Rr Поперечнополосатый Coluber karelini - - - + + Rr полоз Стрела-змея Psammophis lineolatum + + - + + Rr VIPERS Crotalidae Обыкновенный щито- Agkistrodon halys + + - + + Rr мордник ** Rare species included in Red Book Cm Common Rr Rare b) Rare Birds Table D-2-3. Rare birds inhabiting the Natural Park Local name Latin name Stationary or Relative Migratory abundance HAWKS Accipitridae Обыкновенный осоед Pernis apivorus TM Rr Черный коршун Milvus migrans TM Cm

123 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Перепелятник Accipiter nisus TM Rr Европейский тювик A. brevipes TM Rr Зимняк Buteo lagopus WV Ab Обыкновенный курганник B. rufinus BM Cm Обыкновенный канюк B. buteo TM Rr Змееяд** Circaѐtus gallicus BM Rr Степной орел** Aquila nipalensis BM Rr Большой подорлик A. clanga TM Ab Могильник** A. heliaca BM Rr Беркут** A. chrysaѐtos WV Rr Стервятник** Neophron percnopterus BM Rr FALCONS Falconidae Балобан** Falco cherrug RS Rr Степная пустельга F. naumanni BM Rr Обыкновенная пустельга F. tinnunculus BM Rr PHEASANTS Phasianidae Кеклик Alectoris chukar RS Rr Пустынная куропатка Ammoperdix griseogularis RS Ab Перепел Coturnix coturnix TM Rr RAILS Rallidae Погоныш Porzana porzana TM Ab Малый погоныш P. parva TM Ab Погоныш-крошка P. pusilla TM Ab Коростель С rex crex TM Ab Камышница Gallinnula chloropus TM Ab BUSTARDS Otididae Дрофа** Otis tarda TM Ab Джек** Chlamydotis undulata BM Cm STONE CURLEWS Burhinidae Авдотка Burhinus oedicnemus BM Ab PLOVERS, LAPWINGS Charadriidae Малый зуек Charadrius dubius TM Ab Большеклювый зуек Ch. leschenaultii TM Cm Каспийский зуек Ch. asiaticus TM Ab Чибис Vanellus vanellus BM Ab Камнешарка Arenaria interpres TM Cm OYSTERCATCHER Haematopodidae Кулик сорока Haematopus ostralegus TM Rr SANDPIPERS Scolopacidae Поручейник Tringa stagnatilis TM Ab Перевозчик Actitis hypoleucos TM Ab Турухтан Philomachus pugnax TM Ab Чернозобик Calidris alpina TM Rr Бекас Gallinago gallinago TM Ab Дупель G. media TM Ab Вальдшнеп Scolopax rusticola TM Ab Большой кроншнеп NNumenius arquata TM Ab Средний кроншнеп N.phaeopus TM Ab SAND GROUSES Pteroclididae Чернобрюхий рябок** Pterocles orientalis BM Cm Белобрюхий рябок** P. alchata BM Ab Саджа** Syrrhaptes paradoxus BM Rr PIGEONS, DOVES Columbidae Клинтух Columba oenas TM Rr Сизый голубь C. livia RS Rr Обыкновенная горлица Streptopelia turtur BM Rr CUKOOS Cuculidae Обыкновенная кукушка Cuculus canorus TM Cm

124 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Глухая кукушка C. saturatus TM Rr OWLS Strigidae Филин** Bubo bubo RS Rr Болотная сова A. flammeus TM Rr Домовый сыч Athene noctua RS Cm NIGHTJARS Caprimulgidae Обыкновенный козодой Caprimulgus europaeus BM Rr* SWIFTS Apodidae Черный стриж Apus apus BM Cm Белобрюхий стриж A. melba BM Rr ROLLERS Coraciidae Сизоворонка Coracias garrulus TM Rr KINGFISHER Alcedinidae Обыкновенный зимородок Alcedo atthis TM Rr BEE-EATER Meropidae Золотистая щурка Merops apiaster BM Ab Зеленая щурка M. superciliosus BM Rr HOOPOES Upupidae Удод Upupa epops BM Cm WOODPECKER Picidae Вертишейка Jynx torquilla TM Rr SWALLOWS Hirindinidae Береговая ласточка Riparia riparia TM Cm Деревенская ласточка Hirundo rustica BM Cm LARKS Alaudidae Хохлатый жаворонок Galerida cristata RS Cm Малый жаворонок Calandrella cinerea BM Cm Серый жаворонок C. rufescens BM Cm Солончаковый жаворонок C. cheleensis RS Rr Степной жаворонок Melanocrypha calandra BM Rr Двупятнистый жаворонок M. bimaculata BM Cm Белокрылый жаворонок M. leucoptera WV Rr Черный жаворонок M. yeltoniensis WV Ab Рогатый жаворонок Eremophila alpestris RS Cm Полевой жаворонок Alauda arvensis BM Rr WAGTAILS Motacillidae Полевой конек Anthus campestris BM Cm Лесной конек A. trivialis TM Rr Желтая трясогузка Motacilla flava TM Cm Черноголовая трясогузка M. feldegg BM Rr Желтоголовая трясогузка M. citreola TM Rr Горная трясогузка M. cinerea TM Rr Белая трясогузка M. alba TM Cm SHRIKES Laniidae Туркестанский жулан Lanius phoenicuroides BM Ab Обыкновенный жулан L. collurio TM Cm Чернолобый сорокопут L. minor TM Rr Серый сорокопут L. exibitor RS Cm STARLINGS Sturnidae Обыкновенный скворец Sturnus vulgaris TM Cm Розовый скворец S. roseus BM Rr RAVEN Corvidae Галка Corvus monedula RS Rr Черная ворона C. corone TM Rr Серая ворона C. cornix WV Rr Пустынный ворон C. ruficollis RS Cm Обыкновенный ворон C. corax RS Rr WAXWINGS Bombycillidae

125 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Свиристель Bombycilla garrulus TM Rr ACCENTORS Prunellidae Лесная завирушка Prunella modularis TM Ab WARBLERS Sylviidae Широкохвостка Cettia cetti TM Rr Соловьиный сверчок Locustella luscinioides TM Rr Речной сверчок L. fluviatilis TM Rr Камышевка-барсучок Acrocephalus TM Rr schoenobaenus Индийская камышевка A. agricola TM Cm Садовая камышевка A. dumetorum TM Cm Тростниковая камышевка A. scirpaceus TM Rr Дроздовидная камышевка A. arundinaceus BM Ab Зеленая пересмешка Hippolais icterina TM Rr Северная бормотушка H. caligata TM Rr Южная бормотушка H. rama BM Rr Бледная бормотушка H. pallida BM Rr Большая бормотушка H. languida BM Cm Ястребиная славка Sylvia nisoria TM Rr Черноголовая славка S. atricapilla TM Rr Садовая славка S. borin TM Rr Серая славка S. communis TM Rr Славка завирушка S. curruca BM Rr Пустынная славка S.nana BM Ab Пеночка-весничка Phylloscopus trochilus TM Rr Пеночка-теньковка Ph. collybitus TM Cm Пеночка-трещетка Ph. sibilatrix TM Rr Зеленая пеночка Ph. trochiloides TM Rr Скотоцерка Scotocerca inquieta BM Rr FLYCATCHER Muscicapidae Мухоловка-пеструшка Ficedula hypoleuca TM Rr Малая мухоловка F. parva TM Rr Серая мухоловка Muscicapa striata TM Rr THRUSH Turdidae Луговой чекан Saxicola rubetra TM Rr Обыкновенная каменка Oenanthe oenanthe TM Cm Каменка плешанка Oenanthe pleschanka BM Rr Испанская каменка Oenanthe hispanica BM Cm Черношейная каменка Oenanthe finschii BM Cm Пустынная каменка Oenanthe deserti BM Cm Каменка плясунья Оеnanthe isabellina BM Ab Зарянка Erithacus rubecula TM Rr Варакушка Luscinia svecica TM Rr Чернозобый дрозд Turdus atrogularis TM Ab Рябинник T. pilaris WV Ab Черный дрозд T. merula TM Rr Белобровик T. iliacus WV Rr Певчий дрозд T. philomelos TM Rr Деряба T. viscivorus TM Rr PARROTBILL Paradoxornithidae Усатая синица Panurus biarmicus RS Ab TITS Remizidae, Paridae Обыкновенный ремез Remiz pendulinus TM Rr Бухарская синица Parus bokharensis RS Ab WEAVER FINCH Ploceidae Домовый воробей Passer domesticus RS Rr Индийский воробей P. indicus BM Rr Полевой воробей P. montanus RS Rr

126 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Каменный воробей Petronia petronia RS Rr FINCH Fringillidae Зяблик Fringilla coelebs WV Rr Юрок F. montifringilla TM Rr Обыкновенная зеленушка Chloris chloris TM Rr Чиж Spinus spinus TM Rr Горная чечетка Acanthis flavirostris TM Rr Обыкновенная чечевица Carpodacus erythrina TM Cm Обыкновенный дубонос Coccothraustes TM Rr coccothraustes TREE SPARROWS Emberizidae Просянка Emberiza calandra BM Ab Обыкновенная овсянка E. citrinella TM Rr Тростниковая овсянка Е. schoeniclus WV Rr Садовая овсянка E. hortulana TM Rr Черноголовая овсянка E. melanocephala TM Ab Желчная овсянка E. bruniceps BM Cm Подорожник Calcarius lapponicus WV Rr Пуночка Plectrophenax nivalis WV Rr **- Rare species included in Red Book; RS -nesting and stationary; BM - nesting and migratory; TM - transit migrants WV – wintering; Ab abundant; Cm common; Rr rare. Classification is provided according to E.I Gavrilov, "Fauna and Birds Distribution in Kazakhstan", Almaty, 1999 and Databook on Birds of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, 2000; and www.birds.kz. c) Common and rare mammals observed in the Nature Park Table D-2-4. Common and Rare mammals inhabiting the Natural Park Main zones (see Map D-2-1) Local name Latin Name I II III IV V Relative Comments abundance HEDGEHOGS Erinaceidae Ушастый еж Erinaceus auritus + + - - - Cm Длинноиглый еж E. aethyopicus - - - + + Rr SHREWS Soricidae Малая белозубка Crocidura suaveolens + + - - - Rr BATS Vespertilionidae Белобрюхий Otonycteris hemprichi - - - + - Rr in Red Book of стрелоух** RoK Усатая ночница Myotis mystacinus + + + + + Rr Поздний кожан Eptesicus serotinus + + + + - Cm Пустынный кожан E. bottae + - + + - Rr Двухцветный кожан Vespertilio murinus + + - + + Rr DOGS and FOXES Canidae Волк Canis lupus + + - + + Cm hunted Шакал C. aureus + + - + + Rr hunted Корсак Vulpes corsac + + - + + Rr hunted Лисица V.vulpes + + - + + Cm hunted WEASELS Mustelidae Ласка Mustela nivalis + + - + + Rr Степной хорь Mustela eversmanni + + - + + Cm Перевязка** Vormela peregusna + + - - + Rr in Red Book of RoK FELID CATS Felidae Барханный кот** Felis margarita - - - + + Rr In Red Book of RoK Манул** Felis. manul - - - + - Rr In Red Book of RoK Каракал** Lynx caracal - - + + - Rr In Red Book of RoK BOVIDS Bovidae

127 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Джейран** Gazella subguturosa + + - - - Rr In Red Book of RoK Сайга** Saiga tatarica + + - - - Rr In Red Book of RoK Устюрский горный Ovis orientalis + - + + - Rr In Red Book of баран** RoK SQUIRRELS and MARMOTS Sciuridae Малый суслик Spermophilus + + - - - Rr pygmaeus Желтый суслик Sp. fulvus + + - - - Rr JUMPING MICE Dipodidae Малый тушканчик Allactaga elater + + - - - Rr Большой тушканчик A. major + + - + + Rr Plague carrier Тушканчик-прыгун A. sibirica + + - - + Rr Plague carrier Тарбаганчик Pygerethmus pumilio + + - + + Rr Plague carrier Емуранчик Stylodipus telum + + - + + Rr Plague carrier Толстохвостый туш- Pygeretmus platyurus + - - - - Rr канчик Тушканчик Северцова Allactaga severtzovi + - - - - Rr HAMSTERS, VOLES Cricetidae Серый хомячок Cricetulus migratorius + + - - + Cm Damaging crops Общественная Microtus socialis + + - - + Rr Damaging полевка crops Обыкновенная сле- Ellobius talpinus + + - - + Cm Damaging пушонка crops Тамарисковая (гре- Meriones tamariscinus + + - + + Rr Damaging crop бенчуковая) песчанка lands and pasture, plague carrier Краснохвостая пес- Veriones libycus - - - + - Rr Damaging чанка crops Полуденная песчанка V.meridianus + + - + + Rr Damaging crops, plague carrier Большая песчанка Rhombomys opimus + + - + - Cm Plague carrier MICE, RATS Muridae Домовая мышь Mus musculus + - - - - Cm Damaging crops Серая крыса Rattus norvegicus + - - - - Rr Damaging crops and plague carrier HARES and RABBITS Leporidae Заяц-толай Lepus tolai + + - + + Cm hunted Cm Common Rr Rare

Functional Zoning of Kysylsai Nature Reserve Based on the inventory and assessment of the natural complexes and resources Ecoproject undertook a detailed study to subdivide the Nature Reserve into a number of functional zones. The results of this planning exercise were both a Map of Functional Zoning (Map D-2-2), and a list of permissive vs. forbidden activities in each of the defined zones (Table D-2-5). Both are presented below.

128 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Map D-2-2: Map of Functional Zoning of the Kysylsai Nature Reserve [Source: ECOPROJEKT Planning Documents, 2010]

129 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table D-2-5: Proposed Regulations for the Management of the different Functional Zones of Kysylsai Nature Reserve [Source: Feasibility Study for Kysylsai Reserve, ECOPROJEKT, 2010] Area, Zone Function Regulations ha Core Area for Complete Preservation and Protection – 16127 hectares (23.5%) I 8,408 Forbidden Activities include: Any economic activities impacting (disturbing) natural conditions of natural complexes and objects of state natural- preserved resources, such as: Activities disturbing the natural functioning of the hydrological system (both surface and groundwater) Collection/removal/damage of building remains (or other structures, such as, road signage, pipelines, electricity and other communications lines and objects or public utilities not linked with functioning of natural park; Unauthorized geological surveys and digging of mineral resources, disturbing soil and vegetation, processing of minerals and causing erosion of mountain rocks; haying, stock pasture and other use of vegetation impacting its‟ natural presence; harassing, catching and killing animals, disturbing their proper environment and conditions of their habitats; Ecological introduction of new species, (preserved) Center deliberate increasing of number of local animals, thereby of the park - exceeding the natural capacities of the local habitat area; II 7,719 Preservation of collecting of any natural resources, except for formation of natural communities informational collection for special (scientific and authorized) and resources purposes; use of chemical and biological methods against undesired predators, plants and animals' illnesses and for regulation of their number; passing of livestock; any artificial noise and other acoustic impacts exceeding the applicable norms. It is allowed to carry out: scientific researches (after obtaining respective licenses and permits); actions that are aimed to fight against natural fires, (including anti-fire training activities. People can visit this area only with special permitting document (reference given to article 40, of the Kazakh law№ 175-III dated to 07.07.2006), exempted are park staff and state agencies‟ representatives responsible for park.

Zone of Ecological Stabilization – 19,142 hectares (27.9%) I 3284 Formation of basic II 5514 conditions for Excluded activities are: all economic and recreational preservation of most III 8745 activities; valuable natural Except: supervised (guided) eco-tours and implementation of complexes and measures on rehabilitation of impacted natural resources (e.g. objects V 1599 replantation or ecological enhancement efforts) and

maintenance of objects of state natural-preservation values. Rehabilitation of eroded lands Zone of Touristic and Recreational Activities – 19,730 hectares (28.8%) Support observation It is allowed to implement supervised touristic and recreational IV 9607 of preventative activities (except hunting), including arrangement of touristic

130 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Area, Zone Function Regulations ha objects of the park, routes, camping and observation places with consideration of Arrangement of recreation capacity norms. tourist and excursion routes. Support of basic conditions for preservation of key historical and cultural observation spots on the territory of the park Arrangement of V 10 123 recreation in nature Zone of Limited Economic Activities – 13,588 hectares (19.8%) II 3190 In this zone there will be the location of administrative III 715 buildings and premises, museum, information center etc.. Carry out economic Herein, all activities are permissible that are needed for activities needed for protection and maintenance of the park and providing some functioning of (specified) services for visitors. IV 9683 natural park As for local farmers, it will be allowed to use these zones for limited pasture of their stock, farming of trees and bushes on limited areas and producing souvenirs.

D.6 Due Diligence

The 2006 Feasibility Study for the Nature Reserve provides substantial background information for assessment of environmental impacts and development of mitigation measures of the road rehabilitation. It describes, in a detail, ecological baseline for the whole protected area and greater near Caspian region. Additionally, it presents general assessment of the anthropogenic impacts caused by cattle grazing, railroad, road and pipeline operation. However, the Study neither presents assessment of the potential impacts of the road reconstruction and operation nor develops the relevant mitigation measures. The 2010 Environmental Assessment of the Detailed Design, accomplished by the local environmental company, makes an assessment of the impacts during both construction and operation of the project. Among environmental attributes for which the impacts assessed are air quality, noise, surface and ground water quality, water supply and canalization, land erosion and contamination, flora and fauna, and social impacts. Based on the results of the assessment the mitigation measures have been developed. The Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared based on the environmental assessment. It provides the following information: Major conclusions of environmental assessment study; Assessment of any significant impacts, their consequence for people‟s health and the environment; Obligations and guarantees of the project proponent to comply with environmental safety standards during project‟s implementation and operation. On 25 December 2010, the Zhayk-Caspian Department of Ecology under the Committee of Ecological Regulation and Control of the Ministry of Environment approved the environmental assessment. The major findings of the Environmental Assessment are:

131 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Reconstruction of the road at the section km 514 – km 574 will improve socio- economic condition for population of the region; The project will improve the road safety. The project will not have any substantial the negative impact on flora and fauna; Noise impacts of the project will not exceed maximum allowable levels; Air quality within the RoW will be in compliance with the air quality standards; and, The design of the project prevents soil erosion processes. The environmental assessment also include some conclusions and recommendations in relation to potential biological impacts and mitigation measures of the project: During construction stage, the biological impacts can comprise increased poaching, and cutting trees and vegetation. These adverse impacts can largely be avoided or mitigated by careful environmental planning; Due to rough terrain of the park, the accessibility of its core area for road users and construction workers is limited. The proposed environmental management capacity of the newly established Nature Park allows preventing poaching; Setting up barrier fencing is recommended as a mitigation measure to exclude wildlife-related car accidents. Consideration of the above conclusions reveals the following shortcomings and deficiencies of the Environmental Assessment: The environmental assessment does not take into full account findings of the 2006 Study. For example, the 2006 Study mentions about wildlife migratory routes in the Nature Park. On the other hand, the Environmental Assessment states that there are no wildlife migration patterns within with project area. It is possible, however, that migration routes absent in the area adjacent to the road. The presence of any migratory routes crossing the alignment will be verified by the ecological survey planned for March 2013 as discussed under Paragraph 23. The assessment of ecological impacts of the project is superficial and does not provides enough level of details in regard with physical disturbance of the wildlife, wildlife migratory routes, risks of wildlife – vehicle collision, etc. The proposed ecological mitigation measures are limited. In fact, except barrier fencing and proper environmental planning no other mitigation measures have been presented. The Environmental Assessment focuses only on negative impacts of the project, and ignores positive ones. While 2006 Study states that: o using irregular earthen tracks running parallel to the road causes air pollution and physical disturbance of wildlife close to the core area, o better road connectivity and improved facilities will attract more tourists to visit this unique park and use its recreation facilities. the 2010 Environmental Assessment does not mention that improvement of the road can have positive impacts. The Environmental Assessment does not include any Environmental Mitigation Plan including impacts, mitigation measures, locations, timing, and responsibilities.

In November 2012 an Ecological Study of the site was undertaken. The main findings of the study were as follows:

1. MAMMALS

132 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

The last detailed monitoring of mammals was by the Institute of Zoology of Mangistau RK during 2006-2010. The study (including the the Goitred Gazelle, Ustyurt mountain sheep, the Asiatic wild Ass and the Saiga Antelope) was undertaken in the major habitats of these species throughout much of the territory of Mangystau Oblast. The study found that despite a large decline in recent years, the Ustyurt mountain sheep Gazelle and, Saiga still exist in many areas of Mangystau Oblast. The recent decline of mammal species is caused most notably by poaching and the development of the region.

The Ustyurt mountain sheep - In 2010, according to selected data and reports, these animals are found on the West to the North of Sai-Utes. In addition, reports from 10-12 October of this year, noted 25 mountain sheep in the mountains of Kolenkeli in the northern part of the region. Thus, the Ustyurt mountain sheep always migrates in this territory. Fencing this stretch of motorway requires at least 25 kiolometers on each side. However, this will prevent customary migration paths and, over time, the animal will adapt to any bypass protection and will cross the road at another location. Therefore, to protect these animals it is recommended to establish special speed limit signs in this area. Also along the road, installation of billboards with images of wildlife and a warning to drivers about their possible intersect the road is recommended.

Gazelle - Records and field studies of rare and endangered animals, including the goitred Gazelle, in Mangistau region were held in September, 2009. Near Žabajuškan and part of the West escarpment 22 male species and 2 females species were observed. Along the roads of Sai-Utes, except for chance meetings, observing the the goitred Gazelle is extremely rare. However, its protection is needed for the same events as the mountain sheep above.

Saiga - Habitat of Saiga Antelope in Kazakhstan, was maximised in the 1970 's, when there was a maximum size. In the 1990‟s, a sharp reduction in range, in parallel with the rapid decline in the number of animals, mainly due to massive poaching occured. By the early 2000's, the antelopes had virtually disappeared in the northern and southern part of the Lake , Betpakdale, Muûnkumah, Kyzylkum area, , North of the River, Eastern and Northern Caspian.

Rodents. This group includes small mammals - gerbil, Jerboa, stylodipus, mice etc, they are always are at risk of dying on main roads, fences are not effective protection for rodents, as they can dig holes beneath them. Protective and activities for them can be a speed limit and installing pipes at specified intervals.

2. BIRDS In the surveyed areas ornithofauna is represented by more than 100 bird species, among them rare species.

3. AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES The number of these animals is very low, and they are active only from April to September. During the transition from winter to spring and from summer to fall, when there is a cold snap, snakes often come out onto the road to warm themselves in the sun. Such cases occur on all roads, but they are quite rare. Killing the snake, often is inevitable. For reptiles enclosures are worthless. On the roads of Sai-Utes to Station 10 passing restrictions to save amphibians and reptiles would be required. General

133 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 speed restrictions on this stretch of road and warning billboards and notices will also reduce the amount of creatures affected.

The results of the field survey showed that any special protection fences will not be effective in this area. The most effective mitigations measure is to install signs limiting speed and danger warning billboards and name plates. In some cases, there is a need to install pipe culverts for rodents a reptiles. Measures should also be in place for prevention of poaching during construction and operational phases of the project. In addition to the above it is recommended that further studies during the spring should be undertaken (rutting season) to assess further traditional migration routes and the numbers of animals crossing the road. Further research should take place in the period from 15 April to 15 may in the spring and during the period from 1 September to 15 October in autumn. Term field studies for at least 10 days.

D.7 Recommendations of the Due Diligence

To fill the gaps of the environmental assessment and strengthen mitigation measures the team of national and international consultants worked out a set of measures presented below.

Supplementary Mitigation Measures for Kyzylsai State Regional Nature Reserve

Mitigation measures during pre-construction stage Undertake baseline ecological survey of the park (in accordance with Appendix F) Ensure that all parameters (longitudinal slope of the radius of vertical curves) are aligned with Sanitary rules and norms 03.3.09-2006 “Automobile roads” for I and II category roads on the surface curve designing phase. Specified requirements causes conditions for optimum speed limited vehicles passed with minimal impact to environment from engine noise and emissions of exhaust gases. No changes to alignment shall occur and all construction works limited to the right of way. Design of underpasses for rodents and reptiles. These underpasses can be simple pipe culverts at two kilometer intervals, but they should be small enough to prevent larger animals, such as sheep, attempting to access these areas. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules and of the possibility that animals maybe crossing the road in these areas. Speed limits within the entire buffer zone area (recommended 50km per hour).

Mitigation measures during construction stage The Contractor shall ensure that: The Contractors EMP will be reviewed by both Project Management Consultant, and Administration of the Park. No construction camp, temporary or permanent is located within the Park. No project-related facilities such as concrete batching plants, asphalt plants, bitumen mixers, or storage yards are located within the Park. No blasting works are allowed. Noise, dust, and vibration impacts to the protected area should be minimized. No construction waste is allowed in the area near or within the Park. All spills should be quickly removed.

134 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Sign posts shall be placed along the boundary of the reserve to inform workers and machine operators not to enter this area. Installation of information and road/traffic signs for notification of road users about specially protected natural area and behaving rules. Decrease the construction period in these areas. Use efficient road construction equipment with minimal parameters of emissions and noise level. Construction sites for basing of road building equipment and storage of road building materials to be placed outside of protected areas. Provide dust suppression during the road coating and preparation of road pavement basis layers from macadam and gravel. Temporary bypasses should be placed outside of protected area. Collection and utilization of wastes from asphalt concrete mix used for road coating on outside territory of protected areas. Maintaining of manufacturing operations with bitumen materials strictly in the project within the roadway.

Mitigation measures during operation stage Speed limits should be enforced.

Contractor Obligations The Contractor should be warned that road section is located on the area of the Nature Park. Also general schedule of reconstruction works and obtaining of permission for special works (concrete and bitumen works, blasting works for excavation units, etc). Instructions of all specialists of road departments and their subcontractors on working in accordance with Environmental protection and Flora and fauna protection requirements on territory of wildlife sanctuary. General contractors should be warned about responsibilities and compensation amounts for violation of RoK law “About special protected natural territories”

Tender Documents In condition of tendering documentation explanatory note general contractors must implement monitoring and notification of Inspection about appearance of wild animals birds and other fauna during the construction works notification about animals or plants death, etc.

In addition to the above mitigation measures the following actions are proposed: i. An additional baseline ecological survey of the project area has to be conducted at pre-construction stage. This will include the survey of key flora and fauna occurrence in the project area (in proximity to RoW). The survey will be organized by the Project Management Consultant and use consultant‟s budget under Tranche 1 (estimated amount is $ 15,000). The planned schedule for the survey is March 2013. The surveyors will be represented by a team of national biologists. The ecological survey will be carried out in accordance with the ToR provided (Appendix F) ii. A site-specific Environmental Management Plan for the project (km 514 – 574) should be prepared prior to the construction activity. iii. An Ecological Monitoring Plan should be prepared and implemented by the contractor.

135 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix E: Statistical Socio-Economic and Public Health Data of Mangystau Oblast

Table E-1: Selected demographic data relating to the Rayons along the Tranche 2 Corridor, year 2011 Amount of Population No. of Families economically active Total No. of No. of families w.low in- total officially house- families with come, Rayon active employe self- un- registere holds more receiving d employe employe d employe social d d jobless d support members Mangystau 100.15 225.66 36.980 42.352 184 1.165 96.291 13.322 3.865 537 Region 6 9 Aktau City 850 1.522 n.d. 1 1.676 1.652 162 24 24 2.789 Beineu 21.993 20.012 1.611 1.981 126 51.441 6.969 8.520 31 711 Mangystau 15.045 14.639 2.641 415 91 31.875 5.156 5.625 0 76 [Source: Statistical Bureau Mangystau, Aktau, August 2011]

Table E-2: Average monthly nominal wage (KZT) of employees in the Region (2003- 2009 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Entire Republic of Kazakhstan 23 128 28 329 34 060 40 790 52 479 60 805 64 553 44 369 53 832 63 959 72 086 82 055 98 743 106 361

[Source: Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan “” 2009]

Table E-3: Average Subsistence Minimum (KZT) per capita in the Region (2003-2009) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Entire Republic of 5 128 5 427 6 014 8 410 9 653 12 364 12 660 Kazakhstan Mangystau region 6 932 7 174 7 844 10 322 11 823 15 050 15 883

[Source: Agency of Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan “Regions of Kazakhstan” 2009]

Table E-4: Living Facilities/Housing in the Region (2011) Housing construct Individu construct Total living Rayon area m² ed al ed by space, m³ per person houses Houses NGOs Aktau City 617878 11 21.322 n.d. 0 Beineu 415.222 15,98 17.590 n.d. 0 Total Oblast 1.872.188 66,59 80.872 80.872 0

[Source: Statistical Bureau Mangystau, Aktau, August 2011]

Table E-5: Public Service Structure in the Region (2011) No of Trade Consum Public Rayon Total workers facilities er Catering

136 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Service Services s Mangystau 300 689 222 51 27 Aktau City 24 42 14 0 2 Beineu 583 1.081 349 146 133 Total Oblast 1.471 2.854 983 319 214 [Source: Statistical Bureau Mangystau, Aktau, August 2011]

Table E-6: Communication Facilities in Mangystau (urban) Households, in %

Appliances Data from 2007 Data from 2008

Fixed phone line 66,2 78,8 Cell phone, with internet connection 41,3 49.9 other cell phone 33,4 40,2 Cable TV 26,2 33,9 Satellite TV 7,5 11,9 Game station 10,1 12,8 PC and Notebook 23,8 47,7 Hand PC 5,0 8,0 [Source: Statistical Bureau, Aktau, April 2010]

Table E-7: Livestock and other income-generating activities in Mangystau Oblast Rayon Animal Husbandry Other Cattle Horses Sheep Pork Poultry Camels Fisheries Hunting Handicraf t Mangystau 4.978 22.505 261.998 0 1.512 18.265 0 0 0 Aktau City 0 0 0 Beineu 0 0 0 Total Oblast 12.728 49.561 623.830 338 9.392 47.341 4 2 7 [Source: Statistical Bureau, Aktau, April 2011]

Table E-8: Infectious Diseases in The Rayons along the Tranche 2 Corridor: Cases recorded in the years 2005-2009 [Source: Sanitary and Epidemiology Control Department, Aktau, April 2010] Location / Rayon Tuberculosis 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 49 25 39 32 28 Mangystau Rayon 57 44 40 36 28 Aktau city 369 298 281 208 165 Munailinsky Rayon - - 29 72 77 Mangystau Oblast 748 615 612 564 436

Location / Rayon Respiratory Diseases

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 355 305 265 531 561 Mangystau Rayon 294 177 223 374 457 Aktau city 22113 26961 34101 30379 31105 Munailinsky Rayon - - 961 3053 3543

137 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Mangystau Oblast 42300 37810 47102 44627 44892

Location / Rayon Acute Intestinal Infections

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 22 31 32 38 60 Mangystau Rayon 24 33 20 26 31 Aktau city 444 442 425 361 240 Munailinsky Rayon - - 181 212 178 Mangystau Oblast 722 676 805 787 639

Location / Rayon Measles 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 1 - - - - Mangystau Rayon 2 - 2 - - Aktau city 93 19 1 1 - Munailinsky Rayon -- - 4 - - Mangystau Oblast 132 23 8 1 -

Location / Rayon Acute Viral Hepatitis 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 7 5 3 1 2 Mangystau Rayon 3 - 1 - 3 Aktau city 77 47 67 40 19 Munailinsky Rayon - 10 40 11 Mangystau Oblast 128 78 104 106 73

Location / Rayon Influenza 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 2 9 - 2 4 Mangystau Rayon 3 3 1 10 11 Aktau city 312 142 7 70 90 Munailinsky Rayon - - - 23 17 Mangystau Oblast 327 192 10 143 156

Location / Rayon Syphilis 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 1 -- - - - Mangystau Rayon 0 - - - - Aktau city 133 112 62 51 60 Munailinsky Rayon - - - - - Mangystau Oblast 173 130 78 79 83

Location / Rayon Skin Diseases, Rash 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Karakiyan Rayon 10 6 4 7 10 Mangystau Rayon 3 - 2 1 - Aktau city 47 75 53 21 9 Munailinsky Rayon - - 9 21 14 Mangystau Oblast 122 162 133 107 101

138 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Table E-9: Number of Health Organizations operating in Mangystau Oblast

Hospitals Outpatient polyclinic organizations

2006 2007 2008 2006 2007 2008

33 30 30 51 54 101

[Source: Sanitary and Epidemiology Control Department, Aktau, April 2010]

Table E-10: Number of physicians of all specialties in Mangystau

2006 2007 2008

1432 1447 1586

[Source: - ibid - ] Table E-11: Statistical Data for the past years, on Education Facilities in Mangystau Region Number of Schools and Attendants registered per year 2006 2007 2008 2009 No of No of No of No of No of No of No of No of Facility school Student school Student school Student school Student s s s s s s s s Primary 36 8,434 35 8.592 56 11,023 n.a. n.a. School Secondar 123 2.716 122 2.627 121 2.562 n.a. n.a. y School College 14 15.283 13 16.817 16 19.384 n.a. n.a. Techn. 22 n.a. 22 n.a. 24 23.615 n.a. n.a. Vocationa l University 4 14.480 4 10.921 3 9.112 n.a. n.a. [Source: Statistical Bureau, Aktau, April 2010]

139 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix F: Scope of Works for Ecological Study of the Kyzylsai Regional Nature Park.

Project Description – The Government financed project involves the upgrading of the road section (km 514-574) that partly runs within the buffer zone of the Kyzylsai State Regional Nature Park. The roadway in this section will be a two lane category II road. The purpose of the study is to undertake a rapid assessment of the existing ecological conditions within the Park and make recommendations to protect the parks flora and fauna during the construction and operational phases of the Project.

Scope of Study – The scope of the study is as follows:

1. Review existing data relating to the Nature Park, including most recent studies. This information will be provided to the consultant and comprises extensive surveys undertaken in 2006. If requested road design information can also be provided for review.

2. Undertake a field for approximately 10-15 days to the Park to assess the current conditions relating to flora and fauna. The site visit should be undertaken by qualified specialists.

3. Prepare an updated assessment of the current conditions of the flora and fauna within the park including data relating to: Ornithological Data Small mammals Botany Antelope Other relevant species

The output shall include occurrence lists of species observed, their biodiversity status, presentation of relevant ecological facts and sensitive habitats. For each such information a brief analysis will be included relating to potential risks associated with the planned road rehabilitation project.

4. Assess the potential impacts to the park from road construction activities.

5. Assess the potential long-term impacts to the Park from increased vehicle movements on the road within the buffer zone.

6. Make recommendations for the following: Construction issues, how to limit impacts of road construction to the Park (for example banning and form of construction camp within the park, undertaking regular monitoring within the park during construction) Operational Issues. How to limit impacts to flora and fauna during the operational phase of the Project.

Specifically, the study should identify mitigations including: The need for animal protection fences within the park, their locations, and specifications, e.g. what types of animals will they prevent crossing the road, the height of the fences, the size of the fence mesh. The need for animal underpasses in conjunction with fences. Their numbers and locations. The need for animal bridges.

140 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

The need for speed limits within the park. Limiting and controlling the number of locations to stop on the road within the park.

Study Area – For the purpose of this project, the study area shall comprise the following: Flora – an area one kilometer either side of the Project road center line for the entire length of the road within the parks buffer zone. Fauna – The entire Park.

Deliverables – The consultant shall prepare a report containing the following:

Executive Summary (in English and Russian) Introduction - including the aims and objectives of the report Methodology - a summary of the methodology used for the report Assessment of existing Conditions – Including the review of existing information and data collected from the field. This should include maps and narrative. Impact Assessment of Construction and Operational Actions Recommendations Bibliography, including all documents reviewed and referenced.

Schedule – The recommended schedule is as follows:

Draft report by March 15, 2013 Final Report completed March 20, 2013.

141 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix G: Minutes of the Public Consultations

G-1 Aktau, First Meeting: Subject and Agenda: Minutes of Public Consultations Regarding “Discussing the Feasibility Study of Reconstruction of Beineu-Aktau Section (km 372-802) of Atyrau- Aktau Higway”

Location, Date, Time: Aktau Akimat Conference Hall, 21 April 2010, Time 04.00 p.m.

Organizing Panel and Agency Representatives: A.B. AYTKULOV - Deputy Akim of Mangystau Region; S.A.ABLALIEV the Head of the Board for External Loans and Concession Projects, Committee for Motor Roads of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of the Republic of Kazakhstan; K.B.SUEBAEV – Director of Motor Roads Department of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of Mangystaus Region of the Republic of Kazakhstan; Manzur REKHMAN - Head of the Mission of Asian Development Bank, Manila; Asem Chakenova - Asian Development Bank, Astana Office; Реter C. DARJES - Asian Development Bank, Manila; Tito NIKOLAS - Asian Development Bank, Manila.

From ADB Consultants‟ Team: Olga G. GORPINICH – national consultant on resettlement issues; Svetlana M. SHAKIROVA - national consultant on social issues; Gulnara JUNUSSOVA - national consultant on economic and ecological issues.

From "Kaz SR&DI Dortrans" LLP: L.V.KAN - leader of experts' group of "Kaz SR&DI Dortrans" LLP; Batyr DADAMURZAEV – Deputy Director; Erkebulan TOLUMBAEV – Engineer.

From “Astana Engineering Center”LLP: T.D.NANOSHKINA – Engineering Manager.

In addition: Representatives of public organizations and Aktau residents (see list with signatures of registered participants).

Documentation/Protocols: Minutes and Photos taken by L.Kan and G.Junussova

Secretary of the meeting: Representative of "Kaz SR&DI Dortrans" LLP

Presidium: 1. A.B. AYTKULOV – Deputy Akim of Mangystau Region; 2. S.A.ABLALIEV - the Head of the Board for External Loans and Concession Projects, Committee for Motor Roads of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 3. K.B.SUEBAEV – Director of Motor Roads Department of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of Mangystaus Region of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 4. Manzur REKHMAN - Head of the Mission of Asian Development Bank, Manila; 5. Asem Chakenova - Asian Development Bank, Astana.

Speakers:

142 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 a) A.B. AYTKULOV - introduced the participants of the Public Consultations and informed the participants about the program of development of the road-transport branch for the period of 2008-2012, which includes the reconstruction of the highway section. The Akimat hopes that residents of the Region will support the project and there will be mutual understanding and cooperation. b) S.A.ABLALIEV – mentioned significance of this road section, pointed out that this is the only highway link to a Kazakhstan sea port, also noted positive sides in the development of transport infrastructure of the entire region. c) Manzur Rekhman – expressed his gratitude for participation in the public consultations, informed the participants about funding of the project on the account of ADB loans. He noted that this highway will make substantial contribution to the development of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The Asian Development Bank cooperates already with the Republic of Kazakhstan under other project - the transit corridor “Western Europe – Western China”, the ADB, in particular, finances the construction of the road section in Zhambyl Region. MOTC decided to deliver the FS report and to obtain consent of the people who will be subjected to the project‟s impact. The purpose of these public consultations is to consider opinions of all the interested parties and to take into account these opinions in the course of further project‟s elaboration. We also express our gratitude to the government for its applying to us for funding this project, and we would like to thank MOTC and Akimat of the Region for their invitation to participate in these public consultations. d) L.V.KAN - informed the participants about the FS of the highway reconstruction, purposes and objectives of this project, presented main technical and economic factors regarding the object to be reconstructed, represented the project and all engineering details with use of a slide show.

Questions received from the audience: 1. What is the timeframe and work schedule for reconstruction of Beineu-Aktau section of Atyrau-Aktau highway? Traffic hindrances and traffic jams? 2. What is the established axle load for the selected pavement of the highway? 3. What are the parameters of the highway, in particular, what is the width of the roadway? 4. What are the priority areas for commencement of the construction? 5. Do they take into account the expected increase of traffic volume after the reconstruction of the highway? 6. Do they provide for rest areas for road users at the reconstructed section of the highway?

Public Discussion with Audience: Taking into account all the set issues in the course of the public consultations and the possibility for development of road-transport branch of the economy of the Republic consider as necessary the reconstruction of “Beineu-Aktau” section of “Atyrau-Aktau” highway. All participants welcome the project soon to start. No further objections.

G-2 Shetpe Meeting:

Subject and Agenda: Minutes of Public Consultations Regarding “Discussing the Feasibility Study of Reconstruction of Beineu-Aktau Section (km 372-802) of Atyrau- Aktau Higway”

143 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Location, Date, Time: Shetpe Akimat Meeting Hall, 22 April 2010, Time 02.15 p.m.

Organizing Panel and Agency Representatives:

S.A.SARBALIEV - Deputy Akim of (Rayon); S.A.ABLALIEV - the Head of the Board for External Loans and Concession Projects, Committee for Motor Roads of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of the Republic of Kazakhstan; K.B.SUEBAEV - Director of Motor Roads Department of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of Mangystaus Region of the Republic of Kazakhstan; Manzur REKHMAN – Head of the Mission of Asian Development Bank, Manila; Asem Chakenova – Asian Development Bank, Astana; Tito NIKOLAS – Asian Development Bank, Manila.

From ADB Consultants‟ Team: Olga G. GORPINICH – national consultant on resettlement issues; Svetlana M. SHAKIROVA – national consultant on social issues; Gulnara JUNUSSOVA – national consultant on economic issues;

From "Kaz SR&DI Dortrans" LLP: Batyr DADAMURZAEV – Deputy Director; Erkebulan TOLUMBAEV – From “Astana Engineering Center”LLP: T.D.NANOSHKINA - Engineering Manager.

Plus representatives of public organizations, residents of Shetpe village and Zhetybay village. (see list with signatures of registered participants).

Documentation/Protocols: Minutes and Photos taken by L.Kan and G.Junussova

Secretary of the meeting: Representative of "Kaz SR&DI Dortrans" LLP

Presidium: 1. S.A.SARBALIEV – Deputy Akim of Mangystau District (rayon); 2. S.A.ABLALIEV the Head of the Board for External Loans and Concession Projects, Committee for Motor Roads of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 3. K.B.SUEBAEV – Director of Motor Roads Department of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of Mangystau Region of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 4. Manzur REKHMAN - Head of the Mission of Asian Development Bank, Manila; 5. Asem Chakenova - Asian Development Bank, Astana Office;

Speakers: K.B.Suebaev opened the meeting - mentioning the significance and benefits of Aktau-Beineu highway and the need for its reconstruction. S.A.SARBALIEV – introduced the participants of the Public Consultations and informed the participants about the program of development of the road-transport branch for the period of 2008-2012, which includes the reconstruction of the highway section. S.A.ABLALIEV - mentioned significance of this road section, pointed out that this is the only highway to a sea port, also noted positive sides in the development of transport infrastructure of the Region, informed the participants about the work of the MOTC and objectives of this project.

144 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Manzur Rekhman – expressed his gratitude for participation in the public consultations, informed the participants about funding of the project on the account of ADB loans. He noted that this highway will make substantial contribution to the development of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The Asian Development Bank cooperates already with the Republic of Kazakhstan under other project – the transit corridor “Western Europe – Western China”, the ADB, in particular, finances the construction of the road section in Zhambul Region. MOTC decided to deliver the FS report and to obtain consent of the people who will be subjected to the project‟s impact. The purpose of these public consultations is to consider opinions of all the interested parties and to take into account these opinions in the course of further project‟s elaboration. We also express our gratitude to the government for its applying to us for funding this project, and we would like to thank MOTC and Akimat of the Region for their invitation to participate in these public consultations. Erkebulan TOLUMBAEV – informed the participants about the FS of the highway reconstruction technical features, purposes and objectives of this project, presented main technical and economic factors regarding the object to be reconstructed, represented the project with use of a PPT-slide show. K.B.SUEBAEV - explained certain technical details of the highway reconstruction, pointed out the location of the Shetpe village bypass, spoke about construction materials to be used, location of open pits, and the timeframe for implementation of the project.

Questions received from the audience: 1. What/who is ADB? 2. What ecological damage is expected from construction of the highway? 3. How the road construction materials will be delivered to the object? 4. Who personally will be responsible for the works‟ performance, quality of the construction and appropriation/control of the financial resources? 5. Will the school at the bypass road remain on the same place? What will protect the school children? 6.

Public Discussion with Audience: Taking into account all issues discussed in the course of the public consultation and the possibility for development of road-transport branch of the economy of the Republic consider as necessary the reconstruction of “Beineu-Aktau” section of “Atyrau-Aktau” highway. All participants welcome the project soon to start. After the clarifications and answering the forwarding questions by members of the Panel, there were no objections.

G-3 Aktau, Second Public Consultation Meeting:

Subject and Agenda: Minutes of Public Consultation Regarding “Discussing the Design Project and Environmental Aspects of Implementation of Second Tranche of CAREC Transport Corridor - Beineu-Aktau Road Section (km 632-802)”

Location, Date, Time: Aktau MOTC, Road Department Conference Room, 19 July 2011, Time 03.00 p.m.

Organizing Panel and Agency Representatives:

145 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

K.B. SUEBAEV – Director of Roads Department of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of Mangystau Oblast of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

From ADB Consultants‟ Team: Dr M. MASTALLER - Environmental Specialist, International Consultant of Asian Development Bank G.A. JUNUSSOVA – National Consultant of Asian Development Bank

From “Astana Engineering Center” LLC: T.D.NANOSHKINA – Engineering Manager

In addition: Representatives of public organizations and Aktau residents (the plenum received a list with signatures of registered participants, deposited in the MOTC Director's Office).

Documentation: G.Junussova

Number of Participants (signed on attendance list): 40, plus two consultants from ADB

Display Material: The Engineer displayed 8 Technical Drawings and Maps from the entire road section km 632 – 802. The information shown on the Drawings referred to: - Bypasses in Shetpe and Zhetibay, - Technical detail information of road construction particulars, - Types and quantities of construction materials - Schedules of Works

Presidium: 1. K.B. SUEBAEV – Director of Motor Roads Department of the Ministry of Transport and Communication of Mangystau Region of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 2. Dr M. MASTALLER - International Environmental Specialist, 3. G.A. JUNUSSOVA – National Consultant of Asian Development Bank 4. T.D. NANOSHKINA – Engineering Manager.

Speakers: a) K.B. SUEBAEV – welcomed and introduced the participants of the Public Consultations, referring to the general situation and status of the “Shetpe-Zhetybai- Aktau” section of the “Atyrau-Aktau” motor road; b) T.D. NANOSHKINA – presented detailed design project and all technical details for constructing /rehabilitating the Road Section (km 632-802) of the Beineu- Aktau connection.

Questions received from the audience, and answered by the Engineer:

1. Did the Engineers provide a good solution for animal crossings along the planned road?

ANSWER: yes, the road has for example 5 animal crossings in form of an underpath tube of 2.5 m diameter.

2. Did the Engineers provide a good and safe solution like fences along the entrances to the animal crossings?

146 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

ANSWER: yes, there will be high and long fences along the entrance to the tubes, on both sides of the road, to prevent that animals can run up to the road and cause accidents.

3. No other questions were put forward by the participants.

Public Discussion with Audience and General Conclusion:

Taking into account all the set issues in the course of the public consultations and the possibility for development of road-transport branch of the Republic it is generally considered necessary and urgent to reconstruct the “Shepte-Zhetybai- Aktau” section of “Atyrau-Aktau” highway.

End of Meeting: Time 04.20 p.m.

Secretary and Protocol: E. Dzhanissova (Road Department Aktau), with assistance of G.Junussova.

147 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix H: Survey Photos along Road Alignment Tranche 2

Photo 1: End of Tranche 2, outside the city Photo 2: Existing bridge over the Ashyagar of Aktau, km 802 Creek, Km 755

Photo 3: Depression of Karagiye, view of the central area of the Karagiye-Karakol Reserve adjacent to Hwy A380. Note the widespread littering with tires. Photo 4: Depression of Karagyie, view from East, Ch km 760

148 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Photo 5: Oil Exploration Field SAR, East of Photo 6: Railway level crossing N of Zhetibay, km 720, where the new bypass will Zhetibay be located km 718, where the new 9 km bypass will start

Photo 7: Existing highway condition, Photo 8: Undulating steppe through passing through Mangyshlak Desert, km 645, Mangyshlak Desert, km 650; crossing of South of Shetpe large livestock herds over the road pose high accident risks.

Photo 9: Alignment location for Shetpe Photo 10: Alignment location for Shetpe Bypass, Bypass,

149 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

km 637 km 632-640

Photo 11: Primary School at Kosbulak Photo 12: Quarry near Kosbulak Village km Village km 640, adjacent to bypass alignment 644, one of the major sources for Shetpe. The plans foresee the relocation of construction material for the road, located the school close to the alignment

Photo 13: Eastern start point of Shetpe Photo 14: Approach from West to Manata Bypass, km 642 Mountain Range, km 565

Photo 15: Start ascent to Manata pass. Photo 16: Limestone cliffs, forming the core

150 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Monument used for local worships, km 555. of the proposed Kysylsai Reserve, km 556

Photo 17: Manata pass; this steep passage Photo 18: Manata pass, Kysylsai Park, km at km 555-560 is the most accident-prone 530; steep passage with almost no road part of the A380. Note that almost all shoulder, slope erosion and insufficient rail vegetation near road shoulder has died due guards along both sides of the road. to regular application of salt during winter.

Photo 19: The vast Ustyurt-Plateau is Photo 20: Zhetibay, Public Consultation transected at few locations (km 515) by deep Meeting, 11 June 2010 erosion canyons. These canyons are

biodiversity hotspots as there is sufficient humidity to support bushy vegetation.

151 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Photo 21: Public consultations in Aktau city Photo 22: Public Consultation in Shetpe 21- 20-4-10 4-

[Photos: Michael Mastaller, Gulnara Junussova and Asem Chakanova]

152 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix I: Baseline Monitoring of Physico-Chemical Parameters

REPORT ON ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDY ALONG THE ROAD SECTION OF AKTAU-BEINEU MOTORROAD (2ND TRANCHE)

by

Director «Kazecoanaliz» LLC Z.M. Zhaparova

Project (Study) Manager B.B. Ernazarov

Almaty, October 2011

FILED SURVEY EXPERT TEAM:

«Kazecoproect» LLC

Main Specialist A.A. Belousov Leading Specialist O.B. Gordienko

«Kazecoanaliz» LLC Vice-Head of the Laboratory N.I. Razuvaeva Main Specialist, Candidate of Chemical Science A.M. Zagorev Senior Specialist E. N. Belozerova Senior Specialist М. А. Mazhinova Specialist G. L. Toimbetova Technical Engineer А. К. Adenov

153 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Introduction and Background

This Environmental Baseline Study has been completed for selected locations along the Aktau Beineu road. The samples of air, soil and noise (near the settlements) were taken by a team of experts commissioned by Kazecoanaliz LLC and analyzed in their laboratory. The results of the noise measurements were mathematically processed with the help of the “Ecolog-Shum” Computer Program.

The following map indicates the location of sampling sites No. 1 to 7 Map along the Aktau-Beineu Road:

154 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Testing of Air Quality Parameter The air sampling tests of the project area included identification of the concentrations of following pollutants‟ average concentrations of carbon monoxide (СО), nitrogen oxide (NO),

nitrogen dioxide (NO2), hydrocarbons (СН),

sulfur dioxide (SO2), suspended particles. All samples were taken in the lower layer of the atmosphere. Two samples were considered for measurement of concentrations of СО, NO, NO2 and СН. One sample was used for measurement of concentrations of SO2 and suspended substances. Results obtained were noted as average, and were transformed in MAC (Maximum Allowed Concentrations) units by means of dividing of these concentrations by maximum allowed См concentrations of each component MACмр( ). MACмр Concentrations of pollutants in the air then were compared with the limits according to the Maximum Allowed Concentrations (MAC, mg/m3) in air specified by current state health standards for human settlements [SS 2.1.6.695-98 RoK 3.02.036.99]. The results on air quality monitoring tests are provided in the following table: Table 1.1 – Test results for potential pollutants concentration in the air MA Presence of Actual C concentrations concentration, stan exceeding MAC, Conclusion on Location of Potential time period dard repetition factor environmental testing site Pollutant , situation 7:00- 15:00- 7:00- 15:00- mg/ 9:30 17:30 3 9:30 17:30 m 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 No concentrations СО 0,9 1,4 5 0,18 0,28 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations NO 0,002 0,013 0,4 0,01 0,03 exceeded MAC standard Site №1. No concentrations 0,08 near km 786 of NO 0,017 0,010 0,2 0,1 exceeded MAC 2 5 Beineu-Shepte- standard Zhetibai-Aktau motor road No concentrations CH 15,6 14 50 0,3 0,3 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations SO2 0,005 0,5 0,01 exceeded MAC standard suspended 0,03 0,5 0,06 No

155 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

substances concentrations exceeded MAC standard No concentrations СО 0,8 0,9 5 0,16 0,18 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations NO 0,014 0,013 0,4 0,04 0,03 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations 0,08 NO 0,025 0,022 0,3 0,3 exceeded MAC Site №2. 2 5 in the area of standard Karagie No concentrations depression, CH 17 15,6 50 0,3 0,3 road km 748 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations SO2 0,007 0,5 0,01 exceeded MAC standard No suspended concentrations 0,04 0,5 0,08 substances exceeded MAC standard No concentrations СО 0,8 0,9 5 0,16 0,18 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations NO 0,006 0,022 0,4 0,02 0,06 exceeded MAC Site №3. standard No concentrations Zhetibai 0,08 NO 0,014 0,018 0,2 0,2 exceeded MAC 2 5 settlement, standard near the No hospital concentrations CH 23,1 12,7 50 0,5 0,3 located along exceeded MAC the central standard street No concentrations SO2 0,006 0,5 0,01 exceeded MAC standard No suspended concentrations 0,03 0,5 0,06 substances exceeded MAC standard No concentrations СО 1,1 0,9 5 0,22 0,18 exceeded MAC standard No Site №4. concentrations road km 644 NO 0,011 0,015 0,4 0,03 0,04 exceeded MAC (near Shetpe standard settlement) No concentrations 0,08 NO 0,017 0,016 0,2 0,2 exceeded MAC 2 5 standard CH 22,3 18,4 50 0,4 0,4 No

156 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

concentrations exceeded MAC standard No concentrations SO2 0,002 0,5 0,004 exceeded MAC standard No suspended concentrations 0,06 0,5 0,12 substances exceeded MAC standard No concentrations СО 0,8 0,9 5 0,16 0,18 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations NO 0,017 0,005 0,4 0,04 0,01 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations Site №5. 0,08 NO 0,013 0,019 0,2 0,2 exceeded MAC 2 5 between road standard km 633 and No km 632 near concentrations CH 20,4 18,8 50 0,4 0,4 the railway exceeded MAC crossing standard No concentrations SO2 0,007 0,5 0,01 exceeded MAC standard No suspended concentrations 0,03 0,5 0,06 substances exceeded MAC standard No concentrations СО 0,8 0,9 5 0,16 0,18 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations NO 0,016 0,003 0,4 0,03 0,01 exceeded MAC Site №6. standard in the area of No concentrations 0,08 NO 0,014 0,001 0,2 0,01 exceeded MAC road km 555, 2 5 before the standard elevation of No concentrations Manata pass, CH 11 11 50 0,2 0,2 near the exceeded MAC Manat-Ata standard monument No concentrations SO2 0,004 0,5 0,01 exceeded MAC standard No suspended concentrations 0,03 0,5 0,06 substances exceeded MAC standard No concentrations Site №7. СО 0,7 1,0 5 0,14 0,2 exceeded MAC in the area of standard road km 550- NO 0,016 0,008 0,4 0,04 0,02 No

157 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

545 near café concentrations on the exceeded MAC elevation of standard No concentrations the pass 0,08 NO 0.011 0,011 0,1 0,1 exceeded MAC 2 5 standard No concentrations CH 10.7 12,1 50 0,2 0,2 exceeded MAC standard No concentrations SO2 0.004 0,5 0,01 exceeded MAC standard No suspended concentrations 0.03 0,5 0,06 substances exceeded MAC standard

Findings: The measured concentrations of all considered parameters did nowhere exceed the maximum allowed concentrations, that corresponds with Sanitary-Epidemiological Requirements to the Air Quality approved by the decree № 629 of the Minister of Health of RoK, dated August 18, 2004.

a) Carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations have been observed in the range of 0.7-1.4 mg /m3, while the average values in the entire area ranged between 0.8-0.9 mg/m3. It is noted that in all locations the CO concentrations were elevated during the afternoon hours (see diagram 1.1).

СО MAC 5,0 СО MAC 5,0

3

3 мг/м мг/м

07:00-09:30 15:00-17:30

b) Nitrogen Oxide (NO): Concentrations of nitrogen oxide (NO) were in the range from 0,002 to 0,022 mg/m3, the sensibility of identification was 0,0004 mg/m3. Maximum concentration of NO equal to 0,022 mg/m3 was fixed in the 3rd testing site (Zhetibai settlement, near the hospital located along the central street). However, the obtained values did not exceed the established MAC standard for nitrogen oxide (0,4 mg/m3). The sensitivity for these tests was ± 0,01 mg/m3.

158 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

NO MAC 0.4 NO MAC 0.4

3

3 мг/м мг/м

07:00-09:30 15:00-17:30

c) Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2): Concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (were in the range from 0,0020,001 to 0,025 mg/m3. Average concentration of nitrogen dioxide in the area was 0,014-0,016 mg/m3. Maximum concentration was observed in the testing site No.2 (Karagie depression area, road km 748). Also this value did not exceed the standard MAC limits of 0,085 mg/m3).

NO NO MAC 0,085 2 MAC 0,085 2

3 3 мг/м мг/м

07:00-09:30. 15:00-17:30.

d) Concentrations of Hydrocarbons (СуНх) in the air varied from 11,.0 to 23.1 mg/m3, the average concentration is 0.0013 mg/m3. Maximum concentration was observed in location No 3 testing location (Zhetibai settlement, near the hospital located along the central street) (diagram 1.4).

НС НС

3

3 мг/м мг/м

159 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

07:00-09:30. 15:00-17:30.

e) Concentrations of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) in the air varied from 0,002 to 0,007 mg/m3, the average concentration was 0,005 mg/m3. Maximum concentration was observed in test location No 5 (between road km 633 and 632 near railway crossing). Measurement sensitiveness was 0,0004 mg/m3.

MAC 0,5 SO2

3 мг/м

07:00-09:30.

f) Concentrations of suspended substances in the air varied from 0,03 to 0,06 mg/m3, the average concentration is 0,03 mg/m3. Maximum concentration was observed in the 4th test site (road km 644, near Shetpe settlement). Взвешенные вещества

3 мг/м

07:00-09:30.

Conclusion The obtained results of air sampling allow the conclusion that no pollutants concentrations exceeding MAC standards were discovered within the tested sites in the project area of Aktau-Beineu road. The air quality along the whole road corridor is fully compliant with the ruling sanitary norms of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Sanitary-Epidemiological Requirements to the Air Quality approved by the decree № 629 of the Minister of Health of RoK, dated August 18, 2004). Accordingly, no environmental countermeasures are required (i) as long as the traffic volume does not increase substantially, and (ii) the proposed bypasses through uninhabited terrain around the two settlements (Shetpe and Zhetibai) are implemented.

Measurements of the acoustic conditions along the Aktau-Beineu motor road

160 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Punctual noise measurements were carried out to identify the current levels of noise development in the project area of Aktau-Beineu Road.

The measurements were implemented according to the requirements of GOST 20444-85 «Noise. Transport Traffic. Method of Noise Characteristic Measurement Using Methodology of Inventory Survey of Harmful Physical Impact on Air and Its Sources, approved by the decree № 229-p of MEP RoK, dated July 18, 2007. The used noise level meter was Testo 816 (№ 308518031, in accord with the checking certificate № ВА1г-05-4279, and dated 01.09.2011). The results of noise measurements provided in tables 1.2.1-1.2.4 were compared with requirements of national standards, as specified in the SNiP 23-03-2003 / Noise Protection.

Table 1.2.1 – Standards of noise level for territories adjacent to the settling areas

Level of noise pressure L in dB, in octave band frequency with average Maximum of Sensitive territories compound frequency in Hz sound level LAмакс, dB 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Territories adjacent to the residential housing, 90 75 66 59 54 50 47 45 70 recreation buildings and hospitals

Table 1.2.2 – Results of noise level measurements in testing site 3 (near the hospital located along the central street, Zhetibai)

Level of noise pressure L in dB, in octave Maximu m of Time of band frequency with average compound Locatio sound measureme frequency in Hz n level nt 100 200 400 800 63 125 250 500 LAмакс, 0 0 0 0 dB At the distanc e of 5 m 07:30 49, 52, 55, 57, from the 59,5 57,8 54,9 49,5 63,9 15:35 7 6 5 9 road at the left side At the distanc e of 20 07:35 49, 52, 55, 57, m from 59,3 57,6 54,7 49,3 63,7 15:40 5 4 3 7 the road at the left side At the distanc 07:42 53, 56, 59, 61, e of 5 m 63,5 61,8 58,9 53,5 67,9 15:50 7 6 1 9 from the road at

161 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2 the rigth side At the distanc e of 20 m from 07:47 48, 53, 56, 51 57,9 56,2 53,3 47,9 62,3 the road 15:55 1 9 3 at the rigth side

Table 1.2.3 – Results of noise level measurements in testing site 4 (near Shetpe settlement)

Level of noise pressure L in dB, in octave Maximu m of Time of band frequency with average compound Locatio sound measureme frequency in Hz n level nt 100 200 400 800 63 125 250 500 LAмакс, 0 0 0 0 dB At the distanc e of 5 m 9:05 53, 56, 59, 61, from the 63,4 61,7 58,8 53,4 67,8 15:15 6 5 4 8 road at the left side At the distanc e of 20 9:10 49, 52, 55, 57, m from 59,2 57,5 54,6 49,2 63,6 15:20 4 3 2 6 the road at the left side At the distanc e of 5 m 08:50 52, 55, 58, 60, from the 62,4 60,7 57,8 52,4 66,8 15:00 6 5 4 8 road at the rigth side At the distanc e of 20 m from 08:55 52, 55, 58, 50 59,8 58,1 55,2 49,8 64,2 the road 15:05 9 8 2 at the rigth side

Table 1.2.4 – Results of noise level measurements in testing site 6 (near the Manat-Ata monument)

162 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Level of noise pressure L in dB, in octave Maximu m of Time of band frequency with average compound Locatio sound measureme frequency in Hz n level nt 100 200 400 800 63 125 250 500 LAмакс, 0 0 0 0 dB At the distanc e of 5 m 08:28 52, 55, 58, 61, from the 62,7 61 58,1 52,7 67,1 16:50 9 8 7 1 road at the left side At the distanc e of 20 08:35 49, 52, 55, 58, m from 59,7 58 55,1 49,4 64,1 16:55 9 8 7 1 the road at the left side At the distanc e of 5 m 08:40 55, 58, 61, from the 53 62,8 61,1 58,2 52,8 67,2 17:00 9 8 2 road at the rigth side At the distanc e of 20 m from 08:44 47, 50, 53, 55, 57,1 55,4 55,2 47,1 61,5 the road 17:05 3 2 1 5 at the right side

Conclusions and Recommendations: The above results of acoustic conditions of the environment in the project area of the Aktau-Beineu road allow the following conclusions: Nowhere at the tested locations do the current noise level exceed the allowable standard norm levels of RoK. Equally, the obtained results exceeded anywhere at any time the allowable maximum noise level (GOST 12.1.003-83 Noise General Safety Requirements). However, with the possible increase of traffic pressure on the motor road, connecting with growth of traffic volume after reconstruction of the road, and also with the likely technical modifications of transportation vehicles in the future these limit levels might be met. On the other hand, mitigation technical measures, better road surfaces and speed limits may positively reduce the local on the noise development. According to the SNiP 23-03-2003 Protection against Noise, for protection of residential and public buildings from the noise caused by transport and provision of required noise isolation of external constructions it is recommended to select special structures (effective isolation walls and windows) to provide optimal noise isolation for sensitive buildings such as schools, kindergartens and hospitals in the vicinity of the source of noise development. In addition, special noise barriers (screens, walls,

163 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

roadside trees and hedges) are recommended at locations where it is necessary to minimize noise impacts from motor roads. 1.3 Soil quality The tests carried out focused on the evaluation of current condition of soil within selected spots along the project road are based on field surveys conducted in autumn 2011 by Kazecoproject LLC together with Kazecoanaliz LLC. Soils samples were taken from 0-5 and 5-20 cm depth. The samples were used for identification of potential lead contaminations in three locations that were identified as possibly contaminated. The coordinates of these location is shown in table 1.3.1.

Table 1.3.1 – Coordinates of soil sampling points Location North latitude East longitude № 3 43° 35' 3.720" N 52° 6' 17.700" E № 4 44° 7' 31.320" N 52° 9' 49.680" E № 6 44° 5' 50.760" N 53° 10' 15.120" E

The results of chemical analysis of these samples are provided in table 1.3.2 and diagram 1.3.2. and the obtained results were compared with the actual standard limits identified by the MAC, following the Decree N 99 on approval of Norms on Maximum Allowable Concentrations of Harmful Compounds, Harmful Microorganisms and other Biological Substances Polluting Soils of Health Ministry and Ministry of Environmental Protection of Republic of Kazakhstan, dated January, 30 2004.

Table 1.3.2 – Lead contamination test results in soils along the Aktau-Beineu road Lead contamination Depth of soil Test site number % of MAC sampling mg/kg limit №3 – Zhetibai settlement, 0-5 см 10,05 0,31 hospital 5-20 см 7,08 0,22 №4 – road sign at km 644, 0-5 см 6,25 0,20 Shetpe settlement 5-20 см 6,65 0,21 №6 - road sign at km 555, 0-5 см 9,55 0,30 before pass elevation 5-20 см 8,68 0,27 MAC standard 32

The Table above shows that in all tested locations the lead contamination is relatively low, in fact, well below the standard maximum of allowable concentration (MAC). Maximum results were obtained in soil level 0-5 cm in the location 3 – 0,31 MAC, minimum concentration in location 4 – 0,20 MAC. The above results are graphically illustrated in the following diagram: Diagram 1.3.1. Lead concentration tested in the soil along the Aktau-Beineu road

164 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Содержание свинца в почвах

доли ПДК доли

Conclusion: The results of chemical analysis show that no the lead contamination exceeding allowable concentrations in soil was found anywhere within the tested locations. The conclusion is therefore that according to the ecological requirement in the area of Environmental Protection and Land Use (including agricultural lands) (Astana, 2005) all tested levels of potential chemical pollution, including potential lead contamination, are within allowable ranges, and no specific countermeasures are necessary when considering rehabilitation works of the said motorway.

165 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix J - Project Road Strip Maps

Aktau – Zhetibay Strip Map

166 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Zhetibay – Shetpe Strip Map

167 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

Appendix K - Permits and Approvals for Water Supply

168 Environmental Impact Assessment MFF CAREC Corridor 2 (Mangystau Oblast Sections), Tranche 2

169