1. National Environmental Assessment Requirements and Relation to World Bank Policies Relevance to Central Asia Gulana Hajiyeva WB Safeguards Training Workshop Almaty, December 2012

2. Topics General Overview of National EA System in Central Asia (CA) Relationship to WB EA policy Weaknesses of CA System

3. National EIA System General Overview in CA EIA Legislative Framework EIA Process in CA Summary of National EIA procedures

4. CA EIA Legislative Framework Main Environmental Laws Law on Water/Drinking Water/Water Code Law on Environmental Protection (framework)/Environmental Expertise/Environmental Code (KZ, draft in KG) Law of Air Pollution Protection Law on Specially Protected Natural Areas Law on Industrial and Domestic Waste Law on Fishery Law on Subsoil/Fauna Land Code/Forest Code (KG) Law on the Ozone Layer Protection/

5. CA EIA Legislative Framework Ecological expertise Environmental permitting and audits Environmental Enforcement and liability International and transboundary cooperation EIA and SEA Public access to environmental info Environmental monitoring Environmental quality standards, emissions, discharges, noise

6. EIA Process in CA EIA Key Players The Developer MENR/MEP/State Agency Local/Territorial Environmental Committees Environmental Review Expert Group, members of Academy of Science, experts, professors NGOs, the Public EIA Activities Mandatory for all new/existing activity regardless size/effect Construction/Rehabilitation extension/upgrading projects New technology development; Drafts of local programs on environment protection

7. EIA Process in CA Submission of application by Developer to obtain an Environmental Permit: Initial examination  decision on EIA  Scope Development of EIA Report/EMP Review of EIA Report by MEP/SSE including public consultation and disclosure MEP Decision on project approval/rejection Construction and operational phase

8. Screening of investments in CA EIA Category Definition/Linkage to Sanitary ClassDegree of Impact/Risk I Objects of Sanitary Classes 1-2, and: Extractive activities (except ubiquitous minerals) High II Objects of Sanitary Class 3, and: Extraction of ubiquitous minerals Forestry activities Special uses of water Medium-high IIIObjects of Sanitary Class 4Medium-low IV Objects of Sanitary Class 5, and: All animal uses (except recreational fishing and hunting) Low (?)

9. Summary of national EIA vs WB procedures EIA StagesNational EIAWB EIA Screeninglacks an explicit screening phase (I-IV)A, B, C or FI Consultation and Scoping (ToR) Meeting with NGOs experts; not well defined Required for “A”, not required for “B” Environmental baseline studiesRequired for green-field projectsRequired Assessment of Project AlternativesMostly not required Required for “A”; discussions of alternative for project sites; “do nothing” scenario Description of Impact Assessment and Mitigation Measures Required but not much guidance is given on how detailed should be the measures described Required/EMP Public consultation Required but there is no specific on timeframes Category A (2 required) Category B (1 required) MonitoringMEP decision identifies what impact needs to be monitored Monitoring plan with specific indicators, frequency of measurements, estimated costs, institutional responsibilities

10. Integration of WB EA requirements with Typical CA National Procedures Pre/Feasibility Study Detail Design Bidding Docs Construction Permit Preliminary EIA incl. mitigation measures Final EIAEnv. Permit (Monitoring) Identification/ Preparation Appraisal Implementation World Bank NATIONAL LEGISLATION EA/EMP

11. Weaknesses of CA system Lengthy EIA review/approval process Public hearing quality not very satisfactory; public access to environmental information Different degree of sector-specific integration to address environmental issues Enforcement and compliance system - Capacity to comply with environmental requirements and Reporting Limited capacity an inefficient internal organization of environmental institutions

12. Additional requirements of WB More widespread adoption of environmental management and monitoring plans Identification of more proactive best management practices More explicit measures to address construction related (localized) impacts and mitigation Greater public consultation, documentation and disclosure requirements