REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN Rural Enterprise Support Project-II And its Additional Financing And the Associated GEF Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation Project Revised Environmental Management Framework and Environmental Guidelines for Project Activities November 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. ii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS..................................................................................... v 1. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND ..................................................................................... 1 •Environmental assessment – purpose....................................................................................... 1 •The Project ............................................................................................................................... 1 •RESP II Project components .................................................................................................... 1 •Project Area.............................................................................................................................. 2 •Project Environmental Aspects ................................................................................................ 3 •Agriculture related Environmental Issues ................................................................................ 4 •Responsibility........................................................................................................................... 6 2. POLICY CONTEXT .................................................................................................................. 7 2.1 General...................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 The World Bank Safeguards Policy.......................................................................................... 8 2.3 Environmental Assessment..................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Project Environmental Category............................................................................................. 10 2.5 Uzbekistan Environmental Legislation and Procedures ......................................................... 11 •State Organizations ................................................................................................................ 11 •Non-Governmental Organizations ......................................................................................... 11 •National Environmental Policies............................................................................................ 11 •General Legislation ................................................................................................................ 12 •Decrees Affecting Water Resources and Nature Protection .................................................. 12 2.5.1 International Cooperation ........................................................................................... 13 •Transboundary Water and Energy Resource Management.................................................... 13 •Global and Regional Agreements .......................................................................................... 13 2.5.2 EIA Procedures ............................................................................................................ 14 2.6 Public Involvement ................................................................................................................. 15 3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 15 3.1 General.................................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Potential Benefits and Impacts –Irrigation and Drainage ....................................................... 18 3.3 Potential Benefits and Impacts – Rural Finance ..................................................................... 19 •Agricultural Enterprises ......................................................................................................... 19 •Farm Inputs ............................................................................................................................ 20 - ii - •Pesticides................................................................................................................................ 22 3.4 Potential Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................. 24 3.5 Mitigation................................................................................................................................ 25 3.6 Environmental Risk ................................................................................................................ 26 4. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES ......................................................... 27 4.1 General.................................................................................................................................... 27 4.2 Management............................................................................................................................ 27 4.3 Mitigation................................................................................................................................ 27 4.4 Monitoring .............................................................................................................................. 29 4.4.1 Monitoring plan............................................................................................................... 31 4.4.2 Environmental monitoring of long term issues............................................................... 32 5. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURE GUIDELINES FOR I&D COMPONENT... 33 5.1. Environmental due diligence ................................................................................................. 33 5.2. Environmental protection and enhancement.......................................................................... 34 5.3. Technical interventions.......................................................................................................... 34 5.4. EMP measures after Project completion................................................................................ 35 6. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURE GUIDELINES FOR RURAL FINANCE COMPONENT.............................................................................................................................. 35 6.1 Overview................................................................................................................................. 35 6.2. Environmental screening for small credit applications.......................................................... 36 6.3. Environmental screening for medium credit applications ..................................................... 36 6.5 Sub-project Categories............................................................................................................ 37 6.6. Secondary Screening.............................................................................................................. 37 6.7. Rejection of sub-project......................................................................................................... 38 6.8. Environmental Monitoring..................................................................................................... 38 6.9. Reporting by the PFIs and the RRA ...................................................................................... 38 7. INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS ..................... 39 7.1. Environmental Monitoring Specialist (EMS) ........................................................................ 39 7.2. Training programme .............................................................................................................. 39 7.3 Sustainable Agricultural Extension........................................................................................ 39 Annexes Annex 1 Environmental Categories Annex 2 Environmental Screening Checklist Forms (Rural Finance Component) Annex 3 Environmental Mitigation (Rural Finance Component) - iii - Annex 4 Accept/Reject Decision Making (Rural Finance Component) Annex 5 Environmental Monitoring (Rural Finance Component) Annex 6 Public Consultations for Mid-Size Credits and Grants (Rural Finance Component) Annex 7 Terms of Reference for an Environmental Assessment Annex 8 Summary of Stakeholder Meeting on EMP Annex 9 List of Pesticides registered in Uzbekistan Annex 10 List of Forbidden and Limited Application Chemicals Annex 11 Summary of Project outcomes of RESP-I - iv - ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AF Additional Finance AIS Administration of Irrigation Systems AMC Administration of Main Canals BAIS Basin Administration of Irrigation Systems BVO River Basin Water Management Organization CDW Collector Drainage Water CIS Commonwealth of Independent States EA Environmental Assessment EE Energy efficiency/efficient EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMS Environmental Monitoring Specialist EMF Environmental Management Framework FS Feasibility Study GEF Global Environment Facility GEF Project Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation Project GHG Greenhouse Gas Emissions GWL Groundwater level HGME Hydro-geological Meliorative Expedition ICWC Interstate Commission for Water Coordination I&D Irrigation and drainage IPM Integrated Pest Management IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management MAL Maximum Allowable Limit MAWR Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources MOM Management, Operation and Maintenance NGO Non-governmental Organization O&M Operation and Maintenance OP Operation Policy (of the World Bank) PMFI Participating Microfinance Institution PFI Participating Financial Institution PIU Project Implementation Unit RE Renewable energy SA Social Assessment SEE State Ecological Expertise TOR Terms of Reference USD United States Dollar UZS Uzbekistan Sum VDW Vertical Drainage Well WB World Bank WUA Water Users’ Association RRA Rural Restructuring Agency RESP I Rural Enterprise Support Project Phase I RESP II Rural Enterprise Support Project Phase II RUz Republic of Uzbekistan -v- - vi - 1. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND • Environmental assessment – purpose The objective of the Environmental Management Framework (EMF) for the Rural Enterprise Support Project-II (RESP II) is to help ensure that the project proposed for World Bank financing is environmentally sound and sustainable and that the project interventions are in compliance with the requirements of the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan. This EMF has been updated in November 2011, so that it also applies to activities under the RESP II Additional Financing (AF) and the associated Global Environment Facility (GEF) project “Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation.â€? (GEF Project) RESP II has been rated in the environmental screening category "B" and has been subject to a field-based environmental review by the preparation team. The Project involves investment in Rehabilitation of Irrigation and Drainage (I&D) Systems, Rural Finance, and Rural Training and Advisory Services in a set of administrative districts of Uzbekistan. It is a requirement of the Bank and Uzbekistan legislation that for a B category project, all project components should be verified that they are in compliance with the Uzbekistan environmental laws and regulations and are consistent with World Bank policy (OP 4.01) and procedures on environmental assessment. As in the case of economic, financial, institutional and engineering analysis, Environmental Assessment is a part of project preparation. The Environmental Management Framework provides the framework to address environmental considerations of activities financed under the RESP II. This EMF defines and assesses overall project-level environmental impacts, provides a framework for EA of I&D sub-projects, and provides a screening and mitigation approach for credit line investments. • The Project The original project scales up the Rural Enterprise Support Project Phase I (RESP I) and adheres to that project’s main objectives of increasing the productivity and sustainability of agriculture and agribusinesses in project areas. This will be achieved by directly supporting the newly independent farmers in regions of the country, who did not benefit from the first project. The AF will provide additional funding for the RESP II credit line, and will fund the same types of sub- loans as the original project. The GEF Project will support the introduction of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies, and more sustainable irrigated land use practices. • RESP II Project components The project is financing by an IDA concessional Credit. The amount of the Credit is $67,9 million. The AF would provide approximately $40 million for continuation and expansion of the Rural Finance credit line. The project would comprise the following four components: Component A: Rural Finance. This component will have the objective of facilitating access to credit to the newly independent farmers which originated from the Shirkat reform. -1- The component will finance a credit line for Participating Financial Institutions (PFI – commercial banks, leasing companies and microfinance institutions) to on-lend to farmers and rural business related to farming (including but not limited to provision of farming services such as farm mechanization, storage and distribution facilities, financing of agricultural inputs and investments in tree-crops). The component will also finance leasing transactions, to allow access too much needed financing for rural businesses with collateral constraints. A complementary training program to the PFIs will be provided, to upgrade their skills in agricultural investment project appraisal. The AF would provide approximately $40 million for continuation and expansion of the Rural Finance credit line. Component B: Rehabilitation of Irrigation and Drainage Systems. This component will cover investments for (i) inter-farm and on-farm works (leveraged by the Land Degradation demonstration grant from GEF); (ii) support to Water User Associations, including equipment, material, and training for the maintenance of on-farm canals and drainage; and demonstration plots. This component will be implemented in seven districts which were selected according to the needs for rehabilitation of I&D works. Component C: Rural Training and Advisory Services. This component has two objectives: (i) help potential borrowers to develop business plans in order to increase their business and financial skills, thereby reducing the risks that the final borrowers will face difficulties in repaying the sub-loans (thus reducing potential defaults); (ii) provide advisory services and training to the newly independent farmers in various topics such as legal, accounting, business, technical aspects including agronomy, water management, pesticide handling, IPM, etc. Component D: Project Management. The component will cover the overall coordination of project activities including fiduciary aspects of project management and monitoring and evaluation. The project will be managed by the Rural Restructuring Agency, an institution which significantly developed its capacity during the Rural Enterprises Development Project. • GEF Project The GEF Project will be financed by a GEF grant in the amount of $12.7 million. The project would comprise the following three components: Component A: Investments for sustainable technologies. Activities under this component would aim at introducing renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies in small and medium size (SME) agribusinesses and on small and large farms. Examples of renewable energy technologies could include bio-gas digestors solar (photovoltaics, solar thermal, concentrating solar power), biomass (using cotton stalks and/or sorghum), wind and micro- hydroelectric installations. It is envisioned that the grants would cover 50% of the costs, with the beneficiaries providing the remaining funds. The beneficiaries could apply to the credit line under Component 1 of the baseline project for their portion of the co-financing. This would improve the environmental sustainability of the sub-projects financed under the credit line, and provide needed portfolio diversification under RESP II. -2- Component B: Irrigated land degradation mitigation. This component would support technologies and management approaches for controlling and reversing irrigated land degradation. This could include introduction, testing and demonstration of the integrated low-cost, low-risk water and land management technologies, such as drip irrigation, salinity mitigation of marginal land, water re-use, soil quality enhancement, pumping for groundwater extraction, alternative cropping, and other techniques or practices to increase water use efficiency and agricultural productivity. These activities would be targeted to the rayons participating in the Irrigation and Drainage Component of RESP II, which are receiving funds and technical assistance to repair and upgrade irrigation infrastructure. Component C: Project technical support and advisory services. Activities under this component would support key capacity development and analytical services needed to introduce and scale up adoption of renewable energy, energy efficiency and land degradation mitigation technologies and practices. The GEF Project would also support advisory services for analysis and development of the legal and regulatory framework to support broader adoption of renewable energy technologies. These activities would complement the Rural Training and Advisory Services Component of RESP II, and strengthen environmental oversight and impact of RESP II. • Project Area The RESP II Irrigation and Drainage component will concentrate on a set of seven administrative districts, while other project activities, including the Rural Finance component, will cover a much larger area in seven provinces The AF and the GEF Project will operate in the same oblasts (provinces) and rayons (districts) as RESP II: Component A: Rural Finance and C: Rural Component B: Rehabilitation of I&D Systems Advisory Services (Project Provinces) (Project Districts) Andijan Ulugnar Bukhara Alat Kashkadarya Mirishkor Samarqand Pasdargom Sirdarya Bayavut Tashkent Buka Ferghana Yazyavan • Project Environmental Aspects The project will benefit from the institutional capacity developed under RESP I which stressed awareness of safeguard policies. The project’s information and advisory service activities will continue to promote the adoption of improved and environmentally sound technologies, provide training and advice on integrated pest management techniques as well as on improved use and handling of fertilizer and agro-chemicals. A large number of trainings were provided during RESP I to all project beneficiaries including borrowers from the line of credit under Rural Finance, RBAS and ASC Development components of RESP I. It is planned to continue this -3- practice under RESP II. The GEF Project Component C (technical support and advisory services) would expand advisory services, training and information dissemination related to renewable energy, energy efficiency and land degradation mitigation technologies and practices, and would also support advisory services for analysis and development of the related legal and regulatory framework Rehabilitation and small-scale construction works on irrigation and drainage networks, as in RESP II, usually cause little environmental impact, however these still demand special precautions. The GEF Project Component B (irrigated land degradation mitigation) would focus on the same rayons as RESP II , and be designed to enhance the positive environmental impact of the RESP II I&D Component. The Rural Finance activities related to Participating Financial Institutions (PFIs) will deal with medium-to-small loans which are expected to be used for agricultural inputs and implements, equipment and trading activities with a minimal environmental impact. The project will not finance pesticides. Members of PFIs involved in lending will also be provided with training on the potential environmental impact of sub-projects and on mitigation measures. The most common end-uses of loans under RESP-I have been for provision of farming services such as farm mechanization, storage and distribution facilities, financing of agricultural inputs and investments in tree-crops. These activities are closely linked to Rural Advisory Service activities and borrowers will therefore receive some guidance on their usage. The participating financial institutions (PFIs) for RESP-II are the commercial banks and leasing companies for the mid-size credit line and leasing services. The AF would extend and expand the Rural Finance component of RESP II, and would provide co-financing of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies together with the GEF Project. The GEF Project Component A (investments in sustainable technologies) would support investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency for farmers and agribusinesses. This will improve the environmental sustainability of the sub-projects financed under the credit line, and contribute to Uzbekistan’s efforts to address climate change adaptation and mitigation. • Agriculture related Environmental Issues Uzbekistan has a number of environmental issues that should be addressed and many of these are either directly or indirectly related to agriculture and as such are relevant to this Project, the AF and the GEF Project. A number of environmental problems are as a result of past and current agricultural activities and as such the Project must take care to not exacerbate the situation, but also to promote activities that will be environmentally enhancing, to overcome some of these past mistakes. Over 60% of the irrigated area of 4 million ha is classed as salt affected, while some 30% is classed as having moderately or highly saline land. Soil salinization is worsening because main drainage systems are poorly maintained and an increasing percentage of the on-farm drainage systems is out of operation and difficult to rehabilitate. The rapid increase in river salinization which was observed before 1990 has come to a halt because drainage systems are becoming increasingly less effective in removing salts from the irrigated areas -4- Agricultural and rural enterprises can also indirectly result in negative environmental effects. The issues are listed below, with causes, in no particular order of importance: • Groundwater pollution – chemicals including agricultural • Surface water pollution – chemicals including agricultural • Water losses – irrigation systems • Soil salinization and alkalination – irrigation systems • Water logging – irrigation systems (drainage) • Biodiversity losses (including pressure on relatives of domestic crops, fruit trees and medicinal plants) – grazing and deforestation • Soil erosion – overgrazing and irrigation systems • Soil fertility losses – cultivation practices • Land contamination – chemicals including agricultural, industrial wastes • Environmental health and hazards – food contamination and exposure to pollutants In addition to these issues there are others related to agro-processing and other agribusiness enterprises, major concerns relate to effluent discharges and their impact on water quality, water use, disturbance of significant sites for biodiversity and cultural protection, and general health and safety issues. A specific concern is the introduction of alien species and their effect on biodiversity, especially endemic species. Environmental and safeguard issues are foreseen mainly with respect to rehabilitation of I&D systems, as well as investment in small and medium agro-processing enterprises likely to be financed under the project through credit lines from PFIs. Environmental damage from rehabilitation of I&D systems should be controlled, mainly with regard to: Pollution of ground and surface waters through dumping of fuel, oil and lubricates; Health of workers and the local population connected with construction and transport and operation of machinery; Handling of waste formed at construction sites, and resulting from cleaning and rehabilitation of collectors and wells; Ecological disturbance in canals and collectors in and outside (downstream) of the Project area (elimination feeding and breeding sites of fish, birds and other animals). Agro-processors would have potential environmental impacts from solid and liquid waste emissions, smoke, airborne particles and gaseous discharges, transport and machinery noise. These would need to be mitigated to National Standards and EMF guidelines by incorporating the necessary controls and treatment systems in the design and, during procurement, by specifying equipment and processes that meet these standards. Processors would also need to incorporate National safety measures for personnel in the vicinity of operating machinery. The project including the AF is not expected to produce major environmental impacts. However, some investments from the loan proceeds may involve environmental issues related to, for -5- example, rehabilitation of I&D systems, waste management at farms, agro-enterprises, and location or site preparation for facilities or agricultural techniques. The GEF Project would not present any negative environmental impacts, but would support national and global environmental benefits by reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), providing effective livestock waste management (e.g., bio-gas digesters to convert manure to clean energy and high grade fertilizer), and mitigating degraded irrigated land. The project will screen for physical cultural resources that may be impacted during implementation, and will identify appropriate measures for avoiding or mitigating these impacts as part of the EA process. These measures may range from full site protection to selective mitigation, including salvage and documentation, in cases where a portion or all of the physical cultural resources may be lost. Physcial cultural resources are defined as movable or immovable objects, sites, structures, groups of structures, and natural features and landscapes that have archaeological, paleontological, historical, architectural, religious, aesthetic, or other cultural significance. Physical cultural resources may be located in urban or rural settings, and may be above or below ground, or underwater. Their cultural interest may be at the local, provincial or national level, or within the international community. • Responsibility During fulfillment of some project activities it is anticipated that there would be some impacts to the soil, water, flora and fauna, earth structure and social environment through discharge of solid and liquid type wastes to environment, emissions of harmful gases to atmosphere and other effects. These impacts should be mitigated on the basis of existing standards of Uzbekistan as described in the EMF. This process besides common requirements also includes additional ecological requirements to sub-projects to be formulated before funding of projects and envisages on the basis of relevant standards, control of purchase of some equipment, application of technologies and process of fulfillment of the project. The project implementing agency will require that every loan application submitted under the Rural Finance Component, the AF, and every proposal submitted under the Irrigation and Drainage Component include an environmental assessment of the program proposed. Guidelines for such assessments will be in conformity with Bank requirements, as described in sections 5 and 6 and the annexes of this EMF. The package containing the list of requirements for rehabilitation of I&D systems or loan applications should also include requirement for environmental assessment (EA) of ecological safety of applied sub-project. For all major activities under Rehabilitation of I&D systems component of the RESP II an Environmental Assessment and Environmental Management Plan will be provided with mitigation measures to be included in the design. Depending on the potential environmental impacts of a sub-project under the Rural Finance component, either an Environmental Review (ER), Limited Environmental Assessment (LEA) or Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) would be carried out for each sub-loan application package. Sub-projects financed through project credit lines must be in compliance with the environmental laws and regulations of Uzbekistan and with World Bank safeguard policies. Buildings, equipment and processes; production, storage and marketing technologies; production and -6- processing materials; construction sites and factories, and working environments must all comply with the relevant environmental laws. Environmental risk management of sub-loans will be a part of sub-loan appraisal by the project’s participating financial institutions. Loan officers should be able to verify that sub-loan and micro-loan applications are in compliance with Uzbekistan laws and regulations and will not cause enduring harm to the Uzbekistan natural environment. The RRA environmental specialist will be able to provide guidance in case of complex projects. The proposals for investment in private-sector agri-business development under the project have the potential for environmental pollution, and systems need to be in place to ensure that all proposals adequately protect the environment. The Bank environmental guidelines require financial intermediaries to undertake environmental screening of the sub-project: a) To screen for potential environmental problems against a checklist, and to categorize and quantify the risk against pre-determined charts. b) To call for an environmental impact assessment for any proposal that indicates more than minimal levels of risk. c) To screen credit applications for potential impacts on significant physical cultural resources. It is envisaged that the loan officer (or an environmental specialist) will make decisions on environmental and safeguard compliance, providing that there are no complex environmental issues involved in the proposal. In the case of complex environmental issues that are beyond the experience of the loan officer, the PFI will request assistance from the RRA to advise the PFIs on the scope of an environmental mitigation plan for the application to the PFI. In any case of doubt, the PFI should consult with the RRA. 2. POLICY CONTEXT 2.1 General The AF and GEF project have not been finalized at the stage of environmental assessment although significant changes to the concept and the current description of components are not anticipated. This EA and EMF, as amended remain fully valid for RESP II. The environmental impact of the RESP II is expected to mainly derive from the Irrigation and Drainage component and it is expected to be small, but positive. The proposed works do not include any investment in new infrastructure that would allow increased water abstraction from main sources. The project is classified as category “Bâ€? for the purpose of OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, and project impacts will be monitored during implementation. The challenge in conducting an EA for the Rural Finance component of the Project and the AF is that there are no location specifics for this component (the intent is that the the credit available through the Project will be available for 7 large provinces of the country covering over 60% of the territory of Uzbekistan). The other challenge for Rural Finance component is to -7- attempt to determine as best as possible the various activities that individual farmers and agribusinesses (including agro-processors) will wish to pursue in terms of loan proposals. As described in the following sections, a list of activities has been prepared based on previous similar studies and on discussions with stakeholders. It should be noted, however, that this list may not be comprehensive since it is difficult to predict all activities that may be proposed for financial support. At the same time the list may well contain activities that will not be pursued by potential borrowers. 2.2 The World Bank Safeguards Policy The World Bank requires an environmental assessment of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus improve decision making (OP 4.01, January 1999). The Bank favors preventive measures over mitigatory or compensatory measures, whenever feasible. The World Bank distinguishes different types of environmental analysis: Project specific EA (PSEA) to examine specific investment projects; Regional EA (REA) may be applied where a number of similar but significant development activities with potentially cumulative impacts are planned within a certain region or e.g. catchments area; Sector EA (SEA) is used for the design of sector investment programs. Alternatives may be applied in cases where a full EA is not needed. Alternative approaches include: Application of specific environmental design and/or siting criteria for small scale industries; Full social assessment might be required in cases where large scale or serious sociological or socio-economic impacts are expected. The level of detail of the environmental analysis depends on the scale of the works that are proposed and the magnitude of the environmental impacts. The following categories, based on best professional judgement, are applied: Category A: a full EA is required in cases where significant adverse impacts are expected - large scale irrigation and drainage works are often Category A; Category B: although a full EA is not required, an environmental analysis should be carried out, as the project may have adverse environmental impacts (which are however expected to be less significant than under Category A); Category C: no EA or environmental analysis is required for projects without expected adverse environmental impacts. Figure 1Figure 1 presents the different steps in the project cycle and shows how the various EA phases fit in the project preparation process. The main EA phases concern screening, scoping, EA, and environmental management plan during and after implementation of the project - covering mitigation, monitoring and evaluation. -8- Figure 3.1 EA and the World Bank Project Cycle Project Cycle Environmental Assessment No EA required C Screening Identification Pre-feasibility Study B A Scoping & Public Scoping & Public Con- Consultation sultation (as appropriate) ToR and EA Team ToR and EA Team Feasibility Study Selection Selection Preparation EA Preparation: EA Preparation: - Examine alternatives - Assess impacts; and/or - Assess impacts - Mitigation plan; or Project Planning and - EMP's - Carry out Audit; or Detailed Design - Assess hazards Appraisal Review Environmental Review EA Report & Project Appraisal Section in Appraisal Public Consultation Report Loan Negatiation Negotiation Loan Approval Im plem entation Monitoring Environmental Quality Project Implementa- tion and Supervision Monitoring Mitigation Measures Implementation Completion Report Evaluate EA Report Evaluation Evaluate Mitigation Plan Performance Audit and OED Evaluation Evaluate Institution Capacity • Figure 1. Environmental Assessment and the World Bank project cycle In the framework of World Bank lending programs, the preparation of environmental data sheets is required for proposed projects. These sheets contain the most essential environmental information as well as the category determination. The EA takes into account the environment (air, water and land), humans health and safety, social aspects (obligatory resettlement, residents and cultural heritage property), and trans- boundary and global ecology aspects. At the same time it takes into account all changes taken place in the project and country; results of ecological studies held over the country, plans of local ecological measures; common political framework of the country, local legislation and -9- institutional possibilities on ecological and social aspects; obligations of the country on international Agreements and Treaties concerning the projects activities. The Bank doesn’t fund the project activities which are contrary to such country’s obligations as it would be determined during the EA. The coverage and depth of the EA process on RESP-II is determined by specific properties of proposed components. Key considerations to be taken into account during the EA process include: Generic initial screening to determine appropriate environmental assessment; Compliance with existing environmental regulations in Uzbekistan; Linkages with social assessment; Analysis of alternatives; Public participation and consultation with affected people and organizations; and Disclosure of information. 2.3 Environmental Assessment The Bank undertakes environmental screening of each proposed project to determine the appropriate extent and type of EIA. The Bank classifies the proposed project into one of four categories, depending on the type, location, sensitivity and scale of the project and the nature and magnitude of its potential environmental impacts. The four Categories are A, B, C, and FI, and these categories are detailed in Annex 1. Under Uzbekistan Law an EA is grouped in four environmental categories (1,2,3, or 4) the first three of which are approximately equivalent to Bank environmental categories A, B and C. Uzbekistan Category 4 relates to project activities that have no or localized environmental impact, and may need some form of permit. 2.4 Project Environmental Category According to the World Bank regulation, the Rural Enterprise Support Project is placed into EA category "B" which means that it has a limited impact on the environment. This category was selected because a credit line is included, which may result in adverse environmental impacts, and because provision is made for rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure in particular. The project is part of a long-term program which is expected to foster more prudent use of land, particularly agricultural land and environmentally sustainable farming practices with greater sense of individual and community responsibility for the environment. The rehabilitation and improvement of irrigation and drainage system are expected to help improve water use efficiency, check the process of salinization and water logging, and help arrest the process of land degradation. The project activities to be implemented have a great importance for the promotion and recognition of ecologically sustainable management of the national resources. - 10 - 2.5 Uzbekistan Environmental Legislation and Procedures • State Organizations The State Committee for Nature Protection (Goskompriroda)1 is the primary environmental regulatory agency. It reports directly to the Oliy Majlis (Parliament), and is responsible, at central, oblast and raion levels, for coordinating the environmental and natural resources actions of other national government bodies. The mandate of Goskompriroda is based on the Regulation “On the State Environmental Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistanâ€? as approved by Parliament on 26 April 1996. Goskompriroda is responsible for environmental and natural systems protection. It oversees the national system of protected areas, can initiate liability/damage actions, and administers an Environmental Fund which receives pollution fees and penalties and supports pollution mitigation measures. There are also several scientific institutes attached to the Goskompriroda which conduct analysis on environmental and natural resources problems and measures to address these in support of Goskompriroda’s work. Goskompriroda also issues permits for pollution discharge emissions and may prohibit projects and construction works that do not comply with (international) legislation. Fees are collected at the regional level for the use of resources, for licences to discharge polluting material, and for waste disposal. Money collected from these sources enters into the nature control fund and is used for current expenditure on activities connected with environmental control. 50% of the collected funds are used at the regional level for local projects, and rest is directed to the ‘republican fund for special projects’. The structure of Goskompriroda takes the form of a central body in Tashkent, with regional (oblast) and local (raion) branches and agencies for scientific and technical support. Regional level organisations have the same structure as those at national level. Different departments take responsibility for environmental standards, environmental law, international relations, environmental funding, economics, publicity, and governmental ecological review. • Non-Governmental Organizations There are other national public organizations and national charity and international foundations (NGOs) in Uzbekistan. Their activities are aimed at supporting the health of the population and environmental protection, as well as development of entrepreneurship, establishment and strengthening of cultural relations and intellectual wealth. All NGOs with a mandate for environmental protection established a national program: ECOFORUM. In June 2004 Goskompriroda and ECOFORUM signed a Memorandum of Understanding and Cooperation. • National Environmental Policies The main priority for the Republic of Uzbekistan during the on-going economic reforms is to ensure reliable social guarantees and measures for social security and environmental protection2. 1 In English translations also called ‘State Committee for Nature Conservation’, ‘State Committee for Natural Resources’, ‘Committee of Nature Control’, etc. 2 “Uzbekistan: Towards 21-st Centuryâ€?, Report about the 14-th Session of Parliament (Oliy Majlis). - 11 - Nature protection policy and the implementing measures in the areas of rational use of the natural resources and environment protection are based on the following main principles: Integration of economic and ecological policy aimed at conservation and restoration of the environment as the essential condition for improvement of the living standards of the population; Transition from protection of individual natural elements to the general and integrated protection of ecosystems; Responsibility of all members of society for environment protection and conservation of biodiversity. • General Legislation Since independence Uzbekistan has established more than 100 laws, revisions of old legislation and resource management policies designed to address environmental problems and manage environmental resources. Relevant environmental laws and regulations in the framework of the present Project include: “On Environmental Protectionâ€? (1992), establishing a legal, economic and organizational framework for environment protection, ensuring sustainable development and defining principles including SEE; “On Water and Water Useâ€? (1993), ensuring rational water use, protection of water resources, prevention and mitigation of negative impacts and compliance with national legislation; “On Land Codeâ€? (1998) provides basic norms and rules for land use and stipulates the land rights; “On the Concept of National Securityâ€? (1997), a principle framework for achieving national ecological security, etc.; “On Ecological Expertiseâ€? (2001) provides for mandatory expert assessment of impacts on the environment and human health, as well as a legal basis for conducting expert assessments. With the support of international organizations strategies and plans of actions with relevance to the Project have been developed, including: National Environmental Action Program of the Republic of Uzbekistan for 1996-2010 (1999); National Action Program to Combat Desertification (1998); Mid-Term Strategy for Improving Living Standards (2003). • Decrees Affecting Water Resources and Nature Protection Many important aspects of state management, use and protection of water resources are regulated by Decrees of the Cabinet of Ministers, such as: “On approval of the Regulation of the State Environmental Expertiseâ€? (No 491, 31.12.2001); - 12 - “On approval of Provision on the State Environment Monitoringâ€? (No 49, 3.04.2002); “On rendering status of the specially protected natural territories of the republican importance to the fresh water aquifer formation zonesâ€? (No 302, 26.08.2002); “On improvement of the Hydro-Meteorological Serviceâ€? (No 183, 14.04.2004); “On approval of the Provision for procedures for the cadastral division of territory of the RUz and formation of cadastral numbers for land plots, buildings and structuresâ€? (No 492, 31.12.2001). Relevant nature protection normative documents issued by government include: “Procedure for elaboration and execution of draft standards on maximum permissible emission of contaminants discharged to water bodies including drainage waterâ€? (RD 118.0027719.5-91); “Procedure for granting permission for special water useâ€? (RD 118.0027714.6-92); “Instruction for determining of damage caused to the national economy by underground water contaminationâ€? (RD 118.0027714.47-95); “Temporary recommendation on control of underground water protection of the Republic of Uzbekistanâ€?. State Nature Committee and Uzbekgidrogeologiya of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, 1991; “Procedure for elaboration and principal requirements of recommendations to use waste water for crop irrigationâ€? (RD 118.0027714.41-94). 2.5.1 International Cooperation • Transboundary Water and Energy Resource Management Since independence Uzbekistan has been party to bilateral and multilateral agreements and a participant in regional initiatives in the area of joint water and energy resources management in Central Asia. An important stimulus to strengthening of dialogue and cooperation amongst the Aral Sea basin countries is the signing of a number of intergovernmental agreements, such as: Agreement between Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan about cooperation in water management issues (Chardjev; 16 January 1996); Agreement between Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan about use of water and energy resources of the Syr Darya River Basin (Bishkek; 17 March 1998). On 9 August 2007 the President of Uzbekistan signed a Decree “On joining the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Water Courses and International Lakesâ€?, and “On joining the Convention on the Right to Non-Navigation Use of Transboundary Water Coursesâ€?. This decree is important for the development of integrated water management principles and environmental-friendly use of the transboundary water resources at national and regional levels. • Global and Regional Agreements In the context of the global environment, the Republic of Uzbekistan is a Party to three Rio Conventions: the Convention on Climate Change, Convention on Biological Diversity, and - 13 - Convention to Combat Desertification, together with a number of other international Conventions, Protocols, Agreements, and Memoranda of Understanding in the areas of environmental conservation and sustainable development. Other global agreements to which Uzbekistan is party include: Convention on Prohibition of Military or Any Aggressive Destructive Actions to the Environment (26.05.1993); Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (22.12.1995); Convention on Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (22.12.1995); Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (01.07.1997); Bonn Convention on Conservation of Migrating Species of Wild Animals (01.05.1998); Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (30.08.2001). In the framework of the CIS, Uzbekistan is member of the Inter-State Ecological Council for harmonization of environmental legislation, elaboration on EA and developing economic tools for environmental protection, and has established the Inter-state Environmental Fund for financing environmental protection in inter-state and regional programs. A good example of multi-lateral and multi-donor partnership is the Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM). The objectives of this program are to combat land degradation and reduce poverty in the Central Asian countries by helping to develop a comprehensive and integrated approach to the sustainable management of land and water resources. 2.5.2 EIA Procedures State Environmental Expertise (SEE), i.e. preparation of or the review and approval (or rejection) of developments on environmental grounds, is regulated by Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers No 491.31.12.2001: “On approval of the Regulation of the State Environmental Expertiseâ€?. The main responsible organization is the Main Directorate for State Ecological Expertise (Glavgosecoexpertiza) of Goskompriroda. The Regulation stipulates 4 categories for development: Category 1 – high risk (corresponds to World Bank category A); Category 2 – moderate risk (corresponds to World Bank category B); Category 3 – low risk (corresponds to World Bank category C); Category 4 – local impact (corresponds to World Bank category C). Appendix 2 to the Regulation details the types of development that fall within each Category. Category 2 (moderate risk) includes an item “45. Reconstruction and melioration improvement of deteriorated irrigation lands with a space over 1,000 hectaresâ€?, which would be applicable to the Project at hand (30,000 ha will be improved). Category 3 (low risk) includes an item “40. Reconstruction and melioration improvement of deteriorated irrigation lands with a space from 100 to 1,000 hectaresâ€?. - 14 - It is understood that Glavgosecoexpertiza either performs the SEE itself (in which case separate funding is required) or that the directorate reviews environmental assessments that have been executed by others. It is therefore understood that the RRA is to submit the final Environmental Assessment report to Glavgosecoexpertiza for review and approval. 2.6 Public Involvement Public input to the environmental review was solicited in the process of preparing this EMF: • discussions with farmers, both small and medium sized commercial farms and with PFIs to inform them of the environmental review of the Project, and more importantly, to identify likely activities for which loans through the Project would be requested. As well, farmers were asked for opinions on important environmental issues in their communities. • discussions with Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources officials to determine the categories of likely farm and non-farm rural enterprises for which loans would be requested. • The ecological aspects of the Project were discussed with the officials of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources. • A workshop will be held in March 2008 to solicit ideas on activities to be funded and the probable environmental impacts that could be expected from project activities. A summary of discussions at this round table will be provided in Annex 7. A summary of EMP will br posted in the Website of MAWR prior to public consultation workshop held on March 2008. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 3.1 General 3.1.1 Background of RESP-1 The environmental impact of the RESP-1 mainly derived from the implementation of Irrigation and Drainage component and was expected to be small, and generally positive. Project did not finance construction of new infrastructure, which could have increased water use from main water supply systems. Components Rural Finance and Rural Advisory Services did not provide significant impact to the environment, since no hazardous substance were financed and/or supported to be used. Neverthless, project was classified as category “Bâ€? for the purpose of OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment so as to provide for monitoring the project during and after implementation. With respect to this, Environmental Assessment was conducted prior to project implementation and Environment Management Plan was developed. Summarized actions in respect to EA and EMP and rational application of EA (including stakeholders’ consultation and opening) were included into Project Implementation Plan. Impact of Project to the Environment: Rehabilitation of inter farm and on farm irrigation and drainage system mainly provided positive impact on all the elements of the environment. - 15 - Summarized types and amount of works, including for component Rural Finance is appended below at Annex 10. – With the result of rehabilitation of the canals, structures the canal efficiency increased, increased water supply, decreased water losses due to guaranteed and on time water delivery, which helped to save water and this lead to reduction on groundwater level as well. – Rehabiliation of collector-drainage systems with improved drain, decreased on ground water level, decreased land salinity and decreased in minirelized ground water. Condition of soil and minerals improves and this leads to improvement of productivity of the land and hence increases production. However, temporarily localized adverse impacts might also occure which are mainly related to construction works that requires special mitigation measures. Potential negative impacts and mitigation measures are described in the appended annex. Potential, temporary negative environmental impacts could be the following: Pollution of soil and water tables due to leakage of fuel and oil; Health of the employees and local people, with relation to construction, transporation and exploitation of the machines and equipments; transporation of the wastes, accumulated on the working objects and from cleaning and rehabilitation of the collectors and wells; environmental disturbance on and off the canals and collectors (at the bottom flow) of command area (with removal of feeding zone and reproduction of fishes, birds and other living organisms). Mitigation measures taken; – Rehabiliation of the collector-drainage and canals were followed with large amount of earth works: digging, cutting, removing the earth. In order to reduce the negative impacts, special schemes for construction works were developed. – Soil removed from the collectors-drainages networks were allocated to special zones on trypozod form by use of bulldozers. In the cases were this could not be achieved, soils were taken to the area for recultivation or special allocated zones. – In rehabilitation of respective irrigation canals for the purpose of avoidning the possible disturbance of water supply to the irrigation fields, temporary water delivery schemes were developed or work schedule were foreseen for non-vegetation period. – For prevention of excessive dust pollution, measure were taken by watering the earth during the works and for avoding the noise and disturbance of the surrounding households, works were conducted during the day time. – After completion of construction works, work zone was cleaned from construction and other type of wastes and were taken to the designated places. Also, planning of the land was conducted after completion of the works. Summary of actions taken for environment protection; – Design and evaluation of physical works were developed in accordance with Uzbek norms and standards, requirements on nature and environment protection. - 16 - – RRA in cooperation of the engineer and design institutes have taken primary measures for alternative design and preparation of bidding documents with specifications on protection of the environment. – Necessary environmental assessments for each proposed works were conducted and were approved by the State Committee for Nature Protection of R.Uz. – Contructors were appointed as responsible agent for conducting rehabilitation works in accordance to environmental requirements which were foreseen in bidding docuemtns and respectively in the contracts. – International company, who was the general project design also supervised the construction works during the period of construction. – Project implementation unit were involved in the rehabilitation activities during the entire length of the construction works. 3.1.2 Description of RESP-II, AF and GEF Project The potential negative environmental impacts of the proposed project are expected to derive from the Rural Finance and Irrigation and Drainage components, and are expected to be small as was the case in RESP-I. The proposed works do not include any investment in new infrastructure that would allow increased water abstraction from main sources. Project is classified as category “Bâ€? for the purpose of OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment. It is realistic to expect that the effects of some project components will strengthen the sustainability of agriculture which combines technologies, policies, and activities aimed at integrating socioeconomic principles with environmental concerns so as to maintain or enhance farm production, reduce the risk of diminishing productivity, protect natural resources and prevent degradation of soil fertility and water quality, all with a view to be economically viable, socially acceptable and technically feasible. Hence it could be safely concluded that in implementing this project, no significant negative impacts are expected. Below table summarizes the expected main environmental impacts of the Project. • Table 1 Expected main environmental impacts of the Project Project intervention Impact Value 1. Rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage systems Rehabilitation of main and inter-farm collectors and Enhancement of drainage, reducing Positive canals waterlogging and salinisation WUA development Increasing the water-use efficiency due to Positive improved O&M and water resources management 2. Rural Finance Development of processing and other agricultural Varies Varies businesses 3. RAS Training Increased land productivity due to introduction Positive of improved agricultural practice. Improved pest management 4. Project management and monitoring Design and supervision of construction, Increased sustainability of Project outputs Positive institutional strengthening, monitoring of Project - 17 - Project intervention Impact Value impact 3.2 Potential Benefits and Impacts –Irrigation and Drainage The proposed project activities would finance O&M and low-cost rehabilitation works of parts of irrigation infrastructure for improving water use efficiency and check the process of salinization and water logging through improved drainage. All these works will be of minor nature, but it is expected that they will foster more efficient and prudent use of irrigation water through the restructured farms. Formation of Water User Groups is expected to instill a greater sense of individual and community responsibility and improve water distribution and application procedures, thereby reducing water losses and the rise of ground water level. The rehabilitation of the on-farm and inter-farm irrigation and drainage canals will also improve field level water use and conveyance efficiency with similar beneficial impacts on the environment through reduced water losses. The reduction in losses and improved irrigation distribution will, besides reducing the equity amongst farmers, reduce seepage losses from canals and over-supply of irrigation, with a beneficial effect for the project area. However potential negative impacts of the project would be: i) environmental damage possibly caused by contractors during construction activities; and ii) dumping of excavated sediments and other materials from rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage structures. As far as the negative environmental impacts of the Project interventions are concerned, all options, except the re-use of collector-drainage waters for which no construction or rehabilitation work is required, are expected to cause temporary and localized disruption of the local setting, i.e. due to the construction and use of access roads, and earth- and construction works. However, negative environmental impacts of these interventions are expected to be small and can be mitigated by the application of appropriate safeguard measures. Any remaining negative impacts are believed to be outweighed by the positive impacts that for most options are reduced waterlogging and salinization problems. Further positive environmental impacts should be provided by the irrigated land degradation mitigation component of the GEF Project, which include introduction of integrated low-cost, low-risk water and land management technologies, such as drip irrigation, salinity mitigation of marginal land, water re-use, soil quality enhancement, pumping for groundwater extraction, alternative cropping, and other techniques or practices to increase water use efficiency and agricultural productivity. • Table 2 Expected main environmental impacts of the I&D component Zone Likely main Project Positive environmental Negative Mitigation interventions impacts environmental impacts Vertical Construction or Improved drainage leading Temporary and local Construction Drainage rehabilitation of to reduced waterlogging disruption due to safeguards - 18 - Zone Likely main Project Positive environmental Negative Mitigation interventions impacts environmental impacts Drainage Pressure Relief Wells and salinization problems construction works safeguards and rehab. of Pumped Wells Combined Constr./rehab. of Improved drainage leading Temporary and local Construction Drainage wells and horizontal to reduced waterlogging disruption due to safeguards drainage and salinization problems construction works Horizontal Constr./rehab. of Improved drainage leading Temporary and local Construction Drainage open and closed to reduced waterlogging disruption due to safeguards drainage systems and salinization problems construction works Downstream No interventions None identified Increased influx of envisaged drainage waters and salt, probably of a temporary nature 3.3 Potential Benefits and Impacts – Rural Finance • Agricultural Enterprises Potential benefits and impacts for several major enterprise groups presented in Table 3 below. A rating for the potential impact, the residual impact and the risk is also provided. Good practice mitigation measures are described in the environmental management section below. The major potential impacts associated with the agricultural enterprise categories include water and air quality deterioration, loss of biodiversity and impacts on biophysical resources, including vegetation cover losses and soil erosion. Most of the benefits presented in the table are socioeconomic. The only biophysical benefit (or environmental enhancement) is the storage of agricultural chemicals (including fuel). However, it is the biophysical resource base that supports much of the rural economic activity (e.g. soil, water, forests, and mineral resources). • Table 3. Potential Benefits and Impacts : Agricultural Enterprises - 19 - Benefits Potential Impacts Level of Broad Significance Category of Impact Agro- Provision of secondary production to local Water pollution .safety and Moderate processing farmers, thus providing a guaranteed market for health .biophysical and farm produce and providing them with a steady cultural losses through income. Opportunities for export markets. location Provision of jobs. Market Poor location disrupting Low refurbishment “ people and perhaps or new market important biophysical and structure cultural resources Transportation Provision of improved access to markets and Air pollution Low system (people services; lower cost goods and services; improved and goods) rural economic and social conditions Agricultural Improved productivity, small business Soil erosion and soil Low – equipment hire development compaction as result of moderate farm mechanization Irrigation Improved productivity Desertification and Moderate – system depletion of water high resources Other Improvement of supply chain, resulting in Variety of minor impacts Moderate- agribusiness stabilized markets and farm income. Provision of although aquaculture could High structure to ensure comprehensive farm inputs result in damage to aquatic (aquaculture) resulting in improved production and stabilized ecosystems, particularly the and Low – incomes. Provision of jobs. loss of endemic fish species Mod. for other activities Agrotourism, Provision of jobs; input to the tourist industry Location:.biophysical Low – ecotourism which, if developed, provides additional jobs and losses, aesthetics moderate leads to community prosperity Construction impacts water pollution As the rural economy grows, the onus will be on the Government of Uzbekistan to ensure that relevant environmental regulations are in place, maintained and enforced. The economic development of the rural areas must be sustainable, and the very resources that provide the basis for this development must be protected and managed. • Farm Inputs These impacts apply to both small and medium scale farms. A summary of the benefits, potential impacts and their level of significance is given in Table 4Table 4. • Table 4. Summary of Benefits and Potential Environmental Impacts – Farm Inputs Level of Input Benefits Potential Impacts Significance of Impact Seed Production; increased farm income; improvement of Water and soil Low-moderate rural economy; contribution towards national security contamination through chemical inputs - 20 - Level of Input Benefits Potential Impacts Significance of Impact Pedigree seed Increased production; increased farm income; rural Biodiversity loss; economy improved; contribution towards national Moderate-high chemical inputs food security Fertilizer Increased production; increased farm income; rural economy improved; contribution towards national Water pollution Moderate-high food security Pedigree Fewer animals required for same production; or, animals improved production and higher quality product for marketplace; improved farm income; rural economy None None improved; stock available for export and increasing foreign exchange Animals for Improved farm income; rural economy improved; Overgrazing; forest Moderate- finishing contribution towards national food degradation High Land Increased production; increased farm income; rural preparation economy improved; contribution towards national (tractor and food security Soil erosion Moderate-high machinery hire) Tractors Reduces labor burden on farm family; improves farm Soil compaction and Moderate-high efficiency; improves profits and rural economy erosion Other farm Reduces labor burden on farm family; improves farm None None implements efficiency; improves profits and rural economy Small Reduces labor burden on farm family None None equipment Fencing Reduce boundary disputes; containment of livestock; materials improved management of livestock, protection of Social barriers Low forest resources Primary Value added stays in rural areas leading to improved Water pollution Moderate processing local economy through provision of jobs; improved equipment farm income; reduction in transportation costs and fossil fuel consumption Veterinary Healthy livestock, improved production and farm Hormones and Moderate services incomes chemicals in meat The major potential impacts associated with the potential agricultural inputs relate to water and soil quality, soil erosion, salinization and resource loss. Livestock rearing in large numbers and in closed conditions, results in a concentration of animal waste that can contaminate both groundwater and surface waters. In the case of the former, public health is at risk, in the case of the latter, aquatic ecosystems and, possibly public health, are both at risk. Livestock expansion, particular for farms in the hills and near the mountains, can lead to pressure on common public lands including forests. Loss of biodiversity and soil erosion can occur if livestock and pastureland is not managed effectively and if livestock numbers are not controlled. Introduction of bio-gas digesters under the GEF Project would provide a good tool to manage animal waste f rom concentrated holdings (feed lots, poultry farms), while generating usable gas and/or electricity and producing high quality fertilizer. Tractors and land preparation can promote erosion, particularly if tractors are too heavy and - 21 - cause soil compaction, and if fields are ploughed (with or without the contour) and left for long periods before sowing. Where land is under some other use such as wetland, or forest cover on steep slopes, conversion to agricultural use poses a potential loss of biodiversity, habitat and species. As well, erosion risks may be increased, particularly on steep sites. • Pesticides Increasing pesticide applications can lead to pesticide residue (including heavy metals) build up in the soil. Pesticides and fertilizers can migrate to both surface waters and groundwater resulting in contamination of these two sources and leading to damaged aquatic ecosystems and threatened health to downstream users. In assisting borrowers to manage pests that affect agriculture, the Bank supports a strategy that promotes the use of biological or environmental control methods and reduces reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides. In Bank-financed projects, the borrower addresses pest management issues in the context of the project's environmental assessment. Use of pesticides is a common practice in Uzbekistan, and hence it may occur indirectly under the RESP II components that provide credits to small and medium size agribusinesses. Although no pesticide products will be directly financed under RESP II, use of pesticides might be increased indirectly due to extension of agricultural activities in the project area. Current system of pest control and overall Governments policy in handling dangerous pesticides is sufficiently strong. After independence, there were still practices for using dangerous pesticides countrywide that were widely used during Soviet Union. However, Government has taken initiative to reduce application of hazardous agricultural chemicals and pesticides and develop sound environment to improve pest management in late 1990’s. Cotton sub-sector project funded by World Bank was one of the initiators to start addressing this matter in Uzbekistan with involvement of international consultants and organizations, through the Integrated Pest Management Component of the Project. This component was an applied research programme to develop the technology for strengthening and expanding the use of IPM techniques, which integrate biological, chemical and cultural practices. This included the development of equipment for improved production and dispersal of beneficial insects and improved application of chemical pesticides. Additionally, the project provided production of training materials in IPM that was commonly used over the years among the agricultural producers and supported in drafting of a Pesticide Law. A law was approved on August 31, 2000 (116-II) “About protection of agricultural plants from pests, desease and weedâ€?, that clearly defines about regulation on pest management in the country, which took the grass root from a recommendations of an international consultant and was essentially an enabling law, which formed the framework for laws on pesticide use and plant protection in Uzbekistan. In 1999 Government set up special commission for controlling use of pesticides and chemicals – named State Chemical Commission of R.Uz. (Amendment was made to the structure of the - 22 - organization in 2005) whose main role is to control through registration and banning chemicals and pesticides used in Uzbekistan. Commission comprises from various ministries and agencies, including State Committee for Nature Protection (responsible for assessing the effects of pesticides to the environmental, particularly soil, air and water), Republican Center for Epidemiology (responsible for assessing the effects of pesticides to the human and animal health), and number of research institutes under MAWR and scientific institutions (responsible for testing, screening and identifying the methods for use of pesticides and developing hand outs and manuals) and others. On March 2004 in accordance with Presidential Decree (#148) Republican Center for plant protection and agrochemicals was established under Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources of R.Uz., to enhance the quality of the services rendered for beneficiaries and improve safety use of agricultural pesticides. Currently this organization has branches in all the districts; however their activities are not well established due to the lack of material resources and generally weakness of the capacity of the organization. Generally control on type of pesticides and chemicals are regulated by the above special commission, and Republican Center for Epidemiology produces various handbooks on safe use of pesticides and chemicals. Number of handbooks under Sanitary Rules and Normative (SanRAN) tag were developed; 1. Hygienic pesticides in surrounding area objects and consumption goods normative (SanRAN - 2001); 2. Sanitary rules and hygienic norms during application, storage and transportation of pesticides in agriculture of Uzbekistan (SanRAN – 2001); 3. Hygienic requirements’ for safety of agrochemicals (SanRAN - 2001); Besides above handbooks and manuals, State Chemical Commission of R.Uz. develops special, simple manuals for application and handling every registered pesticides that are distributed, and in most of the time it is seller (producer, importer) responsibility to produce such manuals. State Chemical Commission of R.Uz., annually produces book on pesticides registered in Uzbekistan and for which directions (types of plants and norms) should be applied is indicated. Any unregistered pesticides are forbidden to use and SCC is not responsible for misuse of registered pesticides. Besides this since the establishment of SCC there has been a list of banned for use pesticides and chemicals approved that are highly hazardous and prohibited for use by any individual or organization in the Country. Mainly SCC tries to follow international practices and requirements. Through Ministry of Health R.Uz., working group of SCC receives latest updates on hazardous technical grade active ingredients in pesticides (categorized into four groups) released by World Health Organization; State Committee for Nature Protection assists the SCC to get updated on relevant international environmental treaties and agreements pesticides such as by Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions. Uzbekistan is not a member of these conventions yet but it is planned to become a member in near future. Necessary documentations have been prepared and are currently under review by highest level of the Government. Currently, SCC follows the regulations of the conventions. - 23 - Hazardous products include pesticides listed in Class I(a) and I(b) of the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification (Geneva: WHO, 1994-95); materials listed in the UN Consolidated List of Products Whose Consumption and/or Sale have been Banned, Withdrawn, Severely Restricted, or not Approved by Governments (New York: UN, 1994); and other materials that are banned or severely restricted in the borrower country because of environmental or health hazards. A copy of the national pesticide registration list is appended below at Annex 8. List of banned and severely restricted pesticides is appended below at Annex 9. 3.4 Potential Cumulative Impacts (Rural Finance Component) Assuming that all mitigation is carried out on all sub-projects for which financing is provided, there will still be residual effects, that when considered in total, could have an overall significant effect on the environment. The major environmental concerns, as described in sections above, are water pollution and soil erosion, and the consequences and secondary effects that erosion will cause. Considering the small size of most sub-projects, it would be easy to dismiss the negative effects that each sub-project might have on the environment. For instance, it is anticipated that small farmers will request modest loans for the purchase of basic farm inputs of seed, fertilizers, fuel, and for livestock. Such a loan to a single farmer would present little environmental concern and a large number of such small loans spread throughout the total project area would have a relatively negligible effect. However, if by chance a large number of requests for loans originated from the same area, and more importantly from the same watershed, the cumulative effect of all of the small (negligible) effects could be significant. Cumulative effect is important in spatial terms, as indicated above, and also over time. For instance, a loan for seed purchase in itself has no negative impact, and in fact, has much the opposite with an increased production and return to the farmer. However, the same loan provided for more than two years in a row could promote poor crop and land management and disrupt a relatively current good agricultural management system characterized by long rotations. By avoiding a crop rotation program the farmer can deplete the fertility and organic content of his soil and further promote soil erosion. Over time there would be a cumulative effect. Farmers should not be denied loans on the basis of their location, but if patterns appear to show concentrations of loans (e.g. fertilizers) in one watershed, the RRA environmental specialist should alert the PFIs and local environmental authorities and the PIU office for special monitoring of the situation. If the cumulative effects have the potential to become severe, lending for the activity should be suspended. Another example applied to small and medium enterprises is the application of loans for rehabilitation or for the start-up of new businesses. With agroprocessing and other agrobusinesses, the environmental concerns usually focus on air emissions and effluent discharge. In the case of air emissions, there are usually standards in place that guide the concentration of various emissions at the stack. Although each industrial activity may have emission controls within well established national standards, cumulatively, all of the enterprises - 24 - in one region (e.g. in a small closed valley with poor air circulation) could significantly contribute to the deterioration of overall air quality, resulting in an impact on human health. Similarly for water quality, a number of enterprises releasing effluents into a water body could cumulatively affect the quality of the water in a significant manner even though each enterprise may be releasing very small amounts of effluent that meet set standards. The other aspect of cumulative effects of the overall project is the accumulation of a large number of very small impacts over the full range of project-funded activities. That is, the cumulative impact of all of the small impacts as a result of a number of loans for agricultural machinery purchase, added to the cumulative impact of all of the small impacts from the livestock purchase sub-project, added to the cumulative impact of all of the small impacts from the non-farm enterprises. The overall cumulative impact could be significant. Since many of these activities can have an effect on water quality, the overall effect on water quality could be significant. In a comprehensive examination of cumulative effects, an analysis would be made of all the various other activities taking place that have impacts, for instance, other programs that could be providing agricultural lines of credit; forestry programs that could be contributing to soil erosion; and in the same vein, road construction activities and other general construction that could add to the soil erosion problem. Although the RESP-II cannot be concerned about the effects of other projects, it is important to place the Project and the effects that it does have on the environment within the context of the overall development picture. In order to prevent the risk of adverse cumulative environmental effects, a brief environmental analysis will be made of the portfolio every year by the RRA environmental specialist and reported to the relevant authorities in the Goskompriroda and the World Bank. 3.5 Mitigation Under I&D component, the physical infrastructure, such as the interception collectors, vertical wells and horizontal drainage systems will be constructed and rehabilitated in line with government regulations norms CN&R 3.07.03-97 and CN&R 2 06.01.97. The location of new collectors, if needed, will be selected in such a way that the environmental and social impacts will be minimal. The construction contracts that will be prepared by the Feasibility Study team will include environmental clauses for the Contractors to implement the works in an environmentally sound way. The above-mentioned government guidelines will be the guidelines for the Contractors to prepare site-specific environmental management plans. It is assumed that the contracts will be awarded to capable contracting firms that are experienced to prepare site- specific environmental management plans and carry out these out in line with the requirements. For agricultural activities under Rural Finance component mitigation should not necessarily entail expensive inputs and much can be achieved towards the minimizing of residual impacts through applying efficient and safe farming techniques. The Rural Advisory Services sub- component of the Project will be in a position to advise farmers on the proper handling and application of pesticides and fertilizers, including application rates and timely application. As well, it can advise on effective cultivation techniques (including the size of tractors and the type of equipment to be engaged) that will reduce the threat of soil erosion and compacting. Irrigation - 25 - schemes can be well planned in order to avoid the loss of productive land through salinization and waterlogging. Adherence to water and air quality standards (Maximum Allowable Emissions) that are calculated for each enterprise will be monitored by local environmental agencies to ensure that water and air quality are protected. Recommended mitigation measures for farm inputs and some categories of agro-businesses are addressed in the following section on environmental management guidelines. Guidance for preparation of mitigation plans is attached at Annexes 2 and 3 (Tables A-2.3, A-3.1, A-3.2). To further ensure that environmental concerns are given proper consideration, the RRA hires an environmental expert who can advise on environmental aspects of I&D rehabilitation, as well as conduct overall project environmental monitoring. Similarly the RRA environmental consultant will provide advice and monitoring to PFIs regarding environmental screening of small and medium credit applications. The GEF Project would also support hiring additional environmental experts to advise the project and beneficiaries on renewable energy, energy efficiciency and land degradation mitigation. 3.6 Environmental Risk Overall, the environmental risk is low to moderate, with due attention to the possibility of cumulative impacts. The project will benefit from the institutional capacity developed under RESP I which stressed awareness of safeguard policies. The project’s information and advisory service activities will continue to promote the adoption of improved and environmentally sound technologies, provide training and advice on integrated pest management techniques as well as on improved use and handling of fertilizer and agro-chemicals. The rural finance activities related to PFIs will deal with fairly small loans which are expected to be used for agricultural inputs and implements, equipment and trading activities with a minimal environmental impact. Members of PFIs involved in lending will also be provided with training on the potential environmental impact of sub-projects and on mitigation measures. Mid-size credits for agro-processors and other agribusinesses through qualifying PFIs will be required to include mitigating measures, if appropriate. Compliance with the EMF guidelines will be monitored by the RRA environmental specialist and supervised by the World Bank. - 26 - 4. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES 4.1 General This EMF includes specific management activities that will be followed for ensuring that any Category B type sub-project financed by RESP II receives an appropriate environmental assessment. The responsibility for recognizing the environmental category of loan applications under Rural Finance component and AF rests with the loan officers of the various lending institutions 4.2 Management The Rural Restructuring Agency will be responsible for overall Project implementation. The RRA and the Project in general will be supervised by the World Bank task team. This RRA will hire a consultant with an environmental background to ensure implementation of the Project in compliance with the EMF. The individual must be able to recognize an activity for which a sub- project or loan is being sought that may fall into Category A, B or C of the World Bank and ensure that the EMF guidelines are followed. The same consultant will maintain a working relationship with the relevant officers in the Goskompriroda and the relevant environmental inspectorates. As well, this individual will have a working relationship with the PFIs and will provide assistance in cases where determining the category of a particular activity that has been proposed for financing may be in question. 4.3 Mitigation Measures required for mitigation of the expected negative environmental impacts of the Rehabilitation of the I&D systems component of the Project have been identified in this document below. Part of the mitigation measures for I&D component relate to temporary and local disruption due to construction and rehabilitation works. Most of the identified mitigation measures are assumed to be part of the standard operational practices of Constructors during implementation of the Project. The Contractor contracts that will be prepared by the Feasibility Study team will include clauses on environmental protection that will outline the obligations of the Contractor for environmental management. Most of the costs for mitigation activities for I&D component are expected to be included in the bidding documents that will be prepared by the Feasibility Study team, and the Contractor contracts are expected to include adequate budget for implementation of the environmental mitigation measures. Detailed Mitigation Plan for I&D component of the Project is presented in Table 5 Table 1Table 1 below - 27 - • Table 5. Mitigation Plan for I&D Component Mitigation Plan Activity / issue Environmental impact Mitigation measure Responsibility Construction and Environmental Detailed specifications FS team prepares Contractor contracts, including rehabilitation hazards: to be developed for environmental clauses activities bidding documents; implementation of site- specific EMPs Fuel and oil spills Proper transport, storage Contractor prepares site-specific Environmental and handling Management Plans according to government regulations and guidelines provided in the EA Dust Dust prevention and protection of workers, Contractor and supervising Engineer are personnel and the public responsible for implementation of the environmental management (due diligence) Air pollution from machinery Protection of workers, personnel and the public Disposal of construction materials Designation of disposal sites Traffic control, road Traffic and road maintenance and repair damage Demoliation of old buildings and Appropriate disposal of irrigation pipes asbestos waste. Environmental Disruption of aquatic Establishment of Contractor protection and and terrestrial alternative conservation enhancement ecology/habitats areas (e.g. green belts along constructed collectors, and promotion of multi- purpose trees) Groundwater level Reduced agricultural Implementation of the RRA, Contractors, supported by BAIS and and waterlogging productivity technical and WUAs, and Uzhydroengio institutional interventions and participatory water management Salinity and Reduced agricultural Implementation of the RRA, Contractors, supported by BAIS and WUAs pollution productivity technical and institutional interventions and participatory salinity control; agricultural extension Quality of ground Risk of impacts on Promotion of integrated MAWR, Goskompriroda, supported by BAIS and and surface waters downstream areas water management, Uzglavhydromet institutional support and system rehabilitation; - 28 - Mitigation Plan Activity / issue Environmental impact Mitigation measure Responsibility public awareness campaigns O&M of irrigation Improved O&M Preparation and MAWR and drainage capacity distribution of manuals infrastructure and leaflets High groundwater Reduced agricultural Operation and MAWR and regional institutions, WUAs at local levels and productivity Maintenance of the level waterlogging Project interventions. Salt mobilization Increased salinity System maintenance MAWR and regional institutions, WUAs at local levels and land and participatory level abandonment salinity management control. Quality of ground Increased diffuse and Public awareness MAWR, Goskompriroda, Uzglavhydomet and surface waters point pollution campaigns to counteract pollution. Flora and fauna Risk of biodiversity Promotion of diversity MAWR, Goskompriroda, and their regional loss, reduction of crop in farming practice and departments diversity and loss of local landscape, and gardens to agriculture ensure environmental component measures; awareness campaigns Mitigation of any environmental effects from Rural Finance and AF activities will be the responsibility of the activity proponent. However, it will also be the responsibility of the PFIs and the RRA to ensure that mitigation is carried out successfully for sub-projects of Category B and some sub-projects of Category C as it might be required. This responsibility will be reflected in an effective established monitoring system. Tables A-3.1 and A-3.2 (Annex 3) provide suggestions for agricultural good practices and non-agricultural rural activity good practices which, if followed, will prevent many of the potential impacts from occurring. Most mitigation for the various activities that have been suggested as likely candidates for financial support can be conducted through the application of sound practices. Often it is a choice of how an activity is conducted – between the right way and wrong way with little, if any, additional cost to the activity’s proponent. However, often the proponent will not be aware of an approach that will minimize the environmental effects. The RAS component of the Project will have an important role to play in directing farmers and agribusinesses towards best practices in order to eliminate or reduce environmental impacts as these are related to the various farm inputs that would be sought through the credit program. For example, if a borrower has purchased a tractor, cultivating with the contour as opposed to against the contour will significantly reduce erosion. A format for a mitigation plan is attached at Annex 2 (Table A-2.3) 4.4 Monitoring Those activities of the I&D component of the Project that impose, or may impose, a significant negative impact on the environment, and negative environmental impacts that result from operation of the infrastructure after Project completion, must be monitored so that appropriate - 29 - action can be taken to prevent or minimize environmental damage. The following parameters are recommended for monitoring during Project implementation: Pollution of ground- and surface waters by Project waste; Condition of Water Protection Zones around construction and rehabilitation sites; Handling of soils during earth removal works at excavation and storage sites; Handling of waste including fuel, lubricants and construction wastes; Air quality (dust, exhaust fumes) near work sites; Traffic movement and safety control; Impacts on flora and fauna; Groundwater level and waterlogging; Salinity and pollution; Quality of ground- and surface waters. Monitoring during operation of the irrigation and drainage infrastructure requires: Training and education on integrated water management; Groundwater levels and waterlogging; Land salinization; Ground and surface water quality inside the Project area and downstream; Flora and fauna. Recommended monitoring agencies are: MAWR and its regional institutions (BAIS, HGME), and RRA; Uzglavhydromet of Cabinet of Ministers; Goskompriroda (pollution sources); Goskomzemgeodezcadaster (soil and water quality) Non-governmental organisations e.g. WUAs, farmers associations. Monitoring of all activities within the Rural Finance component of the Project will be the responsibility of the RRA. Monitoring of environmental effects is important. The environmental consultant of the RRA will follow an effective monitoring procedure. With the potential of hundreds of small and medium loans it will not be feasible to monitor all of them on regular basis. The environmental consultant will need to select a sampling of individual activities within categories of activities for regular monitoring purposes. A number of activities will be environmentally benign and as such will not require monitoring on a regular basis. Nevertheless, they should be examined on occasion to ensure that this EA did not overlook any potential impacts. Rural enterprise activities should be monitored regularly on a random sample basis. A checklist for random sampling monitoring is attached in Annex 5. The RRA environmental consultant will develop a monitoring procedure and schedule. It will be important that for each category of activity that indicators upon which to base monitoring are identified. However, in reality it will be impossible to collect base line information for all Rural - 30 - Finance component sub-loans, particularly since the Project is not site specific and investment applications can come from anywhere in the project territory. Indicators may be quantifiably measurable or they may be measured subjectively. Some indicators will require precise measurement, for instance in the case of the water quality indicator to measure the effects of effluent discharge from an agro-processing facility. Once baselines have been established subsequent monitoring missions will measure against this baseline and provide an analysis of changes, if any. From an environmental viewpoint, those groups of projects which have the potential for creating the most serious environmental problems should be given highest priority for sampling. A monitoring report will be prepared indicating monitoring results and a recommendation for actions to be taken, if necessary, to minimize, if not eliminate, any adverse environmental effects. 4.4.1 Monitoring plan Required monitoring activities, as well as responsible agencies for measures and monitoring I&D component activities of the Project are given in the Error! Reference source not found.. • Table 6. Monitoring of environmental parameters during I&D component of the Project implementation Issue Responsible Indicators Location organization andfreque ncy Environmental EMS of the PIU Fuel and oil spills, dust formation, air Work hazards on/ pollution from machinery, disposal of sites; near work construction materials, traffic and road annually sites damage Environmental EMS, Disruption of aquatic and terrestrial; Work protection and Goskompriroda ecology, habitats, greenbelt establishment, sites, enhancement construction of alternative multi-purpose annually ponds Groundwater EMS, Province Water table level, waterlogging extent. Project level and Level Hydro- zone, waterlogging geology annually Meliorative Expedition, and WUAs Soil salinity EMS, Province Mechanical composition, humus content, Project and pollution Level mobile and gross NPK, dry residue, pÐ?, zone, Uzgiprozem and ions of salts (sulphate, hydrocarbonates, Cl, annually Na, K, Ca, MG), mineralization, hardness, HGME, and BOD, COD, nitrates, nitrites, ammonium, WUAs phosphates, pesticides, oil products, phenol Quality of EMS, HGME, Groundwater mineralization, pÐ?, Project - 31 - ground and Glavhydromet suspended sediment, EC, ions of salts (SO4, zone, surface waters at Cabinet of CO3, Cl, Na, K, Ca, Mg), mineralization, annually Ministers hardness, BOD, COD, nitrates, nitrites, ammonium, phosphates, pesticides, oil products, phenol The following activities are required for Environmental Monitoring of Rural Finance component implementation: • The RRA environmental consultant will review the quarterly activity reports submitted by the PFIs, and will conduct random sampling review of 10% of small and medium credit applications every 6 months to verify compliance with the EMP. Review of the credits selected for the random sampling will be based on the environmental screening sheet provided by the PFIs on each loan. The review should include a visit to the activity site, an interview with the applicant, and a consultation with the regional environmental authorities. In sub-projects selected for environmental monitoring, a typical environmental monitoring plan would be prepared as shown in Annex 5. • Based on the credit activity reports, site visits, and information from local environmental authorities, the RRA environmental specialist will analyze environmental situation by province to determine whether purchases under RESP-II credit lines has increased, potentially creating cumulative impact. If this occurs, RESP-II may suspend lending. • The RRA environmental specialist will review plans for training and advisory services to ensure that sustainable agricultural practices for farmers and agro-business personnel are included, and that environmental due diligence for PFI staff is addressed. If monitoring is to be effective, the recommendations of the monitoring report must be acted upon by the RRA and the PFIs. This could include the removal of the category of activities from future loan considerations. The RRA environmental specialist will work in cooperation with the project M&E specialist to integrate monitoring of EMP implementation into the overall project M&E design. 4.4.2 Environmental monitoring of long term issues The Goskompriroda and its local agents will decide on measures to monitor the long-term effects of activities that could have negative environmental impacts. This may include monitoring by its staff, or by specialists contracted to undertake specific monitoring duties. Typically this may include: - Monitoring effluents from production units and factories, and monitoring the water body into which effluents discharge, to ensure no negative impacts - Monitoring air quality in and around mills to ensure compliance with air quality standards - Monitoring soil/water conditions in and around chemical and fuel storage depots and chemical mixing plants to ensure no negative impacts - Monitoring forestry and large scale farming operations to ensure the ecology is being maintained (run-off and erosion) - 32 - - Monitoring wet-lands or areas of scientific, natural or historic interest where they may be affected by the project Special environmental studies may also be called for in the event of sudden environmental change near to a sub-project activity. The frequency of monitoring and type of samples analyzed would be dependent on the nature of the pollutant. Bank supervision missions will include an environmental specialist once a year to audit monitoring procedures and results. The specialist should assess one or two loan activities where impacts are likely to occur in order to ensure compliance. As well, the specialist should provide an assessment of the effects, if any, that the Project may be having on cumulative impacts. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURE GUIDELINES FOR I&D COMPONENT 5.1. Environmental due diligence Environmental due diligence is incorporated in the project implementation to control the residual risk of accidental environmental damage and to prevent the negative environmental impacts during construction. The Contractor(s) and the Construction Supervising Engineer will have the primary responsibility for the environmental due diligence. Mitigation measures will be reflected in the project’s final designs and will be included in the tender documents and Contractor contracts. Supervision of I&D sub-project EMP measures, including activities requiring environmental due diligence, will be done by the Environmental Management Specialist (EMS) within the Rural Restructuring Agency (RRA). The EMS will report to the RRA on a quarterly basis. The RRA is expected to report to the Project Steering Committee. The construction/rehabilitation risks to be monitored will include, but not limited, to the following issues: handling of hazardous material as far as part of construction activities; movement of machinery; collection and safe disposal of hazardous residues and dismantled materials; occupational safety and health; management of pollution incidents. Each irrigation and drainage activity shall be implemented in conformity with all local and national environmental standards, and its design and implementation shall provide for adequate mitigation measures to ensure full compliance with local and national health, environmental and safety standards and requirements. I&D sub-projects shall not drain or reclaim any significant area of natural wetland which has or is likely to have a significant impact on an important area of wildlife habitat or major fishery. Each sub-project shall address the risk of encountering unknown archaeological or historical sites by adopting and following appropriate procedures. - 33 - Potential negative impacts of the I&D component and the GEF-LD component (on-farm) could be: (i) Environmental damage possibly caused by contractors during construction activities; and (ii) Dumping of excavated sediments or other materials from rehabilitation/introduction of the I&D structures/interventions. Early inclusion of the EMF into the I&D NCB/ICB tender documents: This would be the onus of RRA-EMS. The RRA/PIU should include in the tender documents adequate EMF/EG clauses, including (only for the sizable off-farm works) a provisional “chance findâ€? clause as to OP4.11 (Physical Cultural Resources, even if it is not triggered under the Project safeguards). Thereupon, the bid submitted by the wining contractor should include similar EMF-related obligations, to be supervised by the EMS. The farm-level/on-farm interventions introduced by GEF (LD and CC) will be participatory and contingent upon farmers/WUA consent, and hence there will be no issue of land/crop-loss compensation (nor any private-land acquisition). Hence OP4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement will continue to be not triggered. 5.2. Environmental protection and enhancement The ecological and social importance of Project area warrants the implementation of environmental protection and enhancement measures such as habitat protection and management of Water Protection Zones. It is recommended to create of green belts along the constructed intercepting collectors for enhancing environmental and social forestry. Also the creation of alternative reedbeds (to replace the reedbeds currently existing in the drainage collectors) should be considered, for example in small multi-purpose water ponds that may be created on suitable locations. However, it still needs to be confirmed where such interventions are socially desirable and acceptable. Monitoring during contract mobilization to decide if a "Site-specific EMP" is needed: This will be the onus of RRA-EMS, assisted by the (environmental) monitoring consultant. During contract mobilization, the EMS and the contractor would reach-out and cooperate with the local inhabitants to help scope out any site-specific issues/requirements, hence to determine if a site- specific EMP is needed beyond the proposal submitted by the contractor (e.g. to add post- contract mitigations, such as creating alternative reed-beds replacing the ones lost due to the I&D rehab, or restoring any trees which inevitably needed to be cut to access the construction site). The "Site-specific EMP", if any, would be a very focused and succinct document (could just be a few pages), and should be shared with and disclosed by the WB. 5.3. Technical interventions The main Project interventions, i.e. the technical and institutional measures to mitigate the waterlogging and salinization problems, are considered as a part of the EMF, as these are the main Project interventions that are to result in positive environmental impacts. Responsibility for - 34 - implementation of these measures is with the RRA, the Contractors, BAIS, WUAs and involved technical institutions. During implementation of the Project, the impact of the interventions will be monitored by the EMG, HGME and WUAs. Monitoring the EMF during project/contract implementation: Instead of producing separate environmental reports, the periodic project-wide M&E reports would include reporting on: (1) contractors compliance with the EMF (i.e. "environmental audits": first 3 audits can be quarterly, and thereafter, annual) and (2) progress on the indicators identified by the EMF (e.g. GWT level and salinity) compared to their baseline values. 5.4. EMF measures after Project completion Once all Project interventions have been completed the improved irrigation and drainage systems are expected to operate and the processes of water table lowering and reducing the soil salinity are ongoing. To sustain the Project outputs the main mitigation measures will then be operation and maintenance of the irrigation and drainage infrastructure, where necessary with participation of the user groups (WUAs, farmer associations). It is expected that considerable further effort will be needed to inform the users through awareness and training campaigns. Also efforts will be needed to promote farming diversity and environmental protection and enhancement. Responsibility for these after-Project measures will be with the MAWR and its regional institutions, as well as with the Goskompriroda, and WUAs. As the Project funds will have been exhausted by then, all funding for these activities is to come from government, and where possible WUAs. Responsibility for monitoring of the after-Project interventions is among others with MAWR, its regional branches, HGME, WUAs, and local NGOs. Implementation of the EMF will ensure that the Project has a beneficial effect on the four basic natural resources, i.e. surface water, groundwater, soil and biodiversity. The RRA will provide members of WUAs and local governance with information on the soil and water conditions in the Project area. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURE GUIDELINES FOR RURAL FINANCE COMPONENT and AF 6.1 Overview Each sub-loan/lease proposal will undergo an environmental review procedure, as follows: - Credit applicants: complete the form (Form 1, Annex 2) to identify possible environmental impacts of proposed activities, identify and agree to undertake mitigation measures if appropriate. The credit application form includes a checklist (Form 1, Annex 2) to identify environmental risks. The credit applicants are also responsible for obtaining appropriate permits and approvals that may be required for the particular type of activity to be financed, and - 35 - are issued by the local authorities responsible for environmental issues. In all cases where an environmental assessment report or environmental monitoring plan are required, these are to be prepared by the credit applicants and, where relevant, submitted to the Goskompriroda (or its Agents), and the EIA report and monitoring plans are to be provided with the credit/grant application. - PFIs: screening of applications including for environmental impacts, ensuring required permits have been obtained. Request RRA to carry out field site visits for on site environmental screening (specifically, for sub-projects classified as category B) to verify the environmental data provided by applicants, assist in identification of mitigation measures, and confirm that the environmental category is appropriate and that the EMP is adequate: - RRA: monitor compliance with EMP; provide advice on specific issues that may arise including EA/EMP preparation assistance to category B projects through site visits; monitor for cumulative impacts; provide training on environmental due diligence to PFIs; provide training and information on sustainable agricultural practices via advisory services component 6.2. Environmental screening for small credit applications The Environmental Screening Checklist shall be prepared by PFIs and MPFIs for small-size credits up to US$10,000 equivalent. Sample Environmental Screening Checklist form (Form 1, Annex 2) should be included in the credit application form. The loan officer of the PFI screens applications against the environmental checklist and assigns the environmental category (Form 2, Annex 2). Most small credits to will fall under Category C, requiring no further action beyond screening. In case of questions regarding environmental impact or appropriate category, the PFI contacts the environmental specialist of the RRA for advice and assistance. If mitigation measures are needed, these are agreed with the applicant and reflected in the credit application. The results of the environmental screening are recorded on the application and maintained with the credit file. 6.3. Environmental screening for medium credit applications (greater than US$10,000) The potential sub-borrower shall complete Environmental Screening Checklist (Form 1, Annex 2). It is expected that the majority of mid-size credit sub-projects will fall into category B. The PFI will screen each sub-project against the environmental checklist (Form 2, Annex 2) to define the environmental category of the sub-project, review the proposed mitigation measures, and ascertain that all required permits have been obtained and are valid. For sub-projects classified as Environmental Category B, the RRA environmental specialist will visit the applicant and project site to conduct a simple EA and identify mitigation measures. The RRA specialist will complete the field vist checklist (Form 3, Annex 2). The applicant will reflect the checklist findings and recommended mitigation measures in the application package. When the RRA visit or initial screening reveals high or significant risks, the applicant will hire a consultant to prepare a full EIA and management plan. The cost of the EIA can be included in the credit amount. - 36 - In cases when possible adverse impacts are discovered during the Field Site Visit, the Environmental Screening and Field Site Visit Checklists are submitted to the Goskompriroda, which issues a preliminary environmental statement listing potential environmental concerns and mitigation measures and determines whether an environmental assessment (EA) is required. If permits from the Goskompriroda are needed, these are to be obtained by the borrower and submitted to the PFI with the sub-project proposal. The credit application package must include guidelines and instructions to the borrower. The Goskompriroda shall issue environmental permits, if required. The procedure for issuing permits includes: (i) state ecological expertise, and (ii) stakeholder consultation in the decision-making proces During the project implementation, the PFI should ensure that the environmental mitigation measures are implemented. In the case of non-compliance, the PFI (with assistance of RRA environmental consultant as needed) will investigate the nature and reason(s) for noncompliance, and a decision is taken about what is needed to bring a sub-project into compliance, or whether financing should be suspended. 6.5 Sub-project Categories Sub-projects assessed as Category A, (high environmental risks). No Category-A sub- projects will be financed by the project. Sub-projects assessed as Category B, (moderate environmental risks) may require Secondary Screening during appraisal, and are expected to require a basic EA and mitigation and monitoring arrangements. Annex 1 provides examples of Category A, B and C sub-projects. For expansion of existing facilities or where change of technology is proposed, an environmental audit may be required, depending on the nature of the sub-project. Sub-projects assessed as Category C, (sub-projects having no significant environmental issues) require no Secondary Screening. 6.6. Secondary Screening In some cases, a Secondary Screening may be conducted to establish the veracity of the environmental data provided by the sub-project proponent. Secondary Screenings will be done on a random sample basis, or at the request of the PFI as part of sub-project appraisal. The completed Secondary Screening form (Form 3, Annex 2 – Field Site Visit Checklist) will be entered in the project files. Secondary Screening during site inspection includes updating and physical verification of all data provided in the credit application: - Confirm actions taken since submittal of the credit application - Environmental data provided by the applicant is correct - No potential environmental issues have been ignored - The environmental category classification is appropriate - 37 - - Environmental management and monitoring plan is adequate - EIA report has been completed (where required) - Statutory environmental permits have been received and are adequate - Stakeholder consultations are complete (Annex 7) - Confirm that no land aquistion is to be financed, nor resettlement triggered. In cases where Secondary Screening substantially modifies any of the above, the Environmental Screening Category and the Environmental Management Plan may need to be revised. The sub- project must not be financed by the PFI until the revisions have been accepted and checked by the RRA. Secondary Screenings would not typically be performed. 6.7. Rejection of sub-project If the sub-project is rejected on environmental grounds after an unsatisfactory site visit, an improved environmental proposal may be submitted by the proponent, and re-appraised as above. Re-appraisal should be restricted to one improved proposal, and the proponent should not expect to make multiple applications on the basis of continuous marginal improvements to the scheme. Re-appraisal should be at the discretion of the PFI, and consulted with the RRA. More detailed information is given in Annex 4. 6.8. Environmental Monitoring If the credit application is accepted for funding, environmental monitoring will be required for Category B projects in compliance with the environmental management plan (EMP) agreed in the screening procedure. The extent of project monitoring will be dependent on the nature, scale and potential impact of the sub-project. Monitoring may require the services of environmental specialists or a company with laboratory and analytical facilities (for complex environmental problems) or inspection by the local government environmental officer. Environmental monitoring is the responsibility of the RRA. 6.9. Reporting by the PFIs and the RRA Credit line PFIs are required to submit quarterly reports to the RRA on the credits financed using WB funds in accordance with uniform reporting formats as prescribed by the Project and agreed by the World Bank. That report would have a section on environment. The RRA will address in physical progress report section of the regular quarterly Financial Management Reports (FMRs) that are to be provided to the Bank. The RRA will address environmental aspects of the financed sub-projects and the related documents (i.e., environmental management plans and mitigation measures) in its routine reporting to the World Bank and during the periodic supervision missions - 38 - 7. INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS A main output of the EA is the institutional strengthening plan for improving the capability for environmental management. This plan is based on the findings of field surveys and public consultations. The following institutional strengthening activities related to the environmental management and monitoring are recommended: strengthening the RRA capacity by hiring of an Environmental Monitoring Specialist (EMS); environmental training programme for RRA/PFIs, farmers/WUAs and training in coordination with other agencies; agriculture extension and awareness raising programme for key stakeholder groups. Environmental Monitoring Specialist (EMS) The RRA will be responsible for implementation of RESP-II in compliance with the Environmental Management Framework. The RRA will hire Environmental Monitoring Specialist specifically responsible for environmental monitoring of the Project interventions and its impacts. The EMS will be in charge of overall coordination and reporting on the EMP, inspection of environmental compliance at worksites, advising project participants on envirionmental questions, coordination the overall environmental monitoring at project level, and coordination of the agricultural extension programme. The EMS will report directly to the RRA/MAWR. The EMS will be responsible to implement the monitoring plan. EMS will prepare and submit a concise quarterly reports to the attention of the RRA on the most important issues related to the EMP. The format of the report will be prepared by the EMS and approved by the RRA/MAWR. Training programme A training program targeting the RRA/PFIs, WUAs, farmers and other stakeholders will be implemented in the framework of the Project’s institutional component. Some of the training modules will specifically be dedicated to environmental issues and to procedures and methods for the implementation of the EMF. The training provided under RESP II will be expanded and deepened through the GEF Project. Sustainable Agricultural Extension Analysis shows that the current agricultural extension, if existing at all, within Project area is weak and needs strengthening particularly in IWRM to be able to provide the required extension assistance to WUAs. It is therefore recommended to include in the Project an agriculture extension component which will enable WUAs and farmers to gain the full benefit from the Project, i.e. dissemination of improved technologies, effective participation of local stakeholders during the design and construction works, improved skills and empowerment for decision making in integrated water management and environmental protection and enhancement. This component will build capacity of oblast and raion institutions and NGOs, particularly WUAs and - 39 - small farmers. Additional extension services and demonstration of environmentally sustainable technologies and agricultural practices will be provided under the GEF Project. - 40 - ANNEX 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORIES Bank Category A (Uzbekistan Law Category 1): A Category A project is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented. These impacts may affect an area broader than the sites or facilities subject to physical works, can cause serious and irrevocable impact upon the environment or human health. The EIA for a Category A project examines the project's potential negative and positive environmental impacts, compares them with those of feasible alternatives (including the "without project" scenario), and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance for a Category A project, the borrower is responsible for preparing a report, normally an Environmental Impact Assessment (or a suitably comprehensive regional or sectoral EIA). Bank Category B (Uzbekistan Law Category 2): A Category B project has potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations or environmentally important areas - including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats - which are less adverse than that of Category A projects. These impacts are site-specific; few if any of them are irreversible; and in most cases mitigatory measures can be designed more readily than for Category A projects. The scope of EIA for a Category B project may vary from project to project, but it is narrower than that of a Category A assessment. Like Category A, a Category B environmental assessment examines the projects potential negative and positive environmental impacts and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance. Bank Category C (Uzbekistan Law Category 3-4): A Category C project is likely to have minimal or no adverse environmental impacts. Beyond screening, no further EIA action is required. Category-C includes activities, the scope, location and content of which will not bring about serious impact on the environment. Bank Category FI: A Category FI project involves investment of Bank funds through a financial intermediary (FI), in subprojects that may result in adverse environmental impact (also known as Category F). Sub-projects may be defined as Category A, B or C within the FI Category3. Category A sub-projects will not be eligible for financing under the project. Category B sub-project EIA reports, are subject to post review by the Bank. It is important that the project management unit and the lending institution be able to identify activities for which funding is being requested and which may fall into either of the World Bank’s Category A or Category B. For the most recent information on environmental categories see Website www.worldbank.org/environment Sub-projects classified as Categories A, B or C include: 3 As indicated above, Category A sub-projects would not be eligible for financing under RESP-II. - 41 - Category A Sub-Projects Category B Sub-Projects Category C Sub- Projects Agriculture (large scale) Agriculture (medium scale) Agriculture (small scale) - Agriculture, horticulture, - Agriculture, horticulture, - Agriculture, horticulture, vineyards and orchards vineyards and orchards vineyards and orchards (medium scale intensive (medium scale intensive (small scale <50ha) operations >500 ha)4 operations 50 -500 ha)1 - Animal husbandry (small - Animal husbandry (large - Animal husbandry (medium scale – fewer than 100 scale – more than 1000 head scale – 100 to 1000 head cattle head) or 1000 poultry of cattle, 10,000 small and up to 10,000 small - Construction of a grain ruminants, 300,000 poultry) ruminants) drying, cleaning, storage - Re-cultivation of resting land - Poultry production with 1000- and silo towers (greater than 1000 hectares); 300,000 birds (specific - Construction of buildings - Setting up of mariculture and mitigation measures required) to store agriculture goods aquaculture farms with exotic - Construction and operation of and agricultural products species potable and surface irrigation - Construction of glass- - Utilization of agricultural water supply houses or polytunnels land (over 50 hectares) for - Re-cultivation of resting land - Construction of non-agricultural (commercial (up to 1000 hectares); warehouses for chemical or industrial) purposes - Setting up of mariculture and pesticides and mineral aquaculture farms on rivers or fertilizers lakes larger than 0,5 ha (no - Production of flax exotic species) - Utilization of agricultural - Utilization of agricultural land land (20 to 30 hectares) (30 to 50 hectares) for non- for non-agricultural agricultural commercial purposes purposes - Construction and - Utilization of virgin soils and operation of artesian wells Food processing industries unbroken expanses for - Acquisition of tractors and (large scale) intensive agriculture other farm equipment - Complex poultry and cattle - - Agrotourism breeding farms (>500 head of Food processing industries - Recontruction of cattle) (medium scale) - Slaughter-houses and meat - Agro-processing factories, packing plants (large scale -- foods, beverages, seeds, fibers Food processing industries > 10,000 tons/year) (medium scale -- > 5000 (small scale) tons/year of output) - Canning industry - Canning industry (annually (processing <3000 processing 10,000 to 20,000 tons/year of raw tons of output). materials). - Complex cattle breeding farms - Collection of medicinal (1000 head) herbs - Dairy goods, milk and milk - Construction of a roasting products factories enterprise (coffee beans, - Slaughter-houses, meat packing sunflower etc) and animal remains processing - Construction of plants (medium scale – 5000 - agricultural products 10000 tons/year) process buildings, facilities and enterprises 4 There is no specific requirements for EA of agricultural, horticultural or orchard and vineyard activities under the local Law, so the RESP II will specify >50ha and less than 500 ha category B and <50ha as Category C. - 42 - facilities and enterprises - Establishment of semi- finished food factories (capacity < 1000 tons/year) - Production of non- alcoholic beverages - Setting up slaughter- houses (small scale < 5000 tons/year) and butcheries - 43 - ANNEX 2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING CHECKLIST FORMS FOR RURAL CREDIT COMPONENT Environmental Screening Checklist forms shall be prepared by credit applicants and shall be included in the credit application forms. This is a sample screening checklist that is recommended by the team of experts for use during the preparation of credit guideline and manual under Rural Finance Component.5 FORM 1 - ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING CHECKLIST (To be completed by credit applicant) 1. Sub-project name: _____________________________________________________________________________ 2. Brief Description of Sub-project: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 2.1 Nature of the activity: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 2.2 Cost: ________________________________________________________________________ 2.3 Physical characteristics (description of items to be financed): ________________________________________________________ 2.4 Site area (# of hectares) and location: _____________________________________________________________________ 2.5 Property ownership:____________________________________________________________ 2.6 Existence of ongoing operations? (yes/no) _________________________________________________ 2.7 Plans for Expansion?___________________________________________________________ 5 Sections 1 and 2 of Form 1 may be taken from the general application form - 44 - 2.8 New construction?______________________________________________________________ 3. Which of the following inputs would be financed? Indicate with a check below which inputs or investments would be financed, the potential impact (if known), and whether mitigation measures have been identified. Table A-2.1 Farm Inputs Screening Checklist Input Will be Potential Impact Mitigation Financed Measures Identified? Yes No Seed None Pedigree seed Biodiversity loss: Yes___ _No_____ Chemical inputs: Yes___ No_____ Fertilizer Water pollution: Yes__ _ No_____ Pedigree None animals Animals for Overgrazing: Yes_____No___ finishing Forest degradation: Yes____ No___ Land preparation Soil erosion: Yes_____No_____ (tractor and machinery hire) Tractors Soil compaction and erosion: Yes_____No____ Other farm None implements Small None equipment Irrigation Water extraction and salinization equipment and irrigation Yes_____No_____ maintenance Primary Water pollution: Yes_____No_____ processing equipment Veterinary Hormones and chemicals in meat: Yes____No___ Services Table A -2.2: Agricultural Enterprise Screening Checklist Broad Category Will be Potential Impact Mitigation measures Financed Yes No Yes No Agro-processing water pollution safety and health - 45 - biophysical and cultural losses through location Medium Size Odor, waste Poultry and management, animal Livestock and zoonotice disease operations control Market Construction impacts refurbishment or Disturbance of new market important biophysical structure or cultural resources Agriculture Soil erosion and soil equipment hire compaction as result or purchase of farm mechanization Irrigation Desertification and systems depletion of water resources Other Variety of minor agribusiness impacts although aquaculture could result in damage to aquatic ecosystems, particularly the loss of endemic fish species Agrotourism, biophysical losses ecotourism construction impacts water pollution 4. For the environmental impacts that were indicated above with a check, describe the mitigation measures that will be included during the construction (C) or operational (O) phase of sub-project or both (B). Table A- 2.3: Environmental Mitigation Plan Environmental impact Sub-project Phase How and where will it Responsibility and cost (What is to be (C, O or B) be mitigated mitigated) - 46 - FORM 2 – ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING CHEKLIST (To be completed by PFI) 1. Sub-project name: _____________________________________________________________ 2. Environmental Category (A, B or C), based on sub-project application form: _____________________________________________ (For Category B sub-projects, the PFI will refer the screening to the RRA) 3. Environmental assessment required (for B sub-projects): ___Yes/____No 4. What environmental issues raised by the sub-project: ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. If an environmental assessment is required, what are the specific issues to be addressed? ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 6. What is the time frame and estimated cost of conducting the environmental assessment? _____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 7. Date referred to RRA: _____________________________________ - 47 - FORM 3 – FIELD VISIT CHECKLIST FOR CATEGORY B SUB-PROJECTS UNDER THE RURAL CREDIT COMPONENT (To be completed by RRA) Project Name: Date/time of Visit: District: Visitors: Location • Obtain a site map or make a sketch • Locate site on local map or indicate area (e.g. for grazing) Current activity and site history • Who is the site contact (name, position, contact information)? • What is the area of the site to be used for project activities? • What are current uses of the site? • What were previous uses of the site (give dates if possible)? Environmental Situation • Are there sensitive sites nearby (nature reserves, cultural sites, historical landmarks)? • Is anything known about the geology/hydrology of the site? Are there water courses on the site? • What is the terrain or slope? • Does the site experience flooding, waterlogging or landslides? Are there signs of erosion? • What are the neighboring buildings ( e.g., schools, dwellings, industries) and land uses? Estimate distances. • Will the proposed site affect transportation or public utilities? Licenses, Permits and Clearances • Does the site require licenses or permits to operate the type of activity proposed? Are these available for inspection? • What environmental or other (e.g., health, forestry) authorities have jurisdiction over the site? Water Quality Issues • Does the proposed activity use water for any purposes (give details and estimate quantity). What is the source? • Will the proposed activity produce any effluent? (estimate quantity and identify discharge point) • Is there a drainage system on site for surface waters or sewage? Is there a plan available of existing drainage or septic systems? • How waste water is managed (surface water courses, dry wells, septic tanks)? Soils • What is the ground surface (agricultural land, pasture, etc.)? • Will the project damage soils during construction or operations? • Will the project affect the landscape significantly (draining wetlands, changing stream courses) Biological environment • Describe vegetation cover on the site. • Is there information about rare or threatened flora and fauna at or near the site? If yes, would the project have an impact or increase risk to the species? • Obtain a list of vertebrate fauna and common plants of the site (if available). • Note potential negative impacts on biota if project proceeds. Visual Inspection Procedures • Try to obtain a site map or make a sketch to mark details. • Take photos, if permitted. • Walk over as much of the site as possible, including boundaries, to note adjacent activities. • Note any odors, smoke or dust emissions, standing water, etc. - 48 - Recommended Mitigation Measures • Confirm proposed mitigation measures or provide recommendations for satisfactory mitigation measures - 49 - ANNEX 3 ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION FOR CATEGORY B SUB-PROJECTS UNDER THE RURAL CREDIT COMPONENT Likely Impacts, mitigation, and permissible limits of pollutants Mitigation measures will be needed for category B mid-size credits. Most farming, orchards, horticulture and forestry operations have the potential to harm the environment through the use of chemicals, and due to inappropriate land and water management. Credits for medium-scale agriculture activities (>50 ha) that use fertilizers, pesticides and other farm chemicals would be Environmental Category-B, and would require mitigation and monitoring plans. Most processing facilities produce some form of pollution and need to treat their effluent, control dust and smoke, dispose of solid wastes, and limit noise pollution from the plant. They are also subject to health and safety laws, and require permits to operate. Most medium scale processing plants that are potential applicants for project funding would be Category-B. In sub-projects where environmental mitigation is required, a typical environmental mitigation plan would be as shown in Table A- 2.3 in Annex 2. The following headings cover the likely environmental impacts of different activities, possible mitigation of environmental issues, and guidelines on the permissible limits of various pollutants: - Airborne pollution - Waste water treatment - Solid wastes - Noise pollution - Use of chemicals - Irrigation and drainage - Use of water for agriculture and industry - Health and safety in the workplace - 50 - Table A-3.1: Some Agricultural Good Practices – Guidelines for a Protected Environment and Sustainable Agriculture (Farm Inputs) Activity Good Practices Seed - Selection of seed with lowest agro-chemical input requirements to achieve high yields - Selection of seed with minimal level of pest and disease vulnerability. rigorous sanitation facilities and procedures for imported seed - rigorous sanitation facilities and procedures for exported seed - Extension services provide advice on appropriate fertilizer and pesticide applications. Wherever possible, extension service to promote sustainable agricultural practices including IPM, minimum tillage, contour ploughing, crop rotations, and green manure. Fertilizers - selection of best fertilizers for crop and prevailing soil conditions - application levels as per recommended by manufacturer and extension service Pesticides - PFIs and CGS Secretariat will screen applications for credits and grants to ensure that no pesticides are financed. - Training on environmental due diligence for PFI staff will include familiarization with the national pesticide registration list. - Training and advisory services on integrated pest management (IPM) and safe handling and use of agricultural chemicals will be provided to farmers and agribusiness personnel under the Rural Training and Advisory Services component Pedigree livestock N/A Livestock for finishing - manure handling facilities designed to ensure zero runoff - purchase of engine efficient tractors that provide highest ratio of power and work to fuel input Tractors - tractors with high efficiency emissions control - tractors no larger than necessary for the most extensive work anticipated Farm implements - implements suitable for minimal tillage Land preparation - contour ploughing, minimum tillage, grassed waterways, etc. Small equipment - energy efficient equipment - highest efficiency equipment Irrigation equipment - equipment that assists in the use of irrigation water in an efficient manner Farm buildings for - Location of buildings where least disturbance of resources required. stock, machinery, and - energy efficient building design including heating, ventilation chemicals - building design to minimize materials and use of environmentally friendly materials Fencing materials N/A Primary processing - high efficiency equipment including low emission fuels (e.g. gas, solar) equipment Fuel, lubricants, spare - safe storage of fuels, lubricants and chemicals parts and other operating requirements Veterinary services - minimal use of drugs - 51 - Table A-3.2: Some Good Practices for Rural Enterprises – Guidelines for a Protected Environment and Sustainable Rural Development (Agri-businesses) Enterprise Category Good Practices Agro-processing - not to be located in environmentally sensitive areas - effective effluent management system in place - effective disposal of solid wastes - safety features in place Other agribusiness - aquaculture: .use of non-exotic species - effective disposal of animal wastes - use of local feed stocks - avoid use of sensitive water courses - avoid location on sensitive sites - effective waste disposal - safety precautions and systems during construction - control of effluents and emissions - manure management (composting, use as fertilizer, bio-gas digestro) and odor control Medium Size Poultry and - sanitary carcass and litter disposal Livestock operations - robust biosecurity measures and available veterinary services (staff or contractual) - not be located in environmentally sensitive areas Extractive industries – - extraction not to directly or indirectly harm other aspects of the forestry ecosystem and fisheries - forest and fishery harvesting to be conducted on a sustainable basis Trade (wholesale and retail) - location of markets to take into account micro- environmental – rural markets effects such as erosion and potential water contamination market operations to be guided by a printed and displayed list of good practices including waste disposal and sanitary procedures Ecotourism, agrotourism - environmentally sensitive areas not disturbed - hygiene standards to meet national requirements - energy efficient heating and cooking - safe work environment. proper disposal of wastes preventing water contamination, disease and vermin - 52 - ANNEX 4 ACCEPT/REJECT DECISION MAKING FOR SUB-PROJECTS UNDER THE RURAL CREDIT COMPONENT It is the responsibility of the PFI to accept or reject a sub-project proposal on the grounds of environmental issues. The PFI will consult with the RRA environmental specialist in this regard. Providing that the sub-project has been adequately screened into Bank Categories B or C and that adequate EMP is proposed to mitigate significant environmental issues and adequately monitor the results of Category B projects, there should be no reason to reject a sub-project on environmental grounds. If the sub-project is rejected on environmental grounds after an unsatisfactory site visit the proponent, at the discretion of the PFI, may submit an improved environmental proposal. Re- appraisal should be restricted to one iteration, and the proponent should not expect to make multiple applications on the basis of continues marginal improvements to the scheme. Any further consideration of the sub-project should be at the discretion of the PFI. In some instances, however, there may be a number of environmental issues associated with a sub-project, and cumulatively the issues could be more serious than any one individual issue would indicate. For example, a sub-project may have several issues that individual screening would put in Category B or C. Cumulatively, however, the environmental issues may be more serious, and the sub-project may need a more stringent EMP, be screened into a higher Environmental Category or be rejected out of hand. The PFI may use a checklist to provide a score of magnitude of impacts to produce a cumulative index. The higher the index the higher the environmental risk of the sub-project. Using Table- A4-1 as a guide and noting that each activity requires its own individual score – the cumulative score of impacts will provide the overall score for that sub-project. Table A-4.1: Guideline for screening cumulative environmental impacts Activity Risk Significance of Impacts Examples Score None There is no detectable impact of any A procurement project with no 0 kind as a result of the activity direct impacts Low Small changes, measurable, usually Market facilities: small social 1 confined to a small area, mitigation disruption. is simple or not necessary Small scale processing, small scale farming; creates minor pollution Low-moderate Measurable losses, or ecosystem Small-medium scale agro- 2 without mitigation disruption; ecosystem able to cope processing, livestock production, without mitigation slaughter facilities; potential to produce some minor pollution - 53 - Moderate with Measurable losses, or ecosystem Medium scale agro-processing, 3 mitigation disruption; Proposed EMP is livestock production, slaughter adequate but in the event it is not facilities, most category B sub- fully used, ecosystem would be project activities with potential disrupted for pollution or disruption High Substantial losses or ecosystem Livestock overgrazing or 5 disruption: Ecosystem would deforestation causing land probably still function at a lower erosion. level. Paper mills, chemical mix plants, EMP inadequate or difficult/costly to leather production etc operate and maintain The sub-project may comprise many activities, and the cumulative score of the activities would indicate to the PFI the overall risk of the sub-project. - If cumulative score is 5 or less the screened Environmental Category B for individual activities is probably adequate. - If cumulative score is >5 the appraised Environmental Category may be inadequate, and additional requirements may be placed on the sub-project. The applicant may be required to: o Describe in detail the impacts likely to be experienced. o Determine practical and reasonable EMP to be followed. o Describe EMP measures to be taken, and good practices to be followed, to address impacts o Prepare a monitoring schedule The PFI will be required to: o Discuss with RRA or Government environmental agency for input and support o Ensure EMP is incorporated into sub-loan agreement. The RRA will be required to: o Supervise EMP implementation. o Monitor activity on a regular basis. - 54 - ANNEX 5 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING FOR CATEGORY B SUB-PROJECTS UNDER THE RURAL CREDIT COMPONENT Environmental monitoring for the overall project is addressed in the Monitoring section of the EMP above. Table below shows a typical environmental monitoring plan for selected sub-project. Table A-5.1: Environmental Monitoring Plan Project phase What is to be How and Frequency of Responsibility Cost monitored where will it monitoring be monitored Baseline Construction Operation De- commissioning - 55 - FORM 1 – CHECKLIST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING (For random sampling monitoring by RRA) 1. Was an Environmental Assessment needed? (Y or N)___ If yes, was it done?___ Have national and World Bank requirements for public consultation been met and fully documented? (Y or N) ___ 2. Was an Environmental Management Plan prepared? (Y or N) ___ 3. Are the mitigation measures to be included in project implementation adequate and appropriate? (Y or N) ___ 4. Will the project comply with existing pollution control standards for emissions and wastes? (Y or N) _____ If No, will an exemption be sought? _____ 5. Is an Environmental Monitoring Plan necessary? (Y or N) ___ If so, has it been prepared? (Y or N) 6. What follow-up actions are required by the proponent, the PFI or the RRA? ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 7. Were stakeholder consultations held concerning potential environmental impacts of the proposed sub- project? (Y or N) Were minutes recorded? (Y or N) Dates Participants _____________________ _______________________________________ _____________________ _______________________________________ _____________________ _______________________________________ - 56 - ANNEX 6 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION FOR CATEGORY B MID-SIZE CREDITS UNDER THE RURAL CREDIT COMPONENT Consultation is essential in any circumstances where the sub-project will affect local communities or individuals that are not directly part of the sub-project. The physical and social environment must not be changed to the detriment of local residents, and any changes must be with their agreement. Consultation will involve public participation of affected community members and NGOs. The sub-borrower must: - Provide compensation to the community (replacement of public amenities etc) - Fully consider cumulative impacts - Deal with political and social problems associated with development - Offer further consultation and participation with affected communities In the event of public consultation, minutes are to be recorded of the discussions and records maintained of any public objections to the sub-project, together with the mitigating measures proposed by the sub-project proponent. The sub-borrower must provide the PFI with a report (where appropriate) describing the consultation with residents and of their support or rejection of the development plans. - 57 - ANNEX 7 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT An environmental assessment report for a Category B project focuses on the significant environmental issues raised by a Sub-project. Its primary purpose is to identify those measures that, if incorporated into the design and implementation of a project can assure that the negative environmental effects will be minimized. The scope and level of detail required in the analysis depend on the magnitude and severity of potential impacts. The environmental assessment report should include the following elements: (a) Executive Summary. This summarizes the significant findings and recommended actions. (b) Policy, legal and administrative framework. This section summarizes the legal and regulatory framework that applies to environmental management in the jurisdiction where the study is done. (c) Project Description. Describes the nature and scope of the project and the geographic, ecological, temporal and socioeconomic context in which the project will be carried out. The description should identify social groups that will be effected, include a map of the project site, and identify any off-site or support facilities that will be required for the project. (d) Baseline data. Describe relevant physical, biological and social condition including any significant changes anticipated before the project begins. Data should be relevant to project design, location, operation or mitigation measures. (e) Environmental impacts. Describe the likely or expected positive and negative impacts in quantitative terms to the extent possible. Identify mitigation measures and estimate residual impacts after mitigation. Describe the limits of available data and uncertainties related to the estimation of impacts and the results of proposed mitigation. (f) Analysis of Alternatives. Systematically compare feasible alternatives to the proposed project location, design and operation including the "without project" alternative in terms of their relative impacts, costs and suitability to local conditions. For each of the alternatives quantify and compare the environmental impacts and costs relative to the proposed plan. (g) Environmental Management Plan (EMP). If significant impacts requiring mitigation are identified, the EMP defines the mitigation that will be done, identifies key monitoring indicators and any needs for institutional strengthening for effective mitigation and monitoring to be carried out. (h) Appendices. These should include: (i) The list of EA preparers; (ii) References used in study preparation; (iii) A chronological record of interagency meetings and consultations with NGOs and effected constituents; (iv) Tables reporting relevant data discussed in the main text, and; (v) A list of associated reports such as resettlement plans or social assessments that were prepared for the project. In addition, the Terms of reference should specify the composition and qualifications of the study team, the duration of the studies, the scope and nature of any primary data collection and - 58 - field visits that will be required, and include a schedule of reporting and the nature and constituencies for consultations with stakeholders that are to be carried out. - 59 - ANNEX 8 UZBEKISTAN – RURAL ENTERPRISES SUPPORT PROJECT. PHASE-II SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDERS MEETING ON EMF MARCH 15-18, 2008 As a part of World Bank Safegurd Policies proceduresm consultation with project stakeholders was held on March 15, 2008 with representatives of regional Basin Authority of Irrigation Systems and local Governor representatives followed with wider consultation on March 18, 2008 with State Government organizations, commercial organizations and NGO’s in the Rural Restructuring Agency office in Tashkent (Uzbekistan). Alisher Yuldashev, Deputy Director General of RRA, opened the meeting and informed the participants with RRA’s current activities in the framework of the World Bank and ADB financed projects. Then Bekzod Parmanov made presentation of Rural Enterprise Support Project. Phase-I, including the environmental aspects of the project and continued informing participants with preparation of Phase-II. Following to this local team of experts involved in preparation of the project presented materials and works done for addressing environmental issues and presented summary of Environmental Management Framework. A lively discussion followed on many aspects of the project; namely achievements of phase-I, monitoring system to be used for the second phase of the project particularly for the component of Irrigation and Drainage, undertaking local legislations and standards for both preparing the environmental assessments of rehabilitation works (OVOZ) and screening mechanism for checking sub-loans and implementation arrangements, etc. There were no significant comments received on the EMF as the project falls under Category “Bâ€?. The major environmental impact that is expected from InD component activates is not expected to be high, as project is planned to rehabilitate existing infrastructure. Below is the summary of stakeholders meeting and discussion on EMF: Monitoring: For the purpose of improvement of monitoring and evaluation of the impact of irrigation and drainage component to the project zone, it was recommended to analyze the main water, soil and groundwater parameters for the purpose of monitoring during the execution of the works. This issue was raised by representative of SANIIRI, local NGO Ecoserivice, and State Committee for Nature Protection of R.Uz. This activity could be conducted semi-annually, annually, or in the beginning, mids and after the works completion, depending on the complexity of the rehabilitation works and budget that would be allocated by the project for monitoring activity purpose. However, at least baseline analysis needs to be done for the purpose of analyzing the changes and impact after project completes. In order to have detailed, thorough analysis it was recommended to involve local specialized, qualified laboratories that do research and tests. State land geodesy and cadastre Committee of R.Uz. offers these services and representative of this institution who was also invited for consultation shortly briefed participants about this activity. - 60 - Screening sub-loans: It is expected that Rural Finance Component of the project will not have significant environmental impact to the environment. Although project is not expected to finance any hazards substances and/or matters, such as chemicals, pesticides, fertilizers and etc, it was recommended by project preparation team to introduce screening mechanism to avoid any potential risks that could arise from financing various rural and farming activities. During the consultation, screening mechanism was discussed with the participants, where number of local commercial banks and representative of association of farmers raised the matter that, proposed screening checklists might not be adequately completed due to its complexity for farmers. It was recommended to simplify the checklists and to the extent possible adopt them to the local practices. Representative of local commercial bank “Pakhtabankâ€? informed that it is a local requirement for borrower to have project approved by State Committee for Nature Protection of R.Uz, should the project fall into the certain category indicated in the resolution of Cabinet of Ministers of R.Uz. For example, it is not a requirement for borrower to have environmental assessment undertaken neither screen the loan application should the borrower consider purchasing tractor or similar equipments. Hence, screening mechanism should be simplified but not completely eliminated. Participants raised the issue of conducting more training for the beneficiaries and increase the environmental awareness activities through the project. Although project is not planning to finance use of chemicals and pesticides, more awareness activities could be undertaken, such as training certain people that directly involve in supporting farmers in safe use and/or application of these inputs in the farm fields. Such organizations could be advisory centers, WUA, farmers and dehkan associations and etc. Special attention could be given to support district or oblast representatives of Plant Protection Center of R.Uz who are partially commercialized organization but having low capacity to handle large group of emerged independent farmers. Representative of Sanitary and epidemiologic center of R.Uz., supported the discussion to have more active involvement of local organizations at district level during preparation and implementation of the project. Finally, representative of State Committee for Nature Protection of R.Uz stressed that, any construction and or rehabilitation works that is planned under InD component must obtain approval from the Committee prior to start of any civil works. It could be even in the form of framework analysis, but needs to comply with the structure and requirements of the local regulations. During discussion with representatives of regional Basin Authority of Irrigation Systems and local Governor Representatives on March 15, 2008 similar discussion were carried out with more focus given to the activities to be undertaken under InD component. EMF was briefed during the meeting and mitigation measures, and required activities were discussed. It was also stressed that project will finance only rehabilitation of existing InD networks, including inter- farm and on-farm systems, and there is a need to have directly affected participants to involve in the selection and identification of objects for rehabilitation, particularly for on-farm rehabilitation works. In certain project area, respective authorities have already set up special team that would be in charge for working and cooperating with design and implementation team in the course of project preparation and these teams have already included certain representatives from local community. - 61 - During this consultation, participants stressed for need to support local Hydroameliorative Expeditions who are mainly in charge for monitoring the main water, soil and groundwater parameters and there is a need to support and increase the capacity of WUA’s in taking more proactive role in operating & maintaining on-farm irrigation and drainage systems. Currently, in most of the places, WUA’s are relatively weak and unable to O&M their own system adequately. - 62 - LIST OF PARTICIPANTS # Organization Position Name Contact numbers State Committee of Examination, State 139-16-88 1. Chief specialist Bekmuratov B. Committee of Environmental Protection 139-12-47 “Ekoahborotistikbolâ€? of State Committee of 2. Key specialist Turaev A. 150-03-38 Environmental Protection 233-74-87 3. JS Commercial Bank “Gallabankâ€? Head of department Olimjonov S.O. 111-44-11 4. “UZGIPâ€? Institute Chief specialist Khamzina T. 120-75-92 5. “Uzsuvnazoratâ€? Head of department Rakhimov A. 244-64-99 6. Centre of Hydrometeorology Senior staff scientist Ananyeva K.V. 235-82-26 7. State Committee of geodesic cadastre Head of department Bobomurodov S.M. 273-47-11 8. State Committee of Environmental Protection Chief specialist Frank L.G. 139-48-13 Team manager of 9. “SKS Consultingâ€? Environmental Impact Fralik L.V. 326-08-14 Assessment Executor of Environmental 10. “SKS Consultingâ€? Limanina I.D. 235-82-26 Impact Assessment 11. “Ecoservisâ€? scientific-consulting center Director Razakov R.M. 330-24-32 308-11-45 12. SANIIRI Deputy director Mamatov S.A. 265-03-90 Institute of water issues, Academy of Sciences 269-12-67 13. Head of department Yakubov M.A. of the Republic of Uzb. 269-12-70 14. Centre of environmental law “Armonâ€? Director Zaynutdinova 253-11-35 15. Centre of environmental law “Armonâ€? Researcher Murzakhanov R. 253-11-35 “Chinor&Coâ€? Ltd., magazine “Ekologicheskiy 16. Director general Nasirov M. 116-37-95 vestnikâ€? (Enviromental bulletin) “Chinor&Coâ€? Ltd., magazine “Ekologicheskiy 17. Journalist Ð?зизов С. 116-37-95 vestnikâ€? (Enviromental bulletin) 18. Ministry of Economics Key specialist Bagdasarova Y. 132-62-83 19. Ministry of Economics Deputy head of department Mirkhabibov S. 132-64-56 267-40-02 20. Association of Dekhan and Private farmers Head of department Abdusalomov Kh. 267-02-98 21. Sanitary-and-epidemiologic center Head of department Ergashev G.N. 276-75-92 22. MAWR Head of department Ibragimov R.P. 142-01-81 23. Private JS Commercial Bank “ “Hamkorbankâ€? Head of department Hojimuradov S. 253-56-74 24. Info Centre “Sreda obitaniyaâ€? (Environment) Deputy chairman Shulelina N.V. 237-05-18 25. JS Commercial Bank “Pahtabankâ€? Head of department Artikov S. 150-53-39 Regional department of agriculture and water Rizokulov B.N. 26. Deputy on water problems 22-4-65 resources, Mirishkar, Kashkadarya 27. UIS “Narin-Ferghanaâ€?, Yazyavan, Ferghana Head of water department Ibragimov E.I. 8 373 412 21 65 Regional department of agriculture and water Shohhujaev F.Z. 2-24-37-84 28. Head of Oblast WUA resources, Andijan 2-24-45-61 29. WUA, Pasdargom, Samarkand WUA chairman Umbarov H. 8 366 465 17 67 30. UIS “Dargomâ€?, Pasdargom, Samarkand Deputy chief Karamatov N. 8 366 267 36 51 Mustanov A.I. 8 367 277 46 24 31. BAIS “Lower Sirdaryaâ€?, Syrdarya Deputy chief 8 367 225 19 92 32. UIS “Bayavut-Arnasayâ€?, Bayavut, Syrdarya Head of department Ahmatkulov H.A. 62-10-34 Department of agriculture and water resources, Alimov N. 33. Head of department 8 370 573 51 65 Buka, Tashkent 34. UIS “Amu-Karakulâ€?, Alat, Bukhara Head of department Ð?гамуратов Ð?. 342-10-53 35. Alat, Bukhara Ameliorator Boltayev S. 342-16-88 - 63 - LIST OF PESTICIDES REGISTERED IN UZBEKISTAN ANNEX 9 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date Insecticides and Acaridaecides 1 Avaunt 15% s.k. Dupon - USA Indoksakarb Cotton, mulberry, vine, tomato, apple 31.12.2009 2 Admiral 10% k.e. Sumitomo Chemical - Japan Piriproksifen Cotton, cucumber, tomato, apple 31.12.2009 Bayer Invaiponmental Saens SAS - 3 Adonis 4% k.e. Fipronil Potatoes, pasture, mulberry 31.12.2008 France 4 Regent 20% k.s. BASF Agro BV - Switzerland Fipronil Potatoes, mulberry, potato 31.12.2011 5 Applaud 25% s.p. Nihon Nohiaku - Japan Buprofen Cucumber, tomato, cotton 31.12.2009 6 Atilla 5% k.e. (R) Agrokim Ltd - Uzbekistan Lyambdachigalotrin Cotton, vine, mulberry, cotton, vine, 31.12.2011 Apple, cotton, vine, potatoes, wheat, 7 Karate 5% k.e.(R) Singenta - Switzerland Lyambdachigalotrin 31.12.2007 lucerne, corn, soy, pasture, mulberкy Cotton,potatoes, wheat, lucerne, corn, 8 Karate Zeon 5% k.e. ( R) Singenta - Switzerland Lyambdachigalotrin 31.12.2007 mulberry, pasture, vine 9 Kurash 50 g/l, k.e. ( R ) MM-Agro Corporation - USA Lyambdachigalotrin Wheat, apple, vine 31.12.2008 10 Bagira 20% k.e. Agrokim Ltd - Uzbekistan Imidakloprid Cotton 31.12.2011 11 Dalprid 200 u/l v.k. Dalston Associated SA - Panama Imidakloprid Cotton 31.12.2011 Сlose Сorporation Shelkovo 12 Imidor 200 g/l v.r.k. Imidakloprid Cotton 31.12.2009 AgroKhim Cotton, tomato, patato, tobacco, pasture, 13 Konfidor 20% k.e. Baer KropSaens - Germany Imidakloprid 31.12.2007 apple, sugar-beet Cotton, tomato, patato, tobacco, pasture, 14 Koginor 20% k.e. Makteshim Agan - Israel Imidakloprid 21.12.2010 apple, sugar-beet Cotton, apple, patato,tomato, tobacco, 15 Pilarking 20% k.e. Pilar Agree Saens Corp. - Canada Imidakloprid 31.12.2011 pasture 16 Tanrek 200 g/l v.p.k Сlose Сorporation August - Russia Imidakloprid Cotton, mulberкy 31.12.2009 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date Cotton, potato, aubergine, mulberкy, Benzofosfat 30% s.p. (R), tomato, cabbage, Cruciferae's culture, JV Сlose Сorporation 17 Benzofosfat 30% k.у. ( R Fozalon sugar-beet, apple, pear, plum, cherry-tree, 31.12.2008 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan ) citrus, barley,lucerne, tobaco, rose, cloves, carnation Cotton, potato, aubergine, tomato, cabbage, Cruciferae's culture, sugar-beet, 18 Zolon 35% k.e.(R) Keminova A/S - Denmark Fozalon apple, pear, plum, cherry-tree, vine, citrus, 31.12.2009 wheat, barley, lucerne, tobaco, rose, carnation Corn, wheat, barley, rye, oats, leguminous plants, apple, pear, plum, vine, citrus, 19 Bee-58 new 40% k.e., BASF - Germany Dimetoat sugar-beet, mangel-wurzel, beet, 31.12.2009 vegetable's culture, potato. Tobaco, makhorka, kenaf, lucerne 20 Dalmetoat 40% k.e. Dalston Associated SA - Panama Dimetoat Cotton 31.12.2011 Cotton, wheat, barley, rye, oats, leguminous plants, apple, [ear, plum, 21 Danadim 40% k.e. JS company Keminova - Denmark Dimetoat vine, citrus, sugar-beet, mangel-wurzel, 31.12.2009 beet, vegetable plants. Potato, lucerna, tobaco, makhorka, kenaf, mulberry 22 Vanteks 6% s.k. Day AgroSaense - USA Gammazigalotrin Cotton, mulberry 31.12.2007 23 Vertimek 1,8% k.e. Singenta - Switzerland Abamektin Cotton, tomato, carnation, 31.12.2008 24 Pilarmektin 1,8% k.e.(R) Pilar Agree Saens Corp. - Canada Abamektin Cotton, tomato, rose, vine 31.12.2011 25 Danitol 10% k.e. ( R ) Sumitomo Chemical - Japan Phenpropatrin Cotton, mulberry, apple 31.12.2007 AOYA Guy Zey - Chinese People's 26 Datrin 20% k.e. ( R ) Phenpropatrin Cotton 31.12.2010 Republic JV Сlose Сorporation 27 Uzphen 20% k.e. ( R ) Phenpropatrin Cotton 31.12.2009 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan AOYA Guy Zey - Chinese People's 28 Dargit 57% k.e. ( R ) Propargit Cotton 31.12.2010 Republic Krompton(Uniroyal Chemical) Cotton, apple, citrus, vine, soy, sugar- 29 Omayt 57% k.e. ( R ) Propargit 31.12.2007 Registrations Ltd - UK beet, cherry-tree S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date Omayt 570 EW 57% Krompton(Uniroyal Chemical) Cotton, apple, cherry-tree, peach, plum. 30 Propargit 31.12.2010 k.e.v. ( R ) Registrations Ltd - UK Vine, tomato, potato JV Сlose Сorporation 31 Uzmayt 30% s.p. ( R ) Propargit Cotton 31.12.2011 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan JV Сlose Сorporation 32 Uzmayt 57% k.e. ( R ) Propargit Cotton,apple 31.12.2011 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan Deltaphos 36% k.e. ( 33 Bayer KropSaens - Germany Deltametrin+triazofos Cotton, mulberry 31.12.2008 R) Cotton, sunflower, sugar-beet, tomato, corn, lucerne, Cruciferae's culture, tobaco, 34 Dezis 2,5% k.e. ( R ) Bayer KropSaens - Germany Deltametrin wheat, apple, pear, peach, vine, potato, 31.12.2007 cabbage, carrot, water-melon, melon, pasture natural growth, mulberry Tomato, vine, cotton, wheat, apple, 35 Dezis 10% k.e. ( R ) Bayer KropSaens - Germany Deltametrin 31.12.2009 mulberry Bayer Invayronmental Saens SAS - 36 Dezis 10% k.e. ( R ) Deltametrin Pasture 31.12.2009 France Pilardelta 2,5% k.e. 37 Pilar Agree Saens Corp. - Canada Deltametrin Mulberry, pasture, tobaco, apple 31.12.2011 (R) 38 Diazinon 60% k.e. ( R ) Nippon Kayaku - Japan Diazinon Wheat, rice 31.12.2009 Krompton(Uniroyal Chemical) 39 Dimilin OF-6, 6% m.c Diflubenzoron Wheat 31.12.2008 Registrations Ltd - UK Krompton(Uniroyal Chemical) 40 Dimilin 48% m.c Diflubenzoron Wheat, pasture 31.12.2009 Registrations Ltd - UK 41 Zum 10% s.k. Sumitomo Chemical - Japan Etokcazol Cotton 31.12.2009 42 Bitumen-sulphuric broth Uzbnekistan Polysulfide calcium All cultivation 31.12.2007 43 Calipso 48% k.c. Bayer KropSaens - Germany Tiakloprid Cotton, mulberry, apple, vine, tomato, 31.12.2009 44 Camelot 20% s.p. Agrokim Ltd - Uzbekistan Azetamiprid Cotton, mulberry 31.12.2011 Cotton, cucumber of covered soil, potato, 45 Mospilan 20% s.p. Nippon Soda - Japan Azetamiprid 31.12.2010 sugar-beet, pasture, mulberry Cotton, tomato of covered soil, pasture, 46 Pilarmos 20% s.p. Pilar Agree Saens Corp. - Canada Azetamiprid 31.12.2011 mulberry Tagros Chemicals India Limited - 47 Tagspilan 20% s.p. Azetamiprid Cotton, mulberry 31.12.2009 India S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date JV Сlose Сorporation Wheat, lucerna, apple, tomato, pasture, 48 Karbofos 50% k.e. ( R ) Malation 31.12.2010 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan cotton, mulberry Wheat, rice, corn, pea pod, sugar-beet, beet, cotton, apple, pear, quince, cherry, plum, cherry-tree, unfruitful garden, currants, raspberries, strawberries, vine, Phuphanon 57% k.e. ( 49 Keminova A/S - Denmark Malation cabbage, tomato, cucumber, melon, 31.12.2008 R) water-melon, lucerna, tobaco, makhorka, sunflouer, soy, peanut, sesame, citrus, agricultural, natural growth, mulberry, fruit's culture, berrie culture Cotton, pasture, potato, cabbage, wheat, 50 Kinmix 5% k.e. (R) Agro-Kemy - Hungary Beta-zipermetrin 31.12.2009 vine, apple, plum 51 Kurakron 50% k.e. Singenta - Switzerland Prophenophos Cotton 31.12.2009 52 Lanser 75% r.p. United Phosphorus - India Azephat Cotton 31.12.2011 53 Orten 75% r.p. Arista Life Saens SAS - France Azephat Tobaco 21.12.2011 Jangzyagang Red Syn International Beta+zipermethby+chlorpir 54 Lumetrin 12% k.e. Cotton, apple, cabbage 31.12.2007 Co Ltd - China ifos 55 Marshall 25% k.e. FMS - USA Carbosulfan Sugar-beet 31.12.2007 56 Mitak 20% k.e. Arista Life Saens SAS - France Amitraz Cotton, Apple, Vine, pear, peach, tomato 31.12.2007 57 Neoron 50% k.e. Singenta - Switzerland Brompropilat Cotton, vine,apple, citrus, currants 31.12.2007 58 Nissoran 5% k.e. Nippon Soda - Japan Geksitiazoks Cotton, apple 31.12.2009 59 Nissoran 10% k.e. Nippon Soda - Japan Geksitiazoks Cotton, apple 31.12.2009 60 Nomolt 15% s.k. BASF - Germany Tephlubenzuron Pasture 31.12.2008 61 Nurell-D 55% k.e. ( R ) Day AgroSaense - USA Zipermetrin+chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, wheat 31.12.2007 62 Sayeren-s 55% k.e.( R ) Ceraminova A/S - Denmark Zipermetrin+chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, 31.12.2008 Tagros Chemicals India Limited - 63 Tagrell Ð’ 55% люую Zipermetrin+chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, wheat 31.12.2009 India S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 64 Urell-D 55% k.e. United Phosphorus - India Zipermetrin+chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, 31.12.2011 Agrotrade - Bulgary, Agrorus - 65 Zipi Plus 55% k.e. Zipermetrin+chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, 31.12.2011 Russia JV Сlose Сorporation 66 Ziperphos 55% k.e. Zipermetrin+chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, wheat, mulberry 31.12.2010 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan 67 Ortus 5% S.K. Nikhon NoKhiaku - Japan Phenproksimat Cotton 31.12.2011 68 Pillarstar 10% k.e. Pilar Agree Saens Corp. - Canada biphentreen Cotton, apple, 31.12.2011 69 Talstar 10% k.e. FMS - USA biphentreen Cotton, apple, tomato, mulberry 31.12.2009 70 Pirinex 40,8% k.e. Makteshim-Agan - Israel Chlorpiriphos Cotton, apple, 31.12.2009 Prophenophos+lyambdazig 71 Polytreen K 31,5% k.e. Singenta - Switzerland Cotton, mulberry, pasture 31.12.2009 alotrin 72 Polo 50% k.s.( R ) Singenta - Switzerland Diaphentiuron Cotton 31.12.2010 Cotton, apple, pear, cherry, cherry-tree, Preparation â„–30 76% 73 PhGUP VNII ChSZR - Russia petroleum oil plum, decorative plants, currants, 31.12.2011 petroleum emulsion raspberries, citrus, vine, decorative plants Segra 80% s.p. (fine- 74 Agrokim Ltd - Uzbekistan sulfur Cotton 31.12.2011 dyspersated) 75 Sulfur shredded Shorsyiskoe GHO - Uzbekistan sulfur All cultivation 31.12.2008 Cotton, apple vine, potato, cabbage, 76 Sumy-alfa 5% k.e. Sumitomo Chemical - Japan esphenvalerat barley, wheat, rape, agricultural plants, 31.12.2007 natural growth Esphen-Alpha 5% k.e.( R JV Сlose Сorporation Potatoes, cotton, wheat, apple, cabbage, 77 esphenvalerat 31.12.2009 ) Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan pasture 78 Sumy-alfa 20% k.e. Sumitomo Chemical - Japan esphenvalerat lucerna, wheat, pasture, mulberry, cotton 31.12.2007 79 Sumition 50% k.e. Sumitomo Chemical - Japan Phenitrotion Wheat 31.12.2011 Cotton, apple, vine, tomato, cucumber, 80 Superkill Agrephar AS - Belgium Zipermetrin 31.12.2011 cabbage, potato, soy, lucerna, wheat Cotton, apple, vine, tomato, cucumber, Agrotrade - Bulgary, Agrorus - cabbage, potato, Cruciferae's culture, 81 ZIPI 25% k.e.( R ) Zipermetrin 31.12.2011 Russia sugar-beetsoy, lucerna, maize, pasture, water-melon, melon, carrot, wheat S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date Cotton, apple, vine, tomato, cucumber, cabbage, Cruciferae's culture, potato, 82 Zirax 25% k.e. ( R ) United Phosphorus - India Zipermetrin 31.12.2010 sugar-beetsoy, lucerne, maize, water- melon, melon, carrot, wheat, mulberry Zipermetrin 25% k.e. ( R JV Сlose Сorporation Cotton, apple, cabbage, potato, lucerne, 83 Zipermetrin 31.12.2010 ) Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan wheat, pasture cotton, apple, potato, pasture, natural 84 Sherpa 25% k.e. ( R ) Baer KropSaens - Germany Zipermetrin 31.12.2008 growth 85 Titaron 30% s.k.( R ) Nippon Soda - Japan Phluakripirim Cotton 31.12.2007 Tagros Chemicals India Limited - 86 Tramp 10% k.s. ( R ) Alphazipermetrin Cotton, pasture 31.12.2009 India 87 Phastak 10% s.k.( R ) BASF Agro BV - Switzerland Alphazipermetrin Cotton, pasture, potato, 31.12.2011 Phaskord k.e. 100 g.l. ( Close corporation Shelkovo 88 Alphazipermetrin Cotton, mulberry, wheat, pasture 31.12.2010 R) Agrochim - Russia Cotton, apple, vine, currants, potato, cabbage, rape, lucerne, perennial plants, 89 Phenkill 20% k.e. ( R ) United Phosphorus - India Phenvalerat 31.12.2011 maiz, wheat, barley, carrot, melon, pasture, natural growth 90 Phlumayt 20% k.c. Agro-Kemy - Hungary Phluphenzin Cotton 31.12.2007 Cotton, potato, apple, vine, cabbage, 91 Ph'yry 10% v.k. ( R ) FMS - USA Zetazipermetrin 31.12.2010 pasture, mulberry Tiametoksam+lyambdaziga 92 Endgeo 24,7% k.c. Singenta - Switzerland Cotton, mulberry 31.12.2009 lotrin 94 Alto Super 33% k.e. Singenta - Switzerland Ziprokonazol+propikonazol Wnter wheat 31.12.2010 Wheat, barley, maize, oats, sugar-beet, 95 Bayleton 25% s.p. ( R ) Bayer KropSaens - Germany Triadimephon cucumber, melon, tomato, apple, vine, 31.12.2008 strawberries, rose, plum, cherry-plum 96 Batyr 25% s.p. MM-Agro Corporation - USA Triadimephon Apple, vine 31.12.2008 97 Bamper 25% k.e. Makteshim Agan - Israel Propikonazol Vine, wheat 31.12.2009 Tagros Chemicals India Limited - 98 Krest 25% k.e. Propikonazol Winter wheat, vine 31.12.2010 India sulphate copper+calcium Apple, pear, quince, apricot, peach, plum, 99 Bordeaux mixture Uzbekistan 31.12.2007 hydroxide cherry, cherry-tree, vine, currants, citrus, S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date potato, tomato, cucumber, melon, water- melon, sugar-beet, beet, mangel-wurzel, onion, lucerne 100 Vectra 10% s.k. Baer KropSaens - Germany Bromikonazol Vine, apple 31.12.2010 101 Green vitriol 53% r.p. NGMK - Uzbekistan Ferric sulfate Apple, pear, vine 31.12.2008 Apple, pear, vine, cherry, plum, apricot, 102 Lime sulphuric broth Uzbekistan Pollysulphid Calcium cucumber, pea pod, haricot, sugar-beet, 31.12.2007 raspberries, rose 103 Impact 25% c.k Keminova A/S - Denmark Phlutriaphol Apple, winter wheatvine 31.12.2011 Kolosal k.e. (250 g/l 104 Close corporation August - Russia Tebukonazol Vine, winter wheatvine 31.12.2009 tebukonazola) Apple, pear, apricot, peach, plum, cherry- 105 Blue vitriol 98% r.p. AGMK - Uzbekistan sulphate copper 31.12.2008 tree, cherry, currants 106 Pilacur 25% k.e. Pilar Agree Saens Corp. - Canada Tebukonazol Wheat, vine 31.12.2011 107 Previkur SL 60,7 % v.p. Baer KropSaens - Germany Propamokarb gidrochlorid Cotton , tomato, 31.12.2010 Epoksikonazol+tiophanatm 108 Reks 49,5% k.c. ( R ) BASF - Germany Winter wheat 31.12.2008 etil 109 Consul 12,5% k.c. BASF - Germany Epoksikonazol Winter wheat 31.12.2011 110 Saprol 20% k.e. ( R ) BASF - Germany Triphorin Apple, vine 31.12.2010 Segra 80% s.p. (fine- 111 Agrokim Ltd - Uzbekistan sulfur Vine 31.12.2011 dyspersated) 112 Sulfur ground Shorsyiskoe GHO - Uzbekistan sulfur All cultivation 31.12.2008 Titul 390 люлюк (390 Close corporation Shelkovo 113 propikonazol Winter wheat, vine 31.12.2010 п/д) Agrochim - Russia Cucumber, vine, apple, pear, peach, 114 Topaz 10% k.e. Singenta - Switzerland Penkonazol 31.12.2007 strawberries, tomato 115 Topsin-M 705 c.p. ( R ) Nippon Soda - Japan Tiophanatmetil Cucumber, apple, vine, rice 31.12.2009 Tebukonazol+spiroksamin+ 116 Phalkon 46% k.e. Baer KropSaens - Germany Winter wheat 31.12.2007 triadimenol Tebukonazol+Triadimepho 117 Pholikur BT 22,5 k.e. Baer KropSaens - Germany Wheat, rice, vine 31.12.2011 n S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 118 Chemicals for seed processing before sowing Tagros Chemicals India Limited - 119 Avalanche 70% s.p. imidakloprid Cotton 31.12.2010 India 120 Gaucho 70% c.p. Baer KropSaens - Germany imidakloprid Cotton 31.12.2009 121 Dalucho 70% c.p. Dalston Associated SA - Panama imidakloprid Cotton 31.12.2011 privately owned enterprise Baraka - natrium solt cotton's 122 Baraka 60% p.c. Winter wheat, cotton 31.12.2009 Uzbekistan soapstoka ammonium salt salicylic 123 Bakhor 93% v.r.p. Navkar Service - Uzbekistan Cotton, winter wheat, 31.12.2010 acid privately owned enterprise Amari bacterium+antagonist+hum 124 Blumovit v.g/ Cotton 31.12.2011 Orxid Farma - Uzbekistan us+microelement 125 Bronotak 12% p. Baer KropSaens - Germany bronopol Cotton 31.12.2007 JV Сlose Сorporation 126 Bronopol 12% p. bronopol Cotton 31.12.2007 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan AOYA Guy Zey - Chinese People's 127 Dabron 12% p. bronopol Cotton 01.01.2010 Republic 128 Dalbron 12% p. Dalston Associated SA - Panama bronopol Cotton 02.01.2011 JV Сlose Сorporation 129 Bugdoydor 2% k.c. dinikonazol Winter wheat 31.12.2010 Elektrokhimzavod - Uzbekistan tebukonazol 60 g/l + 130 Vial TT 12,9% v.c.k Close corporation August - Russia Winter wheat 31.12.2009 tiabendazol 80 g/l 131 Vinzit 5% c.k. Keminova A/S - Denmark Phlutriaphol+tiabendazol Winter wheat 31.12.2010 Krompton(Uniroyal Chemical) 132 Vitavaks 200 75% c.p. Karboksin-tiram Wheat, cotton 31.12.2009 Registrations Ltd - UK Vitavaks 200 FF 34% Krompton(Uniroyal Chemical) 133 Karboksin-tiram Wheat, cotton, winter wheat 31.12.2009 v.c.k. Registrations Ltd - UK 134 Vitaroc 34% v.c.k/ Close corporation August - Russia Karboksin-tiram Cotton, winter wheat 31.12.2009 135 Dalvaks 34% v.c.k. Dalston Associated SA - Panama Karboksin-tiram Cotton 31.12.2011 Imidakloprid+penzikuron+t 136 Gaucho 58,5% c.p. Baer KropSaens - Germany Cotton 31.12.2008 iram 137 GMK 30% p. NPP Print-TM - Uzbekistan natrium salt humic acid + Cotton 31.12.2009 sulphate copper S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date sulphate copper mixture of natrium salt 138 Darmon-4 25-30% p/ Agrokimyo Lyuks Ltd - Uzbekistan Cotton 31.12.2009 kapron & carbolic acid 139 Dividend 3% k/c/ Singenta - Switzerland Diphenokonazol Winter wheat 31.12.2007 140 Sidigard 3% k.c Paridgat Adgensys - India Diphenokonazol Winter wheat 31.12.2011 Dividend star 036 FS Diphenol + conasol + 141 "Singenta", Switzerland Winter wheat 31.12.2007 3.6% ziproconasol Dividend extrim 115 FS Diphenol + conasol + 142 "Singenta", Switzerland Winter wheat 31.12.2009 11.5% mefenocsam Copolymer fibers of nitron 143 Dorilin 10% IHRV under AS, Uzbekistan with nitrolignin and copper Cotton 31.12.2011 sulfate Close joint-stock company 144 Zirh 36% Bronopol Cotton 31.12.2011 "Avgust", Russia 2 -(tiocyanometiltio) 145 Kisan, 30% "United Phosforus", India Cotton 01.01.2011 benzotiasol 146 Cruiser 350 FS 35% "Singenta", Switzerland Triametoksam Cotton 31.12.2009 147 Medal 35% "Paridjat Adjensis", India Triametoksam Cotton 31.12.2011 148 Lomardor 40% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Tebukonasol+proticonasol Winter wheat 31.12.2009 149 Lancer 80% "United Phosforus", India Acefat Cotton 31.12.2011 150 Dalwtfat 80% "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Acefat Cotton 31.12.2011 151 Maxim XL035 FS, 3.5% "Singenta", Switzerland Fludiocsonil+metfenoksam Cotton 31.12.2009 152 Marchal 40% "FMSi", USA Karbosulfan Cotton 31.12.2007 153 Moncern 25 "Bayer Krop Science", Germany Pencicuron Cotton 31.12.2008 154 Navruz 10% IHRV under AS, Uzbekistan Triterpen acid Cotton 31.12.2009 155 Orten 75% "Arista life Science SAS", France Acephan Cotton 31.12.2011 156 P-4 65% OOO "Agrokhim" Uzbekistan Dimetilol-carbamid Cotton 31.12.2010 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 157 Panoktin 35% "Maktechom Agan", Israel Guazatin Cotton 31.12.2009 158 Panoktin 35% "Maktechom Agan", Israel Guazatin Winter wheat OOO"Ecokimyokurilishkhizmat", 159 Pahta 42% Mono, di, trietanolamines Cotton 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan 160 Pahta M 20% OOO "Versel Kafolat", Uzbekistan Mono, di, trietanolamines Cotton 31.12.2010 Chemical and polymer institute 161 Polysand 62.5% Oxadikcil Cotton 31.12.2011 under AS, Uzbekistan 162 Previcur SL 60.7% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Propamocarb hydrochloride Cotton fine-fibre 31.12.2010 163 Premis 2.5% "BASF AgroBV", Switzerland Triconasol Wheat 31.12.2011 164 Paksill 60 FS 6% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Trebukonasol Winter wheat 31.12.2007 Close joint-stock company 165 Bunker 60 g/l Trebukonasol Winter wheat 31.12.2010 "Avgust", Russia 166 Vinner 6% "Tagros Chemical India Ltd" Trebukonasol Winter wheat 31.12.2010 "Djangczyang Red Sun international 167 Grinasol 6% Traiding Co. Ltd." Chinese People's Trebukonasol Winter wheat, spring wheat 31.12.2009 Republic Close joint-stock company 168 TEBU 60 ME 60 g/l Trebukonasol Winter wheat 31.12.2009 "Shelkovo Agrokhim", Russia 169 Paksil new, 2.5% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Trebukonasol Winter wheat 31.12.2007 170 Sumy-8 2% FLO "Sumitomo Chemical", Japan Dinoconasol - M Winter wheat, spring wheat 31.12.2011 171 Topsin-M 70% "Nippon Soda", Japan Triophfanatmetil Winter wheat 31.12.2011 Chemical and polymer institute 172 UzHitAN 2% Hitosan Cotton 31.12.2009 under AS, Uzbekistan OOO"Ecokimyokurilishkhizmat", 173 Himoya 10% Polychloriodine Cotton 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan OOO"Ecokimyokurilishkhizmat", Polychloriodine +2 174 Himoya - C 31.5% Cotton 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan acetatethanolamine Close joint-stock company 175 Emmisar 250 g/l Bronopol Cotton 31.12.2011 "Shelkovo Agrokhim", Russia S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 176 Nematicids 177** Vidat L 24% "Dupon" USA Oxamil Tomato for hothouse 31.12.2011 Tomato for hothouse, Cucomber for 178 Mokal 10% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Exoprol 31.12.2008 hothouse OOO "Euriteam" Uzbekistan - 179 EZO 10% Exoprol Cucomber for hothouse 31.12.2011 Germany Lepidocid, p/ BA-3000 Institut of microbiology under Bacillus thuringiensis var. 180 Tomato 31.12.2011 EA/mg Academy of Scince, Uzbekistan kur-staki strain U56 181 Rodenticids Close joint-stock company 182 Isocin MK (3g/l) (P) Isopropilpfenacin Field with rodent 31.12.2010 "Shelkovo Agrokhim", Russia IBOH under Academy of Scince, Cis - 11 - gexadecenal +cis 183 Armigal 2 mg Tomato, Cotton, maize, тобак 31.12.2010 Uzbekistan - 9 - gexadecenal Cis - 11 - gexadecenal +cis 184 Armigal 2 mg "Rukim" Moldova Cotton 31.12.2008 - 9 - gexadecenal "MobilUZ - group" Uzbek- Cis - 11 - gexadecenal +cis 185 Armigal 2 mg Cotton 31.12.2009 American joint enterprise - 9 - gexadecenal Trance-10, trance-12, cis- 186 Atracon PF 0.45mg "Rukim" Moldova Mulberry-tree 31.12.2008 14 -gexadectrienilacetate Acetatetrance - 10, trance- "MobilUZ - group" Uzbek- 187 Mulberry-tree PF 1.5 mg 12, cis-14 - Mulberry-tree 31.12.2010 American joint enterprise gexadectrienilacetate 188 Herbicide 189 Alienza 600g/l "Bayer KropScience", Germany Fluortamon Cotton 31.12.2008 190 AMIR 50% "Parijat Agentcis" India Acetochlor Cotton 31.12.2011 AOYA "Juy Zei", Chinese People's 191 Dachlor 50 Acetochlor Cotton 31.12.2008 Republic 192 Arsenal 25% (R) BASF, Germany Imasapir Land for no-agricultural needs 31.12.2011 193 Aasirius 40% OOO "Agrokhim" Uzbekistan Bispiribak natrium Rice 31.12.2011 194 Nominy 400 g/l "Kumiay Chemical", Japan Bispiribak natrium Rice 31.12.2009 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date Mesosulfuron metil natrium 195 Atlantis 3.6% "Bayer KropScience", Germany +iodinesulfuron metil Winter wheat 31.12.2007 natrium 196 Bazagran 48% BASF, Germany Bentazon Wheat, rye, barley, rice, maize 31.12.2009 Joint venture "Electrochimsavod" 197 Banvel 24% Dicamba Maize, wheat, rye, barley, oats 31.12.2010 Uzbekistan Horticultural crops, vineyard, citrus 198 Basta 14% ® "Bayer KropScience", Germany Glupfocinat ammonium 31.12.2007 plants, berry plantation OOO"Ecokimyobioservis", 199 Biozin 360+22.2g/l Dicamba + chlorsulfuron Winter wheat 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan Close joint-stock company 200 Fenizan 360+22.2g/l Dicamba + chlorsulfuron Winter wheat 31.12.2009 "Shelkovo Agrokhim", Russia OOO"Ecokimyobioservis", 201 Biostar 75% Tribenuronmetil Winter wheat 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan 202 Dalstar 75% "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Tribenuronmetil Winter wheat 31.12.2011 203 Ekstrim 75% "Tagros Chemicals India" Tribenuronmetil Winter wheat 31.12.2010 204 Grandstar 75% "Dupon" USA Tribenuronmetil Winter wheat, spring wheat, barley 31.12.2009 Cotton, potatoes, carrot, celery, dill, 205 Gezagard 50 50% ® "Singenta", Switzerland Prometrin 31.12.2007 parsley 206 Gezagard 50Z% "Singenta", Switzerland Prometrin Cotton in hothouse 31.12.2007 207 Dalzak 7,5% "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Fenocsaprop-p-etil+antidot Winter wheat 31.12.2011 Close joint-stock company 208 Lastik 70 g/l Fenocsaprop-p-etil+antidot Winter wheat 31.12.2011 "Avgust", Russia 209 Puma super 7.5% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Fenocsaprop-p-etil+antidot Winter wheat, spring wheat 31.12.2011 210 Dalzlak super "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Fluasiphop - butil Cotton 31.21.2011 Soy, white beet, table beet, mangel, carrot, onion of all generation, sunflower, 211 Flusilad super 12,5% "Singenta", Switzerland Fluasiphop - butil 31.12.2011 cotton, tomato, cabbage, cucumbers, horticultural crops, vineyard, citrus plants Cotton, white beet, apple-tree, vine, 212 Fuzilad forte 15% "Singenta", Switzerland Fluasiphop - butil 31.12.2011 tomato S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 213 Dalzlak extra 104 g/l "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Galaxiphop-R-metil Cotton 31.12.2011 Cotton, white beet, mangel, carrot, onion 214 Zellec super 104 g/l "Dau AgroScience", USA Galaxiphop-R-metil 31.12.2009 of all generation, potatoes Wheat, barley, cotton, land for no- 215 Gliphos 360 g/l "Keminava A/C" Denmark Gliphosat 31.12.2010 agricultural needs 216 Flophogan 360 g/l "Maktechim Agan", Israel Gliphosat Wheat, cotton 31.12.2009 AOYA "Juy Zei", Chinese People's 217 Daphostat 360 g/l Gliphosat Fields for cotton and grain-crops 31.12.2010 Republic Fields for grain-crops, land for no- 218 Raundal 360 g/l "Monsanto" USA Gliphosat 31.12.2011 agricultural needs For fields for agricultural and no- 219 Uragan Forte 500 g/l "Singenta", Switzerland Gliphosat 31.12.2008 agricultiral needs, vineyard 220 Goltix 70% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Metametron Sugar-beet 31.12.2008 Tribenutronmetil+triphensu 221 Grandstar 75% "Dupon" USA Winter wheat 31.12.2011 lphuronmetil 222 Gulliver 50% "Dupon" USA Azimsulphuron Rice 31.21.3009 Close joint-stock company Metsulphuronmetil 45 h/l + 223 Dimet 500 g/l Winter wheat 31.12.2010 "Avgust", Russia dicamba 455 g/l Phlumetsulam + 224 Derby 175 SC 17,5% "Dau AgroScience", USA Wheat 31.12.2009 phlorasulam "Agan Chemical Manufactures" 225 Cotoran 80% Phluometuron Cotton 31.12.2007 Ltd. Israel 226 Cotonex 80% "Maktechim Agan", Israel Phluometuron Cotton 31.12.2010 Joint venture "Electrochimsavod" 227 Cotoran 80% Phluometuron Cotton 31.12.200 Uzbekistan 228 Londax 60% "Dupon" USA Bensulphuronmetil Rice 31.21.2009 Close joint-stock company Wheat of indispensable condition sowing 229 Magnum 600 g/l Metsulphuron 31.13.2009 "Avgust", Russia the next year 230 Nabu 20% "Nippon Soda", Japan Svetoxidim Onion, carrot, cotton 31.12.2009 Cotton, soy, cabbage, tomato, tabaco, Joint venture "Electrochimsavod" 231 Nitran 30% Triphluralin eggplant, pepper, garlic, onion (seeds), 31.12.2008 Uzbekistan cucombers, carrot S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date "Agan Chemical Manufactures" 232 Triflurex 48% Triphluralin Cotton, tomato 31.12.2009 Ltd. Israel Ovsugen extra 140 + 35 Close joint-stock company 233 phenoxaprop-p-etil+antidot Winter wheat 31.12.2011 g/l "Shelkovo Agrokhim", Russia 234 Ordam 6E 72% "Singenta", Switzerland Molinat Rice 31.12.2010 (Uniroyal chemical) Registrations 235 Pantera 40 g/l Quisalophop - tephuril Cotton, sugar-beet 31.12.2011 Ltd. UK 236 PIK, 75% "Singenta", Switzerland Prosulfuron Winter wheat 31.12.2010 237 Rainbou 2.5% "Dau AgroScience", USA Penoxulam Rice 31.12.2007 238 Samuray 33% "Parijat Avencis" India Pendimetalin Cotton, maize, potatoes, onion, carrot 31.12.2011 Onion for all generation, cotton maiz, 239 Stomp 33% BASF, Germany Pendimetalin 31.12.2010 carrot, potatoes 240 Satorn 50% "Kumiay Cemical" Japan Bentocarb Rice 31.12.2009 241 Serto plus 75% BASF, Germany Dicamba + tritosulphuron Winter wheat, barley 31.12.2007 242 Sirius 10% "Nissan Chemical" Japan Pirasosulphurontil Rice 31.12.2010 243 Strane 200 20% "Dau AgroScience", USA Phluroxipir Winter wheat, maize, onion 31.12.2009 244 Stapl 85% "Kumiay Cemical" Japan Pirotiobak natriy Cotton 31.12.2010 245 Targa super 5% "Nissan Chemical" Japan Hisalophotopetil Cotton, patatoes, tomato, cucomber 31.12.2009 246 Titus 25% "Dupon" USA Rimsulphuron Maize 31.12.2009 Clodinaphop propargil + 247 Topic 8% "Singenta", Switzerland Winter wheat 31.12.2010 clocvintocent metil Iodinesulphuron - metil - 248 Hussar 5% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Winter wheat 31.12.2009 natriy 249 Centurion 25.4% "Arista life Science SAS", France Cletodim Cotton, sugar-beet, onion 31.12.2010 Joint venture "Electrochimsavod" 250 Cefat 25% Cvinclorac Rice 31.13.2011 Uzbekistan 251 Shogun 10% "Maktechim Agan", Israel Propahisaphop Cotton 31.12.2007 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 252 Defoliants and Desiccant Close joint-stock company 253 Avguron 500 g/l Tidiasuron Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2009 "Avgust", Russia Close joint-stock company Tidiasuron (360 g/l) + 254 Avguron exrta 540 g/l Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2009 "Avgust", Russia diouron (180 g/l) Tidiasuron (360 g/l) + 255 Dalron super SK "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2011 diouron (180 g/l) Tidiasuron (360 g/l) + 256 Jinstar 540 g/l "Bayer KropScience", Germany Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2009 diouron (180 g/l) Close joint-stock company Tidiasuron (360 g/l) + 257 Yanichar SK Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2011 "Shelkovo Agrokhim", Russia diouron (180 g/l) 258 Dropp 50% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Tidiazuron Cotton middle- and fine- fibre 31.12.2007 259 Dropp ultra 18% "Bayer KropScience", Germany Tidiazuron + diuron Cotton 31.12.2010 260 Kabuki 2.5% "Nihon Nohiaku", Japan Piraphluphenetil Cotton 31.12.2009 261 Mezon, 53% IONH, uzbekistan Chlorat natrium Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2011 Phenilammoniy 2 chlor etil 262 Optim - 2 70% TIIM, UzNIISGPZ, Uzbekistan Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2009 phosphonat 263 Reglon Super 15% "Singenta", Switzerland Dicvat Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2011 264 Rivet 24% "FMCi" USA Carventrazon - etil Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2009 IO-NH OOO"Ecokimyobioservis", 265 Sadaf 70% Tricarbamidohlorat natriy Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2010 Uzbekistan 266 Sadaf - K 96.6% IO-NH, Uzbekistan Tricarbamidohlorat natriy Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2010 OOO"Ecokimyobioservis", Dicarbomid chlorid chlorat 267 Samara 70% Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2010 Uzbekistan natriy + diacetat etanolamin Chlorat natrium + 2 268 Sardor 52% IO-NH, Uzbekistan chloretilphosphonat Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2009 monoetanol ammoniy Chloriat natrium + 269 Sahovat 45% MP "Hosilot", Uzbekiston Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2007 phosphat etanolamina 270 Sihat 70.5% IO-NH, Uzbekistan Tricarbamidohlorat natriy Cotton middle- and fine- fibre 31.12.2010 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 365 g/l chloriat magniy + 271 Super HMD j IO-NH, Uzbekistan 4.5 g/l phosphat Cotton middle-fibre 31.12.2011 etanoplamin 272 Finish 540 g/l "Bayer KropScience", Germany Etephon + ciclonilid Cotton middle- and fine- fibre 31.12.2010 273 Chlorat Magniy 60% "Azot", uzbekistan Chlorat Magniy Cotton middle- and fine- fibre, rice 31.12.2008 274 Chlorat Magniy 36% "Azot", uzbekistan Chlorat Magniy Cotton 31.12.2009 275 Chlorat Magniy 43% "Azot", uzbekistan Chlorat Magniy Cotton 31.12.2009 276 Growth Regulators Privately owned enterprise 277 Baraka 60% Natriy of cotton soapstok Winter wheat 31.12.2009 "Baraka", Uzbekistan Ammonium of salicylic 278 Bahor 93% OOO "Navkar servis", Uzbekistan acid (ammonium Winter wheat, cotton 31.12.2010 salicylate) (Uniroyal chemical) Registrations 279 Vitabax 200 FF 34% Carboxin + tiram Winter wheat, cotton 31.12.2009 Ltd. UK Close joint-stock company 280 Vitaros 34% Carboxin + tiram Cotton 31.12.2009 "Avgust", Russia Research-and-production association "Print - TM", Privately Natrium salt of guminium Cotton middle-fibre, cotton, wheat, 281 Gumat Natriy 30% 31.12.2010 owned enterprisen "E/M/ ocid tomato, cucomber, potatoes Gutnikov", Uzbekistan 282 Dalpiksi 5% "Dalston Associated SA", Panama Mepicvat-chlorid Cotton 31.12.2011 283 PIKS 5% BASF, Germany Mepicvat-chlorid Cotton 31.12.2011 Joint venture "Electrochimsavod" 284 Uztikc 5% Mepicvat-chlorid Cotton 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan 285 D-4-2 4% "Protech" Uzbekistan Natural protein and peptide Cotton 31.12.2011 Winter wheat, cotton, tomato, patatoes, 286 Moviy 50% MP "Hosilot", Uzbekiston Phosphat-etanol-amin 31.12.2009 cabbage Polymer of saponificated 287 Nitrolin 10% IHRV under AS, Uzbekistan Cotton, cucumber 31.12.2009 nitron 288 Ociguat 10% "Grand Agro Plus" Uzbekistan Salt of guminium ocid Cotton, cucumber 31.12.2010 S/Nb Name of the chemicals Origin of the production Type of chemicals Names of the tested crops Registration expiry date 289 P-4 65% "Agrochim" Ltd., Uzbekistan Dimetilol-carbamid Cotton 31.12.2005 Copolymer fibers of nitron 290 Roslin 10% IHRV under AS, Uzbekistan Cotton, winter wheat, tpmato, cucomber 31.12.2006 with nitrolignin Tetrametilendiamin of 291 Rostbisol 60% IGEBR under AS, Uzbekistan Cotton 31.12.2010 oxalic acid Biochemical Instutite under AS, Di-iodine-ociphen-oci di- 292 Stimulator T 2.5 g/l Cotton 31.12.2011 Uzbekistan phenilanin 293 TJ-85 p/ IONH, Uzbekistan Ocietil urea zinchydrate Cotton 31.12.2005 294 Uchkun 1% IHRV under AS, Uzbekistan Derivative of isoprene Cotton 31.12.2009 295 Hocil 40% IONH, Uzbekistan Phosphat-etanol-amin Cotton, tomato, potatoes, cabbage, wheat 31.12.2008 **Used only by special trained personnel with strict following the instructions with application of substance for individual protection of respiratory organs, that filitirates through masks and special dress coat. Source: Handbook: List of pesticides and agrochemicals permitted for use in agriculture in Republic of Uzbekistan (Tashkent, 2007) ANNEX 10 LIST OF CHEMICAL PROTECTANTS, INCLUDED INTO THE REGISTER OF FORBIDDEN AND LIMITED ON APPLICATION THE ACTIVE AND NON-ACTIVE INGREDIENTS. Registration Registration # Name of preparation or reactant CAS No. Reason of forbidden or limitation date period validity 1. DDT and metabolites. 1.1-di-(4-chlorophenol) 2.2.2 50-29-3 High-persistent pesticide, with full-blown cumulative 28.02.2001 Permanently trichloroethane (pesticide) behavior 2. Hexachloran (sum of isomers GCCH) 1.2.3.4.5.6.- 608-73-1 Stable in external environment, with carcinogenic, Hexachloro-cyclohexane(pesticide) 28.02.2001 Permanently embryotoxic action, cumulative behavior. High level of products pollution 3. 2.4.5-T (dynoxol TCF)* (pesticide) 93-76-5 Teratogen, carcinogen, mutagen. Stable in external 28.03.2002 Permanently environment 4. Aldrin ** (pesticide) 309-00-2 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly toxic, Stable in external environment 5. Captaphol * (pesticide) 2425-06-1 28.03.2002 Permanently Carcinogenic, Stable in external environment 6. Chlordan ** (pesticide) 57-74-9 28.03.2002 Permanently Stable in external environment 7. Chlordimeform * (pesticide) 6164-98-3 28.03.2002 Permanently Mutagen, Carcinogenic, Stable in external environment 8. Chlorbenzilat * (pesticide) 510-15-6 28.03.2002 Permanently Oncogenic, Stable in external environment 9. Heptachlor ** (pesticide) 76-44-8 Highly toxic, Carcinogenic, Stable in external 28.03.2002 Permanently environment 10. Deldrin ** (pesticide) 60-57-1 28.03.2002 Permanently Virulent toxic agent, Stable in external environment 11. Dinoseb and it’s salts * (pesticide) 88-85-7 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly toxic, Teratogen, Stable in external environment 12. 1.2 – Dibromethane * (pesticide) 106-93-4 28.03.2002 Permanently Oncogenic, Stable in external environment 13. Fluoroacetamide * (pesticide) 640-19-7 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly toxic, Stable in external environment 14. Hexachlorobenzene ** (pesticide) 118-74-1 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly cumulative, Stable in external environment 15. Lindan * compound 58-89-9 Highly cumulative, Oncogenic, Stable in external 28.03.2002 Permanently environment 16. Mercury compounds * phenol 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly toxic, Stable in external environment 17. Pentachloro-phenol * phenol 87-86-5 Full-blown skin-resorptive action, Stable in external 28.03.2002 Permanently environment 18. Monocortophos * (dangerous formulation) 6923-22-4 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly toxic, Stable in external environment 19. Metamydophos * (dangerous formulation) 10265-92-6 28.03.2002 Permanently Stable in external environment 20. Phosphamydon * (dangerous formulation) 13171-21-6 28.03.2002 Permanently Stable in external environment 21. Methyl-parathyon * (dangerous formulation) 298-00-0 Highly toxic, Teratogen, embryotoxic, Stable in external 28.03.2002 Permanently environment 22. Parathyon * (dangerous formulation) 56-38-2 28.03.2002 Permanently Highly toxic, Stable in external environment 23. Endrin ** (pesticide) 77-20-8 21.10.2005 Permanently Highly toxic, Stable in external environment 24. Mirex ** (pesticide) 2385-85-5 21.10.2005 Permanently Carcinogenic, Stable in external environment 25. Toxaphen ** (pesticide) 8001-35-2 21.10.2005 Permanently Highly toxic, Carcinogenic * the most dangerous chemical compounds, forbidden and limitation of which is approved by the Rotterdam convention. ** the most dangerous chemical compounds, forbidden and limitation of which is approved by the Stockholm convention. Decision to include these preparations to the given “Registerâ€? was accepted on the sittings of State Chemical Commission (Goshimkimissiya) on 28 March 2001, 28 March 2002, 21 October 2005. Source: List of chemical protectants, included into the register of forbidden and limited on application the active and non-active ingredients (Tashkent, 2007) SUMMARY OF PROJECT OUTCOMES OF RESP-I ANNEX 11 UZ-RESP-I. Outputs of the I&D Component: and Environmental impacts A B C D E F G UNIT TOTAL Positive Env Impacts Negatiove Env. Impacts Mitigation Measures Responsibility a) Inter-farm systems Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and Increase canal efficiency, wastes from cleaning, left metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working Contractor/ Inter-Farm canals increased water supply, decrease over materials from during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage km Project rehabilitation 138.8 on water loss, decrease on construction, oil & fuel in water supply works should be conducted during off- Manager groundwater level spils, dust, noise vegetation season, filling the tanker of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. improved drain, decrease on watering the soil for reducing the dust, working during the day Contractor/ inter-farm draining ground water level, decrease of wastes from cleaning, oil for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage in water km Project Collectors 58.5 salinity, decrease in minirelized & fuel spils, dust, noise supply works should be conducted during off-vegetation Manager ground water season Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working Contractor/ Inter-Farm Canal reduction of water loss, improve disposal of old structures, # during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage Project Structures (gates, etc) 207 on water control, dust, noise in water supply works should be conducted during off- Manager vegetation season Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and improved drain, decrease on disposal of old materials, metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working Contractor/ ground water level, decrease of left over materials from during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage Verical Drainages # Project 71 salinity, decrease in minirelized construction, oil & fuel in water supply works should be conducted during off- Manager ground water spils, dust, noise vegetation season, filling the tanker of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working left over materials from Contractor/ Increase pump efficiency, during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage Pumping stations # construction, oil & fuel Project 3 increased water supply in water supply works should be conducted during off- spils, dust, noise Manager vegetation season, filling the tanker of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working left over materials from Contractor/ Levee (coastal increased safety from washing during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage km construction, oil & fuel Project protection) 0.6 away, decrease erosion in water supply works should be conducted during off- spils, noise Manager vegetation season, filling the tanker of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. Contractor/ Siphon (pipeline) Uilization of the wastes to the designated waste disposal # maintain piped water access construction waste Project under river 1 places Manager Total Cost for inter- farm ('000) US$ 7,703.7 b) On-farm systems Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and Increase canal efficiency, wastes from cleaning, left metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working Contractor/ increased water supply, decrease over materials from during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage On farm canals km Project 61.8 on water loss, decrease on construction, oil & fuel in water supply works should be conducted during off- Manager groundwater level spils, noise vegetation season, filling the tanker of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. improved drain, decrease on watering the soil for reducing the dust, working during the day Contractor/ On-Farm draining ground water level, decrease of wastes from cleaning, oil for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage in water km Project collectors 553.6 salinity, decrease in minirelized & fuel spils, noise supply works should be conducted during off-vegetation Manager ground water season Utilization of wastes, demolished concretes and canalets and metal scraps, watering the soil for reducing the dust, working Contractor/ On-farm canal reduction of water loss, improve during the day for avoding the noise, for avoiding the stoppage # disposal of old structures Project structures (gates, etc) 1,227 on water control, in water supply works should be conducted during off- Manager vegetation season, filling the tanker of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. Utilization of wastes and metal scraps, watering the soil for left over materials from reducing the dust, working during the day for avoding the Contractor/ Increase pump efficiency, On-Farm Small Pumps # construction, oil & fuel noise, for avoiding the stoppage in water supply works should Project 74 increased water supply spils, noise be conducted during off-vegetation season, filling the tanker Manager of the vehical should be done in special seperated place. Total Cost for on-farm US$ 4,908.3 ('000) TOTAL COST US$ 12,612.0 Source: M&N unit of RRA UZ-RESP. Outputs of the Credit Component: and Environmental impacts A B C D E F G UNIT TOTAL Positive Env Impacts Negatiove Env. Impacts Mitigation Measures Responsibility reducing pollution by increasing fuel and lubrican efficiency; incease of soil compacting the earth from over fertility (organic structure, capillaries, use of the machine on the field supply and use of appropriate Tractors& combines units farmers 568 drainability) by replacing the top soil (esp. wheeled tractors, not the type and size equipemnt layer through more timely cultivation & track tractors) ploughing (i) regulations on animal Increase in organic fertilizer (manure), Overgrazing; contamination of pressures on pastures (e.g. 1 increase of crop rotation and (i) local authorities; (ii) Livestock (cattle) heads surface & ground waters from cattle/1 ha irrigated land and 1,5 1,354 diversification of plants, (e.g. alfa-alfa farmers concentration of uncleaned wastes ha pasture; (ii) use of manure as increases nitrogen level of the soil) fertilizer (i) regulations on animal Increase in organic fertilizer (manure), Overgrazing; contamination of pressures on pastures (e.g. 10 increase of crop rotation and (i) local authorities; (ii) Livestock (sheeps) heads surface & ground waters from sheeps/1 ha irrigated land and 1,794 diversification of plants, (e.g. alfa-alfa farmers concentration of uncleaned wastes 1,5 ha pasture; (ii) use of increases nitrogen level of the soil) manure as fertilizer Contamination of surface & Poultry (chickens) heads Increase in organic fertilizer (manure) ground waters from concentration use of manure as fertilizer poltry farmers 19,000 of uncleaned wastes Increase of yields through pollination of Bee-keeping (credits) unit none none none 4 flowers water pollution, soil scontents in Rural advisory services for Use of intensive technology increases Vegetable growing using pesticides training in safe pesticide use and training; farmers for ton yeilds per hectar, which reduces cropping (seeds) 49 handling; introduction of IPM adoption of appropriate area. methods Use of negative pesticieds, wastes Introduce IPM, biological from cleaning, wastes from treatments; disposal of old Use of intensive technology increases Green-house cleaning, left over materials from metals and structures to screap set yeilds per hectar, which reduces cropping contrctors/project manager (construction materials) 8 construction, oil & fuel spils, dust, heaps, watering the surface to area. noise reduce dust, working during daytime to avoid noise Agro-processing (oil Use of modern technology and processing wastewater treatment, proper Water pollution .safety and health refinery, milk the farm outputs siting, proper control of # .biophysical and cultural losses credit recipient processing, wool 10 construction wastes and impact through location treetment, etc) (noise, dust) advice and training on good advisory services Rural business (service) # none none 1.0 environmental practices providers TOTAL COST USD 8,266,675 Source: M&N unit of RRA