Russian Federation: Forest Fire Response Project...

28 November 2011 P a g e 1

December 13, 2011

Russian Federation:

Forest Fire Response Project (Forest Project-2)

Environmental Management Framework

(EMF)

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized


Contents

1 Project Context...................................................................................................................... 34

2 Purpose of the EMF............................................................................................................... 67

3 The Russian Federation’s Legal and Regulatory Framework and World Bank

Policies .................................................................................................................................... 67

4 Environmental Screening, Assessment and Management....................................................... 89

5 Institutional Framework......................................................................................................1112

6 Compliance Monitoring and Reporting...............................................................................1213

7 Review and Approval .........................................................................................................1314

8 Prior and Post Review ........................................................................................................1314

9 Public Consultation and Disclosure of Information.............................................................1415

10 Executive Summary............................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

ANNEX 1 Environmental Baseline Conditions .....................................................................1516

ANNEX 2 Description of Russian Federal EIA Regulations..................................................2324

ANNEX 3 Template for “Checklist” EMP.............................................................................2728

ANNEX 4 World Bank’s Policy on Pest Management (OP 4.09)...........................................3536

ANNEX 5 Template for “Full Fledged” EMP........................................................................3738


1 Project Context

Background. The project has three components: (1) enhancing forest fire prevention,

management and control; (2) building forest management capacity; and (3) project

management. There will be two implementing agencies for the project: the Federal Forest

Agency (FFA), which covers the extensive area forest of forest fund, and the Ministry of

Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE), which will implement the project in Protected

Areas (PAs).

Project objective. The World Bank is supporting the Government of the Russian Federation

in the preparation of a Forest Fire Response Project that aims to improve forest fire

prevention and management and enhance sustainable forest management. Specifically, the

Project will support the Russian Government’s preparedness for forest fires, by

strengthening the capacity for forest fire monitoring and response as well as strengthening

the institutional and policy framework for forestry governance, which is also critical to the

prevention of forest fires and management of areas affected by fires. Furthermore, the

project will contribute to raising public awareness and education standards in forestry issues

in general, with specific reference to forest fire prevention/control and forest governance

issues. Given that the bulk of fires are of human origin, the latter is as important as

suppression of fires underway. It is expected that project investments will lead to a decrease

in the number of fires of human origin. Fires which occur will be better controlled (and

hence reduced in extent and severity) as they will be detected sooner, response time will be

reduced due to better communications, fire fighting capacity in terms of equipment and

trained personnel will have been increased, and interagency and interregional fire-fighting

coordination and cooperation will be enhanced. In addition, shortcomings identified in the

forest policy and legislative framework will be addressed at both the national and pilot

region level, strengthening the management of forests and landscapes, which will in turn

have a positive impact on the prevalence and likelihood of forest fires.

Project components: Component 1: Enhancing Forest Fire Prevention, Management and

Control. This component aims to improve the effectiveness of forest fire prevention and

management by (i) strengthening the capacity of early detection and quick response to fight

forest fires and (ii) reducing the number of fires of human origin through awareness raising

and environmental education programs. Early fire detection is recognized as a key element

in improving protection of forest from fires. Management of fires requires clear

coordination across the various agencies. The project will therefore support the

establishment of Inter-regional Forest Fire Centers (IFFCs) to improve detection and

coordination across the various agencies. Fire prevention and environmental education will

be focused on children and youth as a means to encourage long-term behavior change. In

particular, this component will provide technical assistance to (i) develop fire preparedness

master plans at the forest district level to determine the optimum location of different

forest fire interventions; (ii) review and upgrade regional fire danger rating and fire hazard

indices; (iii) improve the capacity of the early fire detection system; and (iv) develop public

awareness and media/education campaigns to decrease the incidence of forest fires of

human origin. In addition, investments will be made to improve fire fighting and

preparedness systems and establish IFFCs.

Component 2: Building Forestry Management Capacity. Forest policy, legislation, institutions

and silvicultural systems clearly have an impact on how forest is managed which in turn has

multiple effects on the environment, including the likelihood, extent and severity of forest

fires. This component will increase forest management capacity through (i) provision of


technical assistance to help identify and address key policy and legislative issues and the

institutional framework (by supporting the clear demarcation of mandates among federal

and regional forest management institutions); (ii) targeted investments to improve forest

regeneration and restoration, establish integrated forest management information systems,

and develop model forests; and (iii) improved training opportunities for both professionals

already in service and new forestry expertise.

Component 3: Project Management. A Project Implementation Unit (PIU) will work with FFA,

MNRE, and each of the participating Inter-regional Forest Fire Centers to ensure effective

and continuous communication with project stakeholders. This PIU will coordinate all

project activities, procure works, goods, and consultants’ services for project

implementation, supervise and monitor project activities, and report regularly to FFA and

MNRE.

Planned project activities. The project will finance hardware, equipment and fire-fighting

infrastructure, focusing on ground-based activities, and will not involve significant or large

scale physical interventions or major civil works. Besides the purchase of equipment, tools,

protection gear and vehicles, project funds will be used for the construction of observation

towers and the rehabilitation of fire stations and warehouses for equipment and machinery.

Such activities will be carried out in areas, regions or other administrative units where some

fire-fighting capacity already exists, which can be enhanced and improved by the project’s

activities. These civil works will have localized, minor and reversible environmental impacts,

which are of a routine nature and will require only simple environmental management

instruments.

The project may finance the construction of temporary access or service roads and the

clearing of fire breaks that are immediately necessary to increase fire fighting effectiveness.

These activities are standard forest management practice and do not cause significant

impacts, either in magnitude or duration. The project will not finance airborne fire fighting,

thus potential impacts from chemical agents commonly added to water dropped from fixed

wing aircraft and helicopters are not expected. (Such agents commonly include retardants,

which slow down water evaporation and thus increase its activity in a fire, and foam agents,

which work in a similar manner and also have a smothering effect. One of the most

commonly used retardants is Ammonium Phosphate, which has a fertilizing effect.)

The planned activities on the development and support of policies, legal frameworks and

institutional capacities would result in a general strengthening of on the ground

enforcement of laws and regulations by clarifying the rights and responsibilities of forest

inspectors and rangers, as well as forest users. This would improve overall control of the

authorities and reduce illegal activities, including negligent behavior or willful setting of fires.

In this context the project also aims to reduce the frequency of fires caused by arson, which

appears to play a role in triggering forest fires. New regulations shall target the currently

existing perverse incentives to set fire to forests intentionally to secure income from salvage

logging, avoiding the complicated “red tape” associated with legally acquiring logging

licenses. The project’s activities aimed at building forest management, education and

training will include measures to improve outreach of forest authorities to the general

public, increase awareness of the ecological and economic value of forests and build /

strengthen the sense of ownership of the population living close to forest resources.

The following specific activities and measures envisaged include:

1. improving ground-based forest fire response, and the reconstruction,

modernization and maintenance of forest fire stations in 3 – 5 pilot regions;


2. local forest fire brigades will be established and firefighting and communications

equipment provided;

3. inter-regional Forest Fire Centers (e.g., in the Far East, Siberian, and Northwestern

Federal Districts) will be established and equipped for the detection and suppression

of large-scale fire outbreaks, coordination of response between regions and

agencies, as well as pest treatment;

4. public awareness and education programs and products (e.g., brochures, school

curricula, posters, radio and TV media, websites, blogs, etc.) will be developed to

advocate forest fire safety rules;

5. early fire detection and response will be strengthened by upgrading the fire danger

rating and hazard index system in pilot regions and Protected Areas and expanding

the network of ground-based fire services, including fire towers and observation

points in key target areas;

6. fire fighting preparedness in targeted Protected Areas will be enhanced through the

upgrading of forest fire stations, constructing and cleaning fire breaks; such activities

will be aligned with respective park management plans;

7. upgrading of communications systems, supply of suitable firefighting machinery,

equipment, protective clothing, gear and hand-tools;

8. forest regeneration, afforestation and carbon sequestration will be improved by (i)

expanding the network of laboratories to evaluate forest seed quality and origin

through DNA analysis to provide genetically certified seed; and (ii) establishing

innovative seed centers to upgrade forest regeneration activities through the

construction of facilities and supply of equipment for seed harvesting, storage,

growing and transportation and to trial modern techniques of plantation

maintenance and protection (from fire and wildlife);

9. design and implementation of a centralized database with standard geospatial

information that will enable all types of forest monitoring (e.g. forest fires, forest

inventory and management, forest pathology, among others);

10. develop a national forest fire management strategy for Protected Areas that takes

into account a differentiated approach to forest fire control depending on regional

environmental and socioeconomic conditions, the environmental landscape,

economic aspects and international experience;

11. develop standard operating procedures and guidelines for Protected Area zoning by

fire protection level; prepare GIS-based fire management plans in the largest

Protected Areas most susceptible to fires; and develop respective guidelines and

standard operating procedures;

Location. While the exact project locations are not yet defined, it is expected that the

physical interventions will focus on 3-5 pilot regions and select Protected Areas, which will

be defined by geographic, economic, and environmental criteria. It may be assumed, that

the project’s geographical focus would be on forests with high environmental or economic

value which may be situated close to settlements or infrastructure, and where fires would

carry the risk of human life loss, severe human health impacts, substantial damage to

infrastructure or substantial loss of economic assets or valuable ecological resources (e.g.

national parks).

Project safeguards category and triggered policies. The project is classified as

environmental category “B” under the World Bank’s operational policy (OP) 4.01, as the

environmental impacts are expected to be largely positive and negative impacts will be

limited in scope and geographical extent, and readily mitigatable. Further environmental

safeguards policies triggered are OP4.09 (Pest Management) and OP4.36 (Forests). The

social policy OP4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement was triggered as well but will be treated by

separate safeguards instruments.


2 Purpose of the EMF

This EMF serves as detailed guidance for environmental management during project design

and implementation. As the exact project locations have not yet be determined, design will

not be sufficiently detailed to produce implementation ready EMPs before the project is

appraised. This EMF will become a legally and contractually binding document for the

Borrower, designers and Contractors.

The EMF describes the environmental baseline conditions within which the project will be

implemented, identifies the overall range of impacts, and designs generic mitigation,

management and monitoring measures. It will also describe environmental management

implementation arrangements and the legal framework based on which the project

interventions will be implemented and monitored. The EMF itself will be part of the

designer’s TOR for detailed project design, and will be incorporated into all tender packages

for project implementation contracts. The key safeguards instruments for project

implementation – the specific environmental management plan (EMP) and the “checklist

version thereof – are described in this general EMP which provides guidance on roles and

responsibilities for designers and contractors once concrete projects have been identified,

designs are available and contracts for implementation works signed. Depending on the type

of investment the responsibility for producing the specific EMP will fall to the Designer or

Contractor.

3 The Russian Federation’s Legal and Regulatory Framework and World Bank Policies

The project will be required to comply with both Russian federal legislation and the World

Bank’s policies applicable to this project. In the case of significant discrepancies, the more

stringent of the 2 sets of guidelines will prevail.

Though the Forest Code of the Russian Federation does not contain any specific requirement

to undertake environmental impact assessment (EIA) in areas classified as forests, such a

safeguard is established in other laws and regulations. In particular, in accordance with

Federal Law # 174-FZ of November 23, 1995, on Environmental Review, an Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA) Report should be prepared for all engineering and technical

operations. A state environmental review covers project documents, including

environmental documents, with an EIA report being one of them.

Federal Law # 7-FZ of January 10, 2002, On Environmental Protection sets forth that:

1. Environmental impact assessment shall be undertaken for planned economic and other

activities which may directly or indirectly affect the environment, regardless of

organisational and legal patterns of ownership of the implementation entities for the

economic and other activities.

3. Requirements to environmental impact assessment documents shall be established by

federal executive authorities effecting state environmental management (Article 32:

Environmental Impact Assessment).


Federal Law # 174-FZ of November 23, 1995, on Environmental Review sets forth that

comprehensive nature of environmental impact assessment of economic and other activities

and their implications shall be a principle of the environmental review is (Article 3: Principles

of environmental review).

According to Article 14 (State Environmental Review Procedures) of the same Federal Law,

the documents to be reviewed shall include reports on environment impact assessment of

those economic and other activities which are subject to state environmental review.

Documents on facilities to be constructed or reconstructed on lands of federal protected

areas (provided construction or reconstruction of such facilities on lands of protected areas

is allowed in accordance with the federal and regional legislation) shall be reviewed if the

documentation submitted for review includes reports on environmental impact assessment

of the facilities to be constructed, reconstructed or renovated/rehabilitated within protected

areas, for the respective protected areas; opinions of non-governmental environmental

reviews if such are undertaken; information about consultations on the facilities/sites

covered with the state environmental reviews with the general public and civil society

organisations (associations) and local self-governance bodies.

The Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment of Economic and Other Activities in

the Russian Federation was developed to implement Federal Law # 174-FZ of November 23,

1995, on Environmental Review and governs processes of environmental impact assessment

of intended economic and other activities and preparation of respective documents which

serve as a basis for the development of documentation to justify the scope of state

environmental reviews.

The Regulation on Sections to be Included in Project Documents and Requirements to their

Contents establishes the sections to be included in project documents and requirements to

their contents and is meant to guide the preparation of project documents for various sites

of capital construction as well as selected phases of construction, reconstruction and

renovation/rehabilitation of capital development sites/facilities. This regulation requires an

environmental management section which, in particular, should present the results of

environmental impact assessment of the capital development site as well as the list of

measures to prevent and/or mitigate potential adverse environmental impact of intended

economic activities and to ensure sound use of natural resources during the period of

construction and operation of the capital development site.

World Bank’s Environmental Due Diligence Process. Based on the Bank OP 4.01, the

project’s operational principles for environmental due diligence and the instruments to

address the triggered environmental safeguards policies (OP4.09, OP4.36) are laid out in this

EMF (environmental management framework). This document defines the general nature of

project impacts, how investments are screened and classified according to their potential

environmental and social impacts, which mitigation measures are generally available, and

how environmental and social management procedures for design and implementation will

practically be mainstreamed into each individual investment.

In view of the expected limited scale of the physical works and the overall small to moderate

scale of potential negative impacts, the team suggests producing an EMP for each defined

investment which has been determined to have environmental impacts warranting

management and mitigation. The screening EIA should be a concise exercise focused on

establishing the environmental baseline conditions (which in a more generic manner are

described in this EMF), the environmental sensitivities and vulnerabilities of a given project

area, the expected potential negative impacts of the planned activities, and if and how the

planned project activities could affect sensitive habitats or protected areas.


For minor interventions, such as reconstruction, rehabilitation or small scale construction

works in insensitive areas, the implementation of environmental good practices would be

achieved by simplified “checklist” EMPs.

All environmental documents produced for specific investments will become part of the

tender documents and construction contracts for the planned activities, structures or

facilities.1

.

In some of the potential investments dealing with forest regeneration activities the use of

herbicides may be envisaged to repress weed competition in newly planted areas, and

potentially pesticides to treat or prevent mass pest outbreaks in fire damaged forest and to

protect saplings from insects. The Borrower will for such project activities prepare a pest

management plan (PMP) in accordance with the World Bank’s OP4.09, which will include

clear specifications of allowable pesticide and herbicide products, to the effect that: (a) they

must have negligible adverse human health effects; (b) they must be shown to be effective

against the target species; (c) they must have minimal effect on non-target species and the

natural environment; (d) the methods, timing, and frequency of pesticide application are

aimed to minimize damage to natural enemies; (e) pesticides must be demonstrated to be

safe for forest users and animals in the treated areas, as well as for personnel applying

them; (f) their use must take into account the need to prevent the development of

resistance in pests; (g) the Bank requires that any pesticides it finances be manufactured,

packaged, labeled, handled, stored, disposed of, and applied according to standards

acceptable to the Bank.

4 Environmental Screening, Assessment and Management

It should be noted that the number of investments will not be very large. It is envisaged that 3-5

pilot regions and a select number of Protected Areas in the Russian Federation will participate. All

of the investments proposed by the Borrower for support by the project will be screened to

identify specific (i) environmental/social baseline situation, (ii) severity impacts, (iii) availability and

required effort for mitigation measures. The screening will be performed by the Borrower’s

implementing agencies, specifically MNRE, which has staff with the required skills and experience.

Potential environmental impacts. Investments in forest fire prevention activities and

establishment of fire watch systems are not expected to cause adverse environmental and

social impacts. They are expected to have a net positive effect due to the reduction of forest

ecosystem degradation and the incremental reduction of emissions caused by forest fires.

The investments are expected to decrease the number, frequency and average size of forest

fires.

Potential adverse environmental impacts relate mainly to the potential construction and

reconstruction activities and could include the following:

• dust, generation combustion emissions and noise due to construction;

• generation of solid and liquid construction wastes and their proper disposal;

• local destruction of topsoil and vegetation around construction sites, erosion of soils

and silting of rivers;

• habitat fragmentation and disturbance due to fire roads and breaks;

1 In addition Russian federal legislation may warrant the implementation of domestic safeguards

instruments, such as an OBOC (OVOS), the Russian EIA equivalent.


• potential accidental spillage, and need for regulated and diligent disposal of machine

oil, lubricants, hazardous substances etc.;

• some of the potential investments dealing with forest regeneration activities may

use herbicides to repress weed competition in newly planted areas, and potentially

pesticides to treat or prevent mass pest outbreaks in fire damaged forest and to

protect saplings from insects.

However, these impacts are minor and / or the risk of them occurring low. They will be

manageable during project implementation with tested standard technology and mostly

within good housekeeping practice for construction activities.

Expected safeguards categories: Under the project only such individual investments are expected

that would correspond to the World Bank’s safeguards categories C and B, typical investment

examples are described below:

Category C: Investments involving the implementation and operation of GIS, communication and

monitoring systems, meteorological stations, procurement of equipment, training etc, will in most

cases be qualified as Category C. It is expected that a significant part of the project activities will

fall into this environmental category.

Category B investments would be attributed mostly to construction of new buildings (however, it

should be noted that new building construction is not anticipated under the project) and

watchtowers, fire roads, fire breaks, and reconstruction, renovation and upgrading of more

significant scale in which construction waste, potentially including hazardous construction waste

(e.g. asbestos) may be generated, as well as any construction activities in fringe zones of or near

protected areas, or close to natural habitats as defined by the World Bank’s OP4.04.

Environmental screening and assessment process: The purpose of the Environmental

Assessment (EA) process is to identify the specific environmental impacts of individual

investments (both positive and negative) and design measures to prevent, minimize,

mitigate or offset adverse impacts.

a) For Category C investments no specific environmental documentation is required, as

significant negative impacts are not expected.

b) The safeguards documentation for Category B investments will be covered by two

alternative sets of instruments: either simplified environmental management plans,

which may be of a checklist nature (see Appendix 3) or, in case of more complex

investments, following the standard structure and contents for an EMP suggested by

the World Banks operational policy OP4.01 (see www.worldbank.org/safeguards).

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) may be required for all engineering and

technical operations to comply with the Law on Environmental Review (Federal Law

# 174-FZ of November 23, 1995, on Environmental Review). EIA coincides with many

requirements of the World Bank on environment assessments, is a potential area of

junction/coincidence between the environmental legislation of the Russian

Federation and Operational Policies of the World Bank.

The screening and application of safeguards instruments would be undertaken by MNRE staff

with assistance and supervision from the Bank’s environmental safeguards specialist(s) assigned

to the project. The potential project activities, and which safeguards categories and instruments

they will trigger, is summarized in the table below.


Table 1: Safeguards arrangements for the Russia Forest Fire Response Project

Expected

impact

WB SG

category

Safeguards

instruments Examples of project activities

very low

or none

C no specific safeguards

instruments, general

compliance with

international standards

and practice ensured

• establishment of local forest fire brigades, provision of

fire-fighting and communications equipment;

• development of public awareness and education

programs and products (e.g., brochures, school

curricula, posters, radio and TV media, websites, blogs,

etc.);

• upgrading of communications systems, supply of

suitable fire-fighting machinery, equipment, protective

clothing, gear and hand-tools;

• design and implementation of a centralized database

with standard geospatial information for multi-channel

forest monitoring (e.g. fires, radiation, pathology);

• development of national forest fire management

strategy for Protected Areas, incl. regional

environmental and socioeconomic conditions,

economic aspects and international experience;

• development of standard operating procedures and

guidelines for Protected Area zoning by fire protection

level; prepare GIS-based fire management plans; and

develop respective guidelines and standard operating

procedures;

• strengthening of early fire detection and response

capabilities by upgrading fire danger rating and hazard

index system in Protected Areas

low B

(low

range)

“checklist EMP” • expansion of network of DNA laboratories for forest

seed quality and origin to provide genetically certified

seed;

• reconstruction and rehabilitation of existing fire

stations;

• establishment of seed centers to upgrade forest

regeneration activities through construction of

facilities and supply of equipment; trials of modern

techniques of plantation maintenance and protection

(from fire and wildlife);

moderate B screening EA and EMP

are required; these

projects might require

a Russian EIA, which

might be used

synergistically;

the Borrower will

prepare PMPs )pest

management plans) for

financed activities

involving the use of

herbicides or pesticides

• construction and equipping of inter-regional forest fire

centers (e.g., in the Far East, Siberian, and

Northwestern Federal Districts) for the detection and

suppression of large-scale fire outbreaks, pest and

plant treatment;

• expanding network of ground-based fire services in

Protected Areas, including access roads, fire breaks,

observation and fire towers in key target areas;

• enhancing fire fighting preparedness in targeted

Protected Areas through upgrading of forest fire

stations, constructing and cleaning fire breaks;

• Replanting and re-forestation of burnt out areas,

where herbicides and pesticides may be used to

foster forest re-growth;


Environment Management Plans: For Category B projects (with expected moderate

environmental impacts), a site- or investment-specific EMPs will be prepared, taking into

consideration: (i) the identified type, magnitude, geographic scope, duration and

reversibility of potential environmental impacts; (ii) an appropriate set of responses to

potentially adverse impacts, i.e. measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate, offset or

compensate the negative impacts; (iii) requirements for ensuring that those responses are

made effectively and in a timely manner; and (iv) the means for meeting those

requirements, especially the required staff, financial resources, responsibilities and

competencies.

The standard format for an EMP recommended by the World Bank is attached as Annex 4

(see also Annex C of OP4.01 for suggested format and contents).

For investments with low-risk/low-impact construction activities an alternative may be used

to the “full text” EMP format, which is commonly used for larger-scale projects. The goal is

to provide a more streamlined approach adjusted to the scale of the expected impacts to

enhance environmental management of minor construction and rehabilitation. This

checklist-type format (“EMP Checklist”, see Annex 3) has been developed by the World Bank

to provide “pragmatic guidance for good practice” and designed to be user friendly and

compatible with safeguard requirements. The checklist-type format attempts to cover

typical preventive and mitigation approaches to common civil works contracts with localized

impacts. It is anticipated that in the project context this format provides the key elements to

meet Environmental Assessment requirements of the World Bank (under OP4.01).

5 Institutional Framework

The FFA (Federal Forestry Agency, also RozLezKhoz) is the main federally responsible

institution for the management of the country’s forests as an economic resource. The

Agency plays a fairly insignificant role in environmental safeguard management of forest

areas. FFA itself does not have an environmental department or staff responsible for

environmental due diligence. While there is a person in charge for public relations, there is

little regard in communication for topics such as sustainable forest management, the

ecological significance of forest systems, and good environmental practice in forestry

operations and when using forests for recreational purposes. FFA to date has not launched

large scale communication campaigns on a federal level, carrying messages about forest fire

prevention and general environmental good practice in forests to the broad public. FFA has

delegated much of the responsibility for education and awareness building to the Regions,

without, however, having much enforcement capacity or influence on the scope and content

of such campaigns.

The MNRE (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation) - in

the context of this project. The MNRE is in charge of federal protected areas (nature

reserves and national parks). The MNRE is responsible for 98 nature reserves and 42 national

parks. These functions are performed by about 9,500 people in the Ministry’s staff, including

3,600 PA inspectors (vested with enforcement powers). The personnel of nature reserves

and national parks implement activities to ensure fire safety and are directly involved in

forest fire fighting. In some cases, other resources are mobilised for firefighting on a

contractual basis; these are primarily forest fire enterprises in Russian regions, and teams of

the Ministry of Civil Defence, Emergencies and Disaster Relief of the Russian Federation,

which have needed human, technical and resource capacity for firefighting.

The FFA and MNRE are members in the Government’s Committee for Emergency Prevention

and Management and Fire Safety headed by S.K. Shoigu, Minister of Civil Defence,


Emergencies and Disaster Relief of the Russian Federation, and effecting interagency

coordination.

In the candidate pilot regions (see Attachment 2 to Annex 1), which are, e.g., for MNRE:

Vladimir and Ryazan Oblasts (in the Central Federal Okrug), Republic of Karelia and

Arkhangelsk Oblast (in the North Western Federal Okrug), Republic of Mariy El, and Nizhniy

Novgorod, Orenburg and Samara Oblasts (in the Volga Federal Okrug), Sverdlovsk and

Chelyabinsk Oblasts (in the Ural Federal Okrug), Trans-Baikal and Krasnoyarsk Krays (in the

Siberian Federal Okrug), Khabarovsk Kray, Amur Oblast and Jewish Autonomous Oblast in

the Far East Federal Okrug), a list of projects (including information about project goals and

activities) will be prepared and publicised to ensure free and informed consultations prior to

finalisation of the project content and implementation commencement of project activities.

To raise public awareness of the project among local communities, mass media will be

involved to inform them about the project before the implementation commencement of

project activities. The FFA and MNRE will establish a hotline (by phone and through a web-

page) to provide needed information and receive possible complaints.

Project Implementation Unit (PIU) will be competitively selected by a committee consisting

of officials from the FFA, MNRE, MOED and MOF as the lead agency for the project

implementation. The PIU will cooperate with the FFA, MNRE and each of the participating

Interregional Forest Fire Centres to ensure effective and continuous exchange of information

among all project partners. The PIU will coordinate all project activities, procure works,

goods and consultant services for the project implementation, undertake supervision and

monitoring of project activities and submit, as scheduled, reporting to the FFA, MNRE,

MOED and MOF. Environmental reviews and environmental management will draw upon

capacity of the MNRE which has comparatively abundant experience with environmental

assessments, environmental management and legal and regulatory requirements. If needed,

the PIU will avail of services of an independent expert on environmental assessment to

prepare an EMP and/or an EMP check list.

6 Compliance Monitoring and Reporting

A general ex-post verification review of 5% of all category C investments, 15% of lower end

category B projects, and 30% of “proper” category B investments is planned. This would involve a

compliance review of the compliance with the design, a verification of the project results on site

and an environmental review. The environmental review will focus on the quality of

environmental due diligence documentation, the obtaining of all required permits an on project

implementation following the procedures and parameters specified in the EMPs.

The actual monitoring procedures to be carried out physically on selected project sites will mostly

rely on visual inspections and review of routine construction site records (e.g. built as drawings,

waste disposal records). Aside from the physical aspects verified during site visits it will be

ascertained that appropriate environmental documentation has been produced in acceptable

quality (i.e. EMPs commensurate with good international practice) and duly implemented.

Concrete monitoring parameters will be defined as part of the design and preparation of the

specific EMPs. Parameters will commonly include visual observation of construction waste

management, dust control and economic land use, of overall good housekeeping (e.g. storage and

management of fuels and other hazardous substances), erosion control and vegetation

preservation, as well as post construction re-cultivation. In special cases chemical and physical

parameters may be included to monitor impacts on surface water (turbidity, pollution by fuels

and lubricants), groundwater (pollution by fuel and lubricants) and air (dust, soot, combustion

gases).


The responsibility for project monitoring will lie with the Borrower’s implementing agencies, likely

MENR will play the key role in safeguards compliance monitoring. A review both of the

documentation of individual investments or activities, and of the physical interventions and

impacts in the field will be undertaken synchronous with the Bank’s standard supervision

frequency, i.e. every 6 months. The Bank team will during project supervision undertake a number

of 5-10 joint field visits to sup-projects of all three categories (C, low B, B) to verify implementation

on the ground and provide practical implementation support.

7 Review and Approval

Category B: The PIU will review and approve:

• A copy of the official letter indicating a “Positive Decision” by relevant environmental authorities;

• Russian language Executive Summary of EIA/OVOS;

• Completed Russian language version of the EMP/OVOS;

• other supporting documentation and evidence that all environmental licenses, permits, approvals for this activity are valid, and document the expiration dates for these requirements; and

• Minutes of Public Consultation.

The following Russian Language documentation will be sent to the Bank for ex-ante review

and “No Objection”:

• Executive Summary of EIA/OVOS (for projects subject to EIA/OVOS),

• EMP or checklist EMP,

• A copy of the official letter indicating a “Positive Decision” by the relevant authorities (EA/OVOS is approved),

• Documentation of any special requirements, conditions, or qualifications which accompanied the “Positive Decision”, and

• Minutes of Public Consultations.

The same documentation will be provided to the Bank for ex-post reviews of the sub-

projects. Details of prior and post review process are presented in Section 8 “Prior and Post

Review” below. The Bank may request English Language translations of selected

documentation for review. Such requests will be followed up and responded to by

Gazprombank.

Category C: Random checks of Russian Language documentation – e.g. a copy of the official

letter indicating a “Positive Decision” by relevant environmental authorities, and Executive

Summary of OVOS – will be provided to the Bank for ex-post review of the subprojects (see

also the following Section 8 below).

8 Prior and Post Review

Site-specific EMPs for the Category of “High B” subprojects or EMP checklists for the

Category of “Low B” subprojects will have to be prepared prior to the commencement of

works in form and substance satisfactory to the Bank. Prior review of site-specific EMPs will

be undertaken for at least the first three B subprojects. Depending on the quality of the


reviewed EMPs the Bank reserved the right to review further documents as considered

advisable to ensure an acceptable level of environmental due diligence and oversight.

The same principle will apply to the checklist EMPs produced for Low B subprojects.

Category C subprojects will be randomly selected for post-review only. Post-review of

Category C project will involve checking adequacy of subproject categorization based on

documentation mentioned in Section 7 above.

9 Public Consultation and Disclosure of Information

Consultations are generally governed by various parts of Russian environmental regulation and

carried out on a routine basis for every construction project of significant scale. Where activities

that could have a negative impact on the environment are implemented depending on the scale a

Public hearing is compulsory, besides wide ranging consultations with sectoral authorities (water,

fire safety, construction, monument protection, and environment) as prescribed by the law "On

Ecological Expertise".

To comply with the World Bank’s environmental policies (specifically OP4.01) the draft EMF is

disclosed and the public consulted before its finalization, as commensurate with a category B

project. For this purpose at least one consultation meeting open for the public will be organized in

Moscow, and additional consultations in the Regions which are identified for project

implementation. In the Regions consultations will either take place in the regional capital, or,

depending on the geographic scope and focus of the investment, in (a) location(s) deemed the

most accessible for all affected stakeholders.

Not all individual activities will require disclosure of consultation measures. Individual

investments that would, stand-alone, be classified as “C” (see Table 1) will require no

safeguards instruments and thus neither disclosure nor consultations. Low “B” projects will

require the public disclosure of the checklist EMF, but not a formal consultation meeting

(unless there is explicit demand for such a meeting conveyed to the Borrower’s PMU).

Proper category B projects (according to Table 1) would require the disclosure of the EMP

for a period of 30 days and the organization of a public hearing in the Region where the

project is located, usually in the community or those communities expected to be most

affected by project implementation.


ANNEX 1 Environmental Baseline Conditions

Project activities will be implemented presumably in 3-5 regions in the forest estate (part A

of the project А, FFA) and in 15 regions in protected areas (part B of the project, MNRE).

Forest estate

According to the National Forest Register, as of January 1, 2010, the total area of land under

Russian forests was 1,183.7 million ha, including the area of the forest estate (1,143.6

million ha).

The forest estate land does not include the land under forests of defence and urban forests

(6.1 million ha), land under forests of protected areas (26.9 million ha), land of other

categories (7.1 million ha), including areas of forest estate land which earlier were under

ownership of agricultural organisations (4.6 million ha).

Land of the forest estate includes forest land (land covered with forest vegetation and land

which is not covered with forest vegetation but designated for its restoration, i.e. cutover

areas, burnt forest areas, open stands, glades, etc.) and non-forest land designated for

forest management (rides, roads, bogs, etc.). The forest land accounts for 75.4% in the total

area of forests; 67.4% of the forest land is covered with forest vegetation, and 8.0% is not

covered with forest vegetation. The share of non-forest land is 24.6 %.

All forests growing on land of the forest estate are classified into protection forests (26.0%),

production forests (52.2%) and reserved forests (21.8%).

Overall baseline conditions and characteristics: Forests are the most prevalent type of the

vegetation cover for almost 46% of Russia’s area, and occur in locations where average

monthly temperatures for July exceed +10° С, and humidity is sufficient or excessive. As one

is moving from the west to the east, the climate is getting more continental, the relief is

changing, reflecting the differences in the history of its development, and the soils,

vegetation and wildlife are also changing. This diversity preconditions variations in the

images of natural zones, their arrays and geographic positions. There are five longitude

sectors in Russia: the Western European Sector (with widespread forest zones), Eastern

European Sector (where zones of forest landscapes are receding with the latitude to give

place to forest steppes and steppes), Western Siberian Sector (with its landscape zones

varying from tundra to desert), Eastern Siberian Sector (the most continental sector with

tundra, open forests, taiga and ‘islands’ of steppes and forest steppes in taiga), Far East

Sector (including various zones from tundra to mixed coniferous/broadleaved forests with

significant shares of meadow soils in flatland landscapes). Most of forests are concentrated

in eastern parts of the country, i.e. in the Siberian and Far East Federal Okrugs as well as in

the North Western Federal Okrug.

Pursuant to Article 15 of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation, eight forest site-specific

zones were identified in 2006; each of them includes forests with relatively homogeneous

site characteristics (forest site zoning). These 8 zones are: i) pre-tundra forests and sparse

taiga; ii) taiga; iii) coniferous/broadleaved forests; iv) forest steppe; v) steppe; vi) semi-

deserts and deserts; vii) North Caucasian mountains; and viii) South Siberian mountains.

Within the forest site zones, there are 34 forest regions with relatively similar conditions for

forest utilisation, protection against fire and pests and forest renewal (Figure 1.1).


About 40% of Russian forests grow in severe climatic conditions, accounting for their low

yield and low economic attractiveness. Nevertheless, they are of enormous value owing to

their protection, water conservation and climate regulation functions, which must be

safeguarded, in particular, in view of intensive exploitation of northern oil and gas deposits.

Figure: Forest site zones and forest regions:

1 – pre-tundra forests and sparse taiga; 2 – taiga: 2.1 – northern taiga sub-zone; 2.2 – middle

taiga sub-zone; 2.3 – southern taiga sub-zone; 3 – coniferous/broadleaved forests; 4 – forest

steppe; 5 and 6 – steppes and semi-deserts (zones 7 and 8 are not depicted in the Figure;

they are, respectively, North Caucasian mountains and South Siberian mountains)

The average forest cover of the Russian

Federation is 46.6% which is the ratio between

the area of stocked forest land and the total

terrestrial area of the country (see the Figure).

Forests are unevenly distributed over the

country’s area, depending on climatic and

anthropogenic factors (the Figure). The greatest

forest cover (over 80%) is found in the Perm Kray,

Republic of Komi and Central Siberia while the

least forested areas (with forest cover below 1%) are located in the Republic of Kalmykia,

part of the Stavropol Kray, Astrakhan, Rostov and Volgograd Oblasts. Recent years have seen

a trend towards significant increase in the forest cover primarily owing to natural

afforestation of abandoned agricultural land.

In Russia, 86% of forests grow in the boreal zone. Predominant forest tree species are larch,

pine, spruce, Siberian pine, oak, beech, birch, aspen (see the Figure). They account for about

90% in the area of the land covered with forest vegetation, including conifers (68.4%), hard-

wooded broadleaved species (2.4%) and soft-wooded broadleaved species (19.3%). Other

tree species (pear, chestnut, walnut, Manchurian nut, etc.) occupy less than 1% of the area;

and the remaining part of stocked forest land is covered with shrubs (dwarf Siberian pine,

bushy birch, etc.). Tree stands of larch, pine, and birch occupy, respectively, 35.8%, 15.6%,

and 15.0% of stocked forest land.


Figure: Geographical distribution of tree species in the Russian Federation (No forest,

Pine

Spruce, fir

Larch

Siberian pine

Dwarf Siberian pine

Oak

Beech

Birch

Aspen

Linden

Other species) Source: Государственный доклад «О состоянии и использовании лесных ресурсов Российской

Федерации в 2002 г.» [National Report on the Status and Utilisation of Forest Resources in the

Russian Federation]

The coniferous group includes a significant part of mixed forests managed for the

development of stands with prevailing conifers. The FAO estimates the share of mixed

stands in Russia at 45% of the stocked area in the forest estate (ECE/TIM/SP/18).

Coniferous (taiga) forests are divided into dark coniferous forests (where spruce, fir and

Siberian pine are the dominant species) and light coniferous (i.e. pine and larch) forests.

Dark coniferous forests occur in areas with moderately cold and rather humid climate; they

prevail in taiga of the East European and Western Siberian Plains and are fairly widely spread

in mountains in the Caucasus, Urals and Sikhote-Alin as well as in some parts of Altai and the

Sayan Mountains. Spruce forests occupy over 50% of the area under the dark coniferous

taiga. In light coniferous forests, the predominant species are the Siberian larch, Dahurian

larch, and Scots pine. Larch forests dominate in Middle and North-Eastern Siberia, Baikal and

Trans-Baikal areas. Pine forests stretch from the White See to the lower reaches of the Don

River, and from western borders of the country to Central Yakutia and the Aldan Mountains.

The areas of forest stands have been fairly stable for several recent decades. The area of

spruce forests has got reduced since 1988 due to clear cutting and fires in spruce stands,

slower rates of artificial reforestation and natural regeneration of this species. In 2010, the

area of spruce stands sharply increased, but the reasons for such an increase remain

unknown.


Increases in the area of soft-wooded broadleaved species are attributed to the natural

succession of conifers by deciduous trees in cutover and burnt areas as well as to low

demand for timber of these species.

As regards hard-wooded broadleaved species, about half of their area is occupied with the

Stone birch, with its five varieties growing in Eastern Siberia and in the Far East. The most

valuable species are the tall oak and beech - they occupy about ¼ of the area under hard-

wooded broadleaved species. The area of hard-wooded broadleaved species remains

unchanged owing to their coverage with the protection categories.

The age distribution of the main forest species is as follows: young stands - 17.1%, middle-

aged stands – 28.5%, premature stands – 10.7%, mature and overmature stands – 43.8%.

About 50% of the conifer area is occupied with mature and overmature stands. But their

accumulation chiefly occurs in remote and poorly accessible areas and on soils with

excessive humidity.

As officially reported, Russian forests contain over 180 native forest tree and bush species.

The species diversity is growing from the north to the south, and reaches its highest level in

the North Caucasus. The greatest number of forest tree and shrub species (36) were

identified in the Sochi National Park (in the Krasnodar Kray), with the fewest species (2–5

species) found in Kalmykia, Karelia, South Taimyr and some areas in Yakutia.

Timber resources. According to the 2010 forest account, the total growing stock of the

Russian forest estate is 80 billion m3. The average growing stock per 1 ha is 132 m

3 in mature

and overmature forests (without shrubs), and 165 m3 in forests suitable for commercial

wood harvesting. The mean annual increment in volume is rather low: it does not exceed

1.23 m3 per ha on land covered with forest vegetation.

More than half of Russian forests grow on permafrost soils (Siberia and the Far East) in

severe climatic conditions which account for their low yield and fragmented patterns of tree

stands. Only 45% of the forest area is accessible for timber harvesting, but most of these

forests (located in the European North, Urals and along the Trans-Siberian Transport

Corridor) are significantly depleted as a result of intensive exploitation. The economic

accessibility of mature forests is even lower. Therefore, the share of productive mature and

overmature coniferous stands does not exceed 16%.

Non-timber, nutritional forest resources and medicinal plants: According to the Forest Code

of the Russian Federation, forest uses include: harvesting and collection of the non-timber

forest resources (stumps, birch bark, tree and shrub bark, dry branches, twig forage, spruce,

larch, and pine branches, spruce trees or trees of other coniferous species for the New Year

season, moss, forest litter, cane, reed, and similar forest resources); harvesting of food

forest resources and gathering of medicinal plants; game management, farming (hey-making,

cattle grazing, bee-keeping, reindeer herding, cultivation of agricultural crops and other

agricultural activities) and other forest uses.

In many Russian regions, harvesting of nutritional forest resources (fruit, berries, nuts and

mushrooms), collection of medicinal plants and their sale are nowadays a main source of

subsistence means for rural people. Biological and harvesting capacity of many non-timber

forest resources is significant and sometimes they are very abundant.


Forests are intensively used for farming purposes, especially for hey-making and cattle

grazing as well as for bee-keeping.

In Russian forests, melliferous plants of the tree and shrub storeys (linden, maple, willow,

Robinia pseudoacacia) are widely used in bee-keeping as a source of nectar and pollen.

These species occupy fairly large areas.

For purpose of reindeer herding, pre-tundra forest and sparsely forested taiga and taiga

areas are used as deer pastures. The total area of deer pastures is over 300 million ha.

In many Russian regions, forest utilisation for game management purposes is of great

economic and asocial importance.

Adverse impact on forests

Forests may be adversely affected with weather and soil conditions, disease, other non-

pathogenic abiotic factors, pernicious insects, fire and anthropogenic factors.

Forest weakening and mortality rates vary by year and are expressly cyclic. In recent decade,

the forest mortality rate became 1.5 times higher compared with the previous period: in

1990-1999, the area of stands perished during that time amounted to 3,017,600 ha, whereas

in 2000-2009, it approached 4,347,800 ha.

According to data (including remote sensing data) of the forest health monitoring conducted

by the Russian Forest Health Centre, the total area of forest stands perished in 2010 was

1,392,600 ha. It is 7 times more than in 2009. The death rate of forest stands reached their

highest level over the entire period of observations since 1989 (according to the National

Forest Register, as of January 1, 2010, it was 756,000 ha). In addition, damage of varying

degrees was inflicted upon forest stands on 2,144,000 ha.

In the Russian Federation, the most severe damage to forests is caused by forest fires (in

2010, their contribution was 80.2%). Since 2004, burnt forest areas have been steadily

growing. The year 2010 saw forest fire emergency situations in many Russian regions.

According to Rosstat, in 2010, the burnt area reached 2.5 million ha, including 1.6 million ha

of stocked forests. The number of fires was 34,800. According to the National Forest

Register, the area of perished forests amounted to 550,400 ha, and that of damaged forests

with different degrees of die-back was 804,000 ha. According to the Russian Forest Health

Centre, the area of stands lost to fire in 2010 was 1,196,400 ha. The greatest number of fires

occurred in the Central, Volga and Ural Federal Okrugs (20.4%, 23.5% and 29.6%,

respectively), whereas in previous years, about 50% of fires occurred in Asian Russia.

Fires of 2010 affected (to different degrees) stands in 69 Russian regions in all the Federal

Okrug. As regards regions with the forest cover above 40%, the most severe damage was

inflicted upon forests in the Ryazan, Nizhniy Novgorod, Sverdlovsk, Magadan, Vladimir

Oblasts, Republic of Mariy El, and Chukotka Autonomous Okrug. As for scarcely forested

regions, the greatest damage was caused to forests in the Lipetsk, Voronezh, Tambov,

Saratov, Orenburg, Samara and Volgograd Oblasts, Republics of Mordovia, Kalmykia and

Chuvashia. The least affected forests were those in the North Caucasian Okrug.


The main cause of forest fires (especially, in European Russia) was, as in previous years,

careless handling of fire in forests. As officially reported, people’s behaviours in forests and

uncontrolled agricultural burnings accounted for more than 70% of all ignitions.

The adverse weather and soil conditions, first of all, wind damages, were the second most

important cause of forest destruction in 2010 (16.1%). This factor hit, most of all, forests in

the Vologda Oblast (8,100 ha), Novgorod Oblast (5,900 ha), Yaroslavl Oblast (3,500 ha) and

Leningrad Oblast (1,900 ha).

Adverse soil and climatic conditions were the second and the third among the most

important contributors to forest death in the recent decade. In 2010 the area of forests lost

to these factors was 155,680 ha (versus 120,000 ha as of January 1, 2010, according to the

National Forest Register).

In 2010, diseases killed forests on an area of 27,800 ha, including 23,400 ha of coniferous

forests (versus 26,000 ha as of January 1, 2010, according to the National Forest Register).

Forest deaths from disease were recorded in all Federal Okrugs (in 50 regions: from the

Kaliningrad Oblast to the Khabarovsk Kray). The highest rates of death from disease were

recorded in the Siberian, Far East and Central Federal Okrugs (13,000 ha, 5,400 ha and 5,100

ha, respectively, or 46.8%, 19.4% and 18.3% of all stands lost to disease in the country).

Protected Areas (PA)

The project may be implemented in 15 nature reserves and 11 national parks located in 15

Russian regions (see Attachment 2 to Annex 1). The project geography covers a broad range

of natural zones typical of the Russian Federation. The PAs referred to above are located in

the following five forest site zones: the taiga zone (the middle taiga region in European

Russia, Middle Ural taiga region, and far east taiga region), zone of coniferous/broadleaved

forests (the region of mixed coniferous/broadleaved forests in European Russia,

Amur/Primorye coniferous/broadleaved region), South-Siberian mountainous zone

(Altai/Sayan mountainous taiga region), forest steppe zone (the forest steppe region in

European Russia, Southern Urals forest steppe region, Trans-Baikal forest steppe region),

steppe zone (the steppe region in European Russia). The zone diversity is matched with the

diversity of environmental (climatic, geological, soil and other) conditions.

In PAs, wilderness ecosystems, flora and fauna are typical of respective natural zones and

regions; and preserve their natural status owing to minimized anthropogenic impact.

The land of nature reserves is set aside and withdrawn from economic uses; and there is

practically no human population within their borders (with rare exceptions). In national

parks, economic activates are substantially restricted, and the forests are used primarily for

recreation and ecotourism. The legislation provides for functional zoning: national parks may

include various functional zones such as:

a) strict protection zones where any economic activities and recreation uses are

forbidden;

b) specially protected zones designated to create supportive conditions for

conservation of wilderness ecosystems and sites; and to permit only strictly

regulated visits;

c) educational tourism zones meant for environmental education of the public

and sightseeing in national parks;


d) recreational zones, including zones for leisure activities, physical exercise and

sports;

e) historical/cultural site protection zones where adequate conditions are

created to preserve such sites;

f) zones of visitor services designated to provide overnight lodging, places for

camps and other tourist services and also cultural, consumer and information

services for visitors;

g) logistic zones for management activities needed to support the operation of

the national parks.

National parks may include land of other users which are incorporated into the area within

the parks’ borders without its withdrawal from economic uses; in most cases, this refers to

agricultural land and land of populated areas. Such areas may include places of permanent

residence for fairly many people who have the right to harvest wood for their subsistence,

collect mushrooms, berries, etc. Their residents are engaged in agriculture or other

activities compatible with the special protection regime established for a given functional

zone in the national park. At the same time, natural resources of national parks are

practically never used by local communities for commercial purposes.

Overall, there are no noticeable anthropogenic changes in wilderness ecosystems of nature

reserves and national parks due to their agricultural or recreational uses. But it is careless

handling of fire, and violations of fire safety rules which are the main cause of forest fires.

Existing environmental impacts due to forest fires: There is no exact quantification of

“environmental” damage, the figures will relate directly to the nature of ecosystems on the

lands that were burnt and downstream impacts below fire affected catchments. The short

and long term effects and potential for recovery will determine the environmental “costs”

which, however, are likely to be quite large.

Some ecosystems may never recover or may require several millennia. An example is the

peat land in Western Russia, that was artificially drained and which burnt severely, including

destruction of the vegetation on the peat soil. Most forest areas would eventually recover

from a fire to the original vegetation and species associations. However, the forest that

regenerates after fire can often be different from the one that was there before. Light

demanding species such as birch and aspen will tend to dominate the forest, whereas the

original forest may have been mainly spruce. The more shade tolerant species may take

longer than one cycle to become re-established. Also, ecosystems based on peat where the

supporting and growing medium is destroyed may require even longer time frames for

regeneration.

Fires deplete the variety of species in forest ecosystems, endanger habitats by

fragmentation and can severely reduce the populations of mammals, birds and reptiles. In

post-fire areas the run-off properties are affected, decreasing the watershed’s storage

capacity and increasing hydrological variability (a 10% change in forest cover causes about 1-

5% change in runoff). Fire scars in forests are often exposed to increased erosion and soil

deterioration, especially in areas with steep topography and disadvantageous geological

conditions.

Fires also often lead to subsequent clear-cutting, as burnt out areas are often released for

salvage logging. Many forest fires are likely triggered by arson, either for economic reasons

(the permitting procedure for post-fire salvage logging is much simpler than to apply for a

normal logging license) or resentment of the local population due to a lack of access to

forest resource use.


Such PAs as nature reserves and national parks (which are in the jurisdiction of the MNRE)

also suffer from forest fire. In Russia, the total area of nature reserves is about 33.8 million

ha, including their terrestrial area with internal water bodies (27.3 million ha), and the total

area of national parks is about 9.1 million ha, including their terrestrial area with internal

water bodies (8.3 million ha); and some of them suffer from forest fire every year. In 2010,

forest fires affected much more areas in PAs compared with the average for previous years

with the heaviest damage caused to western parts of Russia where over 50% of the forests

in PAs were lost to fire. The MNRE’s strategy does not provide for artificial reforestation, but

instead relies exclusively on natural regeneration of forests destroyed with fire. However, in

principle, it is permitted to remove damaged wood from some of PAs though with certain

restrictions, especially pertaining to sale of wood from cutting-related operations.

A special type of fires occurs in peat bogs. These peat fires have been an important

contributing factor to the catastrophic situation of the summer 2010, especially in Western

Russia. Peat bogs are a naturally occurring phenomenon in significant areas of Russian

forests and part of the natural ecosystem. Up to 1990 peat bogs were economically

exploited, the peat being mined as fertilizer and soil conditioner for agriculture and

horticulture. This industry collapsed after 1990, which lead to a regeneration of the bogs and

an increase of their stored biomass. Also, due to climate and weather conditions, sometimes

aggravated by irrigation, the groundwater table has dropped in many areas of Russia, leaving

parts of the peat layers dry2. Dry peat can be ignited easily by campfires, cigarette stubs,

lightening or sparks from engines and then often smolders underground, thus being very

hard to extinguish. Burning peat creates large amounts of dense smoke and thus contributed

significantly to the smoke clouds engulfing Moscow in August 2010. Burning peat also often

triggers above ground forest fires.

2 After August 2010 a Government program has been created to restore the water balance in peat

areas, initially ca. 300 Million Rubles (ca. 10 Mill USD) were assigned. .


ANNEX 2 Description of Russian Federal EIA Regulations

The core laws and regulations of the Russian Federation to guide EIA are listed below:

Federal Law # 7-FZ of January 10, 2002, On Environmental Protection

Federal Law # 174-FZ of November 23, 1995, on Environmental Review

Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation # 87 of February 16, 2008 On

Sections to be Included in Project Documentation and Requirements to their Contents

Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation # 698 of June 11, 1996 On

Approving the State Environmental Review Procedures

Decree of the State Committee of the Russian Federation on Environmental Protection # 372

of May 16, 2000, On Approving the Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment of

Intended Economic and Other Activities in the Russian Federation

Codes of the Russian Federation:

Land Code of the Russian Federation # 136-FZ (as amended on June 30, 2003, June 29,

October 3, December 21 and 29, 2004, March 7, July 21 and 22, December 31, 2005, April

17, June 3, 30, July 27, October 16, and December 4, 18, and 29, 2006)

Urban Planning Code of the Russian Federation #190-FZ of December 29, 2004 (as amended

on July 22, December 31, 2005, June 3, July 27, and December 4, 18, and 29, 2006)

Water Code of the Russian Federation #74-FZ of June 3, 2006 (as amended on December 4,

2006)

Forest Code of the Russian Federation # 200-FZ of December 4, 2006

Criminal Code of the Russian Federation # 63-FZ of June 13, 1996 (Articles 236, 237, 243,

246, 250, 251, 252, 254, 255, 259, 260, 261, and 262)

Attachment 1 to Annex 1

Extracts from the Federal Law On Environmental Review:

Article 11: Documents subject to state environmental review of the federal level (as worded

in Federal Law # 232-FZ of 18.12.2006)

The following documents shall be subject to state environmental review of the federal level:

1) draft technical regulations and guidelines in the area of environmental protection to be

approved by federal public authorities;

2) draft federal targeted programs envisaging construction and operation of facilities which

make environmental impact to review location of such facilities taking into account the

protection modes for wilderness sites;

3) draft product sharing agreements;

4) licensing justification documents for selected activities which make adverse impact on the

environment and are licensed by federal executive authorities in accordance with Federal

Law # 128-FZ of August 8, 2001, On Licensing Selected Activities (further on referred to as

the Federal Law on Licensing Selected Activities (except for licensing justification documents

for waste management, including waste collection, utilisation, neutralisation, transportation

and disposal) and legislation regulating on the use of nuclear energy;

(paragraph 4 as worded in Federal Law # 309-FZ of 30.12.2008)


5) draft technical documentation for new equipment/machinery and technologies if their

use may have environmental impact as well as draft technical documentation for new

substances which may affect the natural environment;

6) reports on comprehensive environmental surveys for parts of areas to justify awarding

these areas the status of federal PAs, the status of environmental disaster zones or

environmental emergency zones;

7) the documents subject to state environmental review referred to in Federal Law # 187-FZ

of November 30, 1995 On Continental Shelf in the Russian Federation, Federal Law # 191-FZ

of December 17, 1998 On the Exclusive Economic Zone in the Russian Federation, Federal

Law # 155-FZ of July 31, 1998 On the Internal Sea Waters, Territorial Sea and Adjacent Zone

in the Russian Federation;

7.1) project documents for facilities to be constructed, reconstructed or

renovated/rehabilitated within federal PAs as well as project documents for particularly

hazardous, technically sophisticated and unique facilities, defence and security facilities to

be constructed, reconstructed or rehabilitated within regional and local PAs, if their

constriction, reconstruction and rehabilitation within PAs are allowed in accordance with the

federal and regional legislation in the Russian Federation;

7.2) project documents for facilities related to disposal and neutralisation of wastes of

hazard classes I - V;

(paragraph 7.2 was introduced by Federal Law # 309-FZ of December 30, 2008)

8) documents for facilities subject to state environmental review referred to in this Article

and earlier approved through issuance of a positive state environmental review opinion if:

They have been revised to incorporate the comments of the earlier state environmental

review;

Implementation deviates from the documents approved through issuance of a positive

opinion of the state environmental review and/or if such documents have been revised;

The validity period of the positive opinion of the state environmental review has expired;

Documents approved through issuance of a positive opinion of the state environmental

review have been revised.

Article 12: Documents subject to state environmental review pf the regional level (as

worded in Federal Law # 232-FZ of December 18, 2006)

State environmental review of regional projects shall be undertaken by regional authorities

following the procedures as established by this Federal Law and other laws and regulations

of the Russian Federation. The following documents shall be subject to state environmental

review of the regional level:

1) draft technical regulations and guidelines in the area of environmental protection to be

approved by regional public authorities;

2) draft regional targeted programs envisaging construction and operation of facilities which

make environmental impact to review location of such facilities taking into account the

protection modes for wilderness sites;

3) licensing justification documents for selected activities which are licensed by regional

executive authorities in accordance with the Federal Law on Licensing Selected Activities

(except for licensing justification documents for waste management, including waste

collection, utilisation, neutralisation, transportation and disposal) and legislation regulating

on the use of nuclear energy);

(paragraph 3 as worded in Federal Law # 309-FZ of 30.12.2008);

4) reports on comprehensive environmental surveys for parts of areas to justify awarding

these areas the status of regional PAs;


4.1) project documents for facilities to be constructed, reconstructed or

renovated/rehabilitated within regional and local PAs, except for those referred to in

paragraph 7.1 of Article 11 of this Federal Law, in accordance with the federal and regional

legislation;

(paragraph 4.1 was introduced by Federal Law # 75-FZ of May 16, 2008).

5) documents for facilities subject to regional state environmental review referred to in this

Article and earlier approved through issuance of a positive state environmental review

opinion if:

They have been revised to incorporate the comments of the earlier state environmental

review;

Implementation deviates from the documents approved through issuance of a positive

opinion of the state environmental review and/or if such documents have been revised;

The validity period of the positive opinion of the state environmental review has expired;

Documents approved through issuance of a positive opinion of the state environmental

review have been revised.

Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation # 401 of July 30, 2004 On the

Federal Service for Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Oversight.


Attachment 2 to Annex 1

PROPOSED Federal PAs to be included in the Forest Management Reform and Forest Fire

Response Project (Forest Project-2)

Central Federal Okrug

1 Vladimir Oblast 1 Meshchera NP

2 Ryazan Oblast. 2 Okskiy NR

3 Meshcherskiy NP

North-Western Federal Okrug

3 Republic of Karelia 4 Vodlozerskiy NP

4 Arkhangelsk Oblast 4 Vodlozerskiy NP

Volga Federal Okrug

5 Republic of Mariy El 5 Bolshaya Kokshaga NR

6 Mariy Chodra NP

6 Nizhniy Novgorod Oblast 7 Kerzhensky NR

7 Orenburg Oblast 8 Buzulukskiy Bor NP

8 Samara Oblast 8 Buzulukskiy Bor NP

9 Zhigulevskiy NR

10 Samarskaya Luka NP

Ural Federal Okrug

9 Sverdlovsk Oblast 11 Visimskiy NR

12 Denezhkin Kamen NR

13 Pripyshminkiye Bory NP

10 Chelyabinsk Oblast 14 Ziuratkul NP

15 Taganay NP

Siberian Federal Okrug

11 Trans-Baikal Kray 16 Alkhanay NP

17 Sokhodinskiy NR

12 Krasnoyarsk Kray 18 Sayano-Shushenskiy NR

19 Stolby NR

20 Shushenskiy Bor NP

Far East Federal Okrug

13 Khabarovsk Kray 21 Bureinskiy NR

22 Komsomolskiy NR

14 Amursk Oblast 23 Zeyskiy NR

24 Norskiy NR

25 Khinganskiy NR

15 Jewish Autonomous Oblast 26 Bastak NR


ANNEX 3 Template for “Checklist” EMP

BORROWER

Ministry of … / AGENCY

Specific Investment: ……

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) Checklist for Small Scale Civil Works

General Guidelines for use of EMP checklist:

For low-risk construction projects, such as minor roads rehabilitation works or the

construction of bicycle paths, the ECA (Europe and Central Asia) safeguards team

developed an alternative EMP (environmental management plan) format to provide

an opportunity for a more streamlined approach to mainstreaming the World Bank’s

environmental safeguards requirements into projects which (a) are small in scale or

by the nature of the planned activities have a low potential environmental impact,

(b) are located in countries with well functioning country systems for environmental

assessment and management. The checklist-type format has been developed to

ensure that basic good practice measures are recognized and implemented, while

designed to be both user friendly and compatible with the World Bank’s safeguards

requirements.

The EMP checklist-type format attempts to cover typical key mitigation measures to

civil works contracts with small, localized impacts or of a simple, low risk nature. This

format provides the key elements of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to

meet the minimum World Bank Environmental Assessment requirements for

Category B projects under OP 4.01. The intention of this checklist is that it offers

practical, concrete and implementable guidance to Contractors and supervising

Engineers for simple civil works contracts. It should be completed during the final

design phase and, either freestanding or in combination with any environmental

documentation produced under national law (e.g. EIA reports), constitute an integral

part of the bidding documents and eventually the works contracts.

The checklist EMP has the following sections:

Part 1 includes a descriptive part that characterizes the project, specifies

institutional and regulatory aspects, describes technical project content,

outlines any potential need for capacity building and briefly characterizes the

public consultation process. This section should indicatively be up to two

pages long. Attachments for additional information may be supplemented as

needed.

Part 2 includes a screening checklist of potential environmental and social impacts,

where activities and potential environmental issues can be checked in a

simple Yes/No format. If any given activity/issue is triggered by checking


“yes”, a reference to the appropriate section in the table in the subsequent

Part C can be followed, which contains clearly formulated environmental and

social management and mitigation measures.

Part 3 represents the environmental monitoring plan to follow up proper

implementation of the measures triggered under Part B. It has the same

format as required for MPs produced under standard safeguards

requirements for Category B projects.

Part 4 contains a simple monitoring plan to enable both the Contractor as well as

authorities and the World Bank specialists to monitoring due implementation

of environmental management and protection measures and detect

deviations and shortcomings in a timely manner.

Part 2 and 3 have been structured in a way to provide concrete and enforceable

environmental and social measures, which are understandable to non specialists

(such as Contractor’s site managers) and are easy to check and enforce. The EMP

should be included in the BoQ (bill of quantities) and the implementation priced by

the bidders. Part 4 has also been designed intentionally simple to enable monitoring

of key parameters with simple means and non-specialist staff.

29


CONTENTS

Part 1 General Project and Site Information

Part 2 Safeguards Information

Part 3 Mitigation Measures

Part 4 Monitoring Plan

30


PART 1: GENERAL PROJECT AND SITE INFORMATION

INSTITUTIONAL & ADMINISTRATIVE

Country Poland

Project title Warsaw Urban Transport Project (specific investment loan – SIL)

Scope of project and

activity

Small construction works for roads rehabilitation and bicycle path construction

Institutional

arrangements

(Name and contacts)

WB

(Project Team Leader)

Project Management Local Counterpart and/or Recipient

Implementation

arrangements

(Name and contacts)

Safeguard Supervision

Local Counterpart

Supervision

Local Inspectorate

Supervision

Contactor

SITE DESCRIPTION

Name of site

Describe site location Attachment 1: Site Map [ ]Y [ ] N

Who owns the land?

Description of

geographic, physical,

biological, geological,

hydrographic and

socio-economic context

Locations and distance

for material sourcing,

especially aggregates,

water, stones?

LEGISLATION

Identify national &

local legislation &

permits that apply to

project activity

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Identify when / where

the public consultation

process took place

INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY BUILDING

Will there be any

capacity building?

[ ] N or [ ]Y if Yes, Attachment 2 includes the capacity building program

31


PART 2: SAFEGUARDS SCREENING AND TRIGGERS

ENVIRONMENTAL /SOCIAL SCREENING FOR SAFEGUARDS TRIGGERS

Activity/Issue Status Triggered Actions

A. Roads or building rehabilitation [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section A below

B. New construction of small structures or infrastructure [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section A below

C. Impacts on surface drainage system [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section B below

D. Historic building(s) and districts [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section C below

E. Acquisition of land3 [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section D below

F. Hazardous or toxic materials4 [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section E below

G. Impacts on forests and/or protected areas [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section F below

H. Risk of unexploded ordinance (UXO) [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section G below

Will the site

activity

include/involve

any of the

following??

I. Traffic and Pedestrian Safety [ ] Yes [ ] No If “Yes”, see Section H below

3 Land acquisitions includes displacement of people, change of livelihood encroachment on private property this is to land that is purchased/transferred and affects people who

are living and/or squatters and/or operate a business (kiosks) on land that is being acquired. 4 Toxic / hazardous material includes but is not limited to asbestos, toxic paints, noxious solvents, removal of lead paint, etc.

32


PART 3: MITIGATION MEASURES

ACTIVITY PARAMETER MITIGATION MEASURES CHECKLIST

0. General Conditions Notification and Worker

Safety

(a) The local construction and environment inspectorates and communities have been notified of upcoming activities

(b) The public has been notified of the works through appropriate notification in the media and/or at publicly accessible sites

(including the site of the works)

(c) All legally required permits have been acquired for construction and/or rehabilitation

(d) The Contractor formally agrees that all work will be carried out in a safe and disciplined manner designed to minimize

impacts on neighboring residents and environment.

(e) Workers’ PPE will comply with international good practice (always hardhats, as needed masks and safety glasses, harnesses

and safety boots)

(f) Appropriate signposting of the sites will inform workers of key rules and regulations to follow.

Air Quality (a) During excavation works dust control measures shall be employed, e.g. by spraying and moistening the ground

(b) Demolition debris, excavated soil and aggregates shall be kept in controlled area and sprayed with water mist to reduce

debris dust

(c) During pneumatic drilling or breaking of pavement and foundations dust shall be suppressed by ongoing water spraying

and/or installing dust screen enclosures at site

(d) The surrounding environment (side walks, roads) shall be kept free of soil and debris to minimize dust

(e) There will be no open burning of construction / waste material at the site

(f) All machinery will comply with Polish emission regulations, shall well maintained and serviced and there will be no

excessive idling of construction vehicles at sites

Noise (a) Construction noise will be limited to restricted times agreed to in the permit

(b) During operations the engine covers of generators, air compressors and other powered mechanical equipment shall be

closed, and equipment placed as far away from residential areas as possible

Water Quality (a) The site will establish appropriate erosion and sediment control measures such as e.g. hay bales and / or silt fences to

prevent sediment from moving off site and causing excessive turbidity in canalization and nearby streams and rivers

A. General Rehabilitation

and /or Construction

Activities

Waste management (a) Waste collection and disposal pathways and sites will be identified for all major waste types expected from excavation,

demolition and construction activities.

(b) Mineral construction and demolition wastes will be separated from general refuse, organic, liquid and chemical wastes by

on-site sorting and stored in appropriate containers.

(c) Construction waste will be collected and disposed properly by licensed collectors

(d) The records of waste disposal will be maintained as proof for proper management as designed.

(e) Whenever feasible Contractor will reuse and recycle appropriate and viable materials (except when containing asbestos)

B. Impacts on surface

drainage system

Water Quality (a) There will be no unregulated extraction of groundwater, nor uncontrolled discharge of process waters, cement slurries, or

any other contaminated waters into the ground or adjacent streams or rivers; the Contractor will obtain all necessary

licenses and permits for water extraction and regulated discharge into the public wastewater system.

(b) There will be proper storm water drainage systems installed and care taken not to silt, pollute, block or otherwise

negatively impact natural streams, rivers, ponds and lakes by construction activities

(c) There will be procedures for prevention of and response to accidental spills of fuels, lubricants and other toxic or noxious

substances

(d) Construction vehicles and machinery will be washed only in designated areas where runoff will not pollute natural surface

water bodies

33


ACTIVITY PARAMETER MITIGATION MEASURES CHECKLIST

C. Historic building(s) Cultural Heritage (a) If construction works take place close to a designated historic structure, or are located in a designated historic district,

notification shall be made and approvals/permits be obtained from local authorities and all construction activities planned

and carried out in line with local and national legislation.

(b) It shall be ensured that provisions are put in place so that artifacts or other possible “chance finds” encountered in

excavation or construction are noted and registered, responsible officials contacted, and works activities delayed or

modified to account for such finds.

D. Acquisition of land Land Acquisition

Plan/Framework

(c) If expropriation of land was not expected but is required, or if loss of access to income of legal or illegal users of land was

not expected but may occur, that the Bank’s Task Team Leader shall be immediately consulted.

(d) The approved Land Acquisition Plan/Framework (if required by the project) will be implemented

Asbestos management (a) If asbestos is located on the project site, it shall be marked clearly as hazardous material

(b) When possible the asbestos will be appropriately contained and sealed to minimize exposure

(c) The asbestos prior to removal (if removal is necessary) will be treated with a wetting agent to minimize asbestos dust

(d) Asbestos will be handled and disposed by skilled & experienced professionals

(e) If asbestos material is be stored temporarily, the wastes should be securely enclosed inside closed containments and

marked appropriately. Security measures will be taken against unauthorized removal from the site.

(f) The removed asbestos will not be reused

E. Toxic materials

Toxic / hazardous waste

management

(a) Temporarily storage on site of all hazardous or toxic substances will be in safe containers labeled with details of

composition, properties and handling information

(b) The containers of hazardous substances shall be placed in an leak-proof container to prevent spillage

(c) The wastes shall be transported by specially licensed carriers and disposed in a licensed facility.

(d) Paints with toxic ingredients or solvents or lead-based paints will not be used

F. Affected forests,

wetlands and/or protected

areas

Ecosystem protection (a) All recognized natural habitats, wetlands and protected areas in the immediate vicinity of the activity will not be damaged

or exploited, all staff will be strictly prohibited from hunting, foraging, logging or other damaging activities.

(b) A survey and an inventory shall be made of large trees in the vicinity of the construction activity, large trees shall be

marked and cordoned off with fencing, their root system protected, and any damage to the trees avoided

(c) Adjacent wetlands and streams shall be protected from construction site run-off with appropriate erosion and sediment

control feature to include by not limited to hay bales and silt fences

(d) There will be no unlicensed borrow pits, quarries or waste dumps in adjacent areas, especially not in protected areas.

G. Risk of unexploded

ordinance (UXO)

Hazard to human health

and safety

(a) Before start of any excavation works the Contractor will verify that the construction area has been checked and cleared

regarding UXO by the appropriate authorities

H Traffic and pedestrian

safety

Direct or indirect hazards to

public traffic and

pedestrians by construction

activities

(b) In compliance with national regulations the Contractor will insure that the construction site is properly secured and

construction related traffic regulated. This includes but is not limited to

� Signposting, warning signs, barriers and traffic diversions: site will be clearly visible and the public warned of all

potential hazards

� Traffic management system and staff training, especially for site access and near-site heavy traffic. Provision of safe

passages and crossings for pedestrians where construction traffic interferes.

� Adjustment of working hours to local traffic patterns, e.g. avoiding major transport activities during rush hours or

times of livestock movement

� If required, active traffic management by trained and visible staff at the site for safe passage for the public

� Ensuring safe and continuous access to all adjacent office facilities, shops and residences during construction

34

September 2011 EMF Russia-FFRP p a g e | 34

PART 4: MONITORING PLAN (POPULATED WITH EXAMPLES, TO BE ADAPTED AS NEEDED)

Phase

What

(Is the

parameter

to be

monitored?)

Where

(Is the

parameter

to be

monitored?)

How

(Is the

parameter

to be

monitored?)

When

(Define the

frequency /

or

continuous?)

Why

(Is the

parameter

being

monitored?)

Cost

(if not

included

in

project

budget)

Who

(Is

responsible

for

monitoring?)

During

activity

preparation

site access

traffic

management

availability of

waste disposal

facilities

hazardous

waste

inventory

(asbestos)

construction

material

quality control

(eg. paints /

solvents)

at the site

at the site

in site vicinity

on site

Contractor’s

store / building

yard

check if design

and project

planning

foresee diligent

procedures

visual /

analytical if in

doubt

visual /

research in

toxic materials

databases

before launch

of construction

before start of

rehabilitation

works

before approval

to use materials

safety of

general public,

timely

detection of

waste disposal

bottlenecks

public and

workplace

health and

safety

marginal,

within

budget

marginal,

within

budget;

(prepare

special

account

for

analyses

at PMU?)

Contractor,

Engineer

During

activity

supervision

dust

generation

noise

emissions

waste and

wastewater

types, quality

and volumes

surface

drainage

soundness

on site and in

immediate

neighborhood,

close to

potential

impacted

residents

at discharge

points or in

storage

facilities

visual

consultation of

locals

visual,

analytical if

suspicious

count of waste

transports off

site, check flow

rates and

runoff routes

for wastewater

daily

daily

daily /

continuous

daily /

continuous

avoidance of

public nuisance

avoidance of

negative

impacts on

ground/

surface waters

ensuring

proper waste

management

and disposal

marginal,

within

budget

Contractor,

Engineer

35

September 2011 EMF RF-FFRP p a g e | 35

ANNEX 4 World Bank’s Policy on Pest Management (OP 4.09)

These policies were prepared for use by World Bank staff and are not necessarily a complete treatment of the subject.

OP 4.09 December, 1998

This Operational Policy statement was revised in August 2004 to ensure consistency with the requirements of OP/BP 8.60, issued in August 2004.

Note: This OP 4.09 replaces the version dated July 1996. Changes in wording have been made in paras. 1 and 3 and footnotes 2, 3, and 4. Further guidance for implementing the Bank's pest management policy is in the Environmental Assessment

Sourcebook (World Bank: Washington, D.C., 1991). Questions regarding agricultural pest management may be addressed to the Director, Rural Development. Questions regarding pesticide use in public health projects may be directed to the Director, Health Services.

1. In assisting borrowers to manage pests that affect either agriculture or public health, the Bank

1supports 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.

2

2. In appraising a project that will involve pest management, the Bank assesses the capacity of the country's regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective, and environmentally sound pest management. As necessary, the Bank and the borrower incorporate in the project components to strengthen such capacity.

Agricultural Pest Management3

3. The Bank uses various means to assess pest management in the country and support integrated pest management (IPM)

4and the safe use of agricultural pesticides: economic and sector work, sectoral or

project-specific environmental assessments, participatory IPM assessments, and investment projects and components aimed specifically at supporting the adoption and use of IPM.

4. In Bank-financed agriculture operations, pest populations are normally controlled through IPM approaches, such as biological control, cultural practices, and the development and use of crop varieties that are resistant or tolerant to the pest. The Bank may finance the purchase of pesticides when their use is justified under an IPM approach.

Pest Management in Public Health

5. In Bank-financed public health projects, the Bank supports controlling pests primarily through environmental methods. Where environmental methods alone are not effective, the Bank may finance the use of pesticides for control of disease vectors.

Criteria for Pesticide Selection and Use

6. The procurement of any pesticide in a Bank-financed project is contingent on an assessment of the nature and degree of associated risks, taking into account the proposed use and the intended users.

5 With respect to the classification of pesticides and their specific formulations, the Bank refers to

the World Health Organization's Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification (Geneva: WHO 1994-95).

6 The following criteria apply to the selection and use of

pesticides in Bank-financed projects:

36

September 2011 EMF RF-FFRP p a g e | 36

(a) They must have negligible adverse human health effects. (b) They must be shown to be effective against the target species. (c) They must have minimal effect on nontarget species and the natural environment. The methods, timing, and frequency of pesticide application are aimed to minimize damage to natural enemies. Pesticides used in public health programs must be demonstrated to be safe for inhabitants and domestic animals in the treated areas, as well as for personnel applying them. (d) Their use must take into account the need to prevent the development of resistance in pests. 7. The Bank requires that any pesticides it finances be manufactured, packaged, labeled, handled, stored, disposed of, and applied according to standards acceptable to the Bank.

7 The Bank does not

finance formulated products that fall in WHO classes IA and IB, or formulations of products in Class II, if (a) the country lacks restrictions on their distribution and use; or (b) they are likely to be used by, or be accessible to, lay personnel, farmers, or others without training, equipment, and facilities to handle, store, and apply these products properly. ____________

1. "Bank" includes IBRD and IDA, and "loans" includes IDA credits and IDA grants.

2. See OP/BP 4.01, Environmental Assessment.

3. OP 4.09 applies to all Bank lending, whether or not the loan finances pesticides. Even if Bank lending for pesticides is not involved, an agricultural development project may lead to substantially increased pesticide use and subsequent environmental problems.

4. IPM refers to a mix of farmer-driven, ecologically based pest control practices that seeks to reduce reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides. It involves (a) managing pests (keeping them below economically damaging levels) rather than seeking to eradicate them; (b) relying, to the extent possible, on nonchemical measures to keep pest populations low; and (c) selecting and applying pesticides, when they have to be used, in a way that minimizes adverse effects on beneficial organisms, humans, and the environment.

5. This assessment is made in the context of the project's environmental assessment and is recorded in the project documents. The project documents also include (in the text or in an annex) a list of pesticide products authorized for procurement under the project, or an indication of when and how this list will be developed and agreed on. This authorized list is included by reference in legal documents relating to the project, with provisions for adding or deleting materials.

6. Copies of the classification, which is updated annually, are available in the Sectoral Library. A draft Standard Bidding Document for Procurement of Pesticides is available from OPCPR.

7. The FAO's Guidelines for Packaging and Storage of Pesticides (Rome, 1985), Guidelines on Good Labeling Practice for Pesticides (Rome, 1985), and Guidelines for the Disposal of Waste Pesticide and Pesticide Containers on the Farm (Rome, 1985) are used as minimum standards.

37 Section 5 –

Terms of Reference

37

ANNEX 5 Template for “Full Fledged” EMP

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN: FORMAT FOR SUMMARY TABLES/APPENDICES

A. MITIGATION PLAN

Phase Issue Mitigating

Measure

Cost of

Mitigation

(if Substantial)

Responsibility*

I.

Implementation

/ Construction

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

II.

Operation

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

38

38

B. MONITORING PLAN

[Parameters in Monitoring Plan should be matched to issues in

Mitigation Plan]

Phase

What

parameter

is to be

monitored?

Where

is the

parameter

to be

monitored?

How

is the

parameter

to be

monitored/

type of

monitoring

equipment?

When

is the

parameter to

be

monitored-

frequency of

measurement

or

continuous?

Monitoring

Cost

What is the

cost of

equipment

or

contractor

charges to

perform

monitoring

Responsibility

I.

Construction

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

II. Operation •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

39

39

FEDERAL FORESTRY AGENCY

Public Consultations on Draft Environmental Management Framework of the Forest Fire

Response Project (Forest Project 2)

M I N U T E S

Moscow

November 28, 2011, 6:00pm-7:30pm # AP-13/488-pr

Chairperson:

A.V. Panfilov, Stats-Secretary-Deputy Chief, Federal Forestry

Agency

Participants:

As listed in the Annex.

Potential Environmental Impact of Forest Project 2 Activities.

Review of Forest Project 2 Draft Environmental Management Framework

(Grigorjev, Kulikova, Karpachevsky, Yaroshenko, Repina, Kuzmichev, Ponomarenko, Panfilov)

Speaker:

A.V. Panfilov, Stats-Secretary-Deputy Chief of the Federal Forestry Agency, reporting on

proposed activities and draft Environmental Management Framework under the Forest Fire Response

Project (Forest Project 2).

Discussions:

40

40

Question 1 (A.Yu. Grigorjev):

Are you planning to restore forest roads and what is their approximate length?

Answer (A.V. Panfilov, Rosleskhoz):

The Project Concept does not provide for capital construction, including forest road

construction or reconstruction.

Question 2 (A.Yu. Grigorjev):

What are you going to do with the land reclamation network under the Project?


The Project does not include any land reclamation activities.

Question 3 (Ye.G. Kulikova, WWF Russia):

WWF Russia welcomes the proposed Project and its positive environmental impact.

Project Subcomponent 2.А.4 envisages the development of a model forest network; however,

Russia’s current legislation does not allow establishing model forests in the country. What are

you planning to do on this issue under the Project?


The Project Concept provides for the following activities under this Subcomponent:

- To draft model forest management regulations;

- To supply necessary equipment for model forest management;

- To pilot modern forest management technologies and improve forest use

taking into account economic, environmental and social priorities;

- To create conditions for local and international forest sector staff training

and replication of model forest experience.


WWF Russia is well experienced in model forest network establishment and development

and would like to participate in that work under the Project. Is it possible?


The Project is open to all who wish to participate in its implementation.

Question 5 (M.L. Karpachevsky, Transparent World):

The Project shall help revise the existing regulatory legal framework, including the model

forest issue. Does it mean that you are planning pilots under the Project, or will

recommendations be made on the basis of Project outcomes?


Pilots are possible and, in principle, they are planned under the Project. However, it

should be noted that any legislative changes require detailed elaboration with due regard for

socioeconomic and other implications. The Project also includes: a review and upgrade of the

existing system of fire danger rating based on weather conditions and taking into account

41

41

specific features of each area; expansion of the fire lookout network; cost and performance

analysis of various early wildfire detection systems; and piloting of the most efficient techniques.

Question 6 (M.L. Karpachevsky, Transparent World):

Is there a place for the private sector, that is, forest lessees, under the Project?


There are no restrictions in that respect provided the World Bank policies are complied

with. The Project will be implemented in Russian regions, and if it affects forest parcels leased

by private businesses, all interventions will be undoubtedly agreed with the lessees.

Question 7 (A.Yu. Yaroshenko, Greenpeace Russia):

What are you tentatively planning to do before the next fire season, that is, in the coming

period of about 6 months?


Before the next fire season, we are planning to negotiate the Project with the World Bank

(tentatively in January-February 2012) and submit the results of the negotiations to the World

Bank Board of Directors (tentatively in March 2012). All project processing procedures are

specified in Government Resolution # 43 issued on January 28, 2005 – On Processing of Projects

Implemented by the Russian Federation Together with International Financial Institutions.

Question 8 (T.A. Repina, Center for Environmental Innovations):

Does the Project include forest monitoring, and can other Russian regions participate in

Project implementation?


Forest monitoring is not included in the Project as a separate component. We are planning

to monitor activities to be implemented in forest tracts under the Project. Should the need arise to

add other participating regions during the Project implementation period, the policies and

regulations of the World Bank and Russia allow including additional regions provided there are

reasonable grounds for their participation in the Project.


There is a UN Biodiversity Conservation Project dealing with wildfires that is being

implemented in 12 protected areas of the Altai Sayan Ecoregion and is close to completion. The

project has supported the development of fire safety strategies for the participating protected

areas, publication of 2 large fire-fighting handbooks, etc. How are these activities linked to

Forest Project 2?

Answer (A.A. Troitsky, MNR):

Wildfire management does not depend on financial sources or projects implemented by

various institutions. Of course, all available experience will be used as a basis for Forest Project

2.

42

42


The Project proposes staff training and education standard improvement. WWF Russia

has good experience in developing learning aids such as the Sustainable Forest Management

Framework which was approved by the Ministry of Education and Science. Does the Project

include the development of any learning aid on forest pyrology or wildfire management?


It is one of the key Project components. The education component is a basis for the

future.

Question 11 (Ye.P. Kuzmichev, World Bank Consultant):

Did you have any difficulties in implementing environmental management activities

under the first Forest Project? What should you beware of under the new Project?


We did not have any difficulties of that kind during the 10-year implementation period of

the first project, and such unique experience will be used to implement Forest Project 2.

Question 12 (Yu.G. Ponomarenko, Variant-Gidrotekhnika):

Project Component 2 – Building Forest Management Capacity shall help identify and

address key forest policy and legislative issues. Does it mean that Project implementation shall

inform the development of recommendations on changes to the federal and regional legislation?


Yes, it does. Both on the federal and regional levels.

Decisions:

1. To note Mr. Panfilov’s information on proposed interventions and the draft Environmental

Management Framework under the Forest Fire Response Project (Forest Project 2).

2. To approve the proposed draft Environmental Management Framework.

3. To recommend that Rosleskhoz and regional governments work to identify potential

environmental implications of Project implementation within the assumed Project impact

zone.

4. To recommend that MNR work to identify potential environmental implications of Project

implementation in protected areas within the assumed Project impact zone.

43

43

A.V. Panfilov

Stats-Secretary-Deputy Chief

Federal Forestry Agency

44

44

Annex

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

of the Public Consultations

on Draft Environmental Management Framework

of the Forest Fire Response Project

(Forest Project 2)

PANFILOV

Alexander Victorovich

Stats-Secretary, Deputy Head, Federal Forestry

Agency

BULDAKOV

Anatoly Ivanovich

Deputy Head, Federal Forestry Agency

SERGEEV

Valentin Igorevich

Senior Specialist of 1st

grade, Legal Department,

Federal Forestry Agency

TROITSKY

Alexei Alexandrovich

Head, Division of Protected Areas, Department for

State policy and environmental protection and

ecological safety regulation, RF Ministry of Natural

resources and Environment

REPINA

Tatyana Anatolievna

Autonomous non-profit organization “Center for

ecological innovations”

OSIPOV

Vasily Maximovich

Head, Forestry Committee of republic of Komi

KOSTROV

Sergei Leonidovich

General Director, Research and production

enterprize «Variant-gidrotechnika», Moscow oblast

PONOMARENKO

Yuri Grigorievich

Deputy General Director, Research and production

enterprize «Variant-gidrotechnika», Moscow oblast

KORCHAGIN

Oleg Mikhailovich

Acting Director, Reseach Institute on Forest Genetics

«NIILG and S”, Voronezhskaya oblast

KOTLYAROVA

Elena Vladimirovna

Deputy Head, Forestry Department of Voronezhskaya

oblast

STEMPKOVSKY

Alexander Vitalievich

Head, Division of economics of forest sector, Forest

department of the Government of Khabarovsk Kray

KULIKOVA

Elena Gennadievna

Head, Forest Program, WWF Russia

SHMATKOV

Nikolai Mikhailovich

Projects Coordinator on Forest Policy, WWF Russia

45

45

Nikolai Mikhailovich

GRIGORIEV

Alexei Yurievich

Environmental expert

SMETANINA

Marina Igorevna

Consultant, World Bank

YAROSHENKO

Alexei Yurievich

Head, Forest Department, Greenpeace Russia

KARPACHEVSKY

Mikhail Lvovich

Project Leader, Non-profit partnership “Prozrachniy

mir”

PESHKOV

Maxim Sergeevich

Deputy Minister, Ministry of Natural Resources and

Forest Complex, Krasnoyarsk kray

KUZMICHEV

Evgeniy Pavlovich

Professor, Doctor of agricultural Science, Russian

State Agrarian University after K. Timiriazev,

Consultant for the World bank

AKIMOV

Alexander Vladimirovich

Project Consultant

BELYAEV

Andrei Valentinovich

Acting Director, National Park “Meshcherskiy’,

Ryazanskaya oblast

TEPLUKHOV

Sergei Vladimirovich

Director, National park “Meshiora”, Vladimirskaya

oblast

KISELEV

Gennady Viktorovich

Director, «Sayano-Shushensky zapovednik”, PA,

Krasnoyarsky kray

MARKIN

Yuri Mikhailovich

Director, “Okskiy zapovednik” (PA), Ryazanskaya

oblast

YAKUBOV

Ivan

«Russia’s forest news», Journalist

PROKAZIN

Andrei Evgenievich

Deputy Head, Forest Health Department, Moscow

region

ANDRIUSHIN

Vladimir Anatolievich

Head, Department, “I-Teko” Consulting company

46

46

Russian Federation: Forest Fire Response Project...

Documents

Transcript of Russian Federation: Forest Fire Response Project...