UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY (GEF) PDF BLOCK B REQUEST
Project Title:
Support to the National Plan of Action for the Protection of the
Arctic Marine Environment from Anthropogenic Pollution in the
Russian Federation.
GEF Implementing Agencies: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
in collaboration with World Bank1.
Executing Agencies:
Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea
Russian
Inter-Agency
"Task Team for the preparation of the
National Plan of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Anthropogenic Pollution in the Arctic Region of
the Russian Federation."
Requesting Country:
The Russian Federation
Eligibility:
The Russian Federation is eligible under paragraph 9(b) of the GEF
Instrument. The proposed project is consistent with the relevant
provisions of regional and global agreements relating to International
Waters to which the Russian Federation is a signatory and/or
contracting party
GEF Focal Areas:
International Waters with relevance to Biological Diversity
GEF Programming Framework: Operational Programme #10 - Contaminants-Based Operational
Programme
Estimated Total Project Costs: [15 million US $]
PDF-B Funding:
GEF:
306,000
Co-financing:
ACOPS
33,000
Canada
50,000
Denmark
70,000
Russian
Federation
171,000
Sweden
70,000 (to be confirmed)
U.S.A.
80,000
Total Co-financing 474,000
Total:
780,000
Block A Grant Awarded: No
Operational Focal Point Endorsement:
Mr A.M. Amirkhanov, GEF Operational Focal Point, State Committee of the Russian Federation on
Environmental Protection, 25 May 1999.
IA Contact:
Mr Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Co-ordinator, UNEP/GEF Co-ordination Office,
UNEP, Nairobi, Tel: 254-2-624166; Fax: 254-2-623557; Email:
Ahmed.Djoghlaf@unep.org
1 The role of the World Bank is explained in detail in section 2.1.
1
1. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION)
1.1 The Arctic Ocean is bordered by six states - Canada, Denmark (in right of Greenland),
Iceland, Norway, the United States (in right of the State of Alaska) and the Russian Federation.
Due to their proximity to the arctic basin, Finland and Sweden joined with these states in an
agreement for an Arctic Environment Protection Strategy, concluded in Rovaniemi, Finland in
1991. One outgrowth of this agreement was the commissioning, by all eight states, of a
comprehensive assessment of the State of the Arctic Marine Environment in 1993, published in
summary form in 1997 under the title "State of the Arctic Environment Report". In 1998, all the
supporting scientific and socio-economic assessments were published in a single volume entitled
"AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues"2.
1.2
The completion of these two authoritative documents only three years after the
commencement of the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) reflects the high
level of commitment among the arctic nations to understanding Man's impact on conditions in the
Arctic. The range of topics covered by the assessment include demographics, cultural heritage,
fisheries, chemical contamination, radioactive contamination, threats of oil pollution, climate
change, ozone depletion and the effects of increased solar irradiance, arctic haze, and
acidification.
1.3 A Working Group on "Pollution in the Arctic Marine Environment" (PAME), established
under the aegis of the Rovaniemi agreement was mandated to identify and prioritize legislative,
political, scientific and technical issues to be addressed by the arctic states. In accordance with
the recommendations of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-Based activities, the PAME report advocates the preparation of a
Regional Programme of Action for the Arctic (RPA - Arctic) and coherent National Action
Programmes (NPAs). Preliminary definition and analyses of sources of degradation for the Arctic
region of the Russian Federation were carried out by ACOPS and provided to PAME as input to
the preparation of such a framework document laying out the preparatory steps required to
initiate concrete actions, entitled "Regional Programme of Action for the Protection of the Arctic
Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities", subsequently adopted by the Ministerial
Conference of the Arctic Council in September 1998. Whilst this defines the framework and basis
for future actions required to protect the Arctic from the adverse environmental consequences of
land-based activities it defines neither the priorities, nor the costs of interventions of a remedial
or mitigatory nature.
1.4 Many of the known transboundary threats and impacts emanate from conditions in the
Russian Federation (Annex 1 - Appendix 2 from the RPA-Arctic). Some of these are short-range
and specific, such as the damage caused by metal smelting emissions from Norilsk and Nikel,
especially the latter which is close to the Norwegian and Finnish borders of the Russian
Federation. Two thirds of heavy metals in the atmosphere of the high Arctic originate from
industrial activities on the Kola Peninsula, the Norilsk industrial complex, the Urals (outside the
Arctic) and the Pechora Basin. Some contaminants pose threats to the entire Arctic such as
radioactive wastes from both military and civilian activities in the Russian Federation. Similarly,
the threats of regional and transboundary pollution from runoff are derived primarily from the
Russian Federation which is drained by three of the four largest rivers (Yenisei, Ob, Lena and
Mackenzie) discharging to the Arctic Ocean.
2 Arctic Monitoring & Assessment Programme, 1998 Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues. AMAP, 859 pp.,
Oslo, Norway.
2
1.5 The intermediate range transboundary effects of activities in Russian Federation are therefore
seen in the other arctic states, all of which are developed countries. However, because of the role
of the Arctic Ocean in the global oceanic circulation, larger-scale, indeed global, transboundary
effects may be manifested over longer (c. 1,000 yr.) time scales. The surface waters of the East
Greenland Current, which continues as the West Greenland Current into Baffin Bay and then
moves in a southerly direction along the eastern seaboard of North America, are supplied by the
Arctic Ocean. This flow is augmented by the outflow from the Arctic through the Canadian
Archipelago. More importantly, both the intermediate and deep waters of the Atlantic, including
the Western Boundary Current, are partially supplied by surface flows from the Arctic that
downwell and form waters at various depths in the vicinity of Iceland - the Greenland-Iceland
overflow. The North Atlantic circulation is part of the global oceanic circulation as reflected by
Stommel's "Tour de Force". Thus, purely from the perspectives of oceanic circulation and water
quality the Arctic Basin has global significance invoking far ranging transboundary concerns.
1.6 The Arctic Ocean is of global significance in terms of biological diversity since many of the
marine species are endemic to this ocean. Well known examples of such species include the polar
bear, narwhal, arctic char and walrus. A similar situation prevails for the adjacent land animals
with reindeer/caribou, arctic fox and arctic hare being obvious examples. The terrestrial floral
diversity is also unique particularly in the case of lichens with numerous species being endemic
to the Arctic. The preservation of such species in the context of the maintenance of global
biodiversity is thus of global interest and concern and contaminant levels in some Arctic birds
and mammals exceed thresholds associated with reproductive, immunosuppressive, and
neurobehavioural effects in laboratory animals. Eggshell thinning is known to occur in some
Arctic predatory birds as a consequence of levels of DDE, whilst cadmium levels are high
enough in some terrestrial vertebrates to pose a threat of kidney damage3.
1.7 The present proposal is made against the background of previous multilateral co-operation in
the Arctic, under the Rovaniemi agreement and more recently under the Arctic Council to which
the same eight states are party. A whole-arctic assessment has been completed, and the causes of
damage or threats have largely been identified providing guidance to the countries regarding
individual actions required. The next step in the process is the preparation of National Action
Plans, or National Programmes of Action, that take account inter alia of the issues and priorities
identified through the previous arctic consultative processes.
1.8 In August 1998, the Russian Federation established an Inter-Agency "Task Team for the
Preparation of the National Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment
from Land-Based Activities in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation". The Task Team has
been chaired by the Chairman of the State Committee for the Development of the North
(Goskomsever). The Task Team includes, as members, senior representatives of the Ministry of
Natural Resources, the State Committee for the Protection of the Environment and Natural
Resources, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Science, the Ministry of Economics, the
Ministry for Emergencies and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture. The Task Team meetings are
also attended by representatives of the indigenous peoples of the Russian arctic and of industrial
combines, thereby widening the stakeholder community involvement.
1.9 In support of this Russian initiative three deputies of the State Duma of the Russian
Federation (the Chairman of the Mandate Commission of the State Duma, the Chairman of the
State Duma Committee for Problems of the North, and the Deputy Chairman of the Committee
3 Arctic Pollution Issues: A State of the Arctic Environment Report, AMAP, 1997, 187pp., Oslo, Norway.
3
for Ecology of the State Duma) and the Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (ACOPS)
concluded an agreement in February 1998 on "Collaboration for the Development and
Implementation of the National Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-Based Activities in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation". Part of
this agreement supports the creation and utilization of an International Task Team to address
relevant issues in the development of the National Action Programme.
1.10 In concert with the establishment of the Inter-Agency Task Team, in October 1998, a
Conference of Official Representatives of the State Duma and the Government of the Russian
Federation formulated and adopted a Resolution in relation to the development and elaboration of
a National Plan of Action for the arctic marine environment. This is attached as Annex 2 to this
proposal. Of the eight arctic states: Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, and
the United States, consistent with their developed status, have the expertise and financial
resources to undertake the preparation of National Action Plans. The Russian Federation, in
contrast while having the necessary expertise, does not have the financial resources to cover the
entire cost of developing its National Action Plan for the Arctic.
1.11 The project that will result from this PDF-B grant will provide a basis for the resolution of
Russian national management problems regarding activities and contaminant sources affecting
the arctic marine environment. Without the support provided by such a project, it will not be
possible for the Russian Federation to undertake the far-ranging analyses required to develop an
effective and operational plan of action to address both the national and transboundary effects of
anthropogenic pollution. The execution of the project will serve to accelerate the satisfaction of
Russian commitments to the Arctic Council and to the Global Programme of Action for the
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities.
1.12 The GEF programming context for this proposal is Operational Program number 10 - the
Contaminants-based Operational Program and more specifically that component dealing with
Land-based activities demonstration activities which states: "Project preparation should include
an analysis of the priority contaminants, the barrier being removed, and a strategy for
implementing needed baseline and additional actions. These demonstration projects may be
useful for testing strategies countries might wish to pursue under the Global Programme of
Action for land-based activities that degrade marine waters." (para 10.13, GEF Operational
Programs.).
2. SUMMARY PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION
2.1 The project that will result from this project development facility grant will focus on, but not
be confined to pre-investment studies of the identified priority hot-spots with significant
transboundary consequences and formulation of a comprehensive National Plan of Action to
meet the obligations of the Russian Federation in respect of pollution of the Russian Arctic from
land-based anthropogenic sources. Elements of this National Plan of Action will include support
to: the development of necessary legal instruments, standards, monitoring and enforcement
mechanisms; development of appropriate policies regarding future development activities in the
Russian Arctic; establishment and strengthening of institutional and economic mechanisms
needed to strengthen protection of the Arctic marine environment from anthropogenic activities.
Given the presumed importance of the investment component of the full project, it is anticipated
that the World Bank will act as co-implementing agency of the full project. Discussions with the
World Bank are on-going, and the final agreement is expected at a very early stage during PDF-B
4
execution. Contacts are been taken with other financial institutions as a possible complement to
or substitute of the World Bank participation. The role of the World Bank in the PDF-B phase
should be to participate actively in the preparation of the hot-spot analysis, in the analysis of
existing practices in the preparation of pre-investment studies, and in the development of
guidelines for their future preparation. This will ensure the participation of the World Bank in the
full project, particularly in the preparation of pre-investment studies and subsequent concrete
investments.
2.2 The main activities of the full project will be:
a) Organisation of on-the-ground remedial action
- preparation of pre-investment studies for 6-8 priority hot-spots;
- organisation of concrete investment, on the basis of the pre-investment studies;
b) Legislation and policy reforms
- implementation of appropriate policies regarding future development activities in the
Russian Arctic;
- development and implementation of the legislation relevant to the environmental
protection of the Russian Arctic;
c) Institutional strengthening and capacity building
- establishment and strengthening of institutional and economic mechanisms needed for
the protection of the Arctic marine environment from anthropogenic activities;
- enhancement of the existing capacity for environmental management in the Russian
Arctic.
Pre-investment studies
2.3 Pre-investment studies can be defined as the set of measures necessary and sufficient for
determining the possibility and expediency of capital investment in a given project. Such studies
should include technical, economic, financial, social and other aspects and should be presented in
such a way that will encourage potential partners to invest in the protection of the marine and
coastal environment of the Arctic region of the Russian Federation. It is expected that new pre-
investment studies will enhance chances for timely and efficient investment in the elimination of
the environmental "hot spots".
2.4 At present in the Russian Federation, there is no law laying out the requirements for pre-
investment ecological studies. The practice for new projects and projects of significant expansion
and reconstruction has been the ad-hoc preparation of, often insufficient, documentation on
technical, financial and ecological aspects. Since the current system of preparation of pre-
investment studies in the Russian Federation is not adequate, one of the specific objective of the
PDF-B grant is to analyse selected pre-investment studies which were carried out in the Russian
Federation in the last several years and which are relevant to the protection and development of
the marine and coastal environment of the Arctic region. Such an analysis should indicate the
weak points in the preparation of the pre-investment studies and what changes in the legal
instruments and administrative procedure are to be made in order to improve the usability of the
pre-investment studies. On the basis of such analysis, the guidelines for the preparation of pre-
5
investment studies will be developed.
2.5 One of the activities to be implemented in the framework of the PDF B grant will be the
identification of the list of environmental "hot-spots" in the Arctic region of the Russian
Federation. Out of such a list, the high priority "hot-spots" will be identified and for those "hot-
spots" pre-investment studies should be organised in order to eliminate them. It is expected that
about 6 - 8 pre-investment studies could be prepared in the course of the full project. This
methodology of identification of hot-spots, preparation of pre-investment studies for high priority
hot-spots and subsequent investment in order to eliminate high priority hot-spots was
successfully implemented in the Baltic Sea.
Implementation and Enforcement of the National Plan of Action
2.6 No amount of technical work will prove of much value unless a parallel work is made for a
change in policies. ACOPS was chosen as the Executing Agency by the Russian Federation,
amongst other reasons, because of its political networks across the globe which have the
confidence of policymakers. Senior members of ACOPS in the Russian Federation are the senior
policy makers in that country and a great deal of preparatory work was carried out prior to
submitting the NPA Arctic to the international community at large.
2.7 The National Plan of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from
Anthropogenic Pollution in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation (NPA-Arctic) is the
result of a five-year joint effort of the Russian Government, State Duma, Army and Navy, local
governments, private sector and NGOs, with the assistance of ACOPS. The NPA-Arctic
identifies 38 activities that should be implemented in the period from 1999 to 2001.
2.8 The situation in the Russian Federation has been difficult for a number of years and the
country is likely to continue to experience serious economic, social and political difficulties,
which will be reflected in the fragility of the institutional framework. Notwithstanding this, the
NPA-Arctic was prepared within a limited period of time and this is an indication of the priority
given by the Russian Federation to issues related to the Arctic Environment.
2.9 In this respect, the partnership with ACOPS has proven to be very effective. In fact, following
a workshop which ACOPS organised in the EU mission in Moscow the following year, the text
of the NPA-Arctic was produced in just two years, ahead of all other circumpolar countries, the
relevant government departments began to coordinate their work on Arctic issues, and after an
absence of several years, Russia sent a minister to the Arctic Council meeting in September 1998,
expressing its commitment to the NPA-Arctic vis-à-vis its western circumpolar partners. This is a
positive indication of the level of support to the project within various sectors of the Russian
Federation.
2.10 The main objectives of the PDF-B are:
a) to review and evaluate system of environmental legislation and administrative
arrangements at Federal and Regional levels in the Russian Federation, relevant to the
Arctic region;
b) to prepare proposals for new policy approaches to environmental protection and use of
6
natural resources in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation;
c) to assess the primary air and water routes of pollutant transport from the identified sources
to the Arctic Ocean;
d) to analyse selected pre-investment studies which have been carried out in the Russian
Federation over last several years and which are relevant to the protection and development
of the marine and coastal environment of the Arctic region;
e) to define procedures for comprehensively evaluating existing sources and activities in the
Russian Federation contributing to the damage and threats to the arctic marine
environment;
f) to define a basis for priority-setting among the various stakeholders taking due account of
the previous multilateral assessment of the state of the arctic marine environment;
g) to undertake a root-cause analysis for existing compromises of the arctic environment
stemming from sources and activities in the Russian Federation;
h) to identify, characterise and prioritise all existing sources and activities in the Russian
Federation contributing to damage and significant threats to the arctic environment;
i) to outline procedures for identifying options for intervention in relation to priority issues,
their potential benefits and costs, and the balance of benefits and costs taking account of
technical and socio-economic factors, and the associated technical and infrastructural
requirements for their implementation;
j) to define procedures for estimating the proportions of incremental costs potentially
attributable to developed arctic countries and to the GEF;
k) to examine and outline approaches to securing from national and international sources, the
required support for the development of the capacity to implement identified priority
interventions; and
l) to prepare a GEF Project Brief specifying the procedures and mechanisms by which the full
project will be executed, deliverables, incremental costs, and commitments of support from
co-funding sources.
Indication of incremental costs for the full project
2.11 It is expected that the GEF eligible incremental costs of the full project will be
approximately one third. Another third will be incremental costs to the other developed arctic
states which it is anticipated will contribute proportionately to the project. The remaining third
are wholly national costs. The breakdown of full project costing is presumed on the basis of co-
financing available for PDF-B costs reflecting the commitment by the Russian Federation and
developed arctic states to providing, or obtaining, appropriate co-financing for the full project
execution.
2.12 The breakdown of this preliminary assessment of incremental costs is based on the results of
the previous assessment of the arctic marine environment conducted by the eight arctic states.
From this assessment it is clear that not only is the Russian segment of the Arctic the largest
(some 45% of the circumpolar arc being bordered by the Russian Federation) but that the legacy
of damage and threats posed to the arctic is greatest from the Russian Federation.
2.13 The full project will also serve to fulfil the northern boundary responsibilities of the Russian
7
Federation in respect to the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine
Environment from Land-based Activities signed in 1995. Ultimately, the specification of a
National Action Plan for the Protection of the Arctic will have to be combined with Action Plans
addressing other Russian coastal regions, namely the Baltic Sea, the Bering Sea, the Black Sea,
the Caspian Sea, the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk to constitute a comprehensive National
Action Plan for the entire country.
Justification for the PDF-B Grant
2.14 This proposal is made on the basis of the assumption that effects within the Russian
Federation of national actions are legitimately the responsibility of the Russian Federation to
resolve within its existing, if limited, financial resource base. The costs of dealing with
transboundary impacts in the Arctic region, pursuant to its global value as a unique environment
and the concomitant global interest in its preservation, are incremental under the GEF definition.
2.15 The full project will result in a National Programme of Action that will include a thorough
analysis of costs and benefits of remedial actions addressing individual sources of degradation of
the arctic environment and its associated freshwater sources within the Russian Federation. The
project will cover existing degradation and threats posed to the arctic environment through the
legacy of inadequately regulated activities that give rise to sources of hazardous contaminants
that are transported either continuously, or as a result of episodic events.
2.16 The PDF-B Grant will be used to design the full project in a manner that ensures the most
efficient process of applying management measures to resolve damage and threats to the arctic
marine environment originating in the Russian Federation. This will, in turn, provide the GEF
with greater insight into the nature of existing damage to the arctic marine environment caused by
past activities in the Russian Federation and the potential threats posed by the continuation of
existing practices or the introduction of new ones. The PDF-B will provide the necessary scoping
for the full project and give an early indication of areas of difficulty and the nature and amount of
resources needed to address these issues. Only on the basis of the scoping provided by the PDF-B
can the effectiveness and value of the full project be evaluated.
8
3.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PDF-B ACTIVITIES
3.1 Activity 1: Project Steering Group
At the commencement of project planning, a Steering Group will be formed, under the
Chairmanship of ACOPS, comprising: International Waters specialists from each of the three
Implementing Agencies, and representatives of the Russian Inter-Agency Task Team, the Russian
Duma and the International Task Team for the NPA-Arctic. The Russian Inter-Agency Task
Team will advise the Steering Group on the quality of the reports produced by the various
consultants and working groups and on the practicalities of mechanisms proposed for the
execution of the full project. ACOPS will provide the Secretariat for the Steering Group that will
meet once in October 1999 at the inception of the activity and again in January 2001 to finalize
the project document. During the intervening period, the Steering Group will work through
correspondence and periodic conference calls as required. The first Steering Group meeting will
be held in London in October 1999 and will be of five working days duration. Its purpose will be
to:
a)
confirm and document the scope of the PBF-B and identify a division of primary topics
to be addressed during each of the Expert Workshops;
b) finalize the timing and venues of each of the Expert Workshops;
c)
discuss and agree on the participants to be invited to the Expert Workshops on the basis
of the expertise and representation required to address the relevant topics; and
d) prepare a preliminary draft work plan and timetable for the full project.
3.2 Activity 2: Review and evaluation of relevant legislation and administrative
arrangements at Federal and Regional levels
The current system of legislative and regulatory legal acts in the field of environmental
protection, environmental safety, and nature management includes more than 5,000 (!) legal acts
of all types as of June 1, 1998. Despite this there is no specific legislation for the Arctic region or
for the Arctic marine environment, and the necessity for the development of such a body of
legislation is not fully appreciated. Many of the existing legal acts contradict rather than
complement each other. The purpose of this activity is to undertake a critical evaluation of the
existing legislative framework and to elaborate proposals for change.
The objective of this activity is to prepare a review of the system of environmental legislation in
the Russian Federation, with the aim of assessing their applicability to Arctic environmental
protection; identify new legislation at federal and regional levels, and new departmental and
regional standards, taking into account specificity of environmental conditions in Arctic; assess
the capacity of local environmental protection and law enforcement bodies in the Arctic Region
of the Russian Federation; identify appropriate economic measures that will assist in
environmental protection; and prepare proposals for new policy approaches to environmental
protection and use of natural resources in the Arctic Region of the Russian Federation, including
proposals for enhanced public and indigenous peoples participation in environmental decision
making.
This activity will be undertaken by a small working group, established under the co-ordination of
9
the State Committee for the Development of the North (Goskomsever), with participation of the
representatives of State Duma and several Federal Ministries. Preparation of the draft review and
recommendations will be undertaken by two Russian and one international consultant and the
draft review will be submitted to the Inter-Agency Task Team for consideration and approval.
3.3
Activity 3: Expert Workshop on Methodology and Policy Considerations
An Expert Workshop will be convened to define the scope of the sources and activities to be dealt
with in the GEF project and the nature of the analysis of scales of effect that will lead to the
identification of incremental responsibilities. This Workshop will be attended by technical and
policy experts from the Russian Federation, several technical and policy experts from other arctic
states and a few relevant international experts. It will also be attended by individuals previously
involved in GEF Transboundary Diagnostic Analyses to ensure that the scope of such analyses is
considered in the discussion. The Workshop will be convened for 6 days in Moscow in
November 1999 and would have up to 30 participants including selected members of the Steering
Group. The purpose of this Workshop will be to:
a) define the types of activity and source to be included in the scope of the characterisation of
hot-spots in the Russian Arctic;
b) define the scales of adverse effect that are required to determine incremental
responsibilities beyond those of the Russian Federation, specifically at regional (arctic) and
global scales;
c) outline methodology for assessing incrementality of effects on the arctic environment from
sources and activities within the Russian Federation;
d) specify any other requirements from policy perspectives that will need to be satisfied in the
analysis of hot-spots;
e) establish a basis for characterisation and prioritisation among sources and activities in
relation to their effects on local and regional and international scales;
f) specify procedures, providing examples, for the preparation of a root-cause analysis; and
g) prepare a scoping document for guiding the discussions and work during the subsequent
Expert Workshop on the Identification and Characterisation of Hot-Spots.
3.4 Activity 4: Analysis of pollutant transport mechanisms and zones of impact
Transport of pollutants through the atmosphere and by river flow, results in zones of impact that
may be traced over substantial distances. Specific sources of large-scale releases (into the
atmosphere) and discharges (into water bodies) into the Arctic are of different kinds of pollutants
such as heavy metals (nickel, copper, lead, cadmium, mercury, etc.) and persistent organic
pollutants (POPs of different origin, PCBs, benzopyrenes, dioxins, etc.). Sources will be
identified through: assessment of the data on pollutant discharges and releases from particular
enterprises (source approach); and assessment of the data on the levels of environmental pollution
and ecosystem degradation (target approach). For each identified source the temporal distribution
and composition of releases and discharges will be studied. Data for atmospheric transport in the
arctic region are few and will require careful analysis in order to identify the need for appropriate
remedial actions at source.
10
River runoff plays the leading role in contamination of the Arctic Ocean. Due to the huge
catchment area in the Russsian Federation (75 percent of the entire area of the country) and large
water volume (70 percent of the total river runoff in the country), most of the organic matter,
nitrogen, phosphorus, iron, silicon compounds, petroleum, and pesticides from the Russian
territory ultimately arrive in the Arctic Ocean via river runoff. The relevant data will be carefully
evaluated and where possible correlation made between contamination in zones of impact and
particular sources. The outputs of this activity will include: a list of the major sources of pollution
relevant to the Russian Arctic and an assessment of primary air and water routes of pollutant
transport from the identified sources to the Arctic Ocean.
For the implementation of this activity a small working group will be established, under the co-
ordination of the State Committee for the Development of the North (Goskomsever), with
participation of the representatives of State Duma and several Federal Ministries. Preparation of a
draft analysis will be undertaken by three Russian and two international consultants. The draft
analysis will be presented to the Inter-Agency Task Team meeting for consideration.
3.5 Activity 5: First Expert Workshop on the Identification and Characterisation of Hot-
Spots
A first Expert Workshop on Identification and Characterisation of Hot-Spots will be convened in
Moscow in January 2000. This Workshop will be convened to define the methods for identifying
sources and human activities in the Russian Arctic, including within major arctic drainage basins,
in the context of the severity and distance of adverse effects. These methods must be devised in a
manner that enables the allocation of priorities to individual hot-spots in terms of the scales and
severity of their effects. Guidelines for the application of the selected method(s) would be
prepared to allow assessments of individual hot-spots to be carried out as a demonstration of their
practicality and utility. The output from the Workshop will constitute a blueprint for the scope,
content and modus operandi for the identification, characterisation and prioritisation of hot-spots
in the Russian Arctic in a manner that fully fulfils the needs of not only the Russian Federation
but those of the other Arctic States. Participation in this Workshop will be largely drawn from
technical experts familiar with the Arctic, especially the Russian Arctic, with the involvement of
a few policy experts drawn from the Russian Federation and the arctic community (i.e., from the
member states of the Arctic Council) and representatives of relevant NGOs. Total participation in
each Workshop would be approximately 30 individuals, largely drawn from the Russian
Federation but including some external experts and a small number of members of the Steering
Group.
The first Workshop will be of five working days duration and its purpose will be to:
a) define the range of activities and sources constituting hot-spots of concern in the Russian
Arctic;
b) specify criteria required to characterise these sources and activities in relation to the
severity of adverse effects at local, regional (i.e., Arctic) and global scales in sufficient
detail to allow discrimination between national responsibilities and incremental
responsibilities at both the regional (i.e., Arctic) and global levels;
c) define procedures for rigorous characterisation of all hot-spots within the Russian Arctic
that could be applied in a uniform and coherent manner to permit both the setting of
11
priorities and the identification of incrementality; and
d) develop procedures, with examples, for root-cause analysis of a selected range of
contemporary sources and activities resulting in damage or posing threats to the Arctic as a
means of providing a basis for evaluating options for intervention.
3.6
Activity 6: Intersessional Technical Evaluations of Hot-Spots
A number of Russian expert consultants, working with the assistance of two part-time
international consultants will undertake the technical evaluations required to implement the
assessment of sources and activities as defined by the First Expert Workshop on the Identification
and Characterisation of Hot-Spots. The consultants' task will be to prepare a catalogue of sources
and activities with specification of character and relative priorities as a working paper for
adoption at the Second Expert Workshop (Activity 8). It is estimated that up to 8 months will be
required for this work to be completed.
3.7 Activity 7: Analysis of the existing practice in preparation of pre-investment studies in
the Russian Federation and development of guidelines for their future
preparation
There are number of environmental hot-spots that require investment in order to eliminate their
negative consequences on the environment. For such hot-spots it will be necessary to prepare pre-
investment studies, which will identify the investments needed to mitigate the identified
environmental problems. Such studies will include technical, economic, financial, social and
environmental components that should have adequate content and should be presented in such a
manner as to encourage potential partners to invest in the protection of the marine and coastal
environment of the Arctic region of the Russian Federation.
The specific objective of this activity is to analyse selected pre-investment studies which have
been carried out in the Russian Federation over the last several years and which are relevant to
the protection and development of the marine and coastal environment of the Arctic region. Such
an analysis should indicate the weak points in the preparation of previous pre-investment studies
and propose changes in the legal instruments and administrative procedures required to improve
the utility and acceptability of future pre-investment studies. On the basis of this analysis
guidelines for the preparation of future pre-investment studies will be developed.
For the implementation of this activity a small working group will be established, under the co-
ordination of the State Committee for the Development of the North (Goskomsever), with
participation of the representatives of State Duma and several Federal Ministries. Actual work
will be done by two Russian and two international consultants. The draft analysis and guidelines
will be submitted to the Inter-Agency Task Team for consideration for adoption and application
during the execution of the full project.
3.8 Activity 8: Second Expert Workshop on the Identification and Characterisation of
Hot- Spots
The Second Expert Workshop will be required to review, revise and adopt the products of the
consultants' work, presented in the form of a working paper, in the context of guidance prepared
at the First Expert Workshop. This provides a basis for widespread acceptance among Russian
12
and international experts of the assessment prepared as part of this PDF-B. The Second
Workshop will be held in Moscow in October 2000 for five working days and its purpose will be
to:
a) adopt the specification, characterisation and prioritisation of current Russian sources and
activities, based on the working paper submitted by the technical consultants, contributing
to damage or threats to the arctic environment;
b) evaluate the specification of the proportions of damage and threat attributed to national,
regional and global scales and specify an agreed procedure for discriminating incremental
components of the costs of intervention to obviate, reduce or prevent arctic environmental
degradation;
c) undertake a root-cause analysis for a selected range of contemporary sources and activities
resulting in damage or posing threats to the Arctic as a means of providing a basis for
evaluating options for intervention; and
d) draw up guidelines by which such procedures could be applied to the entire Russian Arctic.
The requirement for two Workshops is mandated by the requirement for the considerable
intersessional work to be carried out by Russian and other expert consultants between the two
Workshops. This will enable the entire specification of hot-spots to be completed in a thorough
and comprehensive manner that would not be possible on the basis of a single Workshop.
3.9 Activity 9: Finalisation of the GEF Project Brief and Final Steering Group Meeting
Following completion of the substantive activities ACOPS will prepare, in close collaboration
with the UNEP/GEF Co-ordination Office, a first draft of the GEF Project brief for consideration
by the Russian Inter-Agency Task Team and other involved agencies. This draft will then be
considered and finalised during a final meeting of the Steering Group convened in London for 5
days in January 2001. The final project document will conform to the GEF format and
requirements. It is estimated that the final project will be of the order of 15 Million US $ and will
take 36 months to complete.
4.
ELIGIBILITY
The Russian Federation is eligible for GEF assistance under paragraph 9(b) of the GEF
Instrument.
5. NATIONAL LEVEL SUPPORT
5.1 National support for PDF-B activities has been included in the proposal in the form of in-kind
and financial contributions. Purely national support has been augmented by contributions from
the other developed arctic states to ensure an equitable balance between Russian and GEF
funding. The same approach, but with rather more discernment in the actual proportions of
incremental costs attributable to the other arctic countries and GEF, will be adopted in the
preparation of the full project brief.
5.2 The present proposal has been formulated in support of the resolution in relation to a National
Plan of Action for the arctic marine environment formulated and adopted in October 1998, at a
Conference of Official Representatives of the State Duma and the Government of the Russian
Federation (Annex 2).
13
6.
OUTPUTS OF THE PDF-B
a) Reports of the two Steering Group meetings, the Expert Workshop on Methodology and
Policy Considerations and the two Expert Workshops on the Identification and
Characterisation of Hot-Spots;
b) Review of relevant legislation and administrative arrangements at Federal and Provincial
level together with recommendations for change;
c) Complete scoping of the project with guidelines and procedures for the thorough
development of pre-investment studies for priority transboundary hot-spot remedial
measures;
d) A preliminary root-cause analysis for compromises to the arctic environment stemming
from sources and activities in the Russian Federation;
e) Identification of options for intervention selected on the basis of the root-cause analysis;
f) Definition of procedures to be used for the evaluation of intervention options taking full
account of their net benefits and efficacy;
g) Criteria for determination of incremental costs attributable at the regional (i.e., Arctic) and
global levels to provide a basis for the division of costs and an itemisation of appropriate
co-funding from national sources and from the other arctic states;
h) Priority listing of Russian hot-spots and agreed list of those for which pre-investment
studies will be undertaken;
i) A review or pollutant transport mechanisms and zones of impact; and
j) A GEF Project Brief.
7. SPECIAL FEATURES - ASPECTS OF THE ANALYSIS FOR PARTICULAR ATTENTION
7.1 This project addresses environmental degradation of national and regional scope resulting
from national activities within the Russian Federation affecting the arctic regional marine
environment. Its purpose is to promote preventative and corrective action on the part of the
Russian Federation for activities that adversely affect the Russian arctic, the whole arctic region
and the global environment. It provides a constructive and multilateral process for addressing
problems at all scales in a manner that ensures that the greatest benefits accrue to the affected
areas. Furthermore, it embodies a mechanism to pre-define national, regional and global
responsibilities for the protection and improvement of the marine environment. The PDF-B
activities have been specifically designed to promote appropriate and sustained communication
with a wide selection of government representatives, both Russian and from the other Arctic
countries thereby providing an appropriate consultative mechanism.
7.2 A special feature of this project is that it is a proposed single country intervention in a region
consisting of eight countries, of which only one is GEF eligible. All countries in the region
participated in the preparation of a detailed regional assessment, analogous to the Transboundary
Diagnostic Analysis called for under the GEF International Waters Operational Strategy.
14
8. ITEMS TO BE FINANCED THROUGH GEF PDF-B BLOCK GRANT
8.1 Table 1 provides a breakdown by costs of activity. Costs of travel and DSA for expert non-
UN agency participants in the Expert Workshops, and in the Steering Group meetings will be met
from the GEF grant as will the costs of consultant assistance in the preparation of, and follow-up
to, each Workshop. Meeting facilities and administrative support to the conduct of meetings will
be provided through the executing agencies as an in-kind contribution to costs of execution.
8.2 Consultants from the Russian Federation and the region will be hired to undertake technical
and substantive work during the intersessional period in collaboration with the Russian Executing
Agency between the first and second Technical Workshops and to prepare various background
documents and reviews. Administration and management of the entire project will be undertaken
by ACOPS that will contribute in cash and kind to the execution of this PDF-B.
8.3 It is intended that representatives of industry and NGOs be involved in the Expert Workshops
at their own cost, however, no assumptions have been made in this regard so as not to endanger
full participation in the Expert Workshops.
15
TABLE 1 COST TABLE - FRAMEWORK BUDGET BY ACTIVITY (US $)
Activity GEF
ACOPS
Russian
Other
Total
Federation
Sources
Activity 1 Steering Group
First Meeting
20,000
3,000
6,000
0
29,000
Second Meeting
30,000
3,000
10,000
0
43,000
Activity 2 Review of legislation
0
6,000
24,000
36,000
66,000
Activity 3 Expert Workshop on
28,000
3,000
23,000
23,000 77,000
Methodology and Policy Considerations
Activity 4 Analysis of pollutant
50,000
3,000
30,000
46,000 129,000
transport mechanisms and zones of
impact
Activity 5 First Expert Workshop on
25,000
4,000
20,000
25,000 74,000
Identification & characterisation of hot-
spots
Activity 6 Technical evaluation of hot
60,000
3,000
25,000
34,000 122,000
spots
Activity 7 Analysis of practices for
25,000
3,000
13,000
65,000 106,000
preparation of pre-investment studies
Activity 8 Second Expert Workshop on
25,000
3,000
20,000
23,000 71,000
Hot Spots
Activity 9 Preparation of Working
15,000
2,000
0 0
17,000
Papers and GEF Project Brief
Executing Agency Management &
28,000
0
0 18,000 46,000
support costs
TOTAL
306,000
33,000
171,000
215,000
780,000
16
EXPECTED DATE OF PDF COMPLETION
Sixteen months from PDF-B approval. A preliminary timetable is provided in Table 2. The full project will probably run for about 30-36 months.
TABLE 2: PRELIMINARY WORKPLAN AND TIMETABLE FOR PDF-B ACTIVITIES
PDF-B Activities
1999 2000
2001
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
Activity 1 Project Steering Group
Internalisation and Establishment of Steering Group
Preparations for Steering Group Meetings
Steering Group Meetings
Steering Group Meeting Report Preparation
Activity 2 Review of legislation & administration
Meeting of the working group
Preparation of the review
Approval of the review by the Inter-Agency Task Team
Activity 3 Expert Workshop on Methodology and
Policy
Preparations for Workshop
Workshop on Methodology & Policy Considerations
Workshop Report Preparation
Activity 4 Pollutant transport & zones of impact
Meeting of the Working Group
Preparation of the Analysis
Approval of the Analysis by the Inter-Agency TT
Activity 5 First Expert Workshop on Hot-Spots
Preparations for Expert Workshop
Expert Workshop
Workshop Report Preparation
Activity 6 Intersessional Technical Work
Activity 7 Analysis of practices for pre-investment
studies
Meeting of the Working Group
Preparation of the Analysis & Guidelines
Approval of the Analysis & Guidelines by IA T. Team
Activity 8 Second Expert Workshop on Hot-Spots
Preparations
for
Expert
Workshop
Expert
Workshop
Workshop
Report
Preparation
Activity 9 Preparation of GEF Project Brief
Draft Preparation
Finalisation of GEF Project Brief
17
ANNEX 1. Major Pollution Sources Identified by the Russian Federation (after appendix 2 of the RPA - Arctic)
Pollutant
Major Sources and Priority
Principle
Known/Suspected
Status of
Uncertainties to be
Relative
Category
Pollutants
Pathways
Effects
Information and
Resolved
Importance
Management
POPs
3. Archangelsk & Solombalsky pulp &
1. River transfer.
Ecosystems of N. Dvina
Information is
Exact information on
Important
paper mills (PPM)
2. Air transfer.
Gulf are destroyed.
insufficient.
discharges and emissions in
·
Methyl mercaptan, CS2, formaldehyde,
Management is
recent years.
phenols, dioxins, mercury.
inadequate.
Radionuclides
5. Severodvinsk nuclear fleet shipyards
Water and air
Harm to human health.
Information almost
State of existing RW storage
Very Important
(SMP) & Zvezdochka) Kola peninsula
transfer.
Pollution of ecosystems.
sufficient.
sites.
coastal zone.
Management
·
Radionuclides
inadequate.
Radionuclides
6. (a) Majak reprocessing;
Water and air
Harm to human health.
Information almost
State of existing RW storage
Very Important
(b) Siberian chemical works (near transfer.
Pollution of ecosystems.
sufficient.
sites. State of radioactive
Tomsk);
Management
pollution in river systems
inadequate.
environment Techa-Iset-Tobol-
(c) Krasnoyarsk mining and
Irtysh-Ob' (a); Tom'-Ob' (b);
chemical works
and Yenisey (c).
· Radionuclides
Heavy Metals
1. Norilsk mining and metallurgical works.
1. Air transfer.
1. Regional: Impact on
Information
More information on the
Most Important
·
Heavy metals: Cu, Ni, Co, Cd.
2. River transfer.
Arctic rivers, ecosystems
insufficient.
concentration of pollution in
·
Flue gases (combustion products): SO
3. Wash-out with
and coastal areas, especially
Management
the ecosystems is required.
2,
NO
melted snow.
Pyasina Bay and Yenisey
inadequate.
Additional studies of effects on
x, suspended solids (dust), H2S.
·
Anions (saline discharge), SO 2-
Bay.
ecosystems. Long-range
4 , Cl- and
formaldehyde.
2. Local: Forest destruction
transfer should be studied in air
500,000 ha: 100 x
(origin of Arctic haze?) and
background concentration in
rivers.
moss at 100 km.
Heavy Metals
2. Pechanga-nickel mining and
1. Air transfer.
Forest destruction 70,000 ha. Information is almost
Additional studies of effects in
Most Important
metallurgical works.
2. River transfer.
Landscape destruction
sufficient.
ecosystems. Studies of long-
·
Heavy metals: Cu, Ni, Co, Cd.
3. Wash-out with
within a radius of 40 km.
Management is almost
range transfer in air and by
·
Flue gases (combustion products): SO
melted snow.
River ecosystems damaged.
adequate.
rivers.
2,
NOx, suspended solids (dust), H2S.
·
Anions (saline discharge) SO 2-
4 , Cl- and
formaldehyde.
Oil
4. Oil and gas installation in Timano-
River transfer.
Pollution and degradation of
Information sufficient.
Better monitoring of the
Important
Pechors Province (TPP) and West Siberia
river ecosystems, marches
Management
condition of pipelines.
Province (WSP).
ecosystems, soil and
inadequate.
·
Oil hydrocarbons
terrestrial ecosystems.
* based on papers presented by Russian Federation to ACOPS International Conferences (Washington and Stockholm).
18
ANNEX 2
Resolution of the Conference of Official Representatives of the State Duma and the
Government of the Russian Federation Dedicated to Approval of the National Plan of Action
for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Anthropogenic Pollution in the Arctic
Region of the Russian Federation (NPA-Arctic)
Moscow, 2nd October 1998
Aware of the need to safeguard and improve the quality of the marine environment in the Arctic
region of the Russian Federation, reduce the unfavourable effects of pollution on ecosystems and
human health, ensure the Russian Federation's effective participation in the implementation of
international programmes of action aimed at protecting the marine environment, secure Russia's
national interests and implement the principles of sustainable development, the participants of the
conference:
1. support the efforts made by the Goskomsever, other ministries and government departments
concerned, and the executive authorities of the Arctic regions to develop the NPA-Arctic;
2. endorse the work done by the Interagency Task Team under the auspices of the Goskomsever
and with the assistance of the Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea (ACOPS) with a
view to developing the NPA-Arctic;
3. note that implementation of the NPA-Arctic would meet the national interests of Russia and the
interests of the world community and help accomplish the tasks stipulated under the Federal
Target-Oriented Programme (FTOP) `World Ocean', as well as other relevant international
programmes, and promote the objectives of protecting the natural environment and a stable
Arctic environment as reflected in the Declaration of Section 1 of the Arctic Council
(September 1998, Canada);
4. approve the concept, structure, general content and focus areas of the NPA-Arctic and an
associated long-term work plan;
5. recommend that the NPA-Arctic be forwarded to the Ministry of Economy of the Russian
Federation for consideration of the possibility of incorporating it in the FTOP `World Ocean';
6. take notice of statements made by State Duma Deputy's Prof. V.V. Tetelmin and Mr. V.A.
Bayunov to the effect that they support the key provisions of the NPA-Arctic, which will help to
ensure that the Government of the Russian Federation makes a decision to finance individual
sections of the NPA-Arctic and will promote the improvement of legal infrastructures for the
protection and conservation of the marine environment in the Arctic region of the Russia
Federation;
7. recommend considering the possibility of incorporating the NPA-Arctic into the National Plan
of Action to Protect the Natural Environment of the Russian Federation (1988-2000);
8. recommend considering the possibility of forwarding information on the NPA-Arctic to the
Government of Russian Federation and the State Duma of the Russian Federation;
9. request the federal executive authorities, the administrations of the Arctic regions, scientific,
financial and public organisations, and large industrial centres in the Arctic to take part in the
development and implementation of the NPA-Arctic; and
10. invite interested countries, international governmental and public organisations, and business
and industrial communities to participate in the development and implementation of the NPA-
Arctic.
19