Environmental Impact Assessment of the Concept Paper

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Government of the Republic of Armenia MCA-Armenia Team Proposal for Millennium Challenge Account Assistance of the Concept Paper E2203 September 2005

2 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL Proposed Investment Areas Current Situation of Irrigation Infrastructure and Proposed Investments Current Situation of Rural Roads and Proposed Investments ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN ARMENIA Legal Framework International Agreements Institutional Framework ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS No Action Alternative Potential Positive Impacts Potential Negative Impacts Mitigation Measures ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND CLAUSES FOR CIVIL WORKS CONTRACTS PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION MONITORING MAIN FINDINGS REFERENCES...74 ANNEXES...76 ANNEX A: MAP...77 ANNEX B: CHECKLISTS AND FORMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RECONNAISSANCE...78 ANNEX C: TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR EIAs AND ESMPs...87 ANNEX D: LIST OF KEY CONSULTATIVE MEETINGS AND FIELD VISITS...97 Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 2

3 1. INTRODUCTION This Proposal, presented by the Government of the Republic of Armenia, seeks financial assistance from the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) to support a five year program of strategic investments in irrigation and community roads, aimed at increasing agricultural production in poor rural areas of the country. The proposal has been elaborated in close consultation with key stakeholders in civil society, the most important being the communities themselves. The specific poverty reduction focus on public infrastructure in rural areas is consistent with the government s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) of August 2003 and addresses directly the various impediments reducing rural poverty identified in the first full PRSP progress report of March The proposal has been prepared within the framework of the guidance for MCA assistance provided to eligible countries. Main Program Highlights Objective: Increase Agricultural Productivity and Output, and Reduce Rural Poverty MCA Financing: $175 million (to be clarified) Implementation: 5 years Key Sectors: Irrigation and Rural Roads Impact: 5% Decrease in Rural Poverty by 2010 Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 3

4 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL 2.1. Proposed Investment Areas A productive agricultural sector is important for the national economy, vital for food security as well as for rural poverty alleviation, and provides links to downstream industries such as agricultural processing. More than one million people, or 35% of the population, live in rural areas and their economic livelihood is dependent on agricultural production. In 2003, farm income accounted for more than 50% of total income of rural households. With very few opportunities for off-farm employment, Armenia s rural population depends for survival on small farms. There are two important preconditions for productive agriculture in Armenia: investment in irrigation, which is key to increasing agricultural production, improving labor productivity and eradicating rural poverty; and investment in a rural roads network, which is essential for commercializing agricultural production in rural communities. Only 10% of Armenia s rural road network is in good condition and there has been minimal investment, or maintenance of the network, over the past decade. Annex A contains a map of the irrigation and road schemes Current Situation of Irrigation Infrastructure and Proposed Investments Currently the most effective and reliable way to increase labor productivity, accelerate growth and eradicate rural poverty are investments in irrigation networks. During Soviet Union times, the volume of cropland under permanent irrigation was hectares, or 57% of all arable land. The Soviet irrigation system was based on the mechanical irrigation principle with extensive use of electricity (around 600 million kilowatts yearly in the late 1980s compared with million kilowatts in 2003) and water was provided free of charge. The lack of recurrent expenditure, and maintenance, on the infrastructure over the last decade, has had a deleterious impact on the condition of the network. The irrigation infrastructure is in a poor state or entirely non-operational in over 52% of previously irrigated land. About 20% of the total network is regarded as being in good condition, whilst 28% is regarded as being in fair condition. In these conditions, the irrigation investment strategy should aim at the improvement of the level of commercial viability of crop production, keeping or upgrading mechanical irrigation system only in the places, where they are economically efficient and replacing them with the gravity and other systems, which will provide water at an economically acceptable cost. The proposed project components are aimed at an expansion of irrigated land areas and an increase in the efficiency of irrigation systems. This will be achieved through the following schemes presented below. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 4

5 IRRIGATION SCHEMES DESCRIPTION SCHEME No: 01 Scheme Name: Artashat WUA: Azat, Artashat, Vedi, Mkhchian, Ararat, Masis Marz: Ararat Location (center): E 44 o 32' ; N 40 o 00' Elevation range: m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 28,902 ha After Project: 34,502 ha Main Crops: grape, orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 19,391 Indirect: 59,734 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Artashat irrigation system is designed for more than 36,000 ha in south-east Ararat valley. Around 17,000 ha are under Artashat main canal which intakes by gravity water from River Hrazdan (until May), from Azat Reservoir and from Mkhchian P/S (16 m 3 /s and 2 steps) after flood season. The rest 19,000 ha are irrigated by pumping stations located on the rivers and drainage collectors or by tube-wells. The Artashat main canal is under operation since 1930's and water loses in the canal are estimated at 25%. In the scope of Irrigation Rehabilitation Project financed by the World Bank in the mid of 1990's critical hydro-structures (siphons, etc.) and stretches of canal have been rehabilitated, but 21km of the main canal (from total 54km) still needs rehabilitation. 14 large pumping stations supplying water to around 19,000 ha are in operation more than 20-30years and are in bad technical condition, which causes extra energy use, high annual expenses for maintenance and there is a risk that thousands hectares can stay without water. Less water and distrust of farmers for sufficient irrigation do not allow cultivation of high value crops as grapes, fruits or vegetables and farmers currently grow wheat or alfalfa. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:1.1) rehabilitation of 21km stretches of the Artashat main canal will allow to reduce water losses by 13.1 Mm 3, increase water distribution and have enough water for lands located in the end of the main canal; (Subcomponent No:1.2) rehabilitation of 14 pumping stations will allow to sufficiently reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on more than 23,000 ha; (Subcomponent No:1.3) construction of Aigezard gravity scheme will allow to annually save 2.8 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 1800ha; (Subcomponent No:1.4) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 4600 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 3.5 Mm 3 3. DESCRIPTION OF OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 13.0 MkWt/h will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction of gravity scheme. Eight large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. annually around 16.0 Mm 3 will be saved in the irrigation system after rehabilitation of the main canal and tertiary system; on 8,000 ha around 20,000 farmers (or around 80,000 residents in 73 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and double net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 5

6 SCHEME No: 02 Scheme Name: Low-Hrazdan WUA: Vagharshapat, Khoi, Musaler, Aknalich Marz: Armavir Location (center): E 44 o 15' ; N 40 o 08' Elevation range: m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 13,178 ha After Project: 16,230 ha Main Crops: grape, orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 11,124 Indirect: 29,759 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Low-Hrazdan irrigation system is designed for more than 18,000 ha in the mid-western part of Ararat valley. The system receives water from River Hrazdan (until May), from Lake Sevan and from Arevshat and Ranchpar large P/S after flood season. Another 7 P/S are irrigating 1750 ha lands located higher the Low-Hrazdan main canal. Local plots are irrigated also irrigated by deep-wells. Due to high losses of water in the main canal lands receiving water from end part of the canal do not receive enough water. The pumping stations are in operation more than years and are in bad technical condition. This causes extra energy use, often irrigation interruptions and currently more than 2000 ha are not irrigated. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:2.1) reconstruction of 24.9 km of Low-Hrazdan main canal will allow to reduce water losses by 10.2 Mm 3, increase water distribution, increase water supply to Arevshat P/S and have enough water for lands located in the end part of the main canal; (Subcomponent No:2.2) rehabilitation of 11 pumping stations which will result in energy savings at around 10 Mkwt/h and improve water distribution on ha; (Subcomponent No:2.3) rehabilitation of tertiary irrigation system on 3500 ha will reduce water losses and will result better conditions for water distribution. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually 9.7 MkWt/h will be saved due to efficient operation of pumping stations; annually more that 12 Mm 3 will be saved due to rehabilitation of main canal and tertiary system; irrigation will be recovered on around 3000 ha; farmers (or more than rural residents) from 43 communities will get opportunity to grow high value crops and double their net income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 6

7 SCHEME No: 03 Scheme Name: Armavir WUA: Armavir, Araks, Merdzapnia, Sevjur-Akhtamar Marz: Armavir Location (center): E 44 o 00 ; N 40 o 06 Elevation range: m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 23,003 ha After Project: 24,531 ha Main Crops: grape, orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 4,005 Indirect: 32,150 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Armavir irrigation system is designed for more than 25,000 ha in the western part of Ararat valley. Armavir main canal takes water by gravity from river Araks and Akhurian reservoir. 7 pumping stations located on the main canal provide water to 1800 ha higher lands. The main canal is under operation many decades and water losses in the canal are estimated at 30%. In the scope of Irrigation Development Project intake structure was reconstructed and 8.8km (from total 16km of the main canal) earth canal was lined. Due to high losses in the main and tertiary canal, also bad technical condition and high consumption of energy by the pumping stations thousands hectares of lands do not receive water and on many thousand hectares of other lands farmers are not able to cultivate high value crops. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:3.1) lining km of Armavir main earth canal which will allow to reduce water losses by 27,3 Mm 3, increase water distribution and have enough water for lands located in the end of the main canal; (Subcomponent No:3.2) rehabilitation of 7 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use by 2.5 Mkwt/h annually and will insure irrigation on more than 1,700 ha; (Subcomponent No:3.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on around 6,000 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 4.5 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually 2.5 MkWt/h will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations; annually around 32.0 Mm 3 will be saved in the irrigation system after reconstruction and rehabilitation of the main canal and tertiary system; on 2,500 ha around 10,000 farmers (or around 40,000 residents in 50 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 7

8 SCHEME No: 04 Scheme Name: Talin WUA: Shenik, Karakert, Talin, Mush, Armavir Marz: Aragatsotn Location (center): E 43 o 50' ; N 40 o 10' Elevation range: 900-1,400 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 13,056 ha After Project: 23,320 ha Main Crops: orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 12,043 Indirect: 14,612 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Talin irrigation system is designed for irrigating 25,000 ha lands in the mid-west of Armenia. This part of the country was populated relatively not long ago (in 1950s) and the lands were ameliorated since that time. The main canal currently is operating WSA and is supplying water to 3 WUAs (the fourth - Mush WUA is under small reservoirs located on the slopes of mountain Aragats). Water source for system is Akhurian reservoir (525 Mm 3 ) which is on the border with Turkey and the water is shared by both countries. Critical sections (3.3 km from total 48 km) and hydro-structures of the main canal were rehabilitated in the scope of Irrigation Rehabilitation Project (WB) in the mid of 90s. The rest part of the canal currently is in poor condition and has huge losses. This causes water distribution problems for lands located in the end of the canal and currently only 13,000 ha (from total 20,000 ha) are irrigated. More than 9,000 ha of lands in Talin and Shenik WUAs are under large 6 pumping stations which are located on the main canal. Due to bad technical condition of the pumps currently only 3,800 ha are irrigated. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:4.1) rehabilitation of40,89 km stretches of the Talin main canal will allow to reduce water losses by 50.0 Mm 3 and have enough water for efficient irrigation of entire 20,000 ha of lands; (Subcomponent No:4.2) rehabilitation of 6 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on 9,500 ha; (Subcomponent No:4.3) construction of Shenik gravity scheme will allow to annually save 4.46 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 2,100ha; (Subcomponent No:4.4) construction of Sasnashen reservoir will allow to irrigate by gravity 200 ha of lands of 2 communities in Mush WUA; (Subcomponent No:4.5) reconstruction of Irind reservoir will allow to irrigate by gravity 150 ha of lands of community Irind in Mush WUA. (Subcomponent No:4.6) Rehabilitation of tertiary system on 3,800 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 2.8 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 6.7 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction of Shenik gravity scheme. Two large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. annually more than 52.0 Mm 3 water will be saved in the irrigation system after rehabilitation of the main canal and tertiary system; on 10,000 ha around 12,000 farmers (or around 50,000 residents in 51 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 8

9 SCHEME No: 05 Scheme Name: Arzni-Shamiram WUA: Nairi, Eghvard, Ashtarak, Kasakh, Amberd, Parpi, Shamiram Marz: Aragatsotn, Kotayq Location (center): E 44 o 20' ; N 40 o 16' Elevation range: 900-1,400 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 15,765 ha After Project: 20,765 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 16,214 Indirect: 33,669 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Arzni-Shamiram system irrigates around 25,000 ha lands of 7 WUAs located in sub-mountainous region of Aragats. The source for the main canal is the river Hrazdan and Aparan reservoir. In early 1980's the 82 km Arzni-Shamiram main canal was capitally rehabilitated. Later in the mid of 1990's emergency rehabilitation works were carried out in the scope of Irrigation Rehabilitation Project (WB) which included critical structures and the intention was to avoid interruption of irrigation on thousands of hectares, but not reduction of water losses. Currently Arzni-Shamiram main canal is operated by WSA. Due to very high losses in the canal (30%) it is very difficult to manage water distribution especially to the last WUA in the chain - Shamiram WUA, which always has water scarcity problems. In quite bad technical condition are the pumping stations located on the canal and currently only 1/3 of lands are irrigated. In general because of technical poor condition 5,000 ha (from total 20,000) of privatized lands are currently cultivated and around 8,000 farmers are not cultivating their lands. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:5.1) rehabilitation of 34,15 km of Arzni-Shamiram canal will allow to reduce water losses by 26 Mm 3 and enough water will be available for efficiently irrigating 20,000 ha of lands; (Subcomponent No:5.2) rehabilitation of 5 P/S will allow to reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on more than 500 ha of lands; (Subcomponent No:5.3) construction of Ashtarak gravity scheme will allow to annually save 3.4 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on around 800 ha. Six large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. (Subcomponent No: 5.4, 5.5, 5.6) construction of Apna, Orgov and Lernarot small reservoirs will allow to irrigate by gravity more than 900 ha of lands and provide water to 11 communities; (Subcomponent No:5.7) Rehabilitation of tertiary system on 4,200 ha will allow to reduce water losses by 3,2 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually 3.6 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction of a gravity scheme; annually around 30.0 Mm 3 water will be saved in the irrigation system after rehabilitation of the main canal and tertiary system; on 20,000 ha around 35,000 farmers (or around 110,000 residents in 62 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 9

10 SCHEME No: 06 Scheme Name: Shirak WUA: Ajapniakvorogum, Shirvorogum, Aigabats Marz: Shirak Location (center): E 43 o 50' ; N 40 o 48' Elevation range: 1,500-1,700 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 8,562 ha After Project: 15,521 ha Main Crops: vegetables, potato, alfalfa, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 4125 Indirect: 9200 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM More than 17,000 ha lands in Shirak valley (the second biggest valley located in the north west of the country) are irrigated by Shirak irrigation system. The main water source is the river Akhurian, Arpi-Lich, Tavshut, Karnut, Vardakar and Mantash reservoir. The main canal is under operation since 1920's and due to deterioration has high losses (around 20%). In the scope of Irrigation Rehabilitation Project financed by the World Bank in the mid of 1990's critical hydro-structures and stretches of canal have been rehabilitated which intended to avoid breaks in irrigation. High losses in the canal do not allow to irrigate half of command area (8,000 ha). During the last soviet years construction of Kaps reservoir was started but after collapse of the Soviet Union construction was stopped. Meantime completion of the Kaps reservoir and construction of gravity system could sufficiently increase productivity of agriculture on more than 3,000 ha in the region. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:6.1) rehabilitation of 40 km stretches of Shirak main canal will allow to reduce water losses by 15 Mm 3 and enough water will be distributed end farmers; (Subcomponent No:6.2) construction of Kaps gravity scheme will allow to annually save 7.10 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 3,100 ha; (Subcomponent No:6.3) construction of Tavshut gravity scheme will allow to annually save 7.10 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 3,100 ha; (Subcomponent No.6.4) Construction of Kaps Reservoir (Subcomponent No:6.5) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 2300 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 1.8 Mm 3 ; 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 7 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to construction of Kaps and Tavshut gravity schemes. Nine large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. annually more than 17 Mm 3 water will be saved in the irrigation system after rehabilitation of the main canal and tertiary system; on 15,500 ha 9,000 farmers (or around 35,000 residents in 53 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: potato, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 10

11 SCHEME No: 07 Scheme Name: Gegharkunik WUA: Martuni, Vardenis Marz: Gegharkunik Location (center): E 45 o 27' ; N 40 o 06' Elevation range: 1,900-2,100 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 3,589 ha After Project: 5,249 ha Main Crops: potato, vegetables, wheat, barley Beneficiaries: Direct: 5,402 Indirect: 5,747 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Three WUAs are established in Gegharkunik marz and each one has separate irrigation system. The main source of water is the lake Sevan. Continuous dynamic changes of the lake Sevan level creates problems for water capture and the same time the pumps after decades of operation are in bad technical condition. The same time high energy consumption makes irrigation inefficient in this area. Meanwhile Martuni and Vardenis WUAs have alternative water sources which can by gravity supplied to more than 3,000 ha. Currently more than 2/3 of lands in Gegharkunik marz are not irrigated and farmers here are able to cultivate only wheat with very low benefits. Improvement and availability of irrigation water can sufficiently increase agricultural production and a good chance will appear to reduce poverty level in this region. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:7.1) construction of Agrija gravity scheme in the service area of Martuni WUA will allow to annually save 4.2 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 2,200 ha; (Subcomponent No:7.2) construction of Vardenis gravity scheme will ensure irrigation on 1,000 ha in Vardeins WUA; (Subcomponent No. 7.3) Construction of Agrija Reservoir. (Subcomponent No:7.4) rehabilitation of 4 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use by 660 kwt/h annually and will insure irrigation on more than 2,000 ha; (Subcomponent No:7.5) Rehabilitation of tertiary system on 980 ha will allow to reduce water losses by 0.7 Mm 3 annually. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 4.8 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction 2 gravity schemes. Five large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 3,000 ha 5,500 farmers (or 20,000 residents in 30 communities) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: potato, irrigated wheat and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 11

12 SCHEME No: 08 Scheme Name: Vayots-Dzor WUA: Eghegnadzor, Vayk Marz: Vayots-Dzor Location (center): E 45 o 23' ; N 39 o 45' Elevation range: 1,000-1,500 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 4206 ha After Project: 4,544 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 634 Indirect: 634 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Two WUAs supply water to 7,500 ha of lands in Vayots-Dzor marz. Irrigation system of this region has the highest consumption of energy and in the scope of two projects financed by the World Bank and IFAD majority of lands after couple of years will receive cheap gravity water. Although tertiary system is not appropriate to fully use advantages of gravity irrigation and needs improvement and rehabilitation. Kndzorut village is located in the mountains and is separated from mentioned gravity schemes. Formerly water was supplied by pumps meantime there is a possibility to receive gravity water after construction of a reservoir and distributing canal. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:8.1) construction of Khndzorut gravity scheme with reservoir will allow to annually save 1.02 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on 450 ha; (Subcomponent No:8.2) construction of Khndzorut Reservoir will allow to ensure irrigation of 450 ha; (Subcomponent No:8.3) Rehabilitation of tertiary system on 1,500 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 1 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 1.0 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to construction of Khndzorut gravity scheme.. One large pumping plant will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 500 ha 700 farmers (or 3,000 residents) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 12

13 SCHEME No: 09 Scheme Name: Aparan WUA: Aparan-Aragats Marz: Aragatsotn Location (center): E 44 23' ; N 40 33' Elevation range: 1,800-2,000 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 1406 ha After Project: 2250 ha Main Crops: wheat, barley, vegetables, potato Beneficiaries: Direct: 3,703 Indirect: 4,506 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Service are of Aparan WUA is around 3000 ha. The water source is the river Kasakh and Halavar reservoir. Irrigation of around 2200 ha lands is performed by 5 pumping stations located on the river Kasakh. The pumps are highly deteriorated and have high energy consumption. In the result only 430 ha are currently irrigated. Around 3200 farmers do not receive water and without irrigation can cultivate only cereals with low production and benefits. Reservoir (Halavar) which is feeding river Kasakh is in upper elevations and it's pressure is enough to irrigate the lands by gravity and eliminate mentioned 5 pumping stations. Another opportunity for eliminating pumping station is the construction of hydro-pump which will allow to irrigated lands without consuming energy. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:9.1) construction of a 12 km pipeline from the Halavar reservoir which will eliminate 5 pumping stations, construction of Yerinjatap turbo-pump which will allow to irrigate 1950 ha; (Subcomponent No:9.2) construction of Vardenut reservoir which will provide water by gravity to 300 ha of lands ; (Subcomponent No:9.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 500 ha of lands. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more 2.4 MkWt/h will be saved due to elimination of five pumping station; annually more than 0.5 Mm 3 will be saved in the irrigation system after rehabilitation of the tertiary canals; on 2250 ha around 3200 farmers (or around residents in 11 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: potato, alfalfa, cabbage and double netincome - annually increasing by 200 USD per resident. People living in this area under poverty line (which is currently estimated at 350 USD per annum, per resident) will get enough capability to overpass that level. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 13

14 SCHEME No: 10 Scheme Name: Geghardalich WUA: Jrvegh-Dzorakhoiur Marz: Kotayq Location (center): E 44 o 48' ; N 40 o 16' Elevation range: 1,200-1,600 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 1,112 ha After Project: 1,322 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 563 Indirect: 2,869 Communities: 7 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Geghardalich reservoir is on 3000m elevation and has capability to supply water by gravity to more than 1000 ha of lands. Meantime currently it is feeding Azat reservoir located below from where water is pumped to irrigate the lands. The pumping station providing water has 4 steps, with high consumption of energy and due to very high cost makes irrigation inefficient. Besides the high cost of water the pumping station is in very poor technical condition and very often accidents cause interruptions for weeks with all negative consequences. Construction of a gravity scheme could sufficiently improve irrigation and increase agriculture production. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:10.1) construction of Geghardalich gravity scheme will allow to annually save 5.8 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on 1,000 ha; (Subcomponent No:10.2) rehabilitation of 2 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on 150 ha; (Subcomponent No:10.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 350 ha will allow to reduce water losses by 0.3 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 5.8 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction gravity scheme. Four large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 1,000 ha 3,000 farmers (or 12,000 residents) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 14

15 SCHEME No: 11 Scheme Name: Meghri WUA: Meghri Marz: Syunik Location (center): E 46 o 16' ; N 38 o 54' Elevation range: 600-1,000 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 496 ha After Project: 1,200 ha Main Crops: orchard, grapes Beneficiaries: Direct: 2,338 Indirect: 2,292 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Meghri is the farthest region from the capital Yerevan and is located on the border with Iran. Due to low elevations, hot summers and mild winters fruits (grapes, peach, quince, fig, pomegranate, red-pulp) are of excellent quality and have high demand in the local and out markets. The main source of irrigation water is the river Araks. 14 high pressure pumping stations are lifting water up to m and have high energy consumption. Besides this, due to high concentration of sediments in Araks river the rotors are very soon deteriorating and maintenance is more costly. The result is that currently only 500 ha are irrigated instead of formerly irrigated 1200 ha. Meghri river flows from the mountains and in high elevations have enough pressure to irrigate all lands of the region. Construction of a gravity scheme could fix all technical issues and farmers would be able to get maximum from fertile lands. For accumulating enough water for summer season there is possibility to construct a reservoir which will fully satisfy the needs. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:11.1) construction of Meghri gravity scheme with Lichk reservoir will allow to annually save 4.5 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 1200 ha. Twelve large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. (Subcomponent No:11.2) construction of Lichk Reservoir will allow to ensure irrigation of 1200 ha; (Subcomponent No:11.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 585 ha will allow to operate the gravity scheme and reduce water losses by 0.45 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually 4.5 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to construction of Meghri gravity scheme; on 1,200 ha 2,400 farmers (or 10,000 residents in 13 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grapes, peach, quince, fig, pomegranate, red-pulp and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 15

16 SCHEME No: 12 Scheme Name: Artik WUA: Aragats-Vorogum Marz: Shirak Location (center): E 43 o 50' ; N 40 o 38' Elevation range: 1,500-1,700 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 1,357 ha After Project: 2,812 ha Main Crops: orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 5,301 Indirect: 6,452 Communities: BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Aragats-Vorogum WUA is supplying water to lands of Artik region and the main source is the Mantash and Artik reservoirs. Due to high deteriorated pumping stations, collapsed Artik reservoir (1998 break of the Artik dam caused human losses and since that time is out of operation) and high losses in the canal since mid of 1990's more than half of the lands are not irrigated and farmers have minimum benefits from rain-fed wheat. Reconstruction of Artik reservoir, construction of a gravity scheme and construction of Bagravan reservoir could sufficiently improve irrigation, recover irrigation on 1,500 ha. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:12.1) construction of Mantash gravity scheme will allow to annually save 0.8 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on 900 ha; (Subcomponent No:12.2) reconstruction of Artik reservoir will allow to irrigate by gravity 450 ha of lands of 3 communities; (Subcomponent No:12.3) construction of Bagravan reservoir will allow to irrigate by gravity 150 ha of lands; (Subcomponent No:12.4) Rehabilitation of tertiary system on 370 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 0.3 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 0.8 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to construction of Mantash gravity scheme. Two large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 1,500 ha 3,000 farmers (or 12,0. 00 residents in 18 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: potato, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 16

17 SCHEME No: 13 Scheme Name: Spandaryan WUA: Spandaryan Marz: Syunik Location (center): E 46 o 06' ; N 39 o 27' Elevation range: 1,200-1,600 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 302 ha After Project: 1,400 ha Main Crops: potato, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 472 Indirect: 600 Communities: 2 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Spandaryan WUA supplies water to 2,000 ha lands in the southeast of the country. The water source is on a river which is 40 km far from the lands. Due to high losses in the canal only 300 ha are currently irrigated. Construction of gravity scheme from Spandaryan power-plant pressure basin could improve irrigation on hundreds of hectares. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:13.1) construction of Spandaryan gravity scheme will allow to ensure irrigation on more than 1,000 ha; (Subcomponent No:13.2) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 160 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 0.12 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: on 1,000 ha 250 farmers (or 1,000 residents) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: orchard, irrigated wheat and increase net-income. The Spandaryan gravity scheme will have three large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 17

18 SCHEME No: 14 Scheme Name: Kapan WUA: Kapan Marz: Syunik Location (center): E 46 o 22' ; N 39 o 13' Elevation range: 800-1,200 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 76 ha After Project: 338 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 768 Indirect: 991 Communities: 5 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Kapan WUA is irrigating discretely located small plots with total 900 ha lands. Surrounding forests keep the climate mild and specific conditions allow to grow high value crops. Tsav, Shikahogh and Norashenik villages are located in the mountains and currently are irrigated by pumps. High cost of energy, deteriorated pumping stations and far distance from repair workshops make pumping irrigation not effective and currently only 80 ha are irrigated instead of maximum 340 ha. These 3 villages have alternative gravity way for irrigation which will ensure irrigation and sufficient increase in benefits. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:14.1 and 14.2) construction of Tsav-Shikahogh and Norashenik gravity schemes will allow to annually save 2.40 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 260 ha. Two large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. (Subcomponent No:14.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 120 ha will allow to reduce water losses by 0.09 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 2.4 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction Tsav-Shikahogh and Norashenik gravity schemes; on 260 ha 1,000 farmers (or around 4,000 residents in 3 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase netincome. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 18

19 SCHEME No: 15 Scheme Name: Goris WUA: Karahunji-Jrambar Marz: Syunik WSA Branch: Vorotan-Arpa Location (center): E 46 o 19' ; N 39 o 30' Elevation range: 1,400-1,600 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 897 ha After Project: 1,538 ha Main Crops: orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 1,349 Indirect: 3,237 Communities: 7 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Karahunji-Jrambar WUA is serving 1,800 ha lands in the southeast of the country. The main water source are the pumps located on the is the river Vorotan. High pressure and inefficient work of pumps makes difficulties and currently only 900 ha irrigated instead of 1,600 ha. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:15.1) rehabilitation of 4 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on 1,500 ha; (Subcomponent No:15.2) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 240 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 0.18 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 0.02 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of 4 pumping stations; on 700 ha 1,500 farmers (or 6,000 residents in 7 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 19

20 SCHEME No: 16 Scheme Name: Lori WUA: Lori-Jrantsk Marz: Lori Location (center): E 44 o 35' ; N 41 o 02' Elevation range: 1,000-1,400 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 724 ha After Project: 1,548 ha Main Crops: orchard, vegetables, potato, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 1,326 Indirect: 2,145 Communities: 6 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Lori WUA has been established on 5,800 ha of lands in the north of the country. Surrounding forests and temperate elevations create good conditions for enhanced agriculture. Meantime due to deteriorated infrastructure farmers are not able to irrigate their lands and currently only 1/3 of lands are irrigated. The reason of the insufficient irrigation is the deteriorated condition of canals and nonoperation of pumping stations. Meantime more than 1,500 ha can receive gravity water after construction of a gravity canal from higher elevations of river. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:16.1) construction of Amrakits gravity scheme will allow to annually save 3.0 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on more than 1,500 ha; (Subcomponent No:16.2) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 400 ha will allow to reduce water losses by more than 0.3 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 3.0 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction Amrakits gravity scheme. One large pumping plant will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 1,500 ha 1,500 farmers (or 6,000 residents in 6 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 20

21 SCHEME No: 17 Scheme Name: Getik WUA: Getik Marz: Lori Location (center): E 44 o 15' ; N 40 o 49' Elevation range: 1,500-1,700 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 530 ha After Project: 2,210 ha Main Crops: vegetables, potato, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 1640 Indirect: 2500 Communities: 9 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Getik WUA supplies water to 3,300 ha of lands in the zone of 1988 earthquake. The main canal was constructed in 1940s which takes water from river Chichkhan. The water intake structure and the first 5km of the main canal are passing by critically steep slopes and any moment some stretches of the earth canal can be demolished which will be very hard (at least very expensive) to repair and construction can last few months. In the mid of 1990s in the scope Irrigation Rehabilitation project 10 km of the canal (less than the half of the total canal) was lined and today is in pretty good condition. Although the end part of the canal still needs rehabilitation as due to high filtration the water does not reach to the end lands. Besides the higher lands of the WUA are served by pumps which are in poor condition and have high consumption of energy. Meantime there is a possibility to use the water pressure and construct a gravity scheme for irrigating 1,500 ha. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:17.1) construction of Spitak gravity scheme will ensure irrigation on more than 1,500 ha; (Subcomponent No:17.2) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 370 ha will reduce water losses and improve water distribution. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 0.9 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction Spitak gravity scheme. Two large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 1500 ha 2,200 farmers (or 10,000 residents in 9 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: orchard, potato, vegetables and sufficiently increase netincome. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 21

22 SCHEME No: 18 Scheme Name: Noyemberyan WUA: Noyemberyan WUAs Marz: Tavush Location (center): E 44 o 53' ; N 41 o 12' Elevation range: m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 1,163 ha After Project: 3,227 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 1,277 Indirect: 1,996 Communities: 8 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Noyemberian WUA serves 7,500 ha of lands in the northeast of the country. Due to low elevations and mild climate this is one of the most productive agricultural zones in the country. The water source is the river Debet which even in peak season in summer has more than enough water to irrigate the lands. Although the issue is that water is pumped by 5 step pumping station and alternative solution for bringing water by gravity is very expensive and technically difficult. The only solution for here is the renovation of the pumping stations and introduction of drip irrigation which will ultimately make irrigation economically viable. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:18.1) rehabilitation of 6 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on more than 2,000 ha; (Subcomponent No:18.2) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 314 ha will allow to reduce losses of expensive water and improve water distribution. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually 0.2 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations; on 2,000 ha 2,000 farmers (or 8,000 residents in 8 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase netincome. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 22

23 SCHEME No: 19 Scheme Name: Berd WUA: Berd Marz: Tavush Location (center): E 45 o 20' ; N 40 o 56' Elevation range: 800-1,000 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 230 ha After Project: 300 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 104 Indirect: 202 Communities: 3 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Berd WUA is located in small valley with surrounded forests and because of mild climate has productive lands. The region has enough water which is accumulated in the Tavush reservoir. 3 communities in this area receive water by pumps which are deteriorated and only half of the lands were irrigated during the last decade. Meantime the pressure in the reservoir is enough to have gravity water which could ensure cheap and proper irrigation. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:19.1) construction of Berd gravity scheme will allow to annually save 0.5 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on 150 ha; (Subcomponent No:19.2) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 130 ha will allow to reduce water losses and improve water distribution. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 0.5 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to construction of Berd gravity scheme. One large pumping plant will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 150 ha 300 farmers (or 1,200 residents in 3 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase netincome. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 23

24 SCHEME No: 20 Scheme Name: Ijevan WUA: Ijevan Marz: Tavush Location (center): E 45 o 09' ; N 40 o 53' Elevation range: 700-1,000 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 355 ha After Project: 1,119 ha Main Crops: orchard, grape, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 847 Indirect: 1,240 Communities: 6 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Ijevan WUA supplies water to more than 5,000 ha of lands in the northeast of the country. Due to high deterioration of the pumping stations which are under operation years less than 1/10 of the lands are currently irrigated and farmers are not able to get profits from agriculture. Meantime hydrology allows to supply enough water by gravity for 150 ha of 3 communities. Lands under other 5 pumping stations have not alternative for gravity irrigation and need rehabilitation. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:20.1) construction of Getahovit-Lusadzor gravity scheme will allow to annually save 0.5 Mkwt/h energy and ensure irrigation on 150 ha; (Subcomponent No:20.2) rehabilitation of 5 pumping stations will allow to reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on 900 ha; (Subcomponent No:20.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 170 ha will allow to reduce water losses and improve water distribution. 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 0.6 MkWt/h energy will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction Ijevan gravity scheme. Two large pumping plants will be placed out of service and decommissioned. on 800 ha 1,000 farmers (or 4,000 residents in 6 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase netincome. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 24

25 SCHEME No: 21 Scheme Name: Kotayq WUA: Kotayq WUAs Marz: Kotayq Location (center): E 44 o 40' ; N 40 o 20' Elevation range: 1,200-1,500 m Benefit Area: Actually irrigated: 3,100 ha After Project: 3,650 ha Main Crops: orchard, vegetables, wheat Beneficiaries: Direct: 639 Indirect: 639 Communities: 8 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Kotayq irrigation system is designed for irrigation of 5,500 ha lands in the middle part of Armenia. The main water source is the river Hrazdan and the main canal takes water by gravity. The main critical stretches and hydro-structures of the main canal have been rehabilitated in the scope of Irrigation Rehabilitation Project. Part of the lands in the system is irrigated by pumps. Due to bad technical condition of the pumps which are in use much longer than the lifetime of the pumps hundreds of hectares have irrigation problems and farmers are not able to cultivate high value crops and currently grow wheat or alfalfa. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: (Subcomponent No:21.1) construction of Ptghni gravity scheme will allow to irrigate by gravity 235 ha and annually save 2.3 Mkwt/h energy; (Subcomponent No:21.2) rehabilitation of 4 pumping stations will allow to sufficiently reduce energy use and will insure irrigation on 150 ha; (Subcomponent No:21.3) rehabilitation of tertiary system on 450 ha will allow to reduce water losses by 0.4 Mm DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: annually more than 2.3 MkWt/h will be saved due to rehabilitation of pumping stations and construction of gravity scheme; annually around 0.4 Mm 3 will be saved in the irrigation system after rehabilitation tertiary system; on 285 ha 640 farmers (or around 2,500 residents in 8 villages) will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 25

26 SCHEME No: 22 REHABILITATION OF TERTIARY SYSTEM IN 8 WUAS Scheme 22 includes rehabilitation of tertiary system for those WUAs that are not covered by abovementioned 21 Schemes. These are Gavar, Khndzorut, Hakhum, Vorotan, Tolors, Dzorer, Brnakot and Hrazdan-Jour WUAs. SCHEME No: 23 REHABILITATION OF DRAINAGE IN ARARAT VALLEY 1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM The project is aimed at improvement of lands productivity, sustainability of agricultural production, and mitigation of harmful impact of ground water high level on the environment and health of the population. Ararat Valley is one of economically developed areas with favorable climatic conditions, providing 40-45% of agricultural production of Armenia. In 1950-s construction of open drainage system began as means of malaria control. The system provided subsidence of ground water level to 1.0 m. but the given measure was not sufficient to provide good cultivation of agricultural products due to salinity of ground water. In 1960-s side by side with desalination of lands, closed drainage 2-3 m deep was constructed, which allowed to hold up the process of lands salinization. Drainage area covers ha. Open Drainage Network 13 collectors, catch-waters of which are Araks, Hrazdan, and Metsamor Rivers, are functioning on the area of Ararat Valley. Collector-drainage system of Ararat Valley can be divided into three regions, according to engineering-geological, hydro-geological condition and water receiving bodies. Region 1 south-eastern part of Ararat Valley, where 4 collector systems are available: Arazdayan the Main, Hrazdan-Araks (I and II sections), and Leftbank Hrazdan, the water receiving body of which is Araks River. Region 2 central part of Ararat Valley, where there are 5 collector systems: Rightbank Hrazdan (I and II sections), collector-1, collector-5, and collector BC-5, water receiving body of which is Hrazdan River. Region 3 north-western part of Ararat Valley, where there are 4 collector systems; Kuru-Araks, Kobu-Artashar, Kobu-Apaga, and Argavand, water receiving body of which is Metsamor river. The collector-drainage scheme in a whole is in unsatisfactory technical state. Collectors, water catchment areas, and drains are overgrown with reeds, silted, operate in backwater regime, channels are deformed, and at some stretches the channels are dammed up by different partitions (fishponds, delivery of water for irrigation etc.). The length of Ararat Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 26

27 Valley collector-drainage system is km, including open network - 723,1 km (collectors km, water catchment areas km, drains km), closed network - 670,0 km (water catchment areas - 126,3 km, drains - 543,7 km). Closed Drainage Network Closed drainage network is situated on separate, independently operating 17 sections. Total area of lands under closed drainage network is 7967 ha, out of which discharge of drainage water by pumping covers 2776 ha, and by gravity ha, the area of irrigated lands under closed drainage network is 7101 ha. On the area of 4240 ha lands are not salinized, 1394 ha - slightly salinized, 985 ha - media-slightly salinized, and 482 ha - media-highly salterned. The area of ground water 1-2 m deep - is 3104 ha, 2-3 m ha, and more than 3 m ha. 2. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WORKS For fixing the problems the Scheme includes: Open Drainage Network deepen the primary collectors along the whole length by 1,0 2,0 m; deepen the secondary collectors in accordance with primary ones; rehabilitation of open drains elimination of backwater structures; elimination of all drainage pumping stations; rehabilitation of irrigation pumping stations at the collectors; Closed Drainage Network perform mechanical cleaning of the whole system with the help of drain cleaners; rehabilitate destroyed parts of drains and water catchments with total length of 70.9 km; reconstruct and rehabilitate 1190 observation holes; removal of drainage water by gravity is planned on the area of 2616 ha. Vertical Drainage reconstruct and rehabilitate of 61 tubewells will allow to reduce ground water level on ha; Artesian Wells In order to improve the operation of collector-drainage network and use underground water of Ararat Valley artesian basin rationally, it is provided to do the following: out of 196 wells: eliminate 76 wells with small discharge (yield) and annular self-flowing out; clean the 79 artesian wells; perform grouting of annular space of 32 wells; construct intake basins and outlet irrigators for 33 wells. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 27

28 3. DESCRIPTION OF EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE SCHEME Expected benefits after construction and rehabilitation are: increase the system discharge capacity and improve meliorative state of about ha, lowering ground water level from m to m; sustainability of drainage network operation; reduction of over-humid lands by a further 8,6 Thos. ha; possibility created for the future to have drainage system for the whole over-humid zone of Ararat Valley; annually 8.8 M kwt/h energy will be saved due to elimination of drainage pumping stations; reconstruction and rehabilitation of 61 tubewells will allow to get irrigation water with total yield of 2,0-2,5 m 3 /sec and irrigate 315 ha; on 8,600 ha around 10,000 farmers will have opportunity to cultivate high value crops: grape, orchard, vegetables and sufficiently increase net-income; improved sanitary and social conditions of the areas. The Table 1 summarizing irrigation components, affected WUAs, beneficiaries, communities and irrigated lands is presented below. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 28

29 Table 1. Summary Data on Irrigation Schemes Sch No: Schemes WUAs Total farmers Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project 1 Artashat Azat, Artashat, Ararat, Vedi, Masis, Mkhchian 63,219 59,734 19, ,515 34, Rehabilitation of Artashat main canal Azat, Artashat, Vedi 29,071 12, , Rehabilitation of 14 P/S Azat, Artashat, Ararat, Vedi, Mkhchian 40,849 7, , Construction of Aigezard gravity scheme 1.4 Rehabilitation of ter/system Vedi, Artashat 3, ,860 Azat, Artashat, Ararat, Vedi, Masis, Mkhchian ,611 2 Low-Hrazdan Vagharshapat, Khoi, Musaler, Aknalich 33,759 29,578 1, ,524 16, Reconstruction of Low-Hrazdan main canal Vagharshapat, Khoi 18,186 7, , Rehabilitation of 11 P/S Vagharshapat, Khoi, Musaler, Aknalich 21,942 4, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Vagharshapat, Khoi, Musaler, Aknalich ,594 3 Armavir Araks, Armavir, Merdzapnia, Sevjur-Akhtamar 32,832 32,150 4, ,051 24, Reconstruction of Armavir main canal Araks, Armavir 32,150 4, , Rehabilitation of 7 P/S Araks, Armavir 2,295 2, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Araks, Armavir, Merdzapnia, Sevjur-Akhtamar ,977 Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 29

30 Sch No: Schemes WUAs Total farmers Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project 4 Talin Shenik, Karakert, Talin, Mush 16,483 14,612 12, ,052 23, Reconstruction of Talin main Canal Talin 13,495 9, , Rehabilitation of 6 P/S Talin, Shenik 6,329 6, , Construction of Shenik gravity scheme Construction of Sasnashen reservoir Reconstruction of Irind reservoir Shenik 1,415 1, ,150 Mush Mush Rehabilitation of ter/system Shenik, Karakert, Talin, Mush ,862 5 Arzni-Shamiram Rahabilitation of Arzni-Shamiram main canal Construction of Ashtarak gravity scheme Nairi, Eghvard, Ashtarak, Kasakh, Amberd, Parpi, Shamiram Nairi, Eghvard, Ashtarak, Kasakh, Parpi, Shamiram Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 30 40,250 33,669 16, ,824 20,765 32,822 14, ,243 Ashtarak 1, Rehabilitation of 5 P/S Eghvard, Shamiram Construction of Apna reservoir Ashtarak, Kasakh Construction of Orgov reservoir Amberd Construction of Lernarot reservoir Rehabilitation of ter/system Nairi, Eghvard, Ashtarak, Kasakh, Amberd, Parpi, Shamiram ,266

31 Sch No: 6 Shirak Schemes Rehabilitation of Shirak main Canal Construction of Kaps gravity scheme Construction of Tavshut gravity scheme WUAs Total farmers Ajapniakvorogum, Shirvorogum, Aigabats 10,115 Ajapniakvorogum, Shirvorogum, Aigabats Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project 9,200 4, ,065 15,521 8,929 3, ,064 Ajapniakvorogum 1, ,108 Ajapniakvorogum 1, , Construction of Kaps Reservoir Ajapniakvorogum 1, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Ajapniakvorogum, Shirvorogum, Aigabats 7 Gegharkunik Martuni, Vardenis Construction of Agrija gravity scheme Construction of Vardenis gravity scheme 19, ,334 5,747 5, ,995 5,249 Martuni 3,921 3, ,206 Vardenis 1,777 1, , Rehabilitation of 4 P/S Martuni 3,631 3, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Martuni, Vardenis Vayots-Dzor Eghegnadzor, Vayk Construction of Khndzorut gravity scheme Construction of Khndzorut Reservoir 10,455 Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 31 1, ,416 4,544 Vayk 1, Vayk 1, Rehabilitation of ter/system Eghegnadzor, Vayk ,419

32 Sch No: Schemes WUAs Total farmers Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project 9 Aparan Aparan Construction of Halavar gravity scheme Construction of Vardenut reservoir 6,461 4,506 3, ,945 2,250 Aparan 4,278 3, ,950 Aparan Rehabilitation of ter/system Aparan Geghardalich Jrvegh-Dzoraghpiur 4,440 2, ,656 1, Construction of Geghardalich gravity scheme Jrvegh-Dzoraghpiur 2, Rehabilitatation of 2 P/S Jrvegh-Dzoraghpiur Rehabilitation of ter/system Jrvegh-Dzoraghpiur Meghri Meghri 2,338 2,338 2, ,224 1, Construction of Meghri gravity scheme 11.2 Construction of Lichk Reservoir Meghri 2,338 2, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Meghri Artik Aragats-Vorogum 7,806 6,452 5, ,402 2, Construction of Mantash gravity scheme Reconstruction of Artik reservoir Aragats-Vorogum 5,076 3, ,212 Aragats-Vorogum 1,033 1, Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 32

33 Sch No: 12.3 Schemes Construction of Bagravan reservoir WUAs Total farmers Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project Aragats-Vorogum Rehabilitation of ter/system Aragats-Vorogum Spandaryan Spandaryan 13.1 Construction of Spandaryan gravity scheme Spandaryan ,041 1, Rehabilitation of ter/system Spandaryan Kapan Kapan 2, Construction of Tsav- Shikahogh gravity scheme Construction of Tsav- Norashenik gravity scheme Kapan Kapan Rehabilitation of ter/system Kapan , Goris Qarahunji-Jrambar 3,860 3,237 1, ,834 1, Rehabilitation of 4 P/S Qarahunj-Jrambar 3,237 1, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Qarahunj-Jrambar Lori Lori-Jrantsk 4,129 1, ,704 1, Construction of Amrakits gravity scheme Lori-Jrantsk 1, ,548 Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 33

34 Sch No: Schemes WUAs Total farmers Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project 16.2 Rehabilitation of ter/system Lori-Jrantsk Getik Getik 5,489 2,500 1, ,381 2, Construction of Spitak gravity scheme Getik 2,500 1, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Getik Noyemberyan Noyemberyan 4,562 1,996 1, ,374 3, Rehabilitation of 6 P/S Noyemberyan 1,996 1, , Rehabilitation of ter/system Noyemberyan Berd Berd 2, , Construction of Berd gravity scheme Berd Rehabilitation of ter/system Berd Ijevan Ijevan 5,907 1, ,330 1, Construction of Getahovit- Lusadzor gravity scheme Ijevan Rehabilitatation of 5 P/S Ijevan Rehabilitation of ter/system Ijevan Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 34

35 Sch No: Schemes WUAs Total farmers Beneficiaries Indirect ben. Direct ben. Communities Total Under project Irrigated lands [ha] Total After area Project 21 Kotayq Kotayq 9, ,500 3, Construction of Ptghni gravity scheme Kotayq Rehabilitatation of 4 P/S Kotayq Rehabilitation of ter/system Kotayq Rehabilitation of tertiary system in 8 WUAs Reconstruction of drainage system in Ararat Valley Gavar, Khndzorut, Hakhum, Vorotan, Tolors, Dzorer, Brnakot, Hrazdan-Jour Masis, Ararat, Azat, Mkhchian, Musaler, Aknalich, Vagharshapat, Sevjur-Akhtamar, Merdzapnia 16, ,999 7,838 TOTAL: 303, ,646 92, , ,199 Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 35

36 2.3. Current Situation of Rural Roads and Proposed Investments Another internationally proven priority way of rural development acceleration and poverty reduction are investments in the rural road networks. Out of a total length of 3,692 km of roads, which connect rural communities with main roads, 2,250 km (61%) are classified as poor or very poor, with a further 1033 km (28%) in fair condition and only 406 km (11%) in good condition. Furthermore, only 597 km (16%) of these roads are fully passable during the winter time, while over 748 km (20%) are completely impassable. Most of the poor rural communities are located at 1700 meters above the sea level, and practically all of them have unsatisfactory access conditions to the main interstate roads. While the road network in Armenia has benefited from a significant injection of foreign funds during the past five years, these funds have been targeted to the rehabilitation of the main (mainly interstate) roads, with the intention of returning them to good condition. The secondary and local roads, which connect rural areas to the primary road network and to the main regional commercial centers, have received almost no capital or recurrent funding for the past decade. Total expenditures on rural roads have amounted to approximately US$ 0.5 million over the last five years, with approximately half (US$ 0.23 million) funded from community budgets. The proposed investments in rural road rehabilitation will improve the access of rural communities to agricultural markets as well as to social infrastructure. The investments will upgrade the condition of 1172 km of rural roads from very poor, or poor, to good. The project beneficiaries are estimated to be about 390,000 rural inhabitants residing in 313 rural communities. Other aspects that will be positively affected are better access to the basic education and health services, which will also contribute to the better use of general education and health establishments, which is also one of the government priorities under the PRSP. Locations, distance between communities, numbers and names of communities connected, numbers of inhabitants are presented in Table 2. Page 36

37 Table 2. Summary Data on Road Roads No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected Total Marz Aragatsotn ,745 1 Aragatsotn Aragats Norashen-Geghadir Aragatsotn Aragats Hnaberd-Amre taza Norashen - Geghadir (2 km, C); Amre taza; Sangyar; Alagyaz Hnaberd - Geghadzor (2 km, C) - Amre taza (1 km, C) 3 Aragatsotn Aragats Tsaghkahovit-Sangyar Sub Total for District ,304 4 Aragatsotn Ashtarak Shamiram-M Aragatsotn Ashtarak Antarut-M Antarut - Byurakan (1 km, B) - Agarak (6 km, C) - M1 (1km, C) 6 Aragatsotn Ashtarak Verin Sasunik-M Verin Sasunik - Sasunik (9 km, C)-M1 (0,5 km, B) Sub Total for District ,352 7 Aragatsotn Aparan Vardenut-M Vardenut - Shenavan (2 km, C)-M3 (1 km, C) 8 Aragatsotn Aparan Dzoraglukh-Aparan Dzoraglukh-Ttudjur (2 km, C) - Vardenis (4 km, C) - Mulki (4 km, C) - Aparan (1 km, C) Sub Total for District ,286 Page 37

38 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) 9 Aragatsotn Talin Tlik-M Communities connected Tlik - Getap (4 km, C) - Aragats (7 km, C) - Arteni (8 km, B) - M9 (7 km, B) 10 Aragatsotn Talin Lernagog-Qarakert Lernagog - Dalarik (3 km, C) - Qarakert (6 km, C) 11 Aragatsotn Talin Garnahovit-M Aragatsotn Talin Baysz-M Garnahovit - Zovasar (2 km, C) - Dzoragyugh (4 km, C) - Mastara (2 km, C) - M1 (1 km, C) Baysz - Kakavadzor(1 km, C) - Nerqin Bazmaberd (4 km, C) - M1 (1 km, B) Sub Total for District ,803 Total Marz Ararat , Ararat Ararat Urcadzor-M Urcadzor - Dashtaqar (6 km, C) - Vedi (1 km, B) - Vanashen (2 km, B) - Vosketap (2 km, B) - M2 (1 km, B) 14 Ararat Ararat Sisavan-Vanashen Sub Total for District ,094 Total Marz Armavir , Armavir Armavir Pshatavan-M Armavir Armavir Khandjyan-Armavir Armavir Armavir Nor Artages-Hoktember Pshatavan - Janfida (3 km, C) - Nalbandyan (3 km, C) - Amasia (4 km, C) - M5 (2 km, C) Khandjyan - Lukashin (2 km, C) - Noravan (2 km, C) - Armavir (1 km, B) Nor Artages - Jrashen (2 km, C) - Bambakashat (1 km, C) - Hoktember (1 km, C) Page 38

39 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 18 Armavir Armavir Lenughi-M Armavir Armavir Getashen-M Getashen - Shenavan (1 km, C) - Nor Kesaria (1 km, C) - M5 (2 km, C) Sub Total for District , Armavir Echmiadzin Griboyedov-M Armavir Echmiadzin Metsamor-Gay Sub Total for District ,746 Total Marz Gegharkunik , Gegharkunik Vardenis Norakert-Pokr Masrik Gegharkunik Vardenis Akhpradzor-M Akhpradzor - Makenis (3 km, C) - Lchavan (2 km, C) - Tsovak (4 km, C) - M11 (1 km, C) 24 Gegharkunik Vardenis Karchaghbyur-M Gegharkunik Vardenis Akunk-Vardenis Sub Total for District , Gegharkunik Gavar Gegharkunik-M Gegharkunik - Lanjaghbyur (1 km, C) - Sarukhan (1 km, C) - Karmirgyugh (4 km, B) - Gavar (2 km, B) - M10 (2 km, B) Page 39

40 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 27 Gegharkunik Gavar Noratus-M Sub Total for District , Gegharkunik Sevan Zovaber-M Zovaber - Ddmashen(1 km, C) - M4 (6 km, C) 29 Gegharkunik Sevan Geghamavan-M Geghamavan - Gagarin (2 km, C) - M4 (1 km, C) 30 Gegharkunik Sevan Lchashen-M Sub Total for District , Gegharkunik Chambarak Antaramech-M Antaramech - Dzoravanq (3 km, C) - Dprabak (2 km, C) - Aygut (3 km, C) - Martuni (9 km, C) - Getik (1 km, C) - Ttujur (3 km, C) - Chambarak (4 km, C) - Aghberk (10 km, C) - M14 (2 km, B) 32 Gegharkunik Chambarak Vahan-Chambarak Gegharkunik Chambarak Artanish-M Sub Total for District , Gegharkunik Martuni Dzoragyugh-M Gegharkunik Martuni Sarnaghbyur-M Sarnaghbyur - Karachi (6 km, C) - Madina (10 km, C) - Verin Getashen (7 km, C) - Nerkin Getashen (1 km, C) - M10 (1 km, C) Page 40

41 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 36 Gegharkunik Martuni Zolakar-M Sub Total for District ,011 Total Marz Kotayk , Kotayk Abovian Sevaberd - M Kotayk Abovian Zovashen - Mayakovski Kotayk Abovian Saranist - Aramus Sevaberd - Zar (5 km,c) - Akunq(5 km,b)- Katnaghbur (2 km, B) - Aramus(1 km,c) - Mayakovski (2 km, B) - Balahovit (3 km, B) - M4 (1 km, B) Zovashen - Hatis (4 km,c) - Kaputan (6 km,b) - Kotayq (7 km,b) - Nor Gyugh (1 km, B) - Mayakovski (3 km,b) Saranist - Geghashen (5 km,c) - Kamaris (3 km,b) - Aramus(2 km,b) Sub Total for District , Kotayk Hrazdan Fantan-M Sub Total for District 1 1 1, Kotayk Nairi Teghenik-Karashamb Sub Total for District Total Marz Lori ,266 Page 41

42 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) 42 Lori Gugark Gyullidara-M Communities connected Gyullidara - Kilisa (2 km, C) - Halavar (2 km, C) - Haydarli (2 km, C) - Lernapat (4 km, C) - Darpas (5 km, C) - M3 (1 km, B) 43 Lori Gugark Antaramut-M Antaramut - Vahagni (5 km, C) - M6 (1 km, C) 44 Lori Gugark Debet-M Lori Gugark Yeghegnut-M Sub Total for District , Lori Tumanyan Tsater-M Lori Tumanyan Chkalov-M Chkalov - Dsegh (5 km, C) - M6 (1 km, C) 48 Lori Tumanyan Ahnidzor-Tumanyan Ahnidzor- Marts (14 km, C) -Tumanyan (7 km, C) 49 Lori Tumanyan Atan-H Atan - Shamut (4 km, C) - H22 (3 km, C) 50 Lori Tumanyan Lorut-H Lori Tumanyan Tsaghkashat-M Tsaghkashat - Haghpat (7 km, C) - M6 (2 km, C) 52 Lori Tumanyan Verin Akhtala-Akhtala Verin Akhtala - Pokr Ayrum (5 km, C) - Akhtala (2 km, C) Page 42

43 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) 53 Lori Tumanyan Chochkan-Pokr Ayrum Communities connected Chochkan - Mets Ayrum (1 km, C) - Pokr Ayrum (3 km, C) 54 Lori Tumanyan Teghut-M Teghut - Shnogh (3 km, C) - M6 (0,5 km, C) Sub Total for District , Lori Spitak Khnkoyan-M Lori Spitak Tsaghkaber-M Tsaghkaber - Mets Parni (4 km, C) - M7 (3 km, B) Sub Total for District , Lori Stepanavan Katnaghbyur- Stepanavan Katnaghbyur - Urasar (6 km, C) - Armanis (3 km, C) - Stepanavan (4 km, C) 58 Lori Stepanavan Sverdlov-M Sverdlov - Urut (2 km, C) - M3 (6 km, C) 59 Lori Stepanavan Koghes-M Lori Stepanavan Kurtan-Gyulagarak Koghes - Yaghdan (3 km, C) - Agarak (3 km, C) - M3 Kurtan - Vardablur (3 km, C) - Gyulagarak (2 km, C) 61 Lori Stepanavan Hobardz-H Sub Total for District , Lori Tashir Paghaghbyur-M Paghaghbyur - Dzyunashogh (6 km, C) - Metsavan (3 km, C) - M3 (5 km, C) Page 43

44 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 63 Lori Tashir Mikhaylovka-M Lori Tashir Sarchapet-M Sarchapet - Norashe (3 km, C) - M3 (2 km, C) 65 Lori Tashir Lernahovit-Tashir Sub Total for District ,693 Total Marz Shirak , Shirak Amasia Voghchi-M Voghchi - Shaghik (4 km, C) - Garnarich (2 km, C) - Tsaghkut (3 km, C) - Zorakert (3 km, C) - Ardenis (6 km, C) - Aghvorik (4 km, C) - Tavshut (6 km, C) - M1 (1 km, C) 67 Shirak Amasia Lorasar-Tsaghkut Shirak Amasia Aregnadem-Gyumri Aregnadem - Gyullibulagh (7 km, C) - Voghchi (5 km, C) - Gyumri (10 km, C) Sub Total for District , Shirak Artik Mets Mantash-M Shirak Artik Geghanist-Horom Mets Mantash - Pokt Mantash (0,5 km, C) - Saralanj (3 km, C) - Artik (4 km, C) - Horom (7 km, C) - M1 (3 km, C) Geghanist - Spandaryan (4 km, C) - Panik (3 km, C) - Nor kyanq (2 km, C) - Horom (1 km, C) 71 Shirak Artik Anushavan-Panik Page 44

45 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 72 Shirak Artik Saratak-M Saratak - Lusakert (0,5 km, C) - M1 (0,5 km, C) 73 Shirak Artik Lernakert-M Lernakert - Pemzashen (3 km, C) - M1 (8 km, C) Sub Total for District , Shirak Ani Anipemza-Maralik Shirak Ani Isahakyan-M Anipemza - Bagravan (7 km, C) - Sarakap (13 km, C) - Karaberd (8 km, C) - Maralik (5 km, C) Isahakyan - Lusaghbyur (4 km, C) - Noraber (4 km, C) - Gusanagyugh (2 km, C) - M1 (1 km, C) Sub Total for District , Shirak Akhuryan Marmashen-Hanr. chan Shirak Akhuryan Haykavan-M Shirak Akhuryan Voskehask-M Shirak Akhuryan Bayandur-M Bayandur - Getk (4 km, C) - Gharibjanyan (2 km, C) - Azatan (3 km, C) - M1 (0,5 km, C) 80 Shirak Akhuryan Aygabac-Gyumri Aygabac - Arevik (5 km, C) - Gyumri (5 km, C) 81 Shirak Akhuryan Jrarat-Gyumri Jrarat - Musayelyan (4 km, C) - Karnut (6 km, C) - Akhuryan (5 km, C) - Gyumri (3 km, C) Page 45

46 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 82 Shirak Akhuryan Kamo-M Shirak Akhuryan Karmrakar-Maisyan Karmrakar - Hatsik (3 km, C) - Maisyan (2 km, C) 84 Shirak Akhuryan Arapi-M Sub Total for District , Shirak Ashotsk Dzorashen- Vardaghbyur Dzorashen - Kakavasar (7 km, B) - Pokr Sariar (2 km, B) - Bashgyugh (4 km, C) - Salut (6 km, B)- Vardaghbyur (5 km, B) 86 Shirak Ashotsk Hartashen-M Hartashen - Zuygaghbyur (2 km, C) - M1 (2 km, C) 87 Shirak Ashotsk Pokr Sepasar-M Pokr Sepasar - Mets Sepasar (1 km, B) - M1 (2 km, C) Sub Total for District ,347 Total Marz Syunik , Syunik Sisian Tsghuni-M Syunik Sisian Spandaryan-M Syunik Sisian Arevis-Sisian Tsghuni - Soflu (1 km, C) - Dastakert (4 km, C) - Torunik (5 km, C) - Tolors (10 km, C) - Sisian (4 km, C) - Shaki (5 km, C) - M2 (1 km, C) Spandaryan - Sarnakunk (4 km, C) - M2 (1 km, C) Arevis - Tasik (8 km, C) - Hatsavan (2 km, C)- Ashotavan (3 km, C) - Sisian (6 km, C) Page 46

47 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 91 Syunik Sisian Mutsk-M Mutsk - Shaghat (5 km, C) - M13 (1 km, C) 92 Syunik Sisian Salvard-Sisian Salvard - Brnakot (6 km, C) - Sisian (6 km, C) 93 Syunik Sisian Shenatagh-M Shenatagh - Lor (3 km, C) - Getatagh (1 km, C) - Darbas (2 km, C) - Ltsen (6 km, C) - Vorotan (8 km, C) - Vaghatin (1 km, C) - M2 (6 km, C) Sub Total for District , Syunik Goris Svarants-M Svarants - Tatev (1 km, C) - Halidzor (19 km, C)- Shinuhayr (3 km, C) - M2 (6 km, C) 95 Syunik Goris Khot-M Syunik Goris Khoznavar-M Khoznavar - Verishen (16 km, C) - M2 (1 km, C) 97 Syunik Goris Brun-Verishen Syunik Goris Khndzoresk-M Syunik Goris Vaghatur-M Vaghatur - Khnatsakh (3 km, C) - M12 (13 km, C) 100 Syunik Goris Kornidzor-Tegh Sub Total for District , Syunik Kapan Aghvani-M Aghvani - Tandzaver (2 km, C) - Verin Khotanan (8 km, C) - Shrvenants (4 km, C) - Norashenik (2 km, C) - M2 (11 km, C) Page 47

48 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected 102 Syunik Kapan David Bek-M Syunik Kapan Verin Gedaklu-M Syunik Kapan Uzhanis-M Verin Gedaklu - Nerkin Gedaklu (5 km, C) - M2 (1 km, C) Uzhanis - Yeghvard (2 km, C) - Agarak (3 km, C)- Khdrants (3 km, C) - M2 (3 km, C) 105 Syunik Kapan Ditsmayri-Syunik Ditsmayri - Siznak (2 km, C) - Syunik (1 km, C) 106 Syunik Kapan Qirs-M Qirs - Kyurut (2 km, C) - Geghi (7 km, C)- Geghavank (2 km, C) - Kavchut (5 km, C) - M2 (1 km, C) Sub Total for District , Syunik Meghri Karchevan-Agarak Sub Total for District Total Marz Tavush , Tavush Idjevan Achadjur-M Tavush Idjevan Lusahovit-M Lusahovit - Khashtarak (3 km, B) - M4 (1 km, C) Sub Total for District 6 3 5, Tavush Tavush Chinari-Idjevan Chinari-Aygedzor (3 km, D) - Artsvaberd (8 km, D) - Verin Karmir aghbyur (4 km, C) - Berd Page 48

49 No Marz District Project name Distance (km) Number of communities Number of inhabitants (person) Communities connected (5 km, C) - Navur (7 km, C) - Idjevan (32 km, C) 111 Tavush Tavush Movsesgyugh-Verin Karmir aghbyur Movsesgyugh - Norashen (4 km, D) - Verin Karmir aghbyur (1 km, C) 112 Tavush Tavush Nerkin Karmir aghbyur- Berd Nerkin Karmir aghbyur - Tovuz (6 km, C) - Berd (3 km, C) 113 Tavush Tavush Chinchin-Navur Sub Total for District ,434 Total Marz Vayots Dsor , Vayots Dzor Yeghegnadz or Aghavnadzor-M Sub Total for District Vayots Dzor Vajk Khndzorut-M Vayots Dzor Vajk Bardzruni-Zaritap Khndzorut - Nor Aznaberd (3 km, C) - Zaritap (15 km, C) - M2 (8 km, B) Bardzruni - Sers (5 km, C) - Martiros (5 km, B) - Zaritap (4 km, B) Sub Total for District ,329 Total Rural Roads 1, ,047 Page 49

50 3. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN ARMENIA 3.1. Legal Framework After Armenia gained its independence in 1991, the deteriorating environmental condition of the country became more apparent and environmental concerns became high priority political issues and the process of development of environmental legislation was initiated. The 10 th Article of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia (passed in 1995) states the State responsibility for environmental protection, reproduction and wise use of natural resources. A number of relevant laws were promulgated to regulate water use, road issues and protect the environment. Law on the Principles of Environmental Protection (1991); Law on Specially Protected Natural Areas (1991); Law on Ensuring Sanitary-epidemiological Security of the RA Population (1992); Forest Code (1994), (new Code is under development); Law on (1995), (new Law is under development); Law on Atmosphere Air Protection (1994); Law on Automobile Roads (1996); Law on the Protection and Use of Fixed Cultural and Historic Monuments and Historic Environment (1998); Law on Environment and Nature Use Charges (1998); Law on Flora (1998); Law on Rates of Environmental Charges (2000); Law on Fauna (2000); Land Code (2001), (the first Code was adopted in 1991); Law on Hydro-meteorological Activity (2001); Law on Environmental Education (2001); Law on Lake Sevan (2001); Code on Underground Resources (2002), (the first Code was adopted in 1992); Water Code (2002) (the first Code was adopted in 1992) Law on Water Users Associations and Federations of the Water Users Associations (2002), Law on Environmental Oversight (2005). Summaries of the laws from the list which are most relevant to the MCA-Armenia projects are presented below. Law on the Principles of Environmental Protection (1991) The Law on the Principles of Environmental Protection was adopted by the National Assembly (Parliament) in It outlines the environmental protection policy of the Republic of Armenia. Its purpose is to ensure state regulation of environmental protection and use within the territory of the republic. It provides a legal basis for the development of environmental legislation regulating the protection and use of entrails, forest, water, flora Page 50

51 and fauna, and the atmosphere. This law also granted every citizen the right to demand and obtain reliable information on environmental conditions. Law on Specially Protected Natural Areas (1991) The Law on Specially Protected Nature Areas outlines the procedures for establishing protected areas and their management. The Law defines four categories of protected areas in RoA: State Reserves; State Reservations; National Parks; and Nature Monuments. Law on Ensuring Sanitary-epidemiological Security of the RA Population (1992) The RoA Law On Ensuring Sanitary-Epidemiological Security of the RA Population adopted in 1992, which sets legal, economic and institutional bases for ensured sanitary and epidemiological safety of the RoA population, as well as other guaranties provided for by the State to exclude influence of adverse and hazardous factors on human organism and ensure favorable conditions for vital capacity of the present and future generations. Forest Code (1994) The RoA Forest Code regulates the conservation, protection and management of forests. Law on (1995) The Armenian Law on (EIA), passed in 1995, contains the standard steps of the EIA process for various projects and activities in Armenia. It establishes in Articles 2-5, the general legal, economic, and organizational principles for conducting mandatory state EIA of various types of projects and concepts of sectoral development (e.g., energy, mining, chemical industry, construction, metallurgy, pulp and paper, agriculture, food and fishery, water, electronics, infrastructure, services, tourism and recreation). The Law forbids any economic unit to operate or any concept, program, plan or master plan to be implemented without a positive conclusion of an EIA. In addition, an EIA may be also initiated for projects that do not meet threshold value requirements ( thresholds were set by the Governmental Decree N193 issued on March 30, 1999). This right was given to local authorities, ministries, local communities and nongovernmental organizations in Article 4. Other national legislation that determines the special status of a particular territory may also trigger a review of environmental impact. The Ministry of Nature Protection can initiate a review of environmental impact when it deems it to be necessary. The EIA Law specifies notification, documentation, public consultations, and appeal procedures and requirements (Articles 6-11). The law also seeks to ensure high professional credentials ( certification ) of environmental assessment experts as well as to exclude any potential for conflict of interest. The Law on EIA is generally consistent with the EIA approaches followed by international conventions and development assistance agencies (e.g., World Bank, USAID, EU and MCC). The Law demands that for the operation of any economic unit, or implementation of a plan or programs, a positive conclusion of an environmental impact assessment must Page 51

52 be obtained. The Law on EIA law also provides for public involvement and participation at all stages of the EIA. Law on Automobile Roads (1996) The Law on Automobile Roads and especially the 13 th Article regulates the alienation zones and protection areas of roads. Law on the Protection and Use of Fixed Cultural and Historic Monuments and Historic Environment (1998) The Law on the Protection and Use of Fixed Cultural and Historic Monuments and Historic Environment, adopted by the National Assembly on November 11, 1998, provides the legal and policy basis for the protection and use of such monuments in Armenia and regulates the relations among protection and use activities. Article 15 of the Law describes procedures for, among other things, the discovery and state registration of monuments, the assessment of protection zones around them, and the creation of historic-cultural reserves. Article 22 requires the approval of the authorized body (Department of Historic and Cultural Monuments Preservation) before land can be allocated for construction, agricultural and other types of activities in areas containing monuments. Law on Environment and Nature Use Charges (1998) The Law classifies the environment charges for the disposal and discharge of wastes to the natural environment; and nature use charges for the water withdrawal, mineral resources, biodiversity, etc. Law on Flora (1998) and Law on Fauna (2000) The Laws on Flora and Fauna outline the Republic s policies for the conservation, protection, use, regeneration, and management of natural populations of plants and animals, and for regulating the impact of human activities on biodiversity. These laws aim for the sustainable protection and use of flora / fauna and the conservation of biodiversity. There are provisions for assessing and monitoring species, especially rare and threatened species. Land Code (2001) The Land Code defines the main directives for use of the lands allocated for the energy production, water economy (water supply, water discharge, pumping stations, dump sites, etc.), and other purposes. The Code defines the lands under the specially protected areas as well as forested, watered and reserved lands. It also establishes the measures aimed to the lands protection, as well as the rights of state bodies, local authorities and citizens towards the land. Code on Underground Resources (2002) This Code contains the main directives for use and protection of mineral resources and underground water, including the sanitary protected zones for the underground water resources. Water Code (2002) The main purpose of the Water Code is to provide the legal basis for the protection of the country s water resources, the satisfaction of water needs of citizens and economic Page 52

53 sectors through effective management of water resources, and safeguarding the protection of water resources for future generations. The Water Code addresses the following key issues: responsibilities of state/local authorities and public, development of the National water policy and National water program, water cadastre and monitoring system, public access to the relevant information, water use and water system use permitting systems, trans-boundary water resources use, water quality standards, hydraulic structures operation safety issues, protection of water resources and state supervision. Adoption of the Water Code in 2002 generated the need for development of a number of Governmental regulations and procedures, including permitting procedure, environmental flows, drainage water use, water alternative accounting, access to information on trans-boundary water, water use for fishery purposes, reservation of underground water sources, registration of documents in state water cadastre, public awareness and publicity of the documents developed by WRMA and other normative documents which provides guidelines directly linked with water and environmental issues. Law on Water Users Associations (WUA) and Federations of the WUAs (2002) Within the main goals and tasks of the Association and Federation (Article 4) the following important issues from environmental perspective could be mentioned: operation and maintenance of irrigation system; implementation of construction works and restoration of watercourses and irrigation system; water supply management and prevention from pollution; implementation of necessary activities to improve the quality of land, supporting the drainage system; providing ecological safety through preventing land erosion, preventing from salinization, over-watering and promoting the protection of irrigation system. Law on Environmental Oversight (2005). The Law regulates the issues of organization and enforcement of oversight over the implementation of environmental legislation of the Republic of Armenia, and defines the legal and economic bases underlying the specifics of oversight over the implementation of environmental legislation, the relevant procedures, conditions and relations, as well as environmental oversight in the Republic of Armenia. The existing legal framework governing the use of natural resources and environmental protection includes a large variety of legal documents. Government resolutions are the main legal implementing instruments for environmental laws. Environmental field is also regulated by presidential orders, Prime-Minister s resolutions and ministerial decrees International Agreements The Table 3 showing the list of International Conventions and Protocols signed and ratified by the Republic of Armenia is presented below. Page 53

54 Table 3. International Conventions and Protocols signed and ratified by the Republic of Armenia NN Convention or Protocol, Name and Place In Force Signed Ratified Relevant to the Proposal Comment 1 Convention on Wetlands ands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar, 1971) Ratified by USSR X 2 Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio-De-Janeiro, 1992) X Re-registered in UN Cartagena Protocol on Biological Safety (Cartagena, 2000) UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (New-York, 1992) Kyoto Protocol (Kyoto, 1997) 2002 Re-registered in UN in 1993 Re-registered in UN in Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (Geneva, 1979) Re-registered in UN in Convention on in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 1991) X Re-registered in UN in 1997 Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment (Kiev, 2003) 2003 X Page 54

55 NN Convention or Protocol, Name and Place In Force Signed Ratified Relevant to the Proposal Comment 8 Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents (Helsinki, 1992) Protocol on Civil Liability and Compensation for Damage Caused by the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents on Transboundary Waters (Kiev, 2003) Re-registered in UN in UN Convention to Combat Desertification (Paris, 1994) X Re-registered in UN in Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (Basel, 1989) Re-registered in UN in Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (Vienna, 1985.) Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal, 1987) Re-registered in UN in 1999 Re-registered in UN in Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 1998) Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemical and Pesticides in International Trade (Rotterdam, 1998) Convention on Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Helsinki, 1992.) X X Page 55

56 NN Convention or Protocol, Name and Place In Force Signed Ratified Relevant to the Proposal Comment Protocol on Water and Health (London, 1999) 1999 X 15 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (Stockholm, 2001) Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (Geneva, 1976) Re-registered in UN in European Convention on Landscape (Florence, 2000) Convention on Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (Paris, 1972) 1993 X Energy Charter Treaty (Lisbon, 1994) Energy Charter Protocol on Energy Efficiency and Related Environmental Aspects (Lisbon, 1994) 1997 Page 56

57 3.3. Institutional Framework This section reviews the roles of government agencies that will have involvement in the MCA-Armenia Proposal projects, primarily but not exclusively from an environment perspective. In Armenia, the State Committee of Water Management is the primary agency in charge of the management of water-related services and activities, whereas the Ministry of Nature Protection (MoNP) has overall responsibility for water resources and environmental protection and management. The Water Resources Management Agency subordinated to the MoNP is responsible for the allocation and issuing of permits of water resources in Armenia. In addition, the Ministry of Health plays a leading role in controlling the spread of malaria and other water-borne diseases. Local and regional authorities assume responsibility for natural resource use and protection within their jurisdiction. The main organization in the road sector is the Ministry of Transport and Communication with its subordinate Armenian Road Directorate. Local and regional authorities assume responsibility for the routine maintenance of local roads. State Committee of Water Management A State Committee of Water Management (SCWM) under the RA Government was set up under RA Government Decision #95, dated 9 February, 2001 with the purpose of improving the management of companies engaged in water activities. Among other objectives the SCWR promotes improvement of services to consumers, improvement of water tariff policy and implementation of reforms in this water sector. The SCWM performs the following functions: a) Participate in the policy development related to Water National Plan and RoA water resources protection and use; b) Submit to the RA Government annual reports on water utilization by a breakdown of sources and user companies; c) Execute authorized management of state stocks in companies engaged in commercial activities like building of hydro-technical constructions, technical operation, water supply and sewerage services in the area of irrigation, drinking water, sewerage as well as in state entities which implement investment projects in natural and artificial water basins in the mentioned areas at the expense of foreign funding. The Melioratsia Closed Joint Stock Company is responsible for organization and supervision of construction, operation, maintenance and cleaning of drainage infrastructure, soils cadastre operation, as well as for monitoring of water quality in drainage areas. The Company monitors drainage conditions, water flow, and water quality through its 425 observation wells. Ministry of Nature Protection The Ministry of Nature Protection (MNP) is responsible for the protection, sustainable use, and regeneration of natural resources as well as the improvement of the environment in the Republic of Armenia. In those areas, the MNP s authority includes overseeing national policy development, developing environmental standards and guidelines, and Page 57

58 enforcement. The MNP implements those functions through the following structural departments: Normative-methodological Department o Division of Legislation o Division of Standards and Technical Regulations Department of International Cooperation Department of Environmental Protection o Division of Biodiversity and Water Resources Protection o Division of Land and Atmosphere Protection Department of Hazardous Substances and Waste Management Department of Nature Protection and Environmental Economics Department of Underground Resources Protection Department of Meteorology and Monitoring of Atmosphere Pollution The MNP also undertakes several functions through the following relevant detached divisions and subordinate bodies: Water Resources Management Agency WRMA is the key institution responsible for the water resources management: development of National Water Policy and National Water Plan; classification of water resources by their purpose usage; participation in water standards development and supervise their application, issue water use permits, etc. State Environmental Expertise SNCO (conduct environmental assessments, issue conclusions) State Environmental Inspectorate (includes 11 Regional Environmental Inspectorates: oversee the implementation of legislative and regulatory standards in natural resources protection, use and regeneration) Environmental Impact Monitoring Centre (collects water quality data from 131 sampling points) Armenian State Hydro-meteorological and Monitoring Service SNCO (operates 97 active hydrological stations) Bio-resources Management Agency Agency of Mineral Reserves Geological Agency Ministry of Health State Hygienic and Anti-epidemiological Survey of the Ministry of Health of RA is responsible for the following actions implementation: Participating in sanitary norms and drinking water quality standards development; Coordination of all issues related to health; Supervise implementation of sanitary norms, hygienic and anti-epidemiological measures implementation by organizations and citizens. Ministry of Agriculture The Melioration Development Department of the Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for the development and implementation coordination of the annual projects on construction, operation, rehabilitation and cleaning of collector-drainage system. Page 58

59 National Water Council This is the top consulting body within the water sector. It comprises representatives of several ministries. The role of the Board is the development of recommendations on National Water Policy and Program. Dispute Settlement Commission should be established under this Board, which is authorized to settle disputes related to water use permits within the scope of water relations. Regulatory Commission Regulatory Commission is responsible for establishment of tariff policy in water relations and issuing of permits for the use of water systems. Ministry of Transport and Communication The MTC undertakes several functions through the Armenian Road Directorate which takes overall responsibilities for the coordination and supervision of the construction, operation and maintenance of the roads within Armenia, including highways and roads of international importance. Page 59

60 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This Chapter addresses the potential environmental impacts of the Proposal Irrigation and Rural Roads Components and proposed mitigation measures. In general, the environmental issues that may need to be addressed will vary with the subprojects depending on the project specific features. In the context of this evaluation an attention was paid to fatal flaw analysis. It should be mentioned that based on brief field and office reviews of representative components of the project, no fatal flaws that would prevent an environmentally-sound implementation of the projects were uncovered. The positive impacts, on the other hand, are expected to be significant. The environmental impact findings of the preliminary studies are briefly presented below by component type. Rural Roads Component. The majority of the project roads are expected to have a minor, short-term, localized, and totally rehabilitation-associated environmental impacts. Besides it is necessary to mention that according to Armenian Law on EIA, rehabilitation works are not subject to EIA. However, it is recommended that a detailed reconnaissance survey of all roads be performed as part of the technical surveys and design to determine if there are any environmental constraints and takings of cultivated land or trees, houses, cultural or community resources. After completing the survey, a checklist should be completed based on the survey results (see Annex B). If the survey/checklist process uncovers potential impacts, detailed EIAs will be produced for those roads, in accordance with the requirements of the terms of reference presented in Annex C. An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) will be developed and implemented for all road projects by the contractors. Annex C contains terms of reference for ESMPs. Irrigation Component. Most of the efforts are associated with rehabilitation of existing schemes or replacement of energy-consuming pumping system with gravity ones where mostly positive impacts associated with the reduction of losses and energy savings are anticipated. There are some cases of construction of the new reservoirs as well as rehabilitation of existing incomplete ones, where it could be necessary to fill the Checklist and investigate the potential for significant impacts to the human and natural environment from construction. The main adverse impacts here could be associated with the water-logging of reservoir sites; however these influences have to be fully compensated with the provision of reliable irrigation to the larger areas with its subsequent positive impacts. Regarding Drainage rehabilitation sub-component a comprehensive ecological study of the wetlands in the Ararat Valley should be accomplished by international and local experts in wetland ecology to determine the current ecological productivity of these areas. The study should include an estimate of the historical extent of wetlands before the large rice and cotton cultivation schemes of the fist half of the twentieth century and the drainage initiated in the 1950 s, the expansion and subsequent reduction in the size of wetlands, and the impact of the drainage project component on the value of the remaining wetlands. The study should investigate through field studies the presence of rare or endangered species of fauna and flora, and the likelihood of impacting these through Page 60

61 continued or expanded drainage works. Recommendations should be made about possible mitigation of the adverse impacts and protection of the wetlands. The rehabilitation of the main and secondary canals, cleaning of tertiary canals, repairing of pumping stations would not pose significant risks to the environment. All of these activities are of rehabilitation nature; they do not affect new areas and do not include expansions or new designs for existing infrastructures. In addition, this part of the project aims only at improving the efficiency of the existing irrigation systems and reducing water losses. As a consequence, the range of impacts is limited (impacts directly related to the rehabilitation activities) and their magnitude remains small (localized impacts and no significant effect on future operation). The sections discussing No Action Alternative of the Proposal, most important potential positive and negative impacts, as well as mitigation measures are presented below No Action Alternative No Action alternative discusses the situation with no Project. In general No Action alternative is applied in respect of the Proposal as a whole. In this case No Action alternative will lead to the following cosequences: Reduction of irrigated area; Further deterioration of irrigation infrastructure and rural roads; Increased water losses; Increased energy consumption; Increased O&M costs for irrigation infrastructure and rural roads; Intensification of secondary salinization process of the valuable lands in Ararat valley; Extension of water-logged area; Deteriorating of soil s physical-chemical conditions resulting in desertification and in biodiversity reduction; Worsening of public health conditions in over-humid areas related to the increase in water-borne diseases; Reduction of income of the rural population; Increased migration from rural areas. Based on above list it may be stated that the potential negative consequences of the No Action alternative greatly overweight the environmental risks associated with the Proposal implementation. Page 61

62 4.2. Potential Positive Impacts The main positive impacts of the Project are followings: Provision reliable irrigation to the ha of lands; Enlargement of irrigated area by ha; Increasing the productivity of irrigated area; increasing of the crop quality and yields, and allowing the cultivation of cash crops; Improvement of melioration state of ha of lands in Ararat valley, stopping the process of lands secondary salinization and soil over-humidization; Reduction of water losses annually by M m 3 ; Reduction of energy consumption. Annual energy savings will comprise M kwt/h. Indirectly this will bring also ecological benefits through prevention of atmosphere pollution associated with less energy production; Considerable reduction of O&M costs of the irrigation systems and rural roads; Reduction of the dependence on pumping irrigation, which is electricity consuming, expensive and unreliable; Improvement of the public health. Rehabilitation of the drainage system in Ararat valley will lead to a reduction of the water-borne diseases (i.e. malaria) and a general improvement in public health; Improvement of the public socio-economic situation. Rehabilitation of km of rural roads will reduce transportation costs, improve the accessibility, and socioeconomic situation of population of 313 rural communities; Establishment of better opportunities for farming products realization; Creation of new jobs; Reduction of migration from rural areas, creation of conditions favoring the immigration back to rural communities process; Increasing of incomes for dozens of thousands farmers and their families throughout Armenia Potential Negative Impacts The potential negative impacts of the Project implementation are followings: Disposal of excavated materials and construction wastes. Demolition debris will be generated during the construction works on gravity schemes and reservoirs and rehabilitation works on canals and distribution network. These effects will be localized, and will be minimized by means of appropriate removal and disposal procedures; Page 62

63 Degradation of landscapes and soil erosion. The impacts on vegetative cover will be short-term, localized, and totally associated with construction of reservoirs and gravity schemes. They can be mitigated by adopting proper measures and contract provisions; Impacts from temporary access roads and work areas. Establishment of temporary dirt roads to access work areas and temporary dumping sites for excavated materials can enhance soil erosion, and degrade the landscape; Loss of fertile topsoil. Mixing of top soils (suitable for agriculture) with lower grade soils (deeper layers) during the excavation and back filling of trenches would have a negative impact on the soil quality and diminish agricultural production and yield; Pollution by construction run-offs. Negative impacts of fuel and oils to groundwater are expected to be temporary and of minor significance; Environmental flow considerations. During low precipitation years water resources will not be sufficient to fully meet the demands of irrigation and environmental flow, however the environmental flows should be preserved; Impacts on the biodiversity of the project region. The construction works could have a negative impact on that special ecosystem as well as rare and endangered species found in the project area; Impacts on trees. The construction works could require uprooting several amount of trees and thus have a negative impact on natural environment; Barriers to fish migration upstream. Construction of reservoirs and intake structures would bring difficulties for the fish to swim upstream and could disturb the lifecycle of the fish and restrict their ability to spawn and reproduce; Increased salinity of drainage water; salinity of the drainage water could temporary increase during rehabilitation, deepening and cleaning of the drainage collectors; Noise and vibration disturbances during construction and temporary air pollution (dust) related to the transportation of construction materials and truck traffic. These impacts will occur during the construction and rehabilitation works, but will be only short-term and affect different people at different times. Effects include dust from construction activities, noise during trench excavation, possible effect of vibration caused by operation of heavy machinery, closure of roads and section of roads causing increased traffic, etc. These impacts will be felt but only for a short period and will also be moderate for people using or passing through the affected areas. Appropriate mitigation measures and construction methods will be in place; Safety hazards from construction activities. No major hazards are expected the construction of the proposed project elements, as long as proper construction practices and safety procedures are applied; Impacts on historic-cultural and archaeological monuments. No archeological or cultural resources are expected to be encountered during project implementation since major works consist in rehabilitation of existing systems where excavations have been conducted before and no findings have been reported. Compensation issues for land acquisition and trees uprooting; Page 63

64 4.4. Mitigation Measures Based on the preliminary assessment, key mitigation measures recommended are listed as follows: Use, where possible, existing quarries for required additional materials; Reuse of suitable excavated and dredged soils limiting the need for old and new quarries; Choose and delineate carefully all access roads and work areas. Manage and monitor them closely so that they do not expand unduly during construction; Where possible use of existing access roads avoiding construction of new ones; Transport and disposal of construction concrete rubbles, debris and spoils in approved paths and landfills/dump sites; Scrape and store preciously the top agricultural grade soil layer (typically about 20 cm, but this could vary from one location to another depending on local soil characteristics). Store these soils in piles not exceeding one meter (soils lose their agronomic qualities in thicker layers); Compact the top surface of access roads and work areas to facilitate water runoff and avoid flooding the area. This will require to dig drainage ditches and connect them to natural drainage axes; Take away the fertile topsoil from the reservoir sites that to be water-logged and use it further for the community needs (to be taken into account during design stage); Conduct dust-depressing measures aimed at prevention of air pollution through watering of access roads and construction sites; Obtain permits from the Ministry of Nature Protection and as needed from the local/regional authorities for the opening and/or use of quarries; Obtain permits from the Ministry of Nature Protection and as needed from the local/regional authorities for disposal of excavated materials and construction wastes; Obtain Water Use Permits from the Water Resources Management Agency of Ministry of Nature Protection for water withdrawal from the source; Survey historic-cultural and archaeological monuments along proposed water conveyance lines and incorporate protection measures in design. During both design stage and construction the appropriate Contractors will cooperate with the Department of Historical and Cultural Monuments Protection under Ministry of Culture and Youth and if needed obtain all necessary permits prior beginning of construction works; Restoration to quasi-original conditions of landscape after completion of construction and rehabilitation works and after use of quarries, where possible use the place-specific plant species; Page 64

65 Monitor irrigation water quality downstream of select new water intakes for gravity schemes; Monitor quality and salinity level of drainage water and its impacts on the resource/land; Cleaning and deepening of drainage collectors should be carried out during the winter, when river flows are high and can dilute easily the increase in suspended solids, besides at that time the aquatic life is less sensitive and lands are not irrigated; Design and build fish ladders/passages and other fish protection measures on reservoirs and gravity schemes where needed; Select optimal route/design that requires uprooting the least number of trees and causes least disruption to ecosystems and habitats of rare/endangered species Compensate owners for land acquisition and loss of trees using village reserve lands and trees replanting; Incorporate environmental (and social) clauses in standard contracts for all Irrigation and Rural Roads components construction works; Conduct mid-term and end-of-project inspections to the sites during construction and rehabilitation works. Page 65

66 5. ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND CLAUSES FOR CIVIL WORKS CONTRACTS Most construction phase impacts will be possible to mitigate by including appropriate clauses into the civil works contracts. Revisions of clauses should cover, but not limited to, the following issues: Compliance with general national environmental guidelines; Protection of Natural Habitats and Specially-protected areas; Protection of Historic-cultural monuments; Adequate disposal of construction and excavation wastes; Location of construction camps; Restoration of the quasi-original conditions of landscape in construction sites after works completion; Occupational safety and health (Consultants and contractors working on the program will be required to adhere to all applicable laws and regulations controlling workplace health and safety), etc. Page 66

67 6. PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION The RA Environmental Laws and International Agreements regulating public consultation and coordination, as well as information availability to public are listed below: The Fundamentals of the RA legislation on Nature Protection ensure citizen s right to request complete information concerning the environmental situation and obtain it in time. The RA Law On sets forth the process of assessment of environmental impacts. The new Water Code of the RA also addresses public participation principles. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 1998). The MNP according to existing legislation is responsible for ensuring public awareness about planned activities through mass media, as well as notify local authorities and concerned NGOs about environmental aspects of a project with further consideration of their views during project preparation and implementation phases. In order to ensure the sustainability of consultations in the Armenian MCA Program implementation process, it is planned to create a clear structure of ensuring the transparent and open processes of decision making and participatory monitoring over implementation. The structure, as well as the main responsibilities of each body will be discussed with all stakeholders. The structure represents the following bodies: Board of Trustees with civil society representatives; Stakeholders Committee; Regional Stakeholders Committees. Board of Trustees: The Armenian MCA Board of Trustees will be in charge of overall coordination of the Armenian MCA program. It will consist of eleven members. The composition of the Board of Trustees will include: representatives from the Government and civil society proposed by the Stakeholders Committee. Stakeholders Committee: Stakeholders Committee will be responsible for formation of civil society participation in the Board of Trustees, as well as for transferring ideas, concerns, complaints and proposals to the Board of Trustees. Stakeholders Committee will include representatives from NGOs, private sector associations, communities and Regional Stakeholders Committees. The Stakeholders Committee shall hold meetings at least quarterly. Regional Stakeholders Committees: Regional Stakeholders Committees will serve as a mechanism to provide representatives of the private sector, civil society, farmers associations, local communities, and regional governments the opportunity to provide Page 67

68 advice and input to MCA-Armenia regarding the implementation of projects in their regions. The main precondition for ensuring transparency and accountability is access to information. It will be through: Website. The established website ( is interactive (public forum, feedback etc.), meaning that all interested parties will have the opportunity to address their comments/complaints/concerns and receive proper responses. Website will make publicly available environmental impact assessment reports and environmental management plans for investment components of the Armenian MCA Program, Program reports, minutes of the meetings of the Stakeholders Committee and the meetings of the Board of Trustees and other project relevant information. Mass media. Mass media capacity, including in regional level, will also be used for provision of information on the process of implementation of the Armenian MCA Program and its results to the wide public. Page 68

69 7. MONITORING In general monitoring functions will range from document review and field observations to field measurements, sampling and analysis. The checklists for environmental survey of the rural roads and irrigation schemes included in the MCA-Armenian proposal are presented in the Annex B. For each potential negative environmental impact specific measures to eliminate, offset, reduce or mitigate those adverse impacts to acceptable levels will be revealed during Environmental and Social Impact Assessments and described in Environmental and Social Management Plans. Terms of References for Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (if required by the Ministry of Nature Protection), Contents of an ESIA Report, as well as for Environmental and Social Management Plan are presented in Annex C. For each revealed potential adverse impact the followings will be identified: the proposed mitigation measure(s); the agencies responsible for implementing those measures, including: o executing agencies responsible for executing the measure; o supervising agencies responsible for supervising the executing agencies to ensure that they are executing the mitigation measures as planned; and o monitoring agencies responsible for monitoring implementation and effectiveness of the mitigation measures and for adjusting the program if needed. Monitoring of the Environmental and Social Management Plans (ESMP) will be carried out using expert consultants engaged for the purpose. The ESMPs will outline the monitoring requirements, the monitoring agency, and the estimated capital and recurrent costs of the monitoring for each key environmental parameter to be monitored. It is envisaged that the ESMP will provide mid-term and end-of-the-project independent inspections to strengthen the monitoring process. Should there be any need to conduct such inspections at an earlier date or have some additional ones, or to make any amendments, the ESMPs will be adjusted as appropriate. Most likely some relevant agencies (i.e. Environmental Monitoring Centre of the MNP) should be supported and some capacity building activities implemented to ensure proper environmental monitoring. These will increase the abilities of involved agencies charged with implementing and monitoring of the ESMPs. For example, monitoring of water quality should be carried out periodically for the irrigation and drainage components to ensure that the projects are not creating water quality problems within or downstream of the project components. Capacity building activities will cover organizational set-up, procurement of equipment and supplies, as well as technical assistance and training. Environmental Documentation Process Environmental Documentation Process is designed to comply with MCC environmental guidelines and with the Armenian environmental laws. A review of the Armenian environmental legal and regulatory structure indicates that it is adequate for the purpose of environmental assessment, and that it will address the MCC environmental documentation requirements. Environmental Documentation Process outlined in Table 4 includes key actions and agencies responsible for implementation and Oversight/ Support/ Review of the process at the various steps. Page 69

70 Table 4. Key Steps of Environmental Documentation Process Step Action Responsibility 1 Definition of schemes as Projects for the environmental evaluation MCA-Armenia Oversight/ Support/ Review MCC Remarks Schemes must be defined as logical aggregates of components from the MCA-Armenia Proposal, must have a defined purpose and need, and must be of appropriate scale. For environmental evaluation, proposed schemes must not be divided into many smaller projects, activities or stages which are addressed as though they were independent, unrelated activities, likely to have insignificant environmental impacts. 2 Preliminary Screening of Projects according to a) Armenian law, b) MCC guidelines a) MNP (State Environmental Expertise) b) MCC MCA-Armenia Categories A, B, and C are as defined in the MCC draft environmental guidelines (Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 42, march 4, 2005) 3 Completion of EIA, including Environmental Management Plan MCA-Armenia, and Project Proponent/ Contractor MNP, MCC The EIA must comply with MCC guidelines and the Armenian EIA law. The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) should include specific mitigation and monitoring requirements, and should be reflected in contract clauses. This EIA and EMP must be approved by MNP (Environmental Expertise Agency). a Field Reconnaissance Surveys Project Proponent/ Contractor MNP MCA Armenia MCC Survey forms for roads and irrigation projects should be used by qualified individuals, trained in the use of these tools. b Completion of Environmental Checklist Project Proponent/ Contractor MNP MCA Armenia MCC Checklists for Rural Roads and Irrigation/ Drainage projects are available. For some projects, the MCC may request other types of environmental documentation, or may elect to waive the requirement for a checklist. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 70

71 Step Action Responsibility 4 Ongoing Public Consultation Project Proponent/ Contractor Oversight/ Support/ Review MCA-Armenia Remarks Documentation of consultation in compliance with MCC requirements and Articles 6, 8 and 10 of the Armenian EIA Law. 5 Submittal of Environment Documentation Package to MNP Project Proponent/ Contractor MCA-Armenia SEE under MNP will review submitted EIAs and EMPs and issue appropriate conclusion 6 Expert Conclusion MNP (Environmental Expertise Agency) Project Proponent/ Contractor MCA-Armenia Prior to construction, expert review and professional conclusion to be obtained in accordance with Articles 9, 11, and 12 of the Armenian EIA Law. 7 Submittal of Environment Documentation Package to MCC MCA-Armenia Project Proponent/ Contractor MNP MCC must receive and approve the environmental documentation on Projects before funding can occur. Documentation should include, for each Project, Project Definition, Checklist, Environmental Survey, EIA, EMP, and/or MNP approval (as appropriate to Project Category) 8 Ongoing Monitoring MNP (Environmental Inspectorate and Environmental Monitoring Agency) MCA-Armenia, MCC Monitoring to ensure compliance with environmental Management plans. For each Project, results of monitoring of environmental impacts, ongoing public consultation and performance of the EMP should be submitted to MCC on a periodic basis as agreed between MCC and MCA-Armenia. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 71

72 8. MAIN FINDINGS The Proposal presented by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to the Millennium Challenge Account is aimed at increasing agricultural production in poor rural areas of the country. In the context of this evaluation an attention was paid to fatal flaw analysis. It should be mentioned that based on brief field and office reviews of representative components of the project, no fatal flaws that would prevent an environmentally-sound implementation of the projects were uncovered. All rural roads included in the Proposal will be rehabilitated, no new construction will be implemented and thus it is expected to have minor, short-term and localized environmental impacts that are mostly associated with the limited emissions of dust. Irrigation component also primarily aims at rehabilitation and improvement existing irrigation schemes and infrastructures or replacement of energy-consuming pumping system with gravity ones, where the impacts of positive nature are mostly anticipated due to the reduction of water losses on the one hand and energy savings on the other. There are some cases of construction of the new reservoirs as well as rehabilitation of existing incomplete ones that are of small scale, where it would be necessary to investigate the potential environmental impacts from construction/rehabilitation works. The main adverse impacts here could be associated with the water-logging of reservoir sites; however these influences have to be fully compensated with the provision of reliable irrigation to the larger areas with its subsequent positive impacts. Regarding Drainage rehabilitation subcomponent, a comprehensive ecological study of the wetlands in the Ararat Valley should be accomplished by international and local experts in wetland ecology prior to beginning of any construction/rehabilitation works with an aim to conduct environmental impact assessment and reveal the expediency of protection of recently established wetlands. The rehabilitation of the main and secondary canals, cleaning of tertiary canals, repairing of pumping stations would not pose significant risks to the environment, especially taking into consideration that these activities are of rehabilitation nature; they do not affect new areas and do not include expansions or new designs for existing infrastructures. To prepare this EIA, the MCA-Armenia team has already identified in advance several potential negative environmental impacts of the proposed project and the adequate measures to eliminate, offset, or reduce those adverse impacts to acceptable levels will be incorporated into the project design. The checklists should be completed for the rural roads and irrigation infrastructure, as well as Terms of References for the Environmental and Social Impact Assessments, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Reports and Environmental and Social Management Plans are developed and presented in this report (see Annexes B and C). The lists of potential negative and positive impacts, No Action alternative and relevant mitigation measures were discussed in the EIA. The EIA recommends that all construction contracts have to include special provisions requiring Contractors to mitigate adverse environmental impacts. This report has also addressed environmental monitoring, Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 72

73 environmental documentation process, capacity building, as well as public consultation and participation mechanism and other relevant issues. The positive socio-economic and environmental impacts of the Proposal greatly overweight the environmental risks associated with its implementation. It will improve agricultural output and productivity, increase income of dozens of thousands of farmers and their families throughout Armenia, provide reliable irrigation, save millions of US dollars annually in energy costs, significantly reduce water losses and increase the supply of water for irrigation, reduce water-logging and flooding of dozens of villages and the spread of malaria in the Ararat valley, lead to the reduction of erosion and promote protection against desertification, etc. Rehabilitation of rural roads will improve the accessibility of communities and population social-economic condition in more than 300 villages. MCA-Armenian team with great support of MCC team members and consultants has conducted EIA of the MCA-Armenian proposal. For a multi-component project of this type, it would not be expedient or realistic to assess each irrigation scheme and rural road section individually within the given time framework. Instead the team engaged in EIA development has targeted a few representative schemes and road areas for field visits with a thorough review and analysis of written documentation on the Proposal components. This approach allowed to identify the most likely range of potential impacts and formulate the most appropriate and reasonable set of mitigation measures. However, unforeseen impacts may arise from certain individual projects. Some of the impacts may also require other and more adapted mitigation measures than the ones described in this report. Therefore, it will be important to adapt/adjust the findings and recommendations of this EIA as needed during project implementation. It is important to mention that the majority of works included in Irrigation Component of the Proposal were inherited from the World Bank Irrigation Development Project. EIA for the mentioned project was prepared by Ecodit Consultant firm (USA) in 2000, submitted to the State Environmental Expertise under the Ministry of Nature Protection and the positive expert Conclusion for the Concept Paper was obtained. Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 73

74 9. REFERENCES 1. Armenia, 2002, National Assessment Report, Republic of Armenia report to the World Summit on Sustainable Development at Johannesburg 2002; Yerevan, Armenia, 2005, Government of the Republic of Armenia, March DAI, 2002, Analytical Report Summary Water Quantity and Quality in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia Prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for USAID Mission for the South Caucasus, February DAI, 2003, Summary of Legislation in the Water Sector. Project Report. Prepared by Development Alternatives, Inc. for USAID Mission for the South Caucasus. 5. ECODIT, 2000, Environmental Assessment of Irrigation Development Project, SW-GR/014 Env, Updated EA Report, October EPAC NGO, 2000, Environmental Law of the Republic of Armenia, by the assistance of USAID, Yerevan (in Armenian) 7. Georisk, 2003, Environmental Management Plan Framework, SW / DW-02/ 002, Armenia Municipal Water and Wastewater Project, Georisk Scientific Research Company, Government of the Republic of Armenia, 1994, Forest Code of the Republic of Armenia. Official Bulletin of the Republic of Armenia. (in Armenian) 9. Government of the Republic of Armenia, 1995, The Law of the Republic of Armenia on Environment Impact Assessment. Official Bulletin of the Republic of Armenia. (in Armenian) 10. Government of the Republic of Armenia, 1996, Law on Automobile Roads Official Bulletin of the Republic of Armenia. (in Armenian) 11. Government of the Republic of Armenia, 2001, The Land Code of the Republic of Armenia. Official Bulletin of the Republic of Armenia. (in Armenian) 12. Government of the Republic of Armenia, 2001, The RoA Government Regulations and Programs on the Republic of Armenia Water Systems Reformation and Development. (in Armenian) 13. Government of the Republic of Armenia, 2002, Water Code of the Republic of Armenia. Official Bulletin of the Republic of Armenia. (in Armenian) 14. Environmental law on the Republic of Armenia, Second Revised Edition. Managing Editor A.B.Iskoyan. Published with financial assistance of OSCE Office in Yerevan, (in Armenian) 15. FAO, Environment Impact Assessment of Irrigation and Drainage Projects. Prepared by T.C.Drougherty, A.W.Hall, Paper N 53, Government of the Republic of Armenia, 2003, Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. 17. Hadj-Mabrouk, 1999, Preliminary Environmental Management Plan. Dam Safety Project. Prepared by Ezedine Hadj-Mabrouk, World Bank, March Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 74

75 18. Karanian et al, 2004, Stone Garden Guide Armenia and Karabagh, by Matthew Karanian and Robert Kurkjian, Stone Garden Productions, Los Angeles/Yerevan, MCC, 2005, Interim Environmental Guidelines for Public Comment, MCC FR 05-02, Federal Register, Vol. 70, No. 42, Friday March 4, Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia, 1999, Armenia National Environmental Action Program. Main Report. (in Armenian) 21. REC, 2004, NGO Directory. A Directory of Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, by The Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus, Tbilisi, REC, 2005, Environment and State Authorities. A Directory of Governmental Organizations with Environmental Responsibilities in the Republic of Armenia, by The regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus, Tbilisi, Transparency International, 2002, Information on Environmental Issues in State Bodies, by Transparency International, UNEP, OSCE, Yerevan (in Armenian) 24. UNESCO, 2000, Environmental Performance Review of Armenia As discussed and approved by the seventh session of the Committee on Environmental Policy, Inited Nations Economic and Social Council, Economic Commission for Europe, Committee on Environmental Policy, September World Bank, 1994, Armenia Irrigation Rehabilitation Project. Project Appraisal Document, Report No AM. 26. World Bank, 1995, Armenia Agriculture and Food Sector Review. Report No AM. 27. World Bank, 1999, Armenia Dam Safety Project. Project Appraisal Document, Report No AM. 28. World Bank, 2000, Natural Resources Management and Poverty Reduction Strategy. Project Report. November World Bank, 2001, Armenia, Towards Integrated Water Resources Management. Technical Paper 30. World Bank Project Appraisal Document on a Proposed Credit to the Republic of Armenia for an Irrigation Development Project. Report No AM. August WSDII PIU SI, 2005 Manual on Legal Acts in Force Related to the Environmental Issues in Irrigation, Water Supply and Wastewater Sectors, by the WSDII PIU SI, JINJ Co Ltd, SWE NGO, EPAC NGO, Yerevan (in Armenian) Environmental Due Diligence Report MCA-Armenia Proposal Page 75

76 ANNEXES Page 76

77 Page 77 ANNEX A: MAP Location of Irrigation Schemes and Rural Roads,,,, Giumri Armavir Spitak Artik Ashtarak Echmiadzin Ashotsk Masis Stepanavan Alaverdi Vanadzor Hrazdan Yerevan Yerevan Ararat Artashat Abovyan Charentsavan Sevan Dilijan Gavar Ijevan Martouni Sevan lake Sevan lake Berd Eghegnadzor Vaiq Jermouk Vardenis Sisyan Goris Kapan Meghri

78 ANNEX B: CHECKLISTS AND FORMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RECONNAISSANCE Proposed forms and instructions for environmental reconnaissance surveys and environmental checklists are presented here. For the irrigation component, it is recommended that the comprehensive checklist prepared by the International Committee on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) be used. More information on this checklist, including a detailed manual and auxiliary software, can be found at: The environmental checklist for the roads component was developed based primarily on similar checklists used for rural roads projects by the Asian Development bank and others. The roads environmental reconnaissance form was developed based on similar rural roads projects. Page 78

79 RURAL ROADS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Project Name/Location: Date: For each environmental issue/effect place a cross (X) in one of the columns Positive Impact Very likely/ Major Possible/ Minor No Impact likely Negative Impact Very likely/ Major Possible/ Minor More information needed Comments Issue/Effect A B C D E F 1.1 Protected areas 1.2 Fisheries, aquatic ecology 1.3 Wetlands 1.4 Forests 1.5 Rare, endangered species Ecology 1.6 Animal migration 1.7 Natural Industry 2.1 Erosion and/or siltation 2.2 Local flooding Physical Effects 2.3 Stream channel regime changes 2.4 Landslides 2.5 Dust/pollution 2.6 Noise 3.1 Population change 3.2 Income & amenities 3.3 Taking of lands / trees 3.4 Resettlement 3.5 Women s role 3.6 Minority groups Socio-economic Issues 3.7 Regional effects 3.8 Cultural Resources 3.9 Urbanizing Problems 3.10 Health 3.11 Recreation Other Number of crosses: Name/Designation of Assessor: Page 79

80 RURAL ROADS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Descriptions of Environmental Issues/ Effects Note: These are residual effects after proper design and construction of the project roads, but before any possibly required specific mitigation is applied. Ecology 1.1 Protected Areas: Does the road itself encroach on and/or destroy National Protected Areas, or other important ecological resources, or facilitate their destruction/encroachment by allowing access to these areas? 1.2 Fisheries, aquatic ecology: Will the road construction negatively or positively affect streams or other water resources and associated aquatic ecology? 1.3 Wetlands: Does the road encroach on, fill in, enhance, or otherwise affect wetlands? 1.4 Forests: Will the road require the encroachment on forests, or the cutting of trees? Will the road project result in planting of trees for shade or soil stabilization? 1.5 Rare, Endangered Species: Is the road likely to impact any plant or animal rare species, directly or indirectly through enhanced access to habitats? 1.6 Animal Migration: Will the road affect wild animal migration routes? 1.7 Natural Industry: Will the road positively or negatively affect commercial or subsistence activities through enhanced access? This includes fisheries, harvesting of natural vegetation, game hunting, honey production, etc.? Physical Effects 2.1 Erosion and/or Siltation: Will the road increase or decrease the potential for erosion along exposed earth cuts and near streams? 2.2 Local Flooding: Will the road increase or decrease the potential for local flooding, especially in villages and other inhabited areas? 2.3 Stream channel regime changes: Is the road and associated bridges likely to encroach on or change stream channels? 2.4 Landslides: Will the road increase or decrease the potential for land slides, subsidence, or other negative geologic aspects along the alignment? 2.5 Dust/Pollution: Will the road increase or decrease airborne dust along the alignment that may affect people or crops, or pollution emissions from vehicles in populated areas? 2.6 Noise: Is the project likely to result in unacceptable levels of noise in populated areas? Socio-Economic Issues 3.1 Population Change: Will the road cause significant population changes in the area which may affect social harmony? 3.2 Income and amenities: Will the road introduce changes in areas such as levels of employment and income, provision of local infrastructure, relative distribution of income, property values, and demand for labor that could increase or decrease social harmony and individual well-being? 3.3 Taking of Lands or Trees: Will the road require the taking of private or community productive lands or trees, vineyards, etc? 3.4 Resettlement: Will the project require any resettlement, and if so, have adequate provisions been made for resettlement, rehabilitation, and compensation in accordance Page 80

81 with National laws and international best practice? 3.5 Women s Role: Will the road cause positive or negative changes in the role of women in relation to social standing, access to health facilities, education, work load, access to income, etc.? 3.6 Minority Groups: Will the road cause changes to the lifestyle, livelihoods or habitation of any social groups leading conflict with their traditional behavior, social organization, or cultural or religious practices? 3.7 Regional Effects: Are the economic, infrastructure, social and demographic changes associated with the road likely to enhance, restrict, or lead to unbalanced regional development? 3.8 Cultural Resources: Will the road improvements affect cultural or religious monuments, places of aesthetic and scenic beauty, or archaeological/ paleontological resources? 3.9 Urbanizing Problems: Will the road bring outside problems (unacceptable levels of traffic, safety concerns, communicable diseases, increased crime, unacceptable outside cultural influences) to areas that were previously less accessible, or to areas primarily inhabited by minority or other susceptible populations? 3.10 Health: Will the road enhance or negatively affect access of the population to health services? 3.11 Recreation: Will the road enhance or constrain recreational possibilities and tourism? Other: In this section the Assessor should enter any other significant issue, relevant to the road in question, that is not covered in the list above. Page 81

82 Marz: Vayots Dzor (for example) Notes: Mark each column below with an "X" if condtion is observed, otherwise leave blank. District: Vajk In "Nearby Houses/Shops" column enter number observed within 20 m of centerline Project Name: Khndzorut-M2 Include any additonal observation not covered in the form under "Remarks" km etc. Location / Land Use Protected area Potential Direct Project Encroachment/ Impact Fisheries/ streams Trees Cultural resources Wetlands Houses/ Cultivation Erosion, siltation, landslides Observations Nearby Houses/ Shops Natural Industry Remarks Name/Designation of Surveyor: Date: Page 82

83 Page 83

84 Page 84

85 Page 85

86 ICID Environmental Checklist Page 86