RELATIONSHIP between WB and NATIONAL REQUIREMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

1. RELATIONSHIP between WB and NATIONAL REQUIREMENTSENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Esra ARIKAN Environmental Specialist ECA Safeguard Training for PIUs, Ankara 2011

2. Overview of the Presentation • SUMMARY OF TURKISH EIA REGULATION • OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS APPLIED TO WB FINANCED PROJECTS IN TURKEY • GAPS BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AND WB REQUIREMENTS • RECOMMENDATIONS

3. Turkish EIA Regulation • Turkey has an EIA Regulation since 1993 and the last amended version is July 17, 2008 EIA Regulation (with minor revision in Dec. 2009). • The responsible authority is MoEF through DG of EIA and Planning (for Annex I projects) and 81 Provincial Directorates of MoEF (for Annex II projects) • EIA Regulation has two lists for screening (Annex I and Annex II) and some projects are ‘No Annex’ • The screening lists are totally dependent on the type and capacity of the project – Project location and site sensitivity is addressed in the EA document not during the screening process – ANNEX I Pulp and paper industry with capacity>40.000 tons/year ANNEX II Pulp and paper industry with capacity<40.000 tons/year NO ANNEX Printing facilities

4. Turkish EIA Regulation • For Annex I Projects full EIA report has to be prepared and the clearance document is ‘EIA Positive’ • For Annex II Projects PIF is prepared and the decision can be either ‘EIA Necessary’ and ‘EIA Not Necessary’. • In case of the former one, the PIF is sent to central authority (DG EIA and Planning) and Annex I procedure starts.The later one serves as the clearance document.

5. Turkish EIA Regulation • For Annex I and Annex II Project the environmental consultancy company who has a valid accreditaion can prepare the report. • For Annex I Projects a Project Application Dossier is submitted to MoEF and the procedure starts. Firstly, a date for public participation meeting was determined by MoEF and announcements are done. • Then a scoping committee is formed including relevant stakeholders and the scope of EIA is determined and shared with the project owner and the EIA consultant. • Then the EIA according to that scope is submitted to MoEF and an Evaluation Committee is established for reviweing the EIA. • After the committee decides that the EIA can be finalized the final draft report is made publicly available at the site and provincial directorates for 30 days then the ‘EIA Positive or Negative’ Decision is given. Public Participation Meeting Evaluation Committee Meeting Scoping Meeting Decision

6. Turkish EIA Regulation • For Annex II Projects a PIF is prepared by the environmental consultant according to the table of contents defined in the EIA Regulation. • In the PIF general characteristics of the project location and site sensitivities are defined. Anticipated environmental impacts of the project and suggested mitigation measures are defined. • Then the PIF is submitted to Provincial Directorate of MoEF. There are no scoping or evaluation committees and no public consultation is required for Annex II Projects. • If the projects environmental impacts defined in the PIF are not significant and the mitigation measures are found to be adequate, mostly the ‘EIA Not Necessary’ decision is obtained. • However, the quality of the PIFs vary regarding the scope and the quality and also the capacity of the provincial diractorates are not the same among the provinces. Therefore, the PIF should be checked regarding the scope and level of details.

7. Implementationof Environmental Safeguards in Turkish Portfolio • Category A – Full Assessment (EIA) • Gas Sector Development • Category B – Partial Assessment and/or EMP • Seismic Risk Mitigation EMP • ECSEE APL 6 • Electricity Distribution Rehabilitation • Railways Restructuring • Land Registration and Cadastre Modernization • Category C – No Assessment • Secondary Education • Category FI – Environmental Management Framework (EMF) • Municipal Services and Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure • Private Sector Renewable Energy and EE • SME Credit Lines and EFILs…

8. The Bank classifies the proposed project into one of four categories, depending on the type, location, sensitivity, and scale of the project and the nature and magnitude of its potential environmental impacts. 1. Category A 2. Category B 3. Category C 4. Category FI The categorization of the projects based mainly on type and scale of the projects. There are 2 categories: Annex I: EIA mandatory Annex II: EIA preliminary study (project introduction file) Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements National laws/regulations generally have environmental screening lists focusing on the sector/size of the project but the project location/site sensitivity is only dealt under some headings of the EA document Screening for WB 4.01 Screening for Turkish EIA

9. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements This is very important for the ‘PROPER’ categorization of sub-projects of FI type projects by the PIU/PFI. PIUs should be guided (through trainings by WB, OMs, etc.) regarding the WB environmental categorization and they have to be encouraged to consult the environmental specialist of the WB team when necessary.

10. The EMP is an integral part of Category A EAs (irrespective of other instruments used).  For Category B projects there can be either a partial EA or a separate EMP, covering mitigation measures, monitoring, and institutional strengthening; The format is provided in Annex C of the OP 4.01. No separate EMP But, requirement for «follow-up/monitoring program» during and after construction, operation and decommissioning. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements EMP for WB 4.01 EMP for Turkish EIA

11. The quality of the PIF documents prepared for Annex II Projects vary among the preparers. Some PIFs can serve as Category B Partial EA / EMPs but not all of them. It depends on the scope and level of detail in the PIF. Generally PIFs lack a detailed impact assessment, detailed remedial measures, and monitoring requirements. The ‘EIA Not Necessary’ decision is not based on risk and complexity of impact (it ignores cumulative impacts). As a consequence the WB would need to require that borrowers follow its approach and fully assess the social and environmental impact of each sub-project, even when this is an incremental task in addition to ensuring compliance with national requirements. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements OP 4.01 does indicate that for Category B projects a “limited EA” or in some cases a free-standing Environmental Management Plan (EMP) may be prepared. Under Turkish law a Project Introduction File (PIF): is required for all Annex II projects as the basis for determining whether an EIA is required.

12. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements Preparation of an EMP rather than / in addition to an EIA - since the EIA is usually required by country system PIUs should be guided with sample EMPs and it should be explained that when a nationally cleared EA is ready, the work is just to summarize the key points in an EMP, which will act as a handbook both for the contractor for implementing and the PIU for monitoring. MITIGATION PLAN MONITORING PLAN

13. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements When EIA is prepared according to the Turkish EIA Regulation in many cases it does not encompass all the project activities (example: EIA for HEPP but the access roads, material borrow sites are not taken into consideration) Suggestion: Although the national regulations are not covering the auxiliary components of the projects PIU should guide the sub-borrower during the scoping phase of the EA document which will be prepared for WB projects Alternative Analysis has a narrower scope in Turkish EIA In Turkish EIAs mostly technology alternatives are provided (briefly) and location alternatives are not detailed.

14. An executive summary is required which can be categorized as a non-technical summary as in EU requirements. The EIA report requires a conclusion to be made which cannot be evaluated as an executive summary. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements Differences in the general outline or table of contents Executive Summary for WB 4.01 Executive Summary for Turkish EIA

15. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements Conducting public participation meetings (generally 2 meetings for Category A’s and 1 for Category B’s) - since the country systems mostly have less public participation requirements • - The client should nominate a person in charge (in PIU) for the environmental issues who will be familiarized (trained) with the WB safeguards and the country EIA system. • - This person will guide the sub-project owner about the scope of the public participation meeting and announcement/disclosure necessities.

16. Example from Turkey on EMP Implementation Public Consultation Outputs in a Natural Gas Storage Project In Turkey • - In most cases, the main issues raised in PC meetings concern employment opportunities and expropriation. • - But an important issue resulted from a PC meeting of Salt Lake Natural Gas Storage Project in Turkey. • Although the pre-feasibility study and draft EIA was prepared with a plan of using local drills to leach the salt to open the gas storage caverns, a group in the PC meeting mentioned that the GW table in the area is very low and the GW amount is only sufficient for agricultural purposes. • More detailed study was conducted and finally it was agreed that fresh water is supplied from a reservoir located 115 km away from the project site via an underground pipeline.

17. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements Turkish disclosure requirements also differ from WB operational policies. • Under WB policy public disclosure is mandatory for category A and B projects. Accordingly, the EA report is made available at an appropriate public location accessible by project-affected people, and their comments must be taken into account • Under Turkish regulations the MoEF makes the draft EIA report available to the public for comment prior to the MoEF decision. There is no requirement for the disclosure of Project Information Files prepared for the Annex II Projects under Turkish EIA Regulation.

18. Gaps Between National Systems and WB Requirements Requirements for EIA Preparers • The Turkish system requires that only authorized / certified consultants prepare the PIF and conduct the EIA. However, the requirements for certification may not be sufficient to ensure the production of high quality EIAs. • The WB policy does not specify certification of EIA consultants. On the other hand, WB policy requires that EIAs for Category A projects be carried out by an independent consultant while no such requirement exists under Turkish EIA law.

19. Recommendations • PIUs should first ask the national clearance and the • documents should be kept as part of the sub-project file. • PIU should nominate/hire a person to follow up on environmental issues • PIU should check that the EIA preparer (for Cat. A’s) is not involved in design/feasibility phases of the same project. • PIU should guide the sub-contractor for better scoping of the EA (inclusion of auxiliary components of the project), and to fill the gaps such as cumulative impact assessment (when needed), better public consultation activity planning and documentation • PIUs should request regular reporting on implementation from the sub-borrowers and also PIUs should inform WB via regular reporting • PIU should include in the Loan Agreement a condition that the Sub-project sponsor agrees to implement the EMP and also it should be advised that the sub-project sponsor make it as a part of the construction contractor. Discharge EIA Positive Emission EIA Not Necessary

20. THANK YOU… QUESTIONS ?? COMMENTS??