chm.pops.intchm.pops.int/Portals/0/docs/from_old_website/documents/implementation/gef/kiev_en.pdfThe workshop was financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) through a Medium

UNITED NATIONS

ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME CCHHEEMMIICCAALLSS

PROCEEDINGS Subregional Workshop on Support for the Implementation

of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

KKiieevv,, UUkkrraaiinnee

2211--2255 OOccttoobbeerr 22000022

Global Environment Facility

IOMC INTER-ORGANIZATION PROGRAMME FOR THE SOUND MANAGEMENT OF CHEMICALS A cooperative agreement among UNEP, ILO, FAO, WHO, UNIDO, UNITAR and OECD

UNITED NATIONS

ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME CCHHEEMMIICCAALLSS

PROCEEDINGS Subregional Workshop on Support for the Implementation

of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

KKiieevv,, UUkkrraaiinnee 2211--2255 OOccttoobbeerr 22000022

Global Environment Facility

IOMC INTER-ORGANIZATION PROGRAMME FOR THE SOUND MANAGEMENT OF CHEMICALS A cooperative agreement among UNEP, ILO, FAO, WHO, UNIDO, UNITAR and OECD

The workshop was financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) through a Medium Sized Project (MSP) with co-financing from the Government of Sweden. This publication is produced within the framework of the Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC).

The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC), was established in 1995 by UNEP, ILO, FAO, WHO, UNIDO and OECD (Participating Organizations), following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase coordination in the field of chemical safety. In January 1998, UNITAR formally joined the IOMC as a Participating Organization. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment.

Material in this publication may be freely quoted or reprinted, but acknowledgement is requested together with a reference to the document. A copy of the publication containing the quotation or reprint should be sent to UNEP Chemicals. Cover photo from Sketches of Kiev

Available from:

UNEP Chemicals 11-13, chemin des Anémones

CH-1219 Châtelaine, GE Switzerland

Phone: +41 22 917 1234 Fax: +41 22 797 3460

E-mail: [email protected] www.chem.unep.ch

UNEP Chemicals is a part of UNEP’s Technology, Industry and Economics Division

UNEP Chemicals Kiev Proceedings POPs Workshop October 2002

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................3

2. WORKSHOP PROGRAMME ..............................................................................5

3. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS..................................................................................10

4. SIGNATORY COUNTRIES AND PARTIES TO THE STOCKHOLM

CONVENTION ON POPS AS OF 1ST OCTOBER 2002. ..........................................16

5. WORKING GROUPS .........................................................................................17

Working Group 1: Issues and questions for working group on industrial chemicals and pesticides ...........................................................................................................17 Working Group 1 Intentionally Produced POPs......................................................20 Working Group 2: Issues and questions for working group on unintentionally produced by-products...............................................................................................26 Working Group 2: Unintentionally Produced POPs................................................28 Financial Mechanism for the Stockholm Convention on POPs: Working Group Discussions ..............................................................................................................34 GEF Working Group................................................................................................35

6. PRESENTATIONS..............................................................................................39

Programme Overview, Goals and Outputs by Dr. Bo Wahlstrom...........................39 Workshop Expectations from UNEP by Mr Jim Willis...........................................43 Overview of the Stockholm Convention on POPs by Dr. John Buccini .................49 Overview of the Basel Convention by Mr Jim Willis..............................................59 Overview of the Basel Convention by Mr Jim Willis..............................................74 Relationship Between Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention by Mr. Jim Willis........................................................................................................................84 Overview of UNECE LRTAP POPS Protocol by Mr. Bo Libert ............................94 Expectations from the Global Environment Facility by Dr. Laurent Granier .......107 Stockholm Convention Provision for Intentionally Produced POPs by Dr John Buccini ...................................................................................................................115 Stockholm Convention Provision for Unintentionally Produced POPs by Dr John Buccini ...................................................................................................................129 Stockholm Convention Provision for Stockpiles and Waste by Dr John Buccini .137


2

Issues and Problems of Obsolete and Banned Pesticides by Dr. Alemayehu Wodageneh ............................................................................................................147 Stockholm Convention: General Obligations by Dr John Buccini ........................152 Interim Activities and INC-6 Outcomes by Dr Bo Wahlstrom .............................160 Legislating Chemicals by Mr Masa Nagai.............................................................175 Chemicals Legislation: A Model by Mr Masa Nagai ............................................182 UNITAR; Preparation of National Profiles by Mr Jonathan Krueger ...................190 Introduction to the Global Environment Facility Dr. Laurent Granier ..................197 Initial Guidelines for Enabling Activities on POPs by Dr. Laurent Granier .........219

7. THE GEF IMPLEMENTING AND EXECUTNG AGENCIES.......................231

What FAO can do to minimize issues and Problems of Stockpiles by Dr. Alemayehu Wodageneh .........................................................................................231 UNITAR Activities for Stockholm Convention NIPs by Mr Jonathan Krueger ...240 POPs –UNEP and the GEF by Mr Jim Willis........................................................245

8. COUNTRY REPORTS......................................................................................251

ARMENIA..........................................................................................................251

AZERBAIJAN...................................................................................................254

BELARUS ..........................................................................................................260

GEORGIA...........................................................................................................262

KAZAKHSTAN................................................................................................268

KYRGYZSTAN................................................................................................273

MOLDOVA........................................................................................................278

RUSSIAN FEDERATION .............................................................................290

TAJIKISTAN.....................................................................................................299

UKRAINE...........................................................................................................305

UZBEKISTAN ..................................................................................................308


3

1. INTRODUCTION The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants was adopted and

opened for signature at the Diplomatic Conference held 22 to 23 May 2001 in Stockholm, Sweden. Countries will need to determine whether they will ratify the Convention and if so begin taking the legal, administrative and other steps necessary to ratify. The early development of national implementation plans (NIP) as required by Article 7 of the Convention will help them in this process, and will enable countries to meet their obligations under the Convention. Altogether 151 countries have signed and 22 countries have ratified at present.

It is highly desirable that the Convention becomes operational quickly. Early ratification by countries is the key. It is thus essential that all countries become familiar with the Convention, its benefits, and sources of support for its implementation as quickly as is possible. Early coverage of all regions is also necessary to ensure equitable access to the interim financial mechanism and other funding sources.

UNEP Chemicals, together with the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) secretariat is organizing a series of sub-regional workshops to Support the Implementation of the Stockholm Convention on POPs. The workshops are funded through a GEF Medium Sized Project with co-funding from the Government of Sweden. The seventh workshop, organized in collaboration with the Ministry of Environment, Ukraine, was held at the Institute for Occupational Health, Kiev, Ukraine, 21-25 October 2002. The meeting was organized within the framework of the UNEP Chemicals capacity building program and primarily aimed at providing assistance to developing countries in strengthening their national chemicals management programs with regard to their implementation and ratification of the Stockholm convention on POPs and related instruments, e.g. the Rotterdam convention on Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade and the Basle Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes.

The participants were senior government managers and decision-makers from environment and other government authorities from 11 countries within the Commonwealth of Independent States and representatives from international organizations.

The purpose of the workshop was to inform countries on the obligations and the steps needed for ratification and implementation of the Stockholm Convention on POPs, and the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent (PIC) and to advise them on how to consider approaches for obtaining support for implementation related activities, e.g. development of National Implementation Plans (NIPs). In addition, countries were informed on how to develop adequate and effective policies and legislation as part of their national strategies, action plans and programs for the sound management of chemicals and to assist national officials in implementing national and regional or sub-regional actions to reduce and/or eliminate releases of persistent organic pollutants (POPs).


4

The present report contains the programme and the presentations given by countries and lecturers during the workshop. In addition, it presents the outcome of working group discussions on the obligations of the Stockholm Convention and its interim financial mechanism.


5

2. WORKSHOP PROGRAMME

20 October (Sunday)

Arrival of participants, hotel accommodation

21 October (Monday) 09:00-09:30 Registration of participants I. OPENING SESSION

Session chair: Professor Yuri Kundiev, Ukraine

09:30-10:00 Official opening of the meeting

• Welcoming remarks by hosts and organizers

Prof. Yuri Kundiev, Director, IOH Mr. Yevgen Matorin, Ministry of Environment, Ukraine Mr. James Willis, Director, UNEP Chemicals, Geneva, Switzerland

10:00-10:20 • Introduction of participants

All

10:20-10:30 • Overview of programme Dr. Bo Wahlström, UNEP

10:30-10:45 • Expectations from UNEP Chemicals Mr. James Willis, UNEP

10.45-11:00 Coffee break II. THE CONVENTIONS 11:00-13:00 Overview of Stockholm Convention on POPs Dr. John Buccini,

Chair, POPs INC Overview of Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed

Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade

Mr. Jim Willis, UNEP

Overview of the Basel Convention on the Control of

Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste Mr. Jim Willis, UNEP

Relationship between the Basel, Rotterdam and Mr. Jim Willis,


6

Stockholm Conventions UNEP Overview of the UNECE LRTAP POPs Protocol Mr. Bo Libert,

UNECE 13:00-14:00 Lunch break III. CURRENT STATUS OF TOXICS

LEGISLATION IN THE SUBREGION

Session chair: Ms. Katarina Magulova, UNEP 14:00-15:30 Country presentations, focusing on legislative and

regulatory action on toxic substances, pesticides, industrial chemicals and by-product POPs.

15:30-16:00 Coffee break 16:00-18:00 Country presentations (continued)

Industry and public interest NGO presentations 22 October (Tuesday)

IV. STOCKHOLM CONVENTION

OBLIGATIONS FOR POPS AND RELATED INSTRUMENTS

Session Chair: Mr. Imran Abdulov, Azerbaijan 09.00-9.20 Opening remarks from GEF

Expectations from GEF Dr. Laurent Granier, GEFSEC

A. Intentionally Produced POPs

09.20-10.30 Stockholm Convention requirements for pesticides and

industrial chemicals Dr. John Buccini

10.30-11.00 Coffee break

B. Unintentionally Produced POPs

11:00-12:30 Stockholm Convention requirement for by-products Dr. John Buccini


7

C. Stockpile and Waste Issues

12.30-13.30 Stockholm Convention requirements for stockpiles

and waste Dr. John Buccini

13.30-14.30 Lunch break Session chair: Ms. Anahit Aleksandryan, Armenia 14.30-15.30 Obsolete pesticides issues Dr. Alemayehu

Wodageneh, FAO 15:30-16:00 Coffee break D. General obligations 16.00-16.30 National Implementation plans Dr. John Buccini E. Interim activities and INC-6 16.30-17.00

Outcomes of INC-6 Dr. Bo Wahlström, UNEP

23 October (Wednesday)

V. BASIC FEATURES OF CHEMICALS

LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT

Session chair: Ms. Natalia Sviridovich, Belarus 09.00-09.45 General features of chemicals legislation and

regulation, principles, legislative hierarchies etc.

Mr. Masa Nagai, UNEP

09.45-10.30 Model legislation Mr. Masa Nagai, UNEP

10.30-11.00 Coffee break 11.00-11.20 National Profiles Mr. Jonathan

Krueger, UNITAR 11.20-12.30 Questions on legislation and management All VI. FUTURE NATIONAL ACTION AND

REGIONAL CO-OPERATION

12.30-13.00 Introduction to Working Groups, tasks and expected

outcome Dr. Bo Wahlström, UNEP


8

Formation of working groups on: (1) intentionally

produced POPs (pesticides and industrial chemicals), stockpiles and wastes, and (2) unintentionally produced POPs ( by-products) and wastes.

Working Group discussions: Development of national strategies, action plans,

programmes and projects for implementing legislation to meet obligations in the Stockholm Convention on POPs and related instruments.

13.00-14:00 Lunch break 14:00-15:30 Continued group discussions. 15:30-16:00 Coffee break 16:00-19:00 Continued group discussions

24 October (Thursday) Session chair: Mr. Alexander Mindorashvili, Georgia 9:00-9:30 Working Group presentations in plenary

9:30-10:00

General discussion and follow up on working group discussions

VII. FINANCIAL MECHANISM FOR THE

STOCKHOLM CONVENTION ON POPS

10.00-11.00

Introduction to the Global Environmental Facility (GEF)

Dr. Laurent Granier, GEFSEC

11:00-11:30 Coffee break 11.30-12.00 GEF Initial Guidelines for Enabling Activities Dr. Laurent Granier,

GEFSEC 12.00-12.30

Country roundtable; situation regarding National Implementation Plans (NIPs)

12.30-13.00 Questions and answers 13.00-14.00 Lunch break Session chair: Ms. Liudmila Marduhaeva, Republic of


9

Moldova 14.00-14.30 Introduction to Working Group discussions on GEF

enabling activities and national implementation plans Dr. Laurent Granier, GEFSEC

14.30-18.00 Working Group discussions All 25 October (Friday) Session chair: Ms. Oxana Tsittser, Russian Federation 09.00-10.00 Working Group presentations in plenary 10.00-11.00 General discussion of National Implementation Plan

issues

11.00-12.30 The GEF implementing and executing agencies

• FAO • UNITAR

• UNEP

Mr. Alemayehu Wodageneh, FAO Mr. Jonathan Krueger, UNITAR Dr.Bo Wahlström, UNEP

12.30-13.00 Closing remarks Professor Yuri

Kundiev, Director, IOH Dr. Bo Wahlström, UNEP

13.00 Closure of the meeting


10

3. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

ARMENIA Mrs. Anahit ALEKSANDRYAN Head of Department of Hazardous Substances and Wastes Management Ministry of Nature Protection 35 Moskovyan St. 375002 Yerevan Armenia Tel: (+374 1) 53 88 38/53 88 38 Fax: (+374 1) 53 18 61/53 81 87 E-Mail: [email protected] Ms. Lusine AGHAYAN Leading Specialist Department of Hazardous Substances and Wastes Management Ministry of Nature Protection 35 Moskovyan St. 375002 Yerevan Armenia Tel: (+374 1) 53 88 38 Fax: (+374 1) 53 88 38/56 18 61 AZERBAIJAN Mr. Imran ABDULOV Head of Environmental Policy Division Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources 100A B.Aghayev St. Baku 370073 Azerbaijan Tel: (+99412) 38 70 73 Fax: (+99412) 925907 E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Tofig HASANOV Component Manager Project Implementation Unit Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources 31 Istiglaliyyat St. Baku 370001 Azerbaijan Tel: (+99412) 92 60 23 Fax: (+99412) 92 68 63 E-mail: [email protected] BELARUS Mrs. Natalia SVIRIDOVICH Leading Specialist Monitoring Department Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection 10 Kollektornaya St. BLR 220048 Minsk Tel: (+375 17) 220 88 97 Fax: (+375 17) 220 47 76 E-mail: [email protected] GEORGIA Ms. Mzia GVILAVA Ministry of Environment/GRID-Tbilisi 68a Kostava St. 380015 Tbilisi Georgia Tel: (+995 32) 333 952/335 514 Fax: (+995 32) 942 808/ 333 952 E-Mail: [email protected] OR [email protected]


11

Mr. Alexander MINDORASHVILI First Deputy Head Inspectorate for the State Supervision Of Sanitary-Hygienic Norms and Rules Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Security 23 A.Kazbegi St. Tbilisi 380060 Georgia Tel : (+995 32) 39 32 05/39 57 08 Fax: (+995 32) 25 15 27/94 02 18/96 03 00 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] KAZAKHSTAN Ms. Irina PICHSHEVA Expert, Division for Environmental Monitoring Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection 1 Satpayev St. Kokshetau 475 000 Kazakhstan Tel: (+7 3162) 25 54 42 Fax: (+7 3162) 25 55 37/25 06 20 E-mail: [email protected] Prof. Marat ISHANKULOV Leading Expert Programme "Institutional Strengthening for Sustainable Development" Programme Implementation Unit UNDP 1 Satpaev St. Kokshetau 475 000 Kazakhstan Tel: (+7 3162) 255 442 Fax: (+7 3162) 255 537 E-mail: [email protected]

KYRGYZSTAN Mr. Melisbek BEKKOENOV Deputy Head Department of Environment and Environmental Monitoring Ministry of Environment and Civil Emergency 2/1 Toktonaliev St. Bishkek 720055 Kyrgyzstan Tel: (+996 312) 547 920/ 541 177 Fax: (+996 312) 660 483 E-Mail: [email protected], [email protected] Ms. Victoria AFANASENKO Chief Specialist Ministry of Environment and Civil Emergency 2/1 Toktonaliev St. Bishkek 720055 Kyrgyzstan Tel: (+996 312) 54 79 40/54 11 77 Fax: (+996 312) 54 79 51 E-Mail: [email protected], [email protected] MOLDOVA Mrs. Liudmila MARDUHAEVA Consultant Division for Environmental Impact And Waste Management Ministry of Environment and Territorial Development 9, Cosmonautilor St. Chisinau MD 2005 Republic of Moldova Tel: (+373 2) 226 850 Fax: (+373 2) 220 748 E-mail: [email protected] OR [email protected]


12

Mrs. Aculina VELEVA Principal Specialist Division of Ecological Analytical Control and Monitoring State Ecological Inspectorate 9, Cosmonautilor St. Chisinau MD 2005 Republic of Moldova Tel: (+373 2) 73 74 54 Fax: (+373 2) 22 07 48 E-mail: [email protected] RUSSIAN FEDERATION Ms. Oxana TSITTSER Principal Expert Department of Ecological Safety Ministry of Natural Resources 4/6 B.Gruzinskaya Str. 123995 Moscow D-242, GSP-5 Russian Federation Tel: (+7 095) 125 52 51/591 95 67 Fax: (+7 095) 125 52 51 E-mail: [email protected] TAJIKISTAN Mr. Abdusalim DJURAEV Head of Control-Inspective Department Ministry of Nature Protection 12 Bohtar St. Dushanbe 734025 Tajikistan Tel: (+992 372) 21 56 69 Fax: (+992 372) 21 18 39 E-mail: [email protected]

Ms. Liudmila BOBRITSKAYA Head of Control Department on Harmful Emissions to Atmosphere Ministry of Nature Protection 12 Bohtar St. Dushanbe 734025 Tajikistan Tel: (+992 372) 23 21 82 Fax: (+992 372) 21 18 39 E-mail: [email protected] UKRAINE

Prof. Yuri KUNDIEV Director Institute for Occupational Health AMSU 75 Saksaganskogo St. Kiev, 01033 Ukraine Tel: (+38 044) 220 80 30 Fax: (+38 044) 220 66 77 E-mail: [email protected] Mr. Yevgen MATORIN Head of Environmental Safety Regulation Department Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine 5 Khreshchatyk St. Kiev 01601 Ukraine Tel/fax: (+38 044) 228 05 43/229 83 83/228 34 15 Prof. Mykola PRODANCHUK Director L. I. Medved Institute of Ecohygiene and Toxicology 6 Heroiv Oborony St. 252022 Kyiv-022 Ukraine Tel.: +380 (44) 250 72 00 Fax: +380 (44) 251 96 43 E-mail: [email protected]


13

UZBEKISTAN Mr. Bohadir SHUKUROV Chief of Department State Specialized Inspection on Analytical Control 13-A U. Nosir St. Tashkent 700100 Uzbekistan Tel: (+998 712) 55 78 47 Fax. (+998 712) 55 23 89 E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Raisa TARYANNIKOVA Chief of Laboratory Environmental Pollution Investigation and Forecast Department Central Asia Research Hydrometeorological Institute 72 K.Makhsumov St. Tashkent 700052 Uzbekistan Tel: (+998 71) 235 84 61 Fax: (998 71) 133 11 50 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION Ms. Olga TSYGULYOVA MAMA-86-Kharkov-IPEN 60 Lenin Ave. Kharkov 61001 Ukraine Tel: (+380 572) 308 326 Fax: (+380 572) 324 494 E-mail: [email protected] Mr. Vahagn KHACHATRYAN President “Ecotox” NGO 1A Kievyan Street Yerevan 375028 Armenia Tel: (+374 1) 27 34 66 E-mail: [email protected]

INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS GEF Mr. Laurent GRANIER Persistent Organic Pollutants Program Manager Global Environment Facility Mailstop G6-602 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 USA Tel: (+1 202) 4739034 Fax: (+1 202) 5223240 E-mail: [email protected] FAO Dr. Alemayehu WODAGENEH FAO Consultant Environmental Affairs Waste management Tel: (+39) 340 485 6217 E-mail: [email protected] UNECE Mr. Bo LIBERT Regional Adviser on Environment Environment and Human Settlements Division UN Economic Commission for Europe Palais de Nations CH 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland Tel: (+41 22) 917 23 96 Fax: (+41 22) 917 06 21 E-mail: [email protected]


14

UNITAR Mr. Jonathan KRUEGER United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) Chemicals and Waste Management Programme (CWM) MIE, B512 Palais des Nations CH-1211 Geneva 10 SWITZERLAND Tel: (+41 22) 917 81 66 Fax: (+41 22) 917 80 47 Email: [email protected] UNEP Mr. James B. WILLIS Director, UNEP Chemicals 11-13 Chemin des Anémones CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland Tel: (+41 22) 917 81 83 Fax: (+41 22) 797 34 60 E-mail: [email protected] Mr. Bo WAHLSTRÖM Senior Scientific Advisor UNEP Chemicals 11-13 Chemin des Anémones CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland Tel: (+41 22) 917 81 95 Fax: (+41 22) 797 34 60 E-mail: [email protected] Ms. Katarina MAGULOVA UNEP Chemicals 11-13 Chemin des Anémones CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland Tel: (+41 22) 917 86 35 Fax: (+41 22) 797 34 60 E-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Masa NAGAI Legal Officer Environmental Law Branch Division of Policy Development and Law UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (+254 2) 62 34 93 Fax: (+254 2) 23 01 98 E-mail: [email protected] Mr. Muhammed OMOTOLA Consultant UNEP Chemicals 11-13 Chemin des Anémones CH-1219 Chatelaine, Geneva, Switzerland Tel: (+41 22) 917 84 87 Fax: (+41 22) 797 34 60 E-mail: [email protected] INVITED LECTURER Mr. John BUCCINI 31 Sycamore Drive Ottawa, Ontario Canada K2H 6R4 Tel: (613) 828-7667 Fax: (815) 352-4253 E-mail: [email protected] OBSERVERS Mrs. Svitlana SUKHOREBRA Head of Methodology Regulation Department National Center for Hazardous Waste Management Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine 39 Degtyarivska St. Kiev 03113 Ukraine Tel/fax: (+38 044) 456 03 06 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]


15

Mr. Yury SHUITSEV (Basel Centre) Project Coordinator Centre for International Projects 58 B Pervomayskaya St. 105043 Moscow Russian Federation Tel: (+7 095) 165 05 62 Fax: (+7 095) 165 08 90 E-mail: [email protected] Mr. Andrei ISAC Project Manager GEF/WB Project on the Enabling Activities on Stockholm Convention on POPs 9 Cosmonautilor St. MD-2005 Chisinau Republic of Moldova Tel/fax: (+373 2) 22 62 54 e-mail: [email protected]

Mr. Ion BARBARASA Chief Technical Advisor GEF/WB Project on the Enabling Activities on Stockholm Convention on POPs 9 Cosmonautilor St. Chisinau MD-2005 Republic of Moldova Tel/fax: (+373 2) 22 62 54 Ms. Elena MUNTEAN Assistant GEF/WB Project on the Enabling Activities on Stockholm Convention on POPs 9 Cosmonautilor St. MD-2005 Chisinau Republic of Moldova Tel/fax: (+373 2) 22 62 54


16

4. SIGNATORY COUNTRIES AND PARTIES TO THE STOCKHOLM CONVENTION ON POPS AS OF 1ST

OCTOBER 2002. CIS countries Countries

Signatory

Not signatory

Party

Armenia X

Azerbaijan X

Belarus X

Georgia X

Kazakhstan X

Kyrgyztan X

Republic of Moldova

X

Russian Federation

X

Tajikistan X

Turkmenistan X

Ukraine X

Uzbekistan X


17

5. WORKING GROUPS

Working Group 1: Issues and questions for working group on industrial chemicals and pesticides Stockholm Convention 1. Legal and/or administrative measures to control intentionally produced POPs:

• legal or administrative means to restrict and/or eliminate POPs • control of production and use • addressing pesticides • addressing industrial chemicals

2. Exemptions:

• Specific exemptions needed for any of the (8) POPs in Annex A and B o mechanism to notify the secretariat o means to control/minimize releases to environment and exposure to humans

• Site-limited exemptions needed for HCB or DDT o reporting measures, etc.

3. Implementation of trade measures:

• Measures for Parties • Non-parties

o reporting requirements 4. Implementation of PCB regime to achieve the main goals:

• Cessation of production (immediately/entry-into-force) • Phase out of existing equipment by 2025 • ESM of wastes by 2028

5. Implementation of DDT regime to achieve the main goals:

• Need to produce or use for the acceptable purpose (disease control programs) • Ability to develop national action plan • Ability to inventory existing/produced DDT • Research and development plans/needs

6. Assessment of new and existing chemicals and pesticides:

• Planned or existing programs • Ability to use Annex D criteria into existing/planned programs

7. Provisions for stockpiles and wastes:


18

• Strategies for stockpiles and wastes o for identification o for ESM collection, transport, handling and transport o for meeting requirements for transboundary movement (N.B. PCB regime) o for ESM disposal

• Strategies for identifying contaminated sites General Provisions: 1. Information exchange

• establish Designated National Authority 2. Public information, awareness and education 3. Research, development and monitoring 4. Reporting requirements 5. Development of national implementation plan (NIP).

• How would the above link into the development of a NIP? • Steps to take • Assistance needed • Funding required

Points to stimulate discussion (not meant to be a limiting list!): - How does present legislation handle intentionally produced POPs identified under the

Stockholm convention? - Is there legislation for their generation and release? - Is there legislation for stockpiles and wastes containing these? - What changes are needed to implement and ratify the Stockholm convention? - What are the needs in developing national legislation that UNEP/other IGOs can help

meeting? - Needs for infrastructure changes?

- How would enforcement of legislation and other regulatory measures, adopted in

implementation of the Stockholm convention, be carried out? - What are the needs and possibilities for co-operation on implementing the Stockholm

convention? - Sub/regional - Bilateral

- What would be the necessary steps for countries to take to ratify the Stockholm

convention? Rotterdam Convention Legal and or administrative measures to implement the Rotterdam Convention.

• Nomination of Designated National Authority (DNA)


19

• Notification of Ban or Severe Reduction • Proposal of Severely Hazardous Pesticide Formulations • Import decisions • Import and export control


20

Working Group 1 Intentionally Produced POPs

OUTCOMES of the discussion in working group №1«Intentionally produced POPs, their stocks and wastes»

EXISTING LEGISLATION RELATING TO INTENTIONALLY PRODUCED POPs

At present the majority of countries do not produce pesticides and industrial chemicals of the POPs group.

In some countries the legislative basis regulating potential POPs production and its releases is either absent or imperfect.


21


Existing national registers of allowed pesticides do not contain pesticide POPs.

In certain countries there are lists of banned pesticides including pesticide POPs.

The legislative and standard setting basis for regulating activities in the area of industrial POPs production and management is practically non-existent.


Legislation on chemical substances management is imperfect.

Many states have domestic laws on wastes and other normative acts regulating activities in the area of waste management but they do not contain provisions specifically relating to POPs.

There is no legislation on wastes in a number of countries.


22

REQUIREMENTS IN THE AREA OF DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION RELATING TO INTENTIONALLY PRODUCED POPs

Existing national legislation should be harmonized with the requirements in the Stockholm Convention.

Develop national legislation or improve existing one on safe management of chemical substances including intentionally produced POPs and their wastes.

Introduce additions and amendments into existing regulatory and legislative basis on wastes relating to POPs.

EXEMPTIONSNot a single country has assessed its requirements in using DDT for acceptable purposes including disease control programs as well as research and development.

OBJECTIVES:

Assess requirements in DDT use;

Develop common strategy to identify exemptions on POPs in accordance with the Stockholm Convention.


23

INFRUSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENTIdentify National focal points to carry out national activities aimed at implementing provisions of the Stockholm Convention.

Assess capabilities of ministries and agencies and of existing infrastructures in terms of POPs management activities as well as their potential to carry out research and development and monitoring.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND MONITORING

Assess impact of pesticides and industrial chemicals included in POPs group on human health and environment.

Facilitate work to identify potential / new POPs.

Search for environmentally friendly technologies to destroy stocks and wastes containing POPs as well as to rehabilitate sites contaminated with POPs.


24

PUBLIC INFORMATION, AWARENESS AND EDUCATION

Use NGO’s potential.

Introduce POPs related information and materials in higher educational establishments’ curricula.

Involve mass media and use modern information technologies.

DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

National implementation plans will be developed in accordance with the provisions of the Stockholm Convention with due account of national priorities and with the participation of international organizations.

Priorities:

Develop strategy and stage-by-stage plan for decommissioning electrotechnical equipment containing PCB.

Assess national economic and technical capabilities to destroy PCB stocks and decontaminate equipment contaminated with PCB.


25

DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLANS Priorities:

Inventory assessment of POPs, their stocks and wastes:

Development of relevant regulatory and methodological basis with due account of guidelines provided by UNEP, FAO and other international organizations;

Determination of composition;

Identification of owners;

Selection of disposal technologies.

BILATERAL AND SUB-REGIONAL COOPERATION

Create intergovernmental focal point / expert council on POPs.

Develop its mechanism of interaction with national entities and define its functions (regulatory, methodological and informational support, data base on POPs, best available technologies and other).

Develop strategy to prevent illegal trafficking of POPs.


26

Working Group 2: Issues and questions for working group on unintentionally produced by-products Provisions for unintentionally produced POPs: 1. Legal and/or administrative measures to control unintentionally produced POPs:

• Legal or administrative means to restrict and/or eliminate generation and release of these POPs

o Ability to develop action plan within 2 years o Ability to implement action plan o Existing or planned inventories/estimates of releases o Release reduction vs source elimination o Substitution or modification of materials, products and processes

2. Provisions for identified sources:

New vs. existing BAT requirements for new sources Promotion of BAT for existing and some new sources Promotion of BEP for new and existing sources

3. Provisions for wastes:

• Strategies for wastes o for identification o for ESM collection, transport, handling and transport o for meeting requirements for transboundary movement (N.B. PCB regime) o for ESM disposal

• Strategies for identifying contaminated sites General Provisions: 1. Information exchange

• establish Stockholm Focal Point 2. Public information, awareness and education 3. Research, development and monitoring 4. Reporting requirements 5. Development of implementation plan.

• How would the above link into the development of a NIP? • Steps to take • Assistance needed • Funding required


27

Points to stimulate discussion (not meant to be a limiting list!): - How does present legislation handle unintentionally produced POPs identified under the

Stockholm convention?

- Is there legislation for their generation and release? - Is there legislation for wastes containing these? - What changes are needed to implement and ratify the Stockholm convention? - What are the needs in developing national legislation that UNEP/other IGOs can help

meeting? - Needs for infrastructure changes?

- How would enforcement of legislation and other regulatory measures, adopted in

implementation of the Stockholm convention, be carried out? - What are the needs and possibilities for co-operation on implementing the Stockholm

convention? - Sub/regional - Bilateral

- What would be the necessary steps for countries to take to ratify the Stockholm

convention?


28

Working Group 2: Unintentionally Produced POPs

DISCUSSION OUTCOMES

WORKING GROUP № 2UNINTENTIONALLY PRODUCED POPs

HOW UNINTENTIONALLY PRODUCED POPs ARE COVERED BY THE EXISTING LEGISLATION?

The majority of countries lack specific provisions in their legislation although all countries do have legislative provisions on Environmental impact assessment procedures (EIA)(NIM).


29

IS THERE A SEPARETE LEGISLATION ON PRODUCTION AND RELEASES OF SUCH POPs?

IS THERE ANY LEGISLATION ON POPs CONTAINING WASTES?

All countries lack separate legislation both on production and releases of POPs and on POPs containing wastes.

WHAT CHANGES ARE REQUIRED TO RATIFY AND IMPLEMENT STOCKHOLM CONVENTION?

National legislation should be harmonized with the Convention e.g. protocols on information exchange (reporting) between government agencies and industry on issues of emissions (wastes, discharges, releases).

There are no obstacles in countries for their ratification of the Convention.


30

WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE AREA OF DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION WHICH

UNEP AND OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS COULD HELP TO MEET?

Countries need consultative and financial assistance in developing their national legislation.

IS THERE ANY NEED IN CHANGING INFRUSTRUCTURE?

This issue requires further clarification.


31

HOW COULD LEGISLATION AND OTHER REGULATORY MEASURES AIMED AT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE

CONVENTION BE INFORCED IN PRACTICAL TERMS?

Legislation and other regulatory measures will be enforced during development and implementation of the National plan of actions.

WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COOPERATION IN THE AREA OF IMPLEMENTATION

OF THE STOCKHOLM CONVENTION?

There is a need to build sub-regional and bilateral cooperation which requires financial, technical and consultative support from international organizations.


32

WHAT STEPS SHOULD COUNTRIES UNDERTAKE IN ORDER TO RATIFY STOCKHOLM CONVENTION?

Use consent procedure in accordance with the national legislation.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Development and implementation of NIP should include (creation) work of National focal point which will provide for information exchange on the basis of a network of interacting organizations:

governmental;

research;NGO;monitoring; international and other organizations

New information technologies (IT) are used or will be used for these purposes (data bases, Internet technologies and other).


33

NIP will be developed in cooperation with competent international agencies on the basis of relevant guiding principles.

GENERAL PROVISIONS


34

Financial Mechanism for the Stockholm Convention on POPs: Working Group Discussions Scope & Objective This WG discussion is concerned i) with the steps that countries need to take to access GEF funding for preparation of their NIP; and ii) the additional type of assistance that may be required from the GEF (in addition to funding for NIP; at the sub-regional level for example). Participants should discuss and understand the process of developing proposals for a NIP, and make recommendations to the GEF (and its Agencies) on how best to assist countries in this interim period in the first years of the implementation of the Convention. Some leads for discussion 1. The GEF guidelines for enabling activities Adequacy of the guidelines Suggestions for improvements 2. The process of accessing GEF funding for NIP Steps required to access funding Need for assistance in developing a proposal / what type? 3. The GEF Questions about the GEF. Are they mostly covered by the workshop? What other type of information would you like to see? 4. Assistance other than NIP at the regional/sub-regional level Need for training / courses, regional centres of excellence, etc? In this first phase of initial assistance, GEF’s assistance will be focused on NIPs, which will serve as a basis for addressing priority issues in a further phase. However, the GEF guidelines recognise that there might be a need for some additional activities at the regional/sub-regional level. This workshop is an example of such activities. 5. Other efforts at the sub-regional level? Preparation of action plans at the subregional level Support needed for what type of regional actions? (Laboratory facilities? Disposal facilities? etc?).


35

GEF Working Group

DISCUSSION OUTCOMES

Financial mechanism for Stockholm Convention on POPs

STEPS TO BE TAKEN BY COUNTRIES TO HAVE ACCESS TO GEF FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR NIP

Accession to the Convention.Work in coordination with the appointed executive body.Project development for GEF approval in accordance with GEF guiding principles:

involvement of internal and external experts; expert evaluation of project proposal;discussion of project proposal with the participation of countries’ representatives;

Project proposal’s adjustment with due account of GEF comments


36

ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE WICH MAY BE REQUIRED FROM GEF

Development of sub-regional strategies against illegal trafficking in POPs and wastes on the basis of ecosystem principle or principle of economic cooperation or other criteria related to the sustainable development of the region.

GEF GUIDING PRINCIPLES RELATING TO THE SUPPORT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF STOCKHOLM CONVENTION

The document is thorough and comprehensive.Proposals on its improvement:

general guidance on budget components would be advisable;


37

SECURING ACCESS TO GEF FINANCING FOR NIP DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

External expert (technical) support is required in developing a project proposal

GEF

The workshop helped to get a general understanding of how a project should be developed


38

ASSISTANCE ON REGIONAL AND SUB-REGIONAL LEVELS

Need to provide training/organize courses, regional centers on best practice exchange etc.;Creating regional/sub-regional centers or strengthening the role of the existing ones:

Basel convention;center on waste management information and technology transfer;chemical analytical center(s) for 12 countries and others;

Development of common strategy of actions on sub-regional level.

OTHER EFFORTS ON THE REGIONAL LEVEL

Involvement of the public at the early stages of discussions on projects to be implemented to meet the requirements of the Convention.Development (possibly, through adopting corresponding legislation) of a set of measures to reduce technogenic impact on the population in the territories where POP’s destruction will take place (in accordance with the Convention).Extend the search for alternative technologies (reflect them on the legislative basis).Support to the introduction of new progressive technologies.


39

6. PRESENTATIONS

Programme Overview, Goals and Outputs by Dr. Bo Wahlstrom

MSP Workshops

Programme overview

Goals and Outputs

MSP Workshops

Purpose

To make country officials familiar with the Stockholm Convention, its benefits and sources of support for its implementation in order for their countries to ratify the convention and take early action on POPs.


40

MSP Workshops

Objectives Improve Government understanding of the Stockholm Convention, and the benefits of and the need to become a Party;· Improve Government understanding of the nature of the problems caused by POPs;· Help countries understand what their obligations are under the Stockholm Convention;· Encourage and facilitate early ratification of the Convention;

MSP Workshops

Objectives, continued

·Identify some of the legislative, capacity building, investment and other infrastructural measures needed to support the implementation of the Stockholm Convention and related instruments (Basel and Rotterdam Conventions, regional agreements);· Facilitate eligible countries’ access to GEF resources for enabling activities, National Implementation Plan (NIP) development and the implementation of the Convention;


41

MSP Workshops

Objectives, continued• Help Governments to begin the process of developing a NIP and other implementation/enabling activities under the Convention;

•Encourage co-operative partnerships among different sectors and stakeholders for the implementation of the Convention; and

MSP Workshops

Objectives, continuedReport on the current situation in countries of the

subregion with regard to existing and planned measures for control and management of toxic substances, including plans to implement action on POPs and other toxic chemicals and to ratify the Stockholm Convention and related instruments.


42

MSP Workshops

General structure of the workshop

I. Opening Session

II. The Conventions

III. Current status of legislation in the region

IV. Stockholm Convention obligations for POPs and related instruments

MSP Workshops

V. Basic features of chemicals legislation and management

VI. Future national action and regional cooperation (Working groups)

VII. Financial mechanism for the Stockholm Convention (including Working Groups)


43

Workshop Expectations from UNEP by Mr Jim Willis

Workshop expectations from UNEP

Jim Willis, DirectorUNEP Chemicals

UNEP Chemicals - Functions

Main Functional Areas:– Stockholm Convention Secretariat (May 2001)– Rotterdam Convention Secretariat (September 1998)– Capacity Building– Assessment (POPs, PTS, Mercury)– Policy Development– Technical Support

Clustered with Basel Convention Secretariat


44

UNEP Chemicals - Relationships

UNEP Chemicals

FAO GEF

Basel Secretariat

IOMCIFCS

UNEP

UNEP Chemicals - Priorities

Support to the Rotterdam ConventionSupport to the Stockholm Convention“Clustering” chemicals and waste treatiesStockholm Convention implementation plans and support for implementationCapacity buildingAssessment: POPs, PTSs and MercuryStrategic approach to international chemicals management


45

Status of signature and ratification

StockholmRotterdamBasel

Stockholm Signatures -151


46

Stockholm Ratifications - 23

Rotterdam Signatures - 73


47

Rotterdam Ratifications - 33

Basel Ratifications - 151


48

Expectations for the workshop

Better understanding among all participants of the Stockholm Convention and relevant issuesPromoting ratification of the Stockholm ConventionUnderstanding of Stockholm Convention implementation plan (NIP) development processPromoting ratification of the Rotterdam ConventionsUnderstanding the relationships among treaties and where possible better PIC-POPs-Basel integration at the country and regional levelIdentification of capacity building steps


49

Overview of the Stockholm Convention on POPs by Dr. John Buccini

Stockholm Convention on POPs

1. Background2. Convention Provisions3. Current Status

John BucciniChairman

UNEP POPs Intergovernmental Negotiating CommitteeOttawa, Canada

Kiev (21 October 2002) Stockholm Convention 2

Background: What are POPs?• POPs are organic compounds (i.e., carbon-based)

– natural or anthropogenic origin• unique combination of physical & chemical properties:

– resist degradation in environment (i.e., persistent)– low, but significant, vapor pressure (“semi-volatile”)

leads to distribution in all environmental media– low water solubility + high fat solubility

regional and global distribution by air, water, wildlifelong-term exposure to humans and wildlifebioaccumulation in fatty tissues of living organismsacute and chronic toxic effects on humans & wildlife


50


Background: The “UNEP 12”Chemical Pesticides Industrial

ChemicalsBy-

products Aldrin Chlordane DDT Dieldrin Endrin Heptachlor Mirex Toxaphene

+ + + + + + + +

Hexachlorobenzene PCBs

+ + +

+ +

Chlorinated dioxins Chlorinated furans

+ +


Convention ProvisionsObjective = protection of health and environment[Precaution is acknowledged as an important element]

Main provisions:• control measures

– intentionally produced POPs– unintentionally produced POPs– stockpiles and wastes

• general obligations• addition of new chemicals• financial and technical assistance• implementation aspects


51


Intentionally Produced POPsGoal = elimination of production and use

of all intentionally produced POPs

• Chemicals slated for elimination are listed in Annex A:– aldrin, chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor– hexachlorobenzene (HCB), mirex, PCBs, toxaphene

• Chemicals slated for restriction are listed in Annex B:– DDT (“acceptable purpose” for production and/or use in

disease vector control programs)• “specific exemptions” for these for some Parties• other types of exemptions exist - some have conditions,

accountability requirements, time limits (extensions)


Intentionally Produced POPsFor PCBs (Annex A):• 3 main goals:

cease production of new PCBs immediately• i.e., entry into force of the Convention

eliminate use of in-place PCB equipment by 2025• continued use is subject to conditions and restrictions

achieve the environmentally sound management of PCB wastes as soon as possible and by 2028

• Parties must report to the COP every 5 years on progress• COP will review progress on 2025 & 2028 targets every 5

years


52


Intentionally Produced POPsFor DDT (Annex B):• all Parties shall:

– eliminate production and use except for disease vector control programs:

• special public DDT register• reporting and other obligations

– promote research and development for alternatives to DDT• the COP will:

– review at its first meeting and every 3 years thereafter to see when DDT is no longer needed for disease vector control use (i.e., technically and economically feasible alternative products, practices or processes are available)


Intentionally Produced POPsTrade will be restricted for all POPs in Annexes A & B

• Imports/exports between Parties are limited to shipments:– intended for environmentally sound disposal, or– to Parties with:

• “Specific Exemptions” under Annex A or B, or• “Acceptable Purposes” under Annex B

• Exports to non-Parties may take place subject to:– conditions on both Non-Party and Party, and– accountability requirements for the use and disposal of

POPs


53


Intentionally Produced POPs

Goal = to identify possible POPs as early as possible in assessment programs and take action to reduce or

eliminate generation and/or releases• Parties with regulatory and assessment schemes for

industrial chemicals and/or pesticides, shall, in conducting assessments of:– new substances, take “measures to regulate with the aim

of preventing the production and use” of new POPs– in-use substances, consider the screening criteria for

candidates for addition to Convention (Annex D)• Convention does not require establishment of such programs


Unintentionally Produced POPsGoal = continuing minimization and, where feasible,

ultimate elimination of total releases of chemicals inAnnex C derived from anthropogenic sources

[dioxins, furans, HCB, PCBs]Parties shall:• develop action plans within 2 years of entry into force

– and implement their plans• promote application of available, feasible and practical

measures to achieve realistic and meaningful levels of release reduction or source elimination

• promote development and, where appropriate, require use of substitute or modified materials, products and processes to prevent formation and release of POPs


54


Unintentionally Produced POPs• Convention lists 20 source types that have potential for

formation and release of unintentionally produced POPs to environment [Annex C Parts II (7 high potential) & III]:– combustion sources (incinerators, boilers, motor vehicles) – thermal sources in metallurgical industry– pulp production with elemental chlorine– some chemical production processes– textile and leather dying and finishing– several waste recovery and disposal practices– destruction of animal carcasses– crematoria


Unintentionally Produced POPs• For source categories with potential for comparatively high

formation & release of POPs to environment, Parties shall:– for new sources,

• promote and, as provided for in an action plan, requireuse of best available techniques (BAT), and

• phase in BAT requirements as soon as practicable but no later than 4 years after Convention enters into force

• promote use of best environmental practices (BEP)– for existing sources, promote use of BAT and BEP

• For other source categories (Annex C Part III), Parties shall:– for new and existing sources, promote use of BAT & BEP


55


POPs in Stockpiles & WastesGoal = environmentally sound management (ESM) of

stockpiles, wastes, and products and articles upon becoming wastes that consist of, contain or are contaminated by POPs

Parties must:– develop and implement strategies to identify stockpiles– manage stockpiles in a safe, efficient and ESM until they are

deemed to be wastes– develop strategies to identify products & articles in use and

wastes consisting of, containing or contaminated with a POP– take measures to

• handle, collect, transport and store wastes in ESM, and• dispose of wastes by destroying POP content or

otherwise in ESM taking into account international rules


POPs in Stockpiles & Wastes Parties must (continued):

– not allow recovery, recycle, reclamation, direct reuse or alternative uses of POPs

– not transport these materials across international boundaries without taking into account international rules (e.g., Basel Convention)

– develop strategies for identifying contaminated sites• remediation is not required by the Convention• if remediation is attempted, it must be done in an

environmentally sound manner


56


General Obligations

• Designate a National Focal Point• Develop, implement and update an implementation plan• Promote and facilitate a wide range of public information,

awareness and education measures for policy makers and all stakeholders

• Encourage and, as resources permit, undertake research, development, monitoring and cooperation on all aspects of POPs and their alternatives

• Report to the COP on:– measures taken by Party to implement the Convention– effectiveness of the measures taken– data concerning trade in intentionally produced POPs


Addition of New POPs• Agreed process will be used to evaluate candidates nominated

by Parties.• Scientific criteria are specified (Annex D):

– persistence, bio-accumulation, potential for long range transport, and adverse effects.

• Precaution will be incorporated in a number of ways to ensure that all proposed candidates are thoroughly considered on the basis of available data to see if they possess POPs properties.

• POPs Review Committee will be set up at the first COP to advise on proposals submitted by Parties.

• Safeguards will ensure that process is transparent and all Parties get a full hearing on any nominated candidate.


57


Financial & Technical Assistance Convention specifications:• Developing countries and countries with economies in

transition will need technical and financial assistance. • Regional and subregional centres will be established for

capacity building and transfer of technology to assist countries in need.

• Developed countries will provide technical assistance and new and additional financial resources to meet agreed full incremental implementation costs.

• Global Environment Facility (GEF) is named as the principle entity of the interim financial mechanism to handle funding of capacity building and other related activities.


Implementation Aspects• Convention will enter into force 90 days after 50th ratification• COP will be established to oversee implementation:

– must meet within 1 year of entry into force• thereafter at regular intervals

– must review effectiveness of convention commencing four years after entry into force, and periodically thereafter:

• COP1 will arrange for comparable monitoring data on presence of POPs and regional/global environmental transport, and for reports on monitoring on regional and global basis

– COP1 to establish POPs Review Committee• UNEP will provide secretariat


58


Convention Status

• Opened for signature on May 23, 2001 (in Stockholm)– 150 countries + EU have signed

• period ended May 22, 2002– 22 Parties have ratified, etc.

• INC-7 will be held July 14-18, 2003 (Geneva)– preparations for COP1– implement Stockholm resolutions– priority focus on NIPs & financial & technical assistance

• COP1 changes?• Convention text & information are on UNEP POPs home page:

www.pops.int


59

Overview of the Basel Convention by Mr Jim Willis

Overview of the Rotterdam Convention

This presentation will cover:

• Background• Objective and scope• How the convention works• Party responsibilities• Key players• Supporting documentation• Technical assistance• Other information


60

Origins

• 1985 - FAO International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides

• 1987 - UNEP London Guidelines for the Exchange of Information on Chemicals in International Trade

• 1989 - FAO/UNEP Joint Program on the Prior Informed Consent procedure

• 1992 - UNCED calls for adoption of a legally binding instrument by 2000

• 1996-1998 - Negotiations take place (5 sessions)• 1998 - Convention adopted in Rotterdam

Rotterdam Conference

• Adoption of the Convention and start of signature process (73 signatories)

• Adoption and signature of the Final Act– Resolution on interim arrangements– Voluntary PIC procedure brought in line

with Convention


61

Status of Ratifications

Objective of the Convention

To promote shared responsibility and cooperative efforts among Parties in the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals in order to protect human health and the environment from potential harm and to contribute to their environmentally sound use


62

Objective of the Convention

How?– by facilitating information exchange about

chemicals and their characteristics, and– by providing for a national decision-making

process on their import and export.

What the Convention Achieves

Early warning system Keeps chemicals-related problems from getting worseEmpowers developing countriesEnsures labeling and hazard communicationPromotes communication and information exchange among countries


63

Scope of the Convention

Applies to– Banned or severely restricted chemicals, and– Severely hazardous pesticide formulations

Does not apply to:– Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances– Radioactive materials– Wastes– Chemical weapons– Chemicals used as food additives– Food– Chemicals in small quantities for research and analysis

How It Works – Key Elements

PIC Procedure:– mechanism for formally obtaining and

disseminating the decisions of importing countries as to whether they wish to receive future shipments of those chemicals specifically subject to the Convention and for ensuring compliance with these decisions by exporting countries


64


Information Exchange– provisions for the exchange of information among Parties

about a very broad range of potentially hazardous chemicals that may be exported and imported

• The provisions include: – parties must inform other Parties of each national

control action to ban or severely restrict a chemical and– a Party that plans to export a chemical that is banned or

severely restricted for use within its territory mustinform the importing Party that such export will take place before the first shipment and annually thereafter;


Information Exchange provisions also include:− exporting Parties, when exporting chemicals to be used

for occupational purposes, must ensure that a safety data sheet following an internationally recognized format is sent to the importer;

− opportunities for developing country Parties to inform others that they are experiencing problems caused by a severely hazardous pesticide formulation under conditions of use in their territory; and

− that exports of chemicals included in the PIC procedure,and other chemicals banned or severely restricted by the exporter, are subject to labelling requirements that ensure adequate availability of information on risks and/or hazards to human health or the environment.


65

It takes two countries from two different regions to get the ball rolling...

1 Country from

Region X

1 Countryfrom

Region Y

Bans/severely restricts chemical Z

Bans/severely restricts chemical Z

SECRETARIAT

Informs world of each country’s bans/restrictions on Chemical Z

Asks expert groupwhether chemical Zshould go on Convention list

Notifies Convention Secretariat

Notifies Convention Secretariat

ANALYSIS Expert Group prepares

draft ‘Decision Guidance Document’

DECISION50+

governments in Convention

(‘Parties’)

AgreeChemical Z goes on Convention list

DisagreeChemical Z stays off Convention list

NATIONAL ACTION GLOBAL COORDINATION

ADDING A “BSR” CHEMICAL TO THE CONVENTION

It takes a single proposal from one country to get the ball rolling...

SECRETARIAT

Informs world of proposal

Asks expert groupwhether chemical Zshould go on Convention list

ANALYSIS Expert Group prepares

draft ‘Decision Guidance Document’

DECISION50+

governments in Convention

(‘Parties’)

AgreeChemical Z goes on Convention list

DisagreeChemical Z stays off Convention list

NATIONAL ACTION GLOBAL COORDINATION

ADDING A “SHPF” TO THE CONVENTION

1 Country(DC or EIT)

Problems with a pesticide formulation under conditions of use

Proposal toConvention Secretariat Collects additional

information


66

Country Responsibilities

Exporting Countries:– Not export the chemical without the consent of the

importer• Unless there have been previous shipments or the chemical

is approved in that country

– Communicate import decisions to exporters, industry and other relevant authorities

– Ensure that exports do not occur contrary to the decisions of importing countries

– Provide Export Notifications to importing countries

Obligations in relation to exports of chemicals

Implement legislative and administrative measures to communicate import decisions within its jurisdictionTake appropriate measures to ensure that its exporters comply with import decisionsAdvise and assist importing Parties– To obtain further information to help them make

import decisions– To strengthen their capacities and capabilities to

manage chemicals safely


67


Importing Countries:– Nominate a DNA– Provide notifications of final regulatory

actions to ban or severely restrict a chemical– Submit proposals of severely hazardous

pesticide formulations– Provide import responses– Acknowledge receipt of Export Notifications


Importing Countries:– Ensure that importers, relevant authorities

and, where possible, users are informed of notifications received, and

– Ensure that import decisions apply uniformly:

• To imports from ALL exporting countries, and• To any domestic manufacture of the chemical


68

Obligations in relation to imports of chemicals

Response shall consist of either a– final decision

• to consent to import• not to consent to import• to consent subject to specified conditions

– interim response, including• an interim decision to import or not to import• a statement that a final decision is under consideration• a request for further information/assistance

Implement measures to ensure timely decisions regarding import of chemicals Respond regarding future import of chemicals within 9 months after circulation of DGD

Key Players

Designated National AuthoritiesConference of the PartiesChemical Review CommitteeSecretariat


69

Designated National Authorities (DNAs)

Focal Point for operation of the PIC procedure– Responsible for the administrative functions

required by the ConventionMay cover pesticides, or chemicals, or bothAs of 1 September 253 DNAs from 165 states

Conference of the Parties (COP)

Highest Authority of the ConventionCountries that have become Parties oversee implementation– Interim procedure – Intergovernmental Negotiating

Committee (INC)– Just over 100 countries now participate

Decides on inclusion of chemicals, establishes subsidiary bodies, defines PIC Regions, etc.


70

Chemical Review Committee (CRC)

Expert CommitteeReview notifications and proposals from PartiesMake recommendations to COP/INC on chemicals to be added to the Convention29 Members from 7 “PIC Regions”– Africa, Asia, Europe, Near East, Latin America,

North America, Southwest PacificInterim procedure – interim Chemical Review Committee (iCRC)

Secretariat

Provided by UNEP and FAO jointlyService Parties, eg, convene COP/INC and CRC/iCRC meetingsFacilitate some aspects of procedures– Collect and review notifications– Maintain registers, eg, DNA lists– Communicate to Parties

Assist Parties in Convention implementation Coordinate with other secretariats Other functions as specified in the Convention


71

Supporting Documentation

PIC CircularNotification of Control Action formSeverely Hazardous Pesticide Formulation Report formDecision Guidance Document (DGD)Import Response form

Interim Arrangements

The resolution on interim arrangements:– Brings the voluntary PIC procedure in line with the

Convention (interim procedure)– Asks the INC to oversee the implementation of the interim

procedure and prepare for the Conference of the Parties;– All chemicals in Annex III of the convention are subject to

the interim procedure;– Chemicals identified for inclusion under the original PIC

procedure will be subject to the interim procedure as soon as the relevant DGD has been adopted;

– The INC can add new chemicals to the interim procure in accordance with the provisions of the Convention

– Establishes an interim Secretariat (UNEP/FAO).


72

Technical Assistance

Parties shall cooperate in promoting technical assistance for the development of the infrastructure and the capacity necessary to manage chemicals to enable implementation of the Convention;Parties with more advanced programs for regulating chemicals should provide technical assistance to other Parties in developing their infrastructure and capacity to manage chemicals.

Current Status27 chemicals listed in Convention:– 17 pesticides– 5 severely hazardous pesticide formulations– 5 industrial chemicals

Four new pesticides added to the interim PIC procedureRegional support for implementation workshops being heldICRC-3 (18-22 February, Geneva) proposed 3 new pesticides and all forms of asbestos (5 new forms) for additionINC-9 held 30 September – 4 October in Bonnadded Monocrotophos


73

AVAILABILITY OFDOCUMENTATION

Rotterdam Convention Website:

WWW.PIC.INT


74

Overview of the Basel Convention by Mr Jim Willis

The Basel Conventionan overview

UNEP/GEF Subregional Workshop on Support for the

Implementation of the Stockholm Convention

2

Large movements of hazardous wastes from developedcountries to developing

countries.

The Problem:


75

3

The Response:The Basel Convention

1989 Adopted1992 Entered Into Force2001 148 States and the EU are

Parties to the Convention

4

Goals of Basel Convention

Protect human health and the environment against hazardous wastesSafeguard the environment in the developing countries


76

5

Key Objectives of Basel Convention

Reduce transboundary movements of hazardous wastes to a minimum consistent with their environmentally sound management;

Dispose of hazardous wastes as close as possible to their source of generation;

Minimize generation of hazardous wastes in terms of quantity and hazardousness.

6

Pillars of Basel Convention

I. Regulation of all Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes

II. Environmentally Sound Management of Hazardous Wastes and Other Wastes and of Their Disposal


77

7

Regulation of Transboundary Movements

•1989 - Control System: Requiring written notification from State of export to State(s) of import/transit.

•1995 - Ban Amendment: Banning export of hazardous wastes from developed countries (OECD members) to developing ones.

•1999 - Protocol on Liability and Compensation:Establishing rules on liability and compensation for damages caused by accidental spills of hazardous wastes during export or import.

8

Waste Controlled Underthe Convention

Transboundary movementsWhich wastes are covered by the Convention

Hazardous waste • Basel waste (Article 1(1) a)• Nationally defined hazardous wastes (Article

1(1)b)Other waste


78

9

Waste Controlled (continued)

«Hazardous Wastes» are

wastes that belong to any category contained in Annex I of the Convention (Y1 – 18 or Y19-45), unless they do not possess any of the characteristics contained in Annex III of the Convention;

10

Waste Controlled (continued)Y10 Waste substances and articles containing or

contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and/or polychlorinated terphenyls (PCTs) and/or polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs)

Y43 Any congener of polychlorinated dibenzo-furan

Y44 Any congener of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin


79

11

The Control System

A procedure for the notification of transboundarymovements of hazardous wastes or other wastes,based upon the prior written consent procedure.

Each shipment of hazardous waste or other waste shall be accompanied by a movement document from thepoint at which a transboundary movement begins to the point of disposal.

12

The Basel Ban AmendmentA new Article 4A:

Immediate export ban from Annex VII to non-Annex VII countries for disposal

Phase in export ban for recycling and recovery from 1998

Ratified by 24 countries so far


80

13

Other Restrictions onTransboundary Movements

Transboundary movements only amongpartiesThe state of export shall prohibit export if

– the state of import has an import ban, OR

– the state of import has not given its consent to theshipment.

14

Other Restrictions (continued)

Non – environmentally sound management

Exports for disposal to the area of 60° South latitude


81

15

Focus

First Decade: Develop global environmental regime for controlling transboundary movements of hazardous wastes.

Second Decade: Strengthen existing political, legal, technical, and institutional efforts while taking on six major challenges:

16

Six Challenges for the Next Decade

1. Environmentally sound management and minimization

2. Effective implementation and enforcement

3. Capacity building

4. Partnership building

5. Greater efficiency through economic incentives

6. Enhanced collaboration


82

17

Supporting tools forimplementation

Manuals and guidelines– Model legislation on control and management of

hazardous wastes– Implementation Manual– Instruction Manual on the Control system– Technical Guidelines

The Basel Convention Regional Centres The Basel Secretariat Web Site

18

A POPs Focus

Guidelines for the environmentally sound management of persistent organic pollutant wastes;PCB guidelinesStockpiles of obsolete pesticides


83

For Further Information

Visit the Basel Convention’s Website:

http://www.basel.int/


84

Relationship Between Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention by Mr. Jim Willis

Relationship of the Stockholm Convention to the Basel and Rotterdam Conventions

Overview

Life Cycle Management– The 3 treaties together cover elements

of “cradle-to-grave” management– Common thread = POPs

Interlocking scope and coverage“Bridging” elements“Clustering” and governance issues


85

Overview

StockholmConvention

BaselConvention

RotterdamConvention

Scope and Coverage

Evaluating/regulating new chemicals (PIC and POPs)Evaluating/regulating existing chemicals (PIC and POPs)Import/export controls (PIC, POPs and Basel)Disposal (POPs and Basel)Hazard communication (PIC, POPs and Basel)Environmental releases (POPs)Other links, eg, regional treaties


86

New and Existing Chemicals

New Chemicals – “regulate with the aim of preventing the production

and use of new pesticides or new industrial chemicals which… exhibit the characteristics of persistent organic pollutants”

Existing Chemicals – “take into consideration within these schemes the

criteria in paragraph 1 of Annex D when conducting assessments of pesticides or industrial chemicals currently in use”

Banned or severely restricted chemicals must be notified under the Rotterdam Convention

Import/Export Controls (1)Rotterdam Convention is a first line of defence (keeps POPs problems from spreading or getting worse) 8 POPs are included in both Conventions– Aldrin– Chlordane– DDT– Dieldrin– Heptachlor– Hexachlorobenzene– PCBs– Toxaphene*

Possible future POPs are also included (or can be included)


87

Import/Export Controls (2)

Stockholm Convention Article 3(2) controls import/exportRotterdam Convention provides an “extension”– Reporting for trade under Stockholm Convention

exemptions– Trade with Stockholm Convention non-Parties– Period until the Stockholm Convention enters into force– Trade in possible future POPs– Monitoring trade– Harmonized System Custom Codes

Should be implemented consistently

Import/Export Controls (3)

Rotterdam Convention/Basel ConventionCovers trade in toxic chemicals and hazardous wastesMasquerades (wastes travelling as chemicals)Stockpiles (eg, prevention)Illegal trafficCustoms matters


88

Waste Management (1)

Destroying POPs wastesStockholm Article 6(1)(d)– “Picked up” by Basel

Stockholm Article 6(2)– A – irreversible transformation– B - Environmentally sound disposal

Stockholm Resolution 5– technical guidelines for the environmentally sound

management of persistent organic pollutant wastes– Under development by Basel TWG


Preventing the creation of POPs in waste management practicesStockholm Article 5Annex C– Relevant Part II Source Categories:

• Waste incinerators, including co-incinerators of municipal, hazardous or medical waste or of sewage sludge

• Cement kilns firing hazardous waste– Relevant Part III Source Categories:

• Open burning of waste, including burning of landfill sites• Waste oil refineries• Possibly others???


89


Basel Technical Guidelines:– PCBs– Dioxins– Furans– Others?

Bridging Elements

Technical AssistanceTechnology TransferRegional CentresFinancial MechanismNational Implementation PlansPolicy Development (INCs, COPs and subsidiary bodies)


90

Technical Assistance/Technology Transfer

Article 12, Paragraph 3 – Bilateral technical assistance– Other technical assistance as agreed by COP

Article 12, Paragraph 4– Technical assistance – Technology transfer – As agreed by COP– Regional Centres

Regional Centres

Established by the Basel ConventionRequired by the Stockholm ConventionInterim period – use of BRCs for the Stockholm Convention?


91

Basel Regional Centres

Financial Mechanism

Stockholm Convention– Financial Mechanism

• GEF• Other sources of funds

Rotterdam Convention– Informal

Basel Convention– Technical Cooperation Trust Fund


92

Financial Mechanism

Leveraging resourcesControl of POPs production, import and useDisposal of POPsWaste disposal technologiesImplementation Plans

“Clustering”International Environmental GovernanceGeneral support for related conventions to look for opportunities to work more closely together“Chemicals and Waste Cluster” identifiedAgreement to encourage conventions to move forward taken in Cartegena (GMEF) in February 2001Endorsed by WSSDFirst steps – administrative and policy linkages


93

Summary

Framework for life cycle managementLeveraged resourcesStrengthened programmes– Infrastructure– Risk Assessment– Risk Management– Public participation– Customs– Sustainable development

Global/regional/national levels


94

Overview of UNECE LRTAP POPS Protocol by Mr. Bo Libert

The Protocol on POPs to the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

Bo Libert, Regional AdvisorSecretariat of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe(UNECE)

http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap

Structure of the presentation

1.The framework: the Convention 2.The Protocol on POPs:

A.The concernsB.The obligations

3.Present priorities and activities under the Convention

4.Conclusions for the NIS


95

The 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

The scientific basis dates back to the 1960sFirst emphasis on acidification leading to the Protocols on Sulphur and NOx in the 1980sIn late 1980s ground-level ozone and eutro-phication become a target (VOC Protocol)Since 1990s, health-impacts are of major concern: heavy metals, POPs, fine particles

CONVENTION ON LONG-RANGE TRANSBOUNDARY AIR POLLUTION

Artic Ocean

Atlantic Ocean

Pacific Ocean

SloveniaHungary

Slovakia

Poland

Lithuania

Latvia

Estonia

Finland

Sweden

Georgia

Norway

Belarus

Czech Rep. Ukraine

Denmark

Moldova

Germany

Yugoslavia

Austria

Bulgaria

Liechtenstein

Turkey

Italy

Monaco

Cyprus

Switzerland

Malta

Netherlands

Greece

Belgium

F.Y.R.ofMacedonia

Luxembourg

Albania

France

Bosnia andHerzegovina

Spain

Croatia

Portugal

IrelandUnited Kingdom

Romania

Russian Federation

Iceland

Kara SeaBarents Sea

North Sea

Atlantic Ocean

Mediterranean Sea

Black Sea Caspian Sea

Aral Sea

Canada

of America

Kyrgyzstan

Kazakhstan

AzerbaijanArmenia

Uzbekistan

Turkmenistan Tajikistan


96

POPs: The main characteristics

Toxicity: effects include birth and developmental abnormalities, cancers, and reduced immunological function PersistenceBioaccumulation and often biomagnificationTransport over long distances: Through the atmosphere POPs can travel long distances very quickly, even across continents

History of work on POPs under the LRTAP Convention

1989: work initiated1990: Task Force set up to prepare a substantive report1994: Preparatory Working Group to review policy response1996: Negotiations on a Protocol started1998: Adoption of the POPs Protocol in Aarhus (Denmark)2003?: Entry into force of the Protocol


97

The 1998 POPs Protocol:The 16 substances

Pesticides: Aldrin, Chlordecone, Chlordane, DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin, Heptachlor, HCH/lindane, Mirex, andToxapheneIndustrial chemicals: Hexachlorobenzene,Hexabromobiphenyl and PCBsUnintended combustion byproducts: Dioxins, Furans, and PAHs

The 1998 POPs Protocol: The obligations

Scheduled for elimination:Aldrin Chlordane Chlordecone DDT (exceptions subject to review)DieldrinEndrinHeptachlor (one exception)Hexachlorobenzene *Hexabromobiphenyl *MirexPCB *Toxaphene

Restrictions on use: DDT, HCH/Lindane, PCB –all to be reevaluatedConditions for disposalPossibility to move substances between categories and to add substances

* Exception for transition countries possible


98

The 1998 POPs Protocol: The obligations

For Dioxins/Furans (PCDD/F), PAHs, and Hexachlorobenzene (HCB):

Emission reductions below 1990 levels (or another years between 1985 & 95)Guiding technical annex for major source categories

For Dioxins/Furans (PCDD/F):Mandatory limit values for waste incineration

Emissions of PCDD/F in Belarus

Emission field for 1999, pg TEQ/m2/y

Emission dynamics, pg TEQ/m2/y

EMEP/MSC-E

69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 77767574737271706968

6364656667

69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

6766656463

68697071727374757677

< 0.050.05 - 0.10.1 - 0.30.3 - 0.50.5 - 0.70.7 - 11 - 22 - 55 - 1010 - 2020 - 3030 - 40> 40

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1970

1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

1997

Emission flux trend of PCDD/Fs, pg TEQ/m2/y


99

Emissions and annual air concentrations of PCB in the Ukraine

EMEP/MSC-E

PCB emissions, g/km2/y PCB annual air concentrations, ng/m3

82

80

78

72

76

64

62

60

68

70

58

56

84

66

74

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106

74

66

84

56

58

70

68

60

62

64

76

72

78

80

82

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106

< 0.50.5 - 11 - 33 - 55 - 77 - 1010 - 2020 - 3030 - 5050 - 100100 - 150150 - 200> 200

82

80

78

72

76

64

62

60

68

70

58

56

84

66

74

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106

74

66

84

56

58

70

68

60

62

64

76

72

78

80

82

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106

< 0.030.03 - 0.050.05 - 0.070.07 - 0.10.1 - 0.130.13 - 0.150.15 - 0.20.2 - 0.30.3 - 0.50.5 - 0.7> 0.111 - 1.1> 1.1

POP’s pollution of main environmental compartments in the Ukraine for 1998

EMEP/MSC-E

pg TEQ/m2/y

pg TEQ/m2/yfg TEQ/gfg TEQ/m3

195

0.21

3.22

Deposition flux,

g/km2/y

9501195.67PCDD/F

3.4815782HCB

5.110.8123PCB

Emission flux,

g/km2/y

Soil conc, ng/g

Air conc, pg/m3Pollutant


100

Long-term trends for PCDD/Fs, 1970 - 1999

EMEP/MSC-E

Emission dynamics for the Ukraine

Dynamics of soil concentrations for the Ukraine

0

500

1000

1500

2000

1970

1974

1978

1982

1986

1990

1994

1998

0

5

10

15

20

1970

1973

1976

1979

1982

1985

1988

1991

1994

1997

Multimedia clearance rates for PCDD/Fin the Ukraine

EMEP/MSC-E

Clearance of air. Half-life is about 10 years.

Clearance of soil. Half-life is about 33 years.

Interpo latio n: C = 2.6 e -0.066(ye ar - 2000)

0

0.5

1

1 .5

2

2 .5

3

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Interpo latio n: C = 15e -0.02(year - 2000)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010


101

Depositions of B[a]P to the Ukraine for 1998

EMEP/MSC-E

Contribution of European countries to B[a]P total

deposition to the UkraineB[a]P deposition flux,

g/km2/y

82

80

78

72

76

64

62

60

68

70

58

56

84

66

74

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106

74

66

84

56

58

70

68

60

62

64

76

72

78

80

82

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 104 106

< 33 - 55 - 1010 - 1515 - 2020 - 2525 - 3030 - 4040 - 5050 - 7070 - 100100 - 120> 120

Ukra ine 413 8 kg

4 1%

Po la nd17 94 kg

1 8%

Rom ania 10 80 kg

1 1%

Other2 17 5 kg

2 2%

Hung ary 37 7 kg

4%

Germ any 41 4 kg

4%

Depositions of B[a]P from the Ukraine for 1998

EMEP/MSC-E

B[a]P total depositions from national sources to European

countries and regions

B[a]P deposition flux, g/km2/y

Ukra in e41 38 kg

52%

Rus s ia 1 62 8 kg

21 %Bla ck S e a

381 kg5 %

Othe r 10 66 kg

14%Rom ania

29 3 kg4%

B elarus 31 0 kg

4%

< 0.050.05 - 0.10.1 - 0.20.2 - 0.30.3 - 0.50.5 - 11 - 22 - 55 - 1010 - 2020 - 3030 - 50> 50


102

The main priorities for the Convention

Implementation of and compliance with existing agreements; Review and extension of existing protocols.

These two policy-related tasks should be based on sound scientific support from three core activities:

Atmospheric measurements and modelling; Effects; and Integrated assessment, including modelling and economic benefit evaluation.

Intergovernmental bodies, expert groups and scientific centres under the Convention

ProgrammeCoordinating

Centre

ProgrammeCentre

CoordinationCentre

for Effects

Main ResearchCentre

ProgrammeCentre

ProgrammeCentre

Implementation Committee

ICPForests

Task Force

ICPIntegrated Monitoring

Task Force

ICPMapping

Task Force

ICPMaterials

Task Force

ICPVegetationTask Force

ICPWaters

Task Force

Task ForceHealth

Working Group onEffects

Task ForceEmission Inventories

and Projections

Task ForceMeasurementand Modelling

ChemicalCoordinating

Centre

MeteorologicalSynthesizingCentre-West

MeteorologicalSynthesizingCentre-East

Task ForceIntegrated

Assessment Modelling

CentreIntegrated

Assessment Modelling

EMEPSteering Body

Ad hocexpert groupon ammonia

Ad hocexpert group

on POPs

Network of Expertson Benefits and

Economic Instruments

Ad hocexpert group

on techno-economic issues

Working Group onStrategies and Review

Executive Body


103

Present priorities: implementation and compliance

Since 1997 the Convention has a compliance procedure covering all Protocols. It covers:

Specific cases of possible non-complianceReporting by Parties on implementation effortsQuality control of reported dataIn-depth reviews of compliance with specific protocol requirements

Present priorities:The review of the POPs Protocol

General review 1 year after entry into forceSpecific review clauses for:

DDT (both as used for vector control and as intermediary for Dicofol), HCH/Lindane, PCBs (PCTs and ugilec), Heptachlor

Preparatory work by the POPs expert group


104

Present priorities:The review of the POPs Protocol

Possible proposal for new POPs. Work under way on:

Dicofol Pentabromodiphenyl ether Hexachlorobutadiene Pentachlorobenzene Polychlorinated naphthalenesShort-chain chlorinated paraffinsEndosulfane

Conclusions for NIS

Many countries in the region are Parties to the Convention and to the EMEP ProtocolExamine the necessary legislation for accession to the 1998 POPs along with the implementation of the Stockholm-conventionPolicies require data on:

Emissions, use and productionMeasurements

The LRTAP Convention offers support and expertise to prepare these data


105

Support from EMEP on emissions

EMEP/CORINAIR Atmospheric Emission Inventory GuidebookTraining workshopsDevelopment of software tools for reporting and training in its use (in cooperation with EEA)Expert assessment of emissions and comparison studies

Support by EMEP on monitoring

EMEP Manual for Sampling and Chemical AnalysisCCC training workshops on specific topicsSupport of national assessment of trends in measurementsDevelopment of software tools (in cooperation with EEA) for reportingSpecific field studies and laboratory intercomparisons


106

Priorities must be set locally!

Together we can move towards a brighter future!

Thank you!

http://www.unece.org/env/lrtaphttp://www.emep.int


107

Expectations from the Global Environment Facility by Dr. Laurent Granier

What is the GEF?• An independent financial mechanism that helps developing

countries and economies in transition protect the global environment.

• 167 countries are members (May 2001).• 36 countries contribute to the GEF trust fund, including

developing countries.• GEF partnerships unite governments, NGOs, scientists and

the private sector.


108

Since 1991, the GEFhas funded more than 800 projects in 160 countries

$3 billion in GEF grants$8 billion in co-financing

The GEF Fills a Unique Niche• GEF funding complements, and does not

substitute for existing aid programs.• GEF supports projects with global

environmental benefits for which official development funds are not available.

• GEF pays the added costs of making development projects friendly to the global environment.


109

What is the GEF?• Project types

– Biodiversity– Climate change– International waters– Ozone depletion– Land degradation

• New initiatives– Sustainable transportation– Integrated ecosystem management– Agro-biodiversity– Persistent organic pollutants (POPs)

The Role of the GEF• GEF is the “interim financial mechanism” for the

Stockholm Convention. • Following Convention guidance, GEF will provide funding

to developing and transition countries for the implementation of some activities to address POPs

• GEF’s approach builds on its previous experience addressing the issue of contaminants, including POPs, in international waterbodies.


110

GEF’s Initial Assistance1. GEF will initially help countries

strengthen their capacity to prepare National Implementation Plans (NIPs). This activity is known in the GEF as “enabling activities.”

2. The NIP will help countries identify and prioritize capacity building, policy and regulatory reforms, and investments needed to address the issue of POPs.

GEF’s Initial Assistance3. See the GEF document “Initial Guidelines for

Enabling Activities for the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants”for information on NIP-eligible activities.

4. The “Initial Guidelines” document is available from the GEF website at www.gefweb.org.


111

How much funding is availablefrom GEF?

• GEF will provide funds to cover the agreed full cost, up to US$500,000 per country, for enabling activities.

• Requests for more than US$500,000 will be considered on a case-by-case basis

How can I improve my country’s technical capacity to prepare its NIP?

1. GEF will provide capacity building support to countries by organizing:

a. workshops to familiarize countries with the application of the GEF’s initial guidelines for enabling activities;

b. specialized training at the regional or sub-regional level


112

How can I apply for GEF funding?• The “Initial Guidelines” document

includes a proposal outline. • Contact one of the GEF’s partner

agencies to assist you throughout the application process and during the implementation of the enabling activities

GEF Partner Agencies• United Nations

Environment Programme• United Nations

Development Programme • World Bank• African Development

Bank • Asian Development Bank

• European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

• Food and Agriculture Organization

• Inter-American Development Bank

• UN Industrial Development Organization


113

Working with GEF

• The proposal must have an endorsement letter from the country’s GEF Operational Focal Point

• The proposal should build on existing knowledge and activities• Local and regional expertise should be used wherever possible• GEF resources should be used efficiently

The main GEF principles to bear in mind when developing a proposal are:

GEF’s Expectations:•Better understanding of the GEF’s role and procedures;•Better understanding of the steps to follow to access financing for POPs National Implementation Plans;•Identification of specific capacity building/financial assistance needs in this early phase of implementation of the Convention;•Signature and ratification of the POPs Convention;•Submission of proposals to the GEF for NIP development.


114

For More Information

Contact:Hutton ArcherGlobal Environment Facility1818 H Street, N.W.Washington, DC 20433 USA

Tel. (202) 473-0508; fax (202) [email protected]

• Visit the GEF website at www.gefweb.org. The website includes a list of country focal points.

END


115

Stockholm Convention Provision for Intentionally Produced POPs by Dr John Buccini

Stockholm Convention Provisions for Intentionally Produced POPs



Kiev (October 2002) Intentionally Produced POPs 2

OUTLINE Measures to reduce or eliminate releases from intentional production and use:

• Articles 3, 4 and 15(2)• Annexes A and B• Specific exemptions, and the Register • Acceptable purposes• General exemptions • Trade restrictions• Assessment of new and existing chemicals• Summary


116


Elimination & RestrictionConvention Goal = elimination of production and use of all intentionally produced POPs

• i.e., industrial chemicals and pesticidesParties shall: [Article 3, para. 1]

(a) “prohibit and/or take the legal and administrative measures necessary to eliminate”: (i) production and use of chemicals in Annex A, and (ii) import and export of chemicals in Annex A

• i.e., trade is restricted [see paragraph (2)]

(b) “restrict its production & use” of chemicals in Annex B• “acceptable purposes” specified for these chemicals


Elimination & Restriction

Annex A (elimination)

• aldrin• chlordane• dieldrin• endrin• heptachlor• hexachlorobenzene• mirex• polychlorinated biphenyls• toxaphene

Annex B (restriction)

• DDT


117


Specific Exemptions

• “Specific exemptions” are identified with regard to production and/or use of the chemicals in Annexes A and B

– during the negotiations, several countries indicated the need for these

– Note: none are specified for endrin or toxaphene• A State, on becoming a Party, may register for one or more of

the specific exemptions listed in Annexes A and B• Parties register by informing the Secretariat• Secretariat will maintain a publicly available Register identifying

Parties that have registered for specific exemptions [Article 4]• The Register will not include the names of Parties for those

specific exemptions that are available to all Parties (e.g., PCBs)


Specific ExemptionsDuration:• period of 5 years after Convention enters into force for a

particular chemical, unless a Party specifies an earlier date• may be withdrawn by a Party at any time• may be extended for 5 years, based on request from a Party

– COP will review each request and any information submitted by requesting Party justifying continued need for exemption

Condition:• Parties intentionally producing or using POPs under the “specific

exemptions” or “acceptable purposes” provisions must take measures to prevent or minimize human exposure and releases to the environment [Article 3, para. 6]


118


Annex AChemical Activity Specific Exemption

Production None Aldrin

Use Local ectoparasiticide Insecticide

Production As allowed for the Parties listed in the Register

Chlordane

Use Local ectoparasiticide Insecticide Termiticide Termiticide in buildings and dams Termiticide in roads Additive in plywood adhesives



Production None Dieldrin

Use In agricultural operations

Production None Endrin

Use None


119



Production None Heptachlor

Use Termiticide Termiticide in structures of houses Termiticide (subterranean) Wood treatment In use in underground cable boxes


Hexachlorobenzene

Use Intermediate Solvent in pesticide Closed system site-limited intermediate




Mirex

Use Termiticide

Production None Toxaphene

Use None


120



Production None PCBs

Use Articles in use in accordance with the provisions of Part II of Annex A

Note (iv): All Parties are entitled to the PCB specific exemption N.B. Parties using the PCB specific exemption will not be listed in the register [Article 4, para. 1]


Annex A, Part II (PCBs)Annex A requires all Parties to cease production of new PCBs immediately (i.e., entry into force)

All Parties using the (Part II) PCB specific exemption shall:• eliminate use of in-place equipment containing PCBs by

2025:– make determined efforts to identify, label & remove from

use equipment with >10% or >0.05% and >5 litres of PCB– endeavour to identify & remove from use equipment with

>0.005% (50ppm) and >0.05 litres of PCB– give higher priority to equipment with higher PCB levels


121


Annex A, Part II (PCBs)All Parties using the PCB specific exemption shall:• promote measures to reduce exposures and risk:

– use PCBs only in intact and non-leaking equipment and only in areas where risk of environmental release can be minimized and quickly remedied

– forbid use in food and feed production and processing areas

– when used in populated areas (schools, hospitals, etc.)• take all reasonable measures to protect from

electrical failure which could result in a fire• inspect regularly for leaks in equipment


Annex A, Part II (PCBs)All Parties using the PCB specific exemption shall:• not export or import PCB equipment, except for the purpose

of environmentally sound management (ESM) of waste• not recover liquids with more than 0.005% PCBs for reuse in

other equipment, except for maintenance and servicing• make determined efforts to achieve ESM of wastes

containing >0.005% PCBs ASAP, and by 2028• endeavour to identify articles with >0.005% PCB for ESM• report to the COP every five years on their progress in

eliminating PCBs [per Article 15]COP will review progress toward the 2025 and 2028 targetsat 5 year intervals, taking into account reports from Parties


122


Annex BChemical Activity Acceptable Purpose or

Specific Exemption Production Acceptable purpose:

Disease vector control use in accordance with Part II of this Annex Specific exemption: Intermediate in production of dicofol Intermediate

DDT

Use Acceptable purpose: Disease vector control in accordance with Part II of this Annex Specific exemption: Production of dicofol Intermediate


Annex B, Part II (DDT)• All Parties shall eliminate DDT production and use except

Parties that notify the Secretariat of their intention to produce and/or use DDT in disease vector control programs (an “acceptable purpose” in Annex B):– these Parties will be included in a special publicly available

DDT Register maintained by the Secretariat• a Party may withdraw from the DDT Register at any time

– production and/or use must be in accordance with WHO recommendations and guidelines on use of DDT, and only when locally safe, effective and affordable alternatives are not available to the Party

• Two “specific exemptions” are allowed for DDT, related to its use as an intermediate in the manufacture of other chemicals


123


Annex B, Part II (DDT)Each Party in the DDT Register shall:• report every 3 years [per Article 15] on:

– quantities used– conditions of use, and– relevance of DDT to the Party’s disease control

strategy • develop national action plan [per Article 7] to:

– confine use of DDT to disease vector control– explore alternatives to DDT, and– take measures to strengthen health care and reduce

incidence of disease


Annex B, Part II (DDT)• All Parties, within their capabilities, are encouraged to

promote research and development to seek alternatives to DDT

• DDT use will be allowed until technically and economically feasible alternative products, practices or processes are available to countries that are currently reliant on DDT

• COP will review at its first meeting and every 3 years thereafter to see whether DDT continues to be needed for disease vector control


124


ExemptionsChemicals in Annex A or B, are exempt in quantities:• used for laboratory-scale research [Article 3, para. 5]

• used as a reference standard [Article 3, para. 5]

• occurring as unintentional trace contaminants in products and articles [Annexes A & B, Note (i)]

• occurring as constituents of articles manufactured or already in use before or on date of entry into force of an obligation concerning that chemical [Annexes A & B, Note (ii)]

– provided Party notifies Secretariat that a particular type of product remains in use within that Party

– Secretariat will make notification publicly available


Exemptions• HCB or DDT may be produced or used as closed-system site-

limited intermediates that are chemically transformed in manufacture of other chemicals that do not exhibit POPs properties [Annexes A and B, Note (iii)]

• Party shall notify Secretariat of:• total amounts produced or used• nature of site-limited process, and• amount of HCB or DDT present in final product

• These notifications will be made publicly available• Such production or use is not considered a specific exemption• Production/use will cease after 10 years unless Party submits a

new notification to Secretariat, in which case period will be extended for another 10 years, subject to COP approval


125


Trade Restrictions

Convention imposes trade restrictions for all POPs in

Annexes A and B [Article 3, para. 2]

Imports and exports between Parties are limited toshipments:

– intended for environmentally sound disposal [per Article 6, paragraph 1(d)], or

– to Parties with:• “specific exemptions” under Annex A or B, or• “acceptable purposes” under Annex B


Trade RestrictionsExports to non-Parties may take place but there are conditionson both Non-Party and Party• Non-Party shall provide annual certification to exporting Party

– specifying the intended use of the chemical– expressing commitment to:

• protect health and environment by minimizing or preventing releases

• comply with the requirements of Article 6, paragraph 1 concerning POPs stockpiles and wastes

• comply with Annex B, Part II, paragraph 2 (DDT production and/or use in accordance with WHO recommendations, etc.)

– supplying information on domestic legislation, regulation, etc.• Exporting Party shall send certification to secretariat within 60 days


126


Trade Restrictions

Parties shall provide the following information: [Article 15, para. 2]

– data on, or estimates of, total quantities of POPs in Annexes A and B that were produced, imported and exported, and

– a list of States from which it has imported or to which it has exported POPs in Annexes A and B

COP will specify the frequency & format of such reports


Assessment of ChemicalsParties with regulatory and assessment schemes for industrial chemicals and pesticides shall, in conducting assessments of: [Article 3, para. 3 and 4]– new substances, take “measures to regulate with the

aim of preventing the production and use of” new POPs– in-use substances, consider the screening criteria for

candidates for addition to Convention (Annex D)Note: These provisions– will allow the identification of possible POPs as soon as

possible in these assessment programs, but– do not require Parties to set up schemes for assessment

and regulation of industrial chemicals or pesticides


127


SummaryChemical Production Use Endrin No No

Toxaphene No No

Aldrin No 2 Specific Exemptions

Dieldrin No 1 Specific Exemption

Heptachlor No 5 Specific Exemptions

PCBs No All Party Specific Exemption


SummaryChemical Production Use Chlordane Restricted 6 Specific Exemptions

HCB Restricted 3 Specific Exemptions Site-limited Intermediate

Mirex Restricted 1 Specific Exemption

DDT Restricted Specific Exemptions Acceptable Purposes

Site-limited Intermediate


128


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• take legal and administrative measures to eliminate and/or

restrict production and/or use of POPs in Annexes A and B• determine need for specific exemptions

– inform Secretariat at time of ratification and get into the Register

– take measures to prevent/minimize human exposure and environmental releases

• needs for site-limited intermediate and other exemptions• measures to comply with trade restrictions• reporting requirements


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• special regimes for PCBs and DDT require detailed

examination of national circumstances• if Party has assessment program(s) for new and/or existing

chemicals or pesticides, must evaluate substances for POPs properties using criteria in Annex D


129

Stockholm Convention Provision for Unintentionally Produced POPs by Dr John Buccini

Stockholm Convention Provisions for Unintentionally Produced POPs



Kiev (October 2002) Unintentionally Produced POPs 2

OUTLINE

Measures to reduce or eliminate releases of unintentionally produced POPs:

• Article 5– action plan– release reduction or source elimination– substitute materials, products, processes– source categories (new and existing):

• best available techniques (BAT)• best environmental practices (BEP)

• Annex C• Summary


130


Unintentionally Produced POPs Convention Goal = “continuing minimization and, where

feasible, ultimate elimination” of the total releases of chemicals in Annex C derived from anthropogenic sources

Annex C, Part I

Chemical Dioxins and furans (PCDD/PCDF)Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)


Article 5 Parties shall, at a minimum, take measures to address

the following:

• action plan• release reduction or source elimination• substitute materials, products, processes• new and existing sources

– best available techniques (BAT)– best environmental practices (BEP)


131


Action Plan An action plan shall: [Article 5, para. (a)]

• be developed within 2 years of entry into force• may be national, regional, or subregional• constitutes part of the overall implementation plan

in Article 7• identify, characterize and address release of chemicals

in Annex C• facilitate implementation of other requirements in

Article 5• be implemented!


Action Plan The action plan shall: [Article 5, para. (a)]

• evaluate current and projected releases, including development & maintenance of source inventories and release estimates, noting source categories in Annex C

• evaluate efficacy of Party’s laws and policies to manage such releases

• develop strategies to reduce releases• promote education and training on strategies• review success of strategies every 5 years

– include this in reports to COP [Article 15]

• include a schedule for implementation of action plan


132


Other Measures Parties must:

• promote application of available, feasible and practical measures to achieve expeditiously realistic and meaningful levels of release reduction or source elimination [Article 5, para. (b)]

• promote development and, where appropriate, require use of substitute or modified materials, products and processes to prevent formation and release of POPs in Annex C [Article 5, para. (c)]

– note the general guidance in Annex C– guidelines will be adopted by COP


Source Categories The following industrial source categories have the

potential for comparatively high formation and release of POPs to the environment: [Annex C, Part II]

• waste incinerators– municipal, hazardous or medical wastes– sewage sludge

• cement kilns firing hazardous wastes• pulp production involving elemental chlorine• thermal processes used in metallurgical industry

– secondary production of aluminum, copper or zinc– sinter plants in iron and steel industry


133


Source Categories For industrial sources that Party identifies as having

potential for comparatively high formation & release of POPs to environment (including those in categories in Annex C Part II), Party must:• for new sources warranting such action:

– promote, and as provided for in an action plan, requireuse of best available techniques (BAT) [Article 5, para. (d)]

• phase in any BAT requirements for new sources in categories in Annex C Part II as soon as practicable but no later than 4 years after entry into force

– promote use of best environmental practices (BEP) [Article 5, para. (d)]

• for existing sources, promote use of BAT & BEP [Article 5 (e)]



potential for formation and release of POPs to the environment: [Annex C, Part III]• open burning of wastes (including landfill sites)• thermal processes in the metallurgical industry not specified

in Part II• residential combustion sources• fossil-fuel fired utility and industrial boilers• firing installations for wood and other biomass fuels• motor vehicles, especially those burning leaded gasoline


134



potential for formation and release of POPs to the environment (continued): [Annex C, Part III]• chemical production processes releasing unintentionally

produced POPs (e.g. production of chlorophenols and chloranil)

• textile and leather dying and finishing• shredder plants for the treatment of end-of life vehicles• destruction of animal carcasses• smouldering of copper cables• waste oil refineries• crematoria


Source Categories• For both new and existing industrial sources in

categories in Annex C Part III, Parties must promoteuse of BAT & BEP [Article 5, para. (e)]

• Parties should take into consideration the guidance on BAT and BEP in Annex C, guidelines that will be adopted by the COP, and definitions in Article 5, para. (f)

• Note: Convention defines new sources [Article 5, para. (f)]

= construction or substantial modification of source commences >1 year after

– convention enters into force for Party, or– entry into force for Party of amendment to Annex C


135


Annex CPart IV: Definitions of chemicalsPart V (A): General preventive measures (BAT & BEP)

• use of low-waste technology• use of less hazardous substances• promote recovery & recycling of materials and wastes• replacement of feedstocks that are POPs or give rise to

POPs releases• good housekeeping and preventive maintenance• improvements in waste management practices• minimize presence of POPs contaminants in products• avoid using elemental chlorine in bleaching operations


Annex C

Part V (B): BAT• general considerations• general release reduction measures

Part V (C): BEP• COP may develop guidance


136


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• measures to reduce and/or eliminate releases of POPs

in Annex C (dioxins, furans, HCB, PCB)• action plan to be developed within 2 years of entry into

force– part of Article 7 implementation plan

• action plan to be implemented– progress reports provided to COP (per Article 15)

• inventories or estimates of current and projected releases


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• for new sources in Annex C:

– Part II, promote and require BAT (within 4 years)– Part III, promote BAT

• for existing sources in Annex C:– Parts II and III, promote BAT

• for all types of new and existing sources– promote BEP


137

Stockholm Convention Provision for Stockpiles and Waste by Dr John Buccini

Stockholm Convention Provisions for Stockpiles and Wastes



Kiev (October 2002) Stockpiles & Wastes 2

OUTLINE

Measures to reduce or eliminate releases from stockpiles and wastes:

• Article 6• Related Issues

– Trade [Article 3]

– Unintentionally produced POPs [Annex C]

– PCB Issues [Annex A, Part II]

– Adding new POPs [Annex F]

• Summary


138


Stockpiles & WastesConvention Goal = to ensure that:• stockpiles that consist of or contain a POP in Annex A

or B, and• wastes, including products and articles upon becoming

wastes, that consist of, contain or are contaminated with a POP in Annex A, B or C

are managed in a manner protective of human health and the environment

Note: 2 differences between “stockpiles” and “wastes”


Article 6: StockpilesParties shall:• develop and implement strategies to identify stockpiles

[para. 1 (a)(i) and 1 (b)]

• manage stockpiles in a safe, efficient and environmentally sound manner (ESM) until they are deemed to be wastes[paragraph 1 (c)]

– i.e., no remaining uses by Party• no specific exemption or acceptable purpose

– does not apply to stockpiles that may be exported• per Article 3, para. 2


139


Article 6: WastesParties shall: [para. 1 (a)(ii)]

• develop strategies to identify– products and articles in use, and– wastes

that consist of, contain or are contaminated with a POP in Annex A, B or C


Article 6: WastesParties shall: [para. 1 (d)]

• handle, collect, transport and store wastes in an ESM• dispose of wastes

– in such a way that POP content is destroyed or irreversibly transformed, or

– otherwise in an ESM when• destruction or irreversible transformation is not the

environmentally preferred option, or• POP content is “low”,

taking into account international rules, standards, etc.


140


Article 6: WastesParties shall: [para. 1 (d)]

• not allow disposal operations leading to recovery, recycle, reclamation, direct reuse or alternative uses of POPs

• not transport wastes across international boundaries without taking into account international rules, standards and guidelines (e.g., Basel Convention)


Article 6: Contaminated SitesParties shall: [para. 1 (e)]

• endeavour to develop strategies for identifying sites contaminated by POPs in Annex A, B or C and,

• if remediation is attempted, do it in an ESM

Note: Remediation is not required by the Convention


141


Article 6: COP ActivitiesCOP shall cooperate with appropriate bodies of Basel Convention to establish: [para. 1 (e)]

• levels of destruction and irreversible transformation for purposes of paragraph 1 (d)

• methods that constitute ESM• levels of POPs in Annexes A, B and C that are

considered “low” for the purposes of paragraph 1 (d)


Related Issues: TradeConvention imposes trade restrictions for all POPs in Annexes A and B: [Article 3, para. 2]

Imports & exports between Parties are limited to shipments:• intended for environmentally sound disposal [per Article 6,

paragraph 1(d)], or• to Parties with:

– “specific exemptions” under Annex A or B, or– “acceptable purposes” under Annex B


142


Related Issues: TradeExports to non-Parties may take place but there are conditions on both Non-Party and Party

• Non-Party shall provide annual certification to exporting Party:– expressing commitment to inter alia:

• protect health and environment by minimizing or preventing releases

• comply with the requirements of Article 6, paragraph 1 concerning stockpiles and wastes

• Exporting Party shall transmit certification to Secretariat within 60 days of its receipt


Related Issues: Trade

Parties shall provide the following information: [Article 15, para. 2]

• data on, or estimates of, total quantities of POPs in Annexes A and B that were produced, imported and exported, and

• a list of States from which it has imported or to which it has exported POPs in Annexes A and B

Note: COP will specify frequency & format of such reports


143


Related Issues: PCB

Parties using PCB specific exemption shall: [Annex A Part II] • eliminate use of in-place PCB equipment PCBs by 2025• not export or import PCB equipment, except for the purpose

of ESM of waste• not recover liquids with more than 0.005% PCB for reuse in

other equipment, except for maintenance and servicing• make determined efforts to achieve ESM of wastes

containing >0.005% PCB ASAP, and by 2028• endeavour to identify articles with >0.005% PCB for ESM• report to the COP every 5 years on their progress in

eliminating PCB [per Article 15]


Related Issues: Unintentional POPs

Annex C, Part II identifies the following among the industrial source categories having the potential for comparatively high formation and release of POPs to the environment:• waste incinerators

– municipal, hazardous or medical wastes– sewage sludge

• cement kilns firing hazardous wastes


144



Annex C, Part III identifies the following among the industrial source categories having the potential forformation and release of POPs to the environment:• open burning of wastes (including landfill sites)• shredder plants for the treatment of end-of-life vehicles• smouldering of copper cables• waste oil refineries



Annex C, Part V (A) identifies the following among general preventive measures to minimize production of POPs (BAT & BEP):• use of low-waste technology• promote recovery & recycling of materials and wastes• improvements in waste magagement practices


145


Related Issues: Adding New POPs

• Annex F requests information on waste disposal implications in evaluating socio-economic information prior to deciding whether a chemical should be added to Annex A, B or C


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• Stockpiles containing POPs in Annex A or B:

– develop and implement strategies for identification– manage in ESM until they become wastes

• Wastes containing POPs in Annex A, B or C:– develop strategies for identification– handle, collect, transport and store in ESM– disposal such that POP content is destroyed or

irreversibly transformed, or otherwise in an ESM, taking into account international rules, standards, etc.


146


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• Wastes containing POPs in Annex A, B or C:

– prevent recovery, recycle, reclamation, direct reuse or alternative uses of POPs

– transport across international boundaries must take into account international rules, standards and guidelines (e.g., Basel Convention)

• Sites contaminated by POPs in Annex A,B or C:– endeavour to develop strategies for identifying sites– if remediation is attempted, do it in an ESM


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• Trade restrictions:

– must implement measures in Article 3, para (2) and reporting requirements in Article 15, para. (2)

• PCB measures:– must implement measures in Annex A Part II

• Unintentionally produced POPs– address source categories in Annex C, Parts II and III– implement BAT and BEP using guidance in Annex C

Part V


147

Issues and Problems of Obsolete and Banned Pesticides by Dr. Alemayehu Wodageneh Pesticides and leaking and corroding pesticides containers is a worldwide and serious environmental issue. They exist in both urban areas and mainly in populated zones. Most of the rural landscapes of developing countries are littered with both obsolete stocks, pesticides and empty and contaminated containers of all types and sizes. These chemical leftovers are constant threats to the human health in the agricultural world that they were designed to help. They are affecting not only the agriculture and its environment, but also the health of people and consequently development. The global environmental tragedy is a direct result of several decades of mishandling and is most dramatic in the developing world where there are no funds or facilities for cleaning up the toxic waste. Conservative estimates find well over 500 000 tonnes of obsolete pesticides in developing countries and of this total over 120,000 tonnes is confirmed to exist in Africa. The alarming inventory information gathered during surveys over the last few years has provided concrete evidence of the real and immediate danger resulting from stockpiles in many of the countries covered. The collaborative programme on disposal of obsolete pesticides underlines the urgency, the importance and the need for both commitment and concerted international effort to solve this problem. Considering that at least over 500 million dollars will be required to clean up critical areas of the developing world, the cost of disposal is high. Not only, but cleaning up the toxic mess is also a complex task. It is technical, dangerous and expensive. Operation has to be handled by professional staff with skills and adequate background and, for this to be achieved, adequate financial resources will be required. If the problem is delayed or left without solution, it will be more expensive and the potential for environmental disaster will be much greater. Causes for accumulation of obsolete pesticide stocks The causes of accumulation stockpiles are many and differ from country to country including the variety or types of toxic waste involved. The following are some of the known causes: 1. Inadequate storage facilities and improper pesticide containers. This is true that

some 96% of the stores in the developing world are substandard including stores owned by governments, state and private farms and also those owned and managed by the pesticide vendors or distributors.

2. Pesticides banned while in storage 3. Prolonged storage of products with short shelf-life 4. Inability to forecast pest outbreaks such as locusts, birds, grasshoppers,

armyworms, etc. 5. Poor or no ability to make correct assessment of pesticide requirements 6. Unawareness of the inherent danger of pesticides and associated short and long-

term environmental consequences 7. Poor stock management and lack of record-keeping in almost all cases


148

8. Inappropriate pesticide provisions or unethical dumping under a pretext of donations

9. Uncoordinated donations of pesticides arriving from different sources at about the same time for the same purpose

10. Over-purchase through government budget allocations 11. Ineffective distribution system or lack of means and facilities for coordinated

actions 12. Aggressive profit motive by vendors 13. Illegal cross-border trading, etc. The first line of action in addressing the issue of stockpiles The first line of action in addressing the problem is to conduct countrywide surveys and to take appropriate inventory of stocks. The following should be taken into consideration. 1. The issue of obsolete pesticides is complicated but at least the points listed (a) to

(g) need to be understood:

(a) Knowledge of causes of accumulation of stockpiles in each case. (b) How and by what means further accumulation can be avoided? (c) Studying how to get prepared to get rid of accumulated stocks and to

find the means to do it. (d) What alternative methods of pest control are available for use? (e) What policies should be put in place to minimise the use of pesticides

and move to other alternative methods of agricultural and vector pest control?

(f) How soon governments concerned can enact the identified measures? (g) What resources are available and how to implement effectively new or

existing rules or regulations? 2. Studying and analysing the above few but basic questions so as to find solutions to

recurring problems of stockpiles causing widespread environmental havoc. 3. Study and understand disposal methods available. Disposal by means of

incineration is increasingly opposed by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), the Civil Society, the public awareness group, Green Peace, etc. Opposition is stiffer when cement-kilns are chosen for destruction of waste. Basically this is not acceptable because a certain level of dioxin emissions into the environment is unavoidable. Dioxins are highly dangerous, more than a given set of pesticide waste intended for destruction.

4. Ensuring the exercise of inventory taking by including the following four

categories of waste directly related to stockpiles:

(a) Obsolete and banned pesticides: These are pesticides that are no longer useful for the purpose for which they were intended. They might exist in various forms such as liquids, granules, powders, emulsions, gasses, etc.


149

(b) Empty and contaminated pesticide containers: These are equally as dangerous as pesticides and therefore should be taken into consideration when taking inventories. In many countries and specifically in developing countries pesticide containers are used for domestic purposes and thus often cause major environmental and health disasters.

(c) Heavily contaminated soils: These are major sources of water

contamination particularly ground water. Often contamination takes place from run off following rainy seasons, etc.

(d) Buried pesticides: These are often found in unmarked sites or in the

middle of populated zones with little or no marks to trace. This leads to soil contamination and therefore represents a source of high hazard to.

FAO has developed a format that is widely used for inventory taking. It is simple and useful to initiate disposal operations and allows to exchange information and is also necessary for updating the global database on stockpiles. The inventory format should be completed in Excel format for easy conversion to a database as might be needed. Survey activities FAO started gathering information and taking inventories of obsolete stocks since 1994. Between 1994 and 2001, the FAO Collaborative Programme on Disposal of Obsolete Pesticides, identified stockpiles in many countries mainly in Africa and the Near East. Currently information on inventories and stock data is available from 46 countries in Africa, nine in the Near East, seven in the Far East and 12 in Latin and Central America and the Caribbean. However, in almost every case, inventories need to be revised and updated from time to time, as more waste is still being discovered or identified in each and every country. Destruction of waste Destruction often requires high temperature incineration in dedicated hazardous waste facilities. At least at the moment these are the preferred means of destruction. There are a number of different facilities but almost all are either under development or are not widely used or accepted in many countries. These are: 1. Chemical treatment 2. Engineered landfill 3. Long term controlled storage 4. Reuse/reformulation 5. New technology

Gas phase hydrogenation Electrochemical Oxidation Molten Metal Molten salt Solvated Electron Process Supercritical Water Oxidation


150

Plasma Arc The above methods of destruction can be debated by listing advantages and disadvantages each of them can provide. The methods are nonetheless being tested and revised or updated while a few are used on a limited scale in limited countries. The method of engineered landfilling is often available if Government policies support them. However, owing to long-term negative effects on the environment and the need to constantly maintain buried waste, the use of landfilling is gradually discouraged. In fact many developed countries are avoiding their widespread use. In many developed countries old landfilled sites are being excavated and decontaminated at much higher cost. What are currently being used widely despite oppositions from different sectors are dedicated high temperature incinerators. Such dedicated facilities usually have emission control mechanisms backed by monitoring and supervisions to ensure safety of operations. But since such reliable and sophisticated incinerators are expensive to install, they do not exist in developing countries. The usual practice therefore is to clean up stockpiles professionally, repackage them in new UN approved repackaging materials, transport them overland to a major port and then tranship them overseas or to countries where waste destruction facilities exist. It is estimated that the cost of such operations varies between US$3 000 and US$4 500 per tonne depending on many factors. However, with increased competition among waste treatment companies, the cost of disposal per unit weight is expected to decrease. Policy Issues Past mistakes have been recognised and measures are being taken to prevent repetition. But still large quantities of obsolete pesticides remain as a heritage since over 30 years of misuse. Unless coordinated international action is taken, the current situation will continue to worsen. The following are ongoing efforts that are currently being implemented: 1. Organizing a global effort to dispose of existing hazardous chemicals and to avoid

further accumulations. 2. Providing monitoring services to ensure that contractors comply with international

safety and environmental standards. 3. Establishing more cooperation among donor governments and aid agencies,

recipient governments and agrochemical companies. Each needs to assume some of the responsibilities for the current situation by giving high priorities.

4. Promoting methods of pest management that will reduce the reliance on pesticides by providing guidelines that should limit stock of pesticides to short-term requirements

5. Recommending or enforcing agrochemical companies to take back and dispose of unused or substandard products they supplied at their own cost.

6. Seeking funding sources for disposal operations establishing joint funding arrangements when necessary.


151

Provisions FAO provided guidance and assistance in a number of ways such as the following:

• Surveying and monitoring of potential problems of existing stockpiles. • Developing and distributing guidelines for safe storage, for preventing

accumulation and for removal and destruction of waste. • Initiating and formulating disposal projects for member countries. • Organising local, national and regional training, seminars, workshops and

group discussions. • Sensitising and mobilizing the public through awareness raising. • Supervision, monitoring and follow-up of disposal operations at field

level. • Raising awareness by sharing information, etc.

Guidelines on obsolete stockpiles FAO has produced and published a series of guidelines and related documents on the management and proper storage of pesticides, safe disposal operations, etc. The following are available in hard copies, in electronic formats and on the Internet. 1. Prevention of Accumulation of Obsolete Pesticide Stocks, 2. Pesticide Storage and Stock Control Manual, 3. Disposal of bulk quantities of obsolete pesticides in developing countries 4. Guidelines for the management of small quantities of unwanted and obsolete

pesticides 5. Assessing soil contamination (A reference manual) 6. Baseline study on the problem of obsolete pesticide stocks 7. Training manual in waste management, 8. Country guidelines to help governments in developing countries as to how to

address the problem and to how to coordinate the various stakeholders, etc. Most of these guidelines are already available in English, French, Spanish and Arabic and those that are not will soon be available. Other related documents such as results of a series of consultations/meetings on prevention and disposal are also available. Most of the guidelines can be referred to and downloaded at the FAO homepage on the Internet: http://www.fao.org at the following website: http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGP/AGPP/Pesticid/Disposal/index_en.htm In addition, various basic information resources such as CD-ROMs, posters, database on stocks, brochures, etc. are also available. There are a series of videos too for demonstrational purposes and for raising awareness. They provide information on the effect of pesticides and problems caused showing actions on disposal operations at the field level.


152

Stockholm Convention: General Obligations by Dr John Buccini

Stockholm Convention:General Obligations



Kiev (October 2002) General Obligations 2

OUTLINE General obligations include the following Articles:

7 - Implementation plans9 - Information exchange

10 - Public information, awareness & education11 - Research, development & monitoring15 - Reporting

Summary


153


Article 7: Implementation PlansParties shall:• develop & endeavour to implement an implementation plan

[para. 1 (a)]

• submit plan to COP within 2 years of entry into force of Convention for the Party [para. 1 (b)]

• review and update plan on a periodic basis, in a manner to be specified by COP [para. 1 (c)]

• cooperate with other Parties directly, or through intergovernmental organizations, and consult stakeholders in all these actions [para. 2]

• endeavour to utilize and integrate these plans in national sustainable development strategies [para. 3]


Article 7: Implementation PlansAs part of its implementation plan under Article 7:• Party in the DDT Register shall develop national DDT

action plan to: [Annex B Part II]

– confine use of DDT to disease vector control– explore alternatives to DDT, and– take measures to strengthen health care and reduce

incidence of disease• Party shall develop an action plan within 2 years of entry

into force to identify, characterize and address releases of unintentionally produced POPs in Annex C and facilitate implementation of the requirements of Article 5


154


Article 9: Information ExchangeParties shall:• facilitate or undertake information exchange on the

reduction or elimination of the production, use and release of POPs and alternatives to POPs [para. 1]

• exchange information directly or through secretariat [para. 2]

• designate a national focal point to facilitate this exchange of information on POPs and their alternatives [para. 3]

• protect confidential information as mutually agreed [para. 5]

– health & environmental information are not confidentialSecretariat serves as clearing house mechanism [para. 4]


Article 10: Public InformationParties shall, within their capabilities, promote and facilitate the following as they relate to POPs and alternatives to POPs: [para. 1]• awareness among policy and decision makers• provision of available up-to-date information to the public• development and implementation of educational and public

awareness programs• public participation in developing and implementing

measures to address POPs• training and development programs for stakeholders• development, exchange and implementation of education

and training programs at national and international levels


155


Article 10: Public InformationParties shall, within their capabilities:• ensure public has access to up-to-date information [para. 2]

• encourage industry and professional users to promote and facilitate provision of information at national & other levels [para. 3]

Parties may:• use range of approaches to provide information, and may

establish information centres at national & regional levels [para. 4]

• develop mechanisms (such as PRTRs) to collect and disseminate information on annual amounts of POPs in Annex A, B or C that are released or disposed of [para.5]


Article 11: Research, etc. Parties shall, within their capabilities, encourage

and/or undertake research, development, monitoring and cooperation on all aspects of POPs, their alternatives and candidate POPs, including on: [para. 1]

• sources and releases to environment• trends in levels in the environment and humans• environmental transport, fate and transformation• effects on human health and the environment• socio-economic and cultural impacts• release reduction and/or elimination• methods for source inventories & for analysis of POPs


156


Article 11: Research, etc.Parties shall, within their capabilities, in undertaking the actions in paragraph 1: [para. 2]

• support and further develop international programmes, networks and organizations to define, conduct, assess and finance research, data collection and monitoring

• support national and international efforts to:– strengthen national scientific and technical research

capabilities, particularly in developing countries and countries with economies in transition, and

– promote access to and exchange of data & analyses• undertake research work on alleviating effects of POPs

on reproductive health


Article 11: Research, etc.Parties shall, within their capabilities, in undertaking the actions in paragraph 1: [para. 2]

• take into account concerns and needs, particularlyfinancial and technical resources, of developing countries and countries with economies in transition, and cooperate in improving their capability to participate in these efforts

• make the results of these activities accessible to the public on a timely and regular basis

• encourage and/or undertake cooperation with regard to storage and maintenance of pertinent information


157


Article 15: Reporting

Parties shall report to the COP on: [para 1]

• measures taken by Party to implement the Convention• effectiveness of the measures taken

Parties shall provide the Secretariat: [para 2]

• data on, or estimates of, total quantities of POPs in Annexes A and B that were produced, imported and exported

• list of States from which it has imported or to which it has exported POPs in Annexes A and B

COP will specify frequency, format of such reports [para 3]


Article 15: Reporting

• Parties that make use of the PCB specific exemptions[Annex A Part II] shall report to the COP every 5 years on their progress in eliminating PCBs

• Parties in the DDT Register [Annex B Part II] shall report to the COP every 3 years on:– quantities of DDT used– conditions of use, and– relevance of DDT to Party’s disease control strategy

• Parties shall report to the COP every 5 years on the success of its strategies in reducing releases of unintentionally produced POPs in Annex C


158


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• Information Exchange [Article 9]

– establish National Focal Point– means to exchange information

• Parties and Secretariat• protection of confidential information

• Public Information [Article 10]

– raise awareness of stakeholders and policy makers– information, education, training & development

– engage all stakeholders in POPs activities


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• Research, Development and Monitoring [Article 11]

– information will be needed to:• assess status quo (inventories, etc.)• set baseline levels for humans and environment• monitor effectiveness of actions taken

– cooperation with other countries and IGOs– capacity building in developing countries

• Note: Effectiveness Evaluation provision will require national and regional inputs [Article 16]


159


Summary

Considerations for ratification include:• Reporting [Article 15]

– reports to COP:• implementation measures and their effectiveness• success of Party’s strategies in reducing releases

of unintentionally produced POPs (5 years)• elimination of in-use PCB & PCB wastes (5 years) • amounts of DDT used, conditions of use,

relevance to disease control strategy (3 years)– report to Secretariat:

• trade data for POPs in Annexes A and B


SummaryConsiderations for ratification include:

• Implementation Plans [Article 7]

– required 2 years after entry into force, but needed earlier because:

– ties together all aspects of Convention– will guide early actions and setting of priorities– plans for DDT and unintentionally produced

POPs to be incorporated – stakeholder involvement will be achieved– engagement of other countries and IGOs

– important element of this workshop!


160

Interim Activities and INC-6 Outcomes by Dr Bo Wahlstrom

MSP Workshop

Interim Activities and INC-6 outcomes

Bo WahlströmUNEP Chemicals

MSP Workshop

Outline

1. Final Act of Stockholm Convention

2. INC-6 outcomes

3. Interim activities


161

MSP Workshop

Final Act

I. Meeting report of DIPCON

II. Resolutions

III. The Stockholm Convention

MSP Workshop

Resolutions

-Interim Arrangements

-Interim financial arrangements

-Capacity building and capacity assistance network

-Liability and redress

-Issues related to the Basel Convention

-Secretariat


162

MSP Workshop

INC-6, outcomes

1. Organizational matters2. Preparations for COP-1 according to the Convention3. Other matters

MSP Workshop

INC-6; Organizational matters, Decision 6/11. The Committee shall elect from among the

representatives of the State Parties a Bureau composed of one Chair and nine Vice-Chairs, one of whom shall act as Rapporteur.

2. In electing the officers, the Committee shall have due regard to the principle of equitable geographical representation. Each of the five regional groups shall be represented by two members


163

MSP Workshop

INC-6; Preparations for COP-1, Decision 6/2

DDT- Report from SSC on format for reporting amounts,

conditions of use, relevance etc.- Report from SSC on guidance and information needed

for COP to evaluate continued need for DDT- WHO to participate actively

MSP Workshop


Register of specific exemptions- Report from SSC on:- format for country reporting of requests;- review process for COP;- Format for a Register of specific exemptions


164

MSP Workshop


Evaluation of current and projected releases of chemicals in Annex C

- Governments to provide comments on the Toolkit;- SSC to develop an updated and expanded version of the

Toolkit

MSP Workshop


Stockpiles and wastes; technical guidelines development- Continued and strengthened collaboration between SSC

and SBC;- Close coordination at national level;- Basel to consider inviting SC members to participate in

Basel Convention activities;- Report from SSC to COP on POPs guidelines to be

adopted by Basel, including analysis of implications for SC;


165

MSP Workshop


National Implementation Plans (NIPs)- Governments to comment on draft guidance document;- SSC to prepare interim guidance to assist countries;- Interim guidance to be submitted for consideration by

INC-7;- SSC to prepare guidance for review and updating of

NIPs

MSP Workshop


Clearing-house for information exchange- Governments to submit questions and comments related

to the design, development, operation and scope of a clearing-house mechanism;

- SSC to prepare a detailed work plan and budget for consideration by INC-7


166

MSP Workshop


Guidance on technical assistance- Developed country governments to provide views and

information on priorities and arrangements regarding provisions for technical assistance;

- Developing country governments to provide views and information on priorities and arrangements regarding technical assistance from develop countries;

- SSC to prepare report based on:- Views and information from countries;- Relevant experience gained from NIPs implementation;- Information gathered during negotiation process and from regional

and sub-regional workshops;

MSP Workshop


Feasibility study on regional and sub-regional centres- SSC to undertake a feasibility study together with SBC;- Identify needs of countries with regard to capacity-

building and technology transfer;- Assess capacity of existing centres;- Assess gaps and limitations of existing arrangements;- Review experiences gained by other MEAs;- Identify and analyse synergies between SC and Basel;- Communicate TOR to governments and report to INC-7


167

MSP Workshop


Case studies on regional and sub-regional centres- SSC to develop and conduct case studies together with

SBC;- Governments, IGOs, NGO, private sector and IFIs to

provide information on contributions to case studies;- SSC to report on progress at INC-7;- Subject to availability of extra-budgetary resources;

MSP Workshop


Capacity Assistance Network- Governments, IGOs, NGO, private sector and IFIs to

provide information on how they might contribute to facilitate and coordinate access to financial and technical assistance;

- SSC to include arrangement for developing modalities for a capacity assistance network in the feasibility study under 6/9;


168

MSP Workshop


Draft MOU with GEF

- SSC to submit to INC-7 a review of similar agreements between GEF and other MEAs and the experience of their use;

- SSC to prepare a draft MOU together with GEFSEC for consideration by INC-7;

MSP Workshop


Guidance to the financial mechanism- Initiate process to develop guidance to the financial

mechanism;- Governments to provide views on elements to be

included;- SSC to submit a report to INC-7 including:- Compilation and synthesis of country views;- Review of experience of guidance from other MEAs to

GEF;


169

MSP Workshop


Draft TOR for the review of the financial mechanism- Initiate process to develop draft TOR for the review of

the financial mechanism;- SSC to submit elements of draft TOR to INC-7;- Paragraphs 7 and 8 of Article 13 to be used as the

primary basis;- Seek input from experts on options for the conduct of

such reviews.

MSP Workshop


Collection of information from funding institutions

- Governments to provide relevant information to SSC on how their funding institutions might support SC objectives;

- IGOs, NGOs and others to provide relevant information to SSC on how they may support SC objectives;

- SSC to collect information and submit draft report to INC-7.


170

MSP Workshop


Format and timing of Party reporting- Governments to provide comments on timing and format

of Party reporting;- SSC to prepare:- Draft model format on reporting for consideration by

INC-7;- Report reviewing obligations, processes and formats for

reporting under other MEAs for consideration by INC-7.

MSP Workshop


Effectiveness evaluation- SSC to begin to address environmental monitoring and

evaluation needs;- Develop guidance on the effectiveness evaluation;- Identify basic data needs and data gaps;- Assess capacity of existing programmes and begin make

arrangements for provision of comparable monitoring data, including facilitating arrangements where infomration is not available;

- Compile guidance for data collection and test, subject to funding;

- Report on progress to INC-7


171

MSP Workshop


Non-compliance- Governments and MEA secretariats invited to provide

views on non-compliance to SSC;- SSC to prepare a report to INC-7 providing a

compilation and synthesis of views received;- SSC to prepare a report on existing non-compliance

regimes under MEAs.

MSP Workshop


Offers to host Permanent Secretariat- Interested countries invited to provide detailed

information on conditions and advantages to SSC, focusing on items listed in an appendix;

- SSC to compile offers received and submit to INC-7 for consideration;


172

MSP Workshop

INC-6; Preparations for COP-1, other matters

Listing of chemicals (Article 8, Annexes A, B and C and paragraph 6 of Article 19)

- INC noted report from contact group;

- SSC to use report as basis for a brief description and draft TOR for the POPs Review Committee to be submitted to INC-7 for consideration.

MSP Workshop


Measures to reduce or eliminate release from unintentional production (Article 5 and Annex C)

- INC agreed to terms of reference for expert group on BAT/BEP;

- INC selected co-chairs for the expert group;- US contributed $100,000 to the first meeting of the

expert group(scheduled for late February 2003).


173

MSP Workshop


Liability and redress

- INC called upon governments and others to provide comments on liability and redress to SSC;

- INC noted with gratitude Austria’s offer to host workshop in Vienna in September 2002.

MSP Workshop

INC-6; Preparations for COP-1, administrative matters

Draft rules on arbitration

Draft rules on conciliation

Draft rules of procedure for COP

Draft financial rules for COP


174

MSP Workshop

Summary

In the interim period there will be:- INCs to prepare COP-1 and oversee interim activities- Interim Secretariat- Implementation of interim activities - Voluntary implementation of the Convention provisions by States


175

Legislating Chemicals by Mr Masa Nagai

LEGISLATING CHEMICALS

Masa NagaiEnvironmental Law Branch

UNEP

Setting objective

To reduce risks to human health and the environment by:

• Regulating certain chemicals• Regulating certain human activities causing

the release of certain chemicals into the environment or introduction of such risks


176

Linkage to sectoral laws

Relevant sectoral laws may cover:• Water pollution (surface and ground water)• Marine environmental pollution• Air pollution• Soil contamination• Harm to wild fauna and flora• Development or land use planning

Lifecycle approachTarget regulatory actions at:• Research, Development & Testing• Manufacture• Transport, Storage• Distribution, Trade• Use• Disposal• Unintentional generation


177

Socio-Economic Consideration

• Ensure that regulatory measures on certain chemicals are identified taking fully into account development needs and the need to protect human health and the environment.

Responsibility

• Identify persons who are responsible for risks associated with certain chemicals

• Make such persons accountable in taking actions required to achieve the legislative objectives

• Make such persons bear administrative costs for implementing legislation


178

Institutional arrangements

• Identify an authority or authorities responsible for implementing legislation

• Identify the relationship with other existing laws, and define jurisdiction among authorities

• Establish institutional mechanisms for inter-sectoral coordination and review

Manufacture & Use Ban/Restriction

• Prohibition or restriction of chemicals causing unacceptable risks

• Address manufacture, import and use• Differentiated regulatory actions for

different types of chemicals


179

Emission/Release Control

• Emission/release control of certain chemicals

• Set emission/release standard• Regulate certain types of activities and

facility

Wastes Management

• Regulate generation, collection, transport, storage, treatment, recycling and disposal of wastes

• Distinct regulatory measures for municipal wastes and industrial wastes

• Regulate the persons and installations involved, and phases of related activities


180

Means to Enforce

• Record keeping• Document to track movement• Permit & License• Reporting• Inspection• Penalties• Incentive measures

Towards Prevention

• Building knowledge basis• Health and environmental risk assessment • Awareness of existing risks• Planning for the sites of hazardous

installations• Preparedness for accidents• Funds for pollution prevention


181

Restoration of Damage

• Compensation schemes for injury• Procedures and funds for clean-up

contaminated sites• Procedures for settlement of disputes

International Issues

Bring national legislation in line with:• Stockholm Convention (persistent organic

pollutants)• Rotterdam Convention (hazardous

chemicals in international trade)• Basel Conventions (transboundary

movements of hazardous wastes)


182

Chemicals Legislation: A Model by Mr Masa Nagai

Chemicals Legislation: A Model

Masa NagaiEnvironmental Law Branch

UNEP

Setting objective

Establish procedures to assess health and environmental impact of certain chemicals

Regulate the chemicals posing unacceptable risks


183

Scope

• Define the categories of chemicals to be covered

• Combination of characteristics for the categories:– Persistent– Bioaccumulative– Toxic

Exemptions

• Exemption may be accorded to:

– Chemicals already covered by other existing laws (e.g. pharmaceuticals)

– Chemicals for specific use (e.g. research)– Chemicals in the quantity under a given

threshold


184

Lists

• Lists of categories of chemicals– First priority for regulation– Second priority for regulation– Others

• Inventory of existing chemicals• Practical means to amend the lists• New chemicals - Not on the lists

Authority

• Identify the authority responsible to implement the legislation– Minister(s) with executing power to issue and

undertake regulatory measures– Minister(s) with whom coordination is required

(e.g by notifying measures taken)


185

Responsibility

• Identify persons who are to be governed by the legislation:– Manufacturers– Importers or traders– Users

• Make them responsible to take measures required under the legislation

Information Gathering

• Notification to the authority of the intent of manufacture, import or sale, or use– Name, address, amount of chemicals, purposes

• Submission of chemicals information by manufacturers or importers


186

Assessment

• Assessment by the authority of impact to health and environment, based on the chemicals information submitted and/or its own tests

• Assessment to be done in a given period• Observe transparent process

Measures

• Prohibit manufacture, import or sale, or use• Permit with certain regulatory measures:

– Licensing– Compliance with certain technical standard – Bookkeeping and report

• Permit


187

Differentiated Measures

• Regulatory measures may be differentiated according to the assessed risks

• Lists of different categories of chemicals, posing different levels of risks, may provide a basis for such differentiated treatment

Enforcement

• Recommendation• Administrative order• Mandatory submission of reports• Onsite inspection• Administrative and criminal punishment


188

Financial means

• Administrative costs may be partially borne by:– those who intend to manufacture, import or

sale, or use, upon application– those who are permitted, upon, e.g. licensing

Regulations

• Lists of individual chemicals may be published under regulations issued by the authority, e.g. Minister(s)

• Such lists maybe amended from time to time to keep them updated

• Other matters that require regular update (e.g. technical standard or administrative fees) may be covered by regulations


189

Linkage to other laws

• Waste management• Agricultural chemicals• Air quality• Water quality• Marine and coastal environment• Soil quality• Environmental impact assessment


190

UNITAR; Preparation of National Profiles by Mr Jonathan Krueger

National Profiles for the Sound Management of Chemicals

Preparation of National Profiles to Assess the National Infrastructure

for the Sound Management of Chemicals

UNITAR

Training and Capacity Building Programmes inChemicals and Waste Management

United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)Palais des Nations1211 Geneva 10

Tel: +41 22 917 1234Fax: +41 22 917 8047Email: [email protected]

Z:cwm.08/PTF8/presentations/National Profiles.ppt


What is a National Profile?

• A comprehensive and systematic documentation of the national

infrastructure for the management of chemicals, including

identification of existing gaps and weaknesses.


191


• Chemical production, import, export and use

• Priority concerns related to chemical production, import, exports and use

• Chemicals legislation and non-regulatory mechanisms

• Responsibilities and activities of governmental and non-governmental bodies

• Existing interministerial bodies and national coordinating mechanisms

• Available data sources

• Technical infrastructure

• Resources available and needed

A National Profile includes Information on…


National Profile Preparation Worldwide

LegendNational Profile in Preparation (23)National Profile Prepared (67)


192


References to National Profiles

• Priorities for Action, Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety, 1994…

“National Profiles to indicate the current capabilities and capacities for management of chemicals and the specific needs for improvements should be elaborated as soon as possible and no later that 1997.”

• Priorities for Action, Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety, 2000…

“By 2002, most countries, through a multi-stakeholder process, will have developed a National Profile on chemicals management.”

• May 2001 Global Environment Facility (GEF) Council Meeting…

Countries recognised the utility of National Profiles with regard to the successful implementation of POPs-related activities and encouraged their development.

Initial Guidelines for Enabling Activities for the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (GEF/C.17/4) encourages countries that have not prepared a National Profile to do so using UNITAR/IOMC guidance.


Key Principles for Preparing a National Profile

• Involvement of all concerned parties (multi-stakeholder approach)

• Country-driven process (by countries for countries)

• Ongoing process (living document – should be updated on a regular basis)

• Presentation in a standard but flexible reporting format


193


Possible Benefits of Preparing a National Profile

• Integration of scattered information into one single national document

• Initiation of a comprehensive and transparent process to define national priorities

• Enhanced co-operation of all interested parties within and outside of government

• Broadened network of contacts

• Increased mutual awareness and promotion of information exchangeamong concerned parties


• Support reporting under international reporting schemes, including the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

• Important component of an Integrated National Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals

Possible Benefits of Preparing a National Profile


194


UNITAR Programme to Assist Countries in Preparing National Profiles

to Assess their National Infrastructure for the Sound Management of Chemicals

• Conducted under the umbrella of the IOMC

• Guidance Document published in English, French, Spanish

• Support programmes in place for developing countries


UNITAR/IOMC National Profile Programme Support

• Assistance for countries to translate the Guidance Document into the local language

• Grants for a national university, research institute, or ministry to assist in collecting the relevant national and local information

• Support of the organisation of national and local meetings

• Consultancy support to facilitate a participatory process in preparing the National Profile


195


• Support for publication, both hard copy and electronic, of the National Profile

• With country permission, National Profiles are added in the UNITAR/ECB National Profiles Homepage

• Eventual addition of future editions of UNITAR National Profiles CD ROM

UNITAR/IOMC National Profile Programme Support


Preparing a National Profile to Assess the National Infrastructure for Management of Chemicals:

A Guidance Document

PART A: The international and National Policy Frameworks for the Sound Management of Chemicals and for the Preparation of National Profiles

PART B: Organising the Preparation of a National Profile

PART C: Suggested Structure and Contents of a National Profile


196


National Profiles Homepage


How to Apply for Support through National Profile Programme

• Application form available from UNITAR

• One application per country

• At least two co-sponsoring Ministries

• Can also be undertaken as part of the preparation process for a POPs National Implementation Plan


197

Introduction to the Global Environment Facility Dr. Laurent Granier

Introduction to the GEFSubregional Workshop to support

the POPs Convention

The Global Environmental Focal Areas of the GEF

Biodiversity

Climate Change

International Waters

Ozone Depletion (only countries in transition)

Cross cutting: Land Degradation as it relates to the above focal areas

[Persistent Organic Pollutants – POPs – to be determined]


198

The GEF and the Global Environmental Conventions

The GEF is the designated “financial mechanism” for the:

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)POPs Convention

The GEF collaborates closely with other treaties and agreements to reach common goals (International Waters, CCD, Montreal Protocol)

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

Objectives of the ConventionConservationSustainable useFair and equitable sharing of benefits

Financial MechanismGEF is the financial mechanism of the Convention


199

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

Requires developing country states (non-Annex I Countries) to prepare National Reports on their:

greenhouse gas emissions national climate policiesvulnerability to climate change

Financial MechanismGEF is the financial mechanism of the Convention

and provides funding for preparation of these reports

The Convention is also the source of guidance for GEF funding of climate projects.

International Waters

The coastal oceans and transboundary fresh water basin are under siege from:

Unsustainable irrigation diversion of fresh water Pollution discharge from industry, sewage, agricultureOver fishingHabitat loss and Wetland conversionPersistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

The GEF is not a financial mechanism for InternationalWaters. However it supports Regional Sea Conventions, UNCLOS, and selected maritime conventions


200

Land Degradation & GEF’s Role

Support country driven activities that prevent/ control land degradation through its interface with the GEF’s Focal Areas.

Addresses LD as part of national sustainable development plan

Complements, rather than substitutes other financing available

Possible if project design is from the bottom up (local needs as well as conservation)

LinkagesThe environment is interconnected through all levels

Local, national, regional, global

Country projects funded by the GEF need to focus on preserving the integrity of the global environment - improving environmental conditions and ensuring sustainability at all levels

Local

Regional

Global


201

History of the GEF – A Timeline

GEF Pilot Phase1991 - 1994$1 Billion US Dollars

Replenishment:1995 - 1998 $2.2 Billion US Dollars1999 - 2001 $2.8 Billion US Dollars

World Bank is the Trustee of the GEF Trust Fund

$434,180$168,130

$177,420

$1,095,400 $1,226,220

Biodiversity

InternationalWatersOzone Depletion

Multi- FocalAreasClimate Change

GEF Portfolio (July 2000)in millions of US dollars

Total GEF $ 3,101.341

Total Co-Financing $ 8,443.100

TOTAL $11,544.441


202

7

GEF Governance Structure

operations, and amendments to the GEF Instrument.

COUNCIL32 Members :18 Recipient

14 Donor

ASSEMBLY

All 168Members

GEF Council meets every 6 months to review and approve all projects, Work Programmes, Business Plans, policies.

GEF Assembly meets every 3 years to review general policies,operations, and amendments to the GEF Instrument.

CONVENTIONS

Provides Guidance on Policy &

Programme Issues

Overview of member countriesof the GEF

Countries grouped according to their Constituency

AFRICA 6 Constituencies

ASIA 6 Constituencies

LAT & CARIB 4 Constituencies

EAST EUR 2 Constituencies


203

STAP

GEF Assembly

GEF Council

GEF Secretariat

UNDP UNEP World Bank

Projects

GEF Operational Framework

Executing Agencies with shared responsibility for GEF Project Cycle Management

FAO

UNIDO

African Development Bank

Asian Development Bank

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Inter-American Development Bank


204

Projects can also be executed by:

Government Agencies

UN Specialized Agencies

Non-Governmental Organizations

Bilateral Development Cooperation Agencies

Others from the private sector/institutes

Key National Focal Points

Political Focal Point / Member

Operational Focal Point

Convention Focal Point


205

Cooperation at National Level

Operational Focal PointStakeholdersNGOsGeneral PublicImplementing Agencies

ResponsibilitiesGEF Political Focal Point

Ensure overall policy consistencyEnsure GEF policies consistent with national policiesCommunicate Government viewsAct as in-country Government contact point Report on GEF Council Meetings


206

ResponsibilitiesOperational Focal Point

Ensure GEF-activities consistent with national policies

Identify project ideas to meet country priorities

Facilitate in-country consultations

Provide feedback on projects

ResponsibilitiesConvention Focal Points (CBD &FCCC)

Receive and distribute Convention documentation

Coordinate national policies consistent with the Conventions

Communicate Government views

Act as in-country contact point for consultations

Report on FCCC and CBD


207

Non-Government Stakeholders


Private Sector (business/banks/local and foreign investors)

Research and Academic Community

Country public involvement


Advise on Governmental and GEF decisions

Assist in shaping GEF policies

Attend GEF council meetings and comment on operational strategies and programs

Assist in designing and execute GEF projects and inform on monitoring work


208

Private Sector

Provides access to private capital

Provides access to know how and training

Encourages shift from public to private sector investment

Provides link with economic activities that effect the global and local environment e.g., energy, transport, agriculture, fisheries

Research and Academic Community

Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel (STAP)

Members and Roster of Experts

STAP Activities

Targeted Research

Need to Incorporate and Coordinate Local Scientists

………………………….


209

Why Country public involvement?

Country’s own priorities are addressed

Projects more responsive to local needs

Strengthens ownership and accountability

Opportunity to build local partnerships

Improves awareness and knowledge

Country Public Involvement

Constraints:

National coordination to include all opinions is not easily established

Involvement of many groups could slow down the project development and approval process

Increased institutional capacity may be required at government level


210

GEF and Strengthening Country Coordination

How to improve communication with the GEF Council through the Constituency?

How to better link the OFP to stakeholders?

How to make effective use of the Internet?

How to strengthen a continuing dialogue at National level?

How to use the media to improve public awareness and involvement?

Basic Project Cycle

Develop project concept

Prepare project proposal

Secure project development

funding option

GEF review for eligibility and pipeline entry;

OFP endorsement

GEF review for ‘Work Program’

inclusionCEO clearance

GEF Council review and

approval for ‘CEO

endorsement’ for OFP

Implement, monitor and

evaluate project

Final evaluation

Project impacts continue after

completion of GEF funding


211

“Coarse Filter” criteria for GEF funding

How do I tell whether my project idea meets basic criteria for GEF eligibility?

1. The Eligibility Test

To be eligible for GEF financing, a country must:

have ratified the Convention on Biodiversity or Framework Convention on Climate Change (or, in the interim period, signed the POPs Convention for eligibility for NIPs)

be eligible for assistance from the UN system or the World Bank


212

2. The Global Significance Test

Does the project idea deal with globally significant biodiversity, transboundaryinternational waters resources, or reduction of greenhouse gas emissions?

3. The National Priority Test

Does your project concept reflect national environmental priorities and commitments?

GEF focal point endorsement is a requirement.


213

4. Co-funding Test

Does your project concept have co-funding from other sources? If not, is there a good potential for creating co-funding partnerships?

Remember GEF financing is co-financing.

5. The Portfolio Test

Does your idea have the potential to be a catalytic and innovative project in the overall GEF portfolio?

Learn about existing or planned GEF projects in your country.


214

GEF is a Co-financier

GEF encourages partnerships by bringing together multiple sources of funding for projects

Key Concept: the GEF is not a project financier, but a project Co-financier providing “new and additional” funds to address global environmental issues

“Incremental Costs”

Cost of activities for the global environment beyond what is required for national development

GEF projects must complement national programmes and policies to maximize global benefits

1) Establish the baseline2) Determine cost of GEF alternative3) Incremental cost (project budget) = GEF

alternative -- cost of baseline


215

Other Project Eligibility Requirements

Country-driven and endorsed by host Government

Produce identifiable global benefits

Participation of all affected groups and transparency

Consistency with the Conventions

Possess strong scientific and technical merit

Financially sustainable and cost-effective

Include processes for monitoring, evaluation, and incorporation of lessons learned

Play catalytic role that leverages other financing

Moving from Concept Paper to Project Proposal

Choose a funding pathway that is appropriate for the scope of your project:

Full ProjectsMedium-sized ProjectsSmall Grants Programme


216

GEF Funding Categories

Full-size projects ($1 million and up)

Medium-sized projects (up to $1 million)

Financing can be available for preparing projects

Small Grants Programme (up to $50,000)

Enabling activities

Project Development Funds (PDF-A up to $25,000; PDF-B up to 350,000; PDF-C up to $1 million)

GEF funding pathways

Funding Pathway

Funding level

~ Time required

Prep. funding

Full Project

$1 US million and up

6-24 months

up to $US 350,000

Medium Project

$US 50,000 – 1 million

6-12 months

up to $US 25,000

Small Grant

up to $US 50,000

3-6 months

up to $US $2000


217

GEF Medium-Size Projects (MSPs)

Meet government/NGO demand for fast, flexible funding

Receive expedited funding of up to $1 million; take 6 months on average

Designed in partnership with the NGO community

Over US$ 21 million in MSPs in fiscal 1999 and x in fiscal 2000

Preparatory funding

PDF A or Block A - up to $US 25,000 funding is available for preparing a medium or full project brief.

PDF B or Block B - up to $US 350,000 funding is available ONLY for full projects.


218

Use PDF A or Block A to:

assess possible project sites

identify threats and root causes or key barriers

evaluate institutional frameworks

meet and consult stakeholders

identify co-funding possibilities

Use PDF B or Block B to:

conduct feasibility studiesundertake detailed assessmentsdevelop institutional and planning frameworksmake field visits and full consultations with stakeholderscomplete co-funding arrangements


219

Initial Guidelines for Enabling Activities on POPs by Dr. Laurent Granier

INITIAL GUIDELINES FOR ENABLING ACTIVITIES ON POPs

Subregional Workshop to Support Implementation of the POPs Convention

G l o b a l E n v i r o n m e n t F a c i l i t y

Part IEarly assistance: criteria and guidelinesEligible ActivitiesStep-wise framework for NIP

Part IIProcedure and Format

Outline


220

Developed by GEF Secretariat in consultation with WB, UNDP, UNEP, FAO, UNIDO and POPs Convention Secretariat;Approved by Council May 2001;Represent an “early response”;NIP is main focus of GEF assistance in this first phase of implementation;Draft Operational Programme on POPs is other component of GEF assistance.

The Guidelines

Eligibility Criteria

In the interim period: developing countries and countries with economies in transition.

After entry into force, the COP will provide guidance on criteria.


221

GEF’s early assistance

NIPsCapacity building for sustained support.To the extent that capacity building needs of countries to address POPs will address more general chemicals management issues, the GEF, in supporting the POPs Convention, will strengthen Basel, PIC, Bamako etc.

Eligible Activities

Preliminary inventories of sources and emissions of POPs;Action Plan for the reduction of releases of unintentional by-products;Action Plan to control the use of DDT for disease vector control;Build capacity to report every five years on progress in phasing out PCBs;


222

Eligible Activities (Contd)

Preliminary assessment of stockpiles of POPs and of waste products contaminated with POPs; identification of management options, including opportunities for disposal;Build capacity to report to the COP on total production, import and export;Build capacity to identify sites contaminated by POP.

Eligible Activities (Contd)

Build capacity to assess the need of continued specific exemptions and preparation of their reporting/extension;

information exchange, and awareness raising through multi-stakeholder participatory processes.


223

Indicative step-wise process

Step 1: Determination of coordinating mechanisms and organization of process

(i) identification and strengthening of national institution/unit toserve as Focal Point;(ii) determination of multi-stakeholder national coordinating committee based on a stakeholder analysis; (iii) identifying and assigning responsibilities among government departments and other stakeholders for the various aspects of POPs management.

Step-wise process for NIP

Step 2: Establishment of POPs inventory and assessment of national infrastructure and capacity (i) preparation of a National Profile (or core sections that relate to POPs); establishment of a register, in order to create and maintain a reliable inventory;(ii) preliminary inventory of production, distribution, use, import and export;(iii) preliminary inventory of stocks and contaminated sites and products; assessment of opportunities for disposal of obsolete stocks;(iv) preliminary inventory of releases to the environment;


224


(v) assessment of infrastructure capacity and institutions to manage POPs, including regulatory controls, needs and options for strengthening them;(vi) assessment of enforcement capacity to ensure compliance; (vii) assessment of social and economic implications of POPs use and reduction;(viii) assessment of monitoring, research and development, and chemical analytical capacity; and(ix) identification of POPs-related human health and environmental issues of concern; basic risk assessment as a basis for prioritizationof further action taking into account, inter alia, potential releases to the environment and size of exposed population.


Step 3: Setting of priorities and determination of objectives

(i) development of criteria for prioritisation, taking into account health, environmental, and socio-economic impact and the availability of alternative solutions; and(ii) determination of national objectives in relation to priority POPs or issues.


225


Step 4: Formulation of a National Implementation Plan, and specific Action Plans on POPs(i) identification of management options, including phasing out and risk reduction options;(ii) determination of the need for the introduction of technologies, including technology transfer and indigenous alternatives;(iii) assessment of the costs and benefits of management options;(iv) development of a national strategy for information exchange, education, communication and awareness raising;(v) preparation of a draft NIP which may include priorities, timetable for implementation, and estimated cost of proposed interventions, including incremental costs where applicable.


Step 5: Endorsement of NIP by stakeholders

(i) submission of a draft NIP to stakeholders for comments through workshops, dissemination of information, etc., to obtainthe commitment of stakeholders, including decision-makers, to implement the NIP;(ii) finalization of the NIP.


226

Expedited ProceduresGEF funds 100% of “agreed costs”; enabling activity costing less than US$ 500,000 approved under expedited procedures.Proposals to be endorsed by the GEF Operational Focal Point.Proposals should build on previous/existing activities/knowledge.Resources should be used efficiently.Local and Regional expertise to be used where possible.

Steps for expedited procedures

STEP 1Choose a GEF Implementing/ Executing

Agency (WB, UNDP, UNEP, FAO, UNIDO, RDBs) that you are comfortable with.

Different Agencies have different “comparative advantages”.The important thing is to develop a NIP. Any of the agencies should be able to assist you.


227


STEP 2Finalise the proposal with IA/EA.

Iterations / e-mailsIA/EA send staff or consultantIA/EA to exercise quality control.


STEP 3: SubmissionSeek Country’s Operational Focal Point endorsement.Proposal is submitted to the GEF Secretariat by IA/EA on behalf of Country.


228


STEP 4: Approval

Circulation to IAs/Eas, Convention Secretariat, for comments.GEF Secretariat may request additional information / clarifications etc.the GEF CEO and Chairman approves proposals < US$ 500,000.


STEP 5: Signature of Project Document with IA/EA

Contractual arrangementsReporting obligationsCountry and IA/EA sign project document which is the legal basis for disbursement of funds from the IA/EA.


229

INDICATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPING NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION PLANS (FOR FULL DETAILS SEE GUIDELINES)

Step 1 Determining Co-ordinating Mechanism and Organizing Process

KEY ACTIVITIES/ ISSUES Output/Results Possible Assistance Needs Indicative Timeframe

• Identification and strengthening ofnational institution/unit to serve as FocalPoint;

• Identification and sensitization of mainstakeholders;

• Strengthening government commitment;• Determination of multi-stakeholder

national co-ordinating committee;• Identifying and assigning responsibilities

amongst government departments andother stakeholders for the various aspectsof POPs management;

• Obtaining commitment of nationalstakeholders (for example by means ofMemorandum of Understanding);

• Assessment of needs of Focal Point tooversee overall execution (technical,human resources, etc.);

• Drawing-up overall workplan;• Organisation of inception workshop.

• Focal Point to oversee overallexecution;

• National co-ordinatingmechanism amongst stakeholdersis identified / established;

• Agreement, including missionstatement, amongst nationalstakeholders is developed;

• Agreed Focal Point needs andbudget;

• Overall workplan and timeframefor country activities.

• Implementation manualand/or guidance foroverall implementation,including expectedcountry deliverables/output;

2 to 3 months

CommentsStep 1

• Wherever possible, use should be made of existing committees/structures for overseeing NIP development; the creation of newcoordinating structures should be avoided.

• External consultants may be recruited to provide technical assistance, if needed. Priority should be given to local and regionalconsultants.

• Awareness raising activities and effective communication at the country level, whether directed to decision-makers or thepublic at large, should be on-going activities which are important for steps 1 through 5 and further.

(Framework developed in the context of the preparation of the “Development of National Implementation Plans for the management of POPs” GEF funded pilot project implemented by UNEP)

Cover pageProject description: not to be forgottenTimetable and workplanBudgetOptional annex: background information on country situationEndorsement

Format for proposal


230

Countries signatory to the Convention are eligible for GEF assistance for NIP development.The guidelines approved by the GEF describe the eligible activities and recommend a step-wise framework.Procedure and format are also described in the guidelines.

Summary


231

7. THE GEF IMPLEMENTING AND EXECUTNG AGENCIES

What FAO can do to minimize issues and Problems of Stockpiles by Dr. Alemayehu Wodageneh

What FAO [in collaboration with member countries] can do to minimize issues and problems of stockpiles

UNEP Subregional workshop on support for the implementation of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

Kiev, Ukraine 21-25 October 2002

Alemayehu Wodageneh (PhD)FAO Consultant

Environmental Affairs, WasteManagement

Email: [email protected]: (39) 340-485-6217

General matters

1. Advise governments about short-and-long term problems of pesticide POPs and stockpiles

2. Raise awareness at all levels 3. Train technical staff, conduct workshops,

seminars on stockpiles4. Assist countries in countrywide surveys and

inventory taking of stockpiles (use FAO inventory format)

5. Mobilize countries in [signing], ratifying and implementing POPs and other Conventions


232

Direct assistance

1. Assist and guide countries in environmental risk assessment

2. Assist member countries in project formulation and execution under donor’s financial support and the FAO Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP) and other sources of project funds

Technical & relevant issues of concern

1. Contaminated soil at affected sites, stores, farms, etc.

2. International tenders, procurement, assessment and selection of waste management services & commissioning of disposal operation

3. Monitoring and supervision of disposal operations

4. Ensuring appropriate cleaning up of waste, repackaging disposal, decontamination and remediation of affected sites


233

Technical guidance on matters of relevance

5. Importance of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG) related to shipment of waste on high seas

6. Importance and relevance of the Basel Conventions to shipment, transport, etc. of waste across international country borders

7. Importance of prevention of accumulation of waste

8. Use and implementation of alternative methods of pest control (Integrated Pest Management)

Technical guidelinesDevelop and provide various FAO guidelines on

toxic waste and stockpiles management free to countries:

__________________________________________1. On prevention of accumulation2. Pesticide storage and management3. Disposal of bulk quantities4. Management of small quantities5. Assessing of contaminated soil6. Baseline studies of stocks7. Training in countrywide surveys and inventory

taking (comprehensive publication)8. Country guidance


234

FAO information sources provided to member countries

1. Video cassettes, CD-ROM's on stockpiles management and pesticide POPs

2. Posters of various affected sites and disposal operations useful for training, awareness raising and workshops

3. Compiled inventory data on stocks and related information kept & regularly updated on FAO database

4. Brochures, on issues and problems of obsolete pesticides

FAO’s training components in relation to obsolete stockpiles

1. Highlight of available technologies on disposal 2. First aid training while handling waste3. Avoidance of risks while inventory taking4. POPs GEF concept and guidance where applicable5. Selection and use of personal protective equipment6. Protective gloves, masks, boots, etc7. Risk assessment in stores and in disposal operation8. Guidance and use of safe working areas9. Sampling and analysis of toxic substances10.Site & stock stabilization11.Turn key disposal project, etc.


235

1. Enhance Prior Informed Consent (PIC) - Information on Certain Hazardous Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals in International Trade

2. Determine Maximum Pesticide Residue Levels (MRLs) in Food and the Environment

3. Engage in Codex Alimentarius procedures through Maximum Limits for Pesticide Residue in Foods

Major interest and salient features of FAO’s activities

Major interest and salient features of FAO’s activities

4. Provide maximum residue levels for individual pesticide in different foods and feed items, and provides advice on the acceptable levels of pesticide residues in food moving in international trade.

5. Provide Pesticide Specifications and Quality Control Standards

6. Ensure management of risks associated with the use of pesticides.

7. Enhance and maintain International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides and

8. Find effective solutions, by following up the implementation of the following sequence of the Code’s operational elements :


236

Major interest Salient features of FAO’s activities

9. Helping countries to establish and strengthen their plant protection capabilities

10.Provide operational guidelines and training on scientific and technical personnel.

11.Strengthen food control through laboratory assessment, training in laboratory management and residue analysis, and publication of specifications for pesticides and manuals for pesticide analysis and quality assurance in food control chemical laboratories.

Major interest Salient features of FAO’s activities

12.Train staff in the safe, efficient and environmentally sound management of pesticides

13.Assist in establishing laboratory infrastructures for quality control of pesticides and residues.


237

The FAO International Code of Conduct (12 articles)

Article 1 Objectives of the CodeArticle 2 Definition of the CodeArticle 3 Pesticide ManagementArticle 4 Testing of Pesticides [Manufacturers to ensure Safety,

Efficiency, Fate in the EnvironmentArticle 5 Reducing Health HazardsArticle 6 Regulatory & Technical RequirementsArticle 7 Restrictions on Availability and UseArticle 8 Distribution and TradeArticle 9 Information Exchange and Prior Informed Consent (PIC)Article 10 Labeling, Packaging, Storage and DisposalArticle 11 AdvertisingArticle 12 Implementation and Monitoring of Code

Related websites of interest maintained by FAO

1. International plant protection convention, IPPC Secretariat, hosted by FAO's Plant production and protection division (AGP)

2. Ecoport, a shared, on-line database aimed at integrating inter-disciplinary information on the Earth's biodiversity. Contains AGPP's Global plant & pest information system.

3. Insect and pest control Programme of the FAO/IAEA joint division for nuclear techniques in food and agriculture (AGE)

4. Pesticide management aimed at minimizing hazards and pollution


238


5. FAO specifications for plant protection products - Technical specifications for more than 200 pesticides and related formulations

6. Manual on the development and use of FAO specifications 7. Issues on activities of FAO's Integrated pest Management

Programme and its approach and , 8. Information on briefing on the dangers of indiscriminate

pesticide use,


9. FAO guidelines and standards - technical standards, test procedures, policy guidelines for the introduction of equipment certification and spray operator-training schemes.

10. Information on and up date of desert locust situation and forecast, i.e. FAO's watchtower on desert locust movements in locust plagued areas/regions.


239

Mad

agas

car

Morocco

Mauritania

Western Sahara

Algeria

Mali

SenegalGambia

Guinea Bissau Guinea

Sierra Leone

Liberia

Ivory Coast

Burkina Faso

Ghana

BeninTogo

Nigeria

Niger

Tunisia

Libya Egypt

SudanChad

Central Africa RepublicCameroon

CongoGabon

Equatorial Guinea

Ethiopia

Kenya

Uganda

Zaire

Somalia

Cabinda

Angola

Tanzania

RwandaBurundi

Zambia

MalawiMoz

am-

biqu

e

NamibiaZimbabwe

Botswana

South Africa

Lesotho

Swaziland

Caprivi Strip

57

280

70

60

ZANZIB

AR

360

50

YemenYear and agencies involved in

disposal

1991: Niger = Shell/USAID/GTZ 1993 Uganda = FAO/UNCDF 1993: Madagascar = Germany-GTZ - G1994: Mozambique = GTZ 1995: Zanzibar = DGIS/USAID 1996: Yemen FAO/DGIS/KfW 1996: Tanzania = GTZ 1997: Zambia = FAO/DGIS 1997: Seychelles = FAO/DGIS 1997: Mauritania = GTZ/Shell 1997: Qatar 1999: Lebanon 1998/1999: South Africa 1998/1999: Swazziland: S/Africa 1998/1999: Namibia: S/AFRICA 1999: Gambia: GCPF/ODC 2000: Iraq: FAO/IRAQ 2000: Ethiopia: USAID-DGIS-Sida_Swe

Eritrea 262

12

200

160

Malawi

Djibout i

Cape Verde

Sao Tome PrincipeComoros Ilands

50 50

14

65 209

6039

Obsolete pesticides in Africa : FAO estimate for Africa: 20,000 (t)

SEYCHELLES

000 Disposed of tonnes

900

Less than 3,000tonnes disposed of in 10 years

2,000


240

UNITAR Activities for Stockholm Convention NIPs by Mr Jonathan Krueger

1

Training and Capacity Building Programmes inChemicals and Waste Management

United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)Palais des Nations1211 Geneva 10

Tel: +41 22 917 1234Fax: +41 22 917 8047Email: [email protected]

UNITAR Activities for Stockholm Convention NIPs

2

UNITAR Services and Chemicals-related Multilateral Environmental Agreements

• Building a Foundation

– UNITAR’s firm belief regarding chemicals-related MEAs (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm) is that effective implementation of these Conventions is not possible without addressing broader issues of sound chemicals management

• Co-ordination

– Collaborative efforts involving ministries and interested and affected parties have the best chance of success

– Stockholm Convention also has provisions regarding stakeholder involvement (Implementation Plans, Article 7, Information Exchange, Article 9, and Public Information, Awareness and Education, Article 10)


241

3

UNITAR Services and Chemicals-related Multilateral Environmental Agreements

• Sustainable, country-owned process

- a country-driven process through which partner countries assess and identify their needs and link related activities to national environmental and development objectives;

- a multi-stakeholder approach, involving representatives from various government ministries as well as concerned parties outside of government; and

- an integrated approach which addresses all stages of the chemical life cycle and emphasises the multi-disciplinary nature of chemicals and waste management.

4

1. Preparing National Chemicals Management Profiles

• At the May 2001 GEF Council meeting, countries recognised the utility of National Profiles with regard to the successful implementation of POPs-related activities and encouraged their development

• Information gathered for the National Profile constitutes a critical first step by providing a baseline of available POPs-related infrastructure which can serve as the basis for a more specific situation analysis required for detailed action on POPs


242

5

2. Skills-Building for Action Plan Development

• Skills attained from this training are useful for developing NIPs for the Stockholm Convention (Article 7)

• The methodology is currently being pilot tested through a Swiss-funded UNITAR project involving Ecuador, Sri Lanka and Senegal

• Ecuador is also one of a set of pilot countries participating in a UNEP-led, GEF pilot-project on National Management Needs for POPs

• UNITAR has harmonised its efforts in Ecuador with the work of UNEP.Plans are being made to undertake training activities for Action Plan development to the remaining GEF pilot countries

6

3. Developing Risk Management Plans for Priority Chemicals

• The Stockholm Convention involves, inter alia:

– action on individual chemicals/groups of chemicals – the identification and substitution of less harmful alternatives– related capacity-building activities

• Based on a 1999 pilot project involving Cameroon, Chile, The Gambia and Tanzania, detailed guidance to assist countries in developing risk management plans for priority chemicals has been developed by UNITAR in co-operation with the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS)

• Related project work is under way in Ghana and the guidance is being considered for use in the context of the Rotterdam PIC Convention


243

7

3. Developing Risk Management Plansfor Priority Chemicals

• This guidance can assist countries in developing and implementing actions on POPs and other chemicals

• A Guidance Document, currently being finalised with the assistance of UNEP and which will be available for countries by early 2003:

– provides information on the main principles and concepts of riskassessment and risk management

– makes suggestions for a flexible, step-wise process for the development of a risk management plan for priority chemicals

– offers practical examples of risk reduction options

8

4. Developing and Sustaining an Integrated National Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals

• Co-ordinated national platforms – a key element of an INP – have the potential to make a valuable contribution to enhancing the effectiveness of POPs-related activities

• Specific guidance and training material has been developed for creating/strengthening mechanisms for:

– inter-ministerial co-ordination and communication

– information exchange

– financial resource mobilisation

– priority-setting through collaboration of relevant ministries and stakeholders


244

9

How are UNITAR Projects Implemented?

• In addition to its experience, UNITAR can bring a wide range of network contacts in more than 70 countries – which have been developed through country-based projects over the past ten years – to the concerted efforts to implement the Stockholm Convention and other chemicals-related MEAs

• Due to its light administrative infrastructure, UNITAR country-based projects can be initiated without great time delay and reach the field level soon after projects have been agreed upon. These projects are implemented with administrative support from and in close co-operation with UNDP country offices and our IOMC partners

• Co-ordination at the international level is ensured through the UNITAR/IOMC Programme Task Force (PTF), which currently comprises representatives from all seven IOMC POs, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Germany

10

Summary

1. Preparing National Chemicals Management Profiles

2. Skills-Building for Action Plan Development

3. Developing Risk Management Plans for Priority Chemicals

4. Developing and Sustaining an Integrated National Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals

• UNITAR can assist countries, in co-operation with all GEF executing/implementing agencies, as part of the development of Stockholm Convention NIPs


245

POPs –UNEP and the GEF by Mr Jim Willis

POPs – UNEP and the GEF

Jim Willis, DirectorUNEP Chemicals

Over 140 countries participate in UNEP GEF Project Activities

Project Jurisdiction # of Activities

Single country 103Regional 78Multi-country 20Global 31Total 232


246

• Regionally-based Assessment of Persistent Toxic Substances Development of NIPs for POPs: 12-country pilot projectSupport for Implementation of the Stockholm Convention (Medium size project)Persistent toxic substances, food security, and Indigenous Peoples in Arctic Russia (Medium size project)Demonstration of alternatives to DDT in Mexico and Central America (PDF-B)Reducing pesticides runoff to the Caribbean Sea (Colombia, Costa Rica, Nicaragua) (PDF-B)

UNEP/GEF POPs and PTS Projects (1)

UNEP/GEF POPs and PTS Projects (2)

Reduction of exposure to DDT and strengthening of malaria control - Executed by WHO/AFRO and Ministries of Health in Eritrea, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Namibia, South Africa, and Swaziland (PDF-B)Support to local communities for the reduction of pesticides use in the Niger and Senegal River basins through Integrated Pest and Production Management - Executed by FAO/Global IPM Facility in Benin, Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal (PDF-B)


247

Some ConsiderationsThe NIP is your plan for implementing the convention; make sure that the plan is designed to meet your needs.Different approaches in developing the plan:– Large external consultant component– Country-driven

EAs get a flat fee of ~$50,000 not included in the project budget.Budgets are country-specific; $500,000 is not automatic.Different EAs have different strengths and weaknesses. Compare offers of assistance carefully.Partnerships are possible, but should be specified in your proposal.

Why Consider UNEP? (1)

UNEP is the secretariat of the Stockholm Convention and is designated by the Convention to assist parties. With UNEP supporting its NIP, the entire amount of GEF funding goes to that country. UNEP has more than $6 million USD, in addition to what is available through the GEF,for projects and workshops in countries that develop their implementation plans withUNEP’s support.


248


UNEP has extensive experience in all of the twelve POPs listed in the Stockholm Convention; an active POPs programme since 1995.Governments selected UNEP to convene and support the negotiations of the Convention on the basis of its policy and technical competence on POPs.UNEP seconded a staff member to write the “Initial guidelines for enabling activities for the POPs Convention” and is the agency most familiar with its requirements.12-Country GEF project gives UNEP a “head start.”


UNEP is preparing the detailed guidelines for developing NIPs.UNEP has developed all of the currently available UN guidelines and guidance materials specific to POPs.UNEP has 40 staff members ready to provide immediate assistance to countries on NIPs. UNEP has financed and provided technical support for over 60 national projects in developing countries and countries with economies in transition on the major issues addressed by the Stockholm Convention.


249


Since 1995, UNEP has held over 100 regional, sub-regional and national workshops addressing POPs and the priority issues that are reflected in the Stockholm Convention. UNEP implements 20-30 regional and sub-regional workshops each year on the Stockholm Convention. These address the key issues of implementation, including PCB and dioxin/furan inventories and action plans, and selecting alternatives to POPs pesticides. Where possible, these will be held in countries selecting UNEP to support their NIP in order to strengthen the plan development process and to build synergies.

Why Consider UNEP? (5)UNEP has extensive experience in implementing GEF projects. UNEP is a founding member of the GEF, and has been an Implementing Agency since the GEF’sinception in 1991.UNEP was the first agency with POPs projects approved by the GEF.UNEP’s underlying interest is to ensure that each country has the ability to fulfil its obligations under the Stockholm Convention and thereby to protect health and the environment from POPs. UNEP’s approach is designed to ensure that projects are country-driven, country-led and country-implemented.


250

Follow-up

UNEP would be pleased to arrange follow-up consultations with countries to:– Provide in depth briefings on the Convention

and its requirements– Develop proposals for NIPs for GEF funding– Design other needed actions (e.g., workshops or

projects) for chemical safetyCan take place at UNEP or in your country


251

8. COUNTRY REPORTS

ARMENIA A range of environmental legislation has been adopted to protect human health and the environment from the damaging effects of human activity and to ensure environmental safety in the Republic of Armenia. These include: The Basic Laws of the Republic of Armenia on the Protection of the Environment (1991)

• Law on Specially-protected Nature Reserves (1991)

• Law on Expert Assessments of Impacts upon the Environment (1995)

• Law on Protecting the Atmospheric Air (1994)

• The Codex of the Republic of Armenia on the Sub-surface (1992)

• The Water Codex of the Republic of Armenia (1991)

• The Land Codex of the Republic of Armenia (1991)

• Law on Payments for the Use of Natural Resources and Preserving the Environment (1998)

At present, efforts to tackle the problem of control over the handling of persistent organic pollutants, and particularly releases of these pollutants, are greatly hindered by the lack of laws and regulations covering the issue. It should be particularly noted that the Republic of Armenia has no Law on Chemicals or Law on Waste, and no legal instruments that would regulate or govern the use of chemicals. Decision of the Government of Armenia No. 799 dated 31st December 1999 introduced standards to limit the lead-content of gasoline, banned the manufacture of ethylated gasoline in Armenia and also banned the import of gasoline that did not conform to the established standards. This same Decision also provides for the drafting and tabling for Government consideration of an Action Programme aimed at completely prohibiting the use of ethylated gasoline, which is known to be a source of pollution by releasing polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxins into the environment. Measures have been taken to restrict and limit releases of POPs in the Republic. 19th April 2000 saw the adoption of the Republic of Armenia’s Law on Rates of Payment for Use of Natural Resources, which entered into force on 1st May. The Law determines the basic rates of payment and the arrangements for calculating emissions and releases of noxious substances into the environment, and also for disposal of wastes according to a pre-ordained scheme. On 24th January 2002 the Government of the Republic of Armenia adopted Decision No. 57, entitled “Confirmation of the list of chemical substances, biogenic elements and heavy metals or their compounds adversely affecting the environment of


252

Lake Sevan”. The list of chemical compounds includes, those chemicals covered by the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade and the Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, to which the Republic of Armenia is a signatory.

Government Decision No. 702 requires an expert assessment to be carried out at enterprises which synthesise or use harmful chemicals, and also those where the wastes formed are hazardous. A qualitative and quantitative inventory of chemicals and wastes located on the territory of the enterprise is drawn up.

Armenia has signed several international agreements whose aim is to protect human health and the environment from potential harm by chemicals and to promote environmentally-safe management of the use of toxic substances, which includes preventing illegal international trade in toxic and hazardous products. The following is a list of some of these agreements:

• The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain

Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (1998)

• The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wasted and their Disposal (ratified in 1999)

• The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (2001)

• The Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, to which Armenia has also signed:

Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants

Protocol on Heavy Metals

The problem of POPs in the Republic of Armenia is an urgent one, since until recently the republic was industrially very developed, with metallurgy, metals-processing, and chemical plants, and agriculture too was highly developed and used a wide variety of poisonous chemicals. It is therefore important and timely for Armenia that the POPs situation in the country should be assessed and that there should be a qualitative and quantitative inventory on which to base future measures to decrease the risk involved. It should be noted that the sources of POP emissions and in particular of polychlorinated biphenyls, dioxins and furans, have for the most part been identified. These sources are enterprises from the energy sector, mining and metallurgy and chemical plants with “dioxin-hazardous” technologies, including the following: • Non-ferrous metal production • Non-ferrous metals processing • Enriching of mined metals (the Kafan copper-smelting plant, the Kadzharan

copper-molybdenum plant) • Steel industry • Working hydraulic units • Electric arc and induction furnaces • Plants producing chloro-vinyl plastics and chlorine-containing solvents, and using

chlorine and its compounds in their process (PO “Nairit”) • Asphalt production • Cement kilns • Production of bricks, glass and ceramics


253

The reason why the problem of dioxins and furans is so urgent for Armenia is because of the fact that there is practically no control over the formation of dioxins and their proliferation in the environment. The problem is compounded by the lack of modern domestically produced apparatus for analysis, and the high cost of instruments and testing.

The use of the most dangerous chloro-organic pesticides, like aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, heptachlor, dinoseb, chlordimeform, pentachlorophenol, 2.4,5-T, is banned in the territory of the republic. However, the results of the monitoring of residues of POPs like DDT or lindane and their metabolites prove that they are circulating in the environment and the habitats of the Republic. Even though they have been banned, residues of DDE and heptachlor continue to be detected in the surface-water of Lake Sevan and the rivers, which flow into it, in the soil and also in the breast-milk of the women who live in agricultural areas. The soil in orchards and vineyards in the Armavir and Ararat districts of the Republic is the worst contaminated by residues of chloro-organic pesticides (DDE+DDT). The levels detected are between 2 and 18 times higher than the TLV. The concentration of heptachlor in the water of the rivers Araks and Sevjur is three times higher than the TLV, and that in the River Razdan – 5 times higher. It is clear from this that detection of residual POPs is a sign of continuing contamination of the environment by persistent organic pollutants resulting from human activities. There is reliable evidence of the harmful effect of exogenic factors like pesticides demonstrated in the fact that inherited pathology occurs and is widespread in the country-dwellers in those districts where chloro-organic pesticides were intensively used. Residues of chloro-organic pesticides – DDT, heptachlor -- have also been found in foodstuffs. The Republic of Armenia, having signed the Stockholm Convention, has now received financial assistance from the GEF and started work on her National Action Plan for persistent organic pollutants. At the moment the Republic is drawing up the inventory of equipment containing PCBs, sources of emissions of dioxins and furans, and also of areas that have been contaminated by POPs.


254

AZERBAIJAN

The Republic of Azerbaijan, once it re-established its independence as a State, found itself faced with a huge nexus of problems inherited from the socialist system. Most of these problems it shared with the other post-Soviet States, and the most urgent and acute of them are to do with various aspects of the environment. These environmental problems impinge on every aspect of the life of the country and are a real threat not only to Azerbaijan’s further development, but also to the very life and safety of its people. The use and accumulation in agricultural areas in soils and sediments of a huge amount of pesticides, minerals and other toxic substances has already effected changes to the genetic functioning of hundreds and hundreds of people, and altered both flora and fauna. Chemicals flushed into rivers and lakes, and their penetration into the groundwater, have aggravated drinking-water problems: the quality of the drinking water in the Republic (where more than 60% of the population gets its drinking water from the River Kura) has long ceased to comply with public-health standards. The problem is made significantly worse by the effects of industrial and household toxic wastes released into the environment. If we bear in mind that more than 75% of industrial enterprises are equipped with obsolete technology whose life-time should have long been over, then it will become clear that the solution to the problem of ensuring environmental safety and lessening the effects of human activities will depend upon adopting urgent measures for industry.

During Azerbaijan’s industrial and energy-sector development very little attention was paid to environmental problems, with disastrous consequences. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union the economy of Azerbaijan was based on heavy industry, oil and gas, while its agriculture specialized in producing cotton, grain, orchard and soft fruits, and vegetables.

Systems for cleansing wastes released into the environment were ineffective and inadequate, which led to growing amounts of contaminants in the air, the soil and the water, and also in foodstuffs -- harmful contaminants produced by human activities. The problem of POPs is one of the most serious factors adversely affecting the status of the environment in the Republic. Oil production, oil refineries, petrochemical plants, mining and metallurgy are all represented in the country. These sectors of industry, alongside an agro-industrial complex using old-fashioned technology, with obsolete and worn-out equipment, led to releases into the air and into the water of large amounts of chemicals, and also to contamination of the soil by heavy metals and large numbers of other toxic wastes.

It was the large number of chemicals used in the agro-industrial complex in the Soviet era that led to the chemical contamination of the environment.

CHLORO-ORGANIC PESTICIDES Traditionally, agriculture has always been a key sector in the economy of the

Republic of Azerbaijan, accounting for 25-30% of GDP and employing 30-35% of the workforce.

The objective problems of a developed agricultural infrastructure using chemical methods for plant protection are compounded in Azerbaijan by subjective


255

problems like violations of the public-health regulations and the rules for storing, transporting, using and destroying pesticides.

In spite of a sharp fall in their use (from 30-40 thousand tones annually at the end of the 1980s) from the early 1990s up until 2000, poisonous chemicals are still the main source of contamination of the environment. The average annual pesticide load in cotton-growing districts was 30-40 kg/hectare, and for vineyards – 150-180 kg/hectare.

Studies effected in 1989 showed high quantities of pesticide residues on average throughout the USSR. However, if in Russia the average over-use was 4.6%, in some parts of Azerbaijan the equivalent figure was 29.3%.

In the 60s-70s and right into the 80s pesticides were usually applied from a crop-spraying plane.

Unfortunately, ignorance about the effects of these substances on the environment and the way in which they ought to be used led to massive contamination. Specialists studies have proved that only 6% of the chemicals for protecting seeds reached their target, and the other 94% (!) was dispersed into the environment, especially when the pesticides were sprayed from the air. Pesticides were released into the air not only as they were sprayed, but also through evaporation from the surface of soils and plants, and when blown by the wind. The pathways by which these contaminants reached the water are also extremely complex.

At the present time poisonous chemicals for agriculture are not produced in the Republic; all pesticides used are imported. The main brands used are manufactured by companies in the USA, Germany, Japan, France, Russia and Britain.

It should be noted that chloro-organic compounds and pesticides have been produced in the Republic in the past. Between 1960 and 1985 alone, at the Chimprom plant in the city of Sumgait between 0.1 and 0.3 thousand tones of heptachlor were manufactured every year, and by 1986 they were producing lindane.

Table 1 Overall use of pesticides in RA between 1988 and 2000

Year 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Pesticides, in tonnes

38671 36432 33889 31581 33540

Table 1 (continued)

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Pesticides, Tones

5375 2182 938 676 420 553

After the “Azerbaijan Agricultural Chemical Plant” was closed down in 1998,

more than 80 interregional storage facilities fell into disrepair, of which more than 30 were designed to hold 10,000 tonnes of pesticides apiece.

At the present time the greatest problem is storage for a significant quantity of pesticides that are no longer usable or that have been banned for further use.

The pesticides are stored in all sorts of different conditions, most of which are below the required standard. They have been stored for too long, in low-quality containers and packaging-materials, which has led to the formation of new compounds of unpredictable properties and characteristics. The further storage of such a large amount of toxic chemicals in facilities that are unsuitable for this purpose


256

is a constant threat to the environment and to human health and may well lead to an environmental catastrophe.

As things stand, moreover, there is a distinct likelihood of the banned pesticides being used illegally. There have already been cases of this happening. It would not however be practicably possible to document such a widespread unsanctioned practice, and even less possible would be to establish where and how the pesticides are being used.

The only proper storage facility for disposal of poisonous agricultural chemicals in the whole country was completely filled and sealed more than 5 years ago. This facility is situated in an arid region, the Gobustan administrative district, 53 km from Baku and 2 km south of the main road from Baku to Shemakha, just before a village called Djangli.

A site 1.5 hectares in area for long-term storage of pesticides and soil contaminated by pesticides was established in 1988. The overall capacity of this disposal site is approximately 8.5 thousand tones. First estimates put the figure for pesticides actually contained in the site at 7.5-8 thousand tones, in other words approximately 75% of the overall capacity. The main types of pesticides likely to be found at the site are polidaphen, DDT, fentiuran, butofos, trichloracetate, sodium, polycarbocyn and others.

Some of the compartments are empty, but some are overflowing, with pesticides stored simply in piles dumped around them. Wastes are dumped completely unsystematically. The local population, unaware of the degree of risk involved, enters the site undeterred by fences and destroys or displaces the concrete slabs, putting themselves in danger of being poisoned. The heaps of pesticides blow away in the wind or are washed down by the rain, contaminating the adjacent land and water sources. Those concrete slabs which have not disappeared lie tossed about the territory of the site, and no longer cover the compartments htat have been filled with pesticides. The condition of the site is itself a major threat to the environment.

Тhese materials are transported within the Republic on ordinary trucks, which

afterwards are often not decontaminated; if they are decontaminated, then it is usually at the ordinary truck-wash, which further pollutes the environment.

It is not only the quantity and regularity of use that causes poisonous chemicals to affect the environment, but also the way in which they are applied. In the recent past, the methods most often used were spraying and sprinkling, and likewise application in granule form.

Now, however, in a society that is much more decentralised, the use of pesticides, the preparation of solutions for application and the actual administration of the poisons is carried out by people who have no specialist training. The equipment and apparatus for spraying at ground level are very defective, which leads to between 50 and 70% of the pesticides blowing outside the area of the field to be treated, causing contamination of soil and water; once the chemicals evaporate from the surface of plants and soil, this leads to secondary contamination of the air.

Changing concentrations of persistent organic pollutants in the Republic are very little monitored for lack of finance and because the State’s inspectorate services are badly-equipped.

Normally, it is impossible to measure levels with an adequate degree of accuracy. Using crude methods and approximation leads to data being lost and the illusion that all is well (a “zero” reading merely indicates that the instruments are too crude to effect a measurement, and not that there is no pollution).


257

In laboratories thin-layer chromatography and photocalorimetry are also used to determine micro-quantities of pesticides. Given the condition of the laboratory service today, the results of tests to determine micro-quantities of pesticides do not reflect the real situation as far as pesticide application is concerned.

In spite of this fact, laboratory results from chemical testing in the public-health system of foodstuffs in 1988 showed that of 7,381 samples analysed, 164 (2.2%) had higher than the TLV of pesticides.

Results of laboratory tests showing residues in foodstuffs Table 2. Year 1988 1995 1996 1997 1998 Number of samples

7381 2924 2550 2866 2200

Number with content higher than threshold

164 55 41 30 27

Expressed as % 2.2 1.88 1.61 1.05 1.23

Field studies have established that in places where these is a concentration of soil pollution, as in areas of intensive chemical use, the result is artificial anomalies in the geochemistry of the region and a high level of these compounds in the soil. Anyone who lives for any length of time in such an area is permanently exposed to the harmful effects of the chemicals. These areas where the geochemistry is an artificial anomaly have higher levels of morbidity, congenital deformities and physical and mental problems of development. There are also more direct effects in these areas, with not only chronic but also acute poisoning of people who have been working by hand in the fields, vegetable-plots and orchards treated with pesticides.

Summary Names of pesticides and status in the Republic of Azerbaijan.

DDT.

In the 1940s-1960s, DDT was the most widely-used pesticide in the USSR. In 1971 the use of DDT was officially banned in the USSR (and in Azerbaijan); in practice, it continued to be used until 1980 and even later. In spite of the ban, for many years the Ministry of Health or the Ministry of Agriculture used to give one-off permits allowing its use for plant protection, to combat insects, or to fight malaria, etc. In spite of the ban, between 1981 and 1985 approximately 3 thousand tonnes of DDT were used for public-health applications. The Ministry of Health waged a successful campaign against the pathogens of dangerous diseases like malaria and encephalitis by using products containing DDT and heptachlor. In 1986, in spite of the fact that DDT had been officially banned for fifteen years, the USSR Ministry of Health permitted the use of DDT and heptachlor to kill arthropods when these occurred in epidemiologically-significant numbers (lice, fleas, malaria-


258

and other mosquitos, and tics). Only in 1989 were these products banned for medical eradication campaigns. Information on DDT use was secret and was not published. Between 1988 and 1990 5,250 tonnes of DDT was buried at the disposal site (figure needs checking).

There is much data showing detection of residues of total DDT (including its metobolite DDE) higher than the established norms in soils and foodstuffs.

DDT is produced not only as an industrial product, but also in the form of various different preparations: 5.5% and 10% dry powder, 30% and 75% powder to be dissolved, an emulsion in mineral oil, a product called “Disinsectal”, and several others. DDT is not manufactured in Azerbaijan. Aldrin At the present time it is not produced, not used, and does not figure on the list of permitted pesticide products. It was used briefly in the 1960s. Dieldrin Never produced, never used, never registered. Briefly tested in the 1960s. Chlordane Limited use in 1960s-1980s. At present time neither used nor produced. Removed from schedule of permitted products in 1986. Endrin Never produced, never used, never registered. Briefly tested. Heptachlor Limited use in 1960s-1980s. At present time neither used nor produced. Removed from schedule of permitted products in 1986. Hexachlorobenzene At present time neither used nor produced. Removed from schedule of permitted products in 1990. HCB is formed as an intermediate stage in chemical synthesis at the chemical plants in the city of Sumgait, so there are possible leaks of this substance and others produced in the same process. Mirex Never produced, never used, never registered.

Toxaphene Used in limited amounts in 1960s-1980s. At present time neither used nor produced. Removed from schedule of permitted products in 1986.


259

Production and use of dioxins, biphenyls and furan compounds in the Republic are prohibited; they may however form as by-products of technological processes. Dioxins and Furans Dioxins and furans are not used intentionally. They occur as by-products of chemical processes and of incineration. The main sources for dioxins and furans being released into the environment are:

- Industry (mainly the chemical industry) in the following facilities: PO Orgsintez, PO Khimprom, PO Sintezkauchuk, Superphosphate Plant, SPAV Plant (producing chlorine), Sumgait Aluminium Plant, The Azerbaijan Pipe-Rolling Plant, Gianjin Auminium Plant, Salyan Plastics Plant, Textile Mills (mostly in bleaching)

- Road transport - use of ethylated gasoline. In recent years in Azerbaijan measures have been taken to decrease the use of ethylated gasolines.

- Burning of organic fuels (fuel oil, gas, wood etc.) - Uncontrolled incineration of wastes including medical wastes.

Azerbaijan has practically no incineration plants. Wastes (mostly at uncontrolled dump-sites) are simply burned.

- Urban utilities, waste-water (mostly during the process of chlorination). There is no monitoring in Azerbaijan at the moment of emissions of dioxins and furans into the atmosphere or of whether they are present in the air. PCDs (POLYCHLORINATED DIPHENYLS) PCDs are not manufactured in Azerbaijan. The main consumer was the electricity industry, which used proprietory insulators called “Sovol” and “Sovtol”. PCDs were used in transformers supplying electricity to thyristor converters. There is evidence of the use of PCDs in the Baku Plant for High-Voltage Equipment (manufacturing transformers), and in the „Az-electro-izolit“ Plant in Mingechaur. There are no data on exchange of used PCDs. PCDs were used as insulation liquid in the “KS” brand of power condensors. The main consumer was the electricity industry, which used proprietary insulators called “Sovol” and “Sovtol”. PCDs were used in TNZP and TNZ-type transformers. PCDs were used as insulation liquid in the “KS” brand of power condensers. Apart from these applications, PCDs were used in lubricants, lacquers and paints. The lacquers, paints and lubricants manufactured many years ago have by now almost all been used up and do not therefore constitute a threat to the environment. Electricity equipment, however, particularly transformers, because of their long lifetime, is still in use today. We have no data on the amount of PCD wastes still present in electrical equipment (i.e. no longer in service, but not yet finally disposed off. Now that production of PCDs and goods containing them is banned, pollution of the environment occurs from evaporation or leaks in industrial systems or during disposal. Disposal is the main source from which these compounds find their way into the environment. At the moment there is no monitoring in Azerbaijan of PCD emissions into the atmosphere or of whether there are PCDs in the air.


260

BELARUS One of the priority tasks for the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Belarus (RB) at the present time is to develop a strategy for dealing with the problem of persistent organic pollutants (POPs): this entails analyzing the POP situation in the country and determining the main areas in which to work, in order to decrease the impact of harmful substances and wastes upon the environment. Unfortunately the Republic of Belarus has not as yet acceded to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection is however at the moment preparing the groundwork for the establishment of a National Strategy to control and diminish the use of POPs that will be the equivalent of the Stockholm Convention. Within the framework of programmes entitled “Use of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection” and “Environmental Safety” they are drawing up an inventory of emissions and sources of POP releases into the environment in the territory of the Republic of Belarus. The results of the implementation of the first stage of these programmes are as follows: For the first time ever, the Republic of Belarus has had an expert assessment carried out into sources of some POP emissions (PCBs, dioxins/furans). There has been a partial inventory drawn up of electrical equipment with PCB-containing contents. It was revealed that in the territory of the Republic of Belarus there is still widespread use in industry and in the energy-sector grid-system of condensers and transformers, which use oils containing PCBs. It was noted that in many cases these pieces of equipment were working way beyond their projected lifetime, which gives greater urgency to the need to document and decommission them, and have them destroyed. Information about the use, accumulation and disposal of pesticides has been collated. All the pesticides listed in the Stockholm Convention have been banned for use in the territory of the Republic of Belarus. The Ministry of Agriculture and Foodstuffs has published a Catalogue of pesticides permitted for use in the Republic of Belarus in 2000-2010. A mechanism for managing the import of pesticides has been developed, and card indexes are used to account for the dispensing of each type of poisonous chemical. However, a significant amount of pesticides is held in storehouses or disposed of in burial-sites, some of which are not up to the technical standards required for such facilities and which therefore constitute a tangible threat to the environment. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, together with the Ministry of Health, keep a check on disposal sites for poisonous chemicals and on more than 2000 places where pesticides are stored in an organized way. An international project entitled “Investigation and Disposal of out-of-date Pesticides Accumulated in the Republic of Belarus” has been running in the territory of Belarus since 1997. 4. The Ministry of Natural Resources monitors the collection, transportation and destruction of household, industrial and medical wastes. A special regional facility for processing toxic industrial wastes and rendering them harmless is being built in the Republic.


261

It is important to note that for the practical implementation of the provisions of the Stockholm Convention, the Republic of Belarus has already promulgated a basic set of laws and regulations, as follows:

1. The Constitution of the Republic of Belarus. 2. Law of the Republic of Belarus on Environmental Protection. 3. Law of the Republic of Belarus on Wastes. 4. Law of the Republic of Belarus on Protection of the Atmospheric Air. 5. The Land Codex of the Republic of Belarus. 6. Belarus Council of Ministers Ruling entitled “On improving the system for

State public-health regulation and registration of chemical and biological agents, materials or goods made from them, intended for industry, personal or household use, and foodstuffs”.

7. Statute on State registration of pesticides, which states that no pesticide on the register of pesticides banned for use in the Republic will be registered or permitted for application. STB 1304-2002 “Safety passport for substances or materials. Arrangements for harmonisation, acceptance and State registration”, etc.

8. There are also other regulations in preparation to determine arrangements for State registration of dangerous chemical and biological agents. The existing laws and regulations obviously require amplification and modification, and this work is being actively pursued.

There are several laboratories in the Republic of Belarus, with analytical equipment and staffed by qualified specialists, capable of measuring the concentrations of pesticides, PCBs and other equally dangerous pollutants. The laboratory of the RB Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection is already being used for the successful implementation of several TACIS international projects monitoring rivers like the Western Bug, the Western Dvina and the Dneiper. These projects undertake both screening and measuring of the concentrations of pesticides and PCBs. At the moment the Republic of Belarus is developing a programme to establish a coordination mechanism for inventorising and monitoring POPs. For the moment, however, work in this field is piecemeal and localized in character. The Republic of Belarus is eager to become a Party to the Stockholm Convention in order to work with all the countries that have signed this UN instrument and to concentrate efforts on lessening the harmful impact of POPs on the environment and on the lives of human beings. Preliminary assessments by experts have shown that considerable material resources will be needed to develop and implement a National Plan of Action and tackle the problem of controlling releases of POPs, eliminating them, and effecting analytical studies. The Republic of Belarus, as a transition economy, is unlikely to be able to tackle this set of tasks without IT, technical and financial assistance from donor countries as provided for in the context of implementation of the Convention. The Republic of Belarus becoming a Party to the Stockholm Convention would make it quicker and cheaper to take on the problem of the harmful effects of POPs on the environment and on human health, a problem which we will have to face whether or not we accede to the Global Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.


262

GEORGIA There is currently in Georgia a range of legislative acts (laws, regulations, presidential and ministerial orders, other) on chemicals safety, environmental and public health protection, which in whole or in part, directly or not are related to POPs. Georgia is a party to Basel Convention (18.08.1999), signed Stockholm Convention in May 2001 (ratification process started); the Rotterdam Convention is under review in related Ministries. The Constitution of Georgia (1995) declares general provisions: the citizens right to live in the safe environment; the right of future generation’s can not be compromised; everybody has the right to receive full, comprehensive and timely information about work place and the state of the environment. The framework Law on Environmental Protection (1996) sets up main principles for environmental protection and human activities: “polluter pays”; “of sustainability”, “of restitution”; “of prevention”, “of risk reduction”, “waste minimization“, “the recycling”, “the environmental impact assessment”, “public participation in decision-making”; the law prescribes the adoption of 88 related sub-normative acts. Several laws are adopted by Parliament of Georgia and subsequently a wide range of related regulations and sub-laws issued by sectoral Ministries. The Law on Hazardous Substances (1998) regulates the production/import and export; examination, markierung, standardization, registration, transportation, packaging, use, treatment, disposal, as well as band restriction and elimination, sets up related procedures and competencies for hazardous chemicals (excluding pesticides). Main Ministries have shared responsibility for the handling with chemicals which are MoE (in the whole lifecycle), MoH, MoFaA, other. The Law of Georgia on Pesticides and Agrochemicals (1998) regulates the issues related to pesticides (POPs pesticides are covered). The most important and advanced laws, with better implementation practice are those on Environmental Permit (1996) and State Ecological Expertise (1996), where Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedure is introduced (at the planning stage) for the human activities which have significant impact on the environment: the procedure for the scoping, review and public participation; the risk minimization and alternative scenarios (as well alternative chemicals); the principle of best available technologies and techniques are laid down (unintentionally released POPs, other issues). The Law of Georgia on the Waste Transit and Import (1995, amended 1997) is linked to provisions of Basel Convention and EC listing of wastes. Many clauses related to handling with hazardous substances and wastes (including POPs) are presented in: Georgia Administrative Code (01.01.2001, amended); The Criminal Code (22.08.2001, amended), the Forest Code (22.06.1999), other. The Law of Georgia on Obligation to Compensate for Damage Caused by Hazardous Substances (23.07.1999) introduces the civil liability to compensate the damage caused by activities dangerous to environment. In the wide range of sub-normative acts or sub-laws the following ones could be mentioned: Order of the President of Georgia “On the Strengthening of Action to Combat Malaria and it’s Prevention”(N 17 of 10.01.2001), where together with assigning of responsibility to the range of government executive bodies (Ministries, Agencies, other), the use of environmentally safe chemicals is prescribed; Several Ministerial Orders: on the List of Chemicals banned or restricted for Production, Use and Import/Export (2001); on


263

the Hygienic Normative for Pesticides Pollution in Environmental Objects (2001); on the Environmental Quality Norms (2001). Generally could be assumed, that there is no clear responsibility and accountability in the most aspects of chemical safety and particularly, in POPs management. From one hand for the initial nine POPs pesticides there does not appear to be any problem to meet the Stockholm Convention requirements. On the other hand, the law does not define clearly the responsibility and accountability for the (POPs) pesticides once they appear in the environment. The same conclusion could be made for the issues of (POPs) pesticides stockpiles, storage, disposal, destruction and/or (safe) disposal. There are no chemicals management data base in the Ministries concerned (MoE, MoH, other). In this regard especially the issue of PCB lacks problem definition, data management, monitoring and reporting requirements. Despite of the fact that some private companies started to implement action in this regard (labeling of PCB-containing transformers, etc.), the national legislative and enforcement system is not able to react adequately due to lack of technologies/tools (institutional capacity, as well laboratories, equipment) and/or resources to monitor the process. The tracking, reporting and enforcement system related to imports, exports (re-exports) needs serious re-shaping to meet the obligations under Stockholm Convention (as well as other MEA’s - Basel, Rotterdam, Marpol, etc.), e.g. need to up-grade coding and customs tracking system. Initiated and facilitated by UNEP the global action on POPs has significant impact on the development of national chemicals management system during last years. The intersectoral POPs Working Group (1998) group facilitated the preparation of the decisions, which resulted in the signing by the government of Georgia the Stockholm Convention. Currently intensive work is undergoing in the preparations (institutional arrangements, other planning issues) to start GEF enabling activities project, which is aimed to increase national capacity and develop National Implementation Plan to meet the obligations of the POPs Convention. Msia Gvilava, POPs NFP Ministry of Environment/GRID-Tbilisi


264

Since 1992 Georgia as well as other countries of former Soviet Union experienced deep social-economic changes including the destruction of health protection system and other fields of economy during that period. The emerged situation effected the quality indicators of environmental objects and health protection, such as: the average life rate of the population and natural multiplication, birth and death rates including the indicators of health conditions of mothers and children. During the aforementioned period the opportunity of conducting the monitoring of environment quality conditions and the funds for financing the separate directions for the establishment of safe environment for the health of human beings did not exist. The background became the basis for the need in radical changes to be made with the support of international institutes. The reforms on regulating health and environment protection fields as well as the active formation of corresponding legislative base have initiated. In 1994 and following years the Georgian Parliament passed numerous legislative acts on health and environment protection fields. It is noteworthy that the laws on "Health Protection" and "Environment Protection" became the basic documents for regulation of these fields and enforcement of the legislative role of state. As an outcome, the priorities have been defined and the preconditions for further gradual development of legislation have been formed. If the legal acts on creation of the safe environment for the human health are, to a certain extent, considered/reviewed or reflected from the views of recommendations, requirements, program documents (UNEP, IOMC, IPCS, IRPTC) and conventions of international organizations (UN, EC, WHO, FAO, WTO, UMANITAR, CSC, etc.), it will be possible to outline the following groups of laws between them:

1. Group of laws forming the general principles for the security of safe environment for the health of human beings (laws on "Health Protection", "Environment Protection", "Permissions for Environment Protection", "State Ecological Expertise", etc).

2. Group of laws reflecting the priorities for the security of the chemical safety of the population, state policy for the support towards the elaboration of standards, the criteria and norms to secure the necessary quality for each concrete factor of environment (laws on "Dangerous Chemical Substances", "Pesticides and Agrochemicals", "Protection of Atmosphere Air", "Water", etc).

3. Group of laws forming the requirements for performing unified state policy in the field of food security (laws on "Food and Tobacco", "Certification of Production and Services", "Protection of User Rights", "Veterinary Medicine", etc).

4. Group of laws comprising the issues on establishment of safe environment for human beings in recreational zones (laws on "Tourism and Resorts", "Resorts and Resort Zones", "Sanitary Protection Zones of Resorts and Recreational zones", etc).

Considering the significance of chemical safety of the population, the Georgian Cabinet of Ministers, as of 1993, passed the rule on "Exchange of Information on Chemical


265

Substances, admission of London Guidelines and integration of the potentially toxic-chemical substances with International Register". According to the final act of Basel Convention the law on "Transit and Import of Remainders on the Territory of Georgia" was elaborated and adopted by the Parliament in 1995. This law afterwards was amended and the new edition was passed in 1997. It is noteworthy to state that two years later according to the May 4, 1999 order #232 of the President of Georgia on "Integration with the Basel Convention of 1989 and Trans-boundary Transportation of dangerous remainders and their emplacement", Georgia joined the Basel Convention. Considering the fact that the development of mechanism for chemical safety is necessary for health of human beings and on the basis of UNITAR and IOMC proposals, the President of Georgia issued the order #82 about "The National Program on Infrastructure of the Management of Chemical Substances" on march 17, 1998. Consequently, the state committee for elaboration of national program on infrastructure of the management of chemical substances was formed. According to the September 29, 1998 order #372/0 of the Ministry of Health about "The Establishment of National Co-ordination Council for the Management of Chemical Substances" the national coordination council was set up. The assignment of the council was to prepare the national profile for the management of chemical substances. On the basis of foregoing, UNITAR, IOMC, UNEP, WHO, UNIDO, OFCD and with the financial support of eleventh general director of EC environment protection and nuclear security the "First National Version of Infrastructure Assessment for the Management of Chemical Substances" was elaborated. "The First Version of Final Resume for the Assessment of National Profile for Infrastructure Management of Chemical Substances" was prepared. "The Guideline materials for Assessment of National Profile for Infrastructure Management of Chemical Substances" was elaborated and issued in 1998. As the uncontrollable import and realization of pesticides and other chemical substances was ongoing in the country the catalogue on the use of pesticides and other plant protection materials for 1999-2003 was prepared and approved in 1999. Integration of Georgia in the international processes of global ecological safety and sustainable development, the practical implementation of systematic reforms in the fields of health and environment protection as well as the definition of priorities for the social orientation of health protection and security of safe environment for the health of human beings, became the basis for the preparation of the following significant documents: "National Policy of Health Protection in Georgia", "Strategic Plan for the Development of Health Protection in Georgia" and "National Program of Environment Protection of Georgia", which were approved by the President of Georgia in 2000. The aforementioned documents reflect the issues on the elaboration of national program for hygiene of environment, sanitary-hygienic norms and their harmonization with the EC requirements, the specification of the quantity of unused industrial and agricultural remainders of chemical substances and the establishment of relevant cadastre, etc.


266

The Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Securities elaborated "The National Plan for the Actions of Environment Hygiene" in cooperation with other ministries and institutions, which was presented at the first national conference. It is noteworthy that this plan is based on the global strategy of WHO (Geneva, 1993), the recommendations of the consulting discussion on elaboration of national plans about actions for environment hygiene (Helsinki, 1994; Sophia, 1995) and the review of 1990 European experience prepared by European bureau of WHO. Considering that the safe technologies for procession of liquid products of Pyrolizi hardly existed in Georgia and the by products of direct mixture (fuel) were characterized by the high contents of Bensol, Toluol and Stirol, the Parliament of Georgia adopted the rule on "Prohibition of import and export of Pyrolizi products on the territory of Georgia". During 1996-1997 the activities of draft law preparation on "Dangerous Chemical Substances" and "Pesticides and Agro-chemicals" were performed. During the preparation of these draft laws, the recommendations and the basic provisions of the following guideline documents were used: "Use of preliminary justified no-objection procedures in the international trade of prohibited or restricted chemical substances" (Rome-Geneva, 1991), "Elaboration of Legislation on Chemical Substances" (1995), "Ethic code for the international trade of chemical substances", "Convention about the trans-border influence of industrial accidents" (Helsinki, 1992), etc. After the tragic events of September 11, 2001 in US and in accordance with the resolution #1337 of UN Security Council (2001) the "Georgian State unified program against the international terrorism" was elaborated in accordance with the assignment of the Security Council of Georgia (14.12.20001). The minister of Labour, Health and Social Security issued the order on "The Participation of the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Security in the implementation of Unified Program against the International Terrorism", which also defines the issues of chemical safety for population. The activities for the establishment of registry for the dangerous chemical substances are already undertaken. As for the Persistent Organic Pollutants, it is prominent that on the basis of data from 1970-1976 the substances: DDT, Aldrin, Dildrin, Endrine, Klordine, Mirex and etc were prohibited, although the relevant act for the prohibition of their use is not yet passed on national level. Currently the activities for the preparation of corresponding normative acts and programs is ongoing, they will also reflect the recommendations obtained at the meeting in Kiev. As an outcome, it can be stated that certain activities for the chemical safety of population and the development of legal base are ongoing by the support of the legislative and executive branches of Georgian government. It is also noteworthy that the establishment of safe environment for the health of human beings is a quite complicated task and it is especially complex for the countries with transitional economies. The final performance of the activities, efficiency of performed


267

tasks and regulation of priorities greatly depends on the quality of laws and by-laws in force as well as the abilities of government structures in practicing them. We are certain that the recommendations obtained at the meeting in Kiev will facilitate the further development of legal base for the security of chemical safety of Georgian population, which will assist in the formation and realization of relevant operational plans. Alexander Mindorashvili Inspectorate for the State Supervision of Sanitary-Hygienic Norms and Rules Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Security


268

KAZAKHSTAN

Contents Introduction. I. Status of POPs in the Republic of Kazakhstan. II. Current and future measures on persistent organic pollutants: a) national measures; b) participation in regional and global projects. III. Legislation on hazardous chemicals. IV. Status in Kazakhstan of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, and also the Rotterdam and Basel international agreements for environmental protection. Conclusion. Introduction In Kazakhstan the POPs problem reached truly acute proportions only after the country signed the Stockholm Convention on POPs. It could not be claimed that the kind of problems tackled in the Stockholm Convention on Pops had never in the past been discussed by the Government or by NGOs. That they were discussed, can be seen from the fact that in 1996 the Ministry of Health issued a ruling banning certain POPs in a list of pesticides, and from the proposal by some of the research institutes in the Ministry of Health system that a programme was needed to deal with dioxins and furans for the sake of the health of the population of the country. Kazakhstan’s signing of the Stockholm Convention gave new impetus to activate the work in this field. There were the preparations for ratification of the Stockholm Convention, implementation of the UNDP/GEF project of measures in support of the Convention, public information to improve people’s understanding of the subject – and these were only some of the priority tasks tackled during that period. I. Status of POPs in the Republic of Kazakhstan. The main sources of pollution by POPs in Kazakhstan are agriculture, the use of obsolete technology in industry, and illegal imports of POPs as pesticides. POPs as pesticides. The end of the 1990s was a particularly bad time with regard to POPs as pesticides, since between 1995 and 1998 the amount of land used for agriculture decreased by 31%. This led to an accumulation of unused pesticides, often in semi-derelict storage-facilities ill equipped for the purpose to which they were being put. The Regional Territorial Administration for Environmental Protection has calculated that 1,200 tonnes of pesticides, accumulated throughout the country, would have to be disposed of, including 39.5 tonnes of POP pesticides, of which 24 tonnes were hexachlor (benzene hexachloride), 15 tonnes of toxaphene and half a tonne of DDT. . The “Kaz-hydro-met” service’s system monitors POP pesticides on an on-going basis, but only in a limited number of environmental features (surface water, some soils) and for a limited number of pesticides (DDT and isomers, hexachlor and isomers). The monitoring is somewhat piecemeal, with some years during which it has ceased altogether. Fisheries institutions, like the Kazakh Fisheries Research Institute (and especially its branch at Lake Balkhash, since 1988) and the Caspian Environmental Programme, have shown themselves to be very committed to monitoring for POPs.


269

As part of the work of the Republic of Kazakhstan Ministry of Health’s public health and epidemiology services, there is occasional monitoring of individual persistent toxic substances (PTSs), but this does not record systematically where the samples were taken and is therefore not very useful for the purposes of the Stockholm Convention on POPs. There is some research that contains isolated pieces of information about PTSs. Table 1 DDT content in the surface waters of Kazakhstan’s rivers, mcg/dm3

Content №. River Average Maximum Minimum

1 Ilek 0,0444 0,2000 0,0000 2 Ural 0,0036 0,0200 0,0000 3 Ishim 0,0030 0,0190 0,0000 4 Tobol 0,0018 0,0090 0,0000 5 Irtysh 0,0015 0,0080 0,0000 6 Syr-Darya 0,0012 0,0040 0,0000 7 Nura 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000 8 Keles 0,0000 0,0000 0,0000

Table 2 Hexachlor content in the surface waters of Kazakhstan’s rivers, mcg/dm3

Content № River Average Maximum Minimum

1 Nura 0,0596 0,2710 0,0000 2 Syr-Darya 0,0317 0,0560 0,0000 3 Keles 0,0092 0,0190 0,0000 4 Ishim 0,0064 0,0300 0,0000 5 Ural 0,0051 0,0190 0,0000 6 Tobol 0,0034 0,0140 0,0000 7 Irtysh 0,0032 0,0120 0,0000 8 Ilek 0,0023 0,0090 0,0000

Table 3 Average content (С) of DDT and its accumulation rate (Кn)* in the muscles of fish, mcg/dm3

(over the course of time) Год 1988 1989 1990 1993 2001 С Кn С Кn С Кn С Кn С Кn 1.15 10,5 0,88 16,3 3,5 195,0 3,40 53,2 11,0

18,3

*Accumulation rate = ratio between hexachlor content in muscles of fish and in water.


270

Analysis of sediments in the Kazakh sector of the Caspian Sea (samples taken at the Kazakh Gulf: 42о15’ lat. N. 51о47’ long. E.) Permitted a quantitative measurements of POPs (mcg/kg): hexachlor (sum of isomers) - 0,307; DDT - 1,726; chlordane - 0,0035; heptachlor - 0,0066; aldrin - 0,042; dieldrin - 0,032; endrin - 0,050. Industrial POPs. PCDs were used in industry in Kazakhstan. During the Soviet period and up until the 1990s these was a condenser plant in Ust-Kamenogorsk in the eastern province of Kazakhstan, using PCD as dielectric in the products made by the plant. The documentation shows that between 1968 and 1970 approximately 26,600 mega-tonnes of PCDs were used in Ust-Kamenogorsk (exact figure to be verified). Almost everything produced by the plant was returned to Russia or the other republics of the former Soviet Union in the form of industrial condensers. The main problem is the contamination of the plant’s territory and the fact that there may possibly be used equipment still being stored, along with obsolete condensers, and on top of these, POPs that have accumulated in the spoil, in mud, in perennial plants, etc., especially in the areas around the facility. A partial survey of PCBs carried out in 1994 in the North Kazakhstan and Semipalatinsk provinces revealed their presence in water (up to 4.6 mcg/l) and in sediments (more than 150 mcg/kg). Dioxins and furans. There has been no analysis of the entire situation in Kazakhstan as far as dioxins and furans are concerned. There is a project proposal by Professor A. A. Mamyrbayev of the Scientific Centre for Public Health and Epidemiology (laboratory of toxicology and toxicological standardization), as part of the project entitled “National Action Plan for the Health of the Environment” (NAPHE), 1998; the Professor’s proposal is called “A toxicological and public-health assessment of the degree to which the environment is contaminated with dioxins followed by a draft set of preventive measures”. The cost of the project has been assessed at US$392,000, and the length of time needed to implement it, 3 years. II. Current and future measures for persistent organic pollutants а) National measures On 9th June 2000 the government of Kazakhstan adopted, as Decision No. 878, the National Action Plan for the Health of the Environment (NAOHE). The Plan was drafted by the Kazakh Republic’s Agency for Health Affairs, and it contains a section dealing with the problems of dioxins and furans, along with the draft programme entitled “Protecting the Population and the Environment from the Effects of Dioxins and Other POPs”. This programme, which is to be implemented out of State budgetary funds, has not in fact been started, for lack of financial resources. The preliminary inventorisation of Pops carried out in 2001 under the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the United Nations Environmental Programme (with UNEP Chemicals as the lead organization) was of invaluable assistance during the period when the Stockholm Convention on POPs was being signed by the Republic of Kazakhstan. This preliminary inventorisation made it possible to assess the scale of the problem in the country and to draft a worthwhile “Note of Explanation” during the period when ministries and agencies were agreeing a package of documents for the signing of the Stockholm Convention on POPs. Another measure at national level was organizing monitoring of POPs in the


271

atmospheric air under an initiative by Lancaster University (United Kingdom). In 2002 this University made an offer to the Parties to the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (the Republic of Kazakhstan became a Party to the Convention in 2001) that they should take part in a project to study the dispersal and effects of European persistent organic pollutants. The University’s assistance came in the form of equipment, monitoring and supply of instruments specially designed for this study, all at the expense of the designers of the project. Kazakhstan’s specialists were very grateful to accept the proposal, and for this purpose 5 observation posts were chosen for monitoring in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Next, after the Republic of Kazakhstan signed the Stockholm Convention on POPs on 23rd May 2001, the GEF Council decided to offer the country a grant of 500,000 US dollars, to implement measures of support. The organizational matters have all now been dealt with, and the project is ready to start. These support measures will help the Government to understand just how acute the POPs problem is in Kazakhstan, and improve the level of awareness as far as public opinion is concerned. b) Participation in regional and global projects Since June 2002 Central Asia has been implementing a project entitled “Establishing the instrumentation and mechanisms need to promote and implement the major environmental conventions in the Central Asian Region, using the Stockholm Convention as a paradigm: involving society in the global process of eliminating persistent organic pollutants (POPs)”. Execution of this project is by the NGOs Environment News Agency, “Greenwoman”, Kazakhstan and the “Gender: innovation and development” Center (Uzbekinstan). The project is aimed at getting the message about the problems of POPs through to the different sectors of society, to NGOs, to State institutions, to the media, etc. This is done through presentations, “round tables” and public information campaigns in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistzan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenstan. The project is being implemented as part of the grant programme for the Central Asian Regional Environmental Centre, with financial support from the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Under this project public information campaigns have already been implemented in all countries of the Central Asian Region, with “round tables” in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan; there has also been a special issue of a magazine devoted to the POP problem, and several articles on POPs and the POPs situation in Central Asian countries. Since October 2001 the Republic of Kazakhstan has played an active part in the UNEP/GEF “Regionally Based Assessment of Persistent Toxic Substances” Global Project. This project was set up to collect data globally on the 12 chemicals regulated by the Stockholm Convention (aldrin, endrin, dieldrin, chlordane, DDT, heptachlor, mirex, toxaphene, hexachlorobenzene, PCD, dioxins and furans), and also on other persistent organic poisons which harm or threaten human health and that of the environment throughout the world. The world was divided into twelve regions, and for each of these a Coordinator and a Regional Expert Group were appointed to direct the collection of data in the countries of their region and to hold a series of technical seminars to analyse and assess the data. The Expert Group also has to draw up a regional report, which will establish which chemicals should be the priority for that region.


272

III. Legislation on hazardous chemicals There is no special legislation on POPs in Kazakhstan. The 1997 Law on Environmental Protection establishes the basic framework for environmental protection in Kazakhstan, but touches upon POPs only superficially: Article 38. Rules for Threshold Limit Values for emissions and releases of pollutants into the environment Article 41. Threshold Limit Values for the use of agrochemicals in agriculture and forestry Article 58. Environmental regulations for the manufacture or use of potentially dangerous chemical and biological substances Article 60. Environmental regulations for the handling of industrial and household wastes Kazakhstan has drafted several Statutes and Guidelines, which involve POPs: Directive on arrangements for disposal of, or destruction of, banned or out-of-date pesticides and used receptacles (1966). Ordinance of the Republic of Kazakhstan’s Chief Public Health Medical Officer dated 31st May 1996, entitled: “Measures to protect the health of the population from the harmful effects of chemicals used in agriculture”, with two annexes: Schedule of products banned for use in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Schedule of products permitted limited use in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. “Schedule of chemical and biological pest-, disease- and weed- control agents, defoliants and plant growth regulators permitted for use in agriculture and forestry in the Republic of Kazakhstan 1997-2001” (1997). IV. Status of the Stockholm Convention on POPs, and also the Rotterdam and Basel Agreements, in Kazakhstan On 23rd May 2001 the Republic of Kazakhstan signed the Stockholm Convention on POPs, and at the present time is preparing a package of ratification instruments. The Ministry of Environmental Protection, aware of the close links between the Stockholm, Rotterdam and Basel Conventions, intends to become a signatory to all of them. Conclusion Kazakhstan has not created an organised, smoothly functioning system for managing POPs, nor does it have any specialized organizations covering this issue. Work on POPs is spread through the divisions of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Health and the Academy of Sciences. People are ill informed about the problem. The country needs a law on POPs. The problem of monitoring POPs is a particularly acute one. Although over several years some data were collected by different agencies (research under the “Regional assessment of POPs” programme), there is a need to develop a systematic and holistic approach to monitoring POPs. Without a doubt, the most important priority is ratification of the Stockholm Convention on POPs.


273

KYRGYZSTAN Status of persistent organic pollutants in the Kyrgyz Republic The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants covers the following basic categories of POPs:

1. Deliberately produced POPs; 2. Inadvertently produced POPs; 3. Stocks and waste.

Each of these categories is treated under the following three headings: a. Production; b. Import; c. Use.

In the Kyrgyz Republic the status of deliberately produced POPs (pesticides, PCBs) is as follows: Pesticides:

a. No production; b. Import ceased in 1992; c. Use ceased in 1992.

The Kyrgyz Republic does not manufacture chemicals but does import pesticides and industrial chemicals as needed for manufacturing. The Kyrgyz Republic has 10.1 million hectares of agricultural land, of which 86% are pasture and grass for hay while only 1.3 million hectares are arable land. More than 80% of the arable land is infested with weeds and if herbicides are not used, the result would be a 50% loss to the harvest. Before, more than a hundred different pesticides were used to control pests and diseases. Between 1946 and 1962 the view was held that chemicals were the answer to every problem of damage by agricultural pests, plant-disease and weeds. This optimism waned, however, after it was discovered how persistent and accumulative pesticides were in the environment and how badly they affected human health. In spite of this, in the 1980s a million hectares of crops were treated with about 5 thousand tons of pesticides, with a standard coverage of 10kgs or more per hectare, so that the pesticide load per hectare of arable land was more than 5 kilograms. The table illustrates the tonnage of pesticides containing chloro-organic compounds used in the country as a whole:

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

Тонн


274

The fall in pesticides coming into the country is due to the collapse of the former supply-system within the CIS countries and to the decreased buying-power of the consumers of this product. The chloro-organic and phosphoro-organic compounds were mainly to be found in insectoacaricides. If in 1980 almost 50% of the insecoacaricides that came into the country were products containing hexachlor, by 1983 that figure had gone down to 25%. After that date the Ministry of Health of the USSR banned them for use in agriculture. Soil surveys to check the content of residues of chloro-organic pesticides were last carried out over the whole territory of the Kyrgyz Republic in 1989. They showed that there were DDT and hexachlor isomers in the top 20cm of soil, but that they did not exceed the TLV for DDT and there was no evidence of large-scale hexachlor contamination. After 1992 there were no more surveys of this type (in the case of the Osh District, it was after 1989). The situation is similar for monitoring of surface water. The last time water was analysed for DDT and hexachlor content was in 1992, and the results of the survey showed the presence of residual doses. For PCBs, as a component of industrial oils: There is no manufacture; Since 1991 there has been no systematic record keeping of imports; Use continues, but the amounts are not known. As for POPs produced inadvertently, the situation in the Kyrgyz Republic is as follows: There has been no study at all of the level of releases of dioxins and furans in Kyrgyzstan. What is known can be summed up as follows: The enotmous increase in the number of vehicles in the country, along with the use of low-grade fuel and lubricants, have greatly increased the concentrations in town and city air of such pollutants as benzapiren, heavy metals, and formaldehyde. In the city of Bishkek, the air contains on average 20 times the TLV of benzapiren. Fixed sources like plants producing cement, lubricants, linoleum, non-ferrous metals, thermal power plants and small-scale boiler-houses all make a significant contribution to the pollution in the atmospheric air. Within the territory of the Republic at the present time there are 49 tailing dumps and slagheaps holding about 75 million cubic metres of waste, while the overall figures for waste from the mining industry are 130 facilities containing 620 million cubic meters, which (depending on the ore being processed) contain radionuclides, heavy metal salts, and also chemicals used as reagents when the ores are processed and enriched. These include cyanides, acids, silicates, citrates, sulphates and so on. The Republic has 53 facilities, which use strong poisons (SPs). 18 of them are industrial facilities classified as chemically hazardous but close to which there are people living, and the siting of these facilities is such that damage would occur in the case of an accident.


275

Simply burying household waste is detrimental to the environment. At the present time in the Republic there are 52 such landfill sites with an overall area of 210 hectares, and more than 1.2 million cubic meters are dumped there without any real waste-processing at all. They are burning night and day. In the Kyrgyz Republic not enough is known about the status of stockpiles and wastes of POPs. The planned economy led to excessive amounts of such products being brought into the Kyrgyz Republic, which in turn led to a considerable accumulation of out-of-date pesticides. In order to solve the problem burial sites were constructed. In one year alone, 1973, 1313 tonnes of pesticides were buried in trenches and reinforced concrete bunkers. For 1980 the figure was 375 tonnes of pesticides, unfit for use and banned. Pesticides that is unfit for use accumulated as a result of incorrect storage and record keeping, or purchases being made at the wrong time of year. At the time there was no disposal by incineration for banned pesticides or out-of-date poisons, for lack of appropriate furnaces or other devices for thermal processing. In spite of this fact, pesticides were brought into the Republic and used somewhat intensively during the 1980s. 72% of the warehouses for storage of poisonous chemicals in the Republic were not, and are not, in line with health and environmental standards, being merely existing buildings adapted for the purpose. According to the operational data available in the State Department for Chemical Use and Plant Protection, by the end of 1989, 48.0 tonnes of banned pesticides were being stored at the warehouses for poisonous chemicals, while by the end of 1994, the figure was up to 171.0 tonnes, a clear indication that banned poisons were being brought into the country in an uncontrolled fashion. Health. In spite of the reduction in the use of pesticides in agriculture in the Republic, pesticide residue pollution in foodstuffs and environmental features remains somewhat prevalent. Ministry of Health figures for the Kyrgyz Republic for 2000 give the level of pollution in foodstuffs as 0.5% and in environmental features as 0.4%. The worst figures are for meat-products – 2.7%, dairy products – 1.8%, and vegetable oils – 2.4% (see table). Type of product 1999 2000 1 Meat 2,2 2,7 2 Eggs and egg products 4,8 1,9 3 Dairy 1,8 1,8 4 Fish - - 5 Flour and grains 0,3 0,3 6 Confectionery - - 7 Fruit and vegetables 0,4 0,4 8 Vegetable oils 2,6 2,4 9 Tobacco 0,4 0,4

Others 0,2 0,1


276

Environmental features Soil where crops and plants are being grown

0,5 0,4

Animal feeds 0,5 0,9

Legislation. Environmental legislation is in the process of being drafted in order to sustain the environmental safety of the Republic. The main aim of the environmental legislation is to establish a single, effective system for protecting the environment, with a clear separation of powers and the ability to ensure the sound use of natural resources. The following environmental laws have been adopted to date:

Law on Environmental Protection Law on Environmental Specialist Assessments Law on Protection of Atmospheric Air Law on the Animal World Law on Biosphere Territories in the Kyrgyz Republic Law on Radiation Safety for the Population of the Kyrgyz Republic and

others. Given the increasing volumes of chemicals in use and the irreversible effects of POP use, Kyrgyzstan has also adopted a Law on Chemical Use and Plant Protection.

In order to strengthen national capacity and increase control over toxic chemicals and pesticides, Decision No. 279 of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic dated 13th July 1995 chose the State Committee for Environmental Protection as the national authority for implementation of the London Guidelines. The Ministry of Health has set up a National Register, which has commenced the registration of potentially toxic chemicals in use (Decision of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic No. 225 dated 16th May 1996). Under the Department of Chemical Use and Plant Protection of the Kyrgyz Republic’s Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources there is now an Interdepartmental Committee for Testing and Registration of Chemical and Biological means of plant protection, feromones and growth regulators for plants and forestry plantations. On 27th July 2001 the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic adopted a decision entitled “On measures to protect the environment and the health of the population from the deleterious effects of particular hazardous chemicals and pesticides”. This decision confirms the list of chemicals and pesticides that are banned for use, and contains methodologies for preventing these hazardous chemicals and pesticides from penetrating the borders and crossing into the territory of the Kyrgyz Republic. The Republic has no chemical industry of its own and imports both pesticides and industrial chemicals. International Law. The Kyrgyz Republic was acceded to the following international environmental conventions, which cover the issue of safety from chemical pollution;

The Basel Convention on the Control of the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (ratified in 1996); The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for

Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (ratified in 2000);


277

The UN ECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (accession 2000); The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (signed 2002).

The Ministry of the Environment and Emergency Situations has held a meeting on the subject of the Stockholm Convention and future work on persistent organic pollutants with representatives of the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources. Interdepartmental Council has been established to draw up and implement an Action Plan, and documentation has been drafted on the basis of which finance can be accorded for the development of this National Action Plan.


278

MOLDOVA

The assessment of POPs inventories and impacts to date in Moldova is limited and would require detailed assessment as part of the enabling activities. The following summarizes the current knowledge base on POPs, Convention participation, chemical and waste management generally and the relevant existing regulatory framework. Table 1. POPs Pesticides Name of pesticide Situation in Republic of Moldova DDT Not produced. Not used. Prohibited since 1970. Not included in

official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Aldrin Not produced. Not used. Prohibited since 1972. Not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Dieldrin Not produced. Not used. Not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Chlordane Not produced. Not used. Not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Endrin Not produced. Not used. Not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Heptachlor Not produced. Not used. Prohibited since 1986. Does not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Mirex Not produced. Not used. Not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Toxaphene Not produced. Not used. Prohibited since 1991. Not included in official register of permitted substances for use in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household.

Table 2. Industrial chemicals PCBs Not produced. Were used in past. There is equipment in storage and

in service, containing PCBs (mostly Trichlorobiphenyl ) Hexachlorobenzene Not produced. Not known to have been used in any industrial

applications.


279

Table 3. By-products PCBs Trichlorobiphenyl is one from PCBs used in the Republic of

Moldova. Its use is restricted by hygienic standard on: • indicative safe exposure level in air of residential areas (0,001

mg/m3); • maximum permissible concentrations of chemicals polluting water

used potable purposes (0,001 mg/l). Hexachlorobenzene Restricted by hygienic standard on:

• maximum permissible concentrations of chemicals polluting air of working zone (0,9 mg/m3);

• indicative safe exposure level in air of residential areas (0,013 mg/m3);

• maximum permissible concentrations of chemicals polluting water used potable purposes (0,05 mg/l);

• indicative permissible quantity of chemicals polluting soil (0,03 mg/kg).

PCDD / PCDFs Restricted by hygienic standard on maximum permissible concentrations of chemicals polluting air of residential areas (0,5 pg/m3).

II. Status of the Republic of Moldova re: Major Global Chemical Conventions and several other international agreements

Table 4. Status of the Republic of Moldova re: Chemical and other Conventions and Protocols Treaty Signed Ratified Remarks Stockholm Convention on POPs

23 May 2001 No

Plan to ratify in near future

Basel Convention -------------- Yes

--------------

Rotterdam Convention

No No

Plan to ratify in near future

LRTAP Convention

------------- Yes

-------------

Aarhus POPs Protocol to the Convention LRTAP

June 24, 1998 Yes There is Law on ratification of the Protocol on POPs and Protocol on HMs to the Convention LRTAP (No. 1018- XV) approved by the Parliament on 25 April 2002. This Law promulgated by the President Decree No. 665-III from 16 May 2002. The Republic of Moldova sent


280

the necessary documents to Depositary.

Aarhus HMs Protocol to the Convention LRTAP

June 24, 1998 Yes There is Law on ratification of the Protocol on POPs and Protocol on HMs to the Convention LRTAP (No. 1018- XV) approved by the Parliament on 25 April 2002. This Law promulgated by the President Decree No. 665-III from 16 May 2002. The Republic of Moldova sent the necessary documents to Depositary.

Gothenburg Protocol to the Convention LRTAP

May 23, 2000 No Plan to ratify in near future

Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents

------------- Yes

-------------

FCCC 12 June 1992 Yes

-------------

Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer

------------- Yes

-------------

Montreal Protocol to the Vienna Ozone Convention

------------- Yes

-------------

Aarhus Convention June 1998 Yes

-------------

• Actually representatives of the Republic of Moldova participate in the UN ECE

negotiation process on: legally binding instrument on Civil Liability for Transboundary Damage caused by Hazardous Activities;

• Draft Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment; • Draft Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers (PRTR) and other

documents.

III. Relevant Legislative Acts Having gained the independence and despite economic difficulties the Republic of Moldova has adopted a number of legislation and regulations on chemicals, harmful products and waste management, environment and health protection.


281

The principle legal act is the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova adopted on 29 July 1994. Environmental protection and a human right for clean environment are stipulated by several articles of the Constitution, e.g. Paragraph 1 of Article 37 states:

“ Every person has a right for the environmentally safe and the healthy environment and also safe food and household products”.

Besides, Paragraph 2 of the same Article states: “ The State guarantees to each person a right for free access to reliable information on the

state of the environment, living and labour conditions, quality of food and household products, and dissemination of this information”.

Paragraph 5 of Article 46 “Private property and its protection” states: “The right for private property demands compliance with regulations for environment

protection and ensuring good neighbourly relations, and also observance of other requirements imposed on the owner in compliance with the legislation”.

The principle legal acts regulating harmful substances, products and waste, protecting the environment and human health against the impact posed by hazardous products, waste and substances are:

Law on Regime of Harmful Products and Substances (No. 1236-XIII), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 3 July 1997;

Law on Wastes of Production and Consumption (No. 1347 – XIII), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 9 October 1997;

Law on Licensing Certain Tips of Activities (No. 451-XV), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 5 September 2001;

Law on Civil Protection (No. 271-XIII) , approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 9 November 1994;

Law on Industrial Safety of the Dangerous Industrial Objects (No. 803-XIV), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 11 February 2000;

Law on certification (No. 652-XIV), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 28 October 1999.

Law on Consumers Rights Protection (No. 1453-XIII), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 25 May 1993;

Law on Plants Protection (No. 612-XIV), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 1 October 1999;

Law on Sanitary and Epidemiological Support of Population (No. 1513-XII), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 16 June 1993;

Law on Environment Protection (No. 1515-XII), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 16 June 1993;

Law on Atmospheric Air Protection (No. 1422-XIII), approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 17 December 1997, - and other legislative acts.

The present report deals with only several legal and regulatory documents, which are in force in the country. Law on Regime of Harmful Products and Substances:

Mainly the above-mentioned Law on Regime of Harmful Products and Substances regulates hazardous products and substances. It constitutes legal basis for activity related to production, storage, transportation and use of hazardous products and substances, their import and export aimed at reducing or eliminating their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.


282

Chapter II of this Act formulates the competence and responsibilities of the Government, central executive bodies and local authorities.

In line with Article 6 of Chapter III of the considered Act the activities related to production and use of harmful products and substances in all spheres of national economy, and also for medical, sanitary, veterinary, educational and scientific purposes are based on permits or licenses issued and registered by the authorized bodies.

In line with Article 8 “Responsibilities of natural persons and legal entities” the above-mentioned persons during production, use, storage, transportation, processing, neutralization and disposal of harmful products and substances, as well as during import and export must take measures to prevent and eliminate adverse effects on human health and the environment.

Article 9-15 of Chapter III stipulate main principles for hazardous products and substances and their production (Article 9), storage (Article 10), transport (Article 11), handling and use (Article 12), registration (Article 13), neutralization (Article 14), import and export (Article 15). Chapter IV contains main provisions on enforcement and responsibility for violating the Act. So, Article 17 “Civil, administrative and criminal liability” and Article 18 “Economical liability “ states that:

“Legal entities and natural persons, guilty for violating of present low stipulations, bear civil, administrative and criminal responsibility in order, established by legislation ”

“Damage caused to the environment and human health in consequence of import,

production, storage, transportation, use, processing and disposal of hazardous products and substances, compensates by guilty in full size in conformity with legislation ”

Law on Wastes of Production and Consumption

Law on Wastes of Production and Consumption was approved by the Decree of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 9 October 1997. In compliance with the Law on Environment Protection, this law regulates handling production and consumption wastes aimed at their reducing and maximum involvement into economic activity and preventing environment pollution.

Chapter II of this Act regulates the competence and responsibilities of the Government, ministries and agencies and local authorities, as well as duties of natural persons and legal entities in the sphere of waste handling.

Thus in line with Article 8 natural persons and legal entities are responsible for: • Applying environmentally clean, low and non-waste technologies; • Waste collection and separation; • Registration of all types of wastes generated by production processes; • Waste utilization with minimum environmental risks; • Ensuring transportation, storage, treatment, decontamination and use of hazardous and

toxic wastes on contracts with economic bodies having special authorization (license) strictly controlling such operations, etc.

Chapter IV contains environmental safety regulations. Article 16 states that: “To prevent or limit harmful impacts of wastes on the environment and population health it

is prohibited: a) to carry out any activity generating hazardous wastes without authorization

(license) for waste disposal (storage, burial), treatment, decontamination and removal;

b) to introduce results of scientific research, innovations and state-of-art technologies not envisaging waste utilization, decontamination and disposal;


283

c) to produce and apply plant protection means, mineral fertilizers and toxic chemicals that can potentially generate hazardous wastes.

Chapter VI of the Law on Wastes of Production and Consumption formulates the responsibility for violating of these low provisions. So, paragraph 1 of article 25 “Responsibility ” states that:

“Legal entities and natural persons, guilty for violating of legislation on waste management, bear economical, disciplinary, administrative and criminal responsibility in conformity with legislation”.

Our national legislation was described (in the more details) in the Proceeding of the

Subregional Expert Meeting on Chemicals Legislation with Special Reference to Reduction and Elimination of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), Novgorod, Russian Federation, 22-25 May 2000.

Future development of related legislation

Actually proposals to introduce modifications in the Law on Payment for Pollution of the Environment are under development and their goal is stipulation of payment provisions for some goods that have environmental impact. List of goods that are supposed to be regulated by some economic instruments will include the following:

Ozone- depleting substances and products containing such substances; Polymer packaging and PVC products; Heavy oil with medium and high sulphur content; Technical oils and lubricants contained halogenated additives; Luminescent lamps; Pesticides, including pesticides, contained chlorine and Hg; Cigarettes; Auto vehicles accumulators; Detergents contained chlorine; Mineral oils; Naphtalin and other products.

Also, actually the Republic of Moldova effectuated first steps on approximation of the

national legislation in conformity with EU legislation. In framework of the project “Preparatory EU Approximation Work of the Republic of Moldova in Integrated Pollution Prevention Control and Waste Management” the Republic of Moldova prepared tables of contents (ToCs), ToCs analysis and draft strategy for adjusting existing legislation with several EU Directives, including: IPPC Directive (96/61/EC), Waste Framework Directive (75/442/EEC), Hazardous Waste Directive (91/689/EEC), Directive on Incineration of Waste (2000/76/EC), Landfill of Waste Directive (1999/31/EC), and Disposal of PCB/PCTs Directive (96/59/EC) etc. IV. Relevant regulatory acts

The main activities for management of toxic chemical substances, products and wastes, and also, environmental and human protection, included in the range of normative acts, prepared, published and entered in force after the Republic of Moldova became independent.

The following normative acts were developed and introduced: List of chemical and biological preparations for struggling with diseases, vermin’s

and weeds, regulators and ferments for plants growing, permitted for using in agriculture, including and individual farms, forestry and household of the Republic of Moldova for 1997-2001 period.


284

Sanitary Regulation on storage, neutralization, use and burring of toxic substances and wastes.

Regulation on State Sanitary-Epidemiological Control in the Republic of Moldova. Temporary Regulation on confiscation, utilizing or destruction food production and

raw material, that presents a threat for Human Health and Environment. Sanitary Regulation on import of food materials and products in the Republic of

Moldova. Regulation on Division of State Trade Inspection for protection of consumer’s rights. Instruction on the order of organization and holding of State Ecological Expertise. Regulation on ecological audit of enterprises. Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment of privatised enterprises. Statistical classificatory of wastes of the Republic of Moldova. Regulation on import, sale and using of chemical and biological preparations of

protection and stimulation of plants growth. List of Sanitary-Hygienic Standards on maximum permissible concentrations,

indicative safe exposure levels, indicative permissible quantity etc., - and a range of other normative acts, regulating management of toxic products and substances and their wastes, effectuation of control, registration and other measures.

Future development of regulatory acts

Presently the following documents are under development: Draft Regulation on granting authorization for carrying on the waste management

activities. Draft Regulation on the transfrontier transport control of wastes and their disposal. Draft Regulation on waste management. Draft Regulation on determination of damage, caused to the environment by

anthropogenic activities, - and other regulations. The Working Group has been established by order of the Minister of Ecology,

Construction and Territorial Development in goals to develop the above-mentioned Regulation on determination of damage, caused to the environment by anthropogenic activities.

V. Economical instruments

The National Strategic Programme of Actions on Environmental Protection approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Moldova on 6 October 1995 and National Action Plan on Environmental Protection approved by the Decision of the Government in 1996 have laid down the guidelines for economic relations in using the natural resources potential. They are based on the principles “user pays” and “polluter pays”. These principles were further developed in the following new legislation and normative acts, namely:

Law on change and adding to the Law on Protection of Environment (nr.1539 – XIII

from 25.02.1998); Law on the Payment for Environmental Pollution (nr.1540 - XIII from 25.02.1998); Law on change and adding to the Law on the Payment for Environmental Pollution (nr.

732-XIV from 16.12 1999); Regulation on Ecological Funds, approved by the Decision of the Government (nr.988

from 21.09.1998); Instruction on Calculation of the Payment for Environmental Pollution, approved by

Minister of Environment and Territorial Development of the Republic of Moldova from 17.04.2000;


285

Regulation on activity of the administrative councils of the ecological funds, approved by Minister of Environment of the Republic of Moldova from 05.11 1998;

Regulation on ecologic – economical services of the territorial bodies of the Ministry of Environment, approved by Minister of Environment of the Republic of Moldova from 05.11 1998;

Temporary Regulation on Determination of Redress Harmed to Environment, approved by Minister of Environment and Territorial Development of the Republic of Moldova from 18.01.2000, Minister of Justice from 17.02.2000, Minister of Finance from 19.01.2000, Minister of Economy and Reforms from 20.01.2000.

These legislative and normative acts and Laws on Budget (for each year) are principal

legislative acts, which stipulate the concrete provisions for formation and use of environmental funds, economic instruments and financial mechanisms for regulation of the environment pollution, stimulating of industrial facilities and other enterprises, redress for environment pollution and other provisions.

Other documents used in activities for ecological funds:

Statistical reporting form 1 – EF “On formation and use of local ecological funds”,

approved by Order of the Minister of Environment and Order of the General Director of the Department of Statistical and Sociological Analysis;

Statistical reporting form 1 – NEF “On formation and use of the National Ecological Fund”, approved by Order of the Minister of Environment and Order of the General Director of the Department of Statistical and Sociological Analysis;

Instruction on mechanisms of the payment levy for pollution from importing petrol products, approved by Minister of Environment of the Republic of Moldova (Nr. 01-13/509 from 25.11.1998) and Minister of Finance of the Republic of Moldova (Nr. 0311-02-182 from 20.11.1998) and, also, adopted by General Director of the Customs Control Department (Nr. 3033 from 10.11.1998).

Law on the Payment for Environmental Pollution

The Law on the Payment for Environmental Pollution is aimed at introducing the

commonly applied in Western states principle “Polluter pays”, stimulating of industrial facilities and other enterprises, while restructuring and being privatised, to introduce more resource-saving technologies with minimum exposure to the environment as well as to establish environmental foundations to finance environment protection projects.

The above-mentioned act has introduced payment for pollutants emissions and discharges into the atmosphere by stationary sources (Article 6) and mobile sources (Article 7), into water bodies (Article 9), and also for waste disposal sites (Article 10).

The economic instruments currently used for environment pollution abatement under the Law on the Payment for Environmental Pollution are charge for pollution of the environment. The procedure for determining such payments for pollution of the environment, disposal of wastes and other harmful activities, and their maximum levels, was approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova in decision nr.1540 - XIII from 25.02.1998.


286

Payment for atmospheric pollutants releases by stationary sources:

The payment for atmospheric pollutants releases by stationary sources are taken according to Article 6 of the Law from the users in the following cases:

• Pollutants releases within the established limits; • Pollutants releases exceeding the established limits. Each economic agent pays for the pollutants that are enclosed in the permit given by State

Ecological Inspectorate of the Ministry of Ecology, Constructions and Territorial Development. Payment for pollutants emission into atmosphere by stationary sources is differentiated by

regions and fixed per one ton of a pollutant. Payment for pollution is incurred for the actual pollutant emission and is quarterly transferred to local environmental foundation accounts. Payment for pollutants emission by stationary sources exceeding the allowed standard increases fivefold, and payment for accidental discharges by stationary sources increases 50-fold.

Payment for atmospheric pollutants releases by mobile sources using fuel petrol:

The Article 7 “Payment for Pollutants Emission by Mobile Sources” of the above-

mentioned Law states: (1) Payment for pollutants emission into the atmosphere by mobile sources using as fuel petrol

(ethylated and non-ethylated) and diesel fuels is fixed for natural persons and legal and physical entities importing this fuel.

(2) Payment for pollutants emission into the atmosphere by mobile sources amounts 1 percent of the custom-duty price for ethylated petrol and diesel fuel; 0,5 percent of the custom-duty price for non-ethylated petrol and is effected at the moment of paying the custom duty for imported fuel.

It is clear from Paragraph 2 of Article 7 of the above act that Republic of Moldova has introduced some economic instruments to stimulate imports of non-ethylated fuel and consequently reducing heavy metals and POPs emissions. Payment for atmospheric pollutants releases by mobile sources using as fuel liquefied natural gas and compressed hydrocarbon gas:

Payment for pollutants emissions into atmosphere mobile sources (auto vehicles) using as fuel liquefied natural gas and compressed hydrocarbon gas (excluding the owners of private transport, that don’t carry business activities) is fixed for natural persons and legal entities with due account for the actual amount of fuel consumed during automobile transport operation expressed in tons or cubic meters.

The established costs for payment are the following: • Mobile sources, working on compressed hydrocarbon gas – 0,9 lei for 1 ton of used

fuel • Mobile sources, working on liquefied natural gas – 0,75 lei for 1000 cubic meters of

used fuel

Payment for pollutants discharge into water bodies and sewerage

In line with Article 9 payment for pollutants discharges with waste- waters into water bodies and sewerage network is imposed on nature users in the following cases:

Pollutants discharges within the established limits; Pollutants discharges violating the established limits.


287

Paragraph 2 of the same Article states: “Payment for pollutants discharge in setting ponds, filtration fields, silt collectors of animal husbandry wastes is imposed on nature users with due account for discharged volume”. Paragraph 3 of the same Article states:

“Payment for discharges into fisheries ponds, storm runoff from a facility area is imposed on nature users when the pollutant amount in waste- waters exceeds the established limits”.

Payment for waste disposal:

In line with Article 10 of the above Law payment for industrial waste disposal is imposed in the following cases:

• Waste disposal sites are located within the enterprise area; • Waste disposal at landfills (open dumps) within the established limits; • Waste disposal at landfills (open dumps) at amounts exceeding the

established limits.

VI. Other activities and initiatives related to environment protection, harmful chemicals management, including POPs In the Republic of Moldova there are a number of specific activities and initiatives that have been undertaken at the national level to demonstrate country commitment to taking action on chemicals, including POPs. The main activities for environment protection, including elements of management of toxic chemical substances, products and wastes, included in the range of programs, prepared, published and entered in force after the Republic of Moldova became independent. Accompanying the above-mentioned legal structure is a variety of policy documents, which have been given official status and are implemented following government and/or parliamentary decisions. Moldova now has a comprehensive legal and policy documents framework for environmental management. These include:

Elaboration and publication of the Environmental Protection Concept (1995). The National Strategic Programme of Action on Environmental Protection, approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Moldova on 6 October 1995. Elaboration and publication of the National Environmental Action Plan 1996 - 1998 approved by the Government’s Decision (No. 302 from 7 June 1996). This Plan although mostly focused on identifying specific projects for implementation and requiring international financial assistance. Elaboration and publication in 1999 of the “Environmental Performance Review”, which elaborated and the final document with recommendations for solution of existing problems in national environmental policy and management was presented in 1998 for evaluation by the ECE Committee on Environmental Policy at its annual session in Geneva. Elaboration and publication in 2000 of the National Strategy on Sustainable Development “Moldova XXI”.


288

Elaboration and publication in 2001 of the Plan of measures on Centralizing Storage and Disposal of Obsolete Unused and Prohibited Pesticides. This Plan was approved 15 January 2001 (Government’s Decision Nr. 30 from “On Measures for Centralizing Storage and Disposal of Obsolete Unused and Prohibited Pesticides”). Elaboration and publication in 2001 of the National Programme on Production and Municipal Wastes Management, which included some provisions concerning solution of the POPs pesticides. This Programme was approved by the Government’s Decision (No. 606 from 28 June 2000). Elaboration and publication in 2001 of the National Plan of Activities for Health in Relation with Environment, which included some provisions relating to solution of components of the toxic chemicals and POPs problem. This Plan approved by the Government’s Decision (No. 487 from 19 June 2001). Elaboration and publication in 2001 of the Programme for Emissions Reduction from Mobile Sources. This Programme was approved by the Government’s Decision (No. 1047 from 4.10.2001). According to this Programme a range of measures for reduction of toxic emissions into air is foreseen:

• Total exclusion of use of leaded petrol; • Supplying the auto vehicles with neutralizers and catalysts; • Reduction of sulphur in fuel; • Enhance the usage of gaseous fuel for transport etc. •

An inter-sectoral POPs Working Group (with participation of national representatives of environment, health, agriculture, industry and energy sector and non-governmental organizations) to the Stockholm Convention on POPs has been established in 2001 and is led by the Ministry of Ecology, Construction and Territorial Development. Elaboration and publication in 2001 of the New Concept of Environmental Policy of the Republic of Moldova approved by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova on 2 November 2001 (No. 605-XV).

Presently the following activities are under development:

The draft National Strategy on reduction and elimination of POPs releases. This strategy will contain concrete provisions for reduction and elimination of POPs releases, regulated by Basel Convention, Aarhus Protocol on POPs under the LRTAP Convention and other international agreements, of which the Republic of Moldova is a Party or plans to be.

VII. Previous Study Projects related to POPs

The EU TACIS project EnvReg 9701 “Prut River Water Management” was completed in 2000. The objective of this project was the monitoring of pollution of surface water in the Prut River Basin, including certain POPs.

The EU TACIS project EnvReg 9705 “Vulcanesti Pesticide Dump Site Investigation” was completed in 2000. The objective of this project was an initial risk assessment of this contaminated site and preparation of a feasibility study for its clean up;

The EU TACIS project “Accident Emergency Warning System and Monitoring Laboratory and Information Management for the Ukrainian and Moldavian Parts of


289

the Danube River Basin” was completed in 1999. The objective of this project was to provide the equipment, training and expert advice required for establishing AEWS and TNMN system in Ukraine and Moldova and the monitoring of pollution of surface water in the Danube River Basin, including certain POPs, - and etc.

Actually the Republic of Moldova develops the GEF project “Enabling activities related to the implementation of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in the Republic of Moldova ”. The overall project objective is to develop a National Implementation Plan (NIP) and provide supporting capacity strengthening such that the Republic of Moldova can effectively protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants and can fully comply with its obligations under the Stockholm Convention. Within this overall objective the following specific objectives have been identified: Developing of a participatory process for identifying POPs related environmental and health problems and formulating a National Implementation Plan (NIP) and thereby strengthen national capacity and enhance knowledge and understanding achieve a high level of awareness amongst decision-makers, managers, industry, and the public at large on POPs. Strengthen national institutional and technical capacity as required to undertake implementation of the NIP, meet Convention compliance and reporting obligations, and participate fully as a Party to the Stockholm Convention. GEF Implementing Agency/Executing Agency for this project is World Bank. Duration of the project is 2 years .


290

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

The Russian Federation signed the Stockholm Convention on POPs in New York on 22nd May 2002. Russia thus recognized the importance of this international agreement for both foreign and domestic Government policy and its readiness to deal with the problems of protecting the environment and ensuring ecological safeguards from the impact of hazardous chemicals in the POP category, along with regulating the handling of POPs in the Russian Federation.

Laws and regulations in the Russian Federation in the field of environmental protection, public health and ensuring ecological safety in the handling of dangerous chemicals

The area of the law established to provide for human health and to protect

people and the quality of the natural environment from the effects of pollutants in the Russian Federation includes constitutional, civil, criminal and administrative law, and also regulations in the fields of health protection, environmental protection, and natural resources, and also regulations, international conventions and agreements that have been ratified by Russia.

The right of every citizen to a salubrious environment, reliable information about its status and compensation for harm done to his health or property through violations of environmental law, are enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and most fully developed in the Federal Law on Protecting the Environment (2002) and in chapter 26, “Environmental Crimes”, of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

The Federal Law on Protecting the Environment requires compliance with the standards established for environmental amenities of maximum permitted concentrations of harmful substances, emissions and discharges, compliance with the rules for the use of agricultural chemicals, maximum permissible residues of chemicals in foodstuffs, compliance with environmental requirements in technologies, products produced, and the use of products, including the use of chemicals in industry and business, and the requirement to protect the environment from industrial and household wastes.

Both the Federal Law on Environmental Expert Assessments (1995), and the basic law on environmental protection contain the principle of presuming a potential danger to the environment from any intended business or other activity; they also state the need for a mandatory State-implemented environmental assessment before any decision is taken to put into effect the subject of same environmental assessment. These subjects of environmental assessments are defined as draft laws at all levels, draft technical specifications for new machinery, technology, materials, substances, goods and services; the documentation for integrated environmental exploration of sites or areas and schemes for rehabilitating areas; all investment projects and programs for Government-budged finance at the pre-draft and draft stage of the project, and so on.

Russian Federation legislation on public health protection – The Basis of Russian Federation Law on Public Health Protection (1993) together with the regulations covering the administrative aspects also ensures that the environmental rights of citizens are protected: it guarantees the right to health protection and the right to information on factors affecting health. This law affirms the right of citizens


291

to have their health protected from harmful environmental effects resulting from economic or other activities, accidents, catastrophes or natural disasters. Enterprises, institutions, organizations or individuals who harm the environment or the health or property of citizens, or the economy, by polluting the natural environment, spoiling, destroying, harming or using it in an unsound manner, destroying natural ecosystems or committing other environmental offences, are obliged to make full compensation.

In this way, the law underpins the rights of citizens to health protection in environmentally affected regions and the rights of individuals to appeal against the actions of State bodies or officials in the field of health protection either through administrative measures, or through the courts.

The Federal Law on the Health and Epidemiological Welfare of the Population (1999) among other provisions establishes public-health requirements for the planning and construction of towns and villages; for chemical and biological substances and particular types of products that are potentially hazardous to man; for products imported into the territory of Russia; requirements for water facilities, the atmospheric air and the human habitat, for the soil in towns and cities, at industrial sites, and for the collection, use, neutralizing, storage and disposal, etc, of waste. This law also introduced State registration of the relevant substances and products.

The Russian Register of Potentially Hazardous Chemical and Biological Substances has existed since 1993, and is the means through which the State registers dangerous chemicals; it does not include pesticides and biological methods of plant protection, growth regulators for agricultural plants and forestry plantations, pharmaceutical preparations and radioactive substances. Moreover, registering with the State in this register is not compulsory for mixed chemical goods production.

The Russian Federation Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights (1992) establishes the legal right of the consumer for goods, work, services (when carried out in the normal way), and also storage and transportation, to be safe as far as his life, health and environment are concerned; the manufacturer or seller is obliged to ensure the quality of the product manufactured or offered for sale; and the law establishes material liability for damage caused by faults in the goods (work, or services).

This last law is extended and developed in the Federal Law on the Safety of Foodstuffs (2000), which regulates everything in this field, from raw materials and how they are obtained through to the final product and the way it is used (or applied). To this end the safety of foodstuffs is defined as justified confidence that foodstuffs if used in the normal way are not harmful and do not constitute a threat to the health of current or future generations. The law has sections on quality assurance and food products safety, materials and merchandise, including standards, registration by the State, also State, industrial and social controls, and finally the provision of detailed information to the population.

This law contains particularly stringent requirements for foodstuffs intended for children and those who need a special diet. When manufacturing foodstuffs in these categories, raw materials containing food additives, animal growth hormones, particular types of pharmaceuticals, pesticides, agrochemicals and other substances and compounds harmful to human health may not be used. Stress is placed on the withdrawal of bad-quality and dangerous foodstuffs, materials and merchandise, and on recycling or destruction for them.

Some of the issues to do with safe handling of pesticides and agrochemicals are covered by the Federal Law on Safe Handling of Pesticides and Agricultural Chemicals (1997). Article 17 of this law forbids the use of the concepts “safe”, “non-


292

harmful”, “non-toxic”, “environmentally safe” or similar for the labeling or advertising of these substances. Under this law all pesticides and agrochemicals have to be certified for compliance with the requirements for safe handling. They have to be manufactured according to standards and other regulatory texts. This law declares the need to find ways that are safe for the environment and for man of rendering harmless, recycling, destroying and disposing of outdated and/or banned pesticides and agrochemicals, and their containers.

A worldwide problem Russia is now dealing with through the Federal Law on Waste from Manufacture and Consumption (1998) is the problem of how to handle the mountains and millions of cubic metres of waste building up in the urban and industrial areas of all the territories of the Russian Federation. This law defines dangerous waste as waste containing harmful substances or having harmful properties (toxic, explosive, inflammable, or highly reactive) or containing the pathogen for infective diseases, or which might pose a direct or potential hazard to the natural environment or to human health, either independently or when coming into content with other substances. All dangerous waste must be furnished with an identity document showing that the waste is in a given hazard category and class and containing information concerning the content. The law lays down the requirements for where the waste is held, how it is handled, requirements for the professional training of those who deal with dangerous waste, and requirements for the transportation of waste and its movement across borders. All wastes must be systematically described and represented in the State cadastre of wastes. Particular emphasis is laid on the right of individuals and associations to exercise society’s control over the waste-handling process.

The State’s actions to create a wholesome habitat in cities, towns and other urbanized places are regulated by the Russian Federation Law on the Bases of Urban Planning in the Russian Federation (1992), which establishes and prescribes the main ways in which town-planning takes into account the status of the environment; the environmentally-safe development of towns and cities, and of other settlements and related systems. The law is aimed at ensuring citizens’ right to better health and to harmonious physical and spiritual development, at rational land-use (including dealing with the problem of waste-tips), protecting the environment, conserving resources and protecting the area from dangerous processes engendered by technology.

The law, which regulates affairs in the field of rational water use and the protection of water features, is the Water Codex of the Russian Federation (1995). In compliance with this text, the use of chemicals or poisons is dependant upon the status of water amenities and bio-resources, and the disposal or discharge of toxic substances and materials into water features is forbidden. The law also forbids the discharge of wastewater containing substances for which no maximum allowable concentration of pollutants has been established. It is not permitted to site waste disposal facilities, dumps, cemeteries or other similar in the catchments area of underground water features, which are used or might be used for drinking water or for supply by the water utility.

1999 saw the entry into force in the Russian Federation of the Federal Law on Protection of the Atmospheric Air. This law covers a range of issues concerning pollution of the atmosphere from various sources, gives an inventory of releases of harmful substances into the atmosphere, including some that have transboundary effects, and states the need for society to exercise control and to


293

determine arrangements for compensation in the case of damage arising from pollution of the atmosphere.

Hardest to regulate is land use, preventing pollution of the soil. The Land Codex of the Russian Federation enshrines a range of standards with regulations applied at different levels: environmentally sound land use, soil protection and the regeneration or rehabilitation of soil ecosystems. The concept of “land protection” includes, inter-alia, safeguarding the land from pollution by industrial waste and chemicals.

To this end, Russian Government Decision No. 555 dated 5th August 1992 approved a document called “Arrangements for conservation of degraded agricultural land and areas polluted by toxic industrial wastes and radioactive substances”, which states that land polluted by toxic industrial waste at higher than maximum permitted doses should undergo conservation in order to restore its fertility and be rehabilitated.

Some individual aspects of environmental protection, public health and prevention of pollution to environmental amenities are reflected in the following federal laws of the Russian Federation: the Bases of Forestry Legislation of the Russian Federation, the Law on the Animal World, the Law on Specially-Protected Natural Areas, the Law on the Continental Shelf, the Law on Soil Improvement and the Law on Natural Remedies, Towns and Villages Providing Cures and Sanatoria, and Spas.

The Administrative Codex of the Russian Federation makes it an administrative offence to exceed the standards for maximum permitted or temporarily-agreed releases of pollutants into the atmosphere, or for releases of pollutants into the atmosphere without a permit from a Government agency authorized to give such permission, etc.

The provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation state, “the universally-recognised principles and standards of international law and international treaties signed by the Russian Federation are an integral part of Russia’s legal system. If an international treaty signed by Russia has established rules that are different from those provided for in the law, then it is the international rules that are applied”.

One of the most important international agreements ratified by Russia is the Basel Convention on Control of the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (1989).

In conformity with the Federal Law on Ratification of the Basel Convention on Control of the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, dated 25th November 1994, Russia has banned the import and transit of wastes containing lead compounds and the transboundary movement of lead dross, lead slurry lead slime or wastes containing lead, and export of waste containing lead compounds is subject to Government regulation. Among the categories of substances subject to regulation under the Basel Convention are those groups of wastes that contain compounds of chrome, copper, zinc, beryllium, arsenic, selenium, cadmium, antimony, tellurium, mercury, thallium or lead.

To complement the above legal texts there have been and are being drafted federal-level regulations and instructions from Russian Federation Government Decisions, and Decrees of the President of the Russian Federation down to agency and sector regulations, orders, directives, requirements, rules and instructions, and also regional regulations and other documents. Under an initiative by the Ministry for the Protection of the Environment and Natural Resources of the Russian Federation in 1992 we drew up “Criteria for Evaluating the Environmental Status of Territories in order to Highlight Environmental Emergency Areas and


294

Environmental Disaster Areas”, which included indications of the amount of toxic substances of various degrees of hazardousness in all natural environments, ranked for three different categories of territory: “Environmental Disaster Status”, “Environmental Emergency Status”, and “Relatively Satisfactory Status”.

The system of State Standards includes some of the most important regulatory texts, including:

GOST R 17.0.0.06-2000, “Protecting the Environment. An Ecological Passport for the User of Natural Resources. Basic Provisions. Standard Forms”, which establishes the rules for generating, structuring, formulating and completing of standard forms in an environment “passport” for users of natural resources in the Russian Federation and is recommended to legal entities of whatever type of ownership-structure when planning or implementing economic or other types of activities that affect the environment. This “passport” is a document which must contain information on the level of use of natural resources by the given user (be they natural, secondary or other resources) and the degree to which the entity’s production facilities will affect the natural environment, along with evidence of any permits received granting the right to use natural resources, the standards covering the effect of the entity’s activities and the amount being paid for polluting the environment and for using its natural resources. GOST 17.4.2.01-81 “List of Indicators of Soil Condition.” establishes a list of indicators of the condition of soils, including the presence of hazardous chemicals and heavy metals, covering all lands held in the unified State system of Land Holdings. Most of the regulatory documents are based on clear-cut rules limiting the amount of pollutants in each element of the environment, in raw materials for industry including the food industry, in foodstuffs themselves and in industrial waste: MPC – maximum permissible concentrations, RILS – reference impact levels for safety, RCS – reference concentrations for safety, RPLHS – reference permissible levels of harmful substances, and other criteria. One of the most problematical issues is evaluating the extent of damage caused by pollution. For this reason, in 1993 we adopted arrangements for determining the extent of damage caused by chemical pollution of the soil. Indicators of the level to which the soil has been polluted by chemicals are used to calculate the extent of the damage. One particularly important issue is creating a State scheme for preventing pollution of the environment by hazardous chemicals, including economic incentives for users of natural resources and goods in line with ISO-14000 and other international standards. Besides the above documents, the constituent elements of the Russian Federation have the right to pass laws and other regulatory texts in the field of environmental protection and use of natural resources, as long as these are consistent with Federal Law. Federal, Regional and Sectoral Programmes are among the basic instruments for implementing legal and other regulatory expressions of Government policy to ensure the environmental safety of the population and protect Russian territory from the negative effects of hazardous chemicals.


295

The Russian Federation’s National Action Plans for environmental protection provide for each region to draw up regional environmental protection programmes. One example is the “Environmental Safety of the Ural Region” programme, some elements of which received support at the federal level as well. The programme included measures aimed at limiting releases and discharges from the industrial enterprises in the region (particularly metalwork’s and energy-sector facilities), and at tackling the problem of handling industrial waste through the renovation of several enterprises, protecting the urban environment from hazardous effects etc. The most pertinent of these programmes to the issue under discussion (protecting the environment from persistent organic pollutants) is the special federal programme entitled “Protecting the Environment and the Population from dioxin and dioxin-type toxins in 1996-1997”. During the course of this programme we drafted and implemented regional programmes and projects. The most successful such regional programme was that of the Republic of Bashkortostan. 1994 saw the adoption of the federal programme “The Technical Re-equipment and Development of Metallurgy in Russia (1993-2000)”. The main priorities of the programme are competitive products and a tangible improvement in the status of the environment by cutting down releases of hazardous chemicals. The Programme provides for the renovation and technical re-equipping of 143 ferrous and non-ferrous enterprises. Developing this aspect of the work led to the “Strategy for Development of the Metallurgy Sector in Russia up until 2005”. Decision of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1098 dated 13.09.96 adopted Special Federal Programme “Waste”. Among the urgent measures aimed at tackling the problems of handling waste are the following:

- Develop a system for classifying toxic wastes, - Implement an environmental assessment of sectoral regulations for

technical design to include a compulsory element of integrated processing of raw materials along with the recycling, neutralization and environmentally safe disposal of waste,

- Establish and introduce into practice economics-based regulatory systems to increase the amount of recycled materials used in the production cycle. The different parts of the Russian Federation have drawn up several

regional programmes aimed at tackling the problem of handling industrial and consumer waste.

Apart from the above Special Federal Programmes, other special federal and further programmes have been drawn up and implemented at various different times: “Protecting the Environment from Pollution by Lead and Minimising its Effect upon the Health of the Population”, “Volga Renaissance”, “Social and Economic Renewal of the Territory of the Samara Region and Protecting the Health of its Population”; “A Healthier Environment and Population in the Town of Cherepovets for 1997-2010”; “A Healthier Environment and Population in the Orenburg Region 1996-2000”; “A Healthier Environment and Population in the Town of Nizhny Tagil, Samara Region, up to 2000”; the Programme for improving the environmental status of the Tula Region and protecting the health of its population 1993-1998, and also “Ensuring Drinking Water for Russia’s People”, “Fertility”, “Lowering the Risk of Emergencies”, “Destroying Stockpiles of Chemical


296

Weapons”, “The Environment of the City of Bratsk”, “Improving Health and Safety at Work 1998-2000”, “Childbirth in Safety”, “Russia’s Children”, etc.

State Monitoring and Chemical-sampling Checks

A new dimension, monitoring of chemical toxins in the atmosphere, had been included in the system for State monitoring of the environment and in the system of integrated background monitoring (SIBM) at monitoring stations situated in biosphere nature-reserves. The “Ros-hydro-met” system also owns a network of stations monitoring air pollution in towns whose industries release various toxins into the air (217 stations in 126 towns and cities). These measurements are used to prepare the “Yearbook of the Status of the Air in Cities” and also bulletins monitoring the pollution of surface-water, snow-cover, soil and plants.

At the present time, the integrated agro-environmental monitoring of the negative impact on the soil in agricultural areas is carried out in 32 centres and 71 stations of the Russian Ministry of Agriculture’s Agro-chemical Service and their 75 stations for plant-protection. The Agro-chemical Service’s experimental and control plots are used for agro-chemical research (including ascertaining the degree to which soils and water are polluted by heavy metals and pesticides), and for determining the quality of agricultural products.

Chemical sampling checks are also carried out at the laboratories of the inspection service in the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation.

The five Russian chemical sampling centres that are best equipped with modern instruments and equipment and justly enjoy the highest reputation have certificates of conformity to international standards for testing for toxins, including POPs, in environmental amenities along with other testing and sampling.

The territory of Russia is subjected to a build-up in the environment not

only of domestically generated, but also of transboundary pollutants from the countries of Europe, North Africa, the Middle East and Asia. A reduction of POP releases in these countries will lead to less transboundary pollution of the environment in Russia. Apart from the above, there is a latent threat inherent in the problem of environmental pollution by POPs in the Russian Federation due to the fact that because of the extremely high cost of determining the concentration of POPs in the environment, Russia cannot perform monitoring of such supertoxins as dioxins (PCDDs) and furans (PCDFs) or assess to overall situation in the country. For this reason, the work under way in the Russian Federation to detect these substances is site-dependant and piecemeal, in spite of which it has succeeded in confirming the presence of dioxins in dangerous concentrations in environmental samples.

Spot-sampling effected in the Bashkortistan and Komi republics and in the Arkhangelsk, Volgograd, Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod, Samara, Tula and some other districts, has detected that the PCDDs in the air, water and soil exceeds the permitted level of concentration (in areas where chemical, petro-chemical, cellulose and paper, electronics, light industry, non-ferrous metal plants, utilities etc are sited).


297

The Benefits for the Russian Federation of Accession to the Stockholm Convention on POPs

In part of paragraph. 1(a) of Article 3 of the Stockholm Convention on POPs, “Measures to restrict or eliminate releases”, it is the HCBs and the PCBs that are problematical for the Russian Federation; for the other chemicals in the list, mostly pesticides, production has already been stopped in the Russian Federation and they are no longer in use (with the exception of DDT, used only exceptionally, and with permission of the Russian Ministry of Health).

Consistent with para. 3 of Article 4, “Register of Specific Exemptions”, it may be possible to resolve the issue of the continuing use (for another 10-20 years) of hexachlorobenzene .PCB production ceased in 1993, and the production facilities at PO “Orgsteklo” in of Dzerzhinsk, Nizhny Novgorod Region, were completely dismantled while those at PO “Orgsintez” in Novomoskovsk, Tula Region were retooled to produce other goods. Replacements for obsolete transformers and condensers have, since 1993, come from old stocks or used alternative dielectrics like the “Middle” produced in the UK and other places. Nevertheless, in the energy systems of Russia’s fuel and energy complex, in chemical and petrochemical plants, in ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, in the cellulose and paper industry, in mechanical engineering and in other sectors there are approximately 7,200 transformers and 360 thousand condensers in operation at the present time which use PCB as a dielectric. The inventory carried out in 1999-2000 gives the figure for the overall volume of PCB in equipment and wastes as 30 thousand tonnes. Their replacement by a environmentally safe dielectric (as the transformers and condensers reach the end of their lifetime) should, according to RAO “EES Rossia” data, be completed by 2025, while destruction of the PCB will take another three years longer. Russia is negotiating these dates as established in Part II of Annexe A to the Convention.

In terms of the practical problems raised by the Convention, one of the major problems for our country, the PCB problem, is bound up with the need to tackle four basic tasks:

1) Mastering the production of a dielectric that would be an alternative to PCB

2) Purging transformers of PCB 3) Destroying the PCB removed from transformers 4) Destroying condensers containing PCB. The overall cost of purging transformers of PCB, of destroying PCB and

condensers containing PCB would, according to preliminary estimates, be at the most US$109.4 million over 25-28 years, or an average of US$4.0-4.5 million per year for the fuel and energy complex, chemical and petrochemical sector, ferrous and non-ferrous metals, the cellulose and paper industry, etc. The production and use of DDT is limited by para. 1(b) of Article 3. The view of the Russian Ministry of Health is that it needs to be possible to use DDT to combat malaria and tick-borne encephalitis. This problem can also be solved by Russia including in the Register of Specific Exceptions (Article 4) information on the production and use of DDT in the Russian Federation to combat infectious diseases and her compliance with the requirements in para. 6 of Article 3. It should moreover be noted that the


298

Russian Federation faces aggravated problems in ensuring environmental safety in the handling of pesticides and agrochemicals because of the prevalence of unsanctioned use of left-overs of products that have been declared unfit for use, many of which are persistent and particularly toxic; a preliminary inventory alone has disclosed more than 24 thousand tones being held in the wrong conditions with no plans for their recycling or disposal. Concerning the unintended formation and release of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and benzofuranes (PCDDs/PCDFs), HCBs and PCBs (para. 3 of Article 3 and Annexe C), Russia intends to implement measures to curtail overall releases resulting from human activities so as to bring down the figure and where feasible to do away with them altogether. Since the Stockholm Convention provides for financial and technical assistance from industrially developed countries to developing and transition economies, Russia, as a Party to the Convention, will be able when fulfilling its obligations under the Convention to avail itself of such assistance, thereby dealing more speedily and economically with the problem of POPs affecting the health of its population and the state of its environment, a problem that must be tackled whether within the framework of the Stockholm Convention or outside of it. In its list of measures to prepare a National Action Plan under the Stockholm Convention on POPs, the Russian Federation intends to prioritise the following issues:

1. Carry out a preliminary assessment of current and forecast POP emissions, implement a preliminary assessment of stocks of waste which consist of or contain chemicals listed in Annexe A or B of the Convention and of the sources listed in Annexe C.

2. Carry out a preliminary assessment of the products and goods in use and likewise of wastes consisting of the chemicals listed in Annexes A, B or C;, and also of items containing or contaminated by them.

3. Draft a strategy to detect which areas are contaminated by chemicals listed in Annexes A, B or C of the Convention.

4. Use the regional registers to draw up a State Register of releases and of the movement of pollutants; and a preliminary cadastre of the production, distribution, use, import and export of POPs and of wastes contaminated by POPs; likewise a preliminary cadastre of current and forecast emissions of POPs into the environment, and of POP stocks and wastes contaminated by POPs; and finally, also of contaminated areas.

5. Assess the effectiveness of existing laws and regulations aimed at implementing the POP rules.

6. Assess the system of monitoring, research and development to improve chemical sampling checks.

7. Assess the social and economic effects of using or curtailing the use of POPs, including the need to publicise safe alternative technologies and products.

8. Assess the level of risk to human health and the environment from the effects of POPs in order to establish priorities for the next stage of action.


299

TAJIKISTAN

POPs problems in Tajikistan

A. DzhuraevL. Bobritskaja.

Ministry of environmental protectionRepublic of Tajikistan

Tajikistan's ministries and agencies dealing with POPs

Ministry of environmental protectionMinistry of agricultureMinistry of healthAcademy of sciencesRepublican sanitary and epidemiological service

Public joint stock company«Tochikkimiedehot»


300

Laws of Republic of Tajikistan

«On environmental protection» (1993)

«On industrial and household wastes» (2002)

Law of Republic of Tajikistan «On environmental protection»Article 28 - Norms regulating use of fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals in agriculture, forestry and other sectors of national economy shall be established on the basis of doses ensuring enforcement of standards relating to maximum chemical residue levels in food and providing for the protection of human health and human genetic fund as well as protection of flora and fauna. Article 29 - Standards relating to maximum chemical residue levels in food shall be developed and approved by state sanitary supervision bodies of Republic of Tajikistan on the basis of proposals from state agrochemical service of Republic of Tajikistan with due account of international standards.


301

Article 49 - Ministry of health together with the ministry of agriculture and ministry of environmental protection shall periodically develop a list of chemicals allowed to be used in agriculture as plant protection products and growth stimulating folios as well as set maximum chemical residue levels in food.

- Use of new chemicals capable of directly or indirectly affecting human health shall be allowed only on the basis of authorization from the ministry of health of Republic of Tajikistan. Use of decay proof toxic chemicals actively affecting human organism and environment shall be banned.

Law «On industrial and household wastes»

Article 12 «Requirements when dealing with hazardous wastes»

- Natural and legal persons whose activities result in hazardous wastes must provide for reliable protection of environment and population from their harmful impact when they deal with these wastes.

- Emplacement of hazardous wastes shall be allowed only in specially equipped facilities and on the basis of permissions issued in accordance with the established procedures.


302

Commission on streamlining and regulatingchemical products management

(Chemical commission)

coordinates use of pest, disease and weed control chemical products, folios and plant growth regulating substances;includes in the «List of pest, disease and weed control chemical and biological products allowed for use in agriculture of Republic of Tajikistan» pesticides and other plant protection chemicals after their laboratory and other tests and registration in corresponding bodies of the ministry of environmental protection and the ministry of health of Republic of Tajikistan;contracts, agreements, agreements on import and export of chemical and biological products by natural and legal persons must be reviewed by the state environmental expertise and agreed on with the Chemical commission.

Ministry of economy and trade is responsible for licensing import of pesticides in Republic of Tajikistan. Imported plant protection chemicals are subject to licensing procedures in accordance with the decision of the government of Republic of Tajikistan «On licensing of export and import of goods (works, services) in Republic of Tajikistan»


303

Ministry of environmental protection and the ministry of health coordinate the use of pesticides on the territory of Republic of Tajikistan.

Ministry of environmental protection monitors the impact of plant protection products used in the country on the environment.

Ministry of agriculture registers these products and monitors their use.

The following state bodies issue licenses for import of agricultural chemicals and monitor their use:

As of the year 2003, the State committee on statistics will introduce state control and accounting in the area of toxic wastes management

Customs department of the ministry of state income and fees controls and monitors import of pesticides registered in Republic of Tajikistan and thus allowed to be used in the Republic.


304

Republic of Tajikistan joined the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

On May 20, 2002


305

UKRAINE Guided by the ideas and principles of the United National Conference on Environment and Development, in the first years after its declaration of independence Ukraine stated its intention to opt for sustainable development that would ensure a balanced approach to many environmental problems, particularly in the field of handling hazardous chemicals. An overview of the activities implemented in Ukraine in the field of chemical safety will show that they are for the most part determined by the country’s international commitments upon becoming a party to the following international Conventions and Agreements, all of them basic texts in this field:

The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (1979); The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of

Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (1999); The Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary

Context, (1999); The Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses

and International Lakes (1999);

The Convention on Access to Environmental Information and Public Participation in Environment Decision-Making and Access to Justice (1999). A significant step towards solving the problem of persistent organic pollutants was taken in Ukraine with the 1998 signing of the Protocol on POPs of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe’s Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution. In the spring of 2001 Ukraine participated in the signing of the Stockholm Convention on POPs, drawn up through the efforts of UNEP. Projects like “Giving legal force to the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure for Trade in Chemicals and Pesticides” are unanimously supported in Ukraine. 26th September 2002 saw the signing of a Decree by the President of Ukraine on Ukraine’s becoming a party to the Rotterdam International Convention. The basis for legislation to cover environmental policy and regulate matters relating to the environment is established in the 1996 Constitution of Ukraine, which determines the following environmental principles: the right of citizens to an environment that is safe for their health, and also compensation in all cases where this right is violated. Apart form this; every citizen is guaranteed the unimpeded right to information on the status of the environment and the quality of foodstuffs, along with the right to disseminate this information. The pre-eminent legal instrument regulating these issues is the Ukrainian Law on Environmental Protection of 1991, which covers the basic principles of environmental protection, the rational use of natural resources, and environmental safety. This law served as the basis for later laws and regulations concerning the protection of the land, water, forests, the use of mineral resources, protection of the atmospheric air, protection and use of flora and fauna and also other special laws and regulations promulgated over the course of the last ten years. The most important laws and Codes that cover regulations for handling and control of chemicals are the Ukrainian Law on Protecting the Atmospheric Air, (1992), the


306

Water Codex of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Law on Pesticides and Agrochemicals (1995), the Ukrainian Law on Wastes (1998) and the Ukrainian Law on Environmental Expert Assessments (1996). In 2002 Ukraine adopted the Law on Insurance, whose provisions include in the list of obligatory types of insurance a section on the responsibility of an exporter of hazardous wastes to be covered for any potential damage to the environment occurred as a result of transboundary movements. As for international transportation of dangerous goods, Ukraine has ratified the European ADR Agreement, which covers road transport, and the Ukrainian Parliament has already adopted the relevant law. Ukraine is a signatory to the Agreement on International Goods Traffic (SZMGSZ). 1993 saw Ruling No. 246 of Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers, entitled “On Agreements Covering International Railway Freight and Passenger Traffic”, which regulates the activities of the bodies and organizations concerned with rail transport and in particular the handling of hazardous goods. At the present time active efforts are being deployed to make Ukraine a signatory to the Rules for International Rail Transport (RID). Work is also under way to study the possibility of Ukraine adhering to the European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Inland Waterways (ADN) and the Agreement on the Rhein (ADNR). One of the fundamental legal mechanisms regulating activities involving hazardous substances in Ukraine is a Ruling of the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers No. 440 dated 20th June 1995, entitled “On the arrangements for granting a permit to produce, store, transport, use, dispose of, destroy or recycle hazardous substances, including toxic industrial wastes, the products of biotechnology and other biological agents”. We should also note that the “Schedule of pesticides banned for use in agriculture, which may not be registered or re-registered” adopted in 1997 by the State Commission for Testing and Registering Plant Protection Products, and also agreed by the Ukrainian Ministry of Health includes all those pesticides mentioned in the appropriate annexes to the Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. Among these substances are aldrin, dieldrin, chlordane, endrin, heptachlor, hexachlorbenzene and DDT. The pesticide mirex, included in Annex A of the Stockholm Convention, is not banned specifically, but it is not registered under the Law on Pesticides and Agrochemicals mentioned above. Unfortunately, Ukraine has not yet established an effective system to control the use of pesticides and industrial chemicals, although work is under way to develop such a system. One major problem in Ukraine is the sizeable (about 20 thousand tonnes) stockpile of pesticides, which have been stored now for several decades in innumerable warehouses and are in the “hazardous wastes” category. On 27th March 1996 the Ukrainian Cabinet of Ministers published Ruling No. 354 entitled “Confirmation of arrangements for disposal, recycling, destruction and rendering harmless unfit-for-use or banned pesticides and agrochemicals and their containers”. Within the overall National Programme for the Handling of Hazardous Wastes, the National Centre at the Ukrainian Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources is implementing a project to establish a National Plan for minimising the risks inherent in storing out-of-date pesticides in the country. As for establishing a Register of Emissions and of Transported Pollutants (RETP), Ukraine has also supported this international initiative. In 2001 saw the establishment of an Inter-Agency Executive Committee to supervise the drawing-up of the Register, along with a working-group under the guidance of the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources, which includes representatives of the ministries and agencies concerned, and also of NGOs. Its first working session took place in August of 2001,


307

at which it determined its main tasks and drafted a plan for first-stage implementation measures. The priority at the moment is to put into effect the Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Environmental Information and Public Participation in Environmental Decision-making and Access to Justice in environmental issues. As part of the integrated approach to assisting the possibility of ratification of the Protocol on POPs, the Inter-Agency Working Group at the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources has drawn up a programme of measures aimed at tackling a whole range of tasks which have a significant impact on the problem of chemical safety in the country. Among these tasks are the following:

Determine the main categories of stationary and moving sources of POPs emissions in Ukraine. Collect and systematically collate existing data on POP emissions into the

atmosphere. Establish data bases on industrial facilities, on the use and on the storage of POPs. Carry out an expert assessment of POP emissions in Ukraine. Draft a plan and

methodology for this exercise, taking into account international experience in this field and using EMEP-CORINAIR and UNEP manuals for drawing up an inventory of emissions. Develop a programme for diminishing the amount of POP emissions, bearing

in mind recommended Best Practices. Agree at the level of industrial-sector Ministries a plan of measures to establish a legal framework to cover handling of POPs. Develop a Draft National Strategy to diminish POP emissions into the atmosphere. Some of the work outlined in the above measures for chemical safety has already been carried out. Under the provisions of the Stockholm Convention, one of the basic stages in developing a national strategy for POPs is the establishment of a National Plan of Action to diminish or eliminate them taking into account the international experience and expertise built up over the last ten years. The Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources of Ukraine drew up proposals for such a project. The plan is for it to be implemented with the assistance of UNEP Chemicals and the World Bank, bringing in all the Ministries, agencies and organizations concerned. The financial and technical assistance of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to transition economies may play a significant part in helping those countries to draw up a National Plan of Action for the handling of hazardous chemicals and fulfil their obligations under the International Agreements.


308

UZBEKISTAN

POPs MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES POPs MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES IN REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTANIN REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN

Presentation made at the sub-regional workshop to support the implementation of

Stockholm Convention on POPs

• Certain measures are being taken in Uzbekistan to provide for the protection of human health and environment from harmful effects of persistent organic pollutants (POPs). These measures lead to the reduction or elimination of POPs releases which cause general concerns.

• Over the last ten years the policy relating to the use of pesticides has dramatically changed: new generation of highly efficient pesticides which can be used in small doses and with minimum danger to the health of population and environment are presentlybeing used on the market. There are plans to develop biological methods of plant protection.

• Legislative basis has been created. A number of regulatory and statutory documents regulating production, export, import and use of POPs - pesticides, pesticide substances and industrial chemicals have been adopted.


309

LEGISLATION ON PESTICIDESLEGISLATION ON PESTICIDES

In Republic of Uzbekistan the use of pesticides is being regulated by State chemical commission (Goshimkomissiya) on chemical and plant protection products under the Cabinet of ministers of Republic of Uzbekistan in accordance with:

Law “On protection of agricultural plants from pests, diseases and weeds”;

Resolution of the Cabinet of ministers of Republic of Uzbekistan “On issues of organization and activities of State chemical commission on chemical and plant protection products” (1999)

The membership of the Commission includes representatives of The membership of the Commission includes representatives of various ministries and agencies:various ministries and agencies: State environmental commission, Ministry of health, Ministry of irrigation, Academy of sciences, Customs committee and other ministries and agencies dealing with pesticides.

Main objective of the State chemical commissionMain objective of the State chemical commission:-pesticide registration (all pesticides - both domestically produced and imported - are subject for registration);-introduction of pesticide register;

All pesticides showing up on the market and subject to All pesticides showing up on the market and subject to registration must be run through government tests which registration must be run through government tests which include:include:-environmental impact assessment (persistence, hydrolysis etc.);-toxicological assessment;-biological activity and conditions of use.

LEGISLATION ON PESTICIDES LEGISLATION ON PESTICIDES


310

Legislative basis of Republic of Uzbekistan on POPs problemsLegislative basis of Republic of Uzbekistan on POPs problems

•State national Program of actions on environmental protection in Republic of Uzbekistan'' for 1999-2005.

•Law '’On protection of agricultural plants from pests, diseases and weeds'’

•Law '’On State sanitary supervision'’

•Law '’On environmental protection'’

•Law '’On protection of atmospheric air'’

•Law '’On wastes'’

•Resolution of the Cabinet of ministers of Republic of Uzbekistan '’On regulating import and export of environmentally hazardous products and wastes into and from Republic of Uzbekistan'’

•Resolution of the Cabinet of ministers of Republic of Uzbekistan '’ On issues of organization and activities of State chemical commission on chemical and plant protection products''


Legislative act on use of pesticides by citizens of Legislative act on use of pesticides by citizens of Uzbekistan on plots of land allocated to themUzbekistan on plots of land allocated to them

Problem:Problem: -creation of farms;-use of pesticides by farmers

Solution:Solution:1. Network of shops selling small packages of plant protection products (PPP) to farmers in rural areas (according to existing plans more than 800 shops will be open in 2001 - 2003);2. Register of plant protection products allowed for use by citizens of Uzbekistan includes: insectoacaricides – 15 types, fungicides - 9 types, compounds for presowing treatment – 8 types, herbicides - 3 types, defoliants and desiccants - 2 types, plant growth regulating products - 4 types, biological preparations - 2 types;3. Procedures for using PPP by farmers.



311

•Use of PPPs in agriculture.

•Warehouses. 1389,2 тons of obsolete, unused and prohibited pesticides in warehouses including 118 тons of PPPs.

•Toxic burial sites. Around 15 000 тtons of prohibited and obsolete pesticides are being presently stored at toxic burial sites. There are 14 such sites in the republic, the total area is ~ 60 hectares. Burials continued from 1972 to 1993.

•Territories of former agricultural airfields. There are 461 agricultural airfields in the Republic, total area - 4,5 thousand hectares. According to the results of a systematic monitoring exercise, DDT’s levels, for instance, in the soil of former agricultural airfields are thousand times higher than maximum acceptable

concentrations.

Sources of PPPs discharges into environmentSources of PPPs discharges into environment

Stocks of obsolete, used and prohibited pesticides in Stocks of obsolete, used and prohibited pesticides in UzbekistanUzbekistan

Region Amount, tons Andijan 1,2Bukhara 1,7Djizak 4,2Kashkadarja 97,5Navoi 65,0Namangan 36,4Samarkand 20,8Surhadarjinsk 1021,7Syrdarja 7,7Tashkent 51,7Fergana 2,7 Khorezm 2,3RK 1,3TOTAL 1389,17 tons,1389,17 tons,

includincludinging 118 tons of POPs118 tons of POPs


312

Decision of the GovernmentDecision of the Government“Regulations concerning environmental monitoring in “Regulations concerning environmental monitoring in

the Republicthe Republic””State committee on environmental protection – monitoring of pesticide contamination sources

Chief directorate of hydrometereology - monitoring of pesticide contamination of surface waters, atmospheric air and soils

State committee of geology and mineral resources –monitoring of contamination of subterranean waters

Ministry of health - sanitary and hygienic monitoring (drinking water, food products, human beings)

Wastes managementWastes management

There are more than 1 billion tons of industrial and household wastes in Uzbekistan.

Solid wastes. Mining and mineral processing industries account for most of solid wastes in the Republic. Due to extremely low gradeores only 1 - 5 % of excavated rock is used to extract metals in non-ferrous sector. In the mining industry 1,25 billion cu.m. of wastes are part of deposits’ refuse piles while 1,3 million tons of wastes stay in tailings.

Household wastes. Urban and rural waste dumps contain up to 30 million cu. m. of household wastes. Urban waste dumps cover the area of 5000 hectares and represent the major source of environmental contamination (especially when wastes are burned in uncontrolled fashion) by POPs.


313

##

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

##

#

#S

#S

#S#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

AndijanFergana

NamanganTashkent

Gulistan

DjizakSamarkand

Karshi

Termez

Navoi

Bukhara

Urgench

Nukus

urban householdurban industrialrural

SOLID WASTE:

#S main cities

The Distribution of Solid Wastes within regions ofRepublic of Uzbekistan

Wastes are not recycled and thus become a source of environmental contamination.

Problems:Problems:•Emplacement, creation of special sites - especially in major cities;

•No waste collection by individual categories thereof;

•No domestic production of special containers and garbage trucks;

•No production of special equipment to recycle wastes.



314

Law “On wastes” (2002)Law “On wastes” (2002)The law is aimed at preventing harmful impact on humans and environment, reducing wastes and their rational use. It ensures proper regulation of waste management including:•requirements concerning storage and burial of wastes;•introduction of State register; •setting of standards in the area of waste management; •rules for import, export and transportation;•incentives for recycling and reducing wastes; •environmental certification and profiling;•allocation of funds for waste recycling.


Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)•PCBs are not produced in Uzbekistan.

•Over many years products like «Sovol» and «Sovtol» had been widely used in the production process at Tchirtchik transformer plant where their leftovers are still being kept. There is no data about the amount of PCBs contained in electrical equipment and contaminated wastes.

•There is no monitoring of PCBs residues in the environment.

•Results of scientific analysis show that basically all environmental facilities contain PCBs.

•There is no information about the situation with other POPs (polychlordibenzodioxins, furanes). Monitoring and assessment of these POPs is not conducted in Uzbekistan.


315

Priority tasks in the area of POPs management in Priority tasks in the area of POPs management in Uzbekistan:Uzbekistan:

•Inventory assessment of PCBs and other POPs;

•Measures to replace and eliminate PCBs and other POPs

(disposal and burying);

•Introduction of national register of hazardous POPs;

•Development and implementation of plan of actions to

reduce or stop POPs releases in the environment on the

basis of new technologies;

•Training of specialists.

• Being aware of the need to enhance its national capabilities in the area of chemical management Uzbekistan is presently reviewing the issue of its accession to the Stockholm Convention on POPs.

• In accordance with the adopted procedure the State committee on environment of Uzbekistan discussed the text of the Convention with the main interested ministries and agencies and submitted it to the government for its review. Active work is being carried out with some of the agencies to develop national plans of further activities to regulate POPs.

Documents

chm.pops.intchm.pops.int/Portals/0/docs/from_old_website/documents/implementation/gef/kiev_en.pdfThe workshop was financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) through a Medium