ANNEX 1
of the Commission Implementing Decision on the Annual Action Programme 2013 for
Nuclear Safety Cooperation to be financed from the general budget of the European
Union
Action Fiche for Central Asia
1.
IDENTIFICATION
Title/Number
MC4.02/13 – Urgent measures for the management and
remediation of high risk uranium legacy sites in Central
Asia
Total cost
Total estimated cost: EUR 3 million
Total amount of EU budget contribution
Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC)
Aid method /
Method of
implementation
Project approach:
Direct centralised management – procurement of services and
supplies
Joint management with UNDP
DAC-code
23064
Sector
2.
RATIONALE & CONTEXT
2.1.
Summary of the action and its objectives
Nuclear Safety
The objectives of the project are to improve the safety of the uranium legacy sites in
Central Asia and to prepare the basis for future remediation works. The actions will
include the construction of a water treatment facility in Taboshar in Tajikistan and a
stakeholder engagement process for uranium legacy remediation in Central Asia. The
foreseen actions contain the financing of a number of tools aimed at building
consensus among national and local authorities on the measures to be carried out.
2.2.
Context
Uranium ore mining and milling in the Central Asian region carried out between
1944 and 1995 provided approximately 30% of the uranium production of the Soviet
Union. This resulted in the significant legacy of about 1 billion tones of waste from
uranium ore mining and processing. After 1995 many of the conventional uranium
mines were closed and a considerable number of uranium legacy sites were left
without appropriate monitoring and maintenance. A strategy on remediation
1
priorities in Central Asia was developed through a baseline technical document1.
This report identified hot spots and priorities for site remediation activities in the
most affected countries Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan have inherited together with Uzbekistan the majority of
uranium legacy sites. Especially the first two countries do not have the technical
capabilities and economic means to conduct safety and environmental impact
assessments of these legacies, including the development of national strategies for
environmental remediation. The current situation has a severe impact on the living
conditions of the local population, in particular with respect to public health and
environmental conditions, i.e contamination of drinking water with radioactive
materials. The nature of the problem has in various cases a cross-boundary
dimension.
The European Commission under the INSC programme is funding already one
regional and five site-specific projects in the Central Asian region. All these uranium
legacy sites benefitting from these projects were rated as high priority in the recent
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) assessment1.
The EC under the INSC programme funded Environment Impact Assessments (EIA)
and Feasibility Studies (FS) for the region that will result in the identification of
necessary remediation works and their technical specifications, including the legacy
site at Taboshar in Tajikistan. The situation at Taboshar is serious and urgent actions
are required. The radiotoxicity of the outflowing water coming from the mines
exceeds the World Health Organisation limit for drinking water 50 times or even
more. The population of Taboshar uses this water for drinking, for livestock and for
the irrigation of crops due to the lack of alternative water resources in the area.
The current projects in the region require comprehensive site characterisation
activities (soil/water sampling, borehole drilling and air monitoring). There is a need
to promote public awareness on the activities to be carried out including outreach
activities in order to inform local governments and local communities in an
appropriate manner. There is also a need to promote capacity building to ensure
well-informed decision-making processes with public support and grassroot-level
involvement to guarantee the successful implementation of the EIA and FS
studies/projects.
2.3. Lessons learnt
There are a number of important lessons to be learned from similar large scale multidonor funding projects. These are:
- A comprehensive Environment Impact Assessment (including safety assessment)
and Feasibility Study (FS) for each high priority legacy site in Central Asia is
essential for the identification, justification and prioritizing of the environmental
remediation needs. It is also a crucial tool to identify the financial needs and
means to ensure proper implementation of the planned activities;
1
“Assessment and way forward for legacy uranium-production sites in Central Asia: An international approach”
(IAEA/EC 2009)
2
- The engagement and involvement of the local population and the local
government in the decision-making processes of an Environment Impact
Assessment and in the development of the FS is also essential to obtain
acceptance of the work by those that will benefit from the remediation activities.
Experience elsewhere has shown that such an approach is essential to avoid
unnecessary delays and thus higher costs in carrying out remediation works;
- Special attention needs to be paid to capacity building at local level to ensure that
local entities will be able to carry out the necessary work in conformity with high
safety standards and in an independent manner. This will require training and
transfer of know-how in cooperation with EU-funded consultants/contractors and
local beneficiaries.
2.3.
Complementary actions
The project is complementary to the regional approach that is followed under project
REG4.01/10 towards the establishment of a legislative and regulatory framework for
the remediation of uranium mining legacy sites in Central Asia, the establishment of
a regional watershed monitoring system and capacity building in analytical
techniques, training and education and information exchange. Particular
consideration will be given to the interaction with site specific projects UZ4.01/10,
KG4.01/11, TJ4.01/11, TJ4.02/11 and KG4.01/12 that are performing Environment
Impact Assessments and Feasibility Studies in high priority uranium legacy sites.
2.4.
Donor coordination
The EU has been actively involved in the initial regional initiative on the remediation
of legacy of uranium mines and tailings that was launched by the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) and which has also been supported by the IAEA,
the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the World Bank,
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The baseline technical document1 of a team
of high-level EU experts, appointed to review and classify the available information
on uranium mines, tailings and mills in the region, to recommend remedial actions
and prioritisation criteria and then to propose projects accordingly has been the basis
for planning future related activities among the above donors, under the technical
lead of the IAEA.
The EU is providing technical assistance on uranium remediation activities in Central
Asia in the framework of the on-going project MC1.01/10 with the IAEA and its
member states, where the technical coordination of uranium remediation projects
funded by different donors and the appropriate contacts with the partner countries in
Central Asia are being addressed.
At a recently organised IAEA coordination meeting2, the creation of a new
Coordination Group for Uranium Legacy Sites (CGULS) was agreed among the
concerned states in Central Asia and main national/international organizations
involved in the management, remediation or regulatory oversight of uranium legacy
2
"Regional Meeting on Safe Management of Uranium Production Legacy Sites", Vienna, 12 – 15 June 2012
3
sites. The CGULS secretariat will be under the technical lead of the IAEA and the
coordination group will be providing an important forum for information exchange,
provision of technical advice and coordinating of the actions of members to
maximize synergies and avoid duplication of effort. The European Commission
supports the objectives and the scope of the CGULS. It will use this platform to
coordinate with donors on activities in the field of environmental remediation.
3.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
3.1.
Objectives
The general long-term objective of the project is to improve safety of uranium legacy
sites in Central Asia through justified remediation actions.
The specific objectives are:
-
To improve the protection against radiation exposure for the population of
Taboshar;
- To improve stakeholder involvement in remediation activities in Central Asia.
3.2.
Expected results and main activities
The project is planned to be implemented through the following four tasks:
- Establishing a water treatment facility at Taboshar;
- Improvement of stakeholder involvement for uranium legacy remediation in
Central Asia including knowledge about the remediated sites and monitoring.
A)
Establishing a water treatment facility at Taboshar
The main activities of this task are:
- The design and engineering of a water treatment facility needed for the cleaning
of the contaminated waters from the Taboshar legacy site;
- The supply and installation of the water treatment facility at Taboshar.
The result will be the establishment of a system adequate to clean the water at
Taboshar from its high pollution with uranium thus allowing its use for irrigation of
crops, for cattle and eventually as drinking water by the local population.
B) Improvement of stakeholder engagement for uranium legacy remediation in
Central Asia
There is a need to engage stakeholders in remediation efforts to obtain their support
for the remediation works because of the significant impact of the abandoned
uranium legacy sites upon the surrounding communities, as well as the highly
4
technical nature of this work. The main activities under this task will be to focus on
the involvement and information of stakeholders concerning uranium legacy sites
remediation in order to clearly demonstrate the benefits for the population involved
as well as to inform about the positive impact on public health and the environment.
This will be done for all legacy sites in the Central Asian countries for which INSC
funded EIA and FS projects are on-going or envisaged.
The expected results will be:
• An assessment of the stakeholder risk perceptions and capacities;
• An increased public awareness and outreach that will facilitate transparency,
uptake and well-informed decision-making about planned remediation activities;
• Increased national and local capacities to ensure sustainable stakeholder
involvement.
3.3.
Risks and assumptions
The proposed activities are part of a wider long-term international programme on the
support of management and remediation of uranium legacy sites in Central Asia. It is
developed and implemented by the EU and several other international donors and
national authorities in the partner countries. Close coordination with other
international donors (e.g. through CGULS) will have to be established and
maintained. There is a considerable risk that national and local authorities are not
convinced of the effectiveness of the actions to be carried out. These risks will be
mitigated with extensive consultation procedures with the relevant authorities in the
countries concerned.
Capacity building at local level is crucial to minimize the risk of weak
implementation of the project.
3.4.
Cross-cutting issues
The project tasks will contribute to the overall improvement of the living conditions
of the population concerned, and to environmental sustainability. It will reduce the
current public health and environmental risks resulting from the present state of the
uranium legacy sites in Central Asia. In particular, remediation of the most urgent
problems of the legacy sites in Central Asia will benefit the citizens of the concerned
region by substantially reducing the exposure of the public to sources of ionising
radiation.
3.5.
Stakeholders
The main stakeholders of the project are the people and the Governments of
Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
5
4.
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
4.1.
Financing agreement
In order to implement this action, it is foreseen to conclude a financing agreement for
Task A with the partner country, referred to in Article 184(2)(b) of the Financial
Regulation.
4.2.
Indicative operational implementation period
The indicative operational implementation period of this action, during which the
activities described in sections 3.2. and 4.3. will be carried out, is 48 months, subject
to modifications to be agreed by the responsible authorising officer in the relevant
agreements.
4.3.
Implementation components and modules
4.3.1.
Procurement (direct centralised management)
Subject in generic terms, Type (works, supplies, Indicative
Indicative
if possible
services)
number
of trimester of
contracts
launch of the
procedure
Task A
4.3.2.
Services/supplies
2
2/2015
Joint management with an international organisation
Task B of this action with the objective of engaging local stakeholders in relation
with remediation of uranium legacy sites in Central Asia will be implemented in joint
management with UNDP for an amount of EUR 0.5 million. This implementation is
justified because UNDP and the partner organisations in the ENVSEC3 interagency
consortium have a strong presence and experience in dealing with the local
stakeholders in the affected uranium legacy sites in Central Asia. Joint management
with this international organisation in accordance with Article 53d of Financial
Regulation 1605/2002 is possible because the organisation is bound by a long-term
framework agreement (FAFA). The international organisation will implement
together with the ENVSEC consortium partners a stakeholder engagement project for
the uranium legacy sites in Central Asia.
The change of method of implementation constitutes a substantial change except
where the Commission "re-centralises" or reduces the level of budgetimplementation tasks previously entrusted to the international organisation.
3
ENVSEC is an interagency consortium of international agencies with specialized and complementary mandates and expertise in providing
an integrated response to environment and security challenges with particular focus on conflict prevention and peace-building. ENVSEC
partners are OSCE, UNDP, UNECE, UNEP, REC and NATO.
6
4.4.
Scope of geographical eligibility for procurement in direct centralised and
decentralised management
Subject to the following, the geographical eligibility in terms of place of
establishment for participating in procurement procedures and in terms of origin of
supplies and materials purchased as established in the basic act shall apply.
The responsible authorising officer may extend the geographical eligibility in
accordance with Article 14(7) of the basic act on the basis of the unavailability of
products and services in the markets of the countries concerned, for reasons of
extreme urgency, or if the eligibility rules would make the realisation of this action
impossible or exceedingly difficult.
7
4.5.
Indicative budget
Module
Amount in
EUR
thousands
4.3.3. – Procurement (direct centralised)
2450
N.A.
4.7. – Evaluation and audit (indicative)
30
N.A.
4.8. – Communication and visibility (indicative)
20
N.A.
0
N.A.
500
N.A.
3.000
N.A.
Contingencies
4.3.2. – Joint management with UNDP
Totals
4.6.
Third party
contribution
Performance monitoring
The project will be subject to Results Oriented Monitoring providing valuable
insights for each specific project but also on the performance of the contractor on the
global tasks. Next to Result Oriented Monitoring the project will be monitored
internally using traditional project management Key Performance Indicators, such as:
 Achievement of milestones;
 Progress reports and technical reports;
 Use of resources.
The long term aspects will be based on KPI to be specified in the Terms of
Reference. They will be defined so as to quantify the medium-long term impact of
the projects. The implication of the partner country in this evaluation exercise is
important for the sustainability of the activities. Possible specific KPI could be:
 Number of documents developed/reviewed;
 Number of sites benefiting from remediation activities.
Each of the indicators should be amenable to an exercise of goal setting, whereby
milestones for the values of the indicators can be set in conjunction with global
strategic plans.
8
4.7.
Evaluation and audit
The project will be monitored in compliance with standard procedures. Monitoring
and assessment should be based on periodic assessment of project activity progress,
achievement of project outputs and its objectives. In addition to the follow-up and
controls carried out on the spot, as necessary, by the Commission, including the
European Antifraud Office (OLAF) and the Court of Auditors, projects shall be
monitored on a regular basis by appropriately qualified specialists based in the field.
Independent ex-post evaluations will be conducted periodically, in order to assess the
relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact of the programme.
4.8.
Communication and visibility
Visibility activities will be implemented according to well-defined standards and
rules: the EU visibility guidelines for external actions. These guidelines are a part of
the contractual obligations of implementing partners/Consultants and must therefore
be carried out in the same way as any other contractual element.
On a regular basis, the Consultant will submit Progress Reports to the European
Commission with copies to the Project Partner, the EU Delegation in the partner
country, the EU Joint Research Centre and the EU Monitoring Team. The Consultant
shall pay particular attention to the confidentiality of the data. Other deliverables
dedicated to visibility may include:
 An inception press release at the start-up of the project;
 A final press release to be provided with the project final report;
 A final presentation meeting for the dissemination of the project results organised
by the Consultant.
Other actions to disseminate results or increase the visibility of the EU action may be
implemented in parallel to the present projects.
9