and other globally harmful pollutants into the environment by promoting sound healthcare waste management in Kazakhstan, and to assist the country in implementing its relevant obligations under the Stockholm convention. prepared and coordination on chemical MEAs is enhanced. Several POPs initiatives are implemented not in a coordinated way recommendations for improvement are prepared Initial inter-agency cooperation Updated draft NIP is presented to the Government for review process and endorsement and draft regulations MTE and FTE reports Published official documentation (law, state programs, etc.). properly coordinated effort and in a weak NIP update. Difficulties in gathering information due to the lack of commitment, actual data or resources. Difficulties in reaching the agreement on NIP content and objectives. Mercury inventory and Reduction plan prepared. Stand-alone, site specific mercury contamination remediation programme is in place by the World Bank No other inventories of mercury initiated and completed and human exposure estimated No mercury use and release standard set No national mercury management plan formulated and approved Data collection teams established and operational Sources of mercury, storages and contaminated sites identified. Legislative gaps analyzed and recommendations drafted UNDP and UNEP separate initiatives progressively advance with their objectives Mercury situation in Kazakhstan assessed Inventory is documented Inter-agency consultations held National capacity to handle recovered mercury is assessed and recommendations for improvement are set forward Draft National Mercury Reduction Plan developed with identified priorities. Mercury emission standard established. Inventory collection reports Legislative options reports and draft regulations MTE and FTE reports Published official documentation (law, state programs, etc.). Data limitations constrain priority discussions Draft Plan is delayed in review and acceptance that results in weak enforcement POPs emissions from healthcare waste incineration are reduced through a demonstration component, and wider replication of Waste segregation for waste source reduction is not a standard accepted approach in medical facilities Routine waste 86.08 g TEQ/a to air, and 0.46 g TEQ/a to bottom ash. 16.38 g TEQ/a to air, and 0.11 g TEQ/a to bottom ash Number of incinerators replaced by alternative systems, and shut down. Quantity of The emission standard for waste incineration is not implemented or delayed in approval.
responsible parties. on new POPs is available Training effectiveness assessed (with both training feedback from the trainees and final tests) Number of requests for data sent out and processed Number of visits made to related stakeholders Number of requests for data sent out and processed Number of visits made to related stakeholders trained teams in data collection Web tool published participants in training sessions; training not effective Lack of cooperation of data collection teams with information holders National information system (inventory) on POPs expanded (updated information on uPOPs and new POPs). Original 2003-2005 uPOPs inventory conducted with a limited set of industrial sources and outdated. Inventory of POPs pesticides stockpiles and burial sites limited to 20% of the country at the NIP stage. Under the sectoral programs “Zhasyl Damu (Green Growth) for 2010-2014”, adopted by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated September 10, 2010 # 924, a detailed inventory of all POPs and obsolete pesticides is envisaged but not started yet. POPs Regular Inventory Mechanism established. Industrial sources of uPOPs identified. Statistical database for the calculation of uPOPs inventory built and validated. Industries using new POPs or recycling waste containing new POPs identified. Reports from responsible parties reviewed and data limitations revealed Data quality and consistency evaluated with recommendations for improvement At least 60% of the questionnaire survey completed and elaborated. Inventory of pesticide stockpiles or uPOPs inventory completed using the most recent data available. POPs inventories updated for uPOPs and POPs pesticides, covering all the territory of Kazakhstan. Industrial use of new POPs identified and possible chemical and non-chemical alternatives assessed. Inventory of stockpiles and burial sites of pesticides covering at least 70% of the country. Plan for maintaining and completing the above inventories elaborated and institutional responsibilities assigned. An information system on inventories of POPs substances established Summary inventory reports for each specific POPs substance. Information system built and regularly updated with new data. Report on alternatives to industrial POPs drafted Resources and technical capacities, including technical assistants, are qualitatively and quantitatively enough for conducting a thorough inventory. Lack of coordination and motivation may lead to incomplete results / coverage of the inventory. Insufficient funding and are a risk to the establishment of a permanent inventory mechanism. Data
burial sites extended to at least 40% of the country. Inventory of PCBs updated by coordination with the UNDP PCB project. limitations and from respondents Outcome 1.2: National capacities on POPs monitoring, analytical capabilities are assessed Studies on existing POPs analytical and monitoring capabilities for the whole range of POPs (with focus on new POPs) carried out A few laboratories identified in the course of NIP preparation and GEF/UNDP PCB management programme. Laboratories are currently only nationally accredited for PCB analyses Draft POPs national monitoring plan developed by RECETOX – a Stockholm Convention’s Regional Centre in the Czech Republic. uPOPs analysis methods included in the national register; Laboratories capacities for uPOPs analysis and POPs in goods and environment assessed. national POPs monitoring plan submitted to government for approval. National POPs monitoring plan approved as part of relevant national policies and documents. Participation in regional monitoring networks. Laboratory assessment reports National registers (analysis methods, laboratories, etc); National environmental monitoring programs Weak analytical equipment at laboratories does not allow upgrades, only investment in new tools A small number of interested and supporting laboratories identified limits project’s activities. National partners lack interest and funding for POPs monitoring. A set of recommendations for the improvement of such capabilities formulated and submitted to the Government No full range of POPs and POPs in goods/environment is handled by existing laboratories No national consultations held on priorities No action plan is in place for improvements Qualified laboratories are identified for further accreditation Cost of accreditation is estimated Consultations held and roadmap prepared At least two (2) laboratories accredited to perform uPOPs analysis in goods/environment; Project reports Laboratory accreditation information logs Interested laboratories are easily identified and agree to participate through Cost of accreditation too high Sampling cost too high for
wider acceptance Outcome 1.3: Policy, institutional frameworks and enabling regulatory environment are in place to ensure better control on POPs accumulation and emissions Institutional coordination and compliance with international agreements improved through firmer institutionalization of POPs issues into national structures No POPs coordination center in existence due to lengthy Government’s approval procedures and unaligned MEP mandate, and mismatch of proposed workplans (to 2028) with 3 year long financial planning processes POPs coordination happens in a fragmented manner with no alignment of roles Nu funding sources to sustain POPs coordination function are available Roles and responsibilities of related stakeholders defined Draft regulation defining TOR and potential Government’s funding sources of the POPs coordinating mechanism established POPs intersectoral working group (mechanism) established (for example, as part of the “Green Development” Center) NGO’s participation and input considered in the composition of the mechanism POPs group meets regularly to guide the NIP update process Institutionalization of new POPs issues into relevant line ministries ensured according to defined roles. Coordination mechanisms on POPs issues institutionalized and embedded into draft regulations sent for Government’s review and approval. Funding sources to ensure the mechanism’s sustainability are defined, consulted on with MoF, and proposed for inclusion in national planning Project reports; Approved TOR of the coordinating mechanism; POPs group’s meeting reports Relevant draft regulations; Reports and decisions on funding sources for the mechanism GoK is committed toward the implementation of a sound and integrated mechanism for the management of POPs. Environmental and social impact review of proposed legislation is timely and successful Public consultations are positive and supportive of proposed legislation Time required for approval of new regulation through parliamentary bodies exceeds timeframe of the project. National legal framework, by aligning institutional roles, reviewed and improved to include the issue of insofar unaddressed POPs, uPOPs and new POPs Ecological Code contains only general information on POPs management (chapter 40 on dangerous chemicals), with amendments related to PCBs supported by GEF/UNDP programme on PCBs The Government has plans to extend the provisions of chapter 40 to regulate emissions uPOPs Preliminary report on the improvement of current regulatory system drafted. One (1) stakeholder consultation workshop conducted. Review and update of EcoCode and other key regulations covering chemicals management (number of legislations reviewed and updated) Final report on the improvement of current regulatory system for including the issues of insofar unaddressed POPs, uPOPs and new POPs. Amended regulation drafted and submitted. Project reports; Draft legislation documents Number of consultations held Workshop reports
MEP plans measures to improve the operational control of industrial emissions, including burning of fuels, and promote the construction and modernization of facilities for cleaning exhaust gases in the steel industry. Sectoral technical guidelines updated to include the issue of priority POPs, including sampling and analysis methods Guidelines and action plans are being drafted on the sectors related to POPs waste and PCBs, under the UNDP PCB project under Zhasyl Damu (Green Growth) initiative. Preliminary draft of the guidelines completed and disseminated to the relevant stakeholders (Government, Industry, NGOs) for amendment Results of stakeholder consultations Technical guidelines and action plans on POPs are submitted for approval by relevant state bodies. Draft and final guidelines; Review reports. Workshop reports Sufficient technical and financial resources made available; In consultation process, guidelines become too general or not sufficiently tailored to the country needs; Guidelines are not approved for endorsement at the governmental level. Capacity building programme (trainings) and consultations for involved stakeholders developed and implemented on POPs related risks, POPs monitoring, institutional roles and responsibilities, No national training held on new POPs, developments in the Stockholm Convention and NIP update guidelines; Currently prevailing insufficient knowledge on new POPs, their risks and control measures and approaches At least, three (3) trainings held on general POPs issues and NIP update process, in particular One hundred (100) stakeholders participated in trainings Results of stakeholder At least, two (2) complementary workshops held Sixty (60) stakeholders participated in workshops Results of stakeholder consultations NIP update formulated Project, workshop and media reports Stakeholder collaboration Trained stakeholders are prepared and apply received knowledge in daily functions
POPs control legislation benchmarks and enforcement consultations National Implementation Plan (NIP) on Stockholm Convention obligations with inclusion of new POPs reviewed and updated, with elaboration of specific action plans on new POPs. The Government is carrying out several non-coordinated actions on POPs (update of inventories on pesticidal POPs in 5 regions, PCB management, inventory and partial disposal, planning better control of uPOPs, improving of existing regulations). Updated NIP structure and content agreed in consultations with relevant stakeholders. A first draft of updated NIP prepared which contains preliminary draft of the inventory, guidelines, legislation and action plan and circulated. Final draft of the NIP completed and circulated for review within the main stakeholders. Updated NIP submitted for approval to the Government, approved and submitted to the Secretariat. Project reports Draft and final NIP update documents Comments from the relevant stakeholders; Consultations are as wide as possible for priority setting Difficulties in reach agreement on NIP content and objectives. Lack of commitment, of one or more partners could result in a not properly coordinated effort and in a weak NIP update. Outcome 1.4: Improved institutional coordination on chemical MEAs Review and better alignment of ministerial functions on implementation of Conventions’ obligations No or very fragmented institutional structure overseeing chemicals MEAs Lack of common knowledge on synergies between chemical MEAs Functional review of stakeholders’ functions is complete for improvement drafted Stakeholder consultations held for priority selection Roadmap in place for joint coordination of MEAs Draft regulation to selected recommendations is in place Project and meeting reports Draft regulations Mobilization and agreement of stakeholders to support the function alignment NGOs participate in the review process Delays in reviewing and approving legislation No financial backing to the mechanism agreed with the Government Roles and Establishment of coordination mechanisms to support synergistic implementation of Stockholm, Rotterdam and Basel Conventions and established No conceptual understanding (strategy) on the synergism and collaborative operation of responsible parties No or very fragmented institutional structure overseeing Drafting and approval of a joint synergistic action plan (concept, strategy note) for the implementation of the Stockholm, Basel and Rotterdam conventions Draft legislation supporting establishment of the coordinating mechanism submitted for review and approval Temporary (with GEF/UNDP project’s help) and fixed Functional review report Draft legislation Media reports Stakeholder consultations
responsibilities are not clear framework (system) for monitoring, accountancy and reporting on the implementation of the Stockholm, Basel and Rotterdam conventions in Kazakhstan chemicals MEAs No formal coordination mechanism established for synergistic implementation of MEAs No TOR and mandate of the mechanism is in existence No formal central monitoring on reporting obligations is maintained to assess quality of MEA implementation Data collection challenges to ensure better reporting Functional review of stakeholders’ functions is complete Draft TOR and mandates are defined in the context of existing Governmental mandates and financial planning processes supporting institutional structures Stakeholder consultations held with agreements received form key authorities (Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Finance) Principles of monitoring system drafted Data collection and reporting processes are reviewed and proposals for improvement drafted (Government) budgets for operation of the MEA mechanism defined and proposal for financing submitted to MoF Monitoring system forms part of the prepared draft legislation on the MEA coordinating mechanism Draft strategic concept and action plan are in place Capacity of government authorities on implementation of chemical conventions improved Lack of legal framework for cooperation among key stakeholders No previous training on synergies and MEA implementation held Data collection challenges to ensure better reporting No conceptual understanding (strategy) on the synergism and At least, three (3) training workshops held for key stakeholders on key aspects of cooperation and data collection and analysis One hundred (100) stakeholders participated in trainings Draft strategic concept and action plan formulated Draft legislation supporting establishment of the coordinating mechanism submitted for review and approval Received capacity is applied in forums Training workshop reports Draft legislation Media reports Stakeholder consultations Stakeholder feedback on trainings Project and meeting reports Draft Improved data collection and chemical review processes for decision making and control
collaborative operation of responsible parties No action plan in place to support operation of the MEA coordinating mechanism Stakeholder consultations held documents improvements on the import and use of new dangerous chemical substances Component 2: Overall mercury situation assessed and initial mercury reduction and containment plan formulated Outcome 2.1: Mercury assessment implemented, national consultations held to identify priorities for actions and capacity building on mercury risks carried out Capacity building programme (trainings) for involved stakeholders developed and implemented on mercury risks, inventories, sources, data tracking No previous larger scale efforts applied to build capacity of related stakeholders on mercury negotiations, mercury convention, mercury associated risks etc Limitations in the scale of stakeholder activities on mercury, with exception to WB’s programme on decontamination Capacity building program (trainings) for involved stakeholders prepared and initiated. At least, three (3) training workshops held One hundred (100) participants participated in training workshops Key stakeholders are trained in inventory and data tracking Capacity building program (trainings) for involved stakeholders completed. Training workshop reports Draft legislation Media reports Stakeholder consultations Stakeholder feedback on trainings Project and meeting reports Draft documents Willingness of private sector to participate. Government’s support to the capacity building programme Mercury situation in Kazakhstan assessed in coordinated manner jointly with UNEP No national mercury assessment made, except in form of waste product No database on sources and mercury releases is in existence No full understanding of scale impact on human health Partnership with stakeholders established Data sources accessed Major sources are identified National capacity to manage mercury products and waste assessed and recommendations for capacity improvement Assessment of country’s mercury sources, releases, contaminated sites and priority areas for mercury control completed The country’s baseline data is established. Information made available through database and open Survey reports Source and on-site verifications Draft assessment reports Project reports Cooperation on data access is low Lack of suitable legislative framework on data reporting Data quality is low
developed access web-site Outline of National mercury reduction plan developed No national mercury assessment made, except in form of waste product No mercury action plan in place outlining priority action and setting budgetary allocations Consultations with stakeholders are held, inclusive coordination with GEF/UNEP’s region programme Future plan’s outline and proposed legislative improvements (inclusive release standards) to control mercury management drafted Data collection and assessment initiated Required data collected and analysed, and discussed in stakeholder forums Priorities identified and agreed with stakeholders Draft National Mercury Reduction plan is formally reviewed and cleared by relevant line Ministries and submitted for final approval. Survey reports Respondent feedback reports Delayed consultation and clearance process with line ministries and important stakeholders Public awareness raising campaigns on mercury risks conducted Low awareness of sources of mercury in consumer goods and consequences of their improper disposal. Public awareness campaign developed 50% of planned awareness activities carried out by MTE. Remaining 50% of activities designed in the awareness campaign accomplished Project reports Media reports Publication materials are developed and available Existing funding limitations Component 3: Minimization of unintentional POPs and mercury releases in selected hospitals through demonstration of sound Waste Management approaches Outcome 3.1: Sound health-care waste management through uPOPs and mercury reduction approaches are demonstrated in regions of the country Review of national policies and update of HCWM regulatory framework and road map No comprehensive conceptual note on improving HCWM policies is in existence No currently established emission standard for waste incineration (POPs, heavy metals). No legal provisions exist, except minimum temperature standard for healthcare waste Existing fragmented national policies fully reviewed with recommendations for improvement along with road map defining strategy and timeline for HCWM plan implementation developed; Consultations with stakeholders, including regional Legislative improvements (through amendments in the EcoCode) are submitted for final approval by the Government. Technical standard for hazardous healthcare waste treatment, including methods, is established in close consultations and forms Project reports Legislative documents Meeting and consultation reports Drafting and final approval of proposed legislative changes are delayed Sufficient political support to pass and enforce the standard. Initial resistance to
incineration. No technical standards set for hazardous healthcare waste treatment, including methods. No current requirements defined for waste management plans and country budget does not consider technologies for wider replication. Public procurement rules do not include provisions on EPP (procured products can still contain heavy metals and other harmful substances), and the lowest price criterion is the main foundation. Reporting systems (on waste amounts, tracking and monitoring) are underdeveloped authorities in target regions and service providers are held (at least, two workshops); List of products and services to be included in the public procurement rules submitted to stakeholders for discussion. Legislative amendments, inclusive emission standards and financial disincentives, are drafted, consulted with key stakeholders (government, civil society, NGOs etc). Awareness raising workshops and media reports (at least, 3 expanded workshops for medical and private sectors, and 5 media reports) a part of legislative improvements Public procurement rules are amended and EPP criteria are set Awareness raising workshops and media reports (at least, 3 complementary workshops for medical and private sectors, and 10 media reports) National reporting to POPs convention improved comply with new regulations Installations that do not comply with the emission standard are gradually removed from operation. Batch type burners are removed from consideration as final solution and gradually reduced from use. Current pricing policy is easily adjustable to optimize the work of the HCWM system Development of Regional HCWM Management Plan in selected provinces Baseline situation indicates no concerted action with adherence to BAT/BEP in medical sector Sector is fragmented with disorganized players with no systemic approach to resolving uPOPs, mercury issues and In selected provinces, all HCW generators and waste disposal installations and companies are identified and mapped. The core data is collected and process of it verification is in progress. The Management Plan is adopted, and further actions and investments scheduled Roadmap to support its implementation is approved by participating stakeholders Project reports Management Plan documentation Meeting and media reports Published official documentation Low political will, no interest and resistance from regional authorities. Limited cooperation from public and private sector Parallel improvements in
inappropriate HCWM practices No specifically tailored action plan exists, and quality data is missing. No previous capacity building and demonstration of BAT/BEP to reduce uPOPs and mercury releases implemented BAT/BEP requirements defined, and end-of-use mercury management capacity is engaged for safe storage (identification, training) Stakeholders’ consultations are held with at least (6) workshops in selected regions (3) held. Draft action plans in preparation with close consultations (law, state and state programs, etc.) legislation and control measures The plan serves as a model for replication within the country. Pilot HCWM projects in selected hospitals, including phase-out of mercury containing thermometers No target hospitals for pilots defined before baseline assessment. Waste minimization and segregation at source not practiced No alternative thermometers and alternative product substitution demonstrated No model facilities (with individual action plans) pilot sustainable BAT/BEP and reduction in waste generation and uPOPs/mercury releases BAT/BEP are not up taken on a larger scale Overall waste The baseline situation is assessed. At least four (4) pilot projects in health facilities identified. HCWM Plans developed, inclusive of BAT/BEP, waste minimization and segregation, waste tracking and reporting, and implemented. Required training is provided on spot (at least, 300 staff trained) BAT/BEP (uPOPs and mercury reduction) policies are implemented and targets recorded. Mercury thermometers are replaced by electronic devices, with resulting mercury waste safely handled Health facilities dispose IHCW in installation. Evaluation and documentation of practical results (inclusive of waste amounts minimized, uPOPs/mercury releases reduced) in conjunction with Outcome 4 Health facility documentation. Project reports Formulated BAT/BEP, best practices documentation. On-site verification ‘Business as usual’ approach – no planning is carried out or/and the Plan is abandoned. The lowest price criterion is dominant. Significant adoption of EPP is beyond the project time frame. No services exist for MSW recycling and/or safe disposal of chemicals. Improved planning on the regional level allows fostering and developing
processing Hospitals do not have guidance materials in support of trainings and daily safe practices General awareness on uPOPs/mercury and management is limited participates in scientific medical conferences (at least, 3), public campaigns (media reports, at least 10, interviews, at least, 4) Changes are proposed to educational curricula of medical and other institutions offering medical degree programmes least, 2), public campaigns (media reports, at least 5, interviews, at least, 3), Zhasyl Damuu programme discussions and rountables National curricula updated Development of national training programs on uPOPs/mercury risks and sound HCWM, partnership with stakeholders and national replication of BAT/BEP demonstration Currently, no HCW management training program exists as established by MPH No manuals specifying details of waste management in a hospital setting exist Limited in scope debriefings are practiced for new hospital staff, but no regular capacity building is in place or regularly planned by hospital facilities Training materials prepared in consultations with stakeholders and approved by the Project Board. Training documentation adjusted to regional situation and needs Training plan and schedule are developed for local, regional and national levels Training carried in two demonstration regions for major health facilities, regional administration, and waste management service providers. Training carried in 12 regions for major health facilities, and regional administration and integrated into national training system. Training program adopted and replicated by health institutions. Media follows the initiative Published official documentation (law, state programs, etc.). List of institutions that have adopted training curriculum. List of training attendees, and training report. On-site verification by training experts Required partnerships are developed and support to the process secured Stakeholder participation is ensured Media support is expected on a wider scale Component 4: Monitoring, learning, adaptive feedback, outreach, and evaluation Outcome 4: Monitoring, learning, adaptive feedback, outreach, and evaluation. M&E and adaptive management applied to project in response to needs, mid-term evaluation findings with lessons No Monitoring and Evaluation system No evaluation of project output and outcomes Monitoring and Evaluation system developed. Mid-term-evaluation of project output and outcomes conducted Final evaluation report ready in the end of project Project document inception workshop report. Independent Availability of reference material and progress reports Cooperation of stakeholder
learned extracted. with lessons learnt at 30 months of implementation. mid-term evaluation report. agencies and other organizations. Annex B. Total Budget and Work Plan Award ID: 00071893 Project ID(s): 00085149 Award Title: NIP update, integration of POPs into national planning and promoting sound healthcare waste management in Kazakhstan Business Unit: KAZ10 Project Title: NIP update, integration of POPs into national planning and promoting sound healthcare waste management in Kazakhstan PIMS no. 4612 Implementing Partner (Executing Agency) United Nations Development Program GEF Outcome/Atlas Activity Responsible Party/Implementing Agent Fund ID Donor Name Atlas Budgetary Account Code ATLAS Budget Description Amount Year 1 (USD) Amount Year 2 (USD) Amount Year 3 (USD) Amount Year 4 (USD) Total (USD) See Budget Note: Component 1: Stockholm Convention NIP update and improved institutional coordination on chemical MEA UNDP 62000 GEF 71200 International consultants 10,000 15,000 10,000 15,000 50,000 1 71300 National consultants 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 120,000 2 72100 Contractual services 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 52,000 3 71600 Travel 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 48,000 4 75700 Workshops 12,500 25,000 12,500 25,000 75,000 5 74200 Communications and publications (television, web, print, etc.) 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 30,000 6 sub-total GEF 82,500 100,000 82,500 110,000 375,000 Total Outcome 1 82,500 100,000 82,500 110,000 375,000 375,000 Component 2: Overall mercury situation assessed and UNDP 62000 GEF 71200 International consultants 12,000 0 0 0 12,000 1 71300 National consultants 32,000 32,000 5,000 5,000 74,000 2 72100 Contractual services 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 12,000 3