Attachment_J.2_IEE_2008-CAR-003.pdf

DCN: 2008-CAR-003

CAR / Program Support IEE 1

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE FACESHEET to the INITIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL EXAMINATION (IEE)

Objective: Various Program Areas: Various

Program Elements: Program Support (including Administration and Oversight, and Project

Design and Learning)

Country/Region: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and

Central Asian Republics Regional (CAR)

Funding Period: FY2008 – FY2010 LOP: FY2008 – FY2010 Resource Levels/Amount(s): $26.178M LOP: $ 26,178,000

Statement Prepared by: Andrew Maybrook, Project Development Officer, USAID/CAR

IEE Amendment? Yes No

Environmental Media and/or Human Health Potentially Impacted (check all that apply):

None Air Water Land Biodiversity Human health Other

Environmental Action(s) Recommended (check all that apply):

Categorical Exclusion(s) Initial Environmental Examination:

Negative Determination: no significant adverse effects expected regarding the proposed activities, which are well defined over life of activity.

1. Summary of Findings:

This activity funds staff of the Regional Mission who are responsible for implementation and monitoring of all USAID/CAR funded activities within the five countries of Central Asia. The staff which are funded includes US, FSNs, TCNs, PSCs, RSSAs, and PASAs working for the US Government. They manage, administer, and support programs --including the design of USAID activities, baseline studies, and evaluations -- to ensure Agency compliance with regulations. This activity also includes funding cross-cutting initiatives for country programs such as evaluations, assessments, invitational travel requests and Peace Corps Small Projects Assistance (SPA) small grants not having significant environmental impacts on environment and health. .

a) Recommended Action: Categorical Exclusion and Negative Determination Pursuant to 22 CFR 216.2(c)(3), the originator of the activities has determined that all of the Activities consist of types of interventions entirely within the categories listed in paragraph (c)(2), “Categorical Exclusions,” of Section 216.2, “Applicability of Procedures,” of Title 22 CFR Part 216, “AID Environmental Procedures”, and therefore are categorically excluded from any further environmental review requirements. The originator of the proposed action has further determined that the proposed activities are fully within the following classes of actions:

mho Typewritten Text mho Typewritten Text mho Typewritten Text mho Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT J.2

mho Typewritten Text

CAR / Program Support IEE 2

• The action does not have an effect on the natural or physical environment [22 CFR 216.2(c)(1)(i)];

• Education, technical assistance, or training programs except to the extent such program includes activities directly affecting the environment (such as construction of facilities, etc.) [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(i)];

• Analyses, studies, academic or research workshops and meetings. [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(iii)];

• Document and information transfers. [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(v)];

• Studies, projects or programs intended to develop the capability of recipient countries to engage in development planning, except to the extent designed to result in activities directly affecting the environment (such as construction of facilities, etc.) [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(xiv)].

b) Revisions: Pursuant to 22 CFR 216.3(a)(9), if new information becomes available which indicates that activities to be funded by the Project might be "major" and the Program’s effect "significant", this determination will be reviewed and revised by the originator of the project and submitted to the E&E Bureau Environmental Officer for approval and, if appropriate, an environmental assessment will be prepared.

USAID APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Mission Director: Date: __________

William M. Frej

USAID/ Project Manager: ______________________ Date: __________ (Andrew Maybrook )

USAID/ MEO: ______________________ Date: __________ (Nina Kavetskaya) Note: N Kavetskaya is on leave. Andrew Maybrook serves as her backup for this Approval.

Concurrence:

Acting Bureau Environmental Officer for Europe, Eurasia and CAR countries : _______________ Date: __________

Mohammad A. Latif

CAR / Program Support IEE 3

Objective: Various Program Area: Various

Program Elements: Program Support (including Administration and Oversight, and

Project Design and Learning)

Country/Region: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Central Asian Republics Regional (CAR)

I. BACKGROUND AND ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

USAID/CAR manages development programs for five countries in Central Asia, budgeted at $70-100 million per year. The management of these programs requires a variety of professional and administrative staff, most of which are program funded. This activity funds staff, project design and learning activities, and cross-cutting initiatives which support the programs in Central Asia.

Direct Staff Costs: Direct Staff Costs cover US staff, FSNs, TCNs, PSCs, RSSAs, and PASAs who work for the US Government managing, administering, and supporting programs. Direct Staff Costs also include program-funded benefits for staff such as:

housing, travel, transportation, IT services, web page maintenance, utilities, staff training, supplies, ICASS, building maintenance and janitorial services, outreach products, and technical assistance to ensure Agency compliance with regulations.

Staff functions: The staffing to be funded through Program Support Costs includes technical specialists, administrative staff and other professionals. The functions to be performed by these staff range from basic clerical tasks to serving as CTOs and technical/professional advisors.

Project Design and Learning: This includes design and evaluation activities conducted by the USAID such as project designs, baseline studies and special evaluations. Annual budgets will be set in consultation with individual country offices to meet these design and learning needs.

Cross-cutting Initiatives: Cross-cutting initiatives include evaluations, assessments, and invitational travel requests. Funds will also support the Peace Corps Small Projects Assistance (SPA) program. Funded through a Washington 632 Mechanism on an annual basis, SPA provides Peace Corp volunteers with small grants (approximately $500 each) to support training and education projects in their respective communities.

II. COUNTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION (BASELINE

INFORMATION)

The five Central Asian Republics (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan , and Uzbekistan) together have a combined population of 55 million, a land mass greater than Western Europe and a significant share of the world’s oil and gas reserves. Surrounded by Russia, China, Iran and Afghanistan, they are adjacent to and affected by some of the contemporary world’s

CAR / Program Support IEE 4 most pressing ideological, political and economic struggles. These landlocked nations have a history of flux and conquest, with historically limited access to world markets. The region’s circumstances and prospects still, seventeen years after the breakup of the USSR, appear fluid and uncertain. Other than in the hydrocarbon fuels industry in Kazakhstan, the countries of Central Asia suffer from limited investment and isolation from major world markets.

Despite potentially vast energy assets and other resources, the Central Asian countries are generally very poor and there is considerable poverty and income inequality. Industry is limited, and economic development highly unbalanced. While there are wide variations among the five CAR’s the expected rapid transition to a market economy has not materialized anywhere in the region. In the wealthiest and most advanced country, Kazakhstan, vested interests, corruption and poor infrastructure continue to slow the transition. In Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, the respective governments have not yet taken even the first basic steps in the process of building market economies. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan fall in the middle ground: with initial reforms having been adopted, but limited resources, poverty, and corruption continuing to stymie progress.

Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan are primarily agrarian societies with about 70% of the population (approximately 26 million people) either partially or wholly dependent on irrigated agriculture. Agriculture accounts for 24 to 40% of GDP (Kyrgyzstan 40%; Tajikistan 24%;

Uzbekistan 38%). GDP per capita in the three countries ranges from $1200 in Tajikistan to $2000 in Uzbekistan. An average daily wage for agricultural workers in Uzbekistan ranges from 1000 to 4000 soums (one to four dollars per day), depending on whether the wage is seasonal or not.

Daily wages in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are even lower, and there are few opportunities for agricultural workers to find employment in other sectors.

Crop-based agriculture is not possible in much of Central Asia without irrigation. Also livestock production, a mainstay of rural populations is largely dependent on irrigation. During the Soviet era there were massive investments in irrigated agriculture. At independence, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan had about 6 million ha of land under irrigation (Kyrgyzstan – 1;

Tajikistan – 0.75; Uzbekistan – 4.2). Since independence, the lack of irrigation investment has led to the rapid decline of the entire irrigation infrastructure. Worn out and inefficient pumps, water logging, salinization, silted canals, and mismanagement have all led to a decrease in irrigated land and crop yields. Figures for the actual area currently being irrigated are unknown; non-public estimates within the government of Uzbekistan assume that about 1 million ha have gone out of production. In Tajikistan approximately 140,000 ha have gone out of production.

Water supply has become unreliable or completely nonexistent in many areas. Consequently, farm incomes have dropped precipitously. Governmental policies combined with the lack of markets and agro-processing facilities have prevented farmers from adapting to free market systems, which would create incentives for infrastructure and management investments. As farm incomes decline, both farmers and governments have fewer resources for investment and maintenance; and the cycle of infrastructure degradation is continued.

Rural poverty is closely linked to access to irrigation, and as irrigated areas contract, the economic burden falls most heavily on the poor. Low wages and the lack of jobs have led to out migrations of able bodied men in search of employment. A number of different surveys have shown that any where from 25 to 75% of rural households in Tajik villages have at least one able-bodied male working outside the country (these figures are probably on the low side). Informal surveys within Uzbek villages where WUASP is working have shown that virtually every household has at least one male member working outside the country; the situation is little better in Kyrgyzstan. Although remittances are an important source of family income, the migrant laborers are often exploited by employers and are under-paid for performing the most dangerous and disagreeable jobs.

CAR / Program Support IEE 5

Population statistics indicate that the median age within these three countries varies from 20 to 24; thus, there are massive numbers of poor, unemployed, and underemployed rural males. Given this situation, significant societal problems loom large in all three countries. While Tajikistan has been labeled by USAID as a fragile society, high unemployment in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan will contribute to further instability.

Improved irrigation systems are essential to improving agricultural productivity and social well-being in Central Asia. Without a strong network of on-farm water user groups which are able to maintain and manage irrigation systems, investments in crop diversification, processing, agricultural finance, markets and trade will have little impact.

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT POTENTIAL

The activities to be implemented are staffing and technical assistance costs and are not anticipated to pose any environmental and social risks including the grants not having significant environmental impacts on environment and health. .

IV. RECOMMENDED ACTION

Categorical Exclusion (approximately 70% of funding) and Negative Determination (approximately 30% of funding) Pursuant to 22 CFR 216.2(c)(3), the originator of the activities has determined that all of Activities 2, 4 and 5 and portions of 1 and 3 consists of types of interventions entirely within the categories listed in paragraph (c)(2), “Categorical Exclusions,” of Section 216.2, “Applicability of Procedures,” of Title 22 CFR Part 216, “AID Environmental Procedures”, and therefore are categorically excluded from any further environmental review requirements. The originator of the proposed action has further determined that the proposed activities are fully within the following classes of actions:

• The action does not have an effect on the natural or physical environment [22 CFR 216.2(c)(1)(i)];

• Education, technical assistance, or training programs except to the extent such program includes activities directly affecting the environment (such as construction of facilities, etc.) [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(i)];

• Analyses, studies, academic or research workshops and meetings. [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(iii)];

• Document and information transfers. [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(v)];

• Studies, projects or programs intended to develop the capability of recipient countries to engage in development planning, except to the extent designed to result in activities directly affecting the environment (such as construction of facilities, etc.) [22 CFR 216.2(c)(2)(xiv)].