BAKAD ESIA, Volume III Technical...

BAKAD ESIA, Volume III

Technical Appendixes Environmental topics Geology and Soil Cover

August 2019

Revision 8

ERM EURASIA BAKAD ESIA

BAKAD CONSORTIUM ESIA REPORT: TECHNICAL APPENDIXES, VOL. III, REV 8

2.3-1

2.3 GEOLOGY AND SOIL COVER

This section presents the geology and soil baseline characteristics within the

Project’s Area of influence (AoI) with respect to potential impacts of the

Project on these settings.

The following potential impacts were identified and assessed:

disturbance of natural bedding of soils and modification of the relief;

development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and

phenomena (erosion);

decrease of soil fertility;

changes in the soil water regime;

degradation of the soil due to pollution.

Once the baseline information was gathered, the potential impacts were

evaluated that may occur during construction and operation phase of the

Project – also in consideration of the various control measures and good

practices that are anyhow obligatory or otherwise planned for the Project (the

so-called embedded controls). Where needed, additional mitigation measures

for each of the identified impacts were developed (beyond the embedded

controls) to reduce the remaining impacts.

It should be noted that the assessment of impacts on geology and soils

overlaps with several other topics addressed in this ESIA Report. In particular,

impacts of the Project with respect to vegetation cover are discussed in Volume

III Section 2.7, impacts on the local land uses are discussed in Section 4, and

impacts on the hydrogeology are discussed in Section 2.4.

2.3.1 Area of Influence

Size of an Area of Influence (AoI) depends on the type of impacts, and is

determined for each specific case on the basis of expert appraisal. Based on

our experience the area of significant impacts on geology and soils does not

exceed the area of land allotment (temporary and permanent) for the Project

facilities. In that case, the Project’s AoI on soils presents in and near the Project

alignment, service areas, access roads, quarries and construction sites.

BAKAD will be constructed in the Almaty Region and will run along Almaty

crossing three districts. The total length of the BAKAD road will be 65.491 km.

The BAKAD construction corridor varies between 70 m (right-of-the-way) and

500 m (interchanges), where the land withdrawn will take place. The size of

the corridor has been selected to accommodate construction works of BAKAD

RoW and interchanges.



2.3-2

The total area of the land allotment will be 801.7 ha1 including 127.4 ha for the

temporary land allotment, which includes construction sites, shift camps and

quarries. The permanent land allotment is 674.3 ha (see Section 7.7 ESIA,

Volume II for more details).

2.3.2 Methodology

2.3.2.1 Baseline survey methodology

Geology and relief

Information on geological conditions and the relief, the identification of the

risks associated with exogenous geological processes and seismic activity in

the ESIA Report is based on site investigations, assessments, literature and

regulatory framework.

Detailed geotechnical and geological surveys were conducted in 2008-2009

and updated in 2013 to determine the geological and geotechnical properties

of the Project site2. Geotechnical boreholes were set up and test pits conducted

along the BAKAD. Geotechnical property testing from soil samples collected

from the boreholes were tested.

Soils and soil cover

Field and geochemical soil surveys of the Project AoI were undertaken in June

2018. The survey covered a 1000 m strip on each side of the axis of the BAKAD

route. The length of walkover surveys totalled 140 km.

The key soil description sites were selected with consideration of the Project

layout, natural geomorphological and geobotanical soil forming factors and

also those associated with the human activity (Figure 2.3-1).

Soil survey and geochemical sampling fieldwork was carried out in

accordance with the universally recognised practice and requirements of the

regulatory documents3.

1 The land allotment area was calculated in ArcGIS based on a 70 m corridor along the road and a 500 m corridor near

junctions.

2 Report on engineering-geological conditions. BAKAD. Prepared by LLP “Shymkent Kazdorproekt” and LLP “KazGIIZ”,

Almaty, 2008-2009, updated in 2013

3 GOST 17.4.3.01-83: Environmental Protection. Soils. General requirements for sampling; GOST 27593-88. Soils. Terms and

definitions; GOST 17.4.4.02-84: Environmental Protection. Soils. Methods for collection and preparation of samples for

chemical, bacteriological and helminthological analysis.



2.3-3

Soil sections and open test pits were morphologically described and

photographed on all soil and soil-geochemical survey sites (Figure 2.3-1,

Annex 2.3.3). Soil diagnostics and designation of genetic horizons were carried

out in accordance with the national and international standards for soil

classification4.

Samples for general chemical analysis and preliminary ecological soil

assessment were taken from genetic soil horizons in accordance with national

requirements3. Altogether 69 soil samples from 17 test points were taken and

analysed in laboratories5.

The significance of contamination to local soils was mainly defined by the

relevant national and international soil quality standards (appropriate links

are presented in Section 2.3.3.2).

4 Classification and diagnostics of soils of the USSR (1977); The international standard for soil classification and preparation

of legends for soil maps of 2014 (FAO WRB as updated in 2015 (2018))

5 Laboratory tests were performed in accredited testing centres and research laboratories holding all the necessary licenses

and accreditation certificates (e.g. TOO Kazackanaliz, National Expert Centre under the National Ministry of Public Health,

Kazakh Soil and Agrochemistry Research Institute, etc.).



2.3-4

Figure 2.3-1 Location of soil survey sites and geochemical sampling points



2.3-5

2.3.2.2 Impact assessment methodology

Magnitude of Impact

Magnitude of impact is evaluated with consideration for the following

characteristics/parameters of impact: scale, duration, frequency, extent.

Out of extent, frequency and duration of impacts, the basic characteristic is

selected, i.e. having the most unfavorable significance (for example, long-term

duration of impacts is the basic characteristic under conditions of long-term,

instantaneous and local impacts).

Magnitude of impacts is determined as combination of the basic characteristic

and the scale of impact (Table 2.3-1).

Table 2.3-1 Determination of Impact Magnitude

Basic Characteristic Scale

Duration Frequency Extent Negligible Small Medium Large

Instantaneous Single Site Negligible

Short-term Occasionally Local

Small

Medium-term Regularly Regional

Medium

Long-term Frequent National

Permanent Continuous International

Large

Scale of Impact

According to the adopted impact assessment terminology scale of impacts is

intensity of alterations. Scale, where possible, is quantitative evaluation of

predicted consequences (for instance, elevated concentrations of pollutants in

the air, water and soils; areas of land plots allocated for Project

implementation in percentage of land areas used for economic activities prior

to Project implementation; a reduction in number of affected species, etc.). At

that, the multivariable and diverse range of impacts not always allow the use

of quantitative methodologies of evaluation, in such cases it is admitted the

use of semi-quantitative and qualitative approaches (Table 2.3-2, Table 2.3-3).



2.3-6

Table 2.3-2 Criteria for evaluation of the Scale of impacts on the geological environment

Note: it is not required to comply with all the criteria for the Scale evaluation

Criteria Negligible Small Medium Large

Topography There are likely to be negligible or no alterations of baseline relief, caused only by the small scope of earthworks (such as grading and levelling) throughout the Project’s life cycle. The impacted area will be within the boundaries of the Project implementation territory.

The total area of the changed terrain will not exceed 10% of the territory of Project implementation.

The Project implementation will cause insignificant changes in the terrain within the territory to be occupied by Project facilities and infrastructures (embankments, dikes, bench levelling) which do not result in large-scale emergency / activation of adverse exogenous processes. Upon completing the Project lifecycle, the terrain will remain changed, but these changes will not affect large areas and will not result in the fundamental change of geotechnical conditions in the subject territory.

The total area of the changed terrain will vary from 10% to 50% of the total Project Area.

Project implementation will cause changes in the terrain which will result in forming of new forms of the man-made origin (both positive and negative, which will occupy a large area – from 50% to 75% of the Project territory); these forms will exist after completing the Project lifecycle. It is quite probable that manifestation/activation of adverse exogenous processes as well as the change of geotechnical conditions / soil properties will take place within newly formed forms of the man-made origin.

The Project will result in radical changes of topography where sizable elevations and depressions will appear and remain after completing the Project lifecycle. Manifestation/activation of negative exogenous processes as well as the radical change of geotechnical conditions / soil properties is expected to take place within newly formed forms of the man-made origin.

The total area of the changed terrain will make from 75% to 100% of the total Project Area.



2.3-7


Exogenous engineering-geological processes and conditions

The Project will not result in activation of exogenous geological processes and will not cause significant changes in geotechnical conditions. No engineering protection measures will be required in the Project territory. The Project will affect the upper soil layer (up to 10 m thick).Geological impact sources will be eliminated as soon as the Project is completed.

The Project will provoke minor activation of exogenous geological processes within local sites. No large-scale engineering protection measures will be required. Minor changes in geotechnical conditions are expected to take place within the Project territory and they will not significantly affect the massif in the Project territory as a whole. The Project will affect the upper soil layer (up to 10 m thick).

The Project may potentially cause significant intensification of adverse exogenous processes that will require engineering protection measures. In addition, noticeable changes of geotechnical conditions / soil properties are expected to take place. Exogenous processes may potentially be in progress after completing the Project lifecycle. The Project will affect the upper soil layer (up to 20 m thick).

Project implementation is expected to cause essential activation of exogenous geological processes in both the Project territory and adjacent land areas. This will necessitate to implement engineering protection measures not only in the Project AoI but in the adjacent territory as well. Almost complete changes in geotechnical conditions / soil properties are predicted within an affected zone. Process activation focuses will persist for a long time after completing the Project lifecycle. The Project will affect soil layer of more than 20 m thick.

Contamination of the geological environment

No permanent sources of underlying strata contamination are expected to be formed in the course of Project implementation.

Local contamination sources may appear in the event of emergencies only.

The Project may cause minor contamination of the upper soil strata within the aeration zone. Contaminants do not penetrate into the groundwater table; no special preventive measures are required. The source of contamination will disappear after completing the Project lifecycle.

The Project may cause contamination of soils and water-bearing strata followed by transport of contaminants by underground water streams. To prevent contamination, a set of special measures should be undertaken. Residual contamination focuses may exist after completing the Project lifecycle.

The Project may cause irreversible contamination of soil strata. Contaminants are expected to migrate via groundwater streams at a considerable distance from the Project AoI. To prevent contamination, a set of special measures should be undertaken. Contamination of the geological environment will exist within the whole territory of Project implementation.



2.3-8

Table 2.3-3 Criteria for evaluation of the Scale of impacts on soils

Note: it is not required to comply with all the criteria for the Scale evaluation


Quality of soil Imperceptible changes in soil quality within soil areas. No erosion processes are predicted to occur.

Minor changes in soil quality; a temporary deterioration of soil fertility. Potential mechanical disturbance of top soil layers. Physicochemical properties may slightly vary but not causing significant changes in the vegetative cover. Erosion processes may develop, but they are local in character and can be noticeably mitigated through erosion preventive measures.

Noticeable changes in soil quality due to impacts on the physicochemical composition and the hydrological regime of soils that result in deterioration of soil fertility.

Temporary mechanical disturbances of soil horizons in profile.

Deterioration of physical and chemical properties may cause transformation / depression of vegetation.

Erosion processes may develop in the vast territory, so erosion preventive measures are necessary.

Soil recovery may take several years /tens years on condition that remediation measures are implemented.

Major changes in soil quality, up to total loss of the fertile top soil layer. The top soil layer may potentially be removed.

New physicochemical properties and/or hydrological regime of soils after impacts restrict development or transform plant communities. Remediation works (both technical and biological) should be obligatory completed.

Soil recovery may take several years /tens years on condition that remediation measures are implemented.

Soil contamination

Contaminants are completely absorbed by the soil adsorption complex, not changing physicochemical properties of soils in general.

Regulatory limits (MPCs) of the content of contaminants in soils are complied with.

Contaminants are absorbed by the soil-adsorption complex, but they cause minor changes in physicochemical properties of soils.

Project standards1 of the content of contaminants in soils are not exceeded, but in the event of long-term impacts, contaminants may be accumulated in amounts close to standard values.

Project standards of the content of contaminants in soils may be exceeded, but these incidents are local in character.

Multiple exceedances of Project standards established for contaminants which may spread beyond contaminated land plots due to migration with groundwater.

1 Project standards are the most stringent limits among national and international ones. Applicable limits are presented in the Annexes 2.3.6 and 2.3.7.



2.3-9

Frequency of Impact

Categories of impacts frequency and consequences for receptors are presented

in Table 2.3-4.

Table 2.3-4 Categories of the Frequency of Impact

Category of impacts

frequency

Criteria

Single (unlikely) Impact occurs once during Project implementation (unlikely, but

the potential exists)

Occasionally (unfrequently) Impact caused by the features of the construction or production

cycle (there is a probability of occurrence)

Regularly Impact occurs with a regular frequency (a high probability of

occurrence)

Frequent Impact occurs with a frequency of once a month or more

(predetermination)

Continuous Means static impact without discontinuity points over a certain

period of time

Duration of Impact

Categories for identification the duration are presented in (Table 2.3-5).

Table 2.3-5 Categories of the Impact Duration

Category of the

Impact Duration

Assessment of impacts on environmental components

Instantaneous Temporary, short impact on ecosystems, not affecting the seasonal

background processes

Short-term Temporary, lasts from one season up to one year, predicted usually for

the construction phase

Medium-term Temporary, lasts for one to five years, usually in the case of long-term

construction and commissioning period, in the early stages of

operation

Long-term Temporary, lasts for five or more years, until the end of the Project and

restoration of baseline conditions

Permanent Persistent (permanent) change in the baseline conditions during the

Project that are not restored after the closure



2.3-10

Extent of Impact

The impact extent characterizes spatial distribution of the given impact. The

impact extent categories are detailed in Table 2.3-6.

Table 2.3-6 Categories of the Extent of Impact

Category of the

Extent of Impact

Assessment of impacts on environmental components

Site Impact that does not go beyond the limits of impacts on primary natural

complexes (local populations of species, geological and soil ranges, etc.)

Local Impact affecting baseline properties of individual landscapes and

locations, not usually associated with the impact on long watercourses

Regional Impacts related to a change in the baseline conditions of natural regions,

usually associated with the impact on long watercourses and significant

air pollution

National Affecting national significant natural resources, territories and

sustainable development of nations

International Affecting the environment components, territory and processes of

international importance

Responsivity of Resources & Recipients

Besides the above-discussed magnitude, the other component for evaluation of

impact significance is the responsivity of the affected resource/recipient which

may be of the physical, biological, cultural, and anthropological nature.

Responsivity is an integral characteristic comprising:

own characteristics of the impacted receptor/environmental component (its vulnerability/importance) (the so-called leading characteristic, i. e. a characteristic with the highest index, is to be selected as specified in Section 3.4.3); and

sensitivity of the impacted receptor/environmental component to the given impact.

The category of responsivity is identified based on the combinations of

vulnerability/importance and sensitivity of receptors/environmental components

in accordance with the responsivity matrix (Table 2.3-7).

Table 2.3-7 Determination of Responsivity of Resources & Recipients

Sensitivity

Vulnerability/ Importance Low Medium High

Low Low

Medium Medium

High High



2.3-11

Vulnerability/ Importance of Resources & Recipients

The evaluation of vulnerability/importance of the affected resources or receptors

is based on the following their properties:

Protected status;

Policy of the regional government;

Views of stakeholders;

Economic value;

Expert opinion of specialists involved in the ESIA development;

International / national standards and regulations;

Special features of ecosystems, such as resistance to change, rarity, adaptability, diversity, and fragility, ability for recovery;

The importance of individual components as environmental components, etc.).

Sensitivity of Resources & Recipients

Sensitivity of the receptor to a particular kind of impact is “severity” of

consequences, the potential for recovery, the reversibility of effects (for

instance, cutting down of forest resources of equal value preserves the

possibility of natural recovery of secondary forest association, whereas

completely removed top soil cannot be recovered without special measures.

The category of responsivity of receptors/environmental components is

identified based on their adaptation/recovery abilities (Table 2.3-8).

Table 2.3-8 Designation of Sensitivity of Resources & Recipients

Sensitivity Environmental resources

Low High ability to recover the initial properties and functions, minor changes of spatial

and dynamic indicators

Medium Limited / low ability to recover the initial properties and functions. Measures to

minimize disturbance of ecosystems are required.

High Lack of ability to recover the initial properties and functions. Irreversible

disturbances may be caused by minor impacts.

Significance of Impact

The category of significance is identified based on the combinations of

magnitude and responsivity of receptors/environmental components in

accordance with Table 2.3-9.



2.3-12

Table 2.3-9 Determination of Impact Significance

Magnitude of Impact Responsivity of Resources & Recipients

Low Medium High

Negligible

Negligible

Small Minor

Medium Moderate

Large Major

Description of categories of environmental impacts’ significance is represented

in table below (Table 2.3-10).

Table 2.3-10 Evaluation of Impact Significance on Environmental resources

Significance of impact Description

Negligible Impacts practically do not change the environmental baseline

conditions, local in extent and temporary or short-term in duration

Minor

Site, local and regional impacts which are not accompanied by long-

term degradation of sensitive resources; effects are usually reversible

and minor (do not require special mitigation measures); usually do not

exceed the applicable standards (criteria, i.e. noise, vibration, light, etc.)

in relation to the less sensitive resources

Moderate

Site and local environmental impacts, mostly long-term; impacts which

do not affect critical resources but result in irreversible loss of

biodiversity and habitats; impacts with regional effects persisting from

1 to 5 years; require development of cost reasonable impact mitigation

measures

Major

Significant impacts of regional and of the larger scale; medium-term,

long-term and permanent impacts resulting in irreversible changes and

degradation of baseline conditions; usually having adverse effects

exceeding national environmental standards or associated with

transnational environmental issues; involving effects of toxic substances

and associated with potential emergencies affecting critical resources

and sensitive receptors



2.3-13

2.3.3 Baseline

2.3.3.1 Geology and relief

General description of relief

The BAKAD road is confined to a single geomorphological element – a

sloping piedmont alluvial-proluvial plain. Positive landforms are represented

by slightly sloping ridges. Absolute elevations vary from 615 to 970 m, with a

downward gradient in the south-north and east-west directions.

The plain is crossed by a network or rivers and ravines. The latter have a pear-

like shape with sheer slopes and round scoop-shaped heads.

River valleys are U-shaped with round eroded sides and incision depth of 5-15

metres. The valleys host flood plains and fragments of upland terraces. The

relief is most rugged at the 42-45 km of BAKAD, where the rivers

Sultankarasu, Malaya Almatinka and Karta-Bulak merge. In the northern part

of the Project Area, the rivers meander to a large extent, which should be

factored in when designing and constructing artificial structures.

The area also features occasional hollows, which are relatively shallow

(1.5-4.0 m deep), slightly bent inwards, with flat bottoms, low water content or

even total absence of permanent waterways.

General description of geological conditions

Geologically, the Project AoI is made up by Quaternary alluvial-proluvial and

proluvial sediments, which are several dozen metres thick along the whole

length of the proposed road.

In the upper part of alluvial cones, on a piedmont bench, the Quaternary

formations are represented by boulder, pebble and gravel deposits, which are

replaced, from the mountains to river valleys, with predominantly loamy

sections alternating with sandy loams, sands of various coarseness and, rarer,

gravel and pebble bands.

Encountered throughout the area is a cover of loess-like loams and, rarer,

sandy loams, the thickness of which increases northwards, away from the

upper parts of alluvial cones.

Geotechnical and geological conditions

As a result of the geological survey [1], the following geotechnical units were

identified in the Project AoI (Table 2.3-11).



2.3-14

Table 2.3-11 Geotechnical conditions in the Project Area

No Geotechnical element Distribution and thickness

1. Topsoil Distributed across the whole area starting from the land

surface

2. Filled soil Present at areas where BAKAD crosses existing roads (0-

0.3 m)

3.

Light silty or loess-like

loam

Semi-solid loam

Distributed across the whole area starting from the land

surface until the depth of up to 15.0 m

4.

Low-plasticity loam

Present near beds of waterways and on irrigated lands (0-

0.3 m)

5.

High-plasticity loam

Present near beds of waterways and on irrigated lands (0-

9.0 m)

6.

Very soft loam

Present near beds of waterways and artificial canals at the

depth of 0.0÷3.4 m. This layer can be exposed by

excavations during construction of artificial structures.

7.

Sandy deposits and

coarse gravel with sand

or sandy loam as filler

material

Distributed across the whole area under light loams, at

the depth of 1.0-4.5 m. This layer can be exposed by

excavations during construction of artificial structures

(BAKAD’s crossing with the Almaty-Talgar road at the

60-64 km section)

Adverse exogenous processes

According to open sources [2] the Project AoI enters to a zone with a moderate

degree of linear erosion development and a very weak degree of sheet erosion

development. The territory is confined to the zone of permissible mudflow

risk. The Project area borders on the zone of extremely dangerous degree of

manifestation of landslides. Dangerous geological processes there is associated

with the current accumulation of alluvial and alluvial-proluvial deposits on

the alluvial cones and river floodplains.

Lateral and bottom erosion is strongly present and is manifested by steep

banks and meandering riverbeds. These processes take place in the valleys of

the Bolshaya Almatinka, Sultankarasu and Karta-Bulak rivers within the 28-30

km and 42-45 km sections of BAKAD.

Also, soils along the whole length of the road have high porosity and high

soaking and subsidence capacity if the water content in them increases, which

– if the construction method is not followed properly – may trigger an erosion

process at areas where topsoil has been removed.



2.3-15

Seismicity

The Project area is located in the piedmont of the Ile Alatau (Trans-Ili Alatau)

mountain system. Neotectonic processes in the region are appeared mainly in

increased of seismic activity.

The MSK-64 scale is the standard for measurement of seismic events in

Kazakhstan and the CIS (and several other countries around the world) as an

indication of the severity of ground shaking. The MSK-64 scale ranges from

Grade 1 (not perceptible, recordable by seismographs only) to Grade 12 (very

catastrophic, landscape changing).

In the Republic of Kazakhstan, the requirements for assessing the degree of

seismic hazard for the construction of facilities are regulated by SP RK 2.03.30-

2017 'Construction in seismically hazardous areas' [3], which contains a list of

settlements and maps of seismic zoning.

The Project area is located within southern part of seismic zone of 9-point

earthquakes and within northern part of seismic zone of 8-point earthquakes

[3], [4]. However, according to the soil-geological conditions, seismicity is

taken as 9-point [5].



2.3-16

2.3.3.2 Soils and soil cover

General description of soil-formation factors

Soil formation within the Project AoI is determined by the presence of the

Trans-Ile Alatau mountain range. Transformation of air masses and increasing

absolute elevations result in altitudinal zonation of soils. In addition,

mountains cause redistribution of solid and liquid geochemical runoff on the

piedmont plain.

Ile Alatau is characterised by predominantly steep erosion relief forms with

distinctly shaped and incised river valleys. Soil-forming rocks are eluvial-

deluvial rubble loams covering dense Palaeozoic deposits. Loessial sediments

prevail on elevated foothills and piedmont plains.

Numerous rivers in the piedmont part form large alluvial fans. Recent alluvial

fans are composed of sand-boulder-pebble material. Sand-pebble deposits in

underlying alluvial fans are covered with a thin layer of loessial loams.

Absolute elevations in these areas vary within 650 m and 660 m.

Groundwater flow fed by water infiltrating from numerous mountain rivers is

discharged at the base of alluvial fans forming lakes and wetlands.

Soil cover within the Project AoI

The following soil-bioclimatic zones can be identified within the subject area:

Piedmont steppe zone,

A belt of fescue-feather grass steppes,

Desert steppes, and

Piedmont sierozems zone.

As a result of baseline studies, 13 types and subtypes of soil were described

within the Project area1 (Table 2.3-12, Annex 2.3.1). The structure of soil cover

within the survey corridor (total width is 2000 m) and land allotment area is

presented below (Figure 2.3-3). A 1:25000 scale soil map is presented in Figure

2.3-4.

The most common soils within the Project area are Anthropic soils, Endosalic

Calcisols Yermic, Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic and Endosalic Geysols Calcaric. They

cover 11,288.6 ha (76.7%) and 519.4 ha (70.9%) within survey corridor and land

allotment area respectively.

About 92.0% of lands/soil cover within the Project right-of-way will be

appropriated permanently. Endosalic Calcisols Yermic, Haplic Kastanozems

Skeletic and Endosalic Geysols Calcaric widely spread within both temporary

1 It should be noted, that according to the Classification and diagnostics of soils of the USSR (1977) 26 types of soil were

classified in total. In this Section separated soil types were combined to match with FAO WRB (updated in 2015). See

Annex 2.3.2



2.3-17

and permanent right-of-way. Endosalic Gleysols Sodic, Mollic Leptosols

Eutric, Haplic Gleysols Dystric and Fibric Histosols Dystric are less common.

Geochemistry and soil fertility

General physical and chemical soil properties

The main physical and chemical soil properties are described below. A

detailed report on the physicochemical soil properties is available in

Annex 2.3.4 and Annex 2.3.5.

Granulometric composition. The granulometric composition of soils investigated

within the Project area can be defined as predominantly 'medium to heavy

loam'. The content of physical clay is from 34.1 to 49.4%. Haplic Gleysols

Dystric (meadow soils) is characterised by light loam composition. The

content of physical clay is more than 50% (light clay) in Haplic Chernozems

Pachic (southern chernozems) and Endosalic Gleysols Sodic (meadow saline

soils) only.

Floodplain meadow soils (SS7) and dark chestnut soils (SS9) are characterised

by a sandy loam and sandy composition with the physical clay content less

than 18.2%.

Reaction (aqueous and salt (KCl) extract). All the investigated soils are “neutral”,

“weakly alkaline (weak-base)” and “alkaline” (pHW varies from 7.3 to 8.4).

Neutral or near neutral reaction characterises Haplic Chernozems Pachic

(southern chernozem, SS17) and Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic (dark chestnut

calcareous soils, SS9).

The values of the exchange acidity (pHKCL) vary from 5.7 to 6.3 (“weakly

acid”) in Haplic Chernozems Pachic and Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic, and

from 6.6 to 8.0 (“neutral” and “weakly alkaline”) in other types of soils.

Organic matter and humus. The content of organic matter in the surveyed soils

varies from 0.4% to 5.6%. The maximum level is in the upper horizons and

gradually decreases in the lower horizons.

Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic (dark and light chestnut calcareous soils) have

the highest content of organic matter and humus (up to 5.6%). The lowest

content was identified in Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic (floodplain meadow

soils, SS7).

Nutrient content. The total content of sodium in the soils of the Project area

ranges from 0.03 to 3.24 mg-eq / 100 g, which is typical for the soils in this

area.

The highest content of potassium is registered in the upper horizons of soils

(from 0.01 to 0.75 mg-eq / 100 g) which enables classification of these as soils

with medium supply of this element. The potassium content decreases with

depth.



2.3-18

The highest content of total phosphorus (up to 4687.0 mg/kg) is registered in

the upper organogenic horizons of Endosalic Calcisols Yermic (sierozems) and

Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic (dark chestnut calcareous soils).

The sum of exchangeable Ca+Mg cations is up to 6.3 mg-eq / 100 g in aqueous

extract. The highest content is in Haplic Gleysols Dystric (meadow soils) and

Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic (floodplain meadow soils). This is typical for the

zonal types of soils.

The iron content in the surveyed soils varies from 6,450 mg/kg to 12,600

mg/kg.

Soil fertility

The proposed Project implementation area is generally characterised by a

medium thickness of the fertile soil layer (topsoil). The thickness of the fertile

topsoil varies from 0 cm in Endosalic Gleysols Sodic and Anthropic soils to 70

cm in Voronic Chernozems Pachic (Figure 2.3-2). Consequently, the soils

within the Project area may be classified as “fertile”.

The data on thickness of the fertile topsoil was used in the calculations of

topsoil removal and stockpiling volumes for the construction period. Topsoil

must be carefully removed and stockpiled for subsequent use for

rehabilitation of slopes and escarps (see Section 2.3.4).

The thickness of the fertile topsoil is indicated in Annex 2.3.1 and illustrated in

Figure 2.3-2 and Figure 2.3-5.

Figure 2.3-2 Thickness of the fertile topsoil by soil types, cm

70

5550 50

4540

3530 30

20

10

0 00

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80



2.3-19

Figure 2.3-3 Soil cover structure within the Project AoI (WRB classification)

Anthropic soilsEndosalic

Calcisols Yermic

HaplicKastanozems

Skeletic

EndosalicGeysols Calcaric

HaplicKastanozems

Chromic

GleyicKastanozems

Chromic

Haplic GleysolsDystric

Umbric FluvisolsOxyaquic

HaplicChernozems

Pachic

VoronicChernozems

Pachic

Mollic LeptosolsEutric

Haplic GleysolsDystric and

Fibric HistosolsDystric

EndosalicGleysols Sodic

Survey corridor 3540,9 3196,1 2710,8 1840,9 1042,8 1012,0 669,3 285,2 165,5 124,3 96,9 21,8 19,2

Allotment area 78,9 179,6 145,1 115,9 68,5 63,4 29,3 17,7 10,5 19,8 1,3 1,5 1,2

0,0

50,0

100,0

150,0

200,0

0,0

800,0

1600,0

2400,0

3200,0

4000,0

Are

a b

y s

oil

ty

pe

s, h

a

Soil types within the survey and allotment areas

0,0 15,0 30,0 45,0 60,0 75,0 90,0 105,0 120,0 135,0 150,0 165,0 180,0 195,0

Anthropic soils

Endosalic Calcisols Yermic

Endosalic Geysols Calcaric

Endosalic Gleysols Sodic

Gleyic Kastanozems Chromic

Haplic Chernozems Pachic

Haplic Gleysols Dystric

Haplic Gleysols Dystric and Fibric Histosols Dystric

Haplic Kastanozems Chromic

Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic

Mollic Leptosols Eutric

Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic

Voronic Chernozems Pachic

Anthropic soilsEndosalic Calcisols

YermicEndosalic Geysols

CalcaricEndosalic Gleysols

Sodic

GleyicKastanozems

Chromic

HaplicChernozems

Pachic

Haplic GleysolsDystric

Haplic GleysolsDystric and FibricHistosols Dystric

HaplicKastanozems

Chromic

HaplicKastanozems

Skeletic

Mollic LeptosolsEutric

Umbric FluvisolsOxyaquic

VoronicChernozems

Pachic

Temporary 1,5 14,1 11,6 0,0 0,2 1,8 3,6 0,0 12,1 14,6 0,0 0,0 0,0

Permanent 77,4 165,9 104,2 1,2 61,6 9,4 25,7 1,5 58,0 130,4 1,3 17,7 19,8

Soil types within the allotment area

Permanent allotment area

92,0%

Temporary allotment area

8,0%



2.3-20

Table 2.3-12 Description of soils within the proposed BAKAD AoI

Soil type/subtype Occurrence and typical vegetation Soil type/subtype Occurrence and typical vegetation

Haplic Chernozems Pachic (Southern chernozems)

Vegetation and relief: miscellaneous herbs and fescue grass; miscellaneous herbs and feather and fescue grass associations (groups)

Occurrence within Project AoI: eastern part, between 64 and 66 km (see point SS17)

Haplic Kastanozems, Skeletic or Chromic (Dark chestnut soils)

Vegetation and relief: fescue, feather-fescue grass dry steppes with low-diversity xerophytic miscellaneous herbs and considerable input by ephemeroids in sloping-undulating landforms.

Occurrence within Project AoI: western part (from 1 to 6 km, SS1), eastern part (from 48 to 64 km, SS14, SS15), Fabrichny (SS8) and Issyk (SS9) quarries

Haplic Kastanozems, Skeletic or Chromic (Light chestnut soils)

Vegetation and relief: savanna-like desert-steppe; wormwood-fescue phytocoenoses with ephemeral plants, ephemeroids and noticeable presence of xerophilic miscellaneous herbs

Occurrence within Project AoI: western part (from 6 to 20 km, SS2, SS4)

Gleyic Kastanozems Chromic (Meadow chestnut soils)

Vegetation and relief: depressions in relief which receive additional moisture from surface runoff or shallow (3.5 to 6.0 m) groundwater. Zonal but more diverse and dense vegetation with relatively frequent presence of mesophilic forms.

Occurrence within Project AoI: eastern part (SS13, SS16)



2.3-21


Endosalic Calcisols Yermic (Sierozems)

Vegetation and relief: piedmont and foothill plains form an independent soil zone.

Wormwood-ephemeroid and ephemeroid-wormwood vegetation (bulbous

bluegrass, colpodium, Carex pachystylis, Artemisia sublessingiana or less common

Artemisia terrae-albae), occasionallt with Ceratocarpus.

Occurrence within Project AoI: north western and northern parts (SS10, SS11)

Endosalic Geysols Calcaric (Meadow sierozems)

Vegetation and relief: depressions (low terraces above floodplains, low foothill-piedmont plains,

dry upland) which receive additional moisture from surface sources and/or groundwater.

Ephemeral-ephemeroid species with some moisture-loving plants (liquorice, couch grass,

depressed reed).

Occurrence within Project AoI: north western and northern parts (SS6)

Haplic Gleysols Dystric (Meadow soils)

Vegetation and relief: noninundated (located outside of floodplains) depressions with

shallow (1.5 to 3 m) fresh or alkali groundwater within moist steppe zone on

piedmont plains and low terraces above floodplains

Occurrence within Project AoI: throughout the Project area (SS3, SS5)

Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic and Mollic Leptosols Eutric (Floodplain meadow and forest-meadow soils)

Vegetation and relief: floodplain terraces of small rivers. Soil forming factors are periodic flooding

during the high-water period, renewal of alluvium and continuous recharge with capillary

water rising from shallow groundwater. Gramineous plants and meadow vegetation with

prevalence of miscellaneous-gramineous herbs and reedgrass meadows

Occurrence within Project AoI: throughout the Project area (SS7, SS12)



2.3-22


Voronic Chernozems Pachic

(Meadow chernozems)

Vegetation and relief: depressions in relief; in conditions of

additional surface moisture under gramineous plants and

miscellaneous herbs associations

Occurrence within Project AoI: eastern part, between 63 and

66 km


(Meadow-bog and bog soils)

Vegetation and relief: piedmont plains in the groundwater show

zone (springs, pools, etc.), on river floodplains. . Soil forming

factors are influence of mostly fresh groundwater of varying salt

content.

Hydrophilic associations (groups) frequently dominated by reed,

sedge and cattail: reed, sedge, reed and gramineous-

miscellaneous herbs, gramineous herbs-reedgrass associations

consist of bushgrass, dog's tooth, couch grass, Ural liquorice and

other moisture-loving species.

Occurrence within Project AoI: throughout the Project area



2.3-23

Figure 2.3-4 Soil map of the Project AoI (WRB classification)



2.3-24

Figure 2.3-5 Map of the fertile soil layer thickness within the Project AoI



2.3-25

Soil quality

The soil quality was assessed in accordance with the national hygiene

requirements and international standards:

“Maximum Permissible Concentrations (MPC) of chemical substances

in soil” dated by 25 May, 2015 (Order #452) establishes maximum

permissible concentrations (MPC) which adopted in the Republic of

Kazakhstan.

MPC is the maximum level that does not have a harmful effect on human

health and does not degrade environmental conditions.

“Dutch Soil Remediation Circular”, 2009 (so-called “Dutch List” 1) – is

generally accepted in the European Community as a methodological

tool for assessing the criticality of soil pollution

The soil remediation intervention values (RIV) established in the Dutch List are

representative of the level of contamination above which there is a serious

case of contamination which requires that remediation measures be

undertaken.

Heavy metals and arsenic

The soil content of arsenic (As) and lead (Pb) exceeds the limit values

established in the Republic of Kazakhstan (Annex 2.3.6):

The arsenic concentration does not meet established requirement

(2.0 mg/kg) in each 17 samples2. The exceedance varies from 1.5 MPC

to 4.4 MPC.

The lead level exceeds national standard (32.0 mg/kg) in one sample

only (SS12). The exceedance is 1.8 MPC.

There was not any exceedance of heavy metals and arsenic concentrations

identified with regard to the critical (intervention) criteria specified in the

Dutch List.

Organic elements

In accordance with the national criteria organic elements in soils meet the

established requirements excluding an exceedance of benzo(a)pyrene in

sample SS12. The exceedance is assessed as 3.6 MPC.

1 It should be noted that the Dutch List has no legal force outside of the Netherlands, including Kazakhstan. However, the

criteria for environmental assessment of soil pollution detailed therein are recommended in the European Community as a

methodological tool for assessing the criticality of soil pollution and, consequently, can be used as a benchmark for

additional investigations or decision-making on remediation of polluted areas

2 Samples from upper soil horizons (depth up to 20 cm) were analyzed only



2.3-26

Other organic elements in soils within the Project area, including the Bereke

and Panfilovo worker camps are in line with both national and international

sanitary and epidemiological standards.

A summary table of chemical analysis results is provided in Annex 2.3.7.

Conclusions and recommendations on the soil use

There are no special requirements and approaches to assess the suitability of

soils for further use in the Republic of Kazakhstan. According to the definition

of MPC and RIV (see above), if the substances content in soil does not exceed

MPC / RIV, no harmful effects on human health and environmental

degradation are expected, as a result no remediation measures are required.

According to the soil sampling results the content of organic and inorganic

substances in soils did not significantly exceed the applicable standards. High

arsenic concentrations (As) may indicate a regional specificity of soils, as

exceedances were found in samples of different types of native soils

throughout the Project area. Potential sources of soil contamination by arsenic

are absent in the region.

Thus, determined exceedance (up to 4.4 MPC) of arsenic does not limit further

soil use.

As a measure to reduce potential pollution and improve the quality of soils,

when using soils for backfilling, forming slopes and landscaping, it is

recommended to cover and / or mix them with clean soil.

2.3.4 Mitigation measures

2.3.4.1 Construction Stage

Minimization, where possible, of land withdrawal during the design stage; adherence to allocated land boundaries during construction.

Reclamation of temporarily withdrawn lands and their return to original users.

Reclamation is carried out in two stages: technical (land planning and application of topsoil) and biological (complex of agrotechnical measures and sowing of perennial grasses). The Project provides for 513,175 m2 of grass seeding;

Removal, stockpiling and reuse of topsoil in reclamation and reinforcement of roadbed slopes; Removed topsoil to be stored in piles (only for the construction period, height of the piles shall ideally not exceed 3 m depending on the topographical conditions and land availability to avoid any loss of fertility) on the designated sites, every 0.5 km;



2.3-27

Sign a contract with a licensed organization that provides waste removal. Set the terms and frequency of waste removal;

Temporary storage of waste from vehicle and machinery maintenance operations at designated areas with subsequent removal of waste to solid domestic and industrial waste landfills or transfer to specialized organizations for disposal / recycling;

Temporary storage of all wastes generated at the construction site at designated areas followed by their timely removal to the landfills or transfer to specialized organizations for disposal / recycling;

The soil contaminated due to spillages during handling of fuel and other hazardous liquids will be removed from the site for suitable treatment and/or disposal;

Construction of water-resistant coatings on equipment maintenance sites;

Collection of wastewater from vehicle washing into a settlement pond to trap suspended particles and petroleum products. Collection of sludge from the settlement pond into a container followed by its offsite removal and reuse in road construction;

Installation of culverts and drain ditches in the roadbed; construction of culverts and bridges crossing permanent watercourses;

To prevent the development of unfavourable geological processes (water and wind erosion), the Project provides for the strengthening of the roadbed, depending on the height of the mound and the angle of slope, followed by sowing of herbs. Reinforcement of bottoms of drainage ditches is envisaged;

The Project design is optimized to limit the gradient of the access roads to reduce runoff-induced erosion, and provide adequate road drainage based on road width, surface material, compaction and maintenance;

To prevent waterlogging of the roadbed by surface water and possible water erosion, the Project provides for a system of surface drainage, including water drainage from the sole of the embankment with ditches;

Culverts for the streams with slopes exceeding 2% are designed according to the off-the-shelf solution: 501-96 "Hillside pipes on the roads" with construction of gullies and dampers to prevent erosion on the inlet and outlet pipe sections;

The Project design will consider relevant national regulatory requirements related to seismic design and risk assessment and also the findings of the site specific geological/ geotechnical investigation study;

The seismic design for the Project and all related structures such as interchanges, culverts, bridges is based on the 9 seismic activity scale in accordance with SNiP RK 2.03.30-2006 (replaced by SP RK 2.03-30-2017).



2.3-28

2.3.4.2 Operation Stage

Diversion of storm run-offs from the road into catch wells.

For more information on measures to mitigate air quality and biodiversity

impacts see in Section 2.1 and Section 2.7.

2.3.5 Impact Assessment

This section assesses the impact on geological conditions and soils within the

Project AoI. The assessment identified the following potential impacts:

Geological conditions and relief

disturbance of natural bedding of soils and modification of the relief;

development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and

phenomena (erosion and waterlogging);

risk of activation of seismic processes.


soil fertility decrease;

changes in the soil water regime;

soil degradation due to pollution.

The assessment of potential impacts on geological conditions and soils took

into account the impact mitigation measures of the Project (see Section 2.3.4).

2.3.5.1 Impact receptors


BAKAD is located on the sloping piedmont plain with a well-developed

network of rivers and ravines (see Section 0). Within residential areas and their

immediate surroundings, including agricultural lands existing roads, the relief

has been disturbed and modified as a result of anthropogenic activities.

The surface of the area is covered by a topsoil layer overlying light loamy

loess-like deposits (see Section 0). Below them are sandy deposits and coarse

gravel with sand or sandy loam as filler material. Artificial structures and

disturbed areas are underlain by fill-up ground.



2.3-29


The soil cover within the Project AoI includes 13 types of soils1 (see Section

2.3.3.2). Most abundant are anthropogenic soils; Endosalic Calcisols Yermic

(Sierozems) with subtypes; Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic (Dark and light

chestnut calcareous soils) with subtypes; and Endosalic Geysols Calcaric

(Meadow sierozems).

Based on the properties and current state of components several groups of

receptors (see Table 2.3-13) were identified and analysed within the Project’s

area of influence to assess the impact on geological conditions and soils (see

Section 2.3.1).

Table 2.3-13 Groups of receptors

Group List of grounds and soils

Geological conditions and relief*

Group I Light silty or loess-like loam

Natural relief

Group II Sandy deposits

Coarse gravel with sand or sandy loam as filler material

Manmade relief


Group I

Haplic Gleysols Dystric and Endosalic Gleysols Sodic

Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic

Mollic Leptosols Eutric


Group II

Haplic and Voronic Chernozems Pachic (including arable)

Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic and Chromic (including arable and eroded)

Gleyic Kastanozems Chromic (including arable)

Endosalic Calcisols Yermic (including arable and eroded)

Endosalic Geysols Calcaric (including arable)

Group III Anthropic soils

Notes: * to avoid double counting, topsoil and filled soil were excluded from the assessment of

the geological and relief impact and will instead be taken into consideration in the soil impact

assessment.

1 The Russian version of the report uses the USSR soil classification, which contains 26 soil types and subtypes. See

Annex 2.3.2 for more details.



2.3-30

Vulnerability/importance

The vulnerability/importance of receptors is based on specific features of

ecosystems, their resilience to changes, adaptability and dependence on

changes in the external environment like water content in soils, ground water

level, and climate conditions in general (Table 2.3-14).

Table 2.3-14 Vulnerability/importance of receptors

Group Dependence on external factors and

resilience to change

Distribution, significance for

ecosystems and economic value


Group I

High

Stability and geotechnical properties of deposits. The silty structure preconditions high probability of erosion. The structure of the relief is typical for the area.

Determine and maintain stability of typical ecosystems. If the construction method is right, they may be used as a construction material. Widely distributed across the potential area of influence.

Group II

Medium

Heterogeneous and thin deposits. Prone to erosion if close to the daylight surface. The terrain is partially graded with artificial embankments.

Determine and maintain stability of typical ecosystems. May be used as a construction material in the road base. Widely distributed across the potential area of influence, although they are always overlain by deposits of a different genesis. Technogenic land forms are present occasionally.


Group I

High

Receptors are intrazonal and strongly depend on changes in environmental factors. Have low resilience to external influence due to their original fragmentation.

Determine and maintain stability of rare ecosystems suitable for agricultural activities like grazing and hay-making. Distributed locally in river valleys and accumulating land forms.

Group II

Medium

Merge into extensive groupings. Impacts only happen if the external environment changes significantly. Have moderate resilience to impacts.

Maintain stability of typical ecosystems. Widely used in agricultural activities. Widely distributed across the potential area of influence.

Group III

Low

Have little or zero dependence on changes in environmental factors. Resilient to external impacts as they have already been highly transformed by anthropogenic activities.

Have no agricultural value. Present locally within residential areas and existing roads.



2.3-31

Sensitivity of receptors to specific impacts is assessed against the receptors’

structure, physical properties and recoverability (Table 2.3-15, Table 2.3-16).

Table 2.3-15 Sensitivity of receptors to potential adverse impacts on geological conditions and relief

Impact Group I Group II

Disturbance of natural

bedding of soils and

modification of the

relief

High

The nature of the impact means that a partial restoration of the original structure of soils and relief will only be possible after backfilling and reclamation. Probability of natural restoration of the ecosystem is extremely low.

Development and

intensification of

adverse exogenous

processes and

phenomena (erosion)

High Medium

Fine structure and sensitivity to changes in the water content greatly increase the probability of water and wind erosion. Erosion prevention measures are necessary to avoid this process.

Only the sand fraction of the sediments is prone to erosion processes. Coarse gravel is less prone to erosion due to a larger size of particles.

Table 2.3-16 Sensitivity of receptors to potential adverse impacts on soils and soil cover

Impact Group I Group II Group III

Soil fertility

decrease

High

Fertility can only be restored after reclamation (backfilling of soils and topsoil). Probability of natural restoration of the ecosystem is extremely low and will in any case take dozens of years.

Changes in

the soil water

regime

Low Medium Low

A change in the ratio between soil fractions and a local compaction of soils given the naturally heterogeneous particle size distribution will change the water regime slightly.

Addition of light fractions and a local compaction of soils given the naturally heavy particles will disturb re-distribution of water in soils.

See Group I

Soil

degradation

due to

pollution

Low High

Neutral and weakly alkaline reaction of the medium and high thickness of organogenic layer (40 cm on average) create a good soil buffer, which prevent downward migration of contaminants.

Restoration of soil properties will only be possible after reclamation. Soils have zero self-purification capacity.



2.3-32

Table 2.3-17 below presents the Responsivity assessment relating to the

potential adverse impacts.

Table 2.3-17 Responsivity of receptors to potential adverse impacts

Component Receptor Vulnerability/

Importance Sensitivity Responsivity

Geo

log

ica

l co

nd

itio

ns

an

d r

elie

f

Disturbance of natural bedding of soils and modification of the relief

Group I High High High

Group II Medium High Medium

Development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and phenomena

(erosion)


Group II Medium Medium Medium

So

ils

an

d s

oil

co

ver

Soil fertility decrease


Group II Medium High Medium

Group III Low High Medium

Changes in the soil water regime

Group I High Low Medium

Group II Medium Medium Medium

Group III Low Low Low

Soil degradation due to pollution

Group I High Low Medium

Group II Medium Low Low

Group III Low High Medium

2.3.5.2 Assessment of the potential impacts during the construction phase


The impact is likely to occur during earthworks, clearing and preparation of

construction sites and the road corridor and will be associated with

mechanical disturbance of natural bedding of soils and creation of positive

and negative landforms.

The construction process will involve removal of topsoil1 and replacement of

weak soils following by backfilling of the roadbed with imported soils.

The footprint of the impact will be 674.3 ha within the permanent land

allotment and 59.4 ha within the temporary land allotment. At quarries, the

1 The impact associated with topsoil removal is assessed in the “Soil fertility decrease” section.



2.3-33

disturbance area is estimated at around 68.5 ha. In total, the earthworks1

(excavation, transfer and stockpiling of soils including soils from quarries)

will amount to over 15 mln m3.

The soil will be used to construct the road bed, embankment slopes, and

artificial structures (overpasses). During this processes, soil masses will be

moved, and positive and occasionally negative landforms will be generated.

Development of quarries will also lead to creation of negative forms of relief.

Riverbed diversion is another reason of modification of the relief. At the

moment permanent riverbed diversion is planned at the B. Almatinka and

Kartabulak Rivers and temporal diversion at M. Almatinka River (see Section

2 "Project description" of the ESIA Report, Volume II).

The table below (Table 2.3-18) estimates the force of the potential impact taking

into account the impact mitigation measures of the Project.

Table 2.3-18 Assessment of the Impact Magnitude

Impact Magnitude

criteria Temporary land allotment Permanent land allotment

Scale

Medium

Project implementation will cause changes in the terrain which will

result in the new forms of the man-made origin (both positive and

negative, which will occupy a large area – from 50% to 75% of the

Project territory); these forms will exist after completing the Project

lifecycle. It is quite probable that activation of adverse exogenous

processes as well as the change of geotechnical conditions / soil

properties will take place within newly formed forms of man-made

origin.

Frequency

Single

The impact will occur on a one-time basis during construction

works.

Duration

Medium-term

The impact will last

throughout the construction

phase.

Long-term

The impact will last throughout

the operational phase.

Extent

Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the land allotment and

quarries.

Impact Magnitude Medium Medium

1 The volume of earthworks includes, in particular, the removal and transfer of grounds from quarries. Data on the

projected depths of quarries at the time of the section preparation are not available



2.3-34

Development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and

phenomena

The impact is likely to occur during earthworks, clearing and preparation of

construction sites and the road corridor and will be associated with

mechanical disturbance of natural bedding of soils and creation of positive

and negative landforms.

The removal of topsoil at most of the area will expose light silty loess-like

loams, which have little resilience to erosion. The impact may be reduced if

the construction method and schedule are strictly followed, as exposed soils

will need to be promptly transferred to temporary storage areas or covered

with more resilient soils as soon as possible.




Impact Magnitude criteria Permanent and temporary land allotment

Scale

Medium

The Project may potentially cause significant intensification of

adverse exogenous processes that will require engineering

protection measures. In addition, noticeable changes of

geotechnical conditions / soil properties are expected to take

place. Exogenous processes may potentially be in progress

after completing the Project lifecycle.

Frequency

Occasionally

The impact is associated with the specifics of the construction

cycle and is highly likely.

Duration Medium-term

The impact will occur last throughout the construction phase.

Extent

Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the land allotment

and quarries.

Impact Magnitude Medium

The Project area is located in the zone of erosion processes, as well as in the risk

zone of mudflows and landslides (see Section 0). To fully assess the risk of

development of exogenous geological processes and phenomena, it is necessary to

conduct the following additional studies:

characteristics of the regime of channel and floodplain deformations of

rivers, marginal erosion, water erosion (types of processes, their

orientation, intensity and impact boundaries);

the identification of possible mudflow occurrence areas (the boundaries of

mudflow distribution, the duration, the frequency, the maximum flow);

identification of slope processes manifestation areas (area, soil

characteristics, sustainability factors, degree of activity and hazard for the

Project area).



2.3-35

Based on the results of the studies, it is necessary to conduct engineering-geological

zoning of the Project area relating to the occurrence and peculiarities of

development of exogenous geological processes and phenomena.

Assessment of potential impact of the Project on the development and

intensification of adverse exogenous processes and phenomena (erosion)

will be updated after the above studies finished.

Straightening of the river beds can also lead to the development of negative

exogenous processes: bottom and coastal erosion may occur due to increased

flow rate and light silty loess-like loams, which have little resilience to erosion.

It is necessary to carry out measures to strengthen the bottom and slopes of

the new channels. Slopes and bottoms of the channels are planned to be

reinforced with in-situ concrete. However, for permanent straightening sites,

consideration should be given to the use of natural materials for bank

protection and stabilization (e.g. vegetation fringes and bankside trees) with

steel reinforcements (gabions). It is also necessary to provide new channels

sinuous (and not straight) with asymmetrical cross sections (see section 2.5

"Surface waters").

Moreover, numerous discharges of groundwater were identified on the slopes

and in floodplains of the rivers (additional hydrological survey of the valleys

of the rivers Malaya and Bolshaya Almatinka was performed by

MosiInzhGeoStroyProekt LLP in September-October 2018), so the risk of

adverse processes is very high.

To assess the significance of impacts from the riverbed migration on the

groundwater discharge, it is necessary to conduct a detailed hydrogeological

study of the river valleys (see section 2.4 " Hydrogeological conditions and

quality of groundwater").


The impact is likely to occur during clearing and preparation of construction

sites and the road corridor, which will involve removal of topsoil.

The footprint of the impact will be 674.3 ha within the permanent land

allotment and 59.4 ha within the temporary land allotment. At quarries, the

disturbance area is estimated at around 68.5 ha. The topsoil will be removed to

the depth of 50 cm in the total amount of 1.4 mln m3.

The topsoil will be stockpiled at designated areas and will then be used to

prepare a plant mixture used in slope reinforcement and land reclamation

activities. For backfilling, over 2.6 mln m3 of topsoil will be used.

Once the construction phase is over, the lands under temporary allotment and

the temporary access roads will be rehabilitated in two stages: technical

reclamation (surface grading and backfilling of topsoil) and biological

reclamation (land treatment and planting of perennial herbs).



2.3-36




Impact

Magnitude

criteria

Temporary land allotment Permanent land allotment

Scale

Medium

Decrease of fertility during partial or full

removal of topsoil. Erosion processes

can start, which requires erosion

prevention measures. Restoration is

possible after reclamation.

Large

Complete loss of topsoil.

Restoration will only be possible

after reclamation.

Frequency Single

The impact will occur on a one-time basis during construction works.

Duration

Medium-term

The impact will last throughout the

construction phase.

Long-term


operational phase.

Extent Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the land allotment and quarries.

Impact

Magnitude Medium Large


As surface run-offs will be re-distributed and filtration capacity of soils will be

modified, the water regime of soils in the Project AoI is likely to change,

mainly towards oversaturation. The impact will be associated with the

following activities:

Topsoil removal, which will expose soils with different filtration

properties to the daylight surface;

Earthworks and roadbed construction, which will change the

groundwater level and re-distribute surface run-offs towards drainage

ditches and create new barriers like embankments and ditches

excavated for other linear facilities of the Project;

Grading and landscaping, which will diver surface run-offs towards

depressions and add light and heavy fractions of soils to the existing

soil structure.

The main anticipated adverse effect of this impact will be potential

waterlogging of lands.

Areas of waterlogging can appear at straightening of river beds because of

numerous discharges of groundwater identified on the slopes and in

floodplains of the rivers (see the section “



2.3-37

Development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and phenomena ”).




Impact

Magnitude

criteria


Scale

Small

Minor changes in physical properties

of soils will not cause significant

modifications of the vegetation cover.

Restoration is possible after

reclamation.

Medium

Local waterlogging will lead to a

change in the properties of soils

and vegetation change.

Restoration is possible after

reclamation.

Frequency

Regularly

Occurrence of the impact will depend on the season and richness of

atmospheric precipitation.

Duration

Medium-term


construction phase.

Long-term



Extent Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the land allotment.

Impact

Magnitude Small Medium


Pollution of soils within the potential area of influence will be associated with

exhaust emissions from construction machinery and equipment, as well as

emissions from concrete and asphalt plants.

The pollutants will mainly disperse in the air (gases) or quickly transform in

soils (organic matters).

Modelling shows that during the construction phase soils will be mainly

contaminated by nitrogen oxides and dust. The dispersion range may reach

1.5 km from sources of emissions; however, it is expected that applicable air

quality standards will not be exceeded (see Section 2.1 “Air Quality”).

Given that concentrations of pollutants are expected to be low and the

duration of the construction phase to be fairly short, no significant

degradation of soils induced by pollution is anticipated.





2.3-38


Impact

Magnitude

criteria


Scale

Negligible

Pollutants will be fully absorbed by the absorbing complex of soils.

Exceedance of quality standards is not anticipated.

Frequency

Frequent

Occurrence of the impact will depend on the construction method and

operation of machinery and plants.

Duration

Medium-term


the construction phase.

Long-term



Extent

Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the land allotment and the

lands within a 1.5 km radius from sources of pollution.

Impact

Magnitude Small

2.3.5.3 Assessment of the potential impacts during the operational phase

Potential impacts of the operational phase include changes in the soil water

regime and soil degradation due to pollution. Other impacts including those on

geological conditions and relief will not be anticipated if the impact mitigation

measures of the Project are put in place (see Section 2.3.4).


A change in the water regime of soils in the Project AoIa towards

oversaturation and waterlogging will be caused by re-distribution of surface

run-offs and a change in the filtration capacity of soils. Also, local

oversaturation is expected at pipeline outlets discharging effluents onto the

landscape.

The presence of a barrier (road embankment) will prevent re-distribution of

water to a larger area and will contribute to accumulation of water on the

roadside.





2.3-39


Impact Magnitude criteria Permanent land allotment

Scale

Negligible

No significant changes in soil quality are expected. The impact

will be minimised by the water removal solutions envisaged

by the Project.

Frequency

Regularly

Occurrence of the impact will depend on the season and

richness of atmospheric precipitation.

Duration Long-term

The impact will last throughout the operational phase.

Extent Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the roadside area.

Impact Magnitude Small


Potential pollution of soils covering lands adjacent to BAKAD will be mainly

associated with traffic emissions. However, most of these pollutants will

disperse in the air (gases) or quickly transform in soils (organic matters).

Long-term accumulation in soils is only possible for heavy metals coming

from combustion of low-quality fuels, and attrition of tyres, parts etc.

Soils along roads may also be contaminated with de-icing chemicals, whose

particles may be flown beyond the road surface by fast-moving vehicles or if

traffic is high.

Pollutants are generally accumulated in the upper horizon of soils. Their

downward migration will depend on the soils’ water regime and oxidation-

reduction conditions. This impact may increase soils’ toxicity and reduce its

quality.

Modelling shows that during the construction phase soils will be mainly

contaminated by nitrogen oxides and dust, which may change acidity of soils.

At the same time, concentrations of particulate matter are expected to be

negligibly low (see Section 2.1 “Air Quality”).

Based on the results of the modelling the concentrations of pollutants will be

at their highest at the crossings between BAKAD and existing motor roads:

BAKAD’s crossing with KV-15 Iliyskaya motorway: concentration of

NO2 may be as high as 1.15 MPCOT; of NO – up to 1.2 MPCOT;

BAKAD’s crossing with KV-67 Burundayskaya motorway:

concentration of NO2 may be as high as 1.15 MPCOT; of NO – up to

1.0 MPCOT;

BAKAD’s crossing with R-17 Talgarskaya motorway: concentration of

NO2 may be as high as 1.3 MPCOT; of NO – up to 1.0 MPCOT.

Within the immediate vicinity of BAKAD (i.e. within 50-250 m) concentrations

may reach 0.7-0.9 MPCOT for NO2 and 0.6 MPCOT for NO.

Given the extremely low concentration of pollutants, the probability of an

increase in acidity of soils due to accumulation of nitrogen compounds will be

negligibly low.



2.3-40




Impact Magnitude criteria Permanent land allotment

Scale

Negligible

Pollutants will be fully absorbed by the absorbing complex of

soils. Exceedance of quality standards is not anticipated.

Frequency

Frequent

Occurrence of the impact will depend on intensity of traffic on

BAKAD.

Duration Long-term

The impact will last throughout the operational phase.

Extent

Local

The extent of the impact will be confined to the land allotment

and its immediate surroundings within 200-300 m.

Impact Magnitude Small

2.3.5.4 Assessment of Impact Significance

The Impact Significance after mitigation measures (implementation of

embedded controls) is described in Table 2.3-25. The residual impact of was

evaluated taking into account recommended additional impact mitigation

measures.



2.3-41

Table 2.3-25 Assessment of Impact Significance and Residual Impact

Receptor Impact

Magnitude Responsivity

Impact Significance

Additional impact mitigation measures Residual Impact

CONSTRUCTION PHASE


Geological conditions and relief (Group I)

Medium High Major Strict compliance with the planned work to strengthen the slopes of the

roadway, the bottom of the ditches, new river beds to prevent erosion and removal of substances to nearby areas.

Control of land rehabilitation/ reinstatement activities.

Development of a “Closure plan” of the quarries at the time of construction works completion.

Implementation of measures to strengthen new river beds (see “Development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and phenomena " in this table).

Minor

Geological conditions and relief (Group II)

Medium Medium Moderate Minor

Development and intensification of adverse exogenous processes and phenomena

Geological conditions and relief (Group I)

Medium

High Major Compliance with the technology and schedule of construction works

Minimization of the time between withdrawal and backfilling of soils on eroded areas

Erosion, sediment and pollution control, management of upper soil, as well as storm water run-off

The Project area is located in the zone of erosion processes, as well as in the risk zone of mudflows and landslides (see Section 2.3.3). To fully assess the risk of development of exogenous geological processes and phenomena, it is necessary to conduct the following additional studies:

- Characteristics of the regime of channel and floodplain deformations of rivers, marginal erosion, water erosion (types of processes, their orientation, intensity and impact boundaries);

- Identification of possible mudflow occurrence areas (the boundaries of mudflow distribution, their duration, frequency and maximum

flow);

Minor Geological conditions and relief (Group II)

Medium Moderate



2.3-42

Receptor Impact


Impact Significance


- Identification of slope processes manifestation areas (area, soil characteristics, sustainability factors, degree of activity and hazard for the Project area).

Based on the results of the studies, it is necessary to conduct engineering-geological zoning of the Project area relating to the occurrence and peculiarities of development of exogenous geological processes and phenomena.

Territories adjacent to the section of the river on which the temporary and permanent straightening of the channel is planned

There is not enough data to assess impact significance

High risk of flooding and other negative processes

It is necessary to conduct a detailed hydrogeological study of the river valleys where straightening is planed (B. Almatinka, M. Alamtinka and Kartabulak);

Based on the analysis of the data obtained, decision should be made on the feasibility of the straightening. Also, the decision should take into account the impact significance of changes in the hydrological regime of watercourses and the significance of loss and degradation of freshwater habitats due to the permanent realignment of riverbeds.

Assessment is ongoing1

New river beds (on rivers Karabulak, B. Almatinka and M. Almatinka

The significance of the impact was not assessed, as the strengthening of the slopes and the bottom of the

channels is not provided by the design

New channels will be made sinuous (and not straight) with asymmetrical cross sections.

Currently, it is required to clarify the design solution for permanent realignment. If permanent realignment remains as construction solution use of natural materials to protect and strengthen banks (turf and forest plantations) in conjunction with steel structures (gabions) rather than monolithic concrete, although slopes and bottoms of the channels are planned to be reinforced with monolithic concrete for both temporary and permanent realignment at the moment.

Assessment is ongoing

Risk of activation of seismic processes

1 Mitigation measures will be updated in the ESIA upon completion of the ongoing hydrology studies in parallel with the finalization of the road main design



2.3-43

Receptor Impact


Impact Significance


Project facilities The Project site is located on the 9 seismic activity zone.

There is a risk of activation of seismic processes

The detail design shall ensure the Project and all related structures such as interchanges, culverts, bridges technical solutions are based on the relevant scale required by Kazakh Regulation (in accordance with SP RK 2.03-30-

2017 (instead of SNiP RK 2.03.30-2006)).

Assessment is ongoing


Soils and soil cover (Group I) Medium

High Major Compliance with the technology and schedule of construction works,

storage technology of a fertile layer.

Additional measures will be taken such as erosion control measures, drainage and re-seeding in case the piles are higher than 3 metres.

Control of land rehabilitation/ reinstatement activities.

A layer-by-layer removal of topsoil is proposed, avoiding of mixing with underlying infertile horizons and construction waste.

Major Large

Soils and soil cover (Group II and Group III)

Medium

Medium

Moderate Moderate

Large Major Major


Soils and soil cover (Group I and Group II)

Small Medium

Minor Control of land rehabilitation/ reinstatement activities.

It is necessary to conduct a detailed hydrogeological study of the river valleys where straightening is planed (B. Almatinka, M. Alamtinka and Kartabulak).

Based on the analysis of the data obtained, decision should be made on the feasibility of the straightening. Also, the decision should take into account the impact significance of changes in the hydrological regime of watercourses and the significance of loss and degradation of freshwater habitats due to the permanent realignment of riverbeds.

Minor

Medium Moderate Moderate

Soils and soil cover (Group III)

Small

Low

Negligible Negligible

Medium Minor Minor


Soils and soil cover (Group I and Group III)

Small Medium Minor Compliance with the embedded controls; Minor



2.3-44

Receptor Impact


Impact Significance


Soils and soil cover (Group II)

Low Negligible

The rest areas/TGs along the BAKAD road must include appropriate treatment of liquid and solid wastes to avoid contamination of local soils/ecology near these facilities (petrol stations are not part of the Project, however they also shall be designed in line with Kazakh legislation);

Store appropriately by following hazardous materials storage and handling good practice.

Negligible

OPERATIONAL PHASE


Soils and soil cover (Group I and Group II)

Small

Medium Minor Control of the serviceable condition of culverts/drainage ditches, etc.

Minor

Soils and soil cover (Group III)

Low Negligible Negligible


Soils and soil cover (Group I and Group III)

Small

Medium Minor Confining of application of deicing agents to within the roadbed

Limitation of the quantity of applied agents with consideration of weather conditions and season

Control of application of de-icing agents and monitoring of the chlorides content in soil

In case of high concentration of chlorides in adjacent farmland areas, measures must be undertaken to reduce/ mitigate adverse impacts on vegetation (e.g. loosening, watering, organic manuring, etc.)

Measures for the case of lorry spills, fire, etc. involving hazardous/polluting substances along the BAKAD route to prevent and clean up any significant impacts from drainage of contaminated liquids and fire-fighting water.

Minor

Soils and soil cover (Group II)

Low Negligible Negligible



2.3-45

Receptor Impact


Impact Significance


Assessment of drainage infrastructure as part of surface and groundwater quality monitoring.



2.3-46

2.3.6 References

[1] Feasibility Study (TEO) of the Big Almaty Ring Road (BAKAD)

Concession Project. Chapter V - Environmental section. Book 1

Explanatory Note, 2013.

[2] National Atlas of the Republic of Kazakhstan. – Almaty, 2006 (in Russian).

[3] Construction rules and regulations of the Republic of Kazakhstan. N 2.03-

30-2006 Construction in seismic areas (in Russian).

[4] Map of general seismic zoning of the Republik of Kazakhstan. Ministry of

education and science of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Institute of

seismology, 2003 (in Russian)

[5] Engineering geological report for the design project of 2008-2009 with

additional data for adjustment of Feasibility Study (TEO) of the Big

Almaty Ring Road (BAKAD) Concession Project. KazNIiPI "Dortrans",

2013 (in Russian)

2.3-47

Annex 2.3.1

Description of Soils within the proposed BAKAD



ANNEX 2.3.1: 2.3-48

Description of soils within the proposed BAKAD AoI

Soil type/subtype Occurrence and typical vegetation Morphology Description

Haplic Chernozems

Pachic (Southern

chernozems)

Calcareous southern

chernozems, arable and

unused (long-

abandoned) abandoned

southern chernozems

SS17

Miscellaneous herbs and fescue grass;

miscellaneous herbs and feather and fescue

grass associations (groups)

Thickness of horizons A+B= 45 to 60 cm

Horizon A (20-25 cm): darkish grey, occasionally brownish, silty-

lumpy humus-accumulative horizon, partly distinguishable sub-

horizon Ad.

Horizon В (25-45 cm): darkish-brown with grey tints lumpy

transitional horizon.

Horizon С: pale yellow-yellow-brown dense calcareous horizon

formed by loessal rocks.

Calcareous formations are blurry pale stains, films, concretions and

earth capsules.

Compared to virgin soil, arable soils have larger thickness (by 8 to

10 cm) of humus horizons (A+B) and deeper occurrence of

calcareous horizons.

Humus content: 4-6% gradually

decreasing with depth

Total nitrogen: 0.2-0.3%

C/N ratio: 10-11

S-value: 30-35 meq/100g

Reaction: weak alkaline,

occasionally neutral, alkaline in

the calcareous horizon.

Nutrient content: N 70-80, P 10-

15, K 40- 55 mg/100g

Calcium calcareous: 15-25%.

Highly soluble salts: practically

absent

Granulometric composition: heavy

loamy

Voronic Chernozems

Pachic (Meadow

chernozems)

Depressions in relief;

in conditions of additional surface moisture

under gramineous plants and miscellaneous

herbs associations

Thickness of horizons A+B = 100 to 120 cm

Humus horizon A+B (100-120 cm): intense black or brown-black

with lumpy or nutty-grain structure.

Horizon BCL (30-70 cm): dark brown, frequently with ferro-humic

streaks, transitional horizon leached from carbonates.

Horizon СC: carbonate enriched loessal soil-forming rock with

veiny and mycelial-calcareous neoformations.

Humus content: 8-9 %

Total nitrogen: 0,36-0,45 %

C/N ratio: 11-13

S-value: 35-40 meq/100g.

Reaction: weak alkaline,

occasionally neutral



ANNEX 2.3.1: 2.3-49


Granulometric composition: heavy

loamy

Haplic Kastanozems

Skeletic and Chromic

(Dark chestnut soils)

SS1, SS8, SS9, SS14, SS15

Piedmont steeply sloping-undulating

landforms in conditions of vertical zonation.

Fescue, feather-fescue grass dry steppe

associations with low-diversity xerophytic

miscellaneous herbs and considerable input

by ephemeroids


Horizon А (25-30 cm): darkish-grey with chestnut tint lumpy-silty

humus-accumulative horizon

Horizon (В): greyish- light brown or brown lumpy transitional

horizon.

Horizon (С): pale, pale-yellow-brown dense calcareous-illuvial

changing with depth to less calcareous loessal rock or rubbly marl

of dense rocks (DC).

Calcareous formations consist of concretions, blurry stains, rubble

incrustations. (HCl) effervescence boundary of calcareous soils is on

the surface and that of normal soils in the middle of the humus

horizon.


Total nitrogen: 0,3-0,6 %

C/N ratio: 8-10


Reaction: neutral or weak

alkaline in the upper and

alkaline in calcareous horizons.

Granulometric composition:

medium and heavy loams.

Irrigation resulted in a decrease

in humus reserves in the arable

horizon equivalent to 38-53%

while the humus content in

Horizon B has been decreasing

very slowly.

Haplic Kastanozems

Skeletic and Chromic

(Light chestnut soils)

SS2, SS4

Savanna-like desert-steppe vertical zone with

vegetation of the same name consisting of

wormwood-fescue phytocoenoses with

considerable input by savanna plants

(ephemeral plants and ephemeroids) and

noticeable presence of xerophilic

miscellaneous herbs


Horizon А (15-25 cm): humus-accumulative, intense grey slightly

brown or greyish-light chestnut, lumpy.

Horizon В (20-30 cm): transitional humus horizon, usually

brownish-grey from the surface and greyish-brown underneath,

lumpy.



Reaction: alkaline


absent



ANNEX 2.3.1: 2.3-50


Horizon ВС /С: pale-yellow-brown nutty calcareous-illuvial

horizon (СCI) changing to pale-yellow loessal loam (С).

HCl effervescence boundary is on the surface.


medium loams.

Gleyic Kastanozems

Chromic (Meadow

chestnut soils)

SS13, SS16

Depressions in relief which receive

additional moisture from surface runoff or

shallow (3.5 to 6.0 m) groundwater.

Zonal but more diverse and dense vegetation

with relatively frequent presence of

mesophilic forms.

Morphogenetically, these differ from zonal soils with regard to

slightly greater thickness, humus content and properties associated

with these parameters (in the case of additional moisture from

surface sources) or may have similar or smaller thickness but

noticeably higher humus content and associated properties (in the

case of groundwater being the prevailing source of additional

moisture).

Soil-forming rocks are usually similar to baseline/background soils

with various ancient alluvial sediments performing this function

within river valleys.




Reaction: alkaline


absent



Endosalic Calcisols

Yermic (Sierozems)

SS11, SS10

Piedmont and foothill plains form an

independent soil zone.

Wormwood- ephemeroid and ephemeroid-

wormwood vegetation (bulbous bluegrass,

colpodium, Carex pachystylis, Artemisia

sublessingiana or less common Artemisia

terrae-albae), occasionallt with Ceratocarpus.


Horizon А (10-15 cm): indistinct humus-accumulative horizon with

surface sod layer (А=4 to 5 cm).

Horizon В (30-40 cm): brownish-light grey or greyish-light brown

horizon.

Horizon СC (30-50 cm): whitish or whitish-pale calcareous-illuvial

horizon with numerous neoformations of carbonates in the form of

blurry stains, films, concretions and earth capsules. The underlying

soil-forming rock (С) is less dense and affected by calcareous

invasion.

Humus content: 1,5-2,5 %

Total nitrogen: 0,08-0,13%

C/N ratio: 7-9


Reaction: alkaline and strongly

alkaline in the calcareous

horizon

Nutrient content: N 50-53, P 20-

27, K 520-560 mg/100g


absent



ANNEX 2.3.1: 2.3-51



medium loam

Endosalic Geysols

Calcaric (Meadow

sierozems)

Meadow sierozems

nonsaline (but

calcareous) and saline

(soloniform-slightly

saline, solonchak, etc.)

SS6

Depressions in relief (low terraces above

floodplains, low foothill-piedmont plains,

dry upland) which receive additional

moisture from surface sources and/or

groundwater.

Sierozem ephemeral-ephemeroid species

with some moisture-loving plants (liquorice,

couch grass, depressed reed)


Horizon А (12-20 cm): brownish-light grey lumpy-silty with

frequently distinct lamination.

Horizon В (20-30 cm): greyish-light brown silty-lumpy transitional

horizon.

Horizon СC : dense calcareous-illuvial horizon with blurry whitish

stains changing to carbonated enriched rock, frequently with rusty

stains and occasionally laminated.



C/N ratio: 8-9


Reaction: alkaline

Highly soluble salts: present in

saline meadow sierozems


medium to heavy loams


and

Endosalic Gleysols

Sodic (Meadow soils)

SS3, SS5

Noninundated (located outside of

floodplains) depressions with shallow (1.5 to

3 m) fresh or alkali groundwater within

moist steppe zone on piedmont plains and

low terraces above floodplains

Genetic horizons in the profile are not distinct.

Thin (25-40 cm) dark-coloured humus horizon with a 6 to 10 cm

thick entangled in roots well-aggregated (lumpy-grain) sod layer in

the upper part.

Horizon B is distinguished by brown colour hues, noticeable

compaction and a chunky-lumpy structure. No clear calcareous

accumulation horizon can be identified but the presence of

carbonates is frequently visible due to the whitishness of the profile.

Signs of gleying usually are visible in the second 50 cm of the

profile.

Depth of salt accumulations and quantity of these are determined

by the depth of occurrence and degree of mineralisation of

groundwater.



Reaction: alkaline

Highly soluble salts: sulphate-

calcium salinity type

Granulometric composition: light,




ANNEX 2.3.1: 2.3-52


Umbric Fluvisols

Oxyaquic and Mollic

Leptosols Eutric

(Floodplain meadow

and forest-meadow

soils)

SS7, SS12

Floodplain terraces of small rivers. Soil

forming factors are periodic flooding during

the high-water period, renewal of alluvium

and continuous recharge with capillary water

rising from shallow groundwater.

Gramineous plants and meadow vegetation

with prevalence of miscellaneous-

gramineous herbs and reedgrass meadows


Horizon A+B (20-30 cm): thin-to-medium grey-coloured horizon

with lumpy and grainy structure and a 5-10 cm layer of root-

entangled sod in the upper part.

Soil-forming rocks are bedded alluvial deposits of varying

mechanical composition with prevalence of loamy beds in the

upper part and sands in the lower part of the section.

Rusty stains of iron oxides begin to appear directly under the

humus layer and can be traced down the entire profile. Buried

horizons of varying thickness and completeness are sometimes

found in the profile of floodplain meadows.



Reaction: alkaline

Highly soluble salts: none



Surface soils are calcareous.

Carbonate content is high: >6%

in the lower part of the profile,

8-10% in the medium part and 7-

8% on the surface without

visible build-ups.


and Fibric Histosols

Dystric (Meadow-bog

and bog soils)

Piedmont plains in the groundwater show

zone (springs, pools, etc.), on river

floodplains. . Soil forming factors are

influence of mostly fresh groundwater of

varying salt content.

Hydrophilic associations (groups) frequently

dominated by reed, sedge and cattail.

Reed, sedge, reed and gramineous-

miscellaneous herbs, gramineous herbs-

reedgrass associations consist of bushgrass,

dog's tooth, couch grass, Ural liquorice and

other moisture-loving species.


Horizon А (5-10 cm): dark-coloured muck horizon with a large

proportion of semi-decomposed root remains.

Horizon В (8-12 cm): light with brownish tints, penetrated by plant

roots.

Horizon С (35-50 cm): gleyed bluish occasionally spotty ochreish-

bluish low-humus horizon.

No build-ups of carbonates. Salt efflorescence and spangles may be

sometimes visible in the upper part of the profile. Floodplain soils

formed on bedded alluvial deposits are characterised by a thinner

and less humous profile.



Reaction: alkaline

Highly soluble salts: none



2.3-53

Annex 2.3.2

Correlation between FAO WRB and USSR Soil Classifications



ANNEX 2.3.2: 2.3-54

Correlation between FAO WRB and USSR soil classifications

No FAO WRB, 2015 No USSR, 1977

1. Haplic Chernozems Pachic 1. Southern chernozems

2. Southern arable chernozems

2. Voronic Chernozems Pachic 3. Meadow chernozems

4. Meadow arable chernozems

3. Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic 5. Dark chestnut calcareous soils

6. Dark chestnut calcareous arable soils

7. Light chestnut calcareous soils

8. Light chestnut calcareous arable soils

4. Haplic Kastanozems Chromic 9. Dark chestnut eroded soils

10. Dark chestnut eroded arable soils

11. Light chestnut eroded soils

12. Light chestnut eroded arable soils

5. Gleyic Kastanozems Chromic 13. Meadow chestnut soils

14. Meadow chestnut arable soils

6. Endosalic Calcisols Yermic 15. Sierozems

16. Arable sierozems

17. Eroded sierozems

18. Arable eroded sierozems

7. Endosalic Geysols Calcaric 19. Meadow sierozems

20. Meadow arable sierozems

8. Haplic Gleysols Dystric 21. Meadow soils

9. Endosalic Gleysols Sodic 22. Meadow saline soils

10. Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic 23. Floodplain meadow soils

11. Mollic Leptosols Eutric 24. Forest-meadow soils

12. Haplic Gleysols Dystric and Fibric Histosols Dystric

25. Meadow-bog and bog soils

13. Anthropic soils 26. Anthropogenic (man-made) soils

2.3-55

Annex 2.3.3

Points of the Soil Survey and Sampling



ANNEX 2.3.3: 2.3-56

Points of the soil survey and sampling

FAO WRB, 2015 Sampling points

No USSR, 1977

Haplic Chernozems Pachic SS17 Southern chernozems

Haplic Kastanozems Skeletic SS1

SS8

SS9

SS15

Dark chestnut calcareous soils

SS2 Light chestnut calcareous soils

SS4 Light chestnut calcareous arable soils

Haplic Kastanozems Chromic SS14 Dark chestnut eroded arable soils

Gleyic Kastanozems Chromic SS13

SS16

Meadow chestnut soils

Endosalic Calcisols Yermic SS11 Sierozems

SS10 Arable sierozems

Endosalic Geysols Calcaric SS6 Meadow sierozems

Haplic Gleysols Dystric SS3 Meadow soils

Endosalic Gleysols Sodic SS5 Meadow saline soils

Umbric Fluvisols Oxyaquic SS7

SS12

Floodplain meadow soils

2.3-57

Annex 2.3.4

Soil Granulometric Composition within the Project AoI



ANNEX 2.3.4: 2.3-58

Soil granulometric composition within the Project AoI

Point No

Depth, cm

Soil fraction (%)by particle size (mm) Sum < 0.01

mm

Soil granulometric composition >10

10-5

5-2 2-1 1-0.5 0.5-0.25

0.25-0.1

0.1-0.05 0.05-0.01 0.01-0.005 0.005-0.002 0.002-0.001 <0.001

SS-1 0-8 - - - 0.1 0.2 0.8 3.1 20.0 33.9 12.4 11.2 5.7 12.6 41.9 heavy loam

SS-1 17-27 - - - 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 16.8 36.9 10.7 14.5 5.6 14.9 45.7 heavy loam

SS-1 37-47 - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.2 20.0 38.3 9.1 13.2 4.6 14.4 41.3 heavy loam

SS-1 57-67 - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.2 15.3 38.2 9.9 14.1 5.9 16.2 46.1 heavy loam

SS-2 0-7 - - 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.3 3.2 18.4 37.8 13.3 11.2 4.8 9.2 38.5 medium loam

SS-2 7-17 - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 15.5 38.4 12.8 13.4 5.5 14.1 45.8 heavy loam

SS-2 22-32 - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 19.4 39.1 8.6 13.7 5.2 13.7 41.2 heavy loam

SS-2 40-50 - - - - 0.1 - 0.1 17.3 40.0 10.3 13.2 4.6 14.4 42.5 heavy loam

SS-3 0-7 - - 0.5 2.5 5.8 8.0 14.0 24.5 20.7 5.4 8.8 4.1 5.7 24.0 light loam

SS-3 8-18 - - 0.4 2.0 6.7 7.9 13.2 19.2 20.8 10.1 8.8 4.9 6.0 29.8 light loam

SS-3 25-35 - - 0.4 3.0 5.2 7.8 15.4 17.0 22.9 8.9 9.2 2.4 7.8 28.3 light loam

SS-3 45-55 - - 0.5 2.3 4.9 7.8 15.7 16.8 22.3 10.8 11.8 2.4 4.7 29.7 light loam

SS-4 0-20 - - - 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.6 19.5 31.3 13.8 13.6 4.8 14.7 46.9 heavy loam

SS-5 0-7 - - - 0.2 0.8 2.0 3.0 13.2 28.4 14.4 14.4 5.0 18.6 52.4 light clay

SS-5 12-22 - - - 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.8 15.1 31.0 14.2 14.5 5.4 18.2 52.3 light clay

SS-5 25-35 - - - 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 13.3 32.4 13.9 14.3 5.1 19.9 53.2 light clay

SS-5 35-45 - - - - - 0.1 0.3 11.3 33.6 16.8 12.3 5.6 20.0 54.7 light clay

SS-5 70-80 - - - - - 0.1 0.1 10.6 35.4 12.1 13.1 4.6 24.0 53.8 light clay

SS-6 0-20 - - 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 2.0 18.2 37.7 12.2 10.8 7.2 10.9 41.1 heavy loam

SS-6 25-35 - - - - 0.2 0.5 2.0 18.7 38.4 11.1 11.6 6.7 10.8 40.2 heavy loam

SS-6 42-52 - - - - 0.2 0.5 1.9 22.7 33.1 11.7 9.3 5.4 15.2 41.6 heavy loam

SS-6 60-70 - - - - 0.1 0.2 1.3 19.3 31.8 12.1 9.8 5.6 19.8 47.3 heavy loam



ANNEX 2.3.4: 2.3-59

Point No

Depth, cm


mm


10-5

5-2 2-1 1-0.5 0.5-0.25

0.25-0.1

0.1-0.05 0.05-0.01 0.01-0.005 0.005-0.002 0.002-0.001 <0.001

SS-7 0-10 0.4 1.0 1.5 2.9 5.3 4.1 13.6 27.7 30.1 7.2 3.0 1.2 2.0 13.4 sandy loam

SS-8 0-25 2.5 0.6 2.0 1.6 2.5 3.4 5.5 15.7 26.8 12.4 9.7 5.3 12.0 39.4 medium loam

SS-8 30-40 3.6 0.5 1.0 2.3 3.8 4.3 7.5 16.2 24.1 12.2 8.6 4.2 11.7 36.7 medium loam

SS-8 50-60 1.7 0.4 1.4 1.7 3.2 4.2 8.7 17.7 24.5 11.2 9.2 4.0 12.1 36.5 medium loam

SS-9 0-7 13.3 10.1 14.9 15.7 1.9 2.2 3.3 7.2 13.2 5.7 4.7 1.7 6.1 18.2 sandy loam

SS-9 7-25 10.9 17.7 21.8 19.8 13.8 5.8 4.3 2.1 1.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.7 2.3 sand

SS-10 0-7 - - 0.2 1.2 2.5 3.3 7.5 14.9 36.3 8.9 10.6 2.1 12.5 34.1 medium loam

SS-10 8-18 - 0.2 0.3 0.7 2.3 2.6 5.9 18.5 29.8 5.0 17.0 5.4 12.3 39.7 medium loam

SS-10 30-40 - - 0.3 0.7 2.3 3.1 7.6 20.5 29.6 9.8 12.5 4.0 9.6 35.9 medium loam

SS-10 53-63 - 0.1 0.5 1.0 3.1 4.5 9.2 16.4 30.8 10.5 10.9 3.9 9.1 34.4 medium loam

SS-11 0-20 - - - 0.5 1.0 1.3 3.2 14.9 34.1 10.6 15.1 6.7 12.6 45.0 heavy loam

SS-11 25-35 - - - 0.2 0.7 1.2 2.4 14.9 32.3 16.9 13.3 6.2 11.9 48.3 heavy loam

SS-11 50-60 - - - 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.3 16.7 35.0 13.6 16.7 1.5 14.3 46.1 heavy loam

SS-12 0-10 - 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.7 3.9 17.2 34.2 14.3 11.9 5.7 9.4 41.3 heavy loam

SS-12 10-20 - 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.0 1.5 4.6 16.3 31.2 15.4 12.3 6.0 10.8 44.5 heavy loam

SS-12 40-50 - - - 0.1 0.4 1.7 4.7 19.8 40.3 14.9 8.1 2.6 7.4 33.0 medium loam

SS-13 0-20 - - 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.3 16.8 32.8 11.9 13.7 6.4 15.3 47.3 heavy loam

SS-14 0-20 - - 0.4 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.9 14.6 28.7 14.3 11.3 6.3 15.3 47.2 heavy loam

SS-14 25-35 - 0.1 0.7 1.7 1.8 2.2 2.4 14.8 32.1 10.0 13.1 5.1 16.0 44.2 heavy loam

SS-14 50-60 - 0.5 0.9 1.6 2.1 1.6 2.6 11.4 41.6 21.8 8.9 4.2 2.8 37.7 medium loam

SS-15 0-7 - - 0.2 0.7 1.0 2.6 3.1 19.6 26.7 14.9 12.8 5.6 12.8 46.1 heavy loam

SS-15 8-18 - - 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.8 1.3 15.7 32.3 15.7 10.1 3.7 18.9 48.4 heavy loam

SS-15 25-35 - - 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.7 1.1 14.0 33.5 14.9 10.1 4.9 19.0 48.9 heavy loam

SS-16 0-10 - 0.1 0.3 0.9 1.0 2.5 3.9 16.9 30.4 13.2 12.8 6.1 11.9 44.0 heavy loam



ANNEX 2.3.4: 2.3-60

Point No

Depth, cm


mm


10-5

5-2 2-1 1-0.5 0.5-0.25

0.25-0.1

0.1-0.05 0.05-0.01 0.01-0.005 0.005-0.002 0.002-0.001 <0.001

SS-16 15-25 - - 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.9 2.2 16.4 33.0 13.5 12.0 6.1 14.4 46.0 heavy loam

SS-16 40-50 - - 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.6 15.5 32.9 14.7 11.7 5.9 17.1 49.4 heavy loam

SS-16 54-64 - - 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 14.6 32.4 15.3 14.1 4.8 17.4 51.6 light clay

SS-17 0-8 - 0.1 1.1 2.0 2.2 2.8 5.7 9.0 25.3 12.8 11.6 4.8 22.6 51.8 light clay

SS-17 11-21 - - 1.1 1.9 1.8 2.1 4.9 5.7 43.5 28.4 3.6 1.7 5.3 39.0 medium loam

SS-17 30-40 - 0.3 0.1 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.8 15.5 26.9 13.3 12.5 5.1 21.8 52.7 light clay

SS-17 55-65 - - - 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.3 14.6 28.5 15.1 12.7 4.3 23.8 55.9 light clay

2.3-61

Annex 2.3.5

General Physical and Chemical Soil Properties within the Project AoI



ANNEX 2.3.5: 2.3-62

General physical and chemical soil properties within the Project area

Point No Depth, cm Parameters Humus,

% N total mg/kg

P total mg/kg

Concentration in aqueous extract, mg-eq / 100 g Al mg/kg

Fe mg/kg

S, % pHKCL pHW Na К Ca Mg SO4 Cl

SS-1 0-8 7.2 7.8 4.9 6047 3181 0.07 0.13 <0.3 0.5 <0.10 0.20 12600 9950 0.13

SS-1 17-27 7.5 8.1 2.4 4530.2 2660.7 0.06 0.03 < 0.3 1.0 < 0.1 0.3 13000 10200 0.17

SS-1 37-47 7.4 8.2 1.7 3268.4 3059.6 0.07 0.03 0.3 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 14600 11400 <0.1

SS-1 57-67 7.6 8.0 0.9 1832.2 1601.6 0.07 0.09 0.8 1.3 < 0.1 0.88 10600 10400 <0.1

SS-2 0-7 7.3 8.0 5.6 10190 3590 0.04 0.05 0.4 0.6 <0.10 0.50 13900 10900 0.18

SS-2 7-17 7.4 8.1 3.0 2692.6 2717.9 0.24 0.05 0.3 0.9 < 0.1 0.5 14200 11200 0.1

SS-2 22-32 7.6 8.2 1.9 3804.9 3041.7 0.04 0.03 0.3 0.8 < 0.1 0.25 10800 8260 0.13

SS-2 40-50 7.6 8.4 1.7 2091.7 2917.3 0.07 0.03 1.3 0.6 < 0.1 0.25 7390 7660 <0.1

SS-3 0-7 7.6 7.8 4.4 1766 2090 0.03 0.13 <0.3 0.3 <0.10 0.25 10300 10100 <0.1

SS-3 8-18 6.6 7.7 2.8 3309.9 3349.1 0.04 0.06 0.3 0.8 < 0.1 0.38 13400 10100 0.18

SS-3 25-35 7.1 7.7 2.0 3230.9 3442.3 0.03 0.04 0.3 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 6030 6450 <0.1

SS-3 45-55 7.1 8.0 1.9 2353.8 3750.9 0.04 0.04 0.3 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 11600 9480 <0.1

SS-4 0-20 7.6 8.1 2.3 2933 373 0.03 0.14 <0.3 0.6 <0.10 0.25 15000 12100 <0.1

SS-5 0-7 7.5 8.2 3.9 1132 3996 0.10 0.12 <0.3 1.1 <0.10 0.50 13500 10700 0.13

SS-5 12-22 7.3 7.9 1.9 1641.0 3362.1 0.22 0.13 3.8 2.5 6.55 0.25 14600 11100 0.26

SS-5 25-35 7.6 7.8 2.0 4086.1 3009.2 0.92 0.12 2.4 2.6 4.28 0.5 11600 9140 0.27

SS-5 35-45 7.5 8.0 1.3 2464.0 3129.4 2.30 0.09 1.4 3.1 4.17 1.38 15200 11700 0.31

SS-5 70-80 7.9 7.9 0.7 3331.0 2613.6 3.24 0.08 1.0 2.9 3.86 1.88 13300 10600 3.88

SS-6 0-20 7.6 8.3 2.6 4746 3693 0.05 0.16 0.8 0.3 <0.10 0.63 10400 8000 0.13

SS-6 25-35 7.8 8.3 1.8 4917.0 2621.1 0.05 0.10 0.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.5 13700 11400 0.17

SS-6 42-52 7.9 8.2 1.4 2894.0 3164.5 0.06 0.05 0.9 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 16000 12600 0.12

SS-6 60-70 7.9 8.3 1.1 2133.6 3366.4 0.07 0.04 0.3 0.8 < 0.1 0.25 10700 8750 0.1

SS-7 0-10 7.7 7.5 1.5 1599 3465 0.05 0.09 <0.3 0.5 <0.10 0.25 6710 6950 0.11



ANNEX 2.3.5: 2.3-63


% N total mg/kg

P total mg/kg


Fe mg/kg


SS-8 0-25 7.5 7.7 2.8 3734 4227 0.03 0.05 <0.3 0.5 <0.10 0.25 14300 10800 0.13

SS-8 30-40 7.6 7.9 2.0 2669.3 3804.3 0.05 0.03 0.3 0.8 < 0.1 0.25 10900 9540 <0.1

SS-8 50-60 7.4 8.2 1.6 4431.8 3540.7 0.05 0.04 1.3 < 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 10300 8350 <0.1

SS-9 0-7 6.3 7.4 3.1 3390 3113 0.04 0.04 <0.3 0.50 <0.10 0.38 5840 6240 <0.1

SS-9 7-25 5.7 7.3 1.5 1798.1 3087.9 0.03 0.04 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 14200 10600 <0.1

SS-10 0-7 8.0 7.8 3.2 1167 1119 0.03 0.17 0.5 0.53 <0.10 0.25 12000 9790 <0.1

SS-10 8-18 7.5 7.9 2.5 3800.9 4687.0 0.04 0.08 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 11300 7990 <0.1

SS-10 30-40 7.4 8.0 2.2 2687.7 1182.6 0.12 0.03 0.5 0.8 < 0.1 0.38 11500 8730 0.14

SS-10 53-63 7.5 8.1 1.7 2335.4 667.8 0.13 0.01 0.3 0.8 < 0.1 0.38 10700 9620 0.13

SS-11 0-20 7.6 8.1 2.6 2980 3814 0.08 0.06 <0.3 0.75 <0.10 0.38 13800 10500 <0.1

SS-11 25-35 7.6 8.2 2.2 3245.1 3284.5 0.11 0.05 0.3 0.9 < 0.1 0.25 10300 9480 0.11

SS-11 50-60 7.6 8.1 1.7 2144.2 3791.2 0.12 0.02 1.0 1.1 < 0.1 0.25 10200 9770 <0.1

SS-12 0-10 7.3 7.6 2.0 5084 2567 1.31 0.57 4.0 3.75 7.41 0.50 12600 9940 0.16

SS-12 10-20 7.9 8.1 2.6 2587.1 2678.8 2.09 0.75 2.3 3.8 7.23 0.38 8310 9330 0.22

SS-12 40-50 8.0 8.2 1.3 1843.1 2679.2 3.04 0.37 2.0 3.5 7.12 0.5 11300 10100 0.21

SS-13 0-20 7.7 8.1 3.2 3815 2679 0.08 0.06 2.50 3.25 5.97 н.о. 14500 12100 <0.1

SS-14 0-20 7.5 8.1 2.8 3706 2679 0.09 0.05 0.38 0.50 <0.10 0.25 14200 10900 <0.1

SS-14 25-35 7.4 7.9 2.8 4162.1 2679.1 0.10 0.02 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 11600 11400 0.13

SS-14 50-60 7.2 7.8 2.9 4166.5 2678.7 0.11 0.02 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 10300 7660 0.15

SS-15 0-7 7.4 8.1 3.0 3210 2679 0.08 0.07 <0.3 0.50 <0.10 0.50 14300 11400 <0.1

SS-15 8-18 7.4 8.2 2.9 2919.7 2679.0 0.09 0.03 0.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 11600 9260 <0.1

SS-15 25-35 7.5 8.1 2.2 4657.9 2679.3 0.08 0.02 0.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 13000 10300 0.12

SS-16 0-10 7.3 8.0 3.4 3719 2679 0.08 0.04 <0.3 1.00 <0.10 0.50 14100 11200 <0.1

SS-16 15-25 7.3 8.0 2.8 3806.7 2678.8 0.09 0.01 0.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.25 9500 9400 <0.1



ANNEX 2.3.5: 2.3-64


% N total mg/kg

P total mg/kg


Fe mg/kg


SS-16 40-50 7.4 8.1 2.2 3305.2 2679.0 0.09 0.01 0.9 0.9 < 0.1 0.38 12500 10200 0.11

SS-16 54-64 7.5 8.2 1.8 4733.0 2679.1 0.11 0.01 0.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.38 12700 10100 <0.1

SS-17 0-8 6.1 7.7 2.8 3513 2679 0.07 0.02 <0.3 0.63 <0.10 0.50 10100 8260 <0.1

SS-17 11-21 5.8 7.6 0.4 3231.2 2678.8 0.08 0.03 0.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.38 9610 7470 0.12

SS-17 30-40 5.7 7.5 3.2 3201.0 2679.0 0.08 0.01 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.1 0.38 8800 9230 <0.1

SS-17 55-65 6.1 7.4 1.4 2298.8 2678.8 0.08 0.03 0.8 0.8 < 0.1 0.63 12000 9170 <0.1

2.3-65

Annex 2.3.6

Concentrations of the Hydrocarbons and Heavy Metals



ANNEX 2.3.6: 2.3-66

Concentrations of the hydrocarbons and heavy metals

Point No Depth, cm Concentrations, mg/kg

Oil products, mg/kg As* Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb* Zn Hg

SS-1 0-8 8.58 (4.3) 0.57 17.5 14.90 17.1 4.67 35.90 <0.1 8.4

SS-2 0-7 8.76 (4.4) 0.74 19.4 17.20 19.0 5.40 42.70 0.1 -

SS-3 0-7 5.55 (2.8) 0.52 14.3 13.20 14.0 4.28 36.70 <0.1 -

SS-4 0-20 7.73 (3.9) 0.69 18.5 16.40 17.9 4.27 40.40 <0.1 5.7

SS-5 0-7 7.85 (3.9) 0.70 18.7 16.30 17.9 4.53 40.30 <0.1 -

SS-6 0-20 6.38 (3.2) 0.52 13.9 12.80 13.1 3.30 30.20 <0.1 1.4

SS-7 0-10 5.32 (2.7) 0.48 9.8 7.18 8.8 2.34 25.60 <0.1 -

SS-8 0-25 7.79 (3.9) 0.77 17.0 14.40 16.2 4.22 36.50 <0.1 15.2

SS-9 0-7 2.94 (1.5) 0.39 5.9 8.24 6.3 7.57 35.00 <0.1 1.4

SS-10 0-7 5.58 (2.8) 0.71 14.7 13.80 14.2 3.61 35.50 <0.1 9.5

SS-11 0-20 7.62 (3.8) 0.92 18.4 17.30 17.8 4.58 41.20 <0.1 -

SS-12 0-10 6.64 (3.3) 0.70 14.9 14.10 13.7 58.7 (1.8) 36.50 <0.1 14.9

SS-13 0-20 6.45 (3.2) 0.82 19.3 17.40 16.8 5.1 40.30 <0.1 -

SS-14 0-20 6.30 (3.2) 0.89 20.7 18.10 18.9 5.2 42.20 <0.1 1.6

SS-15 0-7 6.53 (3.3) 0.83 17.8 16.80 17.6 4.48 39.30 <0.1 -

SS-16 0-10 7.26 (3.6) 0.88 19.1 17.60 18.6 5.02 39.50 <0.1 6.5

SS-17 0-8 8.23 (4.1) 0.95 22.8 19.50 20.8 5.57 42.50 <0.1 13.1

MPC (national standard) 2 - - - - 32 - 2.1 -

Intervention Value (Dutch List) 76 13 - 190 100 530 720 - 5000

Note: * portion of the national MPC level is presented in brackets

2.3-67

Annex 2.3.7

Concentrations of the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)



ANNEX 2.3.7: 2.3-68

Concentrations of the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)

Point No Depth, cm

Concentrations, µg/kg

Na

ph

tha

len

e

Ace

na

ph

thy

len

e

Ace

na

ph

the

ne

Flu

ore

ne

Ph

en

an

thre

ne

An

thra

cen

e

Flu

ora

nth

en

e

Py

ren

e

Be

nz

o(a

)an

thra

cen

e

Ch

ryse

ne

Be

nz

o(b

)flu

ora

nth

en

e

Be

nz

o(k

)flu

ora

nth

en

e

Be

nz

o(a

)py

ren

e*

Be

nz

o(g

hi)

pe

ryle

ne

Dib

en

zo

(a,h

)an

thra

cen

e

SS-1 0-8 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 0.8 1.4 <0.7 1.0 1.1 1.2 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7

SS-4 0-20 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 0.8 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 1.0

SS-6 0-20 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 0.8 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7

SS-8 0-25 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 1.0 0.8 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7

SS-9 0-7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 1.9 2.8 <0.7 1.6 1.6 0.7 0.7 <0.7 <0.7

SS-10 0-7 <0.7 0.8 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 1.9 2.7 0.8 1.6 2.3 0.9 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7

SS-12 0-10 <0.7 2.7 <0.7 <0.7 9.5 2.7 37.9 31.3 26.5 59.8 100.5 37.2 72.4 (3.6) <0.7 43.4

SS-14 0-20 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 1.1 1.3 <0.7 1.8 1.6 <0.7 1.1 <0.7 <0.7

SS-16 0-10 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 0.9 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7 <0.7

SS-17 0-8 <0.7 1.1 <0.7 <0.7 2.3 <0.7 10.9 8.3 2.6 6.8 9.1 4.1 1.8 <0.7 2.4

MPC (national standard) - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 - -

Intervention Value (Dutch List) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Note: * portion of the national MPC level is presented in brackets

Date post:	14-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

BAKAD ESIA, Volume III Technical...

Documents