This document summarizes an agricultural pollution control project in Romania. The project aims to reduce nutrient pollution in the Danube River and Black Sea by implementing integrated land and water management practices in the Calarasi region. Key project components include promoting manure management practices, environmentally friendly agriculture, and rehabilitation of agricultural land. The project is funded through various government and international sources. Monitoring efforts will evaluate reductions in nitrogen and phosphorus discharge into water systems from improved agricultural practices.

1. Agricultural Pollution Control
Project
WBTF 050327-RO
ROMANIA
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT
AND WATER MANAGEMENT
Project Management Unit
Stefan NICOLAU, PhD
The Government
of Romania
Global Environment
Facility
The World Bank

2. Danube Basin
Catchment
Area: 817,000 km2
Danube’s average
annual discharge:
6,430 m3
/sec.
1. Germany
2. Austria
3. Slovakia
4. Hungary
5. FYR Countries
6. Bulgaria
7. Romania
8. Moldova
9. Ukraine
Countries in
the Basin:

3. ROMANIA – GENERAL INFORMATION
Area: 238,392 km2
Population: 22.7 mil. inh.
Capital: Bucharest
No. of Counties: 42
Large Cities: 7
Communes: 2,686
Agricultural
Land: 14.9 mil. ha
Forests: 6.4 mil. ha
International Waters
(Danube River): 1.075 km
National Waters: 9,301 km

4. The data published by the ICPDR shows that Romania is an important
contributor to the overall pollution of the Danube River with nutrients
from non point sources

5. Project Global Environmental Objectives
• The global environmental objective of the
Project is to reduce, over the long-term,
the discharge of nutrients (nitrogen and
phosphorous) into the Danube River and
Black Sea through integrated land and
water management of the Calarasi region
and ecological rehabilitation of two
agricultural polders.

7. Project Funding
Total Project value: US$ 10.8 mil., out of which:
• US$ 5.15 mil. World Bank from GEF funds;
• US$ 1.86 mil. Government of Romania;
• US$ 0.29 mil. Calarasi County Council;
• US$ 1.0 mil. From the Governmental “Agricultural
Support Services” Project;
• US$ 2.50 mil. In kind contribution of the direct
beneficiaries.

8. Project Components
Component 1: Activities in the Calarasi County (US$ 9.22 mil.)
– Manure Management Practices (US$ 5.20 mil.)
– Promotion of Environment-Friendly Agricultural Practices (US$ 2.47 mil.)
– Integrated Management of Boianu-Sticleanu Polder and Ecological Restoration
of part of the Calarasi-Raul Polder (US$ 1.09 mil.)
– Strengthening Capacity in Calarasi County (Service for Water Management,
Soil and Agro-chemistry Office and Public Health Directorate) to Monitor Soil
and Water Quality and Environmental Impacts (US$ 0.46 mil.)
Component 2: Strengthening National Policy and Regulatory Capacity
(US$ 0.27 mil.)
Component 3: Public Awareness and Replication Strategy (US$ 0.45 mil.)
Component 4: Project Management Unit (US$ 0.86 mil.)

9. Main Actions Supported by the Project
At the Local level
• Provision of Sub-grants for Beneficiaries to support:
(i) Adopting organic farming; Funds from the ASSP-Competitive Grant
Scheme are leveraged to support organic farming projects in
Calarasi County;
(ii) Purchasing and installation of household level manure storage
facilities;
• Promotion of Good Agricultural Practices through Testing
and Demonstrating Programs;
• Training Beneficiaries in the field of Good Agricultural
Waste Management Practices;
• Construction of 14 Commune Level Manure Management
Facilities and procurement of related Equipment;

10. • Demonstration of a number of improved agricultural practices,
including integrated crop and nutrient management;
• Tree planting in erosion-prone locations in the terrace area and
windbreaks or shelterbelts on privately-owned agricultural
land;
• Agro-forestry on degraded lands and implementation of Code
of Good Agricultural Practices on the arable land in Boianu-
Sticleanu Polder;
• Design and implementation of a conservation management
plan for the proposed Iezer Calarasi nature reserve;
• Studies for the ecological restoration of part (about 3,000 ha)
of the Calarasi-Raul Polder;
• Specific laboratory and field equipment for the local agencies
in charge with soil and water quality monitoring;

11. • Preparing a Code of Good Agricultural Practices for water and
soil protection;
• Support for adoption of the EU Nitrates Directive and
estimating the costs at the national level for voluntary and
non-voluntary application of the CGAP in accordance with the
provision of the EU Nitrates Directive.
• Support a number of public awareness activities to familiarize
the population and help induce the behavioral changes
necessary to the success of the Project in the seven selected
communes and replication in the County area.
• Promote the Project as a possible model for replication in the
Danube and Black Sea riparian countries.

12. Identified sources of pollution with nutrients:
At household level:
Inappropriate manure
storage
Lack off or bad
conditions of the
concrete slab
protecting the water
well against direct
infiltrations
Aggravating factors:

13. Identified sources of pollution with nutrients:
At commune level:
Inappropriate manure
disposal

14. Identified sources of pollution with nutrients:
At commune level:
Inappropriate manure
disposal
Grazing of animals
on soil erosion
prone areas
Large areas of
slopped land draining
into watercourses
Temporary housing
of livestock near
watercourses

15. Project Interventions
At household level
Individual Platforms
Plastic Bins for waste
segregation

16. Project Interventions
At household level
At commune level
Reclamation of former
unauthorized manure
storages
Construction and
operation of manure
storage and composting
facilities

17. Project Interventions
At commune level
Demonstrations of
well head
rehabilitation

18. Project Interventions
At commune level
Riparian Buffers with
forest vegetation
Windbreaks,
Shelterbelts

19. • Demonstration of good agricultural practices for
farmers; use of the Code of Good Agricultural
Practices.
Testing and demonstration program

20. Weeds and
pests control
Crop rotation
Green fertilizersSoil tillage
Nutrients
management
Demonstrated
practices

21. Project Interventions
At project area
level:
A detailed
water quality
monitoring
network
Rehabilitation
of the water
and soil
quality
monitoring
laboratories

22. Measuring results of nutrient pollution control interventions
• Monitoring the nutrients concentration into the surface and
ground water and review of eutrophical state of the surface
waters at regular intervals.
• Use of indirect measurement methods.
Options:

23. Measuring nutrients concentration into the ground and surface waters
Strong points:
– It shows the actual
quality of the ground
and surface waters at
designated measuring
stations.
Weak points:
– The existing sampling
stations could be not
representative for
project interventions.
– The frequency of
measurements could
not catch stochastic
events as storm rains,
snow melting or variable
factors as fertilizers or
manure applications.
– The trend of nutrient
concentration does not
reflect only the project
interventions.
– It is expensive.

24. Nitrate concentration in Piezometers
Piezometer P5
0.000
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
01.09.03
01.11.03
01.01.04
01.03.04
01.05.04
01.07.04
01.09.04
01.11.04
01.01.05
01.03.05
01.05.05
01.07.05
01.09.05
01.11.05
01.01.06
01.03.06
01.05.06
01.07.06
Testing Date
NO3-mg/l
NO3
Piezometer P8
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
01.09.03
01.11.03
01.01.04
01.03.04
01.05.04
01.07.04
01.09.04
01.11.04
01.01.05
01.03.05
01.05.05
01.07.05
01.09.05
01.11.05
01.01.06
01.03.06
01.05.06
01.07.06
Testing Date
NO3-mg/l
NO3

25. Drinking water quality
Water Well C18
0.000
20.000
40.000
60.000
80.000
100.000
120.000
24.11.03
24.01.04
24.03.04
24.05.04
24.07.04
24.09.04
24.11.04
24.01.05
24.03.05
24.05.05
24.07.05
24.09.05
24.11.05
24.01.06
24.03.06
Testing Date
NO3-mg/l
NO3

26. Why use the indirect measurement methods?
• Are based on extensive scientific research.
• Allow assessment of total results of a variety of diverse interventions.
• Are cheap and offer good accuracy.
• Allow for quantitative estimate in terms of nutrient pollution reduction using
the survey results.
• Allow for forecasting of results of new projects implementing the same
nutrient pollution control interventions.

27. Before Project (Year 2000)
Total
manure
(tons):
Of which:
Use Comments
% tons
80,184
2 1,604
As fertilizers in the back
yard vegetable garden
Good practice,
reduced looses
98 78,850
Mixed with household
waste and dumped in
unauthorized places
The entire
quantity of
nutrients is lost
Nutrient
s (kg/t)
N P K
6 3.5 8
Nutrients in fresh manure

28. Year 2005 (Project year 4)
Total
manure
(tons):
Of which:
Use Comments
% tons
80,184
5 4,009
As fertilizers in the back yard
vegetable garden
Good practice,
reduced looses
29 22,950
Manure applied as fertilizer on
agricultural lands
Good practice.
Only the nutrients
that are not
available to plants
are lost
66 53,225
Still unmanaged manure,
source of pollution, due to the
inappropriate behavior of
some farmers
The entire quantity
of nutrients is lost
According the monitoring surveys and the communes’ reports, the use of the
manure during the year 2005 was as follows:

29. Reduction of nutrients discharge into the waters in the year 2005, due to
manure management interventions at commune and household levels:
N (t/year) P (t/year) K (t/year)
Nutrients subject to
leaching WITHOUT
PROJECT (t/year)
473.41 276.15 631.21
Nutrients subject to
leaching PY4 - 2005
(t/year)
389.57 194.83 489.59
Reduction of
nutrients discharge
into the ground and
surface waters in
year 2005 (t/year)
83.84 81.32 141.62

30. Total reduction of the nutrients discharge into the waters in the Project area, in
the year 2005, as result of appropriate Manure Management and use of the
Code of Good Agricultural Practices:
Reduction of nutrients
discharge into the ground
and surface waters in year
2005 (t/year)
From manure and factory made fertilizers used into
the Project area
N (t) P (t) K (t)
128.6 110.8 141.7

31. Effectiveness of investment
Demonstrations measured in terms
of actual stress reduction (N
reduction) achieved at the project
site(s)
Estimate of impact
achievable through country-
wide application of new
approach (to all NVZs)
Extrapolation to the
entire watershed
Measurable during
project lifetime
Due to lag time of response, changes in
environmental status in the target water-
body will only be detected well beyond
project completion
Stress reduction Environmental status
Source: Andrea Merla – GEF Secretariat

33. N
(tons)
P
(tons)
K
(tons)
Present situation:
Total nutrients looses into the aquatic system
(tones/year)
15,350 8,950 20,460
After Project implementation (year 2011):
Total nutrients looses into the aquatic system
(tones/year)
11,010 5,255 15,585
Forecasted reduction of nutrients looses into the
aquatic system (tones/year)
4,340 3,695 4,875
Estimation of the impact achievable through application of manure
management and use of the Code of Good Agricultural Practices to all NVZs

34. Lessons learned that could be transferred to help other GPA – Partnership
in order to achieve similar results
The Recipe of a Smooth and Successful Implementation
- Strong support of the central coordinating authority and the World Bank
counterparts;
- Permanent contacts and substantial involvement of the local authorities
- Total commitment of the Project beneficiaries
- Timely and appropriate guidance from the National and Local Coordination
Committees
- GEF, GOR and Local funds available on timely basis
- A knowledgeable and dedicated Project Implementation Team.

35. Thank you for your attentionThank you for your attention
Project Management Unit “Agricultural Pollution Control”
Tel: 0242.331.614; 0741.242.001; 021.317.04.03;Fax: 0242.331.619; E-mail: office@apcp.ro; www.apcp.ro