Sheet1ProfileOverallII.
1.II.2.II.3.II.4.II.5III.B.1B.1B.2B.2aB.3B.4B.5B.5.1.B.5.2B.5.3B.5.4.B.5.5.2.
for B.22.A. for B.52.B3.
E-mail4I.1.I.2I.3.I.4.I.4.aI.5.I.6.I.7.I.8part
III.1.1.II.1.2.II.1.3.II.2.1.II.2.2.II.2.3.II.2.4.II.2.5.II.2.6.II.2.7.II.3.1.II.3.2.II.4.1.II.4.2.II.4.3.II.4.4.II.4.5.II.4.6.II.5.1.II.5.2.II.5.3.II.5.4.II.5.5.II.5.6.part
IIIII.1.III.1.a.III.1.a.III.2.III.3.III.3.a.III.4III.5III.6III.7.III.8.III.9.part
IIIIV.1.IV.2.IV.3.IV.4.IV.5.IV.6.IV.7.IV.8.part IVOther
commentsNon-Governmental OrganisationIrish Doctors Environmental
(IDEA)NoJuliet
[email protected];
national; regional/localSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesEIA in
Ireland are not generally undertaken in accordance with the
directives and national
guidelinesDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeThe
Process for allowing public participation inthe EIA process is
inadequateYesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive;
Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy
Policy; Landfill Directive; REACH (Registration, Evaluation and
Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals); Seveso Directive;
Marine Framework Directive; Large combustion Directive; The Espoo
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary
Context; OtherOnventions such as CBD, POPS, Aarhus etcAgreea
coordinated implementation of the various procedures (coordination
between separate assessments) should be
establishedAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeThe
EIA and SEA should be merged.Private companyEvonik Goldschmidt
GmbHNoLudger
Weberludger.weber@evonik.comGermanyOftenOftenOftenNoOftenOftenNeverSometimesAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.DisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysSometimesDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeNoDisagreethe
existing procedures should remain as they
areDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.Non-Governmental
OrganisationSociety for Sustainable Living in the Slovak
RepublicYesNot relevantLess than 2millionYesNot relevantNot
relevantBetween 6 months and 12 monthsDon't knowprof. Mikulas
[email protected];
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNeverNeverAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeYesSEA
Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; REACH
(Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation and Restriction of
Chemicals); The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment
in a Transboundary ContextDisagreea coordinated implementation of
the various procedures (coordination between separate assessments)
should be establishedNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeNo
opinionA comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both
the Annexes and the provisions of the Directive should be amended)
as well as the introduction of provisions fostering the
coordination of sectoral environmental assessments required under
other EC Directives.Non-Governmental OrganisationCapacity Global
and TAI EuropeYesLess than 10Less than 2millionNoNic
[email protected]
KingdomOftenSometimesSometimesYesEUSometimesNo opinionNo
opinionSometimesCapacity Global and TAI Europe believes that the
Directive provides a vital tool for identifying and measuring the
impacts of relevant projects. It offers the opportunity to deliver
a project with a reduced environmental impacts. The EIA offers
important measures for compensating impacted communities and where
necessary identifying mitigation
possibilities.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionWe
believe that relevant changes need to be accounted for in the
updating of the Annexes i.e in relation to location and development
type. One thing that is often reported to us is that screening
needs to be taken more seriously than it presently is. Early
consultations are also seen as crucial for the real public
participation.YesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive;
Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy
Policy; Landfill Directive; Seveso Directive; The Espoo Convention
on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextNo
opiniona coordinated implementation of the various procedures
(coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeNo opinionNo opinionNo opinionAgreeNo
opinionThere needs to be better co-ordination between assessments
to improve the process of environmental decision making. Whilst
specfic frameworks and time scales set by Directive may at times be
useful there is a danger that they could be too prescriptive and
thus fail to recognise different planning systems of Member States.
Civil society has a right to influence EIA and development
decisions.DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeAgreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Changes to the Directive need to be carefully evaluated
to ensure that they strengthen and develop the process. The
Directive should not be weakend by the changes.The EIA is a
cornerstone of environmental decison making. Any weakening of the
EIA process would result in undermining civil society participation
and thus undermine environmental justice.Non-Governmental
OrganisationUMWELTDACHVERBANDYes22810003445-29Between 11 and
49Between 2 and 10 millionYesNot relevantNot relevantNot
relevantNot relevantMichael
Proschek-Hauptmannmichael.proschek@umweltdachverband.atAustriaSometimesSometimesSometimesYesEU;
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesBasic ambition of the
directive shall be: NO permit for a project likely to have
significant environmental impacts without their prior objective
assessment, considering the alternatives and proving that the
selected one is in the least harmful and the public concerned has
the right to participate in an early, effective and efficient
manner. Any changes shall enhance its potential to do
so.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeModifications
shall ensure that: a) all Annex III criteria are considered when
assessing Annex II thresholds, b) screening decisions are justified
and subject to direct judicial review, c) no salami-slicing", d)
all impacts (indirect, cumulative and synergistic) are considered,
e) all relevant alternatives (zero option) are justified, f)
quality of assessment is granted by independent bodyYesSEA
Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill
Directive; Seveso Directive; Large combustion Directive; The Espoo
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary
ContextAgreeOtherThe Directive shall ensure the
assesmentsassessments are coordinated on national level. It shall
leave it toon the MS if they implement a joint procedure or
coordination between separate assessments.AgreeNo opinionAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeImportant is that a) EIA is concluded by a binding
decision (either separate or development consent), which really
reflects the outcomes of the assessment, b) public has right to
effectively influence both EIA and development consent (incl. at
court), and c ) ensure the independence and neutrality of the body
in charge (administration or consultancy) of carrying out the
EIADisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA comprehensive
modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes and the
provisions of the Directive should be amended).All "agree" points
are just relevant as long as any negative development from the
current standard or any dillution of environmental standards in the
revision process is avoided. The current environmental standard and
the must not be dilluted.No fundamental change of the directive is
necessary. Major shortcomings of the directive could be reached by
better implementation efforts of the existing directive. Some
aspects such as updating the Annexes, better regulated thresholds
and screening procedures, prevention of salami slicing, clearer
obligations as to alternative assessments and rules for public
participation and access to justice could be subject to the review
process.Private companyGDF SUEZYes96119922103-43More than 250More
than 50 millionYesNot relevantNot relevantBetween 6 months and 12
monthsBetween 1 and 2 yearsFavrot Elsa; Monnet
[email protected];
[email protected]
opinionSometimesSometimesNeverOften-EIA Directive provides for a
European and transparent approach which limits differences between
national procedures. It does improve consistency in GDF SUEZs
project management. -A transparent EIA process closely involving
stakeholders is always key to raise civil societys support; at the
same time we acknowledge that it often causes delays and increases
costs.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeNo opinionNo
opinionNo opiniona scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the
request of the developer.DisagreeDisagreeNo opinionNo opinionNo
opinionDisagreeNo opinionOftenOftenDisagreeDisagreeNo opinionNo
opinion-Current structure of Annexes is appropriate -The Directive
is efficient since it gives MS leeway in the implementation (e.g.
for timeframe provisions needed for operators visibility) taking
into account local considerations -Screening requires objective
thresholds based on peer-reviewed scientific and technical opinions
-One has to be careful regarding overbooking of national
authoritiesYesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive;
Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy
Policy; Landfill Directive; Seveso Directive; Large combustion
Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment
in a Transboundary ContextDisagreea coordinated implementation of
the various procedures (coordination between separate assessments)
should be establishedDisagreeNo opinionNo opinionNo opinionNo
opinionNo opinion-We share the Commissions vision according to
which no major problems are reported with regard to coordination
between the EIA and other Directives (07/2009) -We do not see any
added value of an overarching Directive, but Member States shall
develop synergies -It is important to stabilize the current legal
framework (project developers needs of
stability)AgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.-It is important to take into
account the slow integration of modifications (last revisions of
the IEA Directive) by actors (authorities, developers and
stakeholders). They impact inter alia large development projects
with significant capital investment -The Commission could better
assess in five or ten years the effectiveness of the Directive in
achieving its targets-Parts of the questionnaire remains unclear
(e.g. what is the scoping?) -Some suggestions of modification are
going further than the Subsidiarity principle -GDF SUEZ has
well-integrated the necessity of involving the stakeholders at any
steps of a project. We reduce sanitary and environmental impacts by
developing R&D on new plants with low/0 emissions or BATPrivate
companyMainsite GmbH & Co. KGNoDr. Matthias
Zirkermatthias.zirker@mainsite-services.comGermanyOftenOftenOftenNoOftenOftenNeverSometimesAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.DisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysSometimesDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeNoDisagreethe
existing procedures should remain as they
areDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.Non-Governmental
OrganisationBirdLife FinlandYes114972Between 11 and 49Less than
2millionNoTeemu
Lehtiniemiteemu.lehtiniemi@birdlife.fiFinlandSometimesSometimesSometimesYesEU;
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesNo opinionCosts of EIAs are
small compared with the lost values due to the project. Potentially
it could be effective tool to defend common interest, but because
of some watered points of directive, it is suspectible to political
manipulation and can be misused for greenwashing of
projects.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeOftenSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionScreening: scientific evaluation should be secured (prone to
political pressure). Scoping is a very weak link in current
EIA-directive - it is too much driven by developers (who try to
minimise the costs of course); no real objectiveness involved in
scoping. NB! Q II.2.2. - unclear.YesSEA Directive; Habitats
Directive; Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Landfill
Directive; REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation and
Restriction of Chemicals); Marine Framework Directive; The Espoo
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary
ContextDisagreea coordinated implementation of the various
procedures (coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSynergy and
coordination is important, but EIA directive should not be object
of manipulation of policies. EIA should be strong and indipendent,
the case by case-tool defending the important values of environment
and biodiversity. The findings of EIA should be
binding.DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA comprehensive
modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes and the
provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as the
introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of sectoral
environmental assessments required under other EC Directives.- The
credibility of EIA for public is weak as long as the findings of
EIAs are not binding in decision making process (for comparison:
findings of Appropriate Assessment under Habitats directive are
binding) - The stressing of ecological factors should be improved
in directive, as it allows social and safety factors to override
the biodiversity issues - these interests are seldom set in danger
in projects and are stressed for greenwashing at the expense of
biodiversity.Non-Governmental OrganisationCitizen Association Oban
za ochranu kvality bydlen v Brn Knnikch, Rozdrojovicch a
JinaovicYes31877851126-59Between 11 and 49Not relevantYesLess than
1%More than 3 monthsBetween 1 and 2 yearsBetween 1 and 2
yearsAssoc. Prof. Dr. Petr [email protected]
RepublicOftenSometimesSometimesYesEU;
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesOftenThe role of EIA process
needs to be clarified in the context of SEA process. It needs to
codified on level of a binding Directive-Decision of the EP and
Council that Strategic Assessment (SEA) needs to be done FIRST and
only then EIA process can be started. EIA process must respect the
SEA conclusions. If such hierarchy is not clearly codified, the SEA
and EIA processes can create a major
mass.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeSEA
and EIA MUST consider alternatives - not only for NATURA2000, but
also homo sapiens should be protected, i.e. whenever a project may
impact peoples homes (city, village, settlement).Urbanized areas
may be impacted only if there is no alternative to implement
project in another way.Adequate compensatory measures have to be
adopted (as an integral part of binding conclusions of SEA and
EIA).YesSEA Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; The Espoo Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextAgreea
coordinated implementation of the various procedures (coordination
between separate assessments) should be
establishedAgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeImportant is that a)
EIA is concluded by a binding decision (either separate or
development consent), which really reflects the outcomes of the
assessment, b) public has right to effectively influence both EIA
and development consent (incl. at court), and c) EIA is not in
hands of pro-development authorities. Transb. procedures need more
coordination.DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).SEA and EIA
MUST consider alternatives - not only for NATURA2000, but also homo
sapiens should be protected, i.e. whenever a project may impact
peoples homes (city, village, settlement).Urbanized areas may be
impacted only if there is no alternative to implement project in
another way.Adequate compensatory measures have to be adopted (as
an integral part of binding conclusions of SEA and EIA).The
conclusions of SEA and EIA have to be binding and can be overridden
only by court rulings.Private companyWELL Consulting s. r.
o.NoPavel [email protected]
RepublicOftenSometimesSometimesYesEU;
nationalAlwaysOftenNeverSometimesAgreeNo
opinionDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping
opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAlwaysSometimesAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeYesIPPC Directive;
Habitats Directive; Water Framework DirectiveAgreea joint procedure
(providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeThe EIA Directive should be
repealed and replaced by a single environmental assessments
Directive or Regulation covering all the existing sectoral
environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Business/Industry AssociationEuropean Association of
Mining Industries (Euromines)NoJohannes
Drielsmadrielsma@euromines.beBelgiumOftenOftenOftenYesnationalOftenAlwaysNeverSometimesThe
above answers only apply to mining projects within the EU. Measures
should be taken at national level to improve the EIA process under
the Directive, but the Directive should not be
modified.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.AgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysOftenDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeSee
Report of the EU Raw Materials Initiative ad-hoc Working Group on
Exchanging Best Practice on Land Use Planning, Permitting and
Geological Knowledge Sharing: Public consultation is of very little
design value, is not sufficiently inclusive of ordinary local
citizens and takes too long relative to the duration of the
resulting permit.YesSEA Directive; Habitats Directive; Water
Framework Directive; OtherEU Raw Materials InitiativeAgreea joint
procedure (providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeNo opinionNo opinionA joint
procedure (providing for a single assessment) should be
established, but with one single authority being competent to make
final
decisions.AgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe EIA
Directive should not be modified.The mining industry believes the
recommended improvements to implementation of the EIA Directive at
national level can be achieved by comitology or the preparation of
European Commission Guidance.It should be specified that joint
permitting procedures (providing for single assessments) should be
established incorporating timely decision makingNon-Governmental
OrganisationCoordinadora Ecoloxista d'AsturiesYesRegistro de
Asociaciones del Principado de Asturiasdel 24-2-2005Between 50 and
249Less than 2millionYesAbove 10%Don't knowBetween 1 and 2
yearsBetween 1 and 2 yearsFructuoso
Pontigoecoloxista@telecable.esSpainSometimesSometimesSometimesYesEU;
national; regional/localNeverOftenNeverNeverEn Asturias este
tramite es un coladero y muchas empresas se ponen a funcionar sin
tener realizado este tramite que es
obligatorioAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
environmental
authorities.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNeverNeverAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeSi
bien se consulta a las asociaciones ambientales, de las respuestas
de estas nunca se escuchan en el caso asturiano.YesSEA Directive;
IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive;
Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill Directive;
REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation and Restriction
of Chemicals); Seveso Directive; Marine Framework Directive; Large
combustion Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary ContextAgreea joint procedure
(providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeA comprehensive modification of the EIA is required
(both the Annexes and the provisions of the Directive should be
amended).Non-Governmental OrganisationPohjois-Pohjanmaan
lintutieteellinen yhdistys ryYesMore than 250Less than
2millionYesNot relevantBetween 1 and 2 monthsBetween 1 and 2
yearsNot relevantEsa
AaltoEsa.Aalto@Oulu.fiFinlandSometimesSometimesSometimesYesEUSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeOftenSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeYesSEA
Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive;
Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Marine Framework
DirectiveAgreea coordinated implementation of the various
procedures (coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeDisagreeNo
opinionDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Non-Governmental OrganisationEuropean Environmental
Bureau (EEB)YesBetween 50 and 249Between 2 and 10 millionNoRegina
[email protected];
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesBasic aim shall be:
Minimize environmental impact for certain major projects by
carrying out a procedure that elaborates environmental impacts of
project and alternatives where public concerned has right to
participate in an early, effective and efficient manner and to
legally challenge decisions falling under this directive. Any
changes shall enhance its potential to achieve
thisAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreea)
all Annex III criteria are considered when assessing Annex II
thresholds and cases, b) screening decisions are justified and
subject to direct judicial review, c) no salami-slicing d) all
potential impacts (incl. indirect, cumulative and synergistic) are
considered, e) all relevant alternatives are studied and the choice
justified, f) quality of assessment is granted by independent
body.YesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water
Framework Directive; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill Directive;
Seveso Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary ContextDisagreeOtherThe Directive
shall ensure that separate assessments are carried out and
coordinated at national level. The public must be informed about
the chosen procedureAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeImportant: a) EIA is concluded by binding decision
(separate or development consent), reflecting outcome of
assessment, b) public has right to influence EIA and development
consent (incl. at legal review), c) EIA is not in hands of
pro-development authorities. d) independence and neutrality of body
in charge of EIS. Transboundary procedures need better
coordination, not details in
DirectiveDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).Not all
sectoral assessment procedures can be merged with EIA. If at all,
only useful for specific large scale projects. Then coordination
can be improved. Most important is to adjust requirements of SEA
and EIA dir. Logical order of assessments and respect of results of
SEA shall be ensured, repeated assessment on same level of details
avoided. It can be done without changing the SEA-directive.No
fundamental change of the directive is necessary. The revision must
address its shortcomings, close some loopholes. Major improvements
could be reached by better implementation efforts of the current
directive. Proposals for improvement: Updating the Annexes, better
regulated thresholds and screening procedures, prevention of salami
slicing, clearer obligations as to alternative assessments and
rules for public participation and access to justice should be
subject to the review process.Non-Governmental
OrganisationClientEarthNoSusie [email protected]
KingdomOftenOftenSometimesYesEU;
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesThe Directive is a
useful tool for environmental protection and we support its aims.
The broader picture of the economic benefits of conserving
biodiversity must be considered. Any amendments must be focused
towards improving the Directive's environmental protection
standards.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionNo opinionNo
opinionAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeIf
minimum community wide thresholds are considered it is essential
that they contain stringent levels of protection and are
scientifically sound. Public participation procedures should
include NGO right of action to request that a screening/scoping
opinion be issued, and access to review of these decisions. Content
of Annexes should be reviewed. System of quality control is
essential.YesSEA Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; The
Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary ContextDisagreethe existing procedures should remain
as they areNo opinionNo opinionNo opinionNo
opinionAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).The merger
of the EIA with other directives into an over-arching assessment
procedure is not supported. Other assessment procedures fulfil
different goals and respond to different circumstances. It is
imperative that the protections contained in each separate system
are maintained and strengthened.Please see ClientEarth's position
paper submitted in conjunction with this response for full details.
Key issues to address are - better implementation of screening,
better public participation at early stages including NGO rights to
request action, quality control procedures entailing accreditation
and independence of EIA providers, rigorous assessment of
alternative options and improved judicial review in line with the
Aarhus Convention.Non-Governmental OrganisationAsociacin
GeotrupesYesLess than 10Not relevantYesDon't knowMore than 3
monthsDon't knowDon't knowCarlos Rodrguez del Valle
[email protected];
national; regional/localNo opinionNeverNo opinionNo opinionLos
estudios se elaboran con recursos econmicos deficientes y en plazos
de tiempo demasiado cortos. La directiva es insuficiente para
garantizar la calidad de la evaluacin y la participacin pblica.
Tambin carece de mecanismos para controlar las actuaciones y
decisiones de las administraciones ambientales competentes,
responsables ltimas de su buen
funcionamiento.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeSometimesNeverAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeEl
rgano ambiental y el pblico deben poder proponer alternativas, que
se incorporen al estudio de impacto para ser evaluadas junto a las
propuestas del promotor. Los estudios carecen de informacin
cientfica y son especulativas. Hay que garantizar la consulta de la
documentacin y la participacin pblica a travs de Internet. Los
plazos para la participacin pblica son insuficientes.YesHabitats
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; The Espoo Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context;
OtherSentencias del Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades
EuropeasNo opinionNo opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionNo
opinionSe deben incorporar las obligaciones que determinan las
directivas de Habitats y de Aves para evaluar proyectos que afecten
a la Red Natura 2000. Tambin consideramos esencial que la nueva
directiva de EIA recoja la jurisprudencia establecida por el
Tribunal de Estrasburgo en distintos casos, en especial en la
sentencia del asunto C-127/02 (Wadden Sea ruling, Comisin Europea
contra Holanda).DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionNo opinionNo
opinionA comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both
the Annexes and the provisions of the Directive should be
amended).Hay que especificar el significado de los efectos sobre el
ser humano (artculo 3). El impacto del proyecto sobre la economa
debe quedar fuera de la evaluacin. Hay que destinar un porcentaje
mnimo del presupuesto a la realizacin del estudio. La fase de
scoping, debe incorporar otros proyectos que puedan tener efectos
sinrgicos con el evaluado. Las administraciones implicadas deben
rebatir explcitamente cada una de las alegaciones presentadas por
el pblico si estas son desestimadas.Non-Governmental
OrganisationNOAHYes11495514257-89Between 50 and 249Less than
2millionNoJesper Hostrup
[email protected];
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesDirective shall ensure
that no permit for a project with significant envir. impacts is
issued without prior objective assessment, considering the
alternatives and proving that the selected one is least harmful and
does not represent unbearable burden. Principle of BAT and Best
Practice should be guiding the assessment. Any changes shall
enhance Directives potential to meet these
goals.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeMain
points: a) all Annex III criteria are always considered, b)
screening decisions are justified and subject to direct judicial
review, c) whole projects are subject to EIA (no salami-slicing),
d) all impacts (incl. indirect and cumulative) are considered, e)
all relevant alternatives are studied and the choice justified, f)
quality of assessment is checked and confirmed by independent
body.YesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water
Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy
Policy; Landfill Directive; Seveso Directive; Large combustion
DirectiveAgreeOtherThe Directive shall ensure that assesments are
coordinated on national level. It should leave up to the Member
States if they implement a joint procedure or coordination between
separate assessments.AgreeNo opinionAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeImportant is that a) EIA is concluded by a binding
decision (either separate or development consent), which really
reflects the outcomes of the assessment, b) public has right to
effectively influence both EIA and development consent (incl. at
court), and c) EIA is not in hands of pro-development authorities.
Transb. procedures need more coordination.DisagreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA comprehensive modification of the EIA
is required (both the Annexes and the provisions of the Directive
should be amended).In theory, the more comprehensive approach to
environmental assessments the better. For practical reasons, the
current review shall concentrate on their better coordination, not
unification. Most important is to adjust requirements of SEA and
EIA directives. Logical order of these assessments and respecting
results of SEA shall be ensured, repeated assessment on the same
level of details avoided.No fundamental change of the directive is
necessary. Review should improve specific aspects of the Directive
(e.g. clear prohibition of salami-slicing, clear request for
description of alternatives and justifying the choice, better
regulated thresholds and screening procedures, providing
information to public in accessible forms within a reasonable
timeframes and access to justice. It shall enhance coordination of
environmental assessments, namely SEA and EIA.Non-Governmental
OrganisationDachverband Archologischer Studierendenvertretungen
e.V.YesMore than 250Not relevantYesNot relevantNot relevantNot
relevantNot relevantPeter
[email protected];
national;
regional/localSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesVerzgerungen im
Projektablauf oder der Genehmigung von Projekten sind normalerweise
durch unvollstndige und/oder mangelhafte Studien und/oder
unvollstndiges Scoping verursacht. Insbesondere das kulturelle Erbe
wird sehr oft gar nicht
geprft.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNeverSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeVerbnden
fr kulturelles Erbe werden - entgegen den Vorgaben der UVP- und der
Aarhus-Konvention - in Deutschland keine Beteiligungs- und
Klagerechte gegeben. Dies ist ein entscheidender Grund, weshalb die
UVP fr das kulturelle Erbe in Deutschland wenig wirksam ist. Ein
gestrafftes und obligatorisches Scoping ist erforderlich um die
Untersuchungen auf das notwendige Ma zu begrenzen.YesSEA Directive;
Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive; Marine Framework
Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment
in a Transboundary ContextAgreea joint procedure (providing for a
single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDie EU-Richtlinien sollten
harmonisiert werden, insbesondere der Begriff "Umwelt". Das
kulturelle Erbe muss (!) deutlicher als bisher als Bestandteil der
Umwelt beschrieben werden. Widrigenfalls hat die Durchfhrung einer
UVP aufgrund von Belastungsverlagerungen die strkere
Beeintrchtigung des kulturellen Erbes zur Folge. Nach Art. 167,4
AEUV muss die EU helfen, das kulturelle Erbe zu
bewahren.DisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeThe EIA
and SEA should be merged.Im Moment werden zu viele separate
Prfungen durchgefhrt, z. B. UVP, FFH-RL und Vogelschutz-RL etc.,
die kaum miteinander verknpft sind und hufig von verschiedenen
Umweltprfern durchgefhrt werden. UVP und SUP sollten zu einem
gemeinsamen Verfahren weiterentwickelt werden. Ein neues Verfahren
wre dagegen mit dem Risiko einer Schwchung erreichter Standards fr
die UVP verbunden.Erwgungsgrnde ergnzen: - Entschlieung
2000/2036(INI) des EP: Umsetzung der UNESCOWelterbekonvention ber
die UVP-RL und SUP-RL. - European Treaty Series 121, 143, 176
(Europarat). Minderungsmanahmen, Alternativensuche, Monitoring und
Qualittsprfung mssen obligatorisch werden. Regelungen zur
Verfahrensbeschleunigung sind erforderlich, da hiermit hufig
versucht wird, die Durchfhrung von UVP zu umgehen.Non-Governmental
OrganisationObansk sdruen VODA Z TETIC o.s.Yes22678956Not
relevantNot relevantYesNot relevantNot relevantNot relevantNot
relevantIng. Josef [email protected]
RepublicOftenOftenSometimesYesEU;
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesMlo by dojt ke skuten
nezvislmu a objektivnmu posouzen vlivu zmru na ivotn prosted a k
vbru nejmn kodliv varianty. Zmny smrnice mus poslit ve
uveden.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNeverNeverAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeV
praxi se setkvme s umlm rozdlovnm zmr do mench celk - toto je teba
odmtnout. Posuzovn v R nen nezvisl, pravda je toho, kdo plat
dokumentaci EIA a posouzen dokumentace jdou na ruku zmru. Vad nm, e
stanoviska (rozhodnut) i screening - a chybn - nelze samostatn
alovat u soudu.YesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats
Directive; Water Framework Directive; Climate and energy Policy;
Landfill Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary ContextNo opinionNo
opinionAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeV zsad nm chyb v procesu
EIA nezvisl orgn - krajsk ady R bohuel nezvisl nejsou. Nzory
veejnosti jsou odmtny s poukazem na neinformovanost a zastnn
odbornci jsou placeni investory. Podle toho to tak vypad. Posuzovn
EIA podlh tlaku ekonomiky.DisagreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionDisagreeDisagreeNo opinionA comprehensive modification of
the EIA is required (both the Annexes and the provisions of the
Directive should be amended).Pokud je vydno zporn stanovisko
(rozhodnut) jasn zakzat povolen zmru v navazujcm zen. Zkaz
"salmovn". Poslit lohu veejnosti. Postihovat zkracovn lht pro
informovn veejnosti neplatnost stanoviska (rozhodnut) EIA. Zajistit
pstup veejnosti k soudu.Non-Governmental OrganisationCzech Society
for OrnithologyYes61686814225-69More than 250Less than
2millionNoKamil [email protected]
RepublicOftenSometimesSometimesYesEU; national;
regional/localSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesEIA is very
necessary and is potentially a strong and efficiet instrument for
protecting the environment and nature. How ever too often its
weaknesses (e.g. screening rules, quality control) are exploited,
e.g. under political pressure to approve projects. Changes must
ensure its use better serves its own objectives and also the nature
and environment protection objectives of other
Directives.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision
should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeScreening:
more clarity; full use Anx. III crit.; retain provisions for
sensitive locations;EIA for 'all' projects in Q II.2.2.(not
'only').Require assessment of alternatives,refined in public
consult.at scoping.Ensure quality control for ecolog.survey
data.Require proper monitoring and enforcement of mitigation.Raise
awareness ot right to participate;public is notified
effectively.YesSEA Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill
Directive; REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation and
Restriction of Chemicals); Marine Framework DirectiveDisagreea
coordinated implementation of the various procedures (coordination
between separate assessments) should be establishedAgreeNo
opinionAgreeNo opinionAgreeAgreeWe support better co-ordination
using EIA but not unifying assessments or opening other Directives
to review. EIA itself needs to become effective to better serve its
own objectives and those of other Directives. EIA should ensure no
net loss of biodiversity, require monitoring and enforce
mitigation.Environmental authorities should make binding judgements
on the adequacy of
EIAs.DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA comprehensive
modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes and the
provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as the
introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of sectoral
environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Emphasis first on improving EIA (Annexes and
provisions)and secondly on improving co-ordination among assessment
requirements. This should be achieved without jeopardising the
environmental protection provisions in other Directives,
particularly the Habitats Directive. We support merger with SEA but
this will be challenging and should be returned to at a later
date.Priorities: clear objectives, incl. no net loss biodiversity
& achieving ent. and conservat. objectives of other Directives;
update and clarify screening, but small projects screened in at
sensitive locations; effective public notification; mandatory
assessment of alternatives and public consultation at screening and
scoping (incl. alternat.);well-resourced quality control (esp. for
ecolog. data);binding env. authority decision on EIA adequacy;
monitoring and enforcement of mitigation.Non-Governmental
OrganisationDeutsche Gesellschaft fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte e.V.
(DGUF)Yes822 779 714 27-06More than 250Not relevantYesNot
relevantNot relevantNot relevantNot relevantChristian A.
[email protected]; national;
regional/localSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesVerzgerungen im
Projektablauf oder der Genehmigung von Projekten sind normalerweise
durch unvollstndige und/oder mangelhafte Studien und/oder
unvollstndiges Scoping verursacht. Insbesondere das kulturelle Erbe
wird sehr oft gar nicht
geprft.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNeverSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeVerbnden
fr kulturelles Erbe werden - entgegen den Vorgaben der UVP- und der
Aarhus-Konvention - in Deutschland keine Beteiligungs- und
Klagerechte gegeben. Dies ist ein entscheidender Grund, weshalb die
UVP fr das kulturelle Erbe in Deutschland wenig wirksam ist. Ein
gestrafftes und obligatorisches Scoping ist erforderlich um die
Untersuchungen auf das notwendige Ma zu begrenzen.YesSEA Directive;
Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive; Marine Framework
Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment
in a Transboundary ContextAgreea joint procedure (providing for a
single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDie EU-Richtlinien sollten
harmonisiert werden, insbesondere der Begriff "Umwelt". Das
kulturelle Erbe muss (!) deutlicher als bisher als Bestandteil der
Umwelt beschrieben werden. Widrigenfalls hat die Durchfhrung einer
UVP aufgrund von Belastungsverlagerungen die strkere
Beeintrchtigung des kulturellen Erbes zur Folge. Nach Art. 167,4
AEUV muss die EU helfen, das kulturelle Erbe zu
bewahren.DisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeThe EIA
and SEA should be merged.Im Moment werden zu viele separate
Prfungen durchgefhrt, z. B. UVP, FFH-RL und Vogelschutz-RL etc.,
die kaum miteinander verknpft sind und hufig von verschiedenen
Umweltprfern durchgefhrt werden. UVP und SUP sollten zu einem
gemeinsamen Verfahren weiterentwickelt werden. Ein neues Verfahren
wre dagegen mit dem Risiko einer Schwchung erreichter Standards fr
die UVP verbunden.Erwgungsgrnde ergnzen: - Entschlieung
2000/2036(INI) des EP: Umsetzung der UNESCO-Welterbekonvention ber
die UVP-RL und SUP-RL. - European Treaty Series 121, 143, 176
(Europarat). Minderungsmanahmen, Alternativensuche, Monitoring und
Qualittsprfung mssen obligatorisch werden. Regelungen zur
Verfahrensbeschleunigung sind erforderlich, da hiermit hufig
versucht wird, die Durchfhrung von UVP zu umgehen.Private
companyVISA Consultores de Geologia Aplicada e Ambiente,
S.A.YesBetween 11 and 49Less than 2millionYesAbove 10%Don't
knowBetween 1 and 2 yearsMore than 2 yearsAna
Amaralaamaral@visaconsultores.comPortugalOftenOftenSometimesYesEUOftenSometimesSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionNo opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping
opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.AgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAlwaysSometimesDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeII.1.1
- Em Portugal a transposio da Directiva AIA estabelece limiares
para os Projectos incluidos no Anexo II II.2.1 - Em Portugal, no se
realiza a apreciao prvia, no obstante ser considerada na transposio
da DIrectica AIA II.4.2 Certificao/qualificao das empresas/equipas
tcnicas de AIAYesIPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water
Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy
Policy; Landfill Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental
Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextDisagreea joint
procedure (providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Private companyEsterhazy Betriebe Basaltwerk Pauliberg
GmbHYes204172d EisenstadtBetween 50 and 249Not relevantNoDr.
Michael
[email protected];
regional/localAlwaysAlwaysSometimesSometimesAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.AgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysOftenDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeYesSEA
Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill
DirectiveAgreea coordinated implementation of the various
procedures (coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeNo opinionThe EIA
Directive should be repealed and replaced by a single environmental
assessments Directive or Regulation covering all the existing
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Business/Industry AssociationUnion wallonne des
EntreprisesNoClaude
[email protected]
opinionNo opinionNeverAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeno scoping opinion/decision should be
issued.DisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysOftenDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeVu
jurisprudence CJCE, dcision a priori pour les projets de lannexe 2
est devenue impossible, et seul un examen au cas par cas est admis
par les le Conseil dEtat en Belgique. Un Etat membre doit pouvoir
tablir par voie rglementaire une liste ferme de projets soumis EIE
(lment de prvisibilit indispensable pour les investisseurs)YesSEA
Directive; Habitats Directive; The Espoo Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextNo
opiniona coordinated implementation of the various procedures
(coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeDisagreeNo opinionDisagreeAgreeDisagreeEIE =
outil daide la dcision intervenant lors d'autres procdures (demande
de permis pour limplantation ou lexploitation d'une activit, par
exemple). Le champ dapplication des directives EIE et IPPC doit
rester distinct et c'est dans la directive IPPC quil faut envisager
ventuellement dinscrire une rgle quant la dure des autorisations
dlivres, pas dans la directive
EIEDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeThe Annexes of
the EIA Directive should be updated and clarified (technical
adaptation).Rvision de fond en comble non justifie. Adaptation des
dispositions pour permettre aux EM dadopter une liste ferme de
projets soumis EIE suffit. Lintgration de la directive 2001/42/CE
doit tre envisage. Loutil dharmonisation des lgislations reste, et
doit rester, la directive et non le rglementLes adaptations
apporter la directive ne justifient pas, selon nous, de rviser de
fond en comble la directive 85/337/CE. Labrogation de la directive
EES et son intgration dans la directive EIE doivent tre envisages.
Loutil juridique privilgier est et reste la directive, pas le
rglement.Non-Governmental OrganisationUudenmaan
ympristnsuojelupiiriYes3182630432-54Between 11 and 49Less than
2millionYesLess than 1%More than 3 monthsBetween 1 and 2 yearsMore
than 2 yearsTapani VeistolaTapani
VeistolaFinlandOftenOftenSometimesYesEU; national; regional/localNo
opinionNo opinionSometimesOftenYvasta on tullut osa normaalia
suunnittelua. Se on mys osa ympristdemokratiaa. Ihmiset voivat
ottaa ajoissa kantaa, kun esimerkiksi vaihtoehtoihin voi viel
vaikuttaa. Yva maksaa ja vie aikaa, mutta sen voi sst vhempin
konflikteina ja valituksina. Joskus yvassa lytyneet ratkaisut
tuovat mys selvi sstj. Yvan arvon nkee parhaiten silloin kun sit ei
ole!AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeOftenOftenAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeYvan
pit tuoda pakollinen kuuleminen kaikille, kytnt vaihtelee yh eri
maissa eri lakien mukaan. Kansalaisten osallistuminen on
laadunvarmistusta ettei hankkeita pilkota ja ett kaikki trket asiat
selvitetn. Ympristviranomaistenkin vahva rooli on trke taata.YesSEA
Directive; Water Framework Directive; Climate and energy Policy;
Marine Framework Directive; The Espoo Convention on Environmental
Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context; Othermaaperstrategia
jne.DisagreeOtherTapauskohtaista harkintaa. Suomessa jotkut asiat
eivt ole osuneet sovaan eivtk yvaan: esimerkiksi jtteen synnyn
ehkisyn vaihtoehto vs. polttolaitokset ja kantojen nosto
energiapolttoaineeksi.AgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo opinionYva
ja lupa on pidettv eri prosesseina. Hankekokonaisuudessa
lupaprosesseja voi olla monta, ja ne voivat menn eri viranomaisten
ja kansallisten sdsten kautta. Vhimmismenettelyt pitisi toki st:
Trke on, ett yvassa yhteysviranomainen on ympristviranomainen,
kansalaisia kuullaan ja ett yvan puuttumista tai puuttellisuutta
voi kytt muutoksenhakuperusteena
oikeudessa.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).Kytnnss yksi
"superdirektiivi" ei toimisi EU-tasolla. Parasta olisi, ett mys
poliitikoista ja budjeteistakin tehtisiin sovia eik vain
strategioista ja toimintaohjelmista; ett hanke-yvia tehtisiin
nykyist enemmn; mutta harmonisoinnilla ei saa menett yva-rajojen
alle menevi kansallisia selvityksi pienemmist hankkeista.Yva
toimii, sit ei kannata romuttaa eik keksi uudelleen. Vain lis
vhemmiskriteerej yvan riittvlle aikaisuudelle, kansalaisten
osallistumiselle ja muutoksenhakukoikeudelle, riittville
vaihtoehdoille, hankekokonaisuuden laajemmalle ksittelylle,
vhimmislausuntoajoille, kaiken aineiston (mys liitteet!) saamista
shkisesti verkkoon sek lupaptksiin tarvitaan perustelu siit miten
yva otettiin huomioon. Suurempia ongelmia kuin yvassa on
sovassa.OtherCollegi d'Ambientlegs de Catalunya -COAMB-YesMore than
250Not relevantNoMaria Siuraneta
Toldrmariasiuraneta@yahoo.esSpainOftenOftenSometimesYesnationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesDisagreeNo
opinionDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping
opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeOftenSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionYesSEA Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy PolicyAgreea
joint procedure (providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeThe
EIA Directive should be repealed and replaced by a single
environmental assessments Directive or Regulation covering all the
existing sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Business/Industry AssociationIMA-EuropeYesBetween 50 and
249Not relevantNoMira
Tayahsecretariat@ima-europe.euBelgiumOftenOftenOftenYesEUAlwaysOftenNeverSometimesExperience
shows that it takes at least 2 to 3 years to obtain a permit and
the validity of the permit is limited to 5 years; The validity of
the permit should therefore be extended and the premitting
procedure shortened. Moreover, excessive and at times unjustified
"investigations" lead to significant financial costs.No
opinionDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision should be issued
at the request of the developer.AgreeNo opinionNo
opinionAgreeAgreeDisagreeNo
opinionAlwaysOftenDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeYesSEA Directive; IPPC
Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive; Seveso
DirectiveAgreea joint procedure (providing for a single assessment)
should be establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeDisagreeNo
opinionNo opinionNo opinionAgreeDisagreeDisagreeThe EIA Directive
should be repealed and replaced by a single environmental
assessments Directive or Regulation covering all the existing
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Private companyScottish Woodlands LtdNoMrs Jean
[email protected]
KingdomSometimesSometimesSometimesYesnationalAlwaysAlwaysNeverSometimesEIA
is a huge amount of work for not much achievement in regard to
forestry projects. It is a complicated and cumbersome process with
work for all: applicant, national authorities and consultees.
Forestry already has a comprehensive suite of guidelines and
regulations to work to.AgreeNo
opinionDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeOftenSometimesDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeUK
authorities responsible, eg Forestry Commission, should hold
consultees to respond to deadlines similar to planning
applications. Applicants are doing everything required of them in
SRDP (RDP-RC) applications already (following Guidelines and
Regulations), without submitting an EIA in addition.YesSEA
Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy PolicyAgreea
joint procedure (providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionNo
opinionDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeThe EIA
Directive should be repealed and replaced by a single environmental
assessments Directive or Regulation covering all the existing
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.A more disciplined and structured process would benefit
all concerned; national authorities, consultees and applicants. EIA
should only be applied to the most sensitive schemes proposed.The
screening process is quite useful; the scoping meeting could be
part of the same process. EIA is a cumbersome process which, if
improved, could be more efficient for all concerned. Forestry is
already working to many guidelines and regulations; EIA adds
another layer of complexity and adds to work and time in getting
forestry projects passed which could help in climate change
mitigation.OtherEirGridNoAidan
Corcoranaidan.corcoran@eirgrid.comIrelandOftenSometimesSometimesYesEU;
national; regional/localAlwaysOftenNeverSometimesA useful piece of
governing legislation though requiring some modification to ensure
better integration with other associated
legislation.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeOftenSometimesDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeImportant
to consult with the public but must be done within specified
timeframe. Public participation is important but must not be used
to obstruct a statutory process.YesSEA Directive; Habitats
Directive; Water Framework Directive; The Espoo Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextAgreea
coordinated implementation of the various procedures (coordination
between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeCloser coordination
between the directive and other associated directives to ensure
integrated approach to environmental assesssment and
management.DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionNo opinionDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.OtherVerband der Landesarchologen in der BRD e.V.NoDr.
C. Sebastian
Sommersebastian.sommer@blfd.bayern.deGermanySometimesSometimesSometimesYesnational;
regional/localSometimesNeverSometimesSometimesDie Direktive wird in
verschiedenen Lndern der BRD nicht konsequent angewendet. Insgesamt
fehlt die regelhafte Einbeziehung des kulturellen Erbes,
insbesondere der Bodendenkmler.DisagreeAgreeDisagreeNo
opinionDisagreeNo opinionAgreeNo opinionAgreeAgreea scoping
opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionSometimesNo
opinionNo opinionNo opinionNo opinionYesSEA Directive; Water
Framework Directive; Landfill Directive;
OtherDenkmalschutzgesetzeAgreea joint procedure (providing for a
single assessment) should be establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeNo opinionAgreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Es muss eine bessere Bercksichtigung des Kulturellen
Erbes, insbesondere der Bodendenkmler, im Rahmen der UVP gefordert
werden. Hierbei ist auf die Ziele der Konvention von La Valletta
(1992), seit 2002 Bundesgesetz, Bezug zu nehmen.Die blosse Abfrage
von vorhandenen Informationen im Rahmen der UVP ist nicht
ausreichend. Vielmehr muss gezielte Prospektion gefordert werden,
z. B. nach Bodendenkmler. Nur dann lsst sich auch fr diesen Bereich
das mgliche Schadenspotential von Manahmen richtig beurteilen und
knnen Schden vermieden oder verringert werden.OtherConfederao dos
Agricultores de PortugalYesBetween 50 and 249Between 2 and 10
millionNoAlexandra [email protected] ;
abrito@cap.ptPortugalOftenOftenSometimesNoOftenOftenNeverSometimesAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.DisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeOftenSometimesDisagreeDisagreeNo
opinionNo opinionYesSEA Directive; Climate and energy
PolicyDisagreea coordinated implementation of the various
procedures (coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.Non-Governmental
OrganisationGreen Budget Germany/Forum kologisch-Soziale
Marktwirtschaft/Green Budget EuropeYesGreen903644101Between 50 and
249Less than 2millionNoJacqueline
[email protected];
nationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesBasic aim: Minimize
environmental impact for certain major projects by carrying out a
procedure that elaborates environmental impacts of a project and
its alternatives, and where the public concerned has right to
participate in an early, effective and efficient manner and to
legally challenge decisions falling under this
directive.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreea)
all Annex III criteria are considered when assessing Annex II
thresholds and cases, b) screening decisions are justified and
subject to direct judicial review, c) whole projects are subject to
EIA, d) all potential impacts are considered, e) all relevant
alternatives are studied and the choice justified, f) quality of
assessment is granted by independent body.YesSEA Directive; IPPC
Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive; Climate
and energy Policy; Landfill Directive; Seveso Directive; The Espoo
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary
ContextDisagreeOtherThe Directive shall ensure that separate
assessments are carried out and coordinated at national level. The
public must be informed about the chosen
procedure.AgreeDisagreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeAgreeImportant: a) EIA
is concluded by binding decision, reflecting outcomes of
assessment, b) public can influence EIA and development consent
(incl. at court/legal review), c) EIA is not in hands of
pro-development authorities, d) independence and neutrality of body
in charge of carrying out EIA. Transboundary procedures need better
coordination, but not detailed regulation in the
Directive.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).Merging
sectoral assessment procedures is only useful for large scale
projects. In that case coordination can be improved. Most important
is to adjust requirements of SEA and EIA directives. The logical
order of these assessments and respecting results of SEA shall be
ensured, repeated assessment on the same level of details avoided.
This can be done without changing the SEA-directive.No fundamental
change of directive is necessary. Revision must address its
shortcomings, close some loopholes. Major improvements could
already be reached by better implementation efforts of current
directive. Proposals for improvement: Updating the Annexes, better
regulated thresholds and screening procedures, prevention of salami
slicing, clearer obligations as to alternative assessments and
rules for public participation and access to justice should be
subject to the review process.Private companywpd Finland OyNoMs.
Heli
Rissanenh.rissanen@wpd.fiFinlandOftenOftenOftenYesnationalAlwaysOftenNeverSometimesIn
FIN EIA decisions for wind power is case-by-case and the practice
of auth. has been to order EIA for very small projects. Problems:
cost-effectiveness in reference to project size and mitigation
possib, 2-yr EIA is unreasonably long for small etc >
size-threshold urgently needed. EIA doesn't result as society
support even with lot of public participation and quality studies.
NIMBY is strong.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeDisagreeNo
opinionDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysOftenDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeA
common project size-threshold for wind power projects is urgently
needed in Finland (see comments part I). Now, case-by-case, an EIA
is ordered for very small (only few turbines) projects which is
unreasonable from many points of view and influence of EIA is
questionable. Scoping and Public consultation is already on very
high level in Finland and this should be the same case in all
MS.YesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Climate and energy Policy; The
Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary ContextAgreea coordinated implementation of the
various procedures (coordination between separate assessments)
should be establishedDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo opinionThere
is overlap with EIA and land-use-planning and env and water
constructing permitting. In FIN EIA is only an attachment of permit
applic where as e.g. in SWE EIA is the application. Also, if env
ass of a land-use-plan incl a certain development, it should be
possible for auth to consider whether that existing assessm is
already adequate. In FIN this isnt possible.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionDisagreeAgreeA comprehensive modification of the EIA is
required (both the Annexes and the provisions of the Directive
should be amended) as well as the introduction of provisions
fostering the coordination of sectoral environmental assessments
required under other EC Directives.Quality of the env information:
it's important to notice that the problem is not only on the poor
quality side, but also over-quality demands. Guidelines on EU level
would be necessary to set a level on the adequate/good quality
information and on the topics that EIA should cover. Tendency is
towards multi-yr bird, bat of fish monitoring before env
information is considered adequate. CONTCONT. This prolongs
projects significantly. The topics to in- and exclude should be
harmonized. Should an EIA cover a complete social impacts assessm
or local economy etc. assessments? Accreditation of consultants
should not be implemented due to limiting free competition of
consulting markets (would have big neg. impacts in small markets
like FIN). There should be guidelines (to harmonize) about who can
do the assessments? What can developer do itself and what not, if
not all?Private companyForth Ports PLCYes11549164209-49More than
250Not relevantYesBetween 5% and 10%More than 3 monthsBetween 1 and
2 yearsBetween 1 and 2 yearsMs Michaela
[email protected]
KingdomSometimesNeverSometimesYesEU;
nationalAlwaysAlwaysNeverSometimesThe Directive frequently
frustrates the progress of developments through the consenting
process, as authorities do not take a reasoned view on assessment
requirements and the suitability of mitigation measures. The
identification of an impact is regarded as preventing progress of a
project, rather than an opportunity to agree proportionate
mitigation.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysSometimesDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDevelopments
involve significant investment, and once started need the certainty
of reaching conclusion - the timeframes suggested are likely to
lead to delays as reassessment is undertaken and the potential to
cause significant economic harm if projects cannot be completed.
Attempts to measure 'quality' at the outset will slow the process
further. The public has sufficient opportunity to comment.YesSEA
Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework
Directive; Climate and energy Policy; Marine Framework Directive;
Large combustion DirectiveAgreea coordinated implementation of the
various procedures (coordination between separate assessments)
should be establishedDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeThere is
fragment between EIA and Habitats Directive, and caselaw that
requires proof that a project will cause no net detriment. EIA can
be undertaken and mitigation agreed to be frustrated when
Appropriate Assessment is done later in the process. There should
be one assessment, and the balance of economics/wider value of a
project should be taken into account as well as environmental
effects.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.It would be regrettable if, as a consequence of this
review, it were to become necessary to satisfy all other sectoral
assessments, at application stage, as there are frequently cases
where these will be worked up in detail as a project progresses
over time. EIA and AA should, however, be streamlined into one
process.The revised EIA Regs should better recognise the balance to
between environmental and economic objectives. The potential to
mitigate effects should be afforded greater weight in the
decision-making process. Emphasis should be on ensuring that
developments can be completed once started, and the suggestion that
these should be the subject of ongoing EIA with the potential to
stop a project once started should be resisted, as it could have
significant negative effects on national economies.OtherIEMA
(Institue of Environmental Management & Assessment)NoJosh
[email protected] KingdomOftenOftenOftenYesEU;
national;
regional/localSometimesSometimesSometimesOftenAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeOftenSometimesDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgree11.5.4
IEMA's survey found that those involved in EIA practice do not
favour public consultation @ scoping (41% agreed), whilst
environmental professionals who simply have an interest in EIA did
favour mandatory public scoping (53% agreed).YesSEA Directive;
Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy;
Climate and energy Policy; The Espoo Convention on Environmental
Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextAgreea joint procedure
(providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.22% of respondents to IEMA's survey indicated a desire
to see the Directive repealed and replaced by a single
environmental assessment Directive. However, 54.3% indicated a
preference for the retention of the EIA Directive as its own
assessment, within this the majority favoured comprehensive
modification and better coordination.Non-Governmental
OrganisationThe Woodland TrustNoRichard
[email protected]
KingdomSometimesSometimesOftenYesEUOftenOftenSometimesOftenThe
Environmental Impact Assessment (Forestry) Regulations (England and
Wales; Scotland) 1999 should be amended to include: ancient
woodland as sensitive areas; and, substantially increase size
thresholds for native afforestation determining whether a project
requires an EIA away from sensitive areas (currently only 5
hectares).DisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeOftenOftenDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeIt
would be better to determine criteria for public consultation by
development type or at a country level. For example, in a UK
context, a need for public consultation prior to a decision on
screening or scoping would make sense in relation to developments
that might impact negatively on ancient woodland but would further
hinder beneficial native afforestation.YesSEA Directive; Habitats
Directive; Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate
and energy PolicyAgreea joint procedure (providing for a single
assessment) should be establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionNo
opinionDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Comprehensive modification of the EIA Directive should
encourage: developers and planners to be far more lateral in
considering how compensatory measures can deliver on other
Directives; and, build in a bigger distinction between benign
projects (e.g. native woodland creation) and major multi-national
developments.Business/Industry AssociationAssociation of
Electricity ProducersYes13457582538-68Between 11 and 49Less than
2millionNoAndy [email protected]
KingdomOftenOftenAlwaysNoSometimesSometimesSometimesOftenEIA has
made a positive contribution to the consenting process for
energy/infrastructure projects allowing consideration of
environmental issues. It is a process most developers, stakeholders
and consenting authorities understand and are happy with. EIA
increases the cost of projects in proportion to the final decision;
changes should avoid needless delay or
cost.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeSometimesOftenAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeIntroducing
unreasonable EIA on all alternatives (inc. those that wont be
undertaken) will create extra delays and huge costs for a
developer. Mechanisms to ensure the quality of the environmental
information provided by the developer could be introduced; e.g.
sector by sector guidance from the European Commission.
Establishing maximum EIA decision timeframes risks removing key
local flexibility.NoDisagreethe existing procedures should remain
as they
areDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.We strongly disagree with the
suggestions of merging EIA with other regulations. This will result
in an unworkable and overly complicated system. Wholesale changes
to regulatory systems will cause confusion and delay to
projects.Responding to this consultation was severely limited by
the character limit allowed for Comments boxes. Please consider
removing or expanding the arbitrary 400 characters
permitted.Non-Governmental OrganisationEuropean Sustainable Use
Specialist Group of IUCN/SSCYes03924014183-05Between 50 and 249Less
than 2millionNoRobert
[email protected]; national;
regional/localSometimesSometimesNeverOftenPrinciples are sound but
EIA and SEA Directives need integration. EIA principles need to be
integrated into land use planning system which must include
management of agricultural and forestry land. There should be a
duty on the Commission and Member States to ensure the availability
and suitability of good quality environmental information for
environmental reports and decision
making.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeSince
EIA principles are sound most non-trivial projects should receive
some form of impact assessment. Thus screening should be removed
but procedures become less burdensome and less dominated by
consultants.YesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats Directive;
Water Framework Directive; Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy
Policy; The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in
a Transboundary ContextAgreea joint procedure (providing for a
single assessment) should be
establishedDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeThere is a need for
mandatory reporting requirements on member states so that the
operation of the Directive can be monitored. Measures for reporting
on actual impacts in a sample of cases should be
considered.DisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeThe EIA
Directive should be repealed and replaced by a single environmental
assessments Directive or Regulation covering all the existing
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Whether a Regulation is feasible in the light of
differences between planning systems needs discussion with member
states but an integrated Directive should allow minimum
wriggle-room.EIA and SEA depend on the quality and coverage of
relevant environmental information and its adaptation for
decision-making at all levels. The Commission and member states
should devote more effort to this objective, using EEA as
co-ordinator.Business/Industry AssociationEUROPIA (European
Petroleum Industry Association)NoHerve
Muslinherve.muslin@europia.comGreeceOftenOftenOftenNoOftenSometimesNeverSometimesThe
EIA Directive gives an overall and coherent framework for Member
States, based on essential requirements to harmonize the principles
of the
EIA.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeNo
opiniona scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request
of the
developer.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeOftenSometimesDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgree2,1
- An add. option could be only to exclude some type of projects in
the An. II based on threshold, the nature, the size and the
localization of the projects 2,3,1 - When an EIA is needed, a
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of both,
developer and envi. auth. following a discussion 242That would
introduce a third party opinion obligation in the
processNoDisagreethe existing procedures should remain as they
areDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.An up-date of the Directive,
with only to exclude some type of projects in the Annex II based on
threshold, the nature, the size and the localization of the
projects, could be a better option than a revision which could
impose new steps of consultation, opinion, decision in the process
of project consent, adding potential jamming and delays.It doesn't
appear as an obvious necessity to revise deeply the current EIA
Directives. this is a clear conclusion of the report from the Com.
on the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive "This
report confirms that the objectives of the EIA Directive have
generally been achieved,All MS have established regulatory
frameworks and implement the EIA in a manner which is in line with
the Directives ,MS have built on the minimum requi. of the
Directive and have gone beyond them "Private companyWSP
Environmental (trading as WSP Environment and
Energy)Yes25791194241-80More than 250Between 2 and 10
millionYesLess than 1%Between 1 and 2 monthsLess than 3
monthsBetween 3 and 6 monthsAndrew
[email protected]
KingdomSometimesSometimesOftenYesregional/localSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesDepends
on enforcement/monitoring at country/local levels/experience of
authority making decisions based on EIA results/when EIA completed
within cycle as to whether findings can influence outcome.
Associated Political pressures may be relevant, eg benefits of
project in terms of regeneration/economics may influence decision
and be considered of greater significance than environmental
effects.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeSometimesSometimesDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlternatives
to assess at EIA project level depend on scheme/site. Some may not
be available/under control of project proponent/inappropriate to
consider eg site identified for development within local planning
policy.Application of max. timescales to validity of data depends
nature related data/technical area, eg ecological data valid less
time than archaeological data.YesHabitats Directive; Climate and
energy PolicyDisagreea coordinated implementation of the various
procedures (coordination between separate assessments) should be
establishedDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeIf EIA done
alongside evolution of development proposal-provides opportunity to
hasten determination by ensuring key environmental effects
identified/appropriately assessed early/where design changes/other
control measures integrated. Measures should be adopted to avoid
shortcomings/differences between mitigation measures/actions
anticipated during planning/measures implemented during
project.DisagreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).Also Annexes
of the EIA Directive should be updated and clarified. The ability
of results of public consultation to influence depends on when
consultation undertaken. If when project design complete no
opportunity to incorporate feedback from public consultation. Where
public feedback has influenced a development is often relatively
arbitrary, eg relating to aesthetics/development's
appearance.Greater enforcement of mitigation measures and
monitoring of the effectiveness of such measures during
construction and post-construction should be undertaken.
Consideration should be given to providing a mechanism by which
environmental effects anticipated at the EIA stage can be verified
or monitored. It is important that environmental effects are
reviewed and monitoring regularly for certain technical topics.
There should be greater focus on consultation workshops early in
the process.Private companyIBERDROLA S.A.NoFernando
Lasherasfernando.lasheras@iberdrola.esSpainOftenOftenOftenYesEUOftenSometimesSometimesOftenTime
limits in each stage should be reduced and developers updates
should be improved i.e. officially informed when a new assesment
stage is
fulfilled.AgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeOftenSometimesDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeComments
related to questions: II.4.1: Assesment should be compulsory when
project developer has reasonable alternatives II.4.2: The quality
of the information is consistent with the environmental authority
requirements II.4.6: The role of environmental authorities
responsability is sufficiently defined by current
regulationsYesIPPC DirectiveAgreea joint procedure (providing for a
single assessment) should be
establishedAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeThe EIA and SEA should be
merged.Non-Governmental Organisationsterreichischer
Naturschutzbund, Landesgruppe VorarlbergYes22463024254-93More than
250Less than 2millionYesDon't knowMore than 3 monthsBetween 6
months and 12 monthsBetween 6 months and 12 monthsMag. Bianca
Burtschervorarlberg@naturschutzbund.atAustriaOftenOftenSometimesYesEU;
nationalSometimesNeverSometimesSometimesBasic ambition of the
Directive shall be: Minimizing the environmental impact for certain
major projects by carrying out a procedure that elaborates
environmental impacts of a project and its alternatives, and where
the public concerned has the right to participate in an early,
effective and efficient manner and to legally challenge decisions
falling under this
directive.AgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreea
scoping opinion/decision should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreea)
all Annex III criteria are considered when assessing Annex II
thresholds and cases, b) screening decisions are justified and
subject to direct judicial review, c) avoiding salami-slicing d)
all potent. impacts (incl. indirect, cumulative and synergistic)
are considered, e) all relevant alternatives are studied and the
choice justified, f) quality of assessment is granted by
independent bodyYesSEA Directive; IPPC Directive; Habitats
Directive; Climate and energy Policy; Large combustion Directive;
The Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary ContextDisagreeOtherThe Directive shall ensure the
assessments are coordinated on national level, but quality of each
specific procedure has to be maintained.AgreeDisagreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeImportant is that a) EIA is concluded by a binding
decision (either separate or development consent), which really
reflects the outcomes of the assessment, b) public has right to
effectively influence both EIA and development consent (incl. at
court), and c) EIA is not in hands of pro-development authorities.
Transb. procedures need more coordination, not detailed regulation
in the
Directive.DisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended).Not all
sect. assessment procedures can be merged with EIA. This is only
useful for specific large scale projects, where coordination can be
improved. Most important is to adjust requirements of SEA and EIA
dir. Logical order of these assessments and respecting results of
SEA shall be ensured, repeated assessment on the same level of
details avoided. This can be done without changing the SEA-dir.No
fundamental change of the directive is necessary. Major
shortcomings of the directive could be reached by better
implementation efforts of the existing directive. Some aspects such
as updating the Annexes, better regulated thresholds and screening
procedures, prevention of salami slicing, clearer obligations as to
alternative assessments and rules for public participation and
access to justice could be subject to the review
process.Business/Industry AssociationLandesbauernverbandYesNot
relevantNot relevantNoMichael
Schulzschulz@lbv-bw.deGermanyOftenOftenOftenNoSometimesSometimesNeverSometimesAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreea
scoping opinion/decision should be issued at the request of the
developer.DisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAlwaysOftenDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeNoDisagreethe
existing procedures should remain as they
areDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeDisagreeThe
EIA Directive should not be modified.Non-Governmental
OrganisationArbeitsgemeinschaft Naturschutz HamburgYesMore than
250Less than 2millionYesDon't knowBetween 1 and 4 weeksLess than 3
monthsDon't knowMonika
BockAGNaturschutz@web.deGermanyOftenSometimesSometimesYesnationalSometimesSometimesSometimesSometimesEIA
is very necessary and is potencially a strong and efficient
instrument for protecting the inviroment and nature. How ever too
often its weaknessess (e.g. screening rules, quality control) are
exploited, e.g. under political pressure to approve projects.
Changes must ensure its use better serves its own objectives and
also the nature and environmental protection objectives of other
DirectivesAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeNo
opinionAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreea scoping opinion/decision
should always be
issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeScreening:
more clarity; full use of Anx. 3 crit.; retain provisions for
sensitive locations; EIA for 'all' projects in Q 2.2.2 (not 'only.
Require assessment of alternatives, refind in public consult. at
scoping. Ensure quality controll for ecolog. survey data. Require
proper montoring and enforcement of mitigation. Raise awareness of
right to participate; public is nitified effectively.YesSEA
Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive;
Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill Directive;
REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation and Restriction
of Chemicals); Marine Framework DirectiveDisagreea coordinated
implementation of the various procedures (coordination between
separate assessments) should be establishedAgreeNo opinionAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeDisagreeAgreeA
comprehensive modification of the EIA is required (both the Annexes
and the provisions of the Directive should be amended) as well as
the introduction of provisions fostering the coordination of
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.Non-Governmental OrganisationPlantlife
InternationalYes32343573967-31Between 11 and 49Between 2 and 10
millionNoSeona [email protected]
KingdomSometimesSometimesSometimesYesEU; national; regional/localNo
opinionNo opinionNo opinionSometimesThe Directive has the potential
to aid individuals and civil society groups in voicing their
concerns and if possible changes outcomes, but at present the
implementation of EIA assessment at the national level is still
biased towards the developer.No opinionNo opinionNo
opinionDisagreeDisagreeAgreeAgreeNo opinionAgreeAgreea scoping
opinion/decision should always be issued.AgreeAgreeAgreeNo
opinionNo
opinionAgreeAgreeSometimesSometimesAgreeAgreeAgreeDisagreeYesSEA
Directive; Habitats Directive; Water Framework Directive;
Biodiversity Policy; Climate and energy Policy; Landfill Directive;
REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation and Restriction
of Chemicals); Marine Framework Directive; The Espoo Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary ContextAgreea
joint procedure (providing for a single assessment) should be
establishedNo opinionNo opinionAgreeNo
opinionAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeAgreeThe EIA
Directive should be repealed and replaced by a single environmental
assessments Directive or Regulation covering all the existing
sectoral environmental assessments required under other EC
Directives.The EIA and SEA should be merged, and this directive
should be overarching to ensure compliance with other EU policies
(Birds and Habitats Directive etc) and this directive repealed and
replaced by a regulation A case in point is the passing of the 400
kV Overhead Electrical Line between Beauly and Denny in Scotland.
This project passed under EIA assessment (a choice of routes within
one small area) when it is likely that it could have been
effectively challenged to consider other routes (in other areas of
Scotland) under an SEA assessment. This was not possible since the
EIA but not SEA Directive had been transposed into national
legislation.Non-Governmental OrganisationAssociazione Analisti
AmbientaliNoMario
Zambriniaaa@analistiambientali.orgItalyOftenSometimesSometimesYesEU;
national; regional/localNeverSometimesSometimes