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 Duffjulietduff@eircom.netIrelandNeverSometimesSometimesYesEU; 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 Hubahuba@savba.skSlovakiaSometimesSometimesSometimesYesEU; 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 Vincentnic@capacity.org.ukUnited 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 Aliceelsa.favrot@gdfsuez.com; alice.monnet@gdfsuez.comFranceAlwaysOftenSometimesNo 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 Firbaspetrfirbas@yahoo.comCzech 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 Obrdlkobrdlik@wellcon.czCzech 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 Schneiderregina.schneider@eeb.orgBelgiumOftenOftenSometimesYesEU; 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 Wilksswilks@clientearth.orgUnited 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 Gonzlezasociaciongeotrupes@gmail.comSpainNeverNeverNeverYesEU; 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 Hansenjesper.hostrup@mail.dkDenmarkOftenSometimesSometimesYesEU; 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 Lochmannvorstand@dasv-ev.orgGermanySometimesOftenAlwaysYesEU; 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 Dvokjosef.dvorak@tetcice.czCzech 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 Cihakcihak@birdlife.czCzech 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. Mllerbuero@dguf.deGermanySometimesOftenAlwaysYesEU; 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 Hechtmichael.hecht@fwp.atAustriaOftenOftenAlwaysYesnational; 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 Rolandclaude.roland@uwe.beBelgiumOftenOftenOftenYesEUSometimesNo 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 Nairnenquiries@scottishwoodlands.co.ukUnited 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 Britocap@cap.pt ; 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 Cottrellfoes@foes.deGermanyOftenOftenSometimesYesEU; 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 Sullivanmichaela.sullivan@forthports.co.ukUnited 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 Fothergillj.fothergill@iema.netUnited 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 Smithersrichardsmithers@woodlandtrust.org.ukUnited 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 Limbrickalimbrick@aepuk.comUnited 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 Kenwardreke@ceh.ac.ukBelgiumOftenOftenSometimesYesEU; 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 Rickettsandrew.ricketts@wspgroup.comUnited 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 Andersonseona.anderson@plantlife.org.ukUnited 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