JASPERS lessons learnt. Adina Relicovschi, EIA Coordinator

Transcription

1 JASPERS lessons learnt Adina Relicovschi, EIA Coordinator

2 Current portfolio Key issues Some 450 assignments in the Action Plans 2011, it is expected that JASPERS will complete about 100 Assignments in 2011 (60 already completed by mid August 2011) Major projects account for 85 % of total active interventions, small projects for 12 % and horizontal projects for 3%. To-date 32 JASPERS assisted Grant Applications lodged with DG REGIO; Out of 35 applications approved so far in 2011, all of them received assistance from JASPERS. 2

3 JASPERS involvement in 2011 Country No. of projects Country No. of projects Poland 150 Slovakia 37 Romania 114 Slovenia 18 Czech 36 Cyprus 8 Republic Hungary 36 Latvia 3 Bulgaria 34 Estonia 1 Malta 17 Lithuania 11 The total number of projects 465, including horizontal tasks projects (required EIA input 399 projects) 3

4 JASPERS involvement in 2011 Type of projects No. of projects total (EIA required) Roads 84 (76) Rails/ports/airports/urban 144 (121) transport Water 94 (83) Waste 59 (53) Energy 35 (32) Knowledge Economy 35 (29) Horizontal tasks 14 (5) The total number of projects 465, including horizontal tasks projects (required EIA input 399 projects) 4

5 Key issues Why do FAs get problems? 1. Environmental procedures (compliance with environmental acquis - EIA, Natura 2000, water acquis, waste acquis, IPPC, LCP) 2. Procurement 3. Decisional tree 4. State Aid 5. CBA 6. Others.. 5

6 Compliance with env acquis required input Assessment of the technical documents Application form for major projects; EIA report + NTS, if applicable; Appropriate Assessment, if applicable Assessment of the procedural aspects on implementation of EIA and Habitat Directives Overall assessment of project compliance with environmental acquis (IPPC, LCP, Habitat and Birds, SEA, etc.) 6

7 General procedural aspects: project classification under EIA Directive: Misinterpretation of Annex I and Annex II projects wrong classification (e.g. water supply networks, water sewage systems, waste disposal recovery, long distance railway double tracking, any change or extension of the projects already authorised, executed or in the process of being executed, etc); Use of EC guideline Interpretation of definitions of certain project categories of annex I and annex II of the EIA Directive. 7

8 General procedural aspects: development consent concept: Misunderstanding of the development consent concept in the meaning of EIA Directive and application of Art. 9 (1) multi-stage development consent (wrong transposition in many cases); Clear indication: which act is considered as development consent in the meaning of EIA Directive; Clear distinction between EIA Decision/approval and development consent. 8

9 General procedural aspects: application of Art 9 (1) - Information made available to the public (e.g. how, where, when, for how long) Content of the decision (development consent) and the conditions attached thereto; Justification of the decision having examined the concerns and opinions expressed by the public concerned and information about overall public participation process; Description of the main measures to avoid, reduce and, if possible, offset the major adverse effects. 9

10 General procedural aspects: Annex II projects: Justification of screening decision for Annex II projects screened out (Negative Screening Decision) case by case examination and criteria listed in Annex III of the EIA Directive; Thresholds: are to help in screening, not to replace it screening determination still needed; Information on how the screening decision has been made available to the public; When thresholds or national criteria have been set up link to art. 11 (2) of the EIA Directive (informing the Commission). 10

11 General procedural aspects: public participation and information on consultation with: Environmental authorities (including other authorities likely to be concerned by the project by the reason of their specific environmental responsibilities); Public concerned as defined by EIA Directive; Application of Art. 6 (3) of EIA Directive mainly in the case of multi-stage development consent; Other Member State for transboundary impact, if applicable (including information on the consultation with authorities and public concerned in the territory of the MS likely to be affected). 11

12 General procedural aspects salami slicing: Dividing the projects to avoid the assessment to be considered Annex II and to be screened out; Considering the cumulative effects of the projects in the EIA reports/eis; Dividing projects up to reduce alternatives (alternatives must be addressed in the EIA report/eis, included in the NTS and public must be consulted on them 12

13 EIA report does not address all issues required by Annex IV of the EIA Directive: cumulative effects; impact no always quantified; risk analysis including risk caused by poor operation of the site during construction period and risk generated by natural disasters; environmental management plan institutional roles/responsibilities, indication on the timeframe for their implementation 13

14 Quality of the NTS - content recommended by EC guideline on EIA: EIS review provides a concise but comprehensive description of the Project, its environment, the effects of the Project on the environment and the proposed mitigation; highlights any significant uncertainties about the Project and its environmental effects; explains the development consent process for the Project and the role of EIA in this process; Provides an overview of the approach to the assessment; is written in non-technical language, avoiding technical terms, detailed data and scientific discussion; is comprehensible to a lay member of the public. 14

15 Natura 2000: Justification of the declaration providing grounds for decision; Appropriate assessment impact no always quantified and the significance determined, mitigation measures proposed misunderstanding of the relevant stages and steps included in the EC methodological guidelines on the provisions of Art. 6(3) and 6(4) of Habitats Directive ; Compensatory measures and art. 6(4) of Habitat Directive. 15

16 Water Framework Directive new modifications/activities application of Art. 4.7: Key decisions: deciding whether or not to initiate the analysis for obtaining an Art. 4 (7) derogation; If yes, assessing whether or not a derogation based on Article 4.7 can be justified. 16

17 Water Framework Directive new modifications/activities application of Art. 4.7: Deciding whether or not to initiate the analysis for obtaining an Art. 4 (7) derogation: Identifying and characterising the new modification/activity; Assessing the impact of the new modification/activity on water status (Assessing the impact on water abstraction and pollution and the likely changes in the ecological quality or quantity of water). 17

18 Water Framework Directive new modifications/activities application of Art. 4.7: Assessing whether or not a derogation based on Article 4.7 can be justified: Identifying practical measures to mitigate the adverse effects Identifying the broader impact on other water bodies; Assessing the reasons for the new modification/activity; 18

19 Water Framework Directive application of Art. 4.7: Assessing whether or not a derogation based on Article 4.7 can be justified: Identifying practical measures to mitigate the adverse effects Identifying the broader impact on other water bodies; Assessing the reasons for the new modification/activity; Comparing the benefits of the new modification/activity with the benefits of avoiding deterioration; Comparing the benefits of the new modification/activity with alternatives that serve the same beneficial objectives 19

20 Explaining the consistency with other Community environmental sectoral policies and legislation: Accession Treaty and the obligations assumed; Water sector (Water Framework Directive River Basin Management Plans, UWWTD, etc.); Waste sector (Waste Framework Directive Regional waste management Plans, Landfill Directive, IPPC Directive, etc). 20

21 What can be done? Capacity building training programme (sectorial seminars Poland); Sectorial guidelines for different project categories EIA report minimum requirements (7 guidelines developed Romania); Multi-stage development consent process - due to the complexity and history of the transport projects a simply synopsis of what has happened - summary of all environmental processes followed, permits obtained, consultation undertaken, mitigation measures defined, etc. etc. for the specific project (Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia); 21

22 Thank you Adina Relicovschi, EIA Coordinator 22