The implementation of the

Environmental Impact Assessment

on the basis of precise examples

Final Report: 12.11.2012

Introduction to IMPEL

The European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of Environmental Law (IMPEL) is an
international non-profit association of the environmental authorities of the EU Member States, acceding and
candidate countries of the European Union and EEA countries. The association is registered in Belgium and its
legal seat is in Bruxelles, Belgium.

IMPEL was set up in 1992 as an informal Network of European regulators and authorities concerned with the
implementation and enforcement of environmental law. The Network’s objective is to create the necessary
impetus in the European Community to make progress on ensuring a more effective application of
environmental legislation. The core of the IMPEL activities concerns awareness raising, capacity building and
exchange of information and experiences on implementation, enforcement and international enforcement
collaboration as well as promoting and supporting the practicability and enforceability of European
environmental legislation.

During the previous years IMPEL has developed into a considerable, widely known organisation, being
mentioned in a number of EU legislative and policy documents, e.g. the 6th Environment Action Programme
and the Recommendation on Minimum Criteria for Environmental Inspections.

The expertise and experience of the participants within IMPEL make the network uniquely qualified to work on
both technical and regulatory aspects of EU environmental legislation.

Information on the IMPEL Network is also available through its website at:
www.impel.eu

2
Title report: Number report:
The implementation of the Environmental Impact 2012/09
Assessment on the basis of precise examples

Project manager: Report adopted at IMPEL

Dr. Markus Graggaber General Assembly:

Nicosia, Cyprus. December

2012

Authors: Number of pages: 228

Dr. Markus Graggaber, DI Wilfried Pistecky Report: 87

Appendices: [141]

Project team

Markus Graggaber, Susanna Eberhartinger-Tafill, Gisela Holzgraefe, Pamela McDonnell

Martino Michieletti, Wilfried Pistecky

Executive summary:
[see chapter 1 – Executive summary]

Disclaimer:
This report is the result of a project within the IMPEL network. The content does not
necessarily represent the view of the national administrations or the European
Commission.

General remarks:
• All conclusions in this report arise from the responses made to a
questionnaire distributed as part of this study and therefore cover
answers from Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Malta,
Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and United
Kingdom.
• The aim of the project is not to determine compliance with the EIA
Directive but is merely to compare EIA practice across Member States.

3
 Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................... 5
2 Introduction ...................................................................................................10
3 Objectives ......................................................................................................12
4 Methodology...................................................................................................12
5 Comparison of Eia Screening Procedures ............................................................15
5.1 General remarks .....................................................................................15
5.2 EIA implementation .................................................................................16
5.3 Screening ...............................................................................................18
5.3.1 Guidance .......................................................................................18
5.3.2 Screening Thresholds ....................................................................18
5.3.3 Provisions regarding cumulation and salami slicing ......................31
5.3.4 Information submitted for the screening stage .............................32
5.3.5 Authorities.....................................................................................36
6 Comparison of EIA procedures ..........................................................................42
6.1 General remarks .....................................................................................42
6.2 Scoping..................................................................................................42
6.2.1 Guidance .......................................................................................43
6.2.2 Participants in the scoping process ...............................................44
6.3 Development consent procedure ...............................................................46
6.3.1 EIA documentation ........................................................................46
6.3.2 Manuals or guidance on Environmental Impact Assessment .........47
6.3.3 Alternatives ...................................................................................48
6.3.4 Content of EIA documentation /Submitted Information ................48
6.3.5 Authorities and decision on development consent .........................50
6.4 Public participation ..................................................................................61
6.5 Monitoring ..............................................................................................67
7 Conclusions ....................................................................................................80
8 Recommendations ...........................................................................................84
9 Register of Abbreviations .................................................................................85
10 Register of Tables .......................................................................................86
11 Register of Figures ......................................................................................87
12 Appendices ................................................................................................88
12.1 Appendix 1: Questionnaire .......................................................................88
12.2 Appendix 2: List of persons sending in completed questionnaires ................ 113
12.3 Appendix 3: Evaluation of general information on EIA screening procedures . 115
12.4 Appendix 4: Evaluation of detailed information on EIA procedures ............... 175
12.5 Appendix 5: Links to Guidance ................................................................ 221
12.6 Term of References ............................................................................... 223

4
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (2011/92/EU) was adopted in
1985, amended in 1997, 2003 and 2009 and codified in 2011. The EIA procedure ensures
that the environmental consequences of projects are identified and assessed before
development consent is issued. The public can give its opinion and the results of the
consultations are taken into consideration in the development consent procedure of the
project. The public has to be informed on the decision. The EIA Directive outlines the
project categories which should be made subject to an EIA, the procedure that shall be
followed and the content of the assessment.

This IMPEL project compares the screening and permitting procedures for projects which
require EIA. The project highlighted some specific issues in EIA procedure like criteria
used in each Member State to determine whether an EIA needs to be carried out,
approaches used to address screening, scoping, cumulation of projects and effects,
"salami slicing", no impacts, accident risk, interaction between factors etc. Further on the
project tried to identify good practice and to support the exchange of information on
existing guidance material.

Conclusions
Approximately 50 % of the 20 participating countries integrated the EIA procedure in
existing procedures, 50 % have implemented separate procedures. The minority of the
surveyed countries undertakes EIA within a single permit procedure (“one-stop-shop”).
Screening procedures
Within this IMPEL project four different types of projects were chosen for a comparison of
the EIA screening procedures in Member States of the European Union and Croatia:
Thermal power plants, landfills, shopping centers and road construction projects.
Main findings:
• Guidelines for screening exist in several countries.
• As already stated in the EC report 2009 the screening procedure pursuant to Article
4 (2) of the EIA Directive allows for a couple of approaches. Some countries
require a screening procedure for all projects of a certain type while others have
introduced threshold for screening and/or obligatory EIA.
• Thresholds for obligatory EIA for Annex II projects exist:
- with regard to thermal power stations: in 9 countries (below the Annex I
threshold of 300 MW)
- with regard to landfills for non-hazardous waste: in 3 countries
- with regard to shopping centres: in 9 countries
- with regard to roads: in 7 countries
• As to the parameters used in thresholds it can be concluded that the majority of
countries uses
- for power stations: capacity in MW
- for landfills for non-hazardous waste: total volume (m³) or volume/day,
tons/day or total capacity in tons
- for shopping centres: area in ha or m² (area of development, gross floor space)
- for roads: length of road (in km)
• A case-by-case examination has to be carried out for

5
 - all power stations: in 5 countries
- all landfills for non-hazardous waste: in 8 countries
- all shopping centres: in 4 countries
- all roads: in 4 countries
Additionally, some countries have determined site-related criteria (e.g. location in
sensitive area, distance to sensitive area or receptor).
• Countries are well aware of the issues of cumulation with other projects and
salami-slicing. With regard to possible cumulation of projects most countries just
referred to the screening criteria laid down in their national EIA law which mirror
the Annex III criteria of the Directive.
Examples for effective addressing of cumulation of several projects and their effects
are are:
- The description of the project includes the relation of the project to other existing
/ planned projects (Bulgaria, Lithuania).
- The submitted information describes the accumulation of the project’s impacts
with the impacts of other existing or planned/known projects.
- Adjacent projects (projects with the same or similar activities) meet or exceed
together with the current project the defined thresholds (Hungary).
- If a project is spatially related to other projects of the same type and, together
with them, reach the relevant threshold value, the authority shall examine on a
case-by-case basis whether due to a cumulation of effects an EIA is required
(Austria).
- The obligation to perform an environmental impact assessment shall also exist if
several projects of the same type which are to be executed simultaneously by the
same developer or more than one developer and which are closely related
(cumulative effects) together reach or exceed the relevant thresholds. (Germany).
- Cumulative effects are taken into account by assuming a “compulsory” application
of the cumulating projects (Denmark).

Half of the countries mentioned no specific provisions against salami slicing; some
responded that the screening criteria also apply to the screening of modifications and
extensions implying that a possible splitting of projects will be identified during the
screening exercise in due course. Strategies to prevent salami slicing include e.g.:
- Wide definition of the term “project” (inclusion of associated/ancillary works,
different developers etc.)
- In order to avoid circumventions of EIA by cutting modifications in several pieces,
the sum total of the capacity-expanding modifications approved in the past five
years has to be added to the capacity increase applied for (Austria).
- Projects are considered together if
1. they are situated on the same operating or construction site and are connected
with common operating or constructional facilities or
2.as other measures encroaching on nature and landscape there is a close spatial
connection between them
3. and if they serve a comparable purpose (Germany).
- If alteration or extension of a project not previously subject to EIA requirements
results in the relevant size or capacity figure being reached or exceeded for the
first time, an EIA shall be carried out for the alteration or extension and shall take
account of the environmental impacts of the existing project not previously
subject to EIA requirements (Germany).
- Projects which are connected technologically shall be qualified as one project, also
if they are implemented by different entities (Poland).

6
 • In most countries information on all of the areas of expertise mentioned in Annex
IV, if relevant, is submitted for screening procedures; the main issues being
(independently of the project type) air quality, nature protection and water
management.The level of detail of the submitted screening documents is general to
medium, whereupon the volume of these documents rarely exceeds 50 pages.
• The authorities (national/federal, regional, local, statutory body) responsible for
the screening procedure vary across the countries and somentimes differ
according to the size of the project;
• The character of the screening decision is a legal document in the majority of the
countries.
• In almost all countries the screening decision can be appealed (exception: Czech
Republic).

EIA procedures
The IMPEL project had a closer look on the EIA procedures for landfills and shopping
centers for the purposes of comparison. The conclusions are as follows:
• In approximately 50 % of the countries scoping for the environmental report is
carried out on a mandatory basis.
• Guidelines for scoping and the EIA process exist in several countries.
• Apart from competent authorities a large number of countries involves the public
and / or other relevant organisations in the EIA process; participation of the public
in mandatory scoping exists in 7 countries.
• In most of the countries the developer can freely choose who compiles the
information required to be submitted to the competent authority for the EIA.
• In response to the question whether countries have imposed to consider the do-
nothing alternative 12 countries answered affirmative. Apart from this most of
the countries seem to have transposed the requirement of the Directive (“main
alternatives studied by the developer”) without further specification.
• Regarding the content of the EIA documentation submitted by the developer, it
can be said that most countries deem all of the topics referred to in Annex IV as
potentially relevant, depending on the site of the project.
• Competent authorities give greater focus to air quality and water management for
both project types, as well as traffic and noise for shopping centers and on waste
management, nature protection, hydrogeology, landscape and human health for
landfills.
• In almost all countries investigations on the environmental impacts of the
construction phase have to be carried out, in approximately 75 % of the countries
the environmental impacts of accidents / incidents have to be investigated.
• In about 2/3 of the surveyed countries the submitted information has a detailed
level; the range of the average size spans from "5 to 200 pages" to "over 1000
pages".
• The authorities responsible for EIA procedures can be either on national/federal,
regional or local level as well as statutory bodies; a slight majority for the regional
level can be observed.
• Basically, the evaluation process of the submitted documents is performed by the
competent authority which consults other authorities or bodies if needed. This
involves sometimes special appointed committees (Croatia, Cyprus, Romania) or
independent experts (Netherlands, Slovenia).

7
 • The result of the EIA is mostly documented in a technical report and leads to
binding conditions in the development consent in the majority of the countries.
• In the majority of the countries development consent for landfills consists in an
environmental permit, in the case of shopping centers it often is a planning
permission only.
• The development consent can be appealed in all countries by almost everybody.
• Public participation is a cornerstone in the EIA process; information to the public
in most of the cases is provided by the competent authority (by public
advertisements, on the EIA-authority´s website and also during public hearing), in
a few countries it is solely the task of the developer.
• In most countries the EIA entails recommendations on monitoring which are at
least in about 2/3 of the countries subsequently included into the development
consent as obligations or conditions.
• Compliance of monitoring results with development consent conditions is checked in
most cases during final inspection, environmental inspections or/and by periodical
reporting by the developer.
• The consequences of non-compliance with EIA related conditions / obligations of
the development consent involve the whole range of adequate measures such as
imposement of fines, concrete enforcement actions and sanctions,
withdrawal/suspension of the permit.
• With regard to the information of the public about the results of the monitoring 2/3
of the surveyed countries (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Hungary,
Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia and United Kingdom) do not
undertake such an activity whereas the other countries referred to passive public
access to monitoring data.

Recommendations
As the project framework did not provide for a workshop in 2012 it was not possible to
discuss the answers with those who completed the questionnaires. This could lead to the
possibility that the questions were not understood by each participant in the same way,
which in some cases affected the clarity of the answers provided and the ability to fully
compare the approaches used across all countries.
Issues which would merit further discussion:

• approaches how to deal with cumulation and salami slicing

• comparison of the level of detail of the information submitted during screening
phase and during the EIA procedure (both for the information which has to be
provided according to EIA Directive and the information about topics with greater
focus) and methods of dealing with the huge amount of information which is
provided during an EIA procedure
• experience concerning the scoping phase as about half of the participating
countries have a mandatory scoping phase (including the experience with the
public during scoping phase)
• closer look on quality issues with regard to the authors of the EIA documentation
(free choice developer or accredited consultants)
• level of detail of the studied alternatives, the construction phase and the
description of impacts of accidents

8
 • merits of conditions or recommendations in the development consent decision
which are based on the results of the EIA planning
• Closer look on public participation

Disclaimer:
This report is the result of a project within the IMPEL-Network. The content does not
necessarily represent the view of the national administrations.

9
2 INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (2011/92/EU) was adopted in
1985, substantively amended in 1997 and codified in 2011. The EIA procedure ensures
that the environmental consequences of projects are identified and assessed before
development consent is issued. The public can give its opinion and the results of the
consultations are taken into consideration in the development consent procedure of the
project. The public has to be informed of the decision.
The EIA Directive outlines the project categories which should be made subject to an EIA,
the procedure that shall be followed and the content of the assessment.

KEY STAGES NOTES

Project Preparation The developer prepares the proposals for the project.


In some MS there is a requirement for the developer to notify the
Notification to Competent Authority (CA) in advance of the application for
Competent Authority development consent. The developer may also do this voluntarily
and informally.


The CA makes a decision on whether EIA is required. This may
happen when the CA receives notification of the intention to make
Screening a development consent application, or the developer may make an
application for a screening opinion. The screening decision must be
recorded and made public (Article 4).


The Directive provides that developers may request a scoping
opinion from the CA. The scoping opinion will identify the matters
Scoping to be covered in the environmental information. It may also cover
other aspects of the EIA process. In preparing the opinion the CA
must consult the environmental authorities (Article 5 para. 2).


The developer carries out studies to collect and prepare the
Environmental Studies
environmental information required by Article 5 of the Directive.


Submission of
Environmental The developer submits the environmental information to the CA
Information to together with the application for development consent.
Competent Authority

10


In some MS there is a formal requirement for independent review
of the adequacy of the environmental information before it is
Review of Adequacy of considered by the CA.
the Environmental In other MS the CA is responsible for determining whether the
Information information is adequate. The developer may be required to provide
further information if the submitted information is deemed to be
inadequate.


The environmental information must be made available to
Consultation with
authorities with environmental responsibilities and to other
Statutory
interested organisations and the general public for review. They
Environmental
must be given an opportunity to comment on the project and its
Authorities, Other
environmental effects before a decision is made on development
Interested Parties
consent. If transboundary effects are likely to be significant other
and the Public
affected MS must be consulted (Articles 6 and 7).


Consideration of the
Environmental
Information by the The environmental information and the results of consultations
Competent Authority must be considered by the CA in reaching its decision on the
before making application for development consent (Article 8).
Development
Consent Decision


The decision must be made available to the public including the
Announcement of
reasons for it and a description of the measures that will be
Decision
required to mitigate adverse environmental effects (Article 9).


Post-Decision
There may be a requirement to monitor the effects of the project
Monitoring if Project is
once it is implemented.
Granted Consent

The steps in bold must be followed under Directive 2011/92/EU. The steps which are not
highlighted form part of good practice in EIA and have been formalised in some Member States.
Source: Guidance on EIA: Scoping, European Commission, 2001

Figure 1: The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process

A number of “problematic areas” in the application of the EIA Directive were highlighted
in the "Report from the Commission on the application and effectiveness of the EIA
Directive (European Commission, 2009)". These included inter alia:
• Screening - the use of thresholds and criteria for Annex II projects;
• Quality control of the information for the Environmental Impact Assessment according
to Art. 5 para. 1 and Annex IV of the EIA Directive;
• Monitoring.
Therefore, this IMPEL project was set up to explore these areas further across all Member
States, with particular emphasis on screening including the use of thresholds, scoping,
cumulation of projects, “salami slicing”, quality control and the consideration of EIA
results.

11
In 2010 the European Commission has launched a review process of the EIA Directive
which is still ongoing. A Commission proposal for a policy option (i.e. technical
adaptation, amendment, new Directive or Regulation etc.) is foreseen for 2012. This
IMPEL project can assist the legislative process by providing concrete practical findings.

3 OBJECTIVES
The main objectives of the project are to
• Compare the thresholds and criteria used in each Member State to determine if an
EIA needs to be carried out;
• compare the approaches used to address particular EIA issues (e.g. screening,
scoping, cumulation, "salami slicing", risk of accidents);
• identify Good Practice with regard to the above mentioned issues;
• exchange information on existing guidance material.

Therefore this IMPEL project has compared both screening procedures and permitting
procedures for projects which require EIA. As a first step, the project will analyse the
present situation in the Member States.

4 METHODOLOGY

The first step of the project was to form a project core team that comprised the following
members:

Function in Name Country Organisation

project
Team Leader Markus Graggaber Austria Department of Environmental
Protection of the Provincial
Government of Salzburg
EIA Expert Susanna Austria Austrian Federal Ministry of
Eberhartinger- Agriculture, Forestry, Environment
Tafill and Water Management
(assisting: Verena
Gubesch)
EIA Expert Gisela Holzgraefe Germany Ministry of Agriculture, Environment
and Rural Areas of Land Schleswig-
Holstein
EIA Expert Pamela McDonnell Ireland Environmental Protection Agency
EIA Expert Martino Michieletti Italy ARPA Lombardia
Consultant Wilfried Pistecky Austria Wilfried Pistecky Consulting
Engineering
Table 1: Members of the project core team
To investigate the differences between EIA legislation and practice in EU Member States,
the project core team developed a questionnaire to collect basic information on the
following issues:
• Screening;
• Scoping;
• Quality control;
• Consideration of specific environmental issues in EIA processes;
• Consideration of EIA results during and after project implementation;
• Monitoring.

12
The questionnaire comprised three main sections:
1. Information on the participant
2. General information on EIA screening procedures for the following 4 project types:
• Thermal power station;
• Landfill;
• Shopping center;
• Road construction.
3. Detailed information on EIA procedures for 2 of the above project types, namely:
• Landfill;
• Shopping center.
The questions within sections 2 and 3 were identical for each project type (see
chapter 12.1 Appendix 1 - Questionnaire).
The questionnaire was distributed by the team leader on 24.02.2012 to the IMPEL
network and EIA experts in all EU Member States. To obtain a representative sample,
those contacted were also asked to forward the questionnaire to other persons in their
countries dealing with EIA procedures.
The deadline for the submission of completed questionnaires was scheduled for the
23.03.2012. Responses were received from the following EU Member States (in
alphabetical order):
• Austria;
• Bulgaria;
• Cyprus;
• Czech Republic;
• Denmark;
• France;
• Germany;
• Hungary;
• Ireland;
• Italy;
• Lithuania;
• Malta;
• Netherlands;
• Poland;
• Romania;
• Slovakia;
• Slovenia;
• Spain;
• United Kingdom.
Additionally, Croatia took part in this survey.

13
 DK
LT

IE
UK
PL
NL

DE
CZ
SK
AT
HU
FR RO
SI
HR

IT BG

ES

MT
CY

Figure 2: Map of countries participating in the study (resource: http://geo.dianacht.de)

The list of participants can be found in chapter 12.2 Appendix 2.

Subsequently, the completed questionnaires were evaluated. Based on this evaluation

conclusions (see chapter 7) and recommendations (see chapter 8) were formulated by
the core team.
If two or more questionnaires from the same country were received the answers were
merged by the team leader and the consultant. If varying answers to the same question
were given, the answer that seemed most appropriate in the context of other information
provided by that country was selected.

The information, results and conclusions in this document are based on the completed
questionnaires and discussions in the core team. The core team met once and reviewed
the draft version of the report by E-mail. Additonal the draft version of the report was
distributed to all participants of the project to recommend especially the results
regarding their country.
As the project framework - for financial reasons - did not provide for a workshop it was
not possible to discuss the answers with those who completed the questionnaires.
Therefore it is possible that the questions were not understood by each participant in the
same way, which in some cases affected the clarity of the answers provided, and the
ability to fully compare the approaches used across all Member States.

14
5 COMPARISON OF EIA SCREENING PROCEDURES

5.1 General remarks

Four different types of projects were chosen for a comparison of EIA screening
procedures in the Member States of the European Union and Croatia:
• Thermal power station;
• Landfill;
• Shopping center;
• Road construction.
The rationale behind this choice was: The project types should be existent in most of the
countries. One industrial project type (coverage of Directive on Industrial Emissions
2010/75/EU), one infrastructure project type and one transport infrastructure project
type should be chosen.

The following chapters of this section give an overview of the relevant answers provided
by the participating countries (details are provided in Appendix 3 – Evaluation of general
information on EIA screening procedures in chapter 12.3).

15
5.2 EIA implementation
According to Art. 2 para. 2 of the EIA Directive the EIA may be integrated into the
existing procedures for development consent in the Member States, or failing this, into
other procedure or into procedures to be established to comply with the aims of the
Directive. The table below shows which countries have integrated the EIA into their
existing systems, and which ones have chosen a separate system with respect to the
scrutinized project types:

Integrated into existing procedures Separate

procedure
Austria 
Bulgaria 
Croatia  Environmental permit  (except thermal
power stations
and landfills when
IPPC installations)
Cyprus 
Czech Republic  for certain shopping center projects: 
integrated in IPPC licensing procedure
Denmark  for shopping center: integrated in spatial  IPPC installations:
planning procedure IPPC permission
substitutes part of
the EIA
permission
France  thermal power stations and landfills:  (for road
administrative authorisation according to construction)
the legislation on Classified Facilities
(except road construction)
Shopping centers: planning permission
Germany  thermal power stations: licensing
procedure under Federal for Immission
Control Act, shopping center: land use
plan and building permission, landfills and
road construction: plan approval
Hungary 
Ireland  Thermal power stations: integrated into
the planning permission procedure and
also the IPPC licensing procedure( if the if
the plant has a thermal input of >50MW)
(dual decision).
Landfills: integrated into the planning
permission procedure and also the waste
licensing procedure (dual decision).
Italy 
Lithuania  (integrated in environmental permitting)
Malta  (integrated in development consent)
Netherlands  (integrated in environmental permitting
for thermal power station and landfill;
spatial planning for shopping center and
road construction; for highway roads there
is a special Act in place, in Dutch the
'Tracéwet'- EIA can be integrated in this
procedure as well)
Poland 

16
 Integrated into existing procedures Separate
procedure
Romania  integrated in environmental permitting
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain 
United Kingdom  integrated in planning permission; England
& Wales: for certain thermal power station
and road construction projects integrated
in National Significant Infrastructure
Projects development consent process
Table 2: Integration of the EIA into procedures for development consent

From the above table it is apparent that Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany,
Ireland, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Romania, and the United Kingdom integrate
EIA into existing procedures (Czech Republic and Denmark have exemptions for shopping
centers). In all other participating countries EIA is undertaken in a separate procedure.
Single permit procedure (“one stop shop”)
The following table provides an overview in which countries EIA is incorporated in a
single permit procedure in which all necessary permits are granted jointly (“one stop
shop”).
EIA incorporated in a single permit procedure (“one stop
shop”)
Country Thermal Landfill Shopping Road
power station center construction
Austria yes yes yes yes (except
federal roads)
Bulgaria yes yes yes yes
Croatia no (not answered) no no
Cyprus yes yes yes yes
Czech Republic no no no no
Denmark no no yes yes
France (not answered) (not answered) (not answered) (not answered)
Germany no yes no yes
Hungary no no no no
Ireland no no yes yes
Italy no no no no
Lithuania no no no no
Malta no no no no
Netherlands yes yes no no
Poland no no no no
Romania yes yes yes yes
Slovakia no no no no
Slovenia no no no no
Spain no no no no
United Kingdom1 no no no (not answered)
Table 3: Comparison of one stop shop procedures including the EIA

1
The planning permission process allows other consents to be gained alongside it. However the detail of which
permits can be gained varies (possibility of devolution).

17
Bulgaria, Romania and Cyprus provide for a one stop shop permit procedure for all 4
project types, Austria for all except projects concerning federal roads, Denmark and
Ireland for shopping center and road construction projects, Germany for landfill and road
construction projects, the Netherlands for thermal power station and landfill projects and
Romania only for thermal power station projects. The majority of participating countries
do not integrate the EIA in a single permit procedure. However, in some countries some
of the necessary permits are granted jointly: This is the case for Croatia, Malta,
Denmark, Germany, Netherlands and United Kingdom1 (see Table 3 above).

5.3 Screening

5.3.1 Guidance
The following table provides an overview of the availability of official guidance for
screening in the countries listed in chapter 5.2.

Availability Availability of official guidance for screening for project types

Level Thermal Landfill Shopping Road
power station center construction
National Austria Austria Austria Austria
Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany Germany
Ireland Ireland Ireland Ireland
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands
Poland Poland Poland Poland
Romania Romania Romania Romania
Spain Spain Spain Spain
United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom
Regional Austria Austria Austria Austria
Germany Germany
Spain Spain Spain Spain
United Kingdom
No guidance Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
available Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic
Germany
Hungary Hungary Hungary Hungary
Italy Italy Italy Italy
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia
Table 4: Availability of official guidance for screening in the participating countries

Eight countries have issued screening guidance on national level, in four of these
countries regional guidance is available as well. For the website links to official guidance
for screening see chapter 12.5, Appendix 5 – Guidance.

5.3.2 Screening Thresholds

The conditions that define the obligation for an EIA are based on the EIA Directive
and the implementation in the Member States. For the project types defined in Annex I of

18
the EIA Directive the Member States have to ensure an EIA is carried out. For projects
listed in Annex II of the EIA Directive Member States shall make the determination
whether an EIA has to be carried out through a case-by-case examination or thresholds
or criteria set by the Member State. Member States may also decide to apply both
procedures.
The responses of the survey with regard to the screening of Annex II projects are
provided in the following tables below. Further details can be found in Appendix 3
(Evaluation of general information on EIA screening procedures) in chapter 12.3).

19
Thermal power stations
The EIA Directive defines in Annex II 3 a): "Industrial installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot water (projects not
included in Annex I);
Annex I 2 a): Thermal power stations and other combustion installations with a heat output of 300 megawatts or more
The following table outlines the thresholds at which each of the participating countries carries out EIA and the thresholds at which
screening for EIA is initiated.
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Austria 200 MW (rated thermal input) • 100 MW (in areas subject to air pollution)
• 50 MW for cumulation with other spatially related thermal
power stations if 200 MW is reached together with them
• 25 MW (in areas subject to air pollution and cumulation) for
cumulation with other spatially related thermal power
stations if 100 MW is reached together with them
Bulgaria 50 MW (heat capacity) case-by-case examination for all projects below Annex I
threshold
Croatia 100 MW (electricity) 1 MW (electricity)
Cyprus 50 MW Case-by-case examination for all projects not included in Annex 1
(below 50MW) based on prelim EIA Report
Czech Republic 200 MW (electricity) 50 MW (electricity)
Denmark 120 MW (heat output) case-by-case examination for all projects below 120 MW
France 20 MW (not answered)
500 tons of coal/day
Germany 200 MW (rated thermal input) 50 MW to less than 200 MW
20 to less than 50 MW when using light heating oil, methanol,
ethanol, untreated vegetable oils or vegetable oil methyl esters,
untreated natural gas, liquefied gas, gas from public gas supplies
or hydrogen
10 to less than 50 MW (when using gaseous fuels, (especially
coke furnace gas, mine gas, steel gas, refinery gas, synthesis
gas, biogas)
1 to less than 50 MW when using coal, coke including petroleum
coke, coal briquettes, turf briquettes, fuel turf, untreated wood,
emulsified natural bitumen, heating oils excluding light heating oil
site related screening:
1 to less than 50 MW when using solid or liquid fuels other than
listed above
100 kW to less than 1 MW when using solid or liquid fuels other
than listed above
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Hungary 300 MW (heat output, other than incineration plant) 50 MW (output performance)
20 MW (electricity)
Ireland 300 MW (heat output) case-by-case examination for all projects below 300 MW. Project
is assessed against the criteria referred to in Annex III of the
Directive.
Italy 300 MW 50 MW
Lithuania 300 MW 50 MW
Malta 50 MW screening required for all projects of this type below the EIA-
threshold (50 MW)
Netherlands 300 MW (thermal) 200 MW (thermal) and/or capacity increase of 20 % or
500 tons of coal/day more(extra power and/or or new fuel mix)
and/or 250 tons of coal/day
100 tons of non-hazardous waste per day and/or
50 tons of non-hazardous waste per day
All thresholds for screening only serve as an indicator, below the
thresholds a screening decision without procedural requirements
is obligatory.
Poland 300 MW (heat input) 25 MW (heat input for fuels)
10 MW (heat input for solid fuel)
Romania 300 MW case-by-case examination for all projects below 300 MW

Slovakia 300 MW (heat output) 50 MW (heat output)

Slovenia 300 MW (not answered)
50 MW (located in air quality management areas)
Spain (not answered) (not answered)
United Kingdom 300 MW (heat output) Case-by-case examination
• 0.5 hectares area of development or
• for all projects within a 'sensitive area’.The definition of
'sensitive area' varies between the different regulations;
however, it mainly relates to Internationally or nationally
designated environmental sites, SAC, SPA, Ramsar, SSSI,
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty etc.
Table 5: Thermal power station projects: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening

21
Landfill for non-hazardous waste

The EIA Directive defines in Annex II: "Installations for the disposal of waste (projects not included in Annex I);"
Annex I: landfills for hazardous waste: mandatory EIA for all projects; landfills for non-hazardous waste: not included in Annex I
The following table outlines the thresholds at which each of the participating countries carries out EIA and the thresholds at which
screening for EIA is inititated.
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Austria Landfills for mass waste or residual materials: Landfills for mass waste or residual materials (in total volume):
500,000 m3 (total volume) • 250,000 m3 (in special protection areas)
Landfills for demolition waste or inert materials: • 375,000 m3 (in areas subjected to air pollution)
1 000,000 m3 (total volume) • 125,000 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills if 500,000 m³ is reached together with them
• 62,500 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills in special protection areas if 250,000 m³ is
reached together with them
• 93,750 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills in areas subject to air pollution if 375,000 m³ is
reached together with them

Landfills for demolition waste or inert materials (in total volume):

• 500,000 m3 (in special protection areas)
• 750,000 m³ ((in areas subjected to air pollution)
• 250,000 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills if 1 000,000 m³ is reached together with them
• 250,000 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills if 1 000,000 m³ is reached together with them
• 125,000 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills in special protection areas if 500,000 m³ is
reached together with them
• 187,500 m3 for cumulation with other spatially related
landfills in areas subject to air pollution if 750,000 m³ is
reached together with them
•
Bulgaria Non-hazardous waste landfills receiving more than 10 tons Installations for the disposal of waste (not included in Annex № 1)
waste per day or with a total capacity exceeding 25,000 tons,
with excluding landfills of inert waste
Croatia 100 tons per day case-by-case examination for all projects below 100 tons per day
Cyprus none case-by-case examination for projects under Annex 2 based on
Preliminary EIA Report

22
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Czech Republic 30,000 tons total capacity 1,000 to 3,000 tons per year and
All waste disposal activities in natural or artificial geological
structures and spaces
Denmark none case-by-case examination for all projects
France 3,500 m² facility size for bulky waste no threshold
Germany 10 tons or more per day case-by-case examination for all projects below 10 tons per day
excluding landfills for inert waste or excluding landfills for inert waste or less than 25,000 tons total
25,000 tons total capacity or more capacity
excluding landfills for inert waste excluding landfills for inert waste site related
Hungary 200 tons per day 10 tons per day
500,000 tons total capacity 25,000 tons total capacity
Ireland 25,000 tons per year screening required for all projects of this type below 25,000 tons
per year
Italy 100,000 m3 screening required for all projects of this type below 100,000 m³
Lithuania 100 tons per day none
Malta 100,000 m3 municipal waste disposal installation 15.000 m3
25,000 m3 if more than 300 dwellings within 200m from the
boundaries of the site
< 200 m of distance to aquifer protection zone boundary
< 500 m of distance to water abstraction points
Netherlands No threshold • 250,000 m3of ‘class B’ sediment
and/or
• 100 tons per day of sediment, sludge or non-
hazardouswaste
and/or
• 5,000 tons per year
dry weight of waste water disposal sludge
and/or
• 50 tons per day of other non-hazardous wastes

All thresholds for screening only serve as an indicator, below the

thresholds a screening decision without procedural requirements
is obligatory
Poland 10 tons per day total capacity (intake capacity) screening required for all projects of this type below the threshold
25,000 tons total capacity
Romania none screening required for all projects of this type
Slovakia 250,000 m3 screening required for all projects of this type below the threshold
Slovenia EIA required for all projects of this type without thresholds none
(municipal waste)

23
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Spain (not answered) none
United Kingdom none Case-by-case examination
• for all projects within a 'sensitive area’.The definition of
'sensitive area' varies between the different regulations;
however, it mainly relates to Internationally or nationally
designated environmental sites, SAC, SPA, Ramsar, SSSI,
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty etc.
• if the area of development exceeds 0.5 hectares
• if the installation is to be sited within 100 metres of any
controlled waters
Table 6: Landfills for non-hazardous waste: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening

24
Shopping Centers
The EIA Directive defines in Annex II 10 b): "Urban development projects, including the construction of shopping centres and car parks"
Annex I: this project type is not included
The following table outlines the thresholds at which each of the participating countries carries out EIA and the thresholds at which
screening for EIA is initiated.
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Austria 10 ha area of development or • 5 ha area of development or
1,000 vehicles parking space 500 vehicles parking space (in special protection area or areas
subject to air pollution)
• 2.5 haarea of development or
250 vehicles parking space (for cumulation with other spatially
related shopping centers if 10 ha or 1,000 vehicles parking space
is reached together with them)
• 1.25 ha area of development or
125 vehicles parking space (in special protection area or areas
subject to air pollution; (for cumulation with other spatially
related shopping centers if 5 ha or 500 vehicles parking space is
reached together with them)

Bulgaria none screening required for all projects of this type

Croatia none 50,000 m2 gross construction area
Cyprus none 2,500 m2
Czech Republic none 3,000 m2 total area of enclosed space
100 vehicles parking space
(total in aggregate for the entire building)
Denmark Shopping centers of regional significance screening required for all projects of this type without thresholds
France 40,000 m2 area of development 10,000 m2 area of development
Germany 5,000 m2 gross floor space 1,200 m2
Federal EIA Act: Construction of a shopping centre, large- scale
retail outlet or other large-scale trade establishment within the
meaning of Art. 11 para. 3 sentence 1 of the Building Uses
Ordinance [Baunutzungsverordnung], for which a land use plan
/development plan is prepared in the existing external area
within the meaning of Article 35 of the Building Code
[Außenbereich gem. Baugesetzbuch], according to screening:
additional in other areas for the same projects, for which a
development plan is prepared, amended or supplemented;
Schleswig-Holstein: for the construction of the above

25
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
mentioned projects in external areas and within Built-up Areas
[Innnenbereich acc. to Article 34 Building Code], according to
screening: without mentioning the preparation of the land use
plan
Hungary none 10,000 m2 shopping facility area
300 vehicles parking space
Ireland 10,000 m² gross floor space screening required for all projects of this type below the 10,000
m² gross floor space thresholds.
Italy 15,000 m² sales area 150 m2
(e.g. for Lombardy; dependent on Regional laws) (in towns with population < 10.000 inhabitants)
250 m2
(in towns with population > 10.000 inhabitants)
Lithuania none 5,000 m2 area of development
Malta 10,000 m² gross floor area
Netherlands none 1,000,000 m2 area of development or
200,000 m2 (total floor coverage of the entire project - including
other commercial and/or industrial activities)
All thresholds for screening only serve as an indicator, below the
thresholds a screening decision without procedural requirements
is obligatory
Poland none 5,000 m2 (in areas of conservation of nature)
20,000 m2 (in other areas)
Romania none screening required for all projects of this type without thresholds
Slovakia 300 vehicles parking space 2,000 m2 floor area
100 vehicles parking space
Slovenia 30,000 m² gross floor space none
1,000 vehicles parking space or 5 ha parking lot or accessible
for commercial vehicles of 7.5 tons
Spain (not answered) none
United Kingdom none Case-by-case examination
• for all projects within a 'sensitive area’.The definition of
'sensitive area' varies between the different regulations;
however, it mainly relates to Internationally or nationally
designated environmental sites, SAC, SPA, Ramsar, SSSI,
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty etc.
• if the area of development exceeds 0.5 hectares
Table 7: Shopping center projects: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening

26
Road construction:
The EIA Directive defines in Annex II 10 e): "Construction of roads, harbours and port installations, including fishing harbours (projects
not included in Annex I)
Annex I 7 b) and c): Construction of motorways and express roads; construction of a new road of four or more lanes, or realignment
and/or widening of an existing road of two lanes or less so as to provide four or more lanes, where such new road or realigned and/or
widened section of road would be 10 km or more in a continuous length
The following table outlines the thresholds at which each of the participating countries carries out EIA and the thresholds at which
screening for EIA is inititated. For the most part, thresholds implementing Annex I (see above) are not displayed.
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Austria Additonally to Annex I projects (10 km); thresholds for federal new roads or extensions (thresholds for federal roads are not
roads are not shown: shown):
New roads or extensions: 5 km and • roads of 500 m length with average daily traffic volume of
average daily traffic volume of 15,000 motorised vehicles 2,000 motorised vehicles number of cars (in alpine region
within a forecasting period of 5 years (new or extension) or areas subject to air pollution)
• roads with average daily traffic volume of 2,000 motorised
within a forecasting period of 5 years (in special
protection areas andwater protection and conservation
areas)
• Roads with average daily traffic volume of 15,000
motorised within a forecasting period of 5 (in or near
settlement areas)
Bulgaria none screening required for all projects of this type which are not
included in Annex I
Croatia 2 km none
Cyprus new roads with four or more lanes, movement or alignment or 1,000 m (in mountainous areas where coverage of the
widening to four lanes or more for continuous stretch of 4000m surrounding natural vegetation is in excess of 50% in length of
continuous street)
screening required for all projects (roads with four lanes) of this
type without thresholds
Czech Republic 500 m (new construction or reconstruction of highways with a
width greater than 10m (not included in Annex I of EIA Directive)
or local roads with four and more lanes)
Denmark 2 km screening required for all projects of this type below threshold
and in areas of special potential/actual interests in nature
protection and ecological corridors
France 3 km screening required for all projects of this type below thresholds
3,000 m² land consumption (roundabout)
Germany none Construction of any other Federal Highway not mentioned in

27
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
ANNEX 1
1 km
(construction or alteration of any other road of Land Schleswig-
Holstein, of an administrative district excluding cycle tracks and
pavement belonging to it in special areas (e.g. zone III of a water
reserve area, in a biosphere reserve, in a landscape conservation
area or in a nature park, registered areas according to
environmental quality standards laid down in European
Community legislation, in densely populated area acc. to the
spatial planning of Land Schleswig-Holstein or in middle-order-
centres (medium sized cities) or high-order-centres (large cities))
500 m
(Construction or alteration of any other road of Land Schleswig-
Holstein, of an administrative district or a municipality including
cycle tracks and pavement belonging to it in protected areas
(including Habitats Directive, national park water protection area,
registered biotopes, may affect a historical monument) or a road
in forests acc. to Forests Act of Land Schleswig Holstein)
Hungary none 1 km
(public roads)
All national & public roads (non Annex I) in Natura 2000 sites
Ireland 8 km screening required for all projects of this type below the
of 4-lane road in a rural area and 500 m obligatory thresholds
of 4-lane road in an urban area
100 m new bridge/tunnel
Italy none 1,5 km
Lithuania 10 km 2 km
Malta 2 km 1 km
(road with min 7.5m carriageway, >300 dwellings within 100 m (road with min 3.5m carriageway,
from the centre line, passage of 100 m protected site) passage of 100 m protected site)
1 km (tunnel length,
passage beneath or within 100m protected area or passage
through or within 100 m of aquifer protection zone)
Netherlands 10 km 5 km (of existing non-highway roads with in the new situation at
(existing non-highway roads with in the new situation at least 4 least 4 lanes which will be altered or expanded)
lanes which will be altered or expanded) 5 km
(of existing highway roads which will be altered or expanded)
All thresholds for screening only serve as an indicator, below the
thresholds a screening decision without procedural requirements
is obligatory

28
Country Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without screening) Thresholds for screening
Poland none >1km hard-surfaced roads (not included in Annex 1) and
bridge-like structures accompanying a hard-surfaced road (not
included in Annex 1)
Romania construction of a new road of four or more lanes, or screening required for all projects of this type below threshold
realignment and/or widening of an existing road of two lanes or
less so as to provide four or more lanes, where such new road
or realigned and/or widened section of road would be 10 km or
more in a continuous length
Slovakia 10 km (Annex I and II (EIA Diretive) roads and reconstruction 5 km
or expansion of existing Annex I and II (EIA Diretive) roads, (Annex I & II (EIA Diretive) roads and reconstruction or
including objects) expansion of existing Annex I and II (EIA Diretive) roads,
including objects)
Slovenia 10 km (Main roads order I & II & policy/regional road order I, none
II, III & local raods (except in relocation/ extansions where axis
of roads are not moved by more than 200 m and the road is
not built new lane)
5 km (main roads order I & II & policy/regional road order I, II,
III & local roads in protected area (nature, cultural heritage &
water)
Spain (not answered) (not answered)
United Kingdom none 1 ha of area of works
Any development listed in Schedule 2 in any of the UK's EIA
Regulations, related to planning permissions, will require
screening (based on a significance survey) if any part of the
proposal is within a 'sensitive area'. The definition of 'sensitive
area' varies between the different regulations; however, it mainly
relates to Internationally or nationally designated environmental
sites, SAC, SPA, Ramsar, SSSI, Area of Outstanding Natural
Beauty, etc
Table 8: Road construction projects: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening

29
The survey illustrates that - as the Directive allows - different approaches have been
adopted by the countries2: While some countries apply case-by-case examinations for all
projects within a certain type, others have set (mandatory) screening thresholds. Some
countries have established thresholds for mandatory EIA of Annex II projects. If for a
project type a certain threshold is set by the EIA directive itself (i.e. in Annex I) most
countries have used this parameter for the purpose of implementation of the
corresponding Annex II project type (e.g. MW thermal output for thermal power stations)
by lowering the threshold value.
The main findings in detail:
Thermal power stations
Parameters/criteria used: capacity in Megawatt (heat output, electricity, rated thermal
input), coal fired (tons coal/day), area of development in hectare, location in sensitive
areas
A case-by-case examination for all thermal power stations included on Annnex II of the
EIA directive is applied in 6 out of 20 countries (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Ireland,
Malta, Romania). Thresholds for obligatory EIA below the Annex I threshold (300 MW)
have been introduced in 9 countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic,
Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Malta, Slovenia). 5 countries have determined the
screening threshold at 50 MW which is the threshold for installations covered by the
Directive on Industrial Emissions - IED (Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania,
Slovakia). An obligatory EIA for power stations exceeding 50 MW (IED threshold) is
carried out in 4 countries (France, Malta, Cyprus, Bulgaria).

Landfills for non-hazardous waste

IED threshold: 10 tons or more per day excluding landfills for inert waste or 25.000 tons
total capacity or more excluding landfills for inert waste

Parameters/criteria used: total volume (m³), tons/day or total capacity in tons, area of
development in hectare, distance to any controlled water or aquifer protection zone
boundary or water abstraction points, distance to dwellings, location in sensitive areas

A case-by-case examination for all landfills for non-hazardous waste (if applicable, below
a threshold for mandatory EIA) is applied in 8 out of 20 countries (Cyprus, Croatia,
Bulgaria, Slovenia, Poland, Italy, Ireland, Denmark). An obligatory EIA for landfills
exceeding the IED threshold is carried out in 3 countries (Germany, Poland, Bulgaria). 1
country (Hungary) uses the IED threshold as a screening threshold.

Shopping centers
Parameters/criteria used: area of development or gross floor space in square metres or
hectare, number of vehicles in parking space, location in sensitive areas

A case-by-case examination for all shopping centres is applied in 4 (Romania, Ireland,

Bulgaria, Denmark) out of 20 countries. Thresholds for obligatory EIA have been
introduced in nine countries (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Irland, Italy, Malta,
Slovakia, Slovenia).

Road construction
Parameters/criteria used: length of road, average daily traffic volume, area of works in
square metres or hectare, location in sensitive areas

A case-by-case examination for all roads is applied in 4 out of 20 countries (Romania,

Ireland, Bulgaria, Denmark). Apart from transposition of Annex I threshold (10 km)

2
Most countries only reported the requirements for new projects
thresholds for obligatory EIA have been introduced in 7 countries (Austria, Denmark,
Cyprus, France, Irland, Malta, Slovenia).

5.3.3 Provisions regarding cumulation and salami slicing

The issue of cumulative effects can inter alia arise when two or more (similar) projects
are planned or exist in proximity and when taken together they cause significant effects
on the environment.
The term salami slicing describes the practice of dividing projects up into two or more
separate entities so that each individual element does not require an EIA and thus the
project as a whole is not assessed; or the practice of obtaining permission for a project
that is below a threshold (and thus not subject to EIA) and at a later date extending that
project or its capacity above the threshold limits.

Cumulation
The Report from the Commission on the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive
(2009) stressed that there are still several cases in Member States in which cumulative
effects are not taken into account or where salami slicing is not counteracted with
appropriate actions.
Pursuant to Article 4 para. 3 of the Directive the relevant selection criteria set out in
Annex II shall be taken into account when a case-by-case examination is carried out or
thresholds or criteria are set. One explicit selection criteria referred to in this Article is
the cumulation with other projects. To gain information on these issues countries have
been asked how cumulation with other projects and the danger of salami slicing is taken
into account in the screening procedure.
Most countries (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia,
Poland, Lithuania, United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Romania, Denmark) just referred to
the screening criteria laid down in their national EIA law which mirror the Annex III
criteria of the Directive. Specific provisions were mentioned by Austria and Germany.
Along with the thresholds reported by the countries the following conclusions can be
drawn: Where countries have introduced screening procedures for all projects
(irrespective of size) or have set very low screening thresholds the consideration of
cumulative effects will be done on a case-by-case basis for each project. For countries
which subject projects to EIA through determination of (higher) thresholds this could be
regarded as a potential barrier to the proper consideration of cumulative effects.
Therefore, some countries have enacted specific provisions.

Examples:
Austria: If projects under Annex 1 of the Austria EIA Act that fall below the threshold
values or do not fulfil the criteria defined therein are spatially related to other
projects and, together with them, reach the relevant threshold value or fulfil the
criterion, the authority shall examine on a case-by-case basis whether significant
harmful, disturbing or adverse effects on the environment are to be expected due
to a cumulation of effects and whether, as a result, an environmental impact
assessment shall be performed for the project planned. A case-by-case
examination shall not be carried out if the capacity of the project submitted is less
than 25% of the threshold value. When taking a decision on a specific case, the
criteria of para. 4 no. 1 to 3 (which mirror the Annex III criteria of the Directive)
shall be taken into consideration.

Germany: EIA obligation due to type, scale and capacity of project

The obligation to perform an environmental impact assessment shall also exist if
several projects of the same type which are to be executed simultaneously by the
same developer or more than one developer and which are closely related

31
 (cumulative projects) together reach or exceed the relevant size or capacity
figures. Such projects shall be deemed to be closely related if

1. they are situated as technical or other installations on the same operating or

construction site and are connected with common operating or constructional
facilities or
2. as other measures encroaching on nature and landscape there is a close spatial
connection between them, and if they serve a comparable purpose.
The sentences 1 and 2 shall apply only to projects which, taken on their own, reach
or exceed the figures for the site-related screening or, if no such examination is
required, the figures for the general screening in Annex 1 column 2 of the German
EIA Act3.

Salami slicing
Half of the countries mentioned no specific provisions against salami slicing; some
responded that the screening criteria also apply to the screening of modifications and
extensions implying that a possible splitting of projects will be identified during the
screening exercise in due course. As the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice
provides a broad interpretation of the concept of “project” it can be assumed that
obvious cases of splitting of projects are dealt with accordingly. A few countries
indicated how salami slicing was avoided in practice:
Austria: In order to avoid circumventions of EIA by cutting modifications in several
pieces, the sum total of the capacity-expanding modifications approved in the past
five years has to be added to the capacity increase applied for (provided the
current capacity increase amounts to at least 25% of the threshold value, except
for shopping centers). If a new project is split between several applicants they may
have to undergo an EIA according to the provision on cumulation. Furthermore, the
definition of project in the EIA Act is a wide one (including also associated/ancillary
works spatially related to the project) and can cover projects with different
developers as well.
Poland explains that projects which are connected technologically shall be qualified as
one project, also where they are implemented by different entities.
Denmark reports a similar approach treating the projects in question as a single project.
Germany: Article 3 b para. 3 EIA Act: If alteration or extension of a project not
previously subject to EIA requirements results in the relevant size or capacity
figure being reached or exceeded for the first time, an EIA shall be carried out for
the alteration or extension and shall take account of the environmental impacts of
the existing project not previously subject to EIA requirements. Existing projects
shall also include cumulative projects within the meaning of para. 2, sentence 1.

5.3.4 Information submitted for the screening stage

According to the survey the information provided by the developer to the competent
authority during the screening stage addresses the following areas of expertise for the
chosen project types4:

3
Federal Law: According to Article 3 b par. 2 Environmental Impact Assessment Act; Schleswig-Holstein:
additional guidance document on “Application and Interpretation of the new EIA-provisions” (24.03.2004)
4
Based upon the factors mentioned in Annex IV of the Directive (i.e. population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air,
climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the
interrelationship between the above factors) and rearranged as common areas of expertise

32
Traffic, noise, air quality, vibrations, climate, shading, waste management, regional
development planning, nature protection, water management, geotechnical engineering,
hydrogeology, landscape engineering, cultural heritage, human health
Summing up, it can be said that in most countries information on all of these topics is
submitted, if relevant5.
Furthermore, the consideration of the following aspects was highlighted by some
countries:
Material assets, archaeology, architectural heritage, radiation, biodiversity, socio-
economy, energy sources, heat, odours
Examples for how national regulations have implemented provisions for the submission of
information for the screening phase are described by United Kingdom and Malta:
Examples:
United Kingdom
Where a developer wishes to request a screening opinion prior to submitting their application they are required
to submit various pieces of information as below:

(1) A person who is minded to carry out development may request the relevant planning authority to adopt a
screening opinion.

(2) A request for a screening opinion in relation to an application for planning permission shall be accompanied
by

(a) a plan sufficient to identify the land;

(b) a brief description of the nature and purpose of the development and of its possible effects on the
environment; and

(c) such other information or representations as the person making the request may wish to provide or
make.

(3) A request for a screening opinion in relation to a subsequent application shall be accompanied by

(a) a plan sufficient to identify the land;

(b) sufficient information to enable the relevant planning authority to identify any planning permission
granted for the development in respect of which a subsequent application has been made;

(c) an explanation of the likely effects on the environment which were not identified at the time that the
planning permission was granted; and .

(d) such other information or representations as the person making the request may wish to provide or
make.

A similar procedure is described by Malta:

Prior to detailed screening, the developer submits a Project Description Statement which contains the
following information:

(a) details of the person wishing to carry out the development,

(b) a brief description of the project and its general objectives,

(c) an indication of the proposed timing of the project and why this timing was preferred,

(d) the location of the proposed development with site boundaries clearly shown on a map,

(e) a concise but reasonably comprehensive indication of the alternative uses, alternative technologies and
suitable alternative locations and sites for the proposed development and alternative arrangement of land

5
With the exception of the topic „shading“

33
uses, on the proposed site,

(f) a description of the physical characteristics including size, scale, design and phasing of the development
using models, photographs, diagrams, plans and maps where appropriate,

(g) a description of present land uses and environmental characteristics of the site,

(h) a brief description of surrounding land uses, their nature, their extent and their environmental
characteristics,

(i) a description of the services, water, foul water sewers, surface water drainage, including storm water
drainage, and energy sources available on site,

(j) estimates of the number of persons to be employed with estimates for each phase of the development,

(k) the nature and quantities of raw materials and energy to be used, and wastes generated during
construction and operation, the proposed method of storage or handling of materials and wastes, and
machinery needed during both the construction and the operational phases,

(l) access arrangements and general parking requirements on and off the site, during both construction and
operation,

(m) list of the major environmental impacts likely to be generated by the project, including reference to
cumulative impacts, proposals for mitigating the negative effects of the development.

Level of detail of documents submitted in screening

Additionally, the questionnaire asked for the level of detail that is required in the
documents submitted for the screening phase in order to get an impression of the
work load.The options provided were:
• general level (rough estimations)
• medium level (modelling for a few selected topics, estimations for the rest)
• detailed level (deep level of detail in all topics)
A corresponding question queried the average volume of the documents submitted for
the screening phase.

34
 Thermal Power Station Landfill

51 to 100 pages
51 to 100 pages

over 100 pages

over 100 pages

21 to 50 pages

21 to 50 pages
5 to 20 pages

5 to 20 pages
Detailed level

Detailed level
Medium level

Medium level
General level

General level
Austria    
Bulgaria    
Croatia
Cyprus  
Czech    
Republic
Denmark    
France
Germany    
Hungary    
Ireland    
Italy    
Lithuania    
Malta    
Netherlands    
Poland    
Romania    
Slovakia    
Slovenia    
Spain  
United     
Kingdom
Table 9: Level of detail that is required in the documents submitted for the screening
phase for thermal power station and landfill projects

35
 Shopping Center Road Construction

51 to 100 pages

51 to 100 pages
over 100 pages

over 100 pages

21 to 50 pages

21 to 50 pages
5 to 20 pages

5 to 20 pages
Detailed level

Detailed level
Medium level

Medium level
General level

General level
Austria    
Bulgaria    
Croatia

Cyprus  
Czech    
Republic
Denmark    
France
Germany    
Hungary    
Ireland    
Italy    
Lithuania    
Malta    
Netherlands    
Poland    
Romania    
Slovakia    
Slovenia    
Spain  
United    
Kingdom
Table 10: Level of detail that is required in the documents submitted for the screening
phase for shopping center and road construction projects

Most countries reported a general or medium level of detail in the EIA screening
procedure with an average volume of the documents up to 50 pages.

5.3.5 Authorities

The responsible authorities for the screening decision in the participating countries
differ within each country. The responsibility of an authority depends in some cases on
the size of the project.

36
Responsible

National/Federal authority

National/Federal authority

National/Federal authority

National/Federal authority
authority for
the screening
procedure

Regional authority

Regional authority

Regional authority

Regional authority
Local authority

Local authority

Local authority

Local authority
Statutory body

Statutory body

Statutory body

Statutory body
Thermal Landfill Shopping Road
Project type power plant center construction
Austria     
Bulgaria     
Croatia  
Cyprus    
Czech Republic    
Denmark       
France (not answered) (not answered) (not answered) (not answered)
Germany     
Hungary    
Ireland       
Italy    
Lithuania        
Malta    
Netherlands          
Poland       
Romania       
Slovakia        
Slovenia    
Spain     
United Kingdom         
Table 11: Responsible authorities for the screening decision
Note: the question was not specified with regard to possible appeal procedure
The screening procedure is carried out
• by a national/federal authority only in: Cyprus, Hungary, Malta, Slovenia
• by a regional authority only in: Austria (except for federal roads), Czech Republic,
Spain (excl. roads), Italy (excl. shopping center)
• with mixed responsibility in: Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Lithuania,
Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, United Kingdom
• by Statutory bodies in: Denmark, Ireland, Germany (state company for road
construction), United Kingdom

37
Screening decision
The character of the screening decision in the countries is shown in the following
table:
Legal Internal
document decision Other
Austria 
Bulgaria 
Croatia 
Cyprus opinion of the MANRE to the
planning authority
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
France (not answered)
Germany 
Hungary 
Ireland recorded in the Inspector’s
report which accompanies the
decision on the
development/activity
Italy 
Lithuania 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Poland 
Romania 
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain 
United Kingdom 
Table 12: Character of the screening decision

In all of the participating countries, except Croatia, Cyprus, Hungary and Ireland, the
result of the EIA screening procedure is a legal document.
The screening decision can be appealed in most of the countries surveyed, as detailed
below.

38
Appeals Appeals
provided
for Appeals can be lodged by

Environm. organ.
Citizen’s groups

Statut. bodies
Municipalities
Neighbours
Everybody

NGOs
no yes Other Remarks
1
    Developer; co-operating host municipalitie(s)
1 2 3 authoritie(s), in case
2
the screening procedure Environmental organisa
was performed upon have been recognised by
its/their request agreement with the Fede
a review of a screening d
subject to an EIA (= nega
3
Ombudsman for the env

co-operating authorities =
which, on the basis of ad
granting development con
not require an EIA.

Note: In case of federal r

present the existing seco
appeals concerning feder
1.1.2014 because of the
Court). However, the pro
authorities, the ombudsm
municipality may file a co
the Federal Minister for T
Court. Environmental org
Austria Administrative Court agai
Bulgaria  
Croatia  (not answered) except for road construct
Cyprus (not answered)
Czech Republic 
Appeals Appeals
provided
for Appeals can be lodged by

Environm. organ.
Citizen’s groups

Statut. bodies
Municipalities
Neighbours
Everybody

NGOs
no yes Other Remarks
        Minister of environment, a. provided they have a legal interest in the matter
(a) (a) (b) (b) (b) (a) NPF
b. provided it has spatial issues as a purpose, is governed by bye-laws
and has more than 100 members

The developer may lodge an appeal, if the screening decision determines

that the project is covered by Annex I of Ministerial Order no. 1510, dated
2010-12-15, concerning EIA. Apart from procedural complaints others,
e.g. neighbours, environmental groups, cannot lodge an appeal, because
they will later on have the opportunity to lodge an appeal, when the final
project assessment has been passed.
Apart from procedural complaints the developer cannot lodge an appeal, if
the screening decision determines that the project isn't subject to an
environmental assessment. Others, e.g. neighbours, environmental
Denmark groups, may lodge an appeal.
France (not answered)
      Negatively affected c. except of shopping centers
(c) parties Not independently. Appeal can be submitted after the permit is granted,
generally: those who are affected negatively by the project
Germany NGOs: no appeal possible at shopping center projects
Hungary  
  Against the Screening decision "an appeal shall not be permitted but an
Ireland administrative dispute may be initiated".
Italy  
      d. Appeals for statutory bodies only at thermal power station projects
Lithuania (d)

Malta   Developer
Netherlands  
       Parties to admin.
Poland procedure

40
Appeals Appeals
provided
for Appeals can be lodged by

Environm. organ.
Citizen’s groups

Statut. bodies
Municipalities
Neighbours
Everybody

NGOs
no yes Other Remarks
Romania   Companies, citizens, mass-media at road construction projects
Slovakia  
Slovenia  
Spain  
United Kingdom   Different regulations in each country of the UK
Table 13: Comparison of the possibilities for appealing the screening decision

41
6 COMPARISON OF EIA PROCEDURES

6.1 General remarks

Out of the 4 project types used in the section to compare screening procedures two types
of projects, namely landfills and shopping centers, were chosen for the purposes of
comparing the EIA procedures in the countries surveyed. This section provides an
overview of the relevant answers of the participating countries (see also chapter 12.4
Appendix 4 – Evaluation of detailed information on EIA procedures).

6.2 Scoping
Scoping is the process of determining the content and extent of the matters which should
be covered in the environmental information to be submitted to a competent authority
for projects which are subject to EIA. Scoping is not mandatory under the directive but
Member States which do not have scoping in their EIA procedure are required to
introduce, as a minimum, a voluntary scoping stage (according to Art. 5 para.2 of the
EIA Directive). The minimum requirement is that competent authorities must provide a
scoping opinion if requested by a developer. The scoping opinion should identify the
content and extent of the information to be elaborated and supplied by the developer to
the competent authority.

Table 14 presents the information received.

Shopping
Landfill Center
Mandatory

Mandatory
Voluntary

Voluntary

Scoping

Austria   Apart from the voluntary scoping procedure Austria offers an

investor service6.
Bulgaria  
Croatia  
Cyprus  
Czech Republic  
Denmark  
France  
Germany  
Hungary  
Ireland   Applicants can apply to the planning authority or ABP for scoping.
This is not commonly availed of.
Italy  
Lithuania  

6
The EIA authority may support the project developers upon their request by providing information that is
available to the authority and that is needed by the project developer for preparing the documents for the EIA
development consent procedure. The topics and issues that are likely to be significant in the EIA development
consent procedure may be communicated within the framework of these investor services for project
preparation.

42
 Shopping
Landfill Center

Mandatory

Mandatory
Voluntary

Voluntary
Scoping

Malta  
Netherlands  
Poland    Voluntary for Annex I projects, mandatory (together with
screening) for Annex II projects.
Romania   If the shopping center has dedicated parking areas.
Slovakia  
Slovenia  
Spain  
United Kingdom   Whilst the Regulations do not require (mandate) scoping in
practice virtually all EIA's will undergo some level of informal
scoping with the consenting authority and statutory consulters as
a matter of standard practice - see Chapter 5 of IEMA's 2011
report into the State of EIA Practice in the UK
www.iema.net/eiareport
Table 14: Scoping procedures

In Bulgaria, Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and
Spain scoping is carried out on mandatory basis for both project types, in Germany for
shopping centers only. In all other of the participating countries scoping procedures are
voluntary.

6.2.1 Guidance

An official guidance for scoping is available on different levels in some of the

participating countries (see table below). For the link list see chapter 12.5, Appendix 5 -
Guidance.
Availability Availability of official guidance for
Level scoping for project types
Landfill Shopping center
National Austria Austria
Denmark Denmark
Germany
Ireland Ireland
Lithuania Lithuania
Poland Poland
Romania Romania
Spain Spain
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Regional Austria Austria
Germany
Spain Spain
United Kingdom
No guidance Bulgaria Bulgaria
available Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus

43
Availability Availability of official guidance for
Level scoping for project types
Landfill Shopping center
Czech Republic
Czech Republic
Germany
Hungary Hungary
Italy Italy
Malta Malta
Netherlands Netherlands
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
(not answered) France
Table 15: Availability of official guidance for scoping

6.2.2 Participants in the scoping process

The participation of authorities and the public in the scoping process is presented in the
following table.
Authorities

Public

Specification Specification
Austria  co-operating authorities e.g. ) Within the voluntary scoping
(
authorities responsible for procedure, the EIA authority may
granting the development also, where appropriate, consult
consent if the project would third parties such as the public or
not require an EIA the ombudsman for the
environment etc. The EIA authority
may also choose the form of such
a consultation.
Bulgaria  competent bodies for taking  affected public
decision on EIA or officials
authorised by them with other
specialised departments
Croatia  bodies and/or persons  public and public concerned
designed by special regulations
and the LRSGU
Cyprus  Environmental authority
Czech   right to participate is given to
Republic anyone
Denmark  The competent authority  The public is consulted as early as
engages in discussions with possible in order to determine the
the developer and relevant scope of an EIA
agencies.
France  Ministry of Environment
Germany  For LANDFILL: Other  For LANDFILL: Registered
authorities and statutory organisations working in the field
bodies affected by the project, of nature protection and citizens’
for SHOPPING CENTERS also groups; AND others experts, if
Environmental organisations necessary
Citizens’ Groups

44
 Authorities

Public
Specification Specification
Hungary   the public concerned
Ireland  The applicant asks the
planning authorities what to
include in the EIS and the
planning authorities must
consult the relevant prescribed
bodies.
Italy  Regional and local authorities
Lithuania 
Malta  MEPA and other authorities  General public; notices in media;
according to the decision of public invited to express opinions
Director of Environmental
Protection; Local Councils,
Government entities, eNGOs
Netherlands  All relevant authorities are  the authorities choose the form of
invited to submit a formal participation, for example
advice participation by a small group or
for all the stakeholders (public,
NGO's, private parties etc.) or
none; for LANDFILL: if Natura2000
is involved in the permitting, a
participation option/form is
obligatory, otherwise voluntary
Poland  Regional Director for  Parties to the procedure (including
Environmental Protection, The NGOs if granted rights of a Party)
authority of the State Sanitary
Inspectorate
Romania  Municipalities, public health
authority, water national
administration; County
Environmental Agency,
Environmental Guard County
Authority, Fire Brigade
(Emergency Situations
Inspectorate), Water
Protection Authority, Mayors
office
Slovakia   If public submits important
comments to preliminary
environmental study, the
competent authority invites
members of the public to the
consultation on the scoping
proposal
Slovenia 
Spain   Environmental organizations and
interested public

45
 Authorities

Public
Specification Specification
United  Within the Regulations where a 
There is nothing to restrict the
Kingdom developer seeks a voluntary public being engaged in scoping
scoping opinion the consentingthe EIA by the developer.
authority is then required to However, this is a voluntary
consult with statutory undertaking. In the majority
environmental bodies (>50%) of UK practice some level
of wider 'public' engagement,
beyond statutory organisations
occurs as part of standard EIA
practice.
Table 16: Participation of authorities and the public in the scoping process

In all surveyed countries (various) authorities take part in the scoping phase (if there is
any). In all participating countries except Cyprus, France, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania,
Romania and Slovenia also the (affected) public participates in the scoping phase.
Participation of the public in mandatory scoping exists in Bulgaria, Czech Republic,
Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Spain.

6.3 Development consent procedure

The sub-chapters 6.3.1, 6.3.2 and 6.3.4 try to get a grasp on approaches for quality
control of the EIA documentation.
Ways of ensuring proper quality control of EIA documentation are for instance a
thorough and efficient scoping phase, the use of independent external review or expert
assistance, use of guidelines on specific issues to be taken into account for certain types
of projects or, keep the data used up to date..

6.3.1 EIA documentation

The information for the Environmental Impact Assessment in accordance with
Art. 5 Para. 1 and Annex IV of the EIA Directive (“environmental report”, “environmental
impact study”, “environmental impact statement”, “EIA documentation”) is compiled as
follows:
Free choice of

Accredited
consultant
developer

Other
Austria 
Bulgaria A team of experts with a team leader - may be Bulgarian
and foreign natural persons, having educational and
 qualification Master degree

46
 Free choice of

Accredited
consultant
developer
Other
Croatia 
Cyprus 
Czech Republic 
Denmark The competent authority
France (not answered)
Germany 
Hungary 
Ireland 
Italy 
Lithuania 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Poland 
Romania 
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain 
United Kingdom 
Table 17: Compilation of the EIA documentation

4 countries (Croatia, Cyprus, Malta and Romania) require that the information for EIA is
compiled by an accredited consultant.

6.3.2 Manuals or guidance on Environmental Impact Assessment

Manuals or guidance on EIA are available for both project types (landfill and shopping
center) to support the developer in the following participating countries:
• Austria;
• Czech Republic;
• Cyprus
• Denmark;
• Germany;
• Ireland;
• Italy;
• Lithuania;
• Poland;
• Romania;
• Slovenia;
• Spain;
• United Kingdom.

47
6.3.3 Alternatives

The EIA Directive states that the EIA documentation shall include an outline of the main
alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main reasons for his
choice.
In response to the question whether countries have imposed to consider the do-nothing
alternative Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, Italy, Malta, Slovakia, Poland, Lithuania, Spain,
Romania, Netherlands, United Kingdom answered in the affirmative.
United Kingdom observed accurately that whilst an assessment of a do-nothing
alternative is not explicitly required by the regulations it is implicit in order to meet the
wider requirements of assessing the significance of the project´s effects (i.e. description
of baseline environment).
Apart from this most of the countries seem to have transposed the above cited
requirement of the Directive (“main alternatives studied by the developer”) without
further specification.
Slovakia reports that at least two variants have to be considered by the developer.
Denmark indicates that the competent authority may impose certain alternatives to be
considered by the developer, but the nature of the alternatives will depend on the
information and preliminary studies provided by the developer. In the Netherlands in all
cases more environmentally friendly alternatives have to be researched, if relevant.

6.3.4 Content of EIA documentation /Submitted Information

According to Annex IV of the Directive the description of the aspects of the environment
likely to be significantly affected by the proposed project have to include population,
fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural
and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above
factors.
The questionnaire asked which of the following areas of expertise were considered
relevant for the two project types7:
Traffic, noise, air quality, vibrations, climate, shading, waste management, regional
development planning, nature protection, water management, geotechnical engineering,
hydrogeology, landscape engineering, cultural heritage, human health
Summing up, it can be said that most countries deem all of the topics potentially
relevant8, depending on the site of the project.

7
Naming of factors was adjusted according to common areas of expertise
8
With the exception of the topic „shading“

48
The following topics receive greater focus during the EIA process (see tables below).

Landfill projects: Percentage

Topic of indication
Air quality 92 %
Nature protection 75 %
Hydrogeology 58 %
Waste management 50 %
Water management 50 %
Landscape engineering 50 %
Human health 50 %
Traffic 42 %
Geotechnical engineering 33 %
Noise 25 %
Cultural heritage 17 %
Vibrations 8 %
Climate 8 %
Shading 0 %
Regional development planning 0 %
Table 18: Topics that receive greater focus during the EIA process of landfill projects (in
percent of indication by countries)

Shopping center projects: Percentage

Topic of indication
Traffic 92 %
Air quality 58 %
Noise 50 %
Water management 50 %
Landscape engineering 42 %
Nature protection 33 %
Geotechnical engineering 33 %
Vibrations 25 %
Human health 25 %
Waste management 17 %
Cultural heritage 17 %
Climate 8 %
Hydrogeology 12 %
Shading 0 %
Regional development planning 0 %
Table 19: Topics that receive greater focus during the EIA process of shopping center
projects (in percent of indication by countries)

The issue of the provision of information on the environmental impact of the

construction phase and information on the environmental impact of
accidents/incidents is dealt with as follows:
All countries responded that the EIA documentation has to contain information on the
environmental impact of the construction phase of the project, with regard to information
on the impacts of accidents/incidents about 75 % of the surveyed countries demand such
explanations (exceptions are Germany, Ireland, Slovakia, Slovenia and United Kingdom).

49
To get a rough idea how labour-intensive the EIA is, the participants were asked to
indicate the level of detail that is required in the EIA documentation. Respondents
could choose between:
• general level (rough estimations);
• medium level (modelling for a few selected topics, estimations for the rest);
• detailed level (deep level of detail in all topics).
A corresponding question focused on the average volume of the EIA documentation.
Landfill Shopping Center

501 to 1,000 pages

501 to 1,000 pages

201 to 500 pages

201 to 500 pages

over 1,000 pages

over 1,000 pages

5 to 200 pages

5 to 200 pages
Detailed level

Detailed level
Medium level

Medium level
General level

General level
Austria    
Bulgaria    
Croatia 
Cyprus    
Czech Republic    
Denmark    
France
Germany    
Hungary   
Ireland    
Italy    
Lithuania    
Malta    
Netherlands     
Poland    
Romania    
Slovakia      
Slovenia    
Spain  
United Kingdom      
Table 20: Level of detail and volume required in the EIA documentation

In about 2/3 of the surveyed countries the submitted information has a detailed level,
the others medium level.

6.3.5 Authorities and decision on development consent

The responsible authorities for carrying out an EIA in the participating countries
differ across the countries, sometimes depending on the size and the location of the
project:

50
Responsible

National/Federal authority

National/Federal authority
authority for
carrying out
the EIA

Regional authority

Regional authority
Local authority

Local authority
Statutory body

Statutory body
Specification
Project type Landfill Shopping
center Specification
Austria  Regional government  Regional government
Bulgaria  Regional inspectorates for Environment and  Regional inspectorates for
Waters Environment and Waters
Croatia  Ministry  Ministry
Cyprus  Ministry  Ministry
Czech Republic  
Denmark  
France  Ministry of Environment 
Germany 
Hungary  Environmental inspectorate  Environmental inspectorate
Ireland   The local planning authorities or ABP (the Irish   The local planning authority, and
Planning Board) along with the Environmental where an appeal is made, ABP (the
Protection Agency Irish Planning Board)
Italy  
Lithuania   Ministry of Environment   Ministry of Environment
Environmental Agency or regional Environmental Agency or regional
Environmental Agency Environmental Agency
Malta  Malta Environment and Planning Authority  Malta Environment and Planning
Authority

51
Responsible

National/Federal authority

National/Federal authority
authority for
carrying out
the EIA

Regional authority

Regional authority
Local authority

Local authority
Statutory body

Statutory body
Specification
Project type Landfill Shopping
center Specification
Netherlands    Landfills in the area of large rivers or coastal  Landfill: depending on decision
waters: Ministry level
Poland   Regional Director for Environmental Protection   Regional Director for Environmental
or municipal authority Protection or municipal authority
Romania   Project covers 2 or more regons: Regional  EPA
Environmental Agency
Slovakia   Slovak Environmental Inspectorate (part of   Slovak Environmental Inspectorate
ministry) or designated powers to the Regional (part of ministry) or designated
Environmental Office and the District powers to the Regional
Environmental Office Environmental Office and the
District Environmental Office
Slovenia  Ministry 
Spain    Shop. center: dep. on spatial
consumption, regional: > 2500 m²,
local: 1000 m² or 50 kW

United Kingdom  Local planning authority  Local planning authority

Table 21: Responsible authorities for carrying out the EIA

52
Review of Adequacy of the Environmental Information

The paragraphs below present how the countries ensure sufficient quality of the EIA
documentation submitted by the developer:
Austria The authority shall commission internal or external experts of the subjects in
question to prepare an environmental impact expertise or summary
assessment of the environmental impacts. These experts have to assess inter
alia the completeness, correctness and the meaningfulness of the applicant´s
data in accordance with the state of the art and other relevant scientific
knowledge and, if necessary, complement the environmental impact
statement. Moreover, the environmental impact expertise shall make
proposals for mitigation and prevention measures.
Bulgaria The competent authority shall assess the quality of the EIA report in 14 days
following its deposition, on the basis of the following criteria:
1. completeness and accuracy of the information by sections of the report, in
compliance with the Terms of reference approved by the competent
authority;
2. consideration of the results of the consultations held;
3. equalized description, analysis and comparison of the alternatives;
4. significance of impacts; significance of unavoidable/permanent impacts on
the environment;
5. proposed measures for prevention or reduction of substantial harmful
impacts, intended to ensure compliance with the environmental normative
acts, and plan elaborated for their implementation;
6. availability of graphic materials – maps, schemes, sketches, diagrams,
etc.;
7. the non-technical summary should not contain technical terms.
Croatia In the course of (public) sessions of the advisory expert committee the
method of operation of the committee and the criteria for evaluating the
environmental impact study may be elaborated in detail. The decision on
evaluation is made on appointment of the committee.
Cyprus Within the committee for EIA formed by various authorities (MANRE, Planning
and Housing Dept., Ministry of Labour and Social Security, Ministry of
Commerce, Ministry of Works, Federation of Environmental and Ecological
Organisations, ETSC).
Czech Republic The information is first reviewed by the "Reviewer" (who provides an
opinion on the Environmental Impact Statement). This is then reviewed in a
public consultation process and the competent authority issues the final
statement.
Denmark The competent authority is responsible for the quality of the information .
Germany For landfill projects: Involvement of other departments of LLUR and other
authorities affected by the project, involvement of the public and public
discussion.
For shopping center projects: Local development plan: The information is
checked by the authority, it becomes subject of the weighting procedure and
the decision is made by the local council or the municipal council.
Development consent: The information is checked by the authority.
Ireland The information is reviewed by the responsible authority, submissions by
prescribed bodies and third parties are taken into account. Additional

53
 information may be sought from the applicant as required. A discretionary
public hearing may be held.
Italy A documental screening phase is expected before the beginning of EIA.
Lithuania It is assessed during the procedure, but not mentioned in the EIA decision.
Malta On a case-by-case basis as the information submitted to the Competent
Authority is reviewed and detailed comments are sent to the EIA Consultant
for any amendments/revisions.
Netherlands By the authorities itself, sometimes by the NCEA; if the NCEA reviews an
EIA, this review is always public available in a written report.
Poland Both the authority and the RDOS (independently) assess the contents. There
is no specific binding guidance and the assessment may be either very formal
of in-depth, on a case-by-case basis.
Romania During the meeting of the Technical Committee, based on guideline and
checklist provided in the legislation -MO 863/2002.
In most cases the quality of information provided by the developer are very
good. If the quality requirements are not met than the competent authority
could claim to revise those pieces of information.
Slovakia Elaborative expert review (expert appointed by ministry).
Slovenia An independent environmental expert from the ministries expert 'database'
(once a year the ministry publishes a public tender and invites candidates for
environmental experts to submit their tenders).
Spain If not detailed enough, correction required.
United Kingdom Reviewed by planning officer and relevant colleagues. There are no
formal (mandatory criteria for this). A number of local authorities contract
consultants in to review environmental statements to assess the quality of
the information submitted.

In most countries the EIA documentation provided by the developer is reviewed by the
competent authority which consults other authorities or bodies if needed. This involves
sometimes special appointed committees (Croatia, Cyprus, Romania) or independent
experts (Netherlands, Slovenia).

Decision making - Consideration of the Environmental Information before

making Development Consent Decision
Pursuant to Article 8 of the Directive the results of the consultation and the information
gathered in the EIA procedure shall be taken into consideration in the development
consent procedure. The questionnaire asked how this is done in practice indicating
binding conditions or obligations, recommendations or other measures as possible means
of enforcement.

54
Development consent comprises

obligations based on EIA

obligations based on EIA

Binding conditions or

Binding conditions or
Recommendations

Recommendations
Other

Other
Specification
Landfill Shopping
center
Austria  
Bulgaria   The EIA Decision is attached to the development consent
Croatia   For LANDFILL: Committee issues an opinion on the accept. of the
project contains in particular: expl. on the (non)accept. of the
project’s most accept. alternative, descr. of the project’s most
accept. alternative for the env. with an expl., proposal of env.
protection measures with an impl. plan, proposal of env. monitoring
programme with an impl. plan.
For SHOPPING CENTER: EIA results are taken into account in the
location permit for project impl.
Cyprus  
Czech  
Republic
Denmark  
France (not answered)
Germany   For LANDFILL: The EIA is an integral part of the plan approval
procedure. If conditions, obligations and recommendations result
from the EIA they are integrated into the plan approval. There they
are not separated from other sector specific obligations.
For SHOPPING CENTER: Local development plan: environmental
report is one issue taken into account in the decision making process
and becomes part of the charter.
Development consent (§ 145 BauGB) authority checks whether there
are results that have to be taken into the permit as conditions or
obligations.
Hungary  
Ireland  
Italy  
Lithuania   EIA recommendations are binding, and they have to be observed in
the project design. The Development consent approves the final
project design, which assumes that the EIA recommendations have
been fully observed and integrated in it.
Malta     The possibility of a negative recommendation if there are
unacceptable residual impacts should also be considered.
Netherlands       If the EIA states 'necessary measures' to conform to regulation or
similar.
Poland  
Romania  
Slovakia  
Slovenia  
Spain  
United   Binding conditions are applied by the development consent;
however, they do not include everything recommended by the ES.
Kingdom
Research in the East of England in 2005 indicated that up to 50% of
EIA recommendations were not conditioned by local planning
authorities. The reasons behind this are multiple.
Table 22: Consideration of the results of the EIA in the development consent

55
Most of the surveyed countries (exceptions: Bulgaria, Croatia, Germany, United Kingdom
and Lithuania in case of landfill projects) define binding conditions or obligations in the
development consent based on EIA for both project types.

Documentation of the results of the EIA

The results of the EIA are documented in the following way:
Documentation of the
results of the EIA
Associated with the final

Associated with the final

Technical report prior to

Technical report prior to

development consent

development consent

development consent

development consent
Other

Other

Specification
Landfill Shopping
center
Austria  
Bulgaria   EIA report + EIA Decision
Croatia   For SHOPPING CENTER: Committee issues an opinion on
the acceptance of the project contains in particular:
explanation on the (non)acceptance of the project’s most
accept. alternative, description of the project’s most
accept. alternative for the environment with an
explanation, proposal of environmental protection
measures with an implementation plan, proposal of
environmental monitoring programme with an
implementation plan.
Cyprus  
Czech  
Republic
Denmark  
France (not answered)
Germany   For SHOPPING CENTER: Environmental report (§ 2 Abs. 4
BauGB) becomes part of the documents of the charter
Hungary  
Ireland  
Italy  
Lithuania  
Malta     Environmental Statement (Environmental Impact
Statement or Environmental Planning Statement
Netherlands      Depends for example on the decision(s) involved and
phasing in the decision making, usually tailor-made
Poland    the EIA ends in a separate administrative decision (decision
on environmental conditions of the development) which is
binding for all subsequent administrative decisions issued

Romania  
Slovakia  
Slovenia  
Spain  
United  
Kingdom
Table 23: Comparison of the documentation of the results of the EIA

56
The results of the EIA are documented in 2/3 of the surveyed countries in a separate
technical report for both project types. The other countries associate the result to the
development consent (Austria, Cyprus, Germany, Ireland, Italy and Malta) or conduct the
documentation of the results of the EIA in another way.

Character of the development consent

The character of the development consent for landfill projects has the following
specifications in the participating countries:
Character of development
consent
Environmental

Project type:
Landfill
permission
Planning
permit

Other

Remarks
Austria   Single permit covering all necessary permits (one-stop-shop)
Bulgaria  Construction permit
Croatia 
Cyprus 
Czech Republic  
Denmark 
France (not answered)
Germany 
Hungary  
Ireland  
Italy 
Lithuania (not answered)
Malta  
Netherlands  
Poland    Multistage procedure, including, apart from the environmental
decision, planning/location permit, construction and exploitation
permit. The general interpretation is that the development
consent is made up of all the permits including the construction
permit.
Romania  Building permit
Slovakia    Building permit
Slovenia  
Spain  Mandatory, binding, independent of the authorization procedure
United Kingdom 
Table 24: Character of development consent for landfill projects

The character of the development consent for shopping center projects has the
following specifications in the participating countries:

57
Character of development
consent

Environmental
Project type:
Shopping

permission
center

Planning
permit

Other
Remarks
Austria   Single permit covering all necessary permits (one-stop-shop)
Bulgaria  Construction permit
Croatia 
Cyprus 
Czech Republic
Denmark  
France (not answered)
Germany   Development consent (building licence)
Hungary 
Ireland 
Italy 
Lithuania  Construction permit
Malta  
Netherlands 
Poland    Construction permit;
multistage procedure, including, apart from the environmental
decision, planning/location permit, construction and exploitation
permit. The general interpretation is that the development
consent is made up of all the permits including the construction
permit.
Romania  Building permit
Slovakia   Building permit
Slovenia  Both building permit & environmental permit are needed if EIA
undertaken.
Spain 
United Kingdom 
Table 25: Character of development consent for shopping center projects

Access to review procedures

The development consent can be appealed in every country (for Ireland the decision
on landfills can be appealed except in the case of Strategic Infrastructure Development
or Local Authority Development). For a comparison of the appeal procedures for the
selected project types see the following tables.

58
Appeals Appeals
provided
against Appeals can be lodged by
for
development
consent

Environm. organ.
Citizen’s groups

Statut. bodies
Municipalities
Project type:

Neighbours
Landfill and

Everybody
Shopping
Center

NGOs
no yes Other Remarks
1 2
1
Austria    Project applicant; parties additionally for certain landfills
stipulated by the applicable
2
administrative provisions for Environmental organisations (including also
example land owners; environmental NGOs), which have been recognised by the
ombudsman of the environment, Federal Minister of Environment in agreement with the
water management planning Federal Minister for Economic Affairs
body
Bulgaria  
Croatia (not answered)
Cyprus  
Czech Republic  
Denmark         Minister of the Environment, Legal interest or spatial issues provided
National Park Fund
France 
Germany       Generally: those who are affected by the project may file
suit the developer.
Hungary  
Ireland   Except in the case of Strategic Infrastructure
Development or Local Authority Development
Everybody can appeal a planning decision provided they
have made a submission to the planning authority in the
first instance; similarly, during the waste licensing
process,only those who made a submission during the
licence application assessment stage can make an
objection to a decision.
Italy  

59
Appeals Appeals
provided
against Appeals can be lodged by
for
development
consent

Environm. organ.
Citizen’s groups

Statut. bodies
Municipalities
Project type:

Neighbours
Landfill and

Everybody
Shopping
Center

NGOs
no yes Other Remarks
Lithuania Shopping center: part of construction law, not
environmental and administrative law
Malta  
Netherlands  
Poland       
Romania  
Slovakia    
Slovenia  
Spain  
United Kingdom  
Table 26: Access to review procedures for landfill and shopping center projects

60
6.4 Public participation
Information to the public on the project and the EIA is provided in the following
way (see next 2 tables):

61
Project Informing public about project and EIA Provision of mandatory information
type:

EIA-authority’s
advertisement
Landfill

Mandatory by

Mandatory by
EIA-authority

During public
and

developer

hearings
Shopping

website
Public
Other

Other
Center
Remarks Remarks
Austria     Austria offers an EIA database which is accessible
for the public at the Austrian Federal Environment
Agency. Some relevant documents of the database
are also accessible via Internet, for example the
EIA permit (see
http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/umweltsituation/
uvpsup/uvpoesterreich1/uvpdatenbank/uvpgenehmi
gung/)

Bulgaria     
Croatia    
Cyprus     
Czech    1  EIA/SEA information system
1
for shopping centers
Republic
Denmark    
France (not answered)
2 3
2 3
Germany   for landfills, for shopping centers
4 4
Hungary   for shopping centers: inspectorate  
Ireland   Developer publishes site notice and newspaper notice.     Site notice, website in case of EPA (for landfill) and
With regard to developments requiring a waste licence, certain local planning authorities. Information is
all information pertaining to the licence application and also available at the planning authority or ABP (the
the EIS are available on the Environmental Protection Irish Planning Board) offices.
Agency (EPA) website. All information relating to a
planning application and associated EIS documentation
is available at the planning authority’s office or in some
cases on a planning authority’s website
Italy   
5
5
Lithuania  for shopping centers   
Malta     
Netherlands  

62
Project Informing public about project and EIA Provision of mandatory information
type:

EIA-authority’s
advertisement
Landfill

Mandatory by

Mandatory by
EIA-authority

During public
and

developer

hearings
Shopping

website
Public
Other

Other
Center
Remarks Remarks
Poland    
Romania   6 Mandatory by the developer under close coordination of   
competent authority for EIA
6
for landfills
Slovakia    
Slovenia   
Spain    In the official bulletin of the regional authority in
the web of substantive body and the municipal
authority
United  The majority of UK EIA now involves public engagement   
activities prior to submission of the Environmental
Kingdom
Statement and application for consent. This is not
mandatory, but has been found to be of such value that
developers have taken it up voluntarily and it is now
seen as standard EIA practice. The scale of such activity
will vary per project.
Table 27: Comparison of information of the public and of the manner of provision of mandatory information for landfill and shopping
center projects

63
In most of the participating countries the information of the public has to be carried out
by the competent authority, in Cyprus, Italy this is solely the task of the developer. In
some countries both authority and developer are responsible for informing the public.
The information is in general provided by public advertisement, on the EIA-authority´s
website and also during public hearing.
A more general question addressed the extent of public participation in the entire
EIA process.The following table shows a summary on this issue given by each country:
Country Landfill Shopping center
Austria Voluntary: Preliminary procedure with Voluntary: Preliminary procedure with
optional consultation of public; optional by optional consultation of public; optional by
developer developer
Mandatory: public inspection of EIA Mandatory: public inspection of EIA
documentation/submission of written documentation/submission of written
comments, public inspection of the comments, hearing of parties; public
Environmental Impact Expertise, hearing of inspection of single permit
parties; public inspection of development
consent order (single permit)
Bulgaria High High
Croatia The public is involved in scoping and EIA The public is involved in scoping and EIA
review (through the public debate / review (through the public debate /
debates). debates).
Cyprus Scoping and review (public debate). Scoping and review (public debate).
Czech The public has the possibility to review the The public has the possibility to review the
first "notification of conception". Furthermore first "notification of conception". Furthermore
Republic
a public hearing is to be scheduled to review a public hearing is to be scheduled to review
the environmental impact statement. the environmental impact statement.
Denmark The public may participate in the scoping The public may participate in the scoping
process. process.
France (not answered) (not answered)
Germany Interested neighbours, citizens’ groups, Comments, statements and objections are
NGOs etc. participate in the procedure. taken into account during the weighting
procedure.
Hungary Possibility for review of the documentation. Possibility to comment on preliminary and
final assessment.
Ireland PLANNING: (a) Third party right to make submissions at
(a) Third party right to make submissions at planning permission stage (to local planning
planning permission stage (to the local authority)
planning authority) or directly to ABP (the (b) third party right of appeal ABP (the Irish
Irish Planning Board) in the case of local Planning Board) against decision of local
authority development or Strategic planning authority provided they have made
Infrastructure Development a submission to the planning authority in the
(b) third party right of appeal to ABP (the first instance. Third parties can also apply
Irish Planning Board)against decision of local for leave to appeal directly to ABP in
planning authority provided they have made exceptional circumstances.
a submission to the planning authority in the
first instance. Third parties can also apply
for leave to appeal directly to ABP (the Irish
Planning Board)in exceptional circumstances.

WASTE LICENCE:
The public has access to the licence
application documentation (including the
EIS), in hardcopy format and electronic
format on the EPA website.
The licensing process allows for written
submissions by anyone. Everyone who
makes a submission is notified of the EPA's
proposed decision on the application.
Subsequently, anyone may make an
objection to a proposed decision by the EPA
on an application, within 28 days of
notification of the proposed decision.
Submissions are available for public
inspection on the EPA's website and are
considered by the EPA in deciding on the
application.

64
Country Landfill Shopping center
Italy The public can provide comments within 60 (not answered)
days from the beginning of the procedure.
Lithuania (not answered) (not answered)
Malta Public participation is carried out during Public participation is carried out during
some of the major steps in the EIA process: some of the major steps in the EIA process:
(1) during scoping and the drafting of the (1) during scoping and the drafting of the
Terms of Reference for the EIA; Terms of Reference for the EIA;
(2) following finalisation of the (2) following finalisation of the
Environmental Statement which is issued for Environmental Statement which is issued for
public consultation; and public consultation; and
(3) during the EIA-related public hearing. (3) during the EIA-related public hearing.
Netherlands In the Netherlands there are few EIA's for In the Netherlands there are few EIA's for
landfill. The extent seems limited. Depending shopping centers. Mostly these centers are
on the controversy of the project the combined in EIA's for large urban
participation can be wider. developments The extent seems limited.
Depending on the procedure for example the
controversy of the project the participation
can be wider.
Poland Every person has the right to take part in Every person has the right to take part in
EIA procedure and the right to submit EIA procedure and the right to submit
comments and suggestions in the course of a comments and suggestions in the course of a
procedure; The administration authorities procedure; The administration authorities
competent to issue decision on the competent to issue decision on the
environmental conditions require that the environmental conditions require that the
possibility of public participation should be possibility of public participation should be
ensured prior to the issue and modification ensured prior to the issue and modification
of decision; the administration authority of decision; the administration authority
competent to issue such decisions shall competent to issue such decisions shall
provide the public without an undue delay provide the public without an undue delay
with information concerning: the possibilities with information concerning: the possibilities
of becoming acquainted with the necessary of becoming acquainted with the necessary
documentation of the case and the place documentation of the case and the place
where it is available for review. The where it is available for review. The
administration authority in the justification of administration authority in the justification of
the decision, irrespective of the requirements the decision, irrespective of the requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Code, under the Administrative Procedure Code,
shall provide information on public shall provide information on public
participation in the procedure and the participation in the procedure and the
manner in which the comments and manner in which the comments and
suggestions submitted in relation to public suggestions submitted in relation to public
participation have been considered and the participation have been considered and the
extent to which they have been used. extent to which they have been used.
Formal scope of public involvement does not Mostly relatively little public interest.
differ according to project type. In practice
waste installations tend to generate more
public participation/opposition.
Romania Throughout all the EIA procedural stages: Throughout all the EIA procedural stages:
notification, screening, scoping, and notification, screening, scoping, and
reviewing, including public debate, EIA reviewing, including public debate, EIA
decision issuance. decision issuance.
Anyone interested can read the Anyone interested can read the
documentations and can provide written documentations and can provide written
objections to competent authorities. objections to competent authorities.
Slovakia If public submits important comments to If public submits important comments to
preliminary environmental study, the preliminary environmental study, the
competent authority invites members of the competent authority invites members of the
public to the consultation at later stages. public to the consultation at later stages.
Slovenia Every person shall have right of access to Time-line: public has 30 days of the public
environmental information. announcement the right of access and an
Time line - public has 30 days of the public opportunity of opinions and comments
announcement the right of access and an (Article 58).
opportunity of opinions and comments
(Article 58).
Spain Such projects often have high opposition. Low public interest.

65
Country Landfill Shopping center
United In the majority of cases for such In the majority of cases for such
development public engagement would occur development public engagement would occur
Kingdom
during the EIA process, prior to submission during the EIA process, prior to submission
to understand the views of NGO's local to understand the views of NGO's local
groups, etc. This may involve information groups, etc. This may involve information
provision, public scoping, workshops, public provision, public scoping, workshops, public
exhibitions, neighbourhood meetings / exhibitions, neighbourhood meetings /
Q&A's, direct meetings with specific groups. Q&A's, direct meetings with specific groups.
All such activity is voluntary and will vary All such activity is voluntary and will vary
between different projects, but a degree of between different projects, but a degree of
this action is standard practice across UK EIA this action is standard practice across UK EIA
practice. practice.
Formal consultation with the public occurs at Formal consultation with the public occurs at
submission of application of consent. This submission of application of consent. This
consultation is both on application and ES consultation is both on application and ES
findings. The responses from the public can findings. The responses from the public can
lead to further assessment being required lead to further assessment being required
before the consent is determined. The public before the consent is determined. The public
are able to attend local authority consent are able to attend local authority consent
procedures and make representations procedures and make representations
directly to the elected decision-makers. directly to the elected decision-makers.
Table 28: Public participation in the entire EIA process in the participating countries for
landfill and shopping center projects

66
6.5 Monitoring

The EIA Directive lacks - in contrast to the SEA Directive - a specific paragraph on the
monitoring of significant environmental effects of a project. Therefore, the questionnaire
tried to get more information on concrete monitoring requirements in the development
consent which are based on the findings of the EIA process.
In most countries (Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain) the EIA
entails recommendations on monitoring which are at least in about 2/3 of the countries
(Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovenia
and Spain) subsequently included into the development consent as obligations or
conditions. An overview is given in the following tables.

67
Project type:

consent comprise

recommendation
s on monitoring
Landfill

Development

based on EIA
conditions/
Recommendation of monitoring of environmental impacts by EIA
Country no yes Other Specification no yes
Austria  
Bulgaria  
Croatia  (not answered)
Cyprus  
Czech Republic  
Denmark  
France (not answered)
Germany  There is no extra chapter of conditions, obligations, recommendations deriving from the EIA in the 
final decision. Whether a condition, obligation or recommendation is based on the EIA, an
objection against the project or the expertise of an authority affected by the project makes no
difference. A recommendation for a permit obligation may result in an obligation in the permit and
become part of the inspection later on. This is not regulated by law.
Hungary  
Ireland  
Italy  
Lithuania  
Malta  
Netherlands  
Poland  
Romania  
Slovakia   Specified by person carrying out the programme 
Slovenia  
Spain  

68
Project type:

consent comprise

recommendation
s on monitoring
Landfill

Development

based on EIA
conditions/
Recommendation of monitoring of environmental impacts by EIA
Country no yes Other Specification no yes
United Kingdom  Depends on the impacts identified. In general monitoring is limited as it is difficult to require  
monitoring via the conditions that can be imposed on UK planning permissions. However,
monitoring of landfill gas levels and signs of leachate pollution / leakage would be expected for
landfill projects. Also specifically recommending dust / litter monitoring (operation) and
archaeological watching brief during construction would be expected.
Note:
In the UK Environmental Management Plans are becoming common practice to carry EIA
recommendations from an Environmental Statement through the consent and into construction
(and in some cases operation). Where such a document is included in an environmental statement
there tends to be better coverage of monitoring.
Table 29: Comparison of monitoring recommendations by EIA for landfill projects

Project type:

recommendations
consent comprise
Shopping
center

on monitoring
Development

based on EIA
conditions/
Recommendation of monitoring of environmental impacts by EIA
Country no yes Other specification no yes
Austria  
Bulgaria  
Croatia  
Cyprus  (not answered)
Czech Republic  
Denmark  

69
Project type:

recommendations
consent comprise
Shopping
center

on monitoring
Development

based on EIA
conditions/
Recommendation of monitoring of environmental impacts by EIA
Country no yes Other specification no yes
France (not answered)
Germany  
Hungary  
Ireland  
Italy  
Lithuania (not answered) 
Malta  
Netherlands  
Poland  
Romania  
Slovakia   Specified by person carrying out the programme 
Slovenia  
Spain  
United Kingdom  Depends on the impacts identified. In general monitoring is limited as it is difficult to require 
monitoring via the conditions that can be imposed on UK planning permissions. However,
monitoring of landfill gas levels and signs of leachate pollution / leakage would be expected for
landfill projects. Also specifically recommending dust / litter monitoring (operation) and
archaeological watching brief during construction would be expected.
Note:
In the UK Environmental Management Plans are becoming common practice to carry EIA
recommendations from an Environmental Statement through the consent and into construction
(and in some cases operation). Where such a document is included in an environmental statement
there tends to be better coverage of monitoring.
However, a shopping center would not require formal environmental monitoring under wider
legislation so in many cases monitoring would not be undertaken.
Table 30: Comparison of monitoring recommendations by EIA for shopping center projects

70
The development consent usually provides for the following monitoring programs in the participating countries:

Monitoring

Waste management
programs in

Nature protection
development
consent

Project type:

Air quality

Vibrations
Landfill
Traffic

Water
Noise

Remarks
Austria   
Bulgaria   
Croatia Measuring meteorological parameters, landfill gas emissions, leachate and precipitation discharges from
the landfill surface, the hazardous substance pollution parameters of groundwater, if located in the landfill
impact area; control of landfill body stability.
Cyprus (not answered)
Czech Republic (not answered)
Denmark (not answered)
France (not answered)
Germany There is no extra chapter of conditions, obligations, recommendations deriving from the EIA in the final
decision. Whether a condition, obligation or recommendation is based on the EIA, an objection against
the project or the expertise of an authority affected by the project makes no difference. A
recommendation for a permit obligation may result in an obligation in the permit and become part of the
inspection later on. This is not regulated by law.
Hungary (not answered)
Ireland     
Italy    
Lithuania 
Malta This is carried out on a case-by-case basis, depending on the significant impacts identified in the
    Environmental Statement.
Netherlands   Ground water, nature values
Poland     
Romania   
Slovakia Depending on impacts
Slovenia    State of environment, monitoring with purpose of reducing risk

71
Monitoring

Waste management
programs in

Nature protection
development
consent

Project type:

Air quality

Vibrations
Landfill

Traffic

Water
Noise
Remarks
Spain       
United Kingdom Depends on the specific project and its predicted environmental effects. However, monitoring can prove
difficult to condition due to restrictions placed on rules concerning the phrasing of conditions, which
must:
Conditions should be clear and specific
• Compliance must be possible
• Inclusion of a requirement to report on the completion of mitigation works or on
monitoring can encourage self-policing by project proponents
• Any conditions concerning monitoring should be clear on what is to be monitored,
how it is to be achieved, who is responsible for carrying it out and how the results
will be used to effect necessary action
• Planning authorities should consider how they will monitor and enforce
such conditions and also how the results of monitoring and mitigation will be
communicated to third parties
Further guidance on the tests for planning conditions can be found in DoE circular
11/95 and in the Scottish Government’s Circular 4/1998 and addendum, and on
planning obligations in ODPM circular 05/2005.
Table 31: Monitoring programs provided for by the development consent for landfill projects

72
Monitoring

Waste management
programs in

Nature protection
development
consent

Project type:

Air quality

Vibrations
Shopping

Traffic
center

Water
Noise
Remarks
Austria   
Bulgaria   
Croatia (not answered)
Cyprus (not answered)
Czech Republic (not answered)
Denmark (not answered)
France (not answered)
Germany        Depending on the case and the items that were most important in the EIA.
Hungary (not answered)
Ireland 
Italy     
Lithuania
Malta     This is carried out on a case-by-case basis, depending on the significant impacts identified in the
Environmental Statement.
Netherlands a monitoring program seems not applicable in this case in the Netherlands
Poland  Depending on local environmental conditions
Romania     
Slovakia Depending on impacts
Slovenia     State of environment, monitoring with purpose of reducing risk to environment, monitoring natural
phenomena.
Spain      
United Kingdom (not answered)
Table 32: Monitoring programs provided for by the development consent for shopping center projects

73
A more general question asked how compliance with the conditions in the
development consent is being checked.
In the majority of countries this is done during the final inspections after completion of
construction, during an environmental inspection or/and by periodical reporting by the
developer (see Table 33 and Table 34).

74
Compliance Check of compliance with monitoring conditions Check of compliance with all other conditions
check

By periodical reporting

By periodical reporting
During final inspection

During final inspection

During environmental

During environmental
after completion of

after completion of
Project type:

by the developer

by the developer
Landfill

construction

construction
inspections

inspections
No checks

No checks
Other

Other
Remarks Remarks
Austria      
Bulgaria      1) The competent authorities shall exercise
control over implementation of the conditions
set forth in the decision on EIA:
in the process of approval and coordination of
investment projects;
in the process of construction;
in the process of issue of permit for use of the
construction;
in the process of operation of the facilities.
2) The control shall include verification, by
documents and by on-site visits, of the results
from implementation of the plan for measures
for prevention, reduction or liquidation of
substantial harmful impacts on the
environment, and assessment of their efficiency.
3) Where the decision on EIA has been issued
by the MEW, the control over implementation of
the conditions may be assigned to the
respective RIEW, basin directorate or
directorate of national park.
Croatia      
Cyprus 
Czech Republic   not specified
Denmark   Compliance with the monitoring 
conditions is subject to the general
regulatory supervision.
France (not answered)
Germany      
Hungary  Controls and test runs

75
Compliance Check of compliance with monitoring conditions Check of compliance with all other conditions
check

By periodical reporting

By periodical reporting
During final inspection

During final inspection

During environmental

During environmental
after completion of

after completion of
Project type:

by the developer

by the developer
Landfill

construction

construction
inspections

inspections
No checks

No checks
Other

Other
Remarks Remarks
Ireland    For planning conditions, complaints    For planning conditions, case by case checks by
to local authority local authority department
Italy      
Lithuania   
Malta      
Netherlands  
Poland      
Romania    
Slovakia   Specified by person carrying out   Specified by person carrying out the programme
the programme
Slovenia    
Spain    
United Kingdom    Some conditions relate to    Some conditions relate to environmental
environmental monitoring that monitoring that relates to checks that will be
relates to checks that will be undertaken by statutory bodies, this form of
undertaken by statutory bodies, monitoring will occur regularly and be complied
this form of monitoring will occur with. Other development control / management
regularly and be complied with. by local authorities is designed to check that
Other development control / conditions are delivered; however, this process
management by local authorities is is not effectively delivered in all cases. As such,
designed to check that conditions conditions may not be delivered or delivered in
are delivered; however, this a less effective manner than imposed.
process is not effectively delivered
in all cases. As such, conditions
may not be delivered or delivered
in a less effective manner than
imposed.
Table 33: Check of compliance with monitoring conditions and all other conditions for landfill projects

76
Compliance Check of compliance with monitoring conditions Check of compliance with all other conditions
check

By periodical reporting

By periodical reporting
During final inspection

During final inspection

During environmental

During environmental
after completion of

after completion of
Project type:

by the developer

by the developer
Shopping
center

construction

construction
inspections

inspections
No checks

No checks
Other

Other
Remarks Remarks
Austria   
Bulgaria      1) The competent authorities shall exercise
control over implementation of the
conditions set forth in the decision on EIA:
in the process of approval and coordination
of investment projects;
in the process of construction;
in the process of issue of permit for use of
the construction;
in the process of operation of the facilities.
2) The control shall include verification, by
documents and by on-site visits, of the
results from implementation of the plan for
measures for prevention, reduction or
liquidation of substantial harmful impacts on
the environment, and assessment of their
efficiency.
3) Where the decision on EIA has been
issued by the MEW, the control over
implementation of the conditions may be
assigned to the respective RIEW, basin
directorate or directorate of national park.
Croatia      
Cyprus
Czech Republic  (not specified)  Not specified
Denmark   Compliance with the monitoring 
conditions are subject to the general
regulatory supervision.
France (not answered)

77
Compliance Check of compliance with monitoring conditions Check of compliance with all other conditions
check

By periodical reporting

By periodical reporting
During final inspection

During final inspection

During environmental

During environmental
after completion of

after completion of
Project type:

by the developer

by the developer
Shopping
center

construction

construction
inspections

inspections
No checks

No checks
Other

Other
Remarks Remarks
Germany     Depending on the case and the items    During inspections
that were most important in the EIA.
Hungary
Ireland   Case by case checks by local authority
department
Italy    
Lithuania  
Malta      
Netherlands  
Poland    
Romania    
Slovakia   Specified by person carrying out the   Specified by person carrying out the
programme programme.
Slovenia    
Spain    
United Kingdom  Some conditions relate to    Some conditions relate to environmental
environmental monitoring that monitoring that relates to checks that will be
relates to checks that will be undertaken by statutory bodies, this form of
undertaken by statutory bodies, this monitoring will occur regularly and be
form of monitoring will occur complied with. Other development control /
regularly and be complied with. management by local authorities is designed
Other development control / to check that conditions are delivered;
management by local authorities is however, this process is not effectively
designed to check that conditions are delivered in all cases. As such, conditions
delivered; however, this process is may not be delivered or delivered in a less
not effectively delivered in all cases. effective manner than imposed.
As such, conditions may not be
delivered or delivered in a less
effective manner than imposed.
Table 34: Check of compliance with monitoring conditions and all other conditions for shopping center projects

78
Non-compliance
The consequences of non-compliance with EIA related conditions / obligations of
the development consent involve the whole range of adequate measures such as
imposement of fines, concrete enforcement actions and sanctions, withdrawal/suspension of
the permit.

Public access to monitoring results

With regard to the information of the public about the results of the monitoring 2/3 of
the surveyed countries (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta,
Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia and United Kingdom) do not undertake such an activity
whereas the other countries referred to passive public access to monitoring data.
Public not informed

Public informed

Specification
1
for certain projects, a post-project analysis has to be carried out (at the
latest five years after notification of completion). The Austrian EIA database
1
Austria   (open to public) includes the results of the post-project analysis.
Bulgaria 
Croatia (not answered)
Cyprus 
Czech Republic (not answered)
Denmark 
France (not answered)
Germany 
Hungary  (for landfill)
PLANNING: Planning files are open to the public at relevant planning authority
office or ABP (the Irish Planning Board) office, as case may be,
WASTE LICENCE: Enforcement files are open to the public at regional EPA
Ireland  offices.
Italy  on the authority website
Lithuania  (for landfill)
Malta 
For SHOPPING CENTER: public not informed
Netherlands   For LANDFILL: passive if a request is made usually the information is provided
It may be released under access to information on the environment. The
competent authority shall inform the public by putting on a publicly accessible
list of information such as the follow-up analysis - Art. 21 section 2, item 17 17
Act OOS; information is publicly available, however rarely publicly advertised
Poland  (i.e. only informed members of the public would obtain access)
The public access to the result of monitoring is guaranteed. Every person
interested can receive those results on request. Also monthly reports regarding
environmental conditions published by competent authority consist of those
Romania  information among others.
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain  The records are public
United
Kingdom 
Table 35: Comparison of public information on monitoring
7 CONCLUSIONS

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive was adopted in 1985 and was
amended in 1997, 2003 and 2009 and codified in 2011. The EIA Directive allows for EIA to be
integrated into existing procedures or on the other hand to implement a separate EIA
procedure.
Approximately 50 % of the 20 participating countries integrated the EIA procedure in existing
procedures, 50 % have implemented separate procedures. The minority of the surveyed
countries undertakes EIA within a single permit procedure (“one-stop-shop”).
Screening procedures
Within this IMPEL project four different types of projects were chosen for a comparison of the
EIA screening procedures in Member States of the European Union and Croatia: Thermal
power plants, landfills, shopping centers and road construction projects.
Main findings:
• Guidelines for screening exist in several countries.
• As already stated in the EC report 2009 the screening procedure pursuant to Article 4
(2) of the EIA Directive allows for a couple of approaches. Some countries require a
screening procedure for all projects of a certain type while others have introduced
threshold for screening and/or obligatory EIA.
• Thresholds for obligatory EIA for Annex II projects exist:
- with regard to thermal power stations: in 9 countries (below the Annex I threshold of
300 MW)
- with regard to landfills for non-hazardous waste: in 3 countries
- with regard to shopping centres: in 9 countries
- with regard to roads: in 7 countries
• As to the parameters used in thresholds it can be concluded that the majority of
countries uses
- for power stations: capacity in MW
- for landfills for non-hazardous waste: total volume (m³) or volume/day, tons/day or
total capacity in tons
- for shopping centres: area in ha or m² (area of development, gross floor space)
- for roads: length of road (in km)
• A case-by-case examination has to be carried out for
- all power stations: in 5 countries
- all landfills for non-hazardous waste: in 8 countries
- all shopping centres: in 4 countries
- all roads: in 4 countries
Additionally, some countries have determined site-related criteria (e.g. location in
sensitive area, distance to sensitive area or receptor).
• Countries are well aware of the issues of cumulation with other projects and salami-
slicing. With regard to possible cumulation of projects most countries just referred to
the screening criteria laid down in their national EIA law which mirror the Annex III
criteria of the Directive.
Examples for effective addressing of cumulation of several projects and their effects are
are:

80
 - The description of the project includes the relation of the project to other existing /
planned projects (Bulgaria, Lithuania).
- The submitted information describes the accumulation of the project’s impacts with
the impacts of other existing or planned/known projects.
- Adjacent projects (projects with the same or similar activities) meet or exceed
together with the current project the defined thresholds (Hungary).
- If a project is spatially related to other projects of the same type and, together with
them, reach the relevant threshold value, the authority shall examine on a case-by-
case basis whether due to a cumulation of effects an EIA is required (Austria).
- The obligation to perform an environmental impact assessment shall also exist if
several projects of the same type which are to be executed simultaneously by the
same developer or more than one developer and which are closely related (cumulative
effects) together reach or exceed the relevant thresholds. (Germany).
- Cumulative effects are taken into account by assuming a “compulsory” application of
the cumulating projects (Denmark).

Half of the countries mentioned no specific provisions against salami slicing; some
responded that the screening criteria also apply to the screening of modifications and
extensions implying that a possible splitting of projects will be identified during the
screening exercise in due course. Strategies to prevent salami slicing include e.g.:
- Wide definition of the term “project” (inclusion of associated/ancillary works, different
developers etc.)
- In order to avoid circumventions of EIA by cutting modifications in several pieces, the
sum total of the capacity-expanding modifications approved in the past five years has
to be added to the capacity increase applied for (Austria).
- Projects are considered together if
1. they are situated on the same operating or construction site and are connected with
common operating or constructional facilities or
2.as other measures encroaching on nature and landscape there is a close spatial
connection between them
3. and if they serve a comparable purpose (Germany).
- If alteration or extension of a project not previously subject to EIA requirements
results in the relevant size or capacity figure being reached or exceeded for the first
time, an EIA shall be carried out for the alteration or extension and shall take account
of the environmental impacts of the existing project not previously subject to EIA
requirements (Germany).
- Projects which are connected technologically shall be qualified as one project, also if
they are implemented by different entities (Poland).

• In most countries information on all of the areas of expertise mentioned in Annex IV, if
relevant, is submitted for screening procedures; the main issues being
(independently of the project type) air quality, nature protection and water
management.The level of detail of the submitted screening documents is general to
medium, whereupon the volume of these documents rarely exceeds 50 pages.
• The authorities (national/federal, regional, local, statutory body) responsible for the
screening procedure vary across the countries and somentimes differ according to the
size of the project;
• The character of the screening decision is a legal document in the majority of the
countries.
• In almost all countries the screening decision can be appealed (exception: Czech
Republic).

EIA procedures
The IMPEL project had a closer look on the EIA procedures for landfills and shopping centers
for the purposes of comparison. The conclusions are as follows:

81
• In approximately 50 % of the countries scoping for the environmental report is carried
out on a mandatory basis.
• Guidelines for scoping and the EIA process exist in several countries.
• Apart from competent authorities a large number of countries involves the public and /
or other relevant organisations in the EIA process; participation of the public in
mandatory scoping exists in 7 countries.
• In most of the countries the developer can freely choose who compiles the
information required to be submitted to the competent authority for the EIA.
• In response to the question whether countries have imposed to consider the do-nothing
alternative 12 countries answered affirmative. Apart from this most of the countries
seem to have transposed the requirement of the Directive (“main alternatives studied
by the developer”) without further specification.
• Regarding the content of the EIA documentation submitted by the developer, it can
be said that most countries deem all of the topics referred to in Annex IV as
potentially relevant, depending on the site of the project.
• Competent authorities give greater focus to air quality and water management for both
project types, as well as traffic and noise for shopping centers and on waste
management, nature protection, hydrogeology, landscape and human health for
landfills.
• In almost all countries investigations on the environmental impacts of the construction
phase have to be carried out, in approximately 75 % of the countries the environmental
impacts of accidents / incidents have to be investigated.
• In about 2/3 of the surveyed countries the submitted information has a detailed level;
the range of the average size spans from "5 to 200 pages" to "over 1000 pages".
• The authorities responsible for EIA procedures can be either on national/federal,
regional or local level as well as statutory bodies; a slight majority for the regional
level can be observed.
• Basically, the evaluation process of the submitted documents is performed by the
competent authority which consults other authorities or bodies if needed. This involves
sometimes special appointed committees (Croatia, Cyprus, Romania) or independent
experts (Netherlands, Slovenia).
• The result of the EIA is mostly documented in a technical report and leads to binding
conditions in the development consent in the majority of the countries.
• In the majority of the countries development consent for landfills consists in an
environmental permit, in the case of shopping centers it often is a planning permission
only.
• The development consent can be appealed in all countries by almost everybody.
• Public participation is a cornerstone in the EIA process; information to the public in
most of the cases is provided by the competent authority (by public advertisements, on
the EIA-authority´s website and also during public hearing), in a few countries it is
solely the task of the developer.
• In most countries the EIA entails recommendations on monitoring which are at least in
about 2/3 of the countries subsequently included into the development consent as
obligations or conditions.
• Compliance of monitoring results with development consent conditions is checked in
most cases during final inspection, environmental inspections or/and by periodical
reporting by the developer.
• The consequences of non-compliance with EIA related conditions / obligations of the
development consent involve the whole range of adequate measures such as
imposement of fines, concrete enforcement actions and sanctions,
withdrawal/suspension of the permit.

82
• With regard to the information of the public about the results of the monitoring 2/3 of
the surveyed countries (Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania,
Malta, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia and United Kingdom) do not undertake such an
activity whereas the other countries referred to passive public access to monitoring
data.

83
8 RECOMMENDATIONS

As the project framework did not provide for a workshop in 2012 it was not possible to
discuss the answers with those who completed the questionnaires. This could lead to the
possibility that the questions were not understood by each participant in the same way,
which in some cases affected the clarity of the answers provided and the ability to fully
compare the approaches used across all countries.
Issues which would merit further discussion:

• approaches how to deal with cumulation and salami slicing

• comparison of the level of detail of the information submitted during screening phase
and during the EIA procedure (both for the information which has to be provided
according to EIA Directive and the information about topics with greater focus) and
methods of dealing with the huge amount of information which is provided during an
EIA procedure
• experience concerning the scoping phase as about half of the participating countries
have a mandatory scoping phase (including the experience with the public during
scoping phase)
• closer look on quality issues with regard to the authors of the EIA documentation (free
choice developer or accredited consultants)
• level of detail of the studied alternatives, the construction phase and the description of
impacts of accidents
• merits of conditions or recommendations in the development consent decision which
are based on the results of the EIA planning
• Closer look on public participation

84
9 REGISTER OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABP An Bord Pleanala (The Irish Planning Board of Ireland)

CA Competent Authority
EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
EC European Commission
EEA European Economic Area
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EIB European Investment Bank
EIS Environmental Impact Study
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EU European Union
IED Directive (2010/75/EU) on Industrial Emissions
IEMA Institute for Environmental Management and Assessment (UK)
IMPEL European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of
Environmental Law
INECE International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement
JASPERS Joint Assistance to Support Projects in the European Regions
LLUR Landesamt für Landwirtschaft, Umwelt und ländliche Räume (Schleswig-
Holstein, Germany)
MANRE Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment (Cyprus)
NCEA Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NPF National Park Fund (Denmark)
RDOS not specified (Poland)
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
UK United Kingdom

85
10 REGISTER OF TABLES
Table 1: Members of the project core team .................................................................................. 12

Table 2: Integration of the EIA into procedures for development consent ......................................... 17

Table 3: Comparison of one stop shop procedures including the EIA ................................................ 17

Table 4: Availability of official guidance for screening in the participating countries ........................... 18

Table 5: Thermal power station projects: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening .................. 21

Table 6: Landfills for non-hazardous waste: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening .............. 24

Table 7: Shopping center projects: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening .......................... 26

Table 8: Road construction projects: Thresholds for obligatory EIA and for screening ........................ 29

Table 9: Level of detail that is required in the documents submitted for the screening phase for thermal
power station and landfill projects ......................................................................................... 35

Table 10: Level of detail that is required in the documents submitted for the screening phase for
shopping center and road construction projects....................................................................... 36

Table 11: Responsible authorities for the screening decision........................................................... 37

Table 12: Character of the screening decision............................................................................... 38

Table 13: Comparison of the possibilities for appealing the screening decision .................................. 41

Table 14: Scoping procedures .................................................................................................... 43

Table 15: Availability of official guidance for scoping ..................................................................... 44

Table 16: Participation of authorities and the public in the scoping process ...................................... 46

Table 17: Compilation of the EIA documentation ........................................................................... 47

Table 18: Topics that receive greater focus during the EIA process of landfill projects (in percent of
indication by countries) ........................................................................................................ 49

Table 19: Topics that receive greater focus during the EIA process of shopping center projects (in
percent of indication by countries) ......................................................................................... 49

Table 20: Level of detail and volume required in the EIA documentation .......................................... 50

Table 21: Responsible authorities for carrying out the EIA.............................................................. 52

Table 22: Consideration of the results of the EIA in the development consent................................... 55

Table 23: Comparison of the documentation of the results of the EIA .............................................. 56

Table 24: Character of development consent for landfill projects..................................................... 57

Table 25: Character of development consent for shopping center projects ....................................... 58

Table 26: Access to review procedures for landfill and shopping center projects................................ 60

Table 27: Comparison of information of the public and of the manner of provision of mandatory
information for landfill and shopping center projects ................................................................ 63

Table 28: Public participation in the entire EIA process in the participating countries for landfill and
shopping center projects ...................................................................................................... 66

Table 29: Comparison of monitoring recommendations by EIA for landfill projects ............................ 69

Table 30: Comparison of monitoring recommendations by EIA for shopping center projects ............... 70

86
Table 31: Monitoring programs provided for by the development consent for landfill projects ............. 72

Table 32: Monitoring programs provided for by the development consent for shopping center projects 73

Table 33: Check of compliance with monitoring conditions and all other conditions for landfill projects 76

Table 34: Check of compliance with monitoring conditions and all other conditions for shopping center
projects ............................................................................................................................. 78

Table 35: Comparison of public information on monitoring ............................................................. 79

11 REGISTER OF FIGURES
Figure 1: The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process ...................................................... 11

Figure 2: Map of countries participating in the study (resource: http://geo.dianacht.de) .................... 14

87
12 APPENDICES

12.1 Appendix 1: Questionnaire

IMPEL-Project
The Implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment
on the Basis of Precise Examples

QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear colleague,

We kindly ask you to complete this questionnaire on the implementation of Environmental

Impact Assessment (EIA) in your country.

You are asked to provide information on the various legal and practical issues associated
with your EIA process.

The questionnaire comprises three main sections:

1. Information on the participant
2. General information on EIA screening procedures for the following 4 project types:
• Thermal power station;
• Landfill;
• Shopping center;
• Road construction.
3. Detailed information on EIA procedures for 2 of the above project types, namely:
• Landfill;
• Shopping center.

Please note that the questions within sections 2 and 3 are identical for each project
type.
The main aim of the evaluation of the questionnaires is to outline the differences between
EIA legislation and practice in EU Member States with regard to:
• Screening;
• Scoping;
• Quality control;
• Consideration of specific environmental issues in EIA processes;
• Consideration of EIA results during and after project implementation;
• Monitoring.

88
The project core team - represented by members from Germany, Italy, Ireland and Austria -
has developed this questionnaire to collect basic information on the above issues from the
participants. We kindly ask you to fill in the questionnaire and return it before March 23rd,
2012 to the following address:

Land Salzburg, Umweltschutz

Attn. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Markus GRAGGABER
P.O. Box 527
A-5010 Salzburg
Austria

or by E-mail to: [email protected]

The completed questionnaires will be evaluated. We will discuss the results within the core
team. The final project report will be published subsequently.

BACKGROUND
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive was adopted in 1985 and was
substantively amended in 1997 and codified in 2011 (see http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:026:SOM:EN:HTML). The EIA procedure ensures
that the environmental consequences of projects are identified and assessed before a
development consent is given. The public can give its opinion and the results of the
consultations are taken into consideration in the development consent procedure of the
project. The public has to be informed of the decision afterwards.

The EIA Directive outlines the project categories which should be made subject to an EIA,
the procedure that shall be followed and the content of the assessment.

A number of “problematic areas” in the application of the EIA Directive were highlighted in
the "Report from the Commission on the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive
(both: European Commission, 2009)". These included:
• Screening - inter alia, the use of thresholds;
• Quality control of the information for the Environmental Impact Assessment according to
Art. 5 Par. 1 and Annex IV of the EIA Directive;
• Monitoring.

Therefore, this IMPEL project looks to explore some of these areas further across all
Member States, with particular emphasis on screening, scoping, cumulation of projects,
“salami slicing”, quality control, EIA thresholds and the consideration of EIA results.

In 2010 the European Commission has launched a review process of the EIA Directive
which is still ongoing. A Commission proposal for a policy option (i.e. technical adaptation,
amendment, new Directive or Regulation etc.) is foreseen for 2012. This IMPEL project can
assist the legislative process by providing concrete practical findings and recommendations
for improvements.

89
1. INFORMATION ON THE PARTICIPANT

1.1. Family name

1.2 First name(s)
1.3 Organisation
Street:
Number:
1.4 Address Zip-Code:
Town/Municipality:
Country:
Country code:
1.5 Telephone number Area code:
Number:
Country code:
1.6 Telefax number Area code:
Number:
1.7 E-mail-address
Federal authority
Regional authority
Local authority
Status of organisation Statutory body (e.g. Environmental Protection
1.8 (please mark where Agency)
applicable) Consultancy
University
Other (please specify):

Geographical territory
1.9
covered by organisation

90
2. GENERAL INFORMATION ON EIA SCREENING PROCEDURES

2.1. Project Type 1: Thermal Power Station Project

Which thermal power station projects are subject to EIA? Please provide the project
definitions and thresholds given in the EIA law of your country by filling in section 2.1. of
this questionnaire.

2.1.1. EIA Implementation

Integrated into existing procedures, e.g.
In which procedure for consent is environmental permitting (please specify):
the EIA integrated for this project
2.1.1.1.
type in your country? (see Art. 2 Separate procedure
(2) EIA-Directive) Other (please specify):

Does a single permit procedure

Yes
exist in which all necessary
2.1.1.2.
permits are granted jointly (“one
stop shop”)? No

Does a joint permit procedure No

2.1.1.3. exist in which some necessary Yes (please specify jointly granted permits):
permits are granted?

2.1.2. Screening
Yes, on national level (please indicate
web-link):
Is an official guidance for
2.1.2.1. screening available in your Yes, on regional level (please indicate
country? web-link):

No guidance available
Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without
screening) (please answer question 2.1.2.3.)
Thresholds for screening (please answer
What are the conditions that question 2.1.2.4.)
define the obligation for an EIA for Screening (significance survey) is required
2.1.2.2.
this project type? for all projects of this type without thresholds
(multiple answers possible) (continue to 2.1.2.5.)
Other (please specify and continue with
2.1.2.5.):

91
 Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Which are the thresholds to be
2.1.2.3. reached or exceeded for an Value:
obligatory EIA? Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values:

Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
Which are the screening Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
2.1.2.4. thresholds that initiate a screening Unit:
procedure?
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values (e.g. lower thresholds for
specific areas):

Please provide further information if relevant:

How is the cumulation with other

2.1.2.5. projects taken into account in the
screening phase?
No
Do you have specific provisions
2.1.2.6. Yes (please specify):
against salami slicing?

92
 Information on
Traffic
Noise
Air quality
Vibrations
Climate
Shading
What information is submitted by Waste management
the developer to the competent
Regional development planning
2.1.2.7. authority during the screening
stage for this type of project? Nature protection
(multiple answers possible) Water management
Geotechnical engineering
Hydrogeology
Landscape engineering
Cultural heritage
Human health
Other (please specify):

General level (rough estimations)

What level of detail is required in
Medium level (modeling for a few selected
2.1.2.8. the documents submitted for the
topics, estimations for the rest)
screening phase?
Detailed level (deep level of detail in all topics)
5 to 20 pages
What is the average volume of the
21 to 50 pages
2.1.2.9. documents submitted for the
51 to 100 pages
screening phase?
over 100 pages
Federal authority (please specify):

Regional authority (please specify):

Which authority is responsible for Local authority (please specify):

2.1.2.10.
the screening decision?
Statutory body (please specify):

Other (please specify):

Legal document
Please specify the character of Internal decision by the authority
2.1.2.11.
the screening decision: Other (please specify):

No (continue with 2.2.)

Yes (please provide further information, if
Can the screening decision be relevant):
2.1.2.12.
appealed?
Other (please specify):

93
 Everybody
Neighbours
Municipalities
Citizens’ group
2.1.2.13. Who can lodge an appeal? Environmental organisations
NGOs
Statutory bodies / agencies
Other (please specify):

2.2. Project Type 2: Landfill Project

Which landfill projects are subject to EIA? Please provide the project definitions and
thresholds given in the EIA law of your country by filling in section 2.2. of this
questionnaire.

2.2.1. EIA Implementation

Integrated into existing procedures, e.g.
In which procedure for consent is environmental permitting (please specify):
the EIA integrated for this project
2.2.1.1.
type in your country? (see Art. 2 Separate procedure
(2) EIA-Directive) Other (please specify):

Does a single permit procedure

Yes
exist in which all necessary
2.2.1.2.
permits are granted jointly (“one
stop shop”)? No

Does a joint permit procedure No

2.2.1.3. exist in which some necessary Yes (please specify jointly granted permits):
permits are granted?

2.2.2. Screening
Yes, on national level (please indicate
web-link):
Is an official guidance for
2.2.2.1. screening available in your Yes, on regional level (please indicate
country? web-link):

No guidance available
Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without
screening) (please answer question 2.2.2.3.)
Thresholds for screening (please answer
What are the conditions that question 2.2.2.4.)
define the obligation for an EIA for Screening (significance survey) is required
2.2.2.2.
this project type? for all projects of this type without thresholds
(multiple answers possible) (continue to 2.2.2.5.)
Other (please specify and continue with
2.2.2.5.):

94
 Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Which are the thresholds to be
2.2.2.3. reached or exceeded for an Value:
obligatory EIA? Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values:

Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
Which are the screening Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
2.2.2.4. thresholds that initiate a screening Unit:
procedure?
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values (e.g. lower thresholds for
specific areas):

Please provide further information if relevant:

How is the cumulation with other

2.2.2.5. projects taken into account in the
screening phase?
No
Do you have specific provisions
2.2.2.6. Yes (please specify):
against salami slicing?

Information on
Traffic
Noise
Air quality
Vibrations
Climate
Shading
What information is submitted by Waste management
the developer to the competent
Regional development planning
2.2.2.7. authority during the screening
stage for this type of project? Nature protection
(multiple answers possible) Water management
Geotechnical engineering
Hydrogeology
Landscape engineering
Cultural heritage
Human health
Other (please specify):

95
 General level (rough estimations)
What level of detail is required in
Medium level (modeling for a few selected
2.2.2.8. the documents submitted for the
topics, estimations for the rest)
screening phase?
Detailed level (deep level of detail in all topics)
5 to 20 pages
What is the average volume of the
21 to 50 pages
2.2.2.9. documents submitted for the
51 to 100 pages
screening phase?
over 100 pages
Federal authority (please specify):

Regional authority (please specify):

Which authority is responsible for Local authority (please specify):

2.2.2.10.
the screening decision?
Statutory body (please specify):

Other (please specify):

Legal document
Please specify the character of Internal decision by the authority
2.2.2.11.
the screening decision: Other (please specify):

No (continue with 2.3.)

Yes (please provide further information, if
Can the screening decision be relevant):
2.2.2.12.
appealed?
Other (please specify):

Everybody
Neighbours
Municipalities
Citizens’ group
2.2.2.13. Who can lodge an appeal? Environmental organisations
NGOs
Statutory bodies / agencies
Other (please specify):

96
2.3. Project Type 3: Shopping Center Project

Which Shopping center projects are subject to EIA? Please provide the project
definitions and thresholds given in the EIA law of your country by filling in section 2.3. of
this questionnaire.

2.3.1. EIA Implementation

Integrated into existing procedures, e.g.
In which procedure for consent is environmental permitting (please specify):
the EIA integrated for this project
2.3.1.1.
type in your country? (see Art. 2 Separate procedure
(2) EIA-Directive) Other (please specify):

Does a single permit procedure

Yes
exist in which all necessary
2.3.1.2.
permits are granted jointly (“one
stop shop”)? No

Does a joint permit procedure No

2.3.1.3. exist in which some necessary Yes (please specify jointly granted permits):
permits are granted?

2.3.2. Screening
Yes, on national level (please indicate
web-link):
Is an official guidance for
2.3.2.1. screening available in your Yes, on regional level (please indicate
country? web-link):

No guidance available
Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without
screening) (please answer question 2.3.2.3.)
Thresholds for screening (please answer
What are the conditions that question 2.3.2.4.)
define the obligation for an EIA for Screening (significance survey) is required
2.3.2.2.
this project type? for all projects of this type without thresholds
(multiple answers possible) (continue to 2.3.2.5.)
Other (please specify and continue with
2.3.2.5.):

Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Which are the thresholds to be
2.3.2.3. reached or exceeded for an Value:
obligatory EIA? Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values:

97
 Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
Which are the screening Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
2.3.2.4. thresholds that initiate a screening Unit:
procedure?
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values (e.g. lower thresholds for
specific areas):

Please provide further information if relevant:

How is the cumulation with other

2.3.2.5. projects taken into account in the
screening phase?
No
Do you have specific provisions
2.3.2.6. Yes (please specify):
against salami slicing?

Information on
Traffic
Noise
Air quality
Vibrations
Climate
Shading
What information is submitted by Waste management
the developer to the competent
Regional development planning
2.3.2.7. authority during the screening
stage for this type of project? Nature protection
(multiple answers possible) Water management
Geotechnical engineering
Hydrogeology
Landscape engineering
Cultural heritage
Human health
Other (please specify):

General level (rough estimations)

What level of detail is required in
Medium level (modeling for a few selected
2.3.2.8. the documents submitted for the
topics, estimations for the rest)
screening phase?
Detailed level (deep level of detail in all topics)
5 to 20 pages
What is the average volume of the
21 to 50 pages
2.3.2.9. documents submitted for the
51 to 100 pages
screening phase?
over 100 pages

98
 Federal authority (please specify):

Regional authority (please specify):

Which authority is responsible for Local authority (please specify):

2.3.2.10.
the screening decision?
Statutory body (please specify):

Other (please specify):

Legal document
Please specify the character of Internal decision by the authority
2.3.2.11.
the screening decision: Other (please specify):

No (continue with 2.4.)

Yes (please provide further information, if
Can the screening decision be relevant):
2.3.2.12.
appealed?
Other (please specify):

Everybody
Neighbours
Municipalities
Citizens’ group
2.3.2.13. Who can lodge an appeal? Environmental organisations
NGOs
Statutory bodies / agencies
Other (please specify):

99
2.4. Project Type 4: Road Construction Project

Which Road Construction projects are subject to EIA? Please provide the project
definitions and thresholds given in the EIA law of your country by filling in section 2.3. of
this questionnaire.

2.4.1. EIA Implementation

Integrated into existing procedures, e.g.
In which procedure for consent is environmental permitting (please specify):
the EIA integrated for this project
2.4.1.1.
type in your country? (see Art. 2 Separate procedure
(2) EIA-Directive) Other (please specify):

Does a single permit procedure

Yes
exist in which all necessary
2.4.1.2.
permits are granted jointly (“one
stop shop”)? No

Does a joint permit procedure No

2.4.1.3. exist in which some necessary Yes (please specify jointly granted permits):
permits are granted?

2.4.2. Screening
Yes, on national level (please indicate
web-link):
Is an official guidance for
2.4.2.1. screening available in your Yes, on regional level (please indicate
country? web-link):

No guidance available
Thresholds for obligatory EIA (without
screening) (please answer question 2.4.2.3.)
Thresholds for screening (please answer
What are the conditions that question 2.4.2.4.)
define the obligation for an EIA for Screening (significance survey) is required
2.4.2.2.
this project type? for all projects of this type without thresholds
(multiple answers possible) (continue to 2.4.2.5.)
Other (please specify and continue with
2.4.2.5.):

Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Which are the thresholds to be
2.4.2.3. reached or exceeded for an Value:
obligatory EIA? Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values:

100
 Threshold N° 1:
Unit:
Value:
Threshold N° 2 (if applicable):
Unit:
Value:
Which are the screening Threshold N° 3 (if applicable):
2.4.2.4. thresholds that initiate a screening Unit:
procedure?
Value:
If more thresholds are applicable, please specify
units and values (e.g. lower thresholds for
specific areas):

Please provide further information if relevant:

How is the cumulation with other

2.4.2.5. projects taken into account in the
screening phase?
No
Do you have specific provisions
2.4.2.6. Yes (please specify):
against salami slicing?

Information on
Traffic
Noise
Air quality
Vibrations
Climate
Shading
What information is submitted by Waste management
the developer to the competent
Regional development planning
2.4.2.7. authority during the screening
stage for this type of project? Nature protection
(multiple answers possible) Water management
Geotechnical engineering
Hydrogeology
Landscape engineering
Cultural heritage
Human health
Other (please specify):

General level (rough estimations)

What level of detail is required in
Medium level (modeling for a few selected
2.4.2.8. the documents submitted for the
topics, estimations for the rest)
screening phase?
Detailed level (deep level of detail in all topics)
5 to 20 pages
What is the average volume of the
21 to 50 pages
2.4.2.9. documents submitted for the
51 to 100 pages
screening phase?
over 100 pages

101
 Federal authority (please specify):

Regional authority (please specify):

Which authority is responsible for Local authority (please specify):

2.4.2.10.
the screening decision?
Statutory body (please specify):

Other (please specify):

Legal document
Please specify the character of Internal decision by the authority
2.4.2.11.
the screening decision: Other (please specify):

No (continue with 3.)

Yes (please provide further information, if
Can the screening decision be relevant):
2.4.2.12.
appealed?
Other (please specify):

Everybody
Neighbours
Municipalities
Citizens’ group
2.4.2.13. Who can lodge an appeal? Environmental organisations
NGOs
Statutory bodies / agencies
Other (please specify):

102
3. DETAILED INFORMATION ON EIA PROCEDURES

3.1. Project Type 1: Landfill Project

For landfill projects which require an EIA, please provide the following information on the
EIA procedures of your country.

3.1.1. Scoping
On what basis is scoping carried On mandatory basis
out before information is submitted
for the Environmental Impact On voluntary basis
3.1.1.1.
Assessment (according to Art. 5
Par. 1 and Annex IV of the EIA Other (please specify):
Directive)?
Yes, on national level (please indicate
web-link):
Is an official guidance for scoping
3.1.1.2. Yes, on regional level (please indicate
available in your country?
web-link):

No guidance available
Authorities (please specify):
Who can participate in the scoping
3.1.1.3. process?
Public (please specify):
(multiple answers possible)

3.1.2. Development Consent Procedure

Who compiles the information for Free choice of developer
the Environmental Impact
Assessment in accordance with Accredited consultants
3.1.2.1.
Art. 5 Par. 1 and Annex IV of the Other (please specify):
EIA Directive (Environmental
Impact Study/Statement)?
No
Do manuals or guidance on EIA
3.1.2.2. Yes (please specify):
exist to support the developer?

Is the developer obliged in national No

legislation to consider specified
3.1.2.3. Yes (please specify):
alternatives to this type of
development?
Is the developer obliged in national
legislation to consider the do- No
3.1.2.4. nothing alternative (zero-
alternative; non-realisation of the Yes
project)?

103
 Information on
Traffic
in all cases
depending on the site
Noise
in all cases
depending on the site
Air quality
in all cases
depending on the site
Vibrations
in all cases
depending on the site
Climate
in all cases
depending on the site
Shading
in all cases
depending on the site
Waste management
in all cases
depending on the site
Regional development planning
What information is submitted by in all cases
the developer to the competent
depending on the site
authority for the purposes of EIA
3.1.2.5. Nature protection
for this type of project (Art. 5 and
Annex IV of the EIA Directive)? in all cases
(multiple answers possible) depending on the site
Water management
in all cases
depending on the site
Geotechnical engineering
in all cases
depending on the site
Hydrogeology
in all cases
depending on the site
Landscape engineering
in all cases
depending on the site
Cultural heritage
in all cases
depending on the site
Human health
in all cases
depending on the site
Other (please specify):
in all cases:

depending on the site:

104
 Which of the above mentioned Please specify:
3.1.2.6. topics receive greater focus for
this project type (landfill project)?
Is it mandatory to include
Yes
information on the environmental
3.1.2.7.
impact of the construction phase
No
of the project?
Is it mandatory to include
Yes
information on the environmental
3.1.2.8.
impact of accidents / incidents of
No
the project?
In general, what level of detail is General level (rough estimations)
required in the documents that the Medium level (modeling for a few selected
3.1.2.9.
developer has to provide for the topics, estimations for the rest)
EIA? Detailed level (on all topics)
50 to 200 pages
What is the average volume of the
201 to 500 pages
3.1.2.10. documents that the developer has
501 to 1,000 pages
to provide for the EIA?
over 1,000 pages
Federal authority (please specify):

Regional authority (please specify):

Which competent authority /

Local authority (please specify):
3.1.2.11. authorities is / are responsible for
carrying out the EIA?
Statutory body (please specify):

Other (please specify):

How is the quality of the

information submitted by the Please specify:
3.1.2.12.
developer evaluated by the
competent authority / authorities?
The development consent comprises binding
conditions / obligations based on the
recommendations from the EIA process
How is the result of the EIA taken
3.1.2.13. into account in the development The development consent comprises
consent? recommendations proposed in the EIA
process
Other (please specify):

Technical report produced prior to the

development consent
How are the results of the EIA As part of the document associated with the
3.1.2.14.
documented? final development consent:
Other (please specify):

Environmental permit
What is the character of the
Planning permission
3.1.2.15. development consent for this
project type (landfill project)? Other (please specify):

Does the development consent No (continue to 3.1.3.)

3.1.2.16.
provide for appeals? Yes

105
 Everybody
Neighbours
Municipalities
Citizens’ groups
Who can lodge an appeal?
3.1.2.17. Environmental organisations
(Please mark applicable parties)
NGOs
Statutory bodies / agencies
Other (please specify):

3.1.3. Public Participation

Mandatory by the developer
How are the public informed about Mandatory by the EIA-authority
3.1.3.1.
the project and the EIA? Other (please specify):

Public advertisement
The mandatory information on the On the EIA-authority’s website
project and the EIA is provided in
3.1.3.2. During public hearings
the following way:
(multiple answers possible) Other (please specify):

Please outline the extent of public

participation in the entire EIA
3.1.3.3.
process for this project type
(landfill project):

3.1.4. Monitoring
No
In general, does an EIA
Yes
3.1.4.1. recommend monitoring of
Other (please specify):
environmental impacts?

Does the development consent

No (continue with 3.1.4.4.)
comprise conditions /
3.1.4.2.
recommendations on monitoring
Yes
based on the EIA?
Traffic
Noise
Which type of monitoring Air quality
programs (as recommended by Vibrations
3.1.4.3. the EIA) does the development Waste management
consent for this type of project Nature protection
usually provide for? Water
Other (please specify):

During final inspection after completion of

construction
In general, how is compliance with During environmental inspections
the monitoring conditions being By periodical reporting by the developer
3.1.4.4.
checked? No checks on consent conditions are carried
(multiple answers possible) out by authorities
Other (please specify):

106
 During final inspection after completion of
construction
During environmental inspections
By periodical reporting by the developer
How is compliance with all other
3.1.4.5.
conditions being checked? No checks on consent conditions are carried
out by authorities

Other (please specify):

What are the consequences, if the

project does not comply with EIA Please specify:
3.1.4.6.
related conditions / obligations of
the development consent?

No, the public is not being informed about the

Is the public informed about the results of monitoring
3.1.4.7.
results of monitoring?
Yes (please specify):

107
3.2. Project Type 2: Shopping Center Project

For Shopping Center projects which require an EIA, please provide the following
information on the EIA procedures of your country.

3.2.1. Scoping
On what basis is scoping carried On mandatory basis
out before information is submitted
for the Environmental Impact On voluntary basis
3.2.1.1.
Assessment (according to Art. 5
Par. 1 and Annex IV of the EIA Other (please specify):
Directive)?
Yes, on national level (please indicate
web-link):
Is an official guidance for scoping
3.2.1.2. Yes, on regional level (please indicate
available in your country?
web-link):

No guidance available
Authorities (please specify):
Who can participate in the scoping
3.2.1.3. process?
Public (please specify):
(multiple answers possible)

3.2.2. Development Consent Procedure

Who compiles the information for Free choice of developer
the Environmental Impact
Assessment in accordance with Accredited consultants
3.2.2.1.
Art. 5 Par. 1 and Annex IV of the Other (please specify):
EIA Directive (Environmental
Impact Study/Statement)?
No
Do manuals or guidance on EIA
3.2.2.2. Yes (please specify):
exist to support the developer?

Is the developer obliged in national No

legislation to consider specified
3.2.2.3. Yes (please specify):
alternatives to this type of
development?
Is the developer obliged in national
legislation to consider the do- No
3.2.2.4. nothing alternative (zero-
alternative; non-realisation of the Yes
project)?

108
 Information on
Traffic
in all cases
depending on the site
Noise
in all cases
depending on the site
Air quality
in all cases
depending on the site
Vibrations
in all cases
depending on the site
Climate
in all cases
depending on the site
Shading
in all cases
depending on the site
Waste management
in all cases
depending on the site
Regional development planning
What information is submitted by in all cases
the developer to the competent
depending on the site
authority for the purposes of EIA
3.2.2.5. Nature protection
for this type of project (Art. 5 and
Annex IV of the EIA Directive)? in all cases
(multiple answers possible) depending on the site
Water management
in all cases
depending on the site
Geotechnical engineering
in all cases
depending on the site
Hydrogeology
in all cases
depending on the site
Landscape engineering
in all cases
depending on the site
Cultural heritage
in all cases
depending on the site
Human health
in all cases
depending on the site
Other (please specify):
in all cases:

depending on the site:

109
 Which of the above mentioned
topics receive greater focus for Please specify:
3.2.2.6.
this project type (shopping center
project)?
Is it mandatory to include
Yes
information on the environmental
3.2.2.7.
impact of the construction phase
No
of the project?
Is it mandatory to include
Yes
information on the environmental
3.2.2.8.
impact of accidents / incidents of
No
the project?
In general, what level of detail is General level (rough estimations)
required in the documents that the Medium level (modeling for a few selected
3.2.2.9.
developer has to provide for the topics, estimations for the rest)
EIA? Detailed level (on all topics)
50 to 200 pages
What is the average volume of the
201 to 500 pages
3.2.2.10. documents that the developer has
501 to 1,000 pages
to provide for the EIA?
over 1,000 pages
Federal authority (please specify):

Regional authority (please specify):

Which competent authority /

Local authority (please specify):
3.2.2.11. authorities is / are responsible for
carrying out the EIA?
Statutory body (please specify):

Other (please specify):

How is the quality of the

information submitted by the Please specify:
3.2.2.12.
developer evaluated by the
competent authority / authorities?
The development consent comprises binding
conditions / obligations based on the
recommendations from the EIA process
How is the result of the EIA taken
3.2.2.13. into account in the development The development consent comprises
consent? recommendations proposed in the EIA
process
Other (please specify):

Technical report produced prior to the

development consent
How are the results of the EIA As part of the document associated with the
3.2.2.14.
documented? final development consent:
Other (please specify):

Environmental permit
What is the character of the
Planning permission
3.2.2.15. development consent for this
project type (landfill project)? Other (please specify):

110
 Does the development consent No (continue to 3.2.3.)
3.2.2.16.
provide for appeals? Yes
Everybody
Neighbours
Municipalities
Citizens’ groups
Who can lodge an appeal?
3.2.2.17. Environmental organisations
(Please mark applicable parties)
NGOs
Statutory bodies / agencies
Other (please specify):

3.2.3. Public Participation

Mandatory by the developer
How are the public informed about Mandatory by the EIA-authority
3.2.3.1.
the project and the EIA? Other (please specify):

Public advertisement
The mandatory information on the On the EIA-authority’s website
project and the EIA is provided in
3.2.3.2. During public hearings
the following way:
(multiple answers possible) Other (please specify):

Please outline the extent of public

participation in the entire EIA
3.2.3.3.
process for this project type
(shopping center project):

3.2.4. Monitoring
No
In general, does an EIA
Yes
3.2.4.1. recommend monitoring of
Other (please specify):
environmental impacts?

Does the development consent

No (continue with 3.2.4.4.)
comprise conditions /
3.2.4.2.
recommendations on monitoring
Yes
based on the EIA?
Traffic
Noise
Which type of monitoring Air quality
programs (as recommended by Vibrations
3.2.4.3. the EIA) does the development Waste management
consent for this type of project Nature protection
usually provide for? Water
Other (please specify):

111
 During final inspection after completion of
construction
In general, how is compliance with During environmental inspections
the monitoring conditions being By periodical reporting by the developer
3.2.4.4.
checked? No checks on consent conditions are carried
(multiple answers possible) out by authorities
Other (please specify):

During final inspection after completion of

construction
During environmental inspections
By periodical reporting by the developer
How is compliance with all other
3.2.4.5.
conditions being checked? No checks on consent conditions are carried
out by authorities
Other (please specify):

What are the consequences, if the

project does not comply with EIA Please specify:
3.2.4.6.
related conditions / obligations of
the development consent?
No, the public is not being informed about the
Is the public informed about the results of monitoring
3.2.4.7.
results of monitoring?
Yes (please specify):

Thank you very much for your cooperation!

We hope to welcome you at our workshop in Salzburg.

112
12.2 Appendix 2: List of persons sending in completed questionnaires
Country Name Organisation Status of organisation Geographical territory Email
covered by
organisation3

Austria Markus Umweltschutz Land Salzburg Regional Authority Land Salzburg [email protected]
Graggaber
Austria Susanne Püls- Oesterreichs Energie Independent advocacy Austria (Thermal Power [email protected]
Schlesinger group for the Austrian Station)
electricity industry
Bulgaria Birgit Reininger JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Bulgaria [email protected]
1 2
Croatia Sarah Duff JASPERS JASPERS /EIB Croatia [email protected]
Cyprus Delia Gorgos JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Cyprus [email protected]
Czech Sarah Duff JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Czech Republic [email protected]
Republic
Denmark Helle Ina Elmer Danish Nature Agency Statutory Body Denmark [email protected]
[email protected]
France Edith Collavizza France Nature Environnement [email protected]
Germany Gisela Ministry for Agriculture, the Ministry of Land Schleswig- Land Schleswig-Holstein [email protected]
Holzgraefe Environment and Rural Areas Holstein (Thermal Power
of Land Schleswig-Holstein Stations)
Germany Martin Rüter Agency for Agriculture, the Regional Authority, Land Schleswig-Holstein [email protected]
Environment and Rural Areas Statutory Body (Landfill)
of Land Schleswig-Holstein
Germany Janine Geisler State Company for Road State Company for Road Land Schleswig-Holstein
Construction and Transport of Construction and Transport (Road Construction)
Schleswig-Holstein of Schleswig-Holstein
Germany Astrid Gasse City of Brunsbüttel, Building Local Authority Land Schleswig-Holstein
authority (Shopping Centre)

Germany Rolf Tippner Bezirksregierung Köln Local Authority Cologne (Landfill) [email protected]

Hungary Sarah Duff JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Hungary [email protected]

Ireland Anne Marie An Bord Pleanala Statutory Body Ireland [email protected]
O'Conner

113
Country Name Organisation Status of organisation Geographical territory Email
covered by
organisation3

Ireland Pamela Environmental Protection Statutory Body Ireland [email protected]

McDonnell Agency
Italia Martino ARPA Lombardia Statutory Body Lombardia [email protected]
Michieletti
Lithuania Ausra JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Lithuania
Jurkeviciute
Malta Charlene Smith Malta Environment and Statutory Body Malta [email protected];
Planning Authority [email protected]
Netherlands Sjoerd Harkema Netherlands Commission for The NCEA is an Netherlands [email protected]
Environmental Assessment independent expert body
(NCEA) (Foundation)
Poland Joanna Huczko - General Directorate for Statutory Body Poland [email protected]
Gruszczyńska Environmental Protection
Poland Urszula Rzeszot JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Poland [email protected]
1 2
Romania Angela Filipas JASPERS JASPERS /EIB Romania [email protected]
Romania Lucian Popa National Environmental Guard Local authority County Arad [email protected]
Local Authority County Arad
Romania Marius Popa Olt County Environmental Local authority Olt County [email protected]
Protection Agency
Slovakia Sarah Duff JASPERS1 JASPERS /EIB2 Slovakia [email protected]
1
Slovenia Sarah Duff JASPERS JASPERS /EIB2 Slovenia [email protected]
Spain Manuel Díaz Xunta de Galicia - Consellería Regional authority Galicia [email protected]
Cano de Medio Ambiente, Territorio
e Infraestructuras
United Josh Fothergill IEMA - Institute for Professional Body United Kingdom [email protected]
Kingdom Environmental Management
and Assessment
1 Joint Assistance to Support Projects in the European Regions) managed by the European Investment Bank; Vienna Regional office covering: Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Hungary, Slovenia and Croatia; Warsaw Regional office covering: Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia; Bucharest Regional office covering: Romania, Bulgaria, Malta, Cyprus
2 The JASPERS Initiative is a joint venture amongst the EC DG REGIO, the EIB, the EBRD and the German Bank KfW (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) to assist the
Beneficiaries of the projects to be financed under the EU Structural Funds to prepare good-quality proposals with higher changes of funding, compared to the same work the
Beneficiaries would undertake by themselves
3 If specified: project type covered by organisation

114
12.3 Appendix 3: Evaluation of general information on EIA screening procedures

Questionnaire
Evaluation
Comparison of EIA Screening
Procedures

1. EIA Implementation
Thermal Power Station Landfill Shopping Center Road Construction
N Issue Answer Country Country Country Country
°
1. Integration of EIA Integrated into France: France: Czech Republic Germany:
1 into procedure of existing Administrative authorisation Administrative authorisation The EIA is an integral part of the
according to the Classified according to the Classified plan approval procedure
consent procedures, e.g. Facilities for the Protection of the Facilities for the Protection of the
environmental Environment legislation Environment legislation
permitting
Germany: Germany: Denmark: Ireland:
The EIA is an integral part of the The EIA is an integral part of the The EIA procedure is an Planning Permission (competant
licencing procedure under the plan approval (Planfeststellung) integrated part of the spatial authority is An Board Pleanala
Federal Immission Control Act planning procedure, which is where EIA required)
assumed in the Danish Planning
Act.
Ireland: Ireland: France: Lithuania:
EIA part of two consent Dual decision: Planning planning permission EIA procedure
procedures - Dual Decision - Permission (from ABP under
(1) Planning Permission Strategic Infrastructure
procedure (An Bord Pleanala Development if exceeds 100,000
(ABP) are the competent authority tonnes per annum, other wise
under Strategic Infrastructure planning authority) and Waste
Development for an installation Licence (from the EPA)
with a total energy output of 300
megawatts or more, otherwise the
local Planning Authority is the
competent authority).
(2) IPPC Licence procedure, if
the plant has a thermal input of
>50MW (EPA are the competent
authority in this instance).

115
Where both licence and planning
required, both EPA and
ABP/Planning Authority carries
out the EIA

Lithuania: Lithuania: Germany: Malta

Standard EIA procedure EIA procedure Preparation of a land use plan and development consent
additional building permit acc. (development permitting
Article 17 Federal EIA Act: procedure)
If local development plans are
prepared, amended or
supplemented, particularly for
certain projects including
shopping centers the EIA
including the screening shall be
performed in the planning
procedure as an EIA pursuant to
the provisions of the Building
Code [Baugesetzbuch]. (rather
strategic environmental
assessment acc. to Directive
2001/42/EC)
If the EIA is performed in a
planning procedure for a
development plan and in a
subsequent approval procedure,
the EIA in the subsequent
approval procedure should be
restricted to additional or different
significant environmental impacts
of the project. (EIA-part).
If a long period of time lies
between the planning procedure
and the approval, a project related
EIA or at least for smaller projects
a screening has to be carried out.
In the case that the kind of the
project (size, nature etc. ) was
only roughly know
Malta Malta Ireland: Netherlands:
development consent development consent Planning Permission (competant special trajectory act and/or
(development permitting (development permitting authority is the Planning Authority spatial planning

116
 procedure) procedure) and ABP on appeal)

Netherlands: Netherlands: Lithuania: Romania:

Environmental permitting Environmental permitting EIA procedure In Romania the EIA is integrated
into permitting procedures for
certain public and separate
procedure
Romania: Romania: Malta United Kingdom:
Environmental Permit for Project Environmental Permit for Project As Thermal power station
(Order 135/2010); (Order 135/2010) response - road schemes
The EIA is integrated into The EIA is integrated into (highways) in England and Wales
permitting procedures for certain permitting procedures for certain can be classed as nationally
public and private projects public and private projects significant infrastructure projects.
Further some aspects of road
projects may require planning
consent however, others are
approved via a different consent
process.
United Kingdom: United Kingdom: Netherlands:
In the UK a thermal power station Consented via planning spatial planning
would generally require an EIA permission in each of the UK's
alongside its application for administrations
planning permission. However, in
England & Wales a new
procedure has been developed for
Nationally Significant
Infrastructure Projects, which
include thermal power stations
>50MW, in this case the EIA is
undertaken alongside the NSIP
development consent process.
Romania:
Environmental Permit for Project (Order 135/2010)
In Romania the EIA is integrated into permitting procedures for certain
public and separate procedure
United Kingdom:
Consented via Planning Permission process in each of UK's
administrations
Separate Austria Austria Austria Austria
procedure
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Cyprus Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Czech Republic Cyprus Cyprus

117
 Czech Republic Denmark Hungary Czech Republic
Denmark Hungary Italy Denmark
Hungary Italy Poland Hungary
Italy Poland Slovakia Italy
Poland Slovakia Slovenia Poland
Slovakia Slovenia Spain Slovakia
Slovenia Spain Slovenia
Spain Spain
Other: Denmark: Poland: Poland: Poland:
specification Section 9 of Ministerial Order no. in individual cases conduct of EIA in individual cases conduct of EIA in individual cases conduct of EIA
1510, dated can be repeated within the can be repeated within the can be repeated within the
2010-12-15, concerning EIA framework of the prcedure to framework of the prcedure to framework of the prcedure to
states that the issue the construction permit issue the construction permit issue the consturktion permit and
IPPC-permission substitutes part decision on the permit for the
of the EIApermission. implementation of a road
investment project
Poland:
in individual cases conduct of EIA can be repeated within the framework of the procedure to issue the construction

1. EIA is imbedded in a Yes Austria Austria Austria Austria

2 single permit (except for federal roads)
procedure in which
all necessary
permits are granted
jointly (“one stop
shop”)
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus
Netherlands Germany: Denmark Denmark
plan approval acc. to German
waste legislation
United Kingdom: Netherlands Ireland Germany
The NSIP process is designed to
provide all development consent
related permits in a single
application; however, operational
permitting (that would allow the
development to begin operating is
clearly not included within this)

118
 Ireland
No Croatia Czech Republic Croatia Croatia
Czech Republic Denmark Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Hungary Germany Hungary
Germany Ireland Hungary Italy
Hungary Italy Italy Lithuania
Ireland Lithuania: Lithuania Malta
Italy Malta Malta Netherlands
Lithuania: Poland Netherlands Poland
Construction permit is granted
seperately
Malta Romania Poland Romania
Poland Slovakia Romania Slovakia
Romania Slovenia Slovakia Slovenia
Slovakia Spain Slovenia Spain
Slovenia United Kingdom Spain
Spain United Kingdom
United Kingdom:
Planning Permission process does not cover every permit in a single process.
1. EIA is imbedded in No Austria Austria Austria Austria
3 permit procedures in
which some
necessary permits
are granted
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Cyprus Cyprus Croatia Croatia
Czech Republic Czech Republic Cyprus Cyprus
Hungary Germany Czech Republic Czech Republic
Ireland Hungary Denmark Denmark
Italy Ireland Germany Hungary
Lithuania Italy Hungary Ireland
Poland Lithuania Ireland Lithuania
Romania Poland Italy Malta
Slovakia Romania Lithuania Netherlands

119
 Slovenia Slovakia Poland Poland
Spain Slovenia Romania Romania
Spain Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain
Yes: Croatia: Croatia: Malta: Malta:
specification Art. 70 of Croatian Environmental If the concerned landfill is an Development permitting; EIA Development permitting; EIA
Protection Act/2007 reads: " (1) IPPC installation then the answer related assessment related assessment
...a decision on the request for given for section 2.1.1.3 above
environmental impact assessment (Thermal Power Station) is
and the request for determining applicable here too: Art. 70 of
integrated environmental Croatian Environmental Protection
protection requirements shall be Act/2007
made within a single
procedure.........(3) In the
procedure referred to in paragraph
1 of this Article a decision on
integrated environmental
protection requirements shall be
issued." The EIA Regulation/ 2008
as amended in 2009 details the
procedure in Art. 24 (The
environmental impact assessment
procedure shall be conducted as a
single integrated procedure
together with the procedure for
establishing integrated
environmental protection
requirements based on the
conclusion adopted pursuant to
the provisions of the regulation on
establishing integrated
environmental protection
requirements for an installation)
and 25.
Denmark: Malta: Netherlands: United Kingdom:
Section 9 of Ministerial Order no. Development permitting; EIA e.g. SEA and EIA of the spatial The Planning Permission process
1510, dated 2010-12-15, related assessment plan and following permits are allows other consents to be
concerning EIA states that the combined gained alongside it; however,
IPPC-permission substitutes part devolution in the UK makes this
of the EIApermission. question difficult to answer
directly. The various Governments
- UK Parliamanet (for England),
Scottish Parliament, Welsh
Assembly and Northern Ireland
Assembly have all made changes

120
 to the planning systems recently
to allow more permits to be gained
via a joint procedure. However,
the detail of which permits can be
gained at once varies.

Germany: Netherlands: United Kingdom:

Apart from the permit procedures e.g. SEA-procedures for spatial The Planning Permission process allows other consents to be gained
acc. to Art. 7 and 8 under the plans and EIA for different permit- alongside it; however, devolution in the UK makes this question difficult
Water Management Act other procedures can be combined to answer directly. The various Governments - UK Parliamanet (for
decisions are integrated part of England), Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland
the licence. Assembly have all made changes to the planning systems recently to
allow more permits to be gained via a joint procedure. However, the
detail of which permits can be gained at once varies.
Malta: United Kingdom:
Development permitting; EIA The Planning Permission process allows other consents to be gained alongside it; however, devolution in
related assessment the UK makes this question difficult to answer directly. The various Governments - UK Parliamanet (for
England), Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland Assembly have all made changes to
the planning systems recently to allow more permits to be gained via a joint procedure. However, the detail
of which permits can be gained at once varies.

Netherlands:
e.g. SEA-procedures for spatial plans and EIA for different permit-procedures can be combined
United Kingdom:
The Planning Permission process allows other consents to be gained alongside it; however, devolution in the UK makes this question difficult to
answer directly. The various Governments - UK Parliamanet (for England), Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland Assembly
have all made changes to the planning systems recently to allow more permits to be gained via a joint procedure. However, the detail of which
permits can be gained at once varies.

2. Screening

Thermal Power Station Landfill Shopping Center Road Construction

N Issue Answer Country Country Country Country
°

121
2. Official guidance for Yes, on national Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
1 screening available level: http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fil http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fil http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fil http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fil
eadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_ eadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_ eadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_ eadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_
indication of SUP_EMAS/uvp- SUP_EMAS/uvp- SUP_EMAS/uvp- SUP_EMAS/uvp-
web-link leitfaeden/EFP_LF.pdf leitfaeden/EFP_LF.pdf leitfaeden/EFP_LF.pdf leitfaeden/EFP_LF.pdf
http://www.lebensministerium.at/u
mwelt/betriebl_umweltschutz_uvp/
uvp/materialien/leitfaeden.html
Cyprus: Cyprus: Cyprus: Cyprus:
http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agricu http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agricu http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agricu http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agricu
lture.nsf/index_en/index_en?Open lture.nsf/index_en/index_en?Open lture.nsf/index_en/index_en?Open lture.nsf/index_en/index_en?Open
Document Document Document Document
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
https://www.retsinformation.dk/For https://www.retsinformation.dk/For https://www.retsinformation.dk/For https://www.retsinformation.dk/For
ms/R0710.aspx?id= ms/R0710.aspx?id= ms/R0710.aspx?id= ms/R0710.aspx?id=
125635 125636 125637 125638
Germany: Germany Lithuania: Germany:
a) General Administrative http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.519685 Forschungsgesellschaft für
Regulation on the Execution of the 001249378224.pdf Straßen- und Verkehrswesen
Environmental Impact (2005): Hinweise zur Prüfung der
Assessment is under revision, The UVP-Pflicht von
Federal Environmental Agency Bundesfernstraßenvorhaben
announced that screening www.fgsv-verlag.de
principles and proceedings as well
as screening criteria should
become part of the current
administrative regulation.
b) Application and interpretation of
the new EIA-regulations (final
version 14.08.2003)
www.bmu.de/umweltvertraeglichk
eitspruefung/doc/6379.php
c) Guidance on the determination
of the EIA obligation in the
individual case of projects (final
version 2003)
www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/
application/pdf
Lithuania: Lithuania: Malta: Lithuania:
http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.519685 http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.519685 Legal Notice 114/2007 http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.519685
001249378224.pdf 001249378224.pdf 001249378224.pdf
Malta: Malta: Netherlands: Malta:
Legal Notice 114/2007 Legal Notice 114/2007 http://www.infomil.nl/onderwerpen/ Legal Notice 114/2007
ruimte/mer/mer-scan/

122
Netherlands: Netherlands: Poland: Netherlands:
http://www.infomil.nl/onderwerpen/ http://www.infomil.nl/onderwerpen/ it is available via the General http://www.infomil.nl/onderwerpen/
ruimte/mer/mer-scan/ ruimte/mer/mer-scan/ Directorate for Environmental ruimte/mer/mer-scan/
Protection (Generalna Dyrekcja
Ochrony Srodowiska - GDOS):
www.gdos.gov.pl. This includes
formal regulations (Regulation of
the Council of Ministers of 9
November 2010 on types of
projects likely to have significant
effects on the environment
(Journal of Laws No. 213; item
1397), which covers Polish
interpretation of Annex I and
Annex II projects, including
national threshold levels
http://www.gdos.gov.pl/files/Materi
aly-i-
publikacje/rozporzadzenie_rady_
ministrow_pol-ang.pdf ), as well
as not legally binding guidance
documetns providing advice to
administrative bodies .
Shopping centres are explicitly
mentioned under paragraph 3
point 54
Poland: Poland: Romania Poland:
it is available via the General it is available via the General http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislations/v it is available via the General
Directorate for Environmental Directorate for Environmental iew/624 Directorate for Environmental
Protection (Generalna Dyrekcja Protection (Generalna Dyrekcja Protection (Generalna Dyrekcja
Ochrony Srodowiska - GDOS): Ochrony Srodowiska - GDOS): Ochrony Srodowiska - GDOS):
www.gdos.gov.pl. This includes www.gdos.gov.pl. This includes www.gdos.gov.pl. This includes
formal regulations (Regulation of formal regulations (Regulation of formal regulations (Regulation of
the Council of Ministers of 9 the Council of Ministers of 9 the Council of Ministers of 9
November 2010 on types of November 2010 on types of November 2010 on types of
projects likely to have significant projects likely to have significant projects likely to have significant
effects on the environment effects on the environment effects on the environment
(Journal of Laws No. 213; item (Journal of Laws No. 213; item (Journal of Laws No. 213; item
1397), which covers Polish 1397), which covers Polish 1397), which covers Polish
interpretation of Annex I and interpretation of Annex I and interpretation of Annex I and
Annex II projects, including Annex II projects, including Annex II projects, including
national threshold levels national threshold levels national threshold levels
http://www.gdos.gov.pl/files/Materi http://www.gdos.gov.pl/files/Materi http://www.gdos.gov.pl/files/Materi
aly-i- aly-i- aly-i-
publikacje/rozporzadzenie_rady_ publikacje/rozporzadzenie_rady_ publikacje/rozporzadzenie_rady_
ministrow_pol-ang.pdf ), as well ministrow_pol-ang.pdf ), as well ministrow_pol-ang.pdf ), as well
as not legally binding guidance as not legally binding guidance as not legally binding guidance
documetns providing advice to documetns providing advice to documetns providing advice to

123
administrative bodies . administrative bodies . administrative bodies .

Romania Romania United Kingdom: Romania:

http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislations/v http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislations/v There are official guides to the http://apmar.anpm.ro/Mediu/regle
iew/624 iew/624 EIA Regulations in each mentari-16
http://www.anpm.ro/upload/58674 http://www.anpm.ro/upload/58673 administration and the www.mmediu.ro
_2010_DESULFURARE.pdf _2010_DESEURI.pdf organisation in charge of NSIP http://www.anpm.ro/upload/58671
applications has produced advice _2010_AUTOSTRAZI_si_DRUMU
on screening, links below: RI.pdf
England & Wales (General EIA
Circular and Guidance, that
covers screening):
- Circular 02/99 =
http://webarchive.nationalarchives
.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://co
mmunities.gov.uk/publications/pla
nningandbuilding/circularenvironm
entalimpact
- Guidance on EIA =
http://webarchive.nationalarchives
.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://co
mmunities.gov.uk/publications/pla
nningandbuilding/environmentalim
pactassessment
England & Wales (NSIP screening
advice document):
-
http://infrastructure.independent.g
ov.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/03/Advice-
note-7-EIA-screening-and-
scoping.pdf
Scotland EIA documents related
to screening:
- PAN58 =
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Public
ations/1999/10/pan58-root/pan58-
pdf

124
 - Advisory page on screening with
resources:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics
/Built-
Environment/planning/National-
Planning-Policy/themes/envi

Spain: Spain: Spain:

http://www.magrama.es/es/calidad http://www.magrama.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion- http://www.magrama.es/es/calidad
-y-evaluacion- ambiental/temas/evaluacion-ambiental/guias-directrices/ -y-evaluacion-
ambiental/temas/evaluacion- ambiental/temas/evaluacion-
ambiental/guias-directrices/ ambiental/guias-directrices/

125
 United Kingdom: United Kingdom: United Kingdom:
There are official guides to the There are official guides to the EIA Regulations in each administration There are official guides to the
EIA Regulations in each and the organisation in charge of NSIP applications has produced EIA Regulations in each
administration and the advice on screening, links below: administration and the
organisation in charge of NSIP England & Wales (General EIA Circular and Guidance, that covers organisation in charge of NSIP
applications has produced advice screening): applications has produced advice
on screening, links below: - Circular 02/99 = on screening, links below:
England & Wales (General EIA http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://com England & Wales (General EIA
Circular and Guidance, that munities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/circularenvironmental Circular and Guidance, that
covers screening): impact covers screening):
- Circular 02/99 = - Guidance on EIA = - Circular 02/99 =
http://webarchive.nationalarchives http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://com http://webarchive.nationalarchives
.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://co munities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/environmentalimpact .gov.uk/20100410180038/http://co
mmunities.gov.uk/publications/pla assessment mmunities.gov.uk/publications/pla
nningandbuilding/circularenvironm England & Wales (NSIP screening advice document): nningandbuilding/circularenvironm
entalimpact - http://infrastructure.independent.gov.uk/wp- entalimpact
- Guidance on EIA = content/uploads/2012/03/Advice-note-7-EIA-screening-and-scoping.pdf - Guidance on EIA =
http://webarchive.nationalarchives Scotland EIA documents related to screening: http://webarchive.nationalarchives
.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://co - PAN58 = http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1999/10/pan58- .gov.uk/20100410180038/http://co
mmunities.gov.uk/publications/pla root/pan58-pdf mmunities.gov.uk/publications/pla
nningandbuilding/environmentalim - Advisory page on screening with resources: nningandbuilding/environmentalim
pactassessment http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built- pactassessment
England & Wales (NSIP screening Environment/planning/National-Planning-Policy/themes/envi England & Wales (NSIP screening
advice document): advice document):
- -
http://infrastructure.independent.g http://infrastructure.independent.g
ov.uk/wp- ov.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/03/Advice- content/uploads/2012/03/Advice-
note-7-EIA-screening-and- note-7-EIA-screening-and-
scoping.pdf scoping.pdf
Scotland EIA documents related Scotland EIA documents related
to screening: to screening:
- PAN58 = - PAN58 =
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Public http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Public
ations/1999/10/pan58-root/pan58- ations/1999/10/pan58-root/pan58-
pdf pdf
- Advisory page on screening with - Advisory page on screening with
resources: resources:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics
/Built- /Built-
Environment/planning/National- Environment/planning/National-
Planning-Policy/themes/envi Planning-Policy/themes/envi
Yes, on regional Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
level: http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf- http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf- http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf- http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf-
leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf
indication of
web-link

126
 Germany: Screening Germany Ireland: Ireland:
Checklist Schleswig- http://www.environ.ie/en/Publicatio http://www.environ.ie/en/Publicatio
ns/Environment/Miscellaneous/Fil ns/Environment/Miscellaneous/Fil
Holstein: eDownLoad,1804,en.pdf eDownLoad,1804,en.pdf
www.schleswig-
holstein.de/UmweltLandwirtschaft/
DE/ImmissionKlima/03_Luftreinhal
tung/02_Genehmigungsverfahren/
3_Eckpunkte/03_3_PDF/
Ireland: Ireland: Spain: Spain:
http://www.environ.ie/en/Publicatio http://www.environ.ie/en/Publicatio http://www.cmati.xunta.es/portal/ci http://www.cmati.xunta.es/portal/ci
ns/Environment/Miscellaneous/Fil ns/Environment/Miscellaneous/Fil dadan/lang/gl/pid/2567 dadan/lang/gl/pid/2567
eDownLoad,1804,en.pdf eDownLoad,1804,en.pdf
Spain: Spain:
http://www.cmati.xunta.es/portal/ci http://www.cmati.xunta.es/portal/cidadan/lang/gl/pid/2567
dadan/lang/gl/pid/2567
United Kingdom:
There are official guides to the EIA Regulations in each administration and the organisation in charge of NSIP applications has produced advice
on screening, links below:
England & Wales (General EIA Circular and Guidance, that covers screening):
- Circular 02/99 =
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/circularenvironmentalim
pact
- Guidance on EIA =
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/environmentalimpactass
essment
England & Wales (NSIP screening advice document):
- http://infrastructure.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Advice-note-7-EIA-screening-and-scoping.pdf
Scotland EIA documents related to screening:
- PAN58 = http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1999/10/pan58-root/pan58-pdf
- Advisory page on screening with resources: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/National-Planning-
Policy/themes/envi

No Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria

Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic
Hungary Hungary Germany: Hungary
Municipalities use a checklist for
screening and exploring whether
there are cumulating projects. The
origin is unknown.
Italy Italy Hungary Italy
Slovakia Slovakia Italy Slovakia

127
 Slovenia Slovenia Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia
2. Conditions that Thresholds for Austria Austria Austria Austria
2 define the obligation obligatory EIA (different procedure for federal
roads)
for an EIA (without
screening)
Bulgaria Bulgaria Denmark Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia: France Croatia:
in case of waste treatment in case of express roads
facilities for non-hazardous waste
Cyprus Czech Republic Germany Cyprus
Czech Republic Denmark: Ireland Czech Republic:
hazardous waste new construction, reconstruction &
rerouting of highways /
expressways
Denmark France Italy Denmark
France Germany Malta France
Germany Hungary Slovakia Germany
Hungary Ireland Slovenia Hungary
Ireland Italy Spain Ireland
Italy Lithuania Lithuania
Lithuania Malta Malta
Malta Poland Netherlands
Netherlands Slovakia Poland
Poland Slovenia Romania
Romania Spain Slovakia
Slovakia United Kingdom Slovenia
Slovenia United Kingdom
Spain
United Kingdom
Thresholds for Austria Austria Austria Austria
screening
Croatia Czech Republic Croatia Czech Republic
Czech Republic Germany Cyprus France
Germany Hungary Czech Republic Germany

128
 Hungary Italy France Hungary
Italy Malta Germany Italy
Lithuania Netherlands Italy Lithuania
Netherlands Poland Lithuania Lithuania
Poland Slovakia Malta Malta
Romania United Kingdom Netherlands Netherlands
Slovakia Poland Poland
Spain Slovakia Slovakia
United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom
Screening Denmark Croatia: Bulgaria Cyprus
required for all Waste disposal facilities;
Remediation and reconstruction of
projects of this landfills
type without
thresholds
Denmark: Denmark Denmark
non hazardous waste
Germany: Romania
Screening generally required for:
construction and operation of a
landfill site for deposition of inert
waste within the meaning of the
Product Recycling and Waste
Management Act
(Kreislaufwirtschafts- und
Abfallgesetz) general screening
Other: Bulgaria: Bulgaria: Hungary: Bulgaria:
screening is required for all screening for all installations for size, risk, sensitivity, cumulation 1) Mandatory EIA for all projects
projects below the mentioned depositing of waste not included in with other activities (fthresholds "Construction of all highways and
treshold the treshold for preliminary assessment) Class I roads"
2) Screening decision for all other
roads but 1), and which are not
included in the treshold

129
Cyprus: Croatia: Ireland: Ireland:
case-by-case for projects under no threshold required for 1) landfill Criteria for determining whether Criteria for determining whether
Annex II - Prelim EIA Report for hazardous waste; 2) landfill in sub threshold development would sub threshold development would
a county or regional waste mgm. be likely to have significant effects be likely to have significant effects
center on the environment, hence on the environment, hence
necessitating EIA, is set out in necessitating EIA, is set out in
Schedule 5 of the Planning and Schedule 5 of the Planning and
Development Regs 2001. Where Development Regulations 2001.
ABP considers that a proposed Where ABP considers that a
development proposed road development
would be likely to have significant would be likely to have significant
effects on the environment it shall effects on the environment it shall
direct the applicant to prepare an direct the road authority to
EIS. prepare an EIS. Where a road
authority considers that a
proposed road development
would be likely to have significant
effects on the environment it shall
inform ABP in writing and where
ABP concurs it shall direct the
road authority to prepare an EIS.
Ireland: Cyprus: Netherlands: Netherlands:
Criteria for determining whether obligatory for projects on Annex 1 All thresholds for screening only 1) All thresholds for screening
sub threshold development would disposal and recovery of serve as an indicator, below the only serve as an indicator, below
be likely to have significant effects hazardous waste; case-by-case thresholds a screening decision the thresholds a screening
on the environment, hence for projects under Annex 2based without procedural requirements is decision without procedural
necessitating EIA, is set out in on Prelim EIA Report obligatory requirements is obligatory
Schedule 5 of the Planning and 2) the construction of new
Development Regs 2001. Where highways requires in general an
ABP considers that a proposed EIA
development (which does not fall
within the obligatory thresholds)
would be likely to have significant
effects on the environment it shall
direct the applicant to prepare an
EIS.
Malta: Germany: United Kingdom: Romania:
others than those included in Without threshold: Obligatory EIA Any development listed in obligatory for projects on
Category 1 projects for landfill sites for hazardous Schedule 2 in any of the UK's EIA construction of highways and
waste subject to special Regulations, related to planning express roads; screening for
monitoring within the meaning of permissions, will require screening projects included in Annex 2 (all
the Product Recycling and Waste (based on a significance survey) if other projects not included in
Management Act any part of the proposal is within a Annex 1)
(Kreislaufwirtschafts- und 'sensitive area'. The deifinition of
Abfallgesetz) 'sensitive area' varies between the
different regulations; however, it
mainly relates to Internationally or

130
 nationally designated
environmental sites, SAC, SPA,
Ramsar, SSSI, Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty, etc

Netherlands: Ireland: Criteria for determining United Kingdom:

1) All thresholds for screening whether sub threshold development would be likely to have significant Any development listed in
only serve as an indicator, below effects on the environment, hence necessitating EIA, is set out in Schedule 2 in any of the UK's EIA
the thresholds a screening Schedule 5 of the Planning and Development Regs 2001. Where ABP Regulations, related to planning
decision without procedural considers that a proposed development permissions, will require screening
requirements is obligatory would be likely to have significant effects on the environment it shall (based on a significance survey) if
2) all new (thermal power) direct the applicant to prepare an EIS. any part of the proposal is within a
installations which burn 'sensitive area'. The deifinition of
'hazardous' waste require an EIA 'sensitive area' varies between the
different regulations; however, it
mainly relates to Internationally or
nationally designated
environmental sites, SAC, SPA,
Ramsar, SSSI, Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty, etc
United Kingdom: Netherlands:
Any development listed in 1) All thresholds for screening only serve as an indicator, below the thresholds a screening decision without
Schedule 2 in any of the UK's EIA procedural requirements is obligatory
Regulations, related to planning 2) all new installations which store 'hazardous' waste in a landfill require an EIA
permissions, will require screening
(based on a significance survey) if
any part of the proposal is within a
'sensitive area'. The deifinition of
'sensitive area' varies between the
different regulations; however, it
mainly relates to Internationally or
nationally designated
environmental sites, SAC, SPA,
Ramsar, SSSI, Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty, etc
Romania:
obligatory for installations included in Annex I - hazardous waste landfills; HG445/2009, Criteria included in
annex III for installations included in Annex I

131
 United Kingdom:
Any development listed in Schedule 2 in any of the UK's EIA Regulations, related to planning permissions,
will require screening (based on a significance survey) if any part of the proposal is within a 'sensitive area'.
The deifinition of 'sensitive area' varies between the different regulations; however, it mainly relates to
Internationally or nationally designated environmental sites, SAC, SPA, Ramsar, SSSI, Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty, etc

2. From 2.2.a: Threshold N° 1: Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:

3 Thresholds to be Unit: MW thermal capacity m³ ha km
200 500.000 10 5
reached or Value: (or threshold N° 2) (and threshold N° 2)
exceeded for an
obligatory EIA
Bulgaria: Bulgaria: Denmark: Bulgaria:
MW heat capacity tons of hazardous waste per cay Regional significance km of construction of a new road
50 10 of four or more lanes or
realignment and / or extension of
an existing road with two or less
lanes to four or more lanes, where
new road, or realigned and / or
extension existing road
≥ 10
Coratia: Croatia: France: Croatia:
Mwel t/day m2 of land consumption m (length)
100 100 40,000 2.000
Cyprus: Cyprus: Germany: Cyprus:
MW category of waste on of disposal / 5 000 m² or more km
50 recovery: Federal EAI Act: 4
Note: case by case analysis of hazardous waste disposal / Construction of a shopping
plants not included in Annex 1 recovery centre, large- scale retail outlet or
(below 50MW) based on prelim Note: disposal instalations not other large-scale trade
EIA Report included in Annex 1 establishment within the meaning
of Art. 11 para. 3 sentence 1 of
the Building Uses Ordinance
[Baunutzungsverordnung], for
which a land use plan
/development plan is prepared in
the existing external area within
the meaning of Article 35 of the
Building Code [Außenbereich
gem. Baugesetzbuch],

Schleswig-Holstein:
for the construction of the
above mentioned projects in

132
 external areas and within Built-up
Areas [Innnenbereich acc. to
Article 34 Building Code]

Czech Republic: Czech Republic: Ireland: Czech Republic:

Mwe (Megawatt electricity) tonnes (capacity) Construction of a shopping centre new construction, reconstruction &
50 to 200 1.000 - 3.000 with a gross floor space rerouting of highways /
(installations for combustion of (installations for the management exceeding 10,000m2 expressways
fuel with a thermal output of) of hazardous waste)
Denmark: Denmark: Italy: Denmark:
120 MW Heat Output 0 thresholds for obligatory EIA are 2 km in a continous length
defined only in some Regional
laws (for example in Lombardy the
threshold is 15000 mq)
France: France: Malta: France:
tons of coal m2 facility size for bulky waste 10.000 m² construction, expansion,
500 3,500 extension and adaption of
highways and expressways
inluding interchanges:
any
Germany: Germany: Slovakia: Germany:
> 200 MW (combustion heat 10 tons per day (non-hazardous spaces/lots construction of a Federal
performance, thermal firing rate) waste, not subject to special 300 motorway or other Federal
monitoring within the meaning of parking lots with mor then 300 lots highway if the latter is an express
the Product Recycling and Waste road within the meaning of the
Management Act European Agreement of 15
(Kreislaufwirtschafts- und November 1975 on Main
Abfallgesetz) with the exception of International Traffic Arteries
landfill sites for inert waste) OR (AGR)
25 000 t or more non-hazardous
waste (total capacity), not subject
to special monitoring within the
meaning of the Product Recycling
and Waste Management Act
(Kreislaufwirtschafts- und
Abfallgesetz) with the exception of
landfill sites for inert waste

133
Hungary: Hungary: Slovenia: Hungary:
MW tonnes per day m2 all
20 200 30,000 express roads (motorways,
Thermal Power Plants nonhazardous waste - disposal highways)
Performance - Electricity
Production
Ireland: Ireland: Slovenia: Ireland:
Heat output of 300 megawatts or Installations for the disposal of passanger vehicles / ha / Note: Roads and EIA are dealt
more waste with an annual intake commercial vehicles mass tons: with under the Roads Act 1993
greater 1,000 / 5 / 7.5 (as amended) and not the
than 25,000 tonnes planning acts. (a) motorway (b)
8kms or more of 4-lane road in a
rural area and 500m in an urban
area (c) new bridge/tunnel 100m
or more in length
Italy: Italy: Lithuania:
300 MW < 100.000 m³ km
>10
Lithuania: Lithuania: Malta:
MW ton / day number of lanes on highway
300 >100 4
Malta: Malta: Netherlands:
50 MW (if this value is exceeded, m3 municipal waste disposal installation (new landfill for non-inert km of new and/or existing non-
proposal would qualify for an waste and hazardous waste): highway roads with in the new
obligatory EIA - Annex I of the EIA 100,000 situation at least 4 lanes which will
directive) be altered or expanded:
10
Netherlands: Poland: Poland:
MWe (thermal) tonnes per day (intake capacity or waste) motorways and expressroads
300 10 t
Poland: Slovakia: Romania:
heat input no limit lanes
300 MW hazardous waste Landfills 4
highways and express roads
Romania: Slovenia: Slovakia:
MW Hazardous waste landfills no limit
300 all Highways and expressways,
including objects
Slovakia: United Kingdom: Slovenia:
MW N/A highways and expressways
300 Landfill of Hazardous Waste all
Thermal power stations and other
combustion equipment with a heat
output

134
 Slovenia: United Kingdom:
MW N/A
300 Construction of new motorways or
expressways
United Kingdom:
MW (heat output)
300
Threshold N° 2: France: Austria: Austria: Austria:
Unit: m3/h flow rate of flammable m3 (demolition waste or intert Vehicles parking space DTV (average daily traffic
liquids material) 1,000 frequency)
Value: 1,000,000 (or threshold N° 1) 15,000
(and threshold N° 1)
Hungary: Bulgaria: Cyprus:
MW tons of totel capacity lanes
300 25,000 5
Heat output other than (excluding landfills of inert waste)
incineration plant
Netherlands: Czech Republic: Czech Republic:
tons of coal per day tonnes (capacity) km
500 over 30.000 10
(installations for the management of other waste) new construction, reconstruction &
rerouting of highways with four /
more lanes
Slovenia: France: Denmark:
(located in an air quality m3 of electric or electronic devices areas of special potential/actual
management area): interests in nature protection and
MW ecological corridors
50
Hungary: France:
Total capacity construction, extension of a 4- or
500.000 tonnes more lane road
nonhazardous waste
Malta: Germany:
>300 dwellings within 200m from the boundaries of the site, m3: 5 or more km construction of a
25,000 new Federal Highway having four
or more lanes, if such new
highway has a continuous length
of 5 km or more
Poland: Hungary:
tonnes (total capacity) km
25.000 10
new construction 4 or more lane
roads (not under express roads)

135
 Slovakia: Malta:
m³ km of length of a road with
250,000 min 7.5m carriageway,
non-hazardous waste landfills with a capacity over 250,000 m³ >300 dwellings within 100m from
the centre line,
passage of 100m protected site:
2
Slovenia: Poland:
Municipal landfills roads other than motorways and
all express roads with four or more
lanes and total continous length of
not less than 10 km
Romania:
km
10
Slovakia:
km
10
I. & II. class roads and
reconstruction or expansion of
exisiting I. and II. Class roads,
including objects
Slovenia:
roads (4 lanes or more) or lanes
on a new classification of existing
roads and / or expansion of
existing road:
km
10
United Kingdom:
Lanes of traffic
Construction of a new road of 4 or
more lanes
Threshold N° 3: France: France: Austria:
Unit: kW m2 of space for processing vehicle waste Separate thresholds for federal
200 50 roads (not displayed)
Value:
Netherlands: Hungary: Czech Republic:
tons of non-hazardous waste per all sizes km
day Hazardous waste landfills longer than 1
100 new consturktion, reconstruction &
rerouting of highways with four /
more lanes
Malta: France:
m of distance to aquifer protection zone boundary: km of road length

136
200 3

Germany:
10 or more km construction of a
Federal Highway having four or
more lanes by rerouting and/or
developing an existing Federal
Highway, if such altered Federal
highway section has a continuous
length of 10 km or more

Hungary:
km
10
expansion of existing roads to 4 or
more lanes
Malta:
re-alignment and/or widening of
an existing road of 2 lanes or less
to provide 4 or more lanes:
km of length of a road with
min 7.5m carriageway,
>300 dwellings within 100m from
the centre line,
passage of 100m protected site:
2
Slovenia:
Main roads order I & II &
policy/regional road order I, II, III &
local raods (except in
relocation/extansions where axis
of roads are not moved by more
than 200 m and the road is not
built new lane):
km
10
United Kingdom:
Lanes of traffic
realignment and/or widening of an
existing road of two lanes or less
so as to provide four or more
lanes, where such new road, or
realigned and/or widened section
of road would be 10 kilometres or
more in a continuous length.

137
Threshold N° 4: France: France: France:
Unit: MW m3 of non hazardous meatl ha of land consumption of
20 1,000 roundabout
Value: 0.3
Malta: Germany - Schleswig
m of distance to water abstraction points Holstein:
500 10 km construction of a road
of Land Schleswig-Holstein, of an
administrative district or a
municipality having four or more
lanes by rerouting and/or
developing an existing, if such an
altered road section has a
continuous length of 10 km or
more

Germany - Schleswig
Holstein:
10 or more km construction of
a new road of Land Schleswig-
Holstein, of an administrative
district or a municipality having
four or more lanes, if such road
has a continuous length of 10 km
or more

Germany - Schleswig
Holstein:
construction of express roads acc.
to Number 7 (b) Annex I of
Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3
March 1997 amending Directive
85/337/EEC on the assessment of
the effects of certain public and
private projects on the
environment

138
Malta:
The following thresholds are
applicable to Category I (Annex I)
projects: (1) Construction of a
four-land highway; (2)
Construction of a road with a
carriageway width of 7.5m or
more and not being a road for
which the design is approved in a
development plan, if the road is (i)
2 km or more in length; or (ii)
more than 300 dwellings or an
area designated for more than
300 dwellings are within 100m of
the centre line of the proposed
road; or, (iii) where the road
passes through or within 100m of
a protected site; and (3)
Realignment and/or widening of
an existing road of two lanes or
less so as to provide four or more
lanes where such new road, or
realigned and/or widened section
of road would be: (i) 2km or more
in length; (ii) more than 300
dwellings or an area designated
for more than 300 dwellings are
within 100m of the centre line of
the proposed road; or (iii) where
the road passes through or within
100m of a protected site.
Malta:
km of tunnel length,
passage beneath or within 100m
protected area or
passage through or within 100 m
of aquifer protection zone:
1
Slovenia:
Main roads order I & II &
policy/regional road order I, II, III &
local roads in protected area
(nature, cultural heritage & water):
km
5

139
2. From 2.2.b: Threshold N° 1: Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
4 Screening Unit: MW m3 (mass waste or residual ha DTV (average daily traffic
100 materials) 5 fequency)
thresholds that Value: In areas subject to air pollution 250,000 (or threshold N° 2) 2,000
indicate a screening In special protection areas In pecial protection areas or water
protection and conservation areas
procedure
Coratia: Czech Republic: Croatia: Cyprus:
inst. for electricity, steam and hot tonnes p.a m² of gross construction area lanes
water (fossil and solid fuels, 1.000 - 3.000 50.000 4
renewable energy souces apart fact finding activity; installations
from water and wind) for managing other wastes
Mwel
1
Czech Republic: Germany: Cyprus: Czech Republic:
Mwe (Megawatt electricity) less than 10 tons per day non- m2 meters
50 to 200 hazardous waste, not subject to 2,500 500
special monitoring within the fact finding activity; new
meaning of the Product Recycling constructionor reconstruction of
and Waste Management Act highways with a width greater
(Kreislaufwirtschafts- und than 10m (not included in
Abfallgesetz) with the exception of category I) or local roads with four
landfill sites for inert waste site and more lanes
related screening OR
less than 25 000 tons total
capacity non-hazardous waste,
not subject to special monitoring
within the meaning of the Product
Recycling and Waste
Management Act
(Kreislaufwirtschafts- und
Abfallgesetz) with the exception of
landfill sites for inert waste site
related screening
Denmark: Hungary: Czech Republic: France:
less than120 MW Heat Output tonnes per day m² (total area of enclosed space) every road
10 over 3.000
nonhazardous waste (not under projects requiring fact-finding
annex I) procedure
Germany: Italy: France: Germany:
50-200 MW (combustion heat >= 100.000 m³ m2 of land consumption without threshold: Construction of
performance, thermal firing rate) 10,000 any other Federal Highway than
mentioned under 2.4.2.3

140
Hungary: Malta: Germany: Hungary:
MW (output performance) m3 1 200 m² to less than 5 000 all
50 15,000 general screening national & public roads (non
Thermal energy production annex I)
facilities (steam and hot water Federal EAI Act:
production, if it is not included in Construction of a shopping
Annex No. 1) centre, large- scale retail outlet or
other large-scale trade
establishment within the meaning
of Art. 11 para. 3 sentence 1 of
the Building Uses Ordinance
[Baunutzungsverordnung], for
which a land use plan
/development plan is prepared in
the existing external area within
the meaning of Article 35 of the
Building Code [Außenbereich
gem. Baugesetzbuch]
and
in other areas for the same
projects, for which a development
plan is prepared, amended or
supplemented.

Schleswig-Holstein:
for the construction of the
above mentioned projects in
external areas and within Built-up
Areas [Innnenbereich acc. to
Article 34 Building Code] (without
mentioning the preparation of the
land use plan more projects are
subject to an EIA)
Italy: Netherlands: Hungary: Italy:
50 MW tons per day lots 1.500 m
50 300
No. Parking lots of shopping
facility
Lithuania: Poland: Italy: Lithuania:
MW recycling or waste disposal >150 mq in towns with population km
<300 installations other than above < 10.000 inhabitants <10
(except agricultural use)

141
 Netherlands: Slovakia: Lithuania: Malta:
MWe (thermal) and/or extra power m³ ha km of length of road with min 3.5m
and/or or new fuel mix 250,000 >0,5 carriageway,
200 and/or 20% non-hazardous waste landfills pu passage of 100m protected site:
to 250,000 m² 1
Poland: United Kingdom: Malta: Netherlands:
heat input Hectares m2 of gross floor area km of existing non-highway roads
25 MW (for fuels other than solid) The area of development > 0.5 750 with in the new situation at least 4
lanes which will be altered or
expanded:
5
Romania: Netherlands: Poland:
MW hectares hard-surfaced roads other than
<300 100 mentioned in 2.4.2.3
Slovakia: Poland: Slovakia:
MW ha (surface) km
50-300 0,5 in areas of conservation 5-10
Thermal power stations and other combustion equipment with a heat reffered to in Article 6 section 1 I. & II. Class roads and
output items 1-6, 8 and 9 of the reconstruction or expansion of
Environmental Protection Act of existing I. and II. Class roads,
16 April 2004 including objects
United Kingdom: Slovakia: United Kingdom:
Hectares m² Hectares
area of development exceeds >0.5 2.000 Aera of works exceeds 1 ha
industrial installations for the production of electricity, steam and hot floor area
water
United Kingdom:
Hectares
The area of development >0.5
Threshold N° 2: Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
Unit: MW m3 (mass waste or residual Vehicles parking space m and DTV (average daily traffic
50 materials) 500 fequency)
Value: For cumulation with other 375.000 (or threshold N°1) 500 and 2,000
spatiallyrelatedthermal power In areas subject to air pollution In alpine regions and areas
stations if 200 MW is reached subject to air pollution
together with them
Germany: Czech Republic: Czech Republic: France:
20 to less than 50 MW tonnes p.a Number of lots (total in aggregate non-substantial changes or
(combustion heat performance, 100 - 1.000 for the entire building) extensions of highways and
thermal firing rate) when using fact finding activity; management 100 expressways (including
light heating oil, methanol, of hazardous waste parking spaces interchanges):
ethanol, untreated vegetable oils any
or vegetable oil methyl esters,
untreated natural gas, liquefied
gas, gas from public gas supplies

142
or hydrogen site-related
screening

Lithuania: Hungary: Hungary: Germany - Schleswig

MW Total capacity m² Holstein:
>50 25.000 tonnes 10.000 Construction or alteration of any
nonhazardous waste (not under size of shopping facility other road of Land Schleswig-
annex I) Holstein, of an administrative
district or a municipality including
cycle tracks and pavement
belonging to it, if the measure
a) has to undergo an impact
assessment acc. to Article 6 para.
3 Habitats Directive (resp. Article
34 Federal Nature Conservation
Act), crosses a protected area or
a national park or is situated in a
protected zone I or II of a water
reserve (water protection area)
b) takes place in registered
biotopes acc. to Article 30 Federal
Nature Conservation Act or in
protected parts of landscape or if
the road in forests acc. to Article 2
para. 1 Forests Act of Land
Schleswig Holstein has a length of
500 m or more
c) may affect a historical
monument acc. to Article 1 para. 2
of the National Monuments Act,
the area of a moment or its
surrounding area or is situated in
the excavation area of an
archeological site

Netherlands: Netherlands: Italy: Hungary:

tons per day of non-hazardous 1) class B sediment or non >250 mq in towns with population km
waste hazardous waste: 250,000 m3 > 10.000 inhabitants 1
50 and/or public roads
2) dryweight of waste water
disposal sludge: 5,000 t/a
3) 100 t/d
Poland: United Kingdom: Netherlands: Lithuania:
heat input Metres inclusion of houses km

143
 10 MW (for solid fuel) the installation is to be sited within 2,000 >2
100 metres of any controlled
waters
United Kingdom: Poland: Poland:
N/A ha (surface) bridge-like structures
If the waste is to be disposed of via incineration 2 in other areas accompanying a hard-surfaced
Installations for the disposal of waste road other than mentioned in
2.4.2.3, excluding the
reconstruction of roads and
bridge-like struktures for servicing
substations and located beyond
areas of conservation reffered to
in Article 6 section 6 items 1-5, 8
and 9 od the Environmental
Protection Act of April 2004
Slovakia:
parking lots / spaces
100 - 300
Threshold N° 3: Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
Unit: MW m3 (demolition waste or inert * Cumulation: 2,5 ha or 250 DTV (average daily traffic
23 materials) vehicles parking space fequency)
Value: In areas subject to air pollution 500,000 * Cumulation in area subject to air 15,000
and cumulation with other spatially In special protection areas pollution: 1,25 ha or 125 vehicles In or at least 300 m next to
related thermal power stations if parking space settlement areas
100 MW is reached together with
them
Germany: Czech Republic: Netherlands: Germany - Schleswig
10 to less than 50 MW all m2 total floor coverage of the Holstein:
(combustion heat performance, waste disposal by depositing in entire project (including other Construction or alteration of any
thermal firing rate) when using natural or artificial geological commercial and/or industrial other road of Land Schleswig-
gaseous fuels, (especially coke structures and spaces activities): 200,000 Holstein, of an administrative
furnace gas, mine gas, steel gas, district excluding cycle tracks and
refinery gas, synthesis gas, pavement belonging to it, if the
biogas) site related screening measure
a) takes place in zone III of a
water reserve area, in a biosphere
reserve, in a landscape
conservation area or in a nature
park with a length of 1 Kilometer
or more
b) takes place in registered
areas, in which the environmental
quality standards laid down in
European Community legislation
have already been exceeded with
a length of 1 kilometer or more

144
 c) takes place in a densely
populated area acc. to the spatial
planning of Land Schleswig-
Holstein or in middle-order-
centres (medium sized cities) or
high-order-centres (large cities) on
a length of 1 kilometer or more

Netherlands: Netherlands: Hungary:

change or wxpansion of an change or expansion of an existing installation for storing hazardous all
existing installation for burning of waste in a landfill Natura 2000 sites
hazardous waste
Threshold N° 4: Germany: Austria: 62.500 m³ for cumuation in special protection area resp. 93.750
Unit: 1 to less than 50 MW (combustion m³ for cumulation in area subject to air pollution
heat performance, thermal firing
Value: rate) When using coal, coke
including petroleum coke, coal
briquettes, turf briquettes, fuel turf,
untreated wood, emulsified natural
bitumen, heating oils excluding
light heating oil site related
screening
Germany: 1 to less than 50 MW (combustion heat performance, thermal firing rate) when using solid or liquid
fuels other than listed above general screening

Germany: 100 kW to less than 1 MW (combustion heat performance, thermal firing rate) when using solid or
liquid fuels other than listed above site-related screening

Netherlands:
tons of coal per day
250
Further Ireland: Austria: Ireland: Cyprus:
All sub-threshold development. m3 (demolition waste or inert All sub-threshold development. Construction of new road of four
information or more lanes movement or
materials)
750,000 alignment or widening of existing
In areas subject to air pollution roads with two or fewer lanes to
four lanes created or more (if not
included in the Annex 1);
Construction, widening and
upgrading of roads in general, (I)
in mountainous areas where

145
 coverage of the surrounding
natural vegetation is in excess of
50% in length of continuous street
at least 1 000 m

Ireland: All sub-threshold Ireland:

development. All sub-threshold development.
Poland:
The Council of Ministers Regulation mentions waste treatment installations, industrial waste treatment,
sewage systems, installations related to waste recovery or waste treatment, and waste collection or
handling points.
2. Cumulation with Austria Lower thresholds for projects Lower tresholds for projects Lower threshold for projects Definition of specific situations
spatially related to other projects
spatially related to other projects spatially related to other projects (e.g. sum-up of current project
5 other projects is of the same category (together theof the same category: mass waste of the same category: (in sum the and adjacent sections built in the
taken into account in projects taken into consideration or residual materials: projects taken into account have past 10 years)
have to exceed the thresholds 200 • 125,000 m3 for cumulation with to reach or exceed the thresholds
the screening phase MW respectively 100 MW in areas other spatially related landfills if of 10 ha/1.000 vehicles parking
in the following way: subject to air pollution) 500,000 m³ is reached together space resp. 5 ha/500 places of
with them parking space in sensitive areas
• 62,500 m3 for cumulation with (special protection areas, areas
other spatially related landfills in subject to air pollution)
special protection areas if 250,000
m³ is reached together with them
• 93,750 m3 for cumulation with
other spatially related landfills in
areas subject to air pollution if
375,000 m³ is reached together
with them; demolition waste or
inert material:
• 250,000 m3 for cumulation with
other spatially related landfills if 1
000,000 m³ is reached together
with them
• 125,000 m3 for cumulation with
other spatially related landfills in
special protection areas if 500,000
m³ is reached together with them
• 187,500 m3 for cumulation with
other spatially related landfills in
areas subject to air pollution if
750,000 m³ is reached together
with them
Bulgaria For the purposes of assessing the For the purposes of assessing the For the purposes of assessing the For the purposes of assessing the
need for making EIA the investor need for making EIA the investor need for making EIA the investor need for making EIA the investor
has to submit information amongst has to submit information amongst has to submit information amongst has to submit information amongst

146
 others about the relation of the others about the relation of the others about the relation of the others about the relation of the
project to other existing / planned project to other existing / planned project to other existing / planned project to other existing / planned
projects projects projects projects
Croatia The selection criteria referred to in The selection criteria referred to in The selection criteria referred to in included in screening criteria: the
article 4 (3) of the EIA Directive article 4 (3) of the EIA Directive article 4 (3) of the EIA Directive cumulation with other activities,
which include the characteristics which include the characteristics which include the characteristics bearing in mind that if the
of projects having regard, in of projects having regard, in of projects having regard, in operation of the installation site or
particular, to……………. “the particular, to……………. “the particular, to……………. “the adjacent property with the same
cumulation with other projects” are cumulation with other projects” are cumulation with other projects” are or similar activities designed to
mandatory to be applied in the mandatory to be applied in the mandatory to be applied in the meet or exceed the activity with
screening procedure screening procedure screening procedure the first Appendix threshold.
Cyprus Law 140/2005, criterion in Annex Law 140/2005, criterion in Annex Law 140/2005, criterion in Annex Law 140/2005, criterion in Annex
4, 1b 4, 1b 4, 1b 4, 1b
Czech Republic included in the "fact-finding" included in the "fact-finding" included in the "fact-finding" criteria: accumulation of it's impacts with
criteria: accumulation of it's criteria: accumulation of it's the impacts of other known plans.
impacts with the impacts of other impacts with the impacts of other
known plans known plans.
Denmark By assuming a compulsory By assuming a compulsory By assuming a compulsory By assuming a compulsory
application from the developer, cf. application from the developer, cf. application from the developer, cf. application from the developer, cf.
Section 2, subsection 1 and 4, Section 2, subsection 1 and 4, Section 2, subsection 1 and 4, Section 2, subsection 1 and 4,
and by observing the compulsory and by observing the compulsory and by observing the compulsory and by observing the compulsory
criteria of the screening procedure criteria of the screening procedure criteria of the screening procedure criteria of the screening procedure
laid down in Annex III, all statutes laid down in Annex III, all statutes laid down in Annex III, all statutes laid down in Annex III, all statutes
in Ministerial Order no. 1510, in Ministerial Order no. 1510, in Ministerial Order no. 1510, in Ministerial Order no. 1510,
dated 2010-12-15, concerning dated 2010-12-15, concerning dated 2010-12-15, concerning dated 2010-12-15, concerning
EIA. EIA. EIA. EIA.
Germany Federal Law: According to Article Federal Law: According to Article Federal Law: According to Article Federal Law: According to Article
3 b par. 2 Environmental Impact 3 b par. 2 Environmental Impact 3 b par. 2 Environmental Impact 3 b par. 2 Environmental Impact
Assessment Act Assessment Act Assessment Act Assessment Act
EIA obligation due to type, scale EIA obligation due to type, scale EIA obligation due to type, scale EIA obligation due to type, scale
and capacity of project and capacity of project and capacity of project and capacity of project
The obligation to perform an The obligation to perform an The obligation to perform an The obligation to perform an
environmental impact environmental impact environmental impact environmental impact
assessment shall also exist if assessment shall also exist if assessment shall also exist if assessment shall also exist if
several projects of the same type several projects of the same type several projects of the same type several projects of the same type
which are to be executed which are to be executed which are to be executed which are to be executed
simultaneously by the same simultaneously by the same simultaneously by the same simultaneously by the same
developer or more than one developer or more than one developer or more than one developer or more than one
developer and which are closely developer and which are closely developer and which are closely developer and which are closely
related (cumulative projects) related (cumulative projects) related (cumulative projects) related (cumulative projects)
together reach or exceed the together reach or exceed the together reach or exceed the together reach or exceed the
relevant size or capacity figures. relevant size or capacity figures. relevant size or capacity figures. relevant size or capacity figures.
Such projects shall be deemed to Such projects shall be deemed to Such projects shall be deemed to Such projects shall be deemed to
be closely related if be closely related if be closely related if be closely related if
1. They are situated as technical 1. They are situated as technical 1. They are situated as technical 1. They are situated as technical
or other installations on the same or other installations on the same or other installations on the same or other installations on the same
operating or construction site and operating or construction site and operating or construction site and operating or construction site and
are connected with common are connected with common are connected with common are connected with common

147
 operating or constructional operating or constructional operating or constructional operating or constructional
facilities or facilities or facilities or facilities or
2. As other measures encroaching 2. As other measures encroaching 2. As other measures encroaching 2. As other measures encroaching
on nature and landscape there is on nature and landscape there is on nature and landscape there is on nature and landscape there is
a close spatial connection a close spatial connection a close spatial connection a close spatial connection
between them, between them, between them, between them,
and if they serve a comparable and if they serve a comparable and if they serve a comparable and if they serve a comparable
purpose. The sentences 1 and 2 purpose. The sentences 1 and 2 purpose. The sentences 1 and 2 purpose. The sentences 1 and 2
shall apply only to projects which, shall apply only to projects which, shall apply only to projects which, shall apply only to projects which,
taken on their own, reach or taken on their own, reach or taken on their own, reach or taken on their own, reach or
exceed the figures for the site- exceed the figures for the site- exceed the figures for the site- exceed the figures for the site-
related screening or, if no such related screening or, if no such related screening or, if no such related screening or, if no such
examination is required, the examination is required, the examination is required, the examination is required, the
figures figures figures figures

Hungary included in screening criteria: the included in screening criteria: the included in screening criteria: the included in the "fact-finding"
cumulation with other activities, cumulation with other activities, cumulation with other activities, criteria: accumulation of it's
bearing in mind that if the bearing in mind that if the bearing in mind that if the impacts with the impacts of other
operation of the installation site or operation of the installation site or operation of the installation site or known plans.
adjacent property with the same adjacent property with the same adjacent property with the same
or similar activities designed to or similar activities designed to or similar activities designed to
meet or exceed the activity with meet or exceed the activity with meet or exceed the activity with
the first Appendix threshold. the first Appendix threshold. the first Appendix threshold.
Ireland In accordance with the criteria for In accordance with the criteria for In accordance with the criteria for In accordance with the criteria for
determining whether or not the determining whether or not the determining whether or not the determining whether or not the
development is likely to have development is likely to have development is likely to have development is likely to have
significant effects on the significant effects on the significant effects on the significant effects on the
environment environment environment environment
Italy the cumulation with other projects the cumulation with other projects the cumulation with other projects the cumulation with other projects
is taken into account into the is taken into account into the is taken into account into the is taken into account into the
documents which describe the documents which describe the documents which describe the documents which describe the
project and its environmental project and its environmental project and its environmental project and its environmental
impacts (environmental study) impacts (environmental study) impacts (environmental study) impacts (environmental study)
Lithuania Among the environmental aspects Among the environmental aspects Among the environmental aspects Among the environmental aspects
of the project there is a of the project there is a of the project there is a of the project there is a
requirement to provide information requirement to provide information requirement to provide information requirement to provide information
on cumulative effects with other on cumulative effects with other on cumulative effects with other on cumulative effects with other
projects projects projects projects
Malta Cumulation with other projects is Cumulation with other projects is Cumulation with other projects is Cumulation with other projects is
taken into consideration as one of taken into consideration as one of taken into consideration as one of taken into consideration as one of
the criteria assessed in the the criteria assessed in the the criteria assessed in the the criteria assessed in the
screening matrix as per European screening matrix as per European screening matrix as per European screening matrix as per European
Commission Guidance on Commission Guidance on Commission Guidance on Commission Guidance on
Screening (2001). ; Screening (2001). ; Screening (2001). ; Screening (2001). ;
Legal Notice 114/2007, criterion Legal Notice 114/2007, criterion Legal Notice 114/2007, criterion Legal Notice 114/2007, criterion

148
 included in Annex I B included in Annex I B included in Annex I B included in Annex I B

Netherlands tailor-made by the competent tailor-made by the competent tailor-made by the competent tailor-made by the competent
authority, if advice from NCEA authority, if advice from NCEA authority, if advice from NCEA authority, if advice from NCEA
tailor-made by our experts tailor-made by our experts tailor-made by our experts tailor-made by our experts
Poland Article 63 of the EIA Law requires Article 63 of the EIA Law requires Article 63 of the EIA Law requires Article 63 of the EIA Law requires
to consider the project's to consider the project's to consider the project's to consider the project's
cumulation with other projects, but cumulation with other projects, but cumulation with other projects, but cumulation with other projects, but
additional thresholds are not set. additional thresholds are not set. additional thresholds are not set. additional thresholds are not set.
There is a formal requirement that There is a formal requirement that There is a formal requirement that There is a formal requirement that
installations linked technologically installations linked technologically installations linked technologically installations linked technologically
be assessed together. be assessed together. be assessed together. be assessed together.
Romania GD445/2009, criterion included in GD445/2009, criterion included in GD445/2209, criterion included in GD445/2209, criterion included in
Annex III, p. 1b Annex III, p. 1b Annex III, p. 1b Annex III, p. 1b
During EIA the projects in the For landfill, a certain distance to during the risk assessment
neighbourhood are also taken into residential areas has to be performed by an authorized
consideration; during the EIA provided, special conditions for person
studies synergic effects are pollution evoidance are required
evaluated and also a risk (according to the technical legal
assessment is performed and a requirements - e.g. GD 349/2005)
safety report has to be presented
Slovakia included in screening criteria: links included in screening criteria: links included in screening criteria: links included in screening criteria: links
with other activities (existing or with other activities (existing or with other activities (existing or with other activities (existing or
planned) planned) planned) planned)
Slovenia No clear provision in legislation No specific guidance No specific guidance No specific guidance

Spain Overcoming thresholds or Overcoming thresholds or Overcoming thresholds or Overcoming thresholds or

condition directly or indirectly condition directly or indirectly condition directly or indirectly condition directly or indirectly
protected areas protected areas protected areas protected areas
United Kingdom The Regulations set out issues to The Regulations set out issues to The Regulations set out issues to The Regulations set out issues to
be taken into consideration when be taken into consideration when be taken into consideration when be taken into consideration when
screening in Scehdule 3, which screening in Scehdule 3, which screening in Scehdule 3, which screening in Scehdule 3, which
includes cumulative effects. includes cumulative effects. includes cumulative effects. includes cumulative effects.
However, the responsibility to do However, the responsibility to do However, the responsibility to do However, the responsibility to do
this is down to the specific this is down to the specific this is down to the specific this is down to the specific
consenting authority, of which consenting authority, of which consenting authority, of which consenting authority, of which
there are >350 across the UK. there are >350 across the UK. there are >350 across the UK. there are >350 across the UK.

IEMA's 2011 research into the IEMA's 2011 research into the IEMA's 2011 research into the IEMA's 2011 research into the
state of EIA practice in the UK state of EIA practice in the UK state of EIA practice in the UK state of EIA practice in the UK
highlighted evidence that highlighted evidence that highlighted evidence that highlighted evidence that
indicated that the quality of indicated that the quality of indicated that the quality of indicated that the quality of
screening consideration varied screening consideration varied screening consideration varied screening consideration varied
considerably across these considerably across these considerably across these considerably across these
different local authorities. see: different local authorities. see: different local authorities. see: different local authorities. see:
Chapter 4 of Chapter 4 of Chapter 4 of Chapter 4 of
www.iema.net/eiareport www.iema.net/eiareport www.iema.net/eiareport www.iema.net/eiareport

149
2. Specific provisions No Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
6 against salami
slicing
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Ireland
Ireland Ireland Ireland Lithuania
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Romania
Slovenia Slovenia Romania Slovenia
United Kingdom United Kingdom Slovenia United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Yes: Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
specification For modifications the activities For modifications the activities For modifications the activities Definition of specific situations
during the last 5 years have to be during the last 5 years have to be during the last 5 years have to be (e.g. sum-up of current project
taken into account;clear taken into account; clear taken into account; clear and adjacent sections built in the
jurisdiction with regard to project jurisdiction with regard to project jurisdiction with regard to project past 10 years)
splitting; wide definition of project splitting; wide definition of project splitting; wide definition of project
(including spatially related (including spatially related (including spatially related
associated/ancilliary works) associated/ancillary works) associated/ancillary works)
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
Please refer to the answer given Please refer to the answer given Please refer to the answer given Please refer to the answer given
above (2.1.2.5.) above (2.2.2.5.) above (2.3.2.5.) above (2.4.2.5.)
Germany: Germany: Germany: Germany:
See above 2.1.2.5 and concerning See above 2.1.2.5 and concerning See above 2.1.2.5 and concerning See 2.1.2.5
extension: extension: extension: Article 3 b par. 3 sentence 5 EIA
Article 3 b par 3 EIA Act: If Article 3 b par 3 EIA Act: If Article 3 b par 3 EIA Act: If Act:
alteration or extension of a project alteration or extension of a project alteration or extension of a project Sentence 1 shall apply to the
not previously subject to EIA not previously subject to EIA not previously subject to EIA projects listed in Annex 1 Nos.
requirements results in the requirements results in the requirements results in the 14.1 and 14.5 (road construction
relevant size or capacity figure relevant size or capacity figure relevant size or capacity figure projects) provided that in addition
being reached or exceeded for the being reached or exceeded for the being reached or exceeded for the to a close spatial there is also a
first time, an EIA shall be carried first time, an EIA shall be carried first time, an EIA shall be carried close relationship in time.
out for the alteration or extension out for the alteration or extension out for the alteration or extension
and shall take account of the and shall take account of the and shall take account of the
environmental impacts of the environmental impacts of the environmental impacts of the
existing project not previously existing project not previously existing project not previously
subject to EIA requirements. subject to EIA requirements. subject to EIA requirements.
Existing projects shall also include Existing projects shall also include Existing projects shall also include
cumulative projects within the cumulative projects within the cumulative projects within the
meaning of para. 2, sentence 1. meaning of para. 2, sentence 1. meaning of para. 2, sentence 1.

150
 Hungary: Hungary: Hungary: Hungary:
only in basic provisions in only in basic provisions in only in basic provisions in only in basic provisions in
screening criteria as described screening criteria as described screening criteria as described screening criteria as described
above above above above
Italy: Italy: Italy: Italy:
the screening procedure is applied the screening procedure is applied the screening procedure is applied the screening procedure is applied
also on changes on existing also on changes on existing also on changes on existing also on changes on existing
projects projects projects projects
Poland: Poland: Poland: Poland:
Article 3 section 1 item 13 Act Article 3 section 1 item 13 Act Article 3 section 1 item 13 Act Article 3 section 1 item 13 Act
OOS: projects which are OOS: projects which are OOS: projects which are OOS: projects which are
connected technologically shall be connected technologically shall be connected technologically shall be connected technologically shall be
qualified as one project, also qualified as one project, also qualified as one project, also qualified as one project, also
where they are implemented by where they are implemented by where they are implemented by where they are implemented by
different entities; Art. 72 section 5 different entities; Art. 72 section 5 different entities; Art. 72 section 5 different entities; Art. 72 section 5
Act OOS: one decision on the Act OOS: one decision on the Act OOS: one decision on the Act OOS: one decision on the
environmental conditions shall be environmental conditions shall be environmental conditions shall be environmental conditions shall be
issued for a given project issued for a given project issued for a given project issued for a given project
Artickle 3 section 2 item 3 Artickle 3 section 2 item 3 Artickle 3 section 2 item 3
Regulation RM (summation of the Regulation RM (summation of the Regulation RM (summation of the
project parameters) project parameters) project parameters)
Romania: Romania: Romania: Romania:
MO 135/2010, Art. 5(3) MO 135/2010, Art. 5(3) MO 135/2010, Art. 5(3) MO 135/2010, Art. 5(3)
Slovakia: Slovakia: Slovakia: Slovakia:
not clarified not clarified not clarified not clarified
Spain: Spain: Spain: Spain:
Inspection, extension or Inspection, extension or Inspection, extension or Inspection, extension or
modification of the project modification of the project modification of the project modification of the project
2. Information Traffic Austria Austria Austria Austria
7 submitted by the
developer to the
competent authority
during screening
stage
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Germany Germany Germany Ireland
Ireland Ireland Ireland Italy

151
 Italy Italy Italy Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Poland
Romania Romania Poland Romania
Spain Romania Spain
Spain
Noise Austria Austria Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Germany Germany Germany Ireland
Ireland Ireland Ireland Italy
Italy Italy Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Poland
Poland Poland Poland Romania
Romania Romania Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Spain
Spain Spain Spain
Air quality Austria Austria Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Germany Germany Germany Hungary
Hungary Hungary Hungary Ireland
Ireland Ireland Ireland Italy
Italy Italy Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands

152
 Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Poland
Romania Romania Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia
Spain Spain Spain Spain
Vibrations Austria Austria Austria Bulgaria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Cyprus
Croatia Croatia Croatia Denmark
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Germany
Denmark Denmark Denmark Ireland
Germany Germany Germany Italy
Italy Ireland Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Italy Lithuania Malta
Malta Lithuania Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Malta Netherlands Poland
Poland Netherlands Poland Romania
Romania Romania Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Spain
Spain Spain Spain
Climate Austria Austria Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Denmark
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Germany
Denmark Denmark Denmark Ireland
Germany Germany Germany Lithuania
Ireland Ireland Italy Malta
Italy Italy Lithuania Netherlands
Lithuania Lithuania Malta Poland
Malta Malta Netherlands Romania
Netherlands Netherlands Romania Spain
Romania Romania Spain
Spain Spain
Shading Denmark Denmark Austria Denmark
Denmark Poland

153
 Ireland Spain
Romania
Waste Austria Austria Austria Bulgaria
management
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Cyprus
Croatia Croatia Croatia Czech Republic
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Denmark
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Germany
Denmark Denmark Denmark Ireland
Germany Germany Germany Italy
Ireland Ireland Ireland Lithuania
Italy Italy Italy Malta
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Netherlands
Malta Malta Malta Poland
Poland Netherlands Poland Romania
Romania Poland Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Romania Slovakia Spain
Spain Slovakia Spain
Spain
Regional Bulgaria Austria Austria Austria
development
planning
Croatia Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Cyprus Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Denmark Cyprus Cyprus Denmark
Ireland Denmark Denmark Germany
Italy Ireland Germany Ireland
Lithuania Italy Ireland Italy
Malta Lithuania Italy Lithuania
Netherlands Malta Lithuania Malta
Romania Netherlands Malta Netherlands
Spain Romania Netherlands Poland
Spain Romania Romania

154
 Spain Spain
Nature protection Austria Austria Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Germany Germany Germany Hungary
Hungary Hungary Hungary Ireland
Ireland Ireland Ireland Italy
Italy Italy Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Poland
Poland Poland Poland Romania
Romania Romania Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Spain
Spain Spain Spain
Water Austria Austria Austria Austria
management
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Germany Germany Germany Hungary
Hungary Hungary Hungary Ireland
Ireland Ireland Ireland Italy
Italy Italy Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Poland
Poland Poland Poland Romania

155
 Romania Romania Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Spain
Spain Spain Spain
Geotechnical Austria Austria Austria Cyprus
engineering
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Denmark
Croatia Croatia Croatia Ireland
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Italy
Denmark Denmark Denmark Lithuania
Germany Germany Ireland Malta
Ireland Ireland Italy Netherlands
Italy Italy Lithuania Poland
Lithuania Lithuania Malta Romania
Malta Malta Romania Spain
Romania Netherlands
Romania
Spain
Hydrogeology Austria Austria Austria Bulgaria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Cyprus
Croatia Croatia Croatia Denmark
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Germany
Denmark Denmark Denmark Ireland
Germany Germany Germany Italy
Ireland Ireland Ireland Lithuania
Italy Italy Italy Malta
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Netherlands
Malta Malta Malta Poland
Netherlands Netherlands Romania Romania
Romania Romania Spain
Spain Spain
Landscape Austria Austria Austria Austria
engineering
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria

156
 Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Hungary Germany Germany Hungary
Ireland Hungary Hungary Ireland
Italy Ireland Ireland Italy
Lithuania Italy Italy Lithuania
Malta Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Netherlands Malta Malta Netherlands
Romania Netherlands Netherlands Poland
Spain Romania Romania Romania
Spain Spain
Cultural heritage Austria Austria Austria Bulgaria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Cyprus
Croatia Croatia Croatia Denmark
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Germany
Denmark Denmark Denmark Hungary
Germany Germany Germany Ireland
Hungary Hungary Hungary Italy
Ireland Ireland Ireland Lithuania
Italy Italy Italy Malta
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Netherlands
Malta Malta Malta Poland
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Romania
Romania Romania Romania Spain
Spain Spain Spain
Human health Austria Austria Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Cyprus Cyprus Denmark
Denmark Denmark Denmark Germany
Germany Germany Hungary Hungary

157
 Hungary Hungary Italy Ireland
Ireland Ireland Lithuania Italy
Italy Italy Malta Lithuania
Lithuania Lithuania Netherlands Malta
Malta Malta Romania Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Slovakia Poland
Romania Romania Spain Romania
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia
Spain Spain Spain
Other: Bulgaria material assets material assets material assets material assets

Other: Denmark Important landscapes from a Important landscapes from a Important landscapes from a Important landscapes from a
historical, cultural, archaeological, historical, cultural, archaeological, historical, cultural, archaeological, historical, cultural, archaeological,
aesthethic or geological viewpoint. aesthethic or geological viewpoint. aesthethic or geological viewpoint. aesthethic or geological viewpoint.
The Wadden Sea Area. The Wadden Sea Area. The Wadden Sea Area. The Wadden Sea Area.
Other: Germany Is storage of hazardous Storage of hazardous substances necessary?
substances necessary for the Are other installations e.g. energy supply, water supply, waste treatment devices etc. necessary for the
project? project?
Are other installations e.g. energy Soil sealing or earth wall of 1 ha,
supply, water supply, waste 2 ha soil consolidation
treatment devices etc. necessary Further information about the site ….
for the project?
Soil sealing or earth wall of 1 ha,
2 ha soil consolidation
Further information about the site
….
Other: Ireland Archeology, architectural heritage
Archeology and Architectural Archeology and Architectural Archeology and Architectural
heritage heritage heritage
Other: Lithuania radiation, biodiversity, Natura radiation, biodiversity, Natura radiation, biodiversity, Natura radiation, biodiversity, Natura
2000, socio-economic, many other 2000, socio-economic, many other 2000, socio-economic, many other 2000, socio-economic, many other

158
Other: Malta Other (please specify): Prior to Other (please specify): Prior to Other (please specify): Prior to Other (please specify): Prior to
detailed screening, the developer detailed screening, the developer detailed screening, the developer detailed screening, the developer
submits a Project Description submits a Project Description submits a Project Description submits a Project Description
Statement which contains the Statement which contains the Statement which contains the Statement which contains the
following information: (a) details of following information: (a) details of following information: (a) details of following information: (a) details of
the person wishing to carry out the the person wishing to carry out the the person wishing to carry out the the person wishing to carry out the
development, (b) a brief development, (b) a brief development, (b) a brief development, (b) a brief
description of the project and its description of the project and its description of the project and its description of the project and its
general objectives, (c) an general objectives, (c) an general objectives, (c) an general objectives, (c) an
indication of the proposed timing indication of the proposed timing indication of the proposed timing indication of the proposed timing
of the project and why this timing of the project and why this timing of the project and why this timing of the project and why this timing
was preferred, (d) the location of was preferred, (d) the location of was preferred, (d) the location of was preferred, (d) the location of
the proposed development with the proposed development with the proposed development with the proposed development with
site boundaries clearly shown on site boundaries clearly shown on site boundaries clearly shown on site boundaries clearly shown on
a map, (e) a concise but a map, (e) a concise but a map, (e) a concise but a map, (e) a concise but
reasonably comprehensive reasonably comprehensive reasonably comprehensive reasonably comprehensive
indication of the alternative uses, indication of the alternative uses, indication of the alternative uses, indication of the alternative uses,
alternative technologies and alternative technologies and alternative technologies and alternative technologies and
suitable alternative locations and suitable alternative locations and suitable alternative locations and suitable alternative locations and
sites for the proposed sites for the proposed sites for the proposed sites for the proposed
development and alternative development and alternative development and alternative development and alternative
arrangement of land uses, on the arrangement of land uses, on the arrangement of land uses, on the arrangement of land uses, on the
proposed site, (f) a description of proposed site, (f) a description of proposed site, (f) a description of proposed site, (f) a description of
the physical characteristics the physical characteristics the physical characteristics the physical characteristics
including size, scale, design and including size, scale, design and including size, scale, design and including size, scale, design and
phasing of the development using phasing of the development using phasing of the development using phasing of the development using
models, photographs, diagrams, models, photographs, diagrams, models, photographs, diagrams, models, photographs, diagrams,
plans and maps where plans and maps where plans and maps where plans and maps where
appropriate, (g) a description of appropriate, (g) a description of appropriate, (g) a description of appropriate, (g) a description of
present land uses and present land uses and present land uses and present land uses and
environmental characteristics of environmental characteristics of environmental characteristics of environmental characteristics of
the site, the site, the site, the site,
Other: Malta (h) a brief description of (h) a brief description of (h) a brief description of (h) a brief description of
surrounding land uses, their surrounding land uses, their surrounding land uses, their surrounding land uses, their
nature, their extent and their nature, their extent and their nature, their extent and their nature, their extent and their
environmental characteristics, (i) a environmental characteristics, (i) a environmental characteristics, (i) a environmental characteristics, (i) a
description of the services, water, description of the services, water, description of the services, water, description of the services, water,
foul water sewers, surface water foul water sewers, surface water foul water sewers, surface water foul water sewers, surface water
drainage, including storm water drainage, including storm water drainage, including storm water drainage, including storm water
drainage, and energy sources drainage, and energy sources drainage, and energy sources drainage, and energy sources
available on site, (j) estimates of available on site, (j) estimates of available on site, (j) estimates of available on site, (j) estimates of
the number of persons to be the number of persons to be the number of persons to be the number of persons to be
employed with estimates for each employed with estimates for each employed with estimates for each employed with estimates for each
phase of the development, (k) the phase of the development, (k) the phase of the development, (k) the phase of the development, (k) the
nature and quantities of raw nature and quantities of raw nature and quantities of raw nature and quantities of raw
materials and energy to be used, materials and energy to be used, materials and energy to be used, materials and energy to be used,
and wastes generated during and wastes generated during and wastes generated during and wastes generated during
construction and operation, the construction and operation, the construction and operation, the construction and operation, the
proposed method of storage or proposed method of storage or proposed method of storage or proposed method of storage or

159
 handling of materials and wastes, handling of materials and wastes, handling of materials and wastes, handling of materials and wastes,
and machinery needed during and machinery needed during and machinery needed during and machinery needed during
both the construction and the both the construction and the both the construction and the both the construction and the
operational phases, (l) access operational phases, (l) access operational phases, (l) access operational phases, (l) access
arrangements and general parking arrangements and general parking arrangements and general parking arrangements and general parking
requirements on and off the site, requirements on and off the site, requirements on and off the site, requirements on and off the site,
during both construction and during both construction and during both construction and during both construction and
operation, (m) list of the major operation, (m) list of the major operation, (m) list of the major operation, (m) list of the major
environmental impacts likely to be environmental impacts likely to be environmental impacts likely to be environmental impacts likely to be
generated by the project, including generated by the project, including generated by the project, including generated by the project, including
reference to cumulative impacts, reference to cumulative impacts, reference to cumulative impacts, reference to cumulative impacts,
proposals for mitigating the proposals for mitigating the proposals for mitigating the proposals for mitigating the
negative effects of the negative effects of the negative effects of the negative effects of the
development. development. development. development.

Other: Poland the type, scale and localisation of the type, scale and localisation of the type, scale and localisation of the project, the type fo technology,
the project, the type fo technology, the project, the type fo technology, the possible options of the project, the possible transoundary impact
the possible options of the project, the possible options of the project, on the environment, the measures to protect the environment
the possible transoundary impact the possible transoundary impact The deveoloper submits the "Project Information Card", reporting the
on the environment, the measures on the environment, the measures project main data. The required formal content in Polish lawfollows the
to protect the environment to protect the environment requirements stated in the Directive
The deveoloper submits the The deveoloper submits the
"Project Information Card", "Project Information Card",
reporting the project main data. reporting the project main data.
The required formal content in The required formal content in
Polish lawfollows the Polish lawfollows the
requirements stated in the requirements stated in the
Directive Directive
Other: Slovakia environment, radiation, heat, environment, radiation, heat, environment, radiation, heat, environment, radiation, heat,
odors odors odors odors
Other: Slovenia Project description Project description Project description Project description

160
 Where a developer wishes to request a Where a developer wishes to request a Where a developer wishes to request a Where a developer wishes to request a
Other: United screening opinion prior to submitting screening opinion prior to submitting screening opinion prior to submitting screening opinion prior to submitting
Kingdom their application they are required to their application they are required to their application they are required to their application they are required to
submit various pieces of information as submit various pieces of information as submit various pieces of information as submit various pieces of information as
below: below: below: below:
5.—(1) A person who is minded to 5.—(1) A person who is minded to 5.—(1) A person who is minded to 5.—(1) A person who is minded to
carry out development may request the carry out development may request the carry out development may request the carry out development may request the
relevant planning authority to adopt a relevant planning authority to adopt a relevant planning authority to adopt a relevant planning authority to adopt a
screening opinion. screening opinion. screening opinion. screening opinion.
(2) A request for a screening opinion in (2) A request for a screening opinion in (2) A request for a screening opinion in (2) A request for a screening opinion in
relation to an application for planning relation to an application for planning relation to an application for planning relation to an application for planning
permission shall be accompanied by— permission shall be accompanied by— permission shall be accompanied by— permission shall be accompanied by—
(a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; . (a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; . (a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; . (a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; .
(b)a brief description of the nature and (b)a brief description of the nature and (b)a brief description of the nature and (b)a brief description of the nature and
purpose of the development and of its purpose of the development and of its purpose of the development and of its purpose of the development and of its
possible effects on the environment; possible effects on the environment; possible effects on the environment; possible effects on the environment;
and . and . and . and .
(c)such other information or (c)such other information or (c)such other information or (c)such other information or
representations as the person making representations as the person making representations as the person making representations as the person making
the request may wish to provide or the request may wish to provide or the request may wish to provide or the request may wish to provide or
make. . make. . make. . make. .
(3) A request for a screening opinion in (3) A request for a screening opinion in (3) A request for a screening opinion in (3) A request for a screening opinion in
relation to a subsequent application relation to a subsequent application relation to a subsequent application relation to a subsequent application
shall be accompanied by— shall be accompanied by— shall be accompanied by— shall be accompanied by—
(a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; . (a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; . (a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; . (a)a plan sufficient to identify the land; .
(b)sufficient information to enable the (b)sufficient information to enable the (b)sufficient information to enable the (b)sufficient information to enable the
relevant planning authority to identify relevant planning authority to identify relevant planning authority to identify relevant planning authority to identify
any planning permission granted for any planning permission granted for any planning permission granted for any planning permission granted for
the development in respect of which a the development in respect of which a the development in respect of which a the development in respect of which a
subsequent application has been subsequent application has been subsequent application has been subsequent application has been
made; made; made; made;
2. Level of detail General level Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
8 required in the (rough
documents estimations for
submitted for the all topics)
screening phase
Denmark Denmark Cyprus Denmark
Lithuania Germany Denmark Lithuania
Netherlands Lithuania Germany Netherlands
Slovenia Netherlands Lithuania Slovenia
Spain Slovenia Netherlands Spain
United Kingdom Spain Romania United Kingdom
United Kingdom Slovenia
Spain
Medium level Austria Austria Austria Austria
(modeling for

161
 selected topics,
estimations for
the rest)
Cyprus Czech Republic Czech Republic Cyprus
Czech Republic Hungary Hungary Czech Republic
Germany Ireland Ireland Germany
Hungary Italy Italy Hungary
Ireland Malta Malta Ireland
Italy Poland Poland Italy
Malta Romania Slovakia Malta
Poland Slovakia United Kingdom Poland
Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia
Detailed level (deep level od details in all Cyprus
topics)
2. Average volume of 5 to 20 pages Denmark Denmark Bulgaria Denmark
9 the documents
submitted for the
screening phase
Germany Germany Denmark Germany
Lithuania Lithuania Germany Lithuania
United Kingdom: Lithuania
if meeting Regulatory requirement
Poland
21 to 50 pages Bulgaria Bulgaria Czech Republic Bulgaria
Czech Republic Czech Republic Malta Czech Republic
Malta Malta Netherlands Malta
Netherlands Netherlands Romania Netherlands
Poland Poland Slovenia Poland
Slovenia Slovenia United Kingdom Romania
United Kingdom: United Kingdom Slovenia
if also providing a screening report
51 to 100 pages Austria Austria Austria Austria
Hungary Hungary Hungary Hungary

162
 Italy Italy Italy Italy
Romania Romania Slovakia Slovakia
Slovakia Slovakia
over 100 pages Ireland Ireland Ireland Ireland
2. Responsible Federal Bulgaria: Croatia: Croatia: Austria:
1 authority for the authority: Minister for Environment and Ministry Ministry Federal Minister for Transport
Waters (MoEW) for over 300 MW concerning federal roads
0 screening procedure specification
Cyprus: Cyprus: Cyprus: Cyprus:
Ministry Agriculture, Natural Ministry Agriculture, Natural Ministry Agriculture, Natural Ministry Agriculture, Natural
Resources and Environment Resources and Environment Resources and Environment Resources and Environment
(MANRE) (MANRE) (MANRE) (MANRE)
Hungary: Hungary: Hungary: Hungary:
Competent Authority Competent Authority Competent Authority Competent Authority
Malta: Malta: Malta: Malta:
Malta Environment and Planning Malta Environment and Planning Malta Environment and Planning Malta Environment and Planning
Authority Authority Authority Authority
Netherlands: Netherlands: Slovakia: Netherlands:
Ministry Ministry Slovak Environmental Ministry
Imspectorate (part of the Slovak
Ministry of the Environment)
Slovakia: Romania: Slovenia: Romania:
Slovak Environmental National Environmental Protection The Environmental Agency of the National Environmental Protection
Imspectorate (part of the Slovak Agency, if the project covers more Republic of Slovenia Agency, if the project covers more
Ministry of the Environment) than one region than one region
Slovenia: Slovakia: United Kingdom: Slovakia:
The Environmental Agency of the Slovak Environmental If problems occur with the initial Slovak Environmental
Republic of Slovenia Imspectorate (part of the Slovak screening opinion offered by Imspectorate (part of the Slovak
Ministry of the Environment) either the IPC or Local Authority Ministry of the Environment)
(see answers below) the
Government Department
responsible for the consent
process has the power to step in
an provide a definitive screening
decision that would over-ride the
lower tier authorities decision.
United Kingdom: Slovenia: United Kingdom: Slovenia:
If problems occur with the initial The Environmental Agency of the If problems occur with the initial The Environmental Agency of the
screening opinion offered by Republic of Slovenia screening opinion offered by Republic of Slovenia
either the IPC or Local Authority either the IPC or Local Authority
(see answers below) the (see answers below) the
Government Department Government Department
responsible for the consent responsible for the consent

163
 process has the power to step in process has the power to step in
an provide a definitive screening an provide a definitive screening
decision that would over-ride the decision that would over-ride the
lower tier authorities decision. lower tier authorities decision.

United Kingdom: Spain

If problems occur with the initial screening opinion offered by either the
IPC or Local Authority (see answers below) the Government
Department responsible for the consent process has the power to step
in an provide a definitive screening decision that would over-ride the
lower tier authorities decision.
United Kingdom
Regional Austria Austria Austria Austria
authority: Regional governments Regional governments Regional governments Regional governments
specification
Bulgaria: Bulgaria: Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
Regional inspectorates for Regional inspectorates for Regional inspectorates for Regional inspectorates for
environment and waters (RIEW) environment and waters (RIEW) environment and waters (RIEW) environment and waters (RIEW)
for up to 300 MW, and for
screening projects below the
treshold
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic
Germany: Germany: Italy Italy
Agency for Agriculture, the Agency for Agriculture, the
Environment and Rural Areas of Environment and Rural Areas of
Land Schleswig-Holstein Land Schleswig-Holstein
Competent authority for permitting
and inspection of industrial
installations
Italy Italy Lithuania: Lithuania:
Environmental agency or Regional Environmental agency or Regional
environmental agency environmental agency
Lithuania: Lithuania: Slovakia: Netherlands:
Environmental agency or Regional Environmental agency or Regional Or designated powers to the Province
environmental agency environmental agency Regional Environmental Office
and the district Environmental
Office
Netherlands: Netherlands: Spain Poland:
Province Province Regional Director for
Environmental Protection
Poland: Poland: Romania:
Regional Director for Regional Director for Environmental Protection Regional Environmental

164
 Environmental Protection Protection Agency, if the project
covers more than one county

Romania: Romania: Slovakia:

for IED installations (IPPC), Regional Environmental Protection Agency, if the project covers more Or designated powers to the
capacity >50MW EPA than one county and projects of IPPC installations Regional Environmental Office
and the district Environmental
Office
Slovakia: Slovakia: Spain
Or designated powers to the Or designated powers to the Regional Environmental Office and the
Regional Environmental Office district Environmental Office
and the district Environmental
Office
Spain Spain
Local authority: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
specification Municipalities, cf. Section 2, Municipalities, cf. Section 2, Municipalities, cf. Section 2, Municipalities, cf. Section 2,
subsection 1 and 4, of Ministerial subsection 1 and 4, of Ministerial subsection 1 and 4, of Ministerial subsection 1 and 4, of Ministerial
Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12- Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12- Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12- Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12-
15, concerning EIA. 15, concerning EIA. 15, concerning EIA. 15, concerning EIA.
Ireland: Ireland: Germany: Netherlands:
Planning Authority Planning Authority Building authority of city, rural Municipality
district or municipality
Netherlands: Netherlands: Ireland: Poland:
Municipality Municipality Planning Authority municipal authority
Poland: Poland: Netherlands: Romania:
municipal authority municipal authority Municipality County Environmental Protection
Agency
Romania: Romania: Poland:
all istallations with capacity County Environmental Protection municipal authority
<50MW county EPA Agency
United Kingdom: United Kingdom: Romania:
The UK has over 350 Local The UK has over 350 Local Environmental Protection Agency
Authorities it is not practical to Authorities it is not practical to
name them within this survey. name them within this survey.
United Kingdom:
The UK has over 350 Local Authorities it is not practical to name them
within this survey.
Statutory body: Denmark: Germany: Denmark Denmark:
specification Danish Nature Agency for Agriculture, the Danish Nature
Agency/Environmental Protection Environment and Rural Areas of Agency/Environmental Protection
Agency (independent Land Schleswig-Holstein Agency (independent
adminsitrative divisions of the adminsitrative divisions of the
Ministry of Environment), cf. Ministry of Environment), cf.
Section 2, subsection Section 2, subsection

165
 2 and 3, of Ministerial Order no. 2 and 3, of Ministerial Order no.
1510, dated 2010-12-15, 1510, dated 2010-12-15,
concerning EIA. concerning EIA.

Ireland: Ireland: Ireland: Ireland:

ABP on appeal or in caes of ABP on appeal or in caes of ABP on appeal or in caes of ABP
Strategic Infrastructure Strategic Infrastructure Strategic Infrastructure
Development Development Development
Lithuania: Lithuania: Lithuania: Lithuania:
Ministry of the Environment Ministry of the Environment Ministry of the Environment Ministry of the Environment
United Kingdom
Overseeing organisation
undertakes the screening process
Other: United Kingdom: Germany:
specification For Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects the authority is currently called the Infrastructure Planning State Company for Road
Commission; however, from April 2011 it will be transformed into the National Infrastructure Directorate Construction and Transport of
within the Planning Inspectorate Schleswig-Holstein as responsible
authority for plan approval
2. Character of Legal document Austria Austria Austria Austria
1 screening decision
1
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany Germany Germany
Italy Italy Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta Malta Malta
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands
Poland Poland Poland Poland
Romania Romania Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain Spain Spain
United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom
Internal decision Croatia Croatia Croatia Hungary
by authority

166
 Hungary Hungary Hungary
Other: Cyprus: Cyprus: Cyprus: Cyprus:
specification opinion by the MANRE to the opinion by the MANRE to the opinion by the MANRE to the opinion by the MANRE to the
planning authority planning authority planning authority planning authority
Ireland: Ireland: Ireland: Ireland:
de facto part of planning decision de facto part of planning decision de facto part of planning decision de facto part of planning decision
2. Screening decision No Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic Czech Republic
1 provides for appeals
2
Ireland
Yes: if relevant, Austria Austria Austria Austria
further
information
Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
Hungary Hungary Hungary Hungary
Ireland: Ireland: Ireland: Italy:
The decision of the planning The decision of the planning The decision of the planning the decision may be appealed to
authority in respect of the planning authority in respect of the planning authority in respect of the planning the regional court
application can be appealed to application can be appealed to application can be appealed to
ABP, not exclusively the ABP, not exclusively the ABP, not exclusively the
screening element, although the screening element, although the screening element, although the
third party may raise the matter of third party may raise the matter of third party may raise the matter of
EIA and ABP has the opportunity EIA and ABP has the opportunity EIA and ABP has the opportunity
to screen for EIA and require the to screen for EIA and require the to screen for EIA and require the
submission of an EIS. submission of an EIS. This submission of an EIS.
provision does not exists for
Strategic Infrastrutrure
Development.
Italy: Italy: Italy: Lithuania
the decision may be appealed to the decision may be appealed to the decision may be appealed to
the regional court the regional court the regional court
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands:
Screening decisions (and all other Screening decisions (and all other Screening decisions (and all other spatial planning decision and/or
decisions taken by the authority or decisions taken by the authority or decisions taken by the authority or the Trajectory Act decision can be
its officers at any stage) can be its officers at any stage) can be its officers at any stage) can be appealed
appealed, even though currently appealed, even though currently appealed, even though currently
there is no explicit provision in there is no explicit provision in there is no explicit provision in
favour or against this. favour or against this. favour or against this.
Netherlands: Netherlands: Netherlands Poland
the proponent/applicant can the proponent/applicant can

167
appeal against the screening appeal against the screening
decision decision

Poland Poland Poland Romania:

it can be appealed at regional
authority
The screening decision is made
public available by publishing it
into a local or regional newspaper;
the decision could be appealed
within 5 days after the publication
Romania: Romania: Romania: Slovakia
It can be appealed at the higher The screening decision is made it can be appealed at regional
forum (e.g. regional authority in public available by publishing it authority
case of the competence of local into a local or regional newspaper; The screening decision is made
authority or national authority in the decision could be appealed public available by publishing it
case of regional projects) within 5 days after the publication into a local or regional newspaper;
The sceening decision is made the decision could be appealed
public available by publishing it within 5 days after the publication
into a local or regional newspaper;
the decision could be appealed
within 5 days after the publication
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Spain:
at the stage of public information
Spain: Spain: Spain: United Kingdom:
at the stage of public information at the stage of public information at the stage of public information As indicated in 2.1.2.10 if there
are issues with the first screening
decision by the consenting
authority the Government can
step in to make a definitive
decision. In England the EIA
Regulations specifically indicate
that either the developer or any
interested party can approach the
Government to request they
reconsider the lower authorities
screening decision. In Scotland,
Wales and Northern Ireland the
Regulations only specify the
developer can take such action.

FURTHER:
Screening decisions, or a lack of a
screening decision, can be
challenged through the UK Courts
and there have been a number of

168
 cases where challenegs have
proved succesful.

United Kingdom: United Kingdom: United Kingdom:

As indicated in 2.1.2.10 if there As indicated in 2.1.2.10 if there As indicated in 2.1.2.10 if there are issues with the first screening
are issues with the first screening are issues with the first screening decision by the consenting authority the Government can step in to
decision by the consenting decision by the consenting make a definitive decision. In England the EIA Regulations specifically
authority the Government can authority the Government can indicate that either the developer or any interested party can approach
step in to make a definitive step in to make a definitive the Government to request they reconsider the lower authorities
decision. In England the EIA decision. In England the EIA screening decision. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland the
Regulations specifically indicate Regulations specifically indicate Regulations only specify the developer can take such action.
that either the developer or any that either the developer or any
interested party can approach the interested party can approach the FURTHER:
Government to request they Government to request they Screening decisions, or a lack of a screening decision, can be
reconsider the lower authorities reconsider the lower authorities challenged through the UK Courts and there have been a number of
screening decision. In Scotland, screening decision. In Scotland, cases where challenegs have proved succesful.
Wales and Northern Ireland the Wales and Northern Ireland the
Regulations only specify the Regulations only specify the
developer can take such action. developer can take such action.

FURTHER: FURTHER:
Screening decisions, or a lack of a Screening decisions, or a lack of a
screening decision, can be screening decision, can be
challenged through the UK Courts challenged through the UK Courts
and there have been a number of and there have been a number of
cases where challenegs have cases where challenegs have
proved succesful. proved succesful.
Other: Croatia: Croatia: Croatia: Denmark:
specification Acc. to the national EIA Acc. to the national EIA Acc. to the national EIA The developer may lodge an
Regulation: the Screening Regulation: the Screening Regulation: the Screening appeal, if the screening decision
decision is made available to the decision is made available to the decision is made available to the determines that the project is
public. Acc. to art. 81 of the public. Acc. to art. 81 of the public. Acc. to art. 81 of the covered by Annex I of Ministerial
Environmental Protection Act: Environmental Protection Act: Environmental Protection Act: Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12-
Against the Screening decision Against the Screening decision Against the Screening decision 15, concerning EIA. Apart from
"an appeal shall not be permitted "an appeal shall not be permitted "an appeal shall not be permitted procedural complaints others, eg
but an administrative dispute may but an administrative dispute may but an administrative dispute may neighbours, environmental
be initiated". be initiated". be initiated". groups, cannot lodge an appeal,
because they will later on have

169
 the opportunity to lodge an
appeal, when the final project
assessment has been passed.
Apart from procedural complaints
the developer cannot lodge an
appeal, if the screening decision
determines that the project isn't
subject to an environmental
assessment. Others, eg
neighbours, environmental
groups, may lodge an appeal.
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Germany:
The developer may lodge an The developer may lodge an The developer may lodge an Not separately, only after the plan
appeal, if the screening decision appeal, if the screening decision appeal, if the screening decision approval or the plan authorization
determines that the project is determines that the project is determines that the project is is granted.
covered by Annex I of Ministerial covered by Annex I of Ministerial covered by Annex I of Ministerial
Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12- Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12- Order no. 1510, dated 2010-12-
15, concerning EIA. Apart from 15, concerning EIA. Apart from 15, concerning EIA. Apart from
procedural complaints others, eg procedural complaints others, eg procedural complaints others, eg
neighbours, environmental neighbours, environmental neighbours, environmental
groups, cannot lodge an appeal, groups, cannot lodge an appeal, groups, cannot lodge an appeal,
because they will later on have because they will later on have because they will later on have
the opportunity to lodge an the opportunity to lodge an the opportunity to lodge an
appeal, when the final project appeal, when the final project appeal, when the final project
assessment has been passed. assessment has been passed. assessment has been passed.
Apart from procedural complaints Apart from procedural complaints Apart from procedural complaints
the developer cannot lodge an the developer cannot lodge an the developer cannot lodge an
appeal, if the screening decision appeal, if the screening decision appeal, if the screening decision
determines that the project isn't determines that the project isn't determines that the project isn't
subject to an environmental subject to an environmental subject to an environmental
assessment. Others, eg assessment. Others, eg assessment. Others, eg
neighbours, environmental neighbours, environmental neighbours, environmental
groups, may lodge an appeal. groups, may lodge an appeal. groups, may lodge an appeal.
Germany: Germany: Germany: Not separately, but after the
Not independently. Appeal can be Not independently. Appeal can be approval of the land use plan [judicial review]/ development plan or the
submitted after the permit is submitted after the permit is granting of the building permit (for the additional part) see 2.3.1.1
granted. granted.
2. An appeal can be Everybody Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria Bulgaria
1 lodged by
3
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
(provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal
interest in the matter). interest in the matter). interest in the matter). interest in the matter).
Hungary Hungary Hungary Hungary
Ireland Ireland Ireland Italy

170
 Italy Italy Italy Malta
Malta Malta Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands Romania
Romania Romania Romania Slovenia
Slovenia Slovenia Slovenia Spain
Spain Spain Spain
Neighbours Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany Germany Germany
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania
Poland Poland Poland Poland
Municipalities Austria Austria Austria Austria
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
(provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal
interest in the decicision). interest in the matter). interest in the matter). interest in the matter).
Germany Germany Germany Germany
Poland Poland Poland Poland
Citizen's groups Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
(provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a
purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws
and has more than 100 and has more than 100 and has more than 100 and has more than 100
members). members). members). members).
Germany Germany Germany Germany
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania
Poland Poland Poland Poland
Environm. Austria Austria Austria Austria
organisations
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
(provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a
purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws
and has more than 100 and has more than 100 and has more than 100 and has more than 100
members). members). members). members).
Germany Germany Germany Germany
Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania
Poland Poland Poland Poland
NGOs Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
(provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a (provided it has spatial issues as a
purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws purpose, is governed by bye-laws

171
 and has more than 100 and has more than 100 and has more than 100 and has more than 100
members). members). members). members).

Germany Germany Lithuania Germany

Lithuania Lithuania Poland Lithuania
Poland Poland Slovakia Poland
Slovakia Slovakia Slovakia
Statutory Poland Austria: Austria: Austria:
bodies/agencies Environmental barrister Environmental barrister Environmental barrister

Lithuania Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:

(provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal
interest in the matter). interest in the matter). interest in the matter).
Denmark: Poland Poland Poland
(provided they have a legal
interest in the decicision).
Austria:
Environmental barrister
Other: Austria: Austria: Austria: Austria:
specification Project developer, ombudsman for Project developer; ombudsman for Project developer; ombudsman for Project developer; ombudsman for
the environment; cooperative the environment; co-operating the environment; co-operating the environment; co-operating
authoritie(s), in case the screening authoritie(s), in case the screening authoritie(s), in case the screening authoritie(s), in case the screening
procedure was performed upon procedure was performed upon procedure was performed upon procedure was performed upon
ist/their request; environmental its/their request; environmental its/their request; environmental its/their request; environmental
organisations (including also organisations (including also organisations (including also organisations (including also
environmental NGOs) only against environmental NGOs) only against environmental NGOs) only against environmental NGOs) only against
a screening decision which negative screening decisions negative screening decisions negative screening decisions;
determines that the project isn't Note: The system of remedies
subject to an EIA (= negative concerning federal roads is
screening decision) different: No second
administrative instance at present.
However, the project applicant,
the cooperating authorities, the
ombudsman for the environment
and the host municipality may file
a complaint against the screening
decision taken by the Federal
Minister for Transport directly to
the supreme authority
(Administrative Court).
Environmental organisations may
file a complaint to the
Administrative Court against
negative screening decisions.

172
Denmark: Denmark: Denmark: Denmark:
Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Environment,
National Park Fund National Park Fund National Park Fund National Park Fund
Germany: Malta: Malta: Malta:
generally: those who are affected Applicant Applicant Applicant
negatively by the project
Malta: Poland: Poland: Poland:
Applicant parties to the administrative parties to the administrative parties to the administrative
procedure procedure procedure
Poland: United Kingdom: United Kingdom: Romania:
parties to the administrative As indicated above the English As indicated above the English Companies, citizens, mass-media
procedure EIA Regulations were amended in EIA Regulations were amended in
2011 to clearly indicate anyone 2011 to clearly indicate anyone
could 'lodge an appeal'. Whilst the could 'lodge an appeal'. Whilst the
Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish
EIA Regulations are unclear on EIA Regulations are unclear on
who, other than the developer, who, other than the developer,
has such a right. These has such a right. These
regulations do not prevent anyone regulations do not prevent anyone
from approaching the Government from approaching the Government
to request a lower authorities to request a lower authorities
screening decision be re- screening decision be re-
examined, but they do not indicate examined, but they do not indicate
this option is open to anyone other this option is open to anyone other
than the developer. than the developer.

In terms of a legal challenge In terms of a legal challenge

everybody has the right to bring a everybody has the right to bring a
challenge, but costs can often be challenge, but costs can often be
an issue that prevent such action. an issue that prevent such action.
United Kingdom: United Kingdom:
As indicated above the English EIA Regulations were amended in 2011 to clearly indicate anyone could As indicated above the English
'lodge an appeal'. Whilst the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish EIA Regulations are unclear on who, other EIA Regulations were amended in
than the developer, has such a right. These regulations do not prevent anyone from approaching the 2011 to clearly indicate anyone
Government to request a lower authorities screening decision be re-examined, but they do not indicate this could 'lodge an appeal'. Whilst the
option is open to anyone other than the developer. Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish
EIA Regulations are unclear on
In terms of a legal challenge everybody has the right to bring a challenge, but costs can often be an issue who, other than the developer,
that prevent such action. has such a right. These
regulations do not prevent anyone
from approaching the Government
to request a lower authorities
screening decision be re-
examined, but they do not indicate
this option is open to anyone other
than the developer.

173
In terms of a legal challenge
everybody has the right to bring a
challenge, but costs can often be
an issue that prevent such action.

174
12.4 Appendix 4: Evaluation of detailed information on EIA
procedures
Questionnaire
Evaluation
Comparison of EIA Procedures

1. Scoping
Landfill Shopping Center
N Issue Answer Country Country
°
1. Scoping is carried out on mandatory basis Bulgaria Bulgaria
1
Czech Republic Czech Republic
France France
Hungary Germany
Malta Hungary
Romania Malta
Slovakia Poland
Spain Romania:
If the project has dedicated
parking areas
Slovakia
Spain
on voluntary basis Austria Austria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Denmark Denmark
Germany Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Netherlands
Netherlands Romania
Slovenia Slovenia
United Kingdom: United Kingdom:
Note: Whilst the Regulations Note: Whilst the Regulations
do not require (mandate) do not require (mandate)
scoping in practice virtually all scoping in practice virtually all
EIA's will udergo some level of EIA's will udergo some level of
informal scoping with the informal scoping with the
consenting authority and consenting authority and
statutory consultees as a statutory consultees as a
matter of standard practice - matter of standard practice -
see Chapter 5 of IEMA's 2011 see Chapter 5 of IEMA's 2011
report into the State of EIA report into the State of EIA
Practice in the UK Practice in the UK
www.iema.net/eiareport www.iema.net/eiareport
other: Austria: Austria:
specification Apart from the voluntary Apart from the voluntary
scoping procedure Austria scoping procedure Austria
offers an investor service: The offers an investor service: The
EIA authority may support the EIA authority may support the
project applicants upon their project applicants upon their
request by providing request by providing
information that is available to information that is available to
the authority and that is the authority and that is
needed by the project needed by the project
applicant for preparing the applicant for preparing the
documents for the EIA documents for the EIA
development consent development consent
procedure. The topics and procedure. The topics and

175
 issues that are likely to be issues that are likely to be
significant in the EIA significant in the EIA
development consent development consent
procedure may be procedure may be
communicated within the communicated within the
framework of these investor framework of these investor
services for project services for project
preparation. preparation.

Ireland: Ireland:
Applicants can apply to the Applicants can apply to the
planning authority or ABP for planning authority or ABP for
scoping. This is not commonly scoping. This is not commonly
availed of. availed of.
Poland:
voluntary for annex I projects, mandatory (together with
screening) for annex II projects
1. Official guidance for on national level Austria: Austria:
2 scoping is available (web-link) http://www.umweltbundesamt. http://www.umweltbundesamt.
at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/ at/fileadmin/site/umweltthemen
DP085.pdf /UVP_SUP_EMAS/uvp-
leitfaeden/EKZ_Leitfaden.pdf
Denmark: Denmark:
https://www.retsinformation.dk/ https://www.retsinformation.dk/
Forms/R0710.aspx?id= Forms/R0710.aspx?id=
125635 125635
Lithuania: Germany:
http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.5196 “Recommendation concerning
85001249378224.pdf the EIA in Urban Planning”
(Muster-Einführungserlass zur
UVP in der
Bebauungsplanung) and
“Recommendation
concerning the amendments of
the Federal Building Code”
(Muster-Einführungserlass
zum Gesetz zur Anpassung
des Baugesetzbuches an EU-
Richtlinien) of the Expert
Commission for Urban
Development (Members of the
Commission = experts from
Federal and Länder ministries
of Urban Developmen
Poland: Lithuania:
see general guidance at http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.5196
www.gdos.gov.pl 85001249378224.pdf
Romania: Poland:
http://www.epcmediu.ro/legislat see general guidance at
ie/hotarare-nr-1213-din-6- www.gdos.gov.pl
septembrie-2006
Spain Romania:
http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislatio
ns/view/624
www.mmediu.ro

176
United Kingdom: Spain
There are official guides to the
EIA Regulations in each
administration and the
organisation in charge of NSIP
applications has produced
advice on screening, links
below:
England & Wales (General EIA
Circular and Guidance, that
covers screening):
- Circular 02/99 =
http://webarchive.nationalarchi
ves.gov.uk/20100410180038/h
ttp://communities.gov.uk/public
ations/planningandbuilding/circ
ularenvironmentalimpact
- Guidance on EIA =
http://webarchive.nationalarchi
ves.gov.uk/20100410180038/h
ttp://communities.gov.uk/public
ations/planningandbuilding/env
ironmentalimpactassessment
England & Wales (NSIP
screening advice document):
-
http://infrastructure.independen
t.gov.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/03/Advic
e-note-7-EIA-screening-and-
scoping.pdf
Scotland EIA documents
related to screening:
- PAN58 =
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Pu
blications/1999/10/pan58-
root/pan58-pdf
United Kingdom:
There are official guides to the
EIA Regulations in each
administration and the
organisation in charge of NSIP
applications has produced
advice on screening, links
below:
England & Wales (General EIA
Circular and Guidance, that
covers screening):
- Circular 02/99 =
http://webarchive.nationalarchi
ves.gov.uk/20100410180038/h
ttp://communities.gov.uk/public
ations/planningandbuilding/circ
ularenvironmentalimpact
- Guidance on EIA =
http://webarchive.nationalarchi
ves.gov.uk/20100410180038/h
ttp://communities.gov.uk/public
ations/planningandbuilding/env
ironmentalimpactassessment
England & Wales (NSIP
screening advice document):
-
http://infrastructure.independen
t.gov.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/03/Advic
e-note-7-EIA-screening-and-
scoping.pdf
Scotland EIA documents
related to screening:
- PAN58 =
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Pu
blications/1999/10/pan58-
root/pan58-pdf

177
 on regional level Austria: Austria:
(web-link) http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf- http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf-
leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf
Spain Germany:
Several states (Länder) have
implemented the above
mentioned recommendations
on state level.
Spain
United Kingdom
no guidance available Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Hungary
Germany Ireland
Hungary Italy
Ireland Malta
Italy Netherlands
Malta Slovakia
Netherlands Slovenia
Slovakia
Slovenia
1. Participants in the authorities: Austria: Austria:
3 scoping process specification Co-operating authorities e.g. Co-operating authorities e.g.
authorities responsible for authorities responsible for
granting the development granting the development
consent if the project would not consent if the project would not
require an EIA require an EIA
Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
competent bodies for taking competent bodies for taking
decision on EIA or officials decision on EIA or officials
authorised by them with other authorised by them with other
specialised departments specialised departments
Croatia: Croatia:
bodies and/or persons bodies and/or persons
designet by special regulations designet by special regulations
and the LRSGU and the LRSGU
Cyprus: Cyprus:
Environmental authority Environmental authority
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark: Denmark
The competent authority
engages in discussions with
the developer and relevant
agencies.
France: France:
Ministry of Environment Ministry of Environment
Germany: Germany:
Other authorities and statutory Other authorities and statutory
bodies affected by the project, bodies affected by the
project,Environmental
organisations Citizens’ Groups
Hungary Hungary
Ireland: Ireland:
The planning authority/ ABP The planning authority/ ABP
must consult the relevant must consult the relevant
planning authority(s)/ ABP and planning authority(s)/ ABP and
prescribed bodies. prescribed bodies.
Italy: Italy:
Regional and local authorities Regional and local authorities
Lithuania Lithuania

178
 Malta: Malta:
MEPA and other auithorities MEPA and other auithorities
according to the decision of according to the decision of
Director of Environmental Director of Environmental
Protection; Local Councils, Protection; Local Councils,
Government entities, eNGOs Government entities, eNGOs
Netherlands: Netherlands:
All relevant authorities are All relevant authorities are
invited to submit a formal invited to submit a formal
advice advice
Poland: Poland:
Regional Director for Regional Director for
Environmental Protection, The Environmental Protection, The
authority of the State Sanitary authority of the State Sanitary
Inspectorate Inspectorate
Romania: Romania:
Municipalities, public health County Environmental Agency,
authority, water national Environmental Guard, Fire
administration; Brigade (Emergency Situations
County Environmental Agency, Inspectorate), Mayor's office,
Environmental Guard County Water Protection Authority)
Authority, Fire Brigade Municipalities, Public Health
(Emergency Situations Authority; Water National
Inspectorate), Water Protection Administration
Authority, Mayours office
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain: Spain
Competent
United Kingdom: United Kingdom:
Within the Regulations where a Within the Regulations where a
developer seeks a voluntary developer seeks a voluntary
scoping opinion the consenting scoping opinion the consenting
authority is then required to authority is then required to
consult with statutory consult with statutory
environmental bodies environmental bodies
public: specification Austria: Austria:
Within the voluntary scoping Within the voluntary scoping
procedure, the EIA authority procedure, the EIA authority
may also, where appropriate, may also, where appropriate,
consult third parties such as consult third parties such as
the public or the ombudsman the public or the ombudsman
for the environment etc. The for the environment etc. The
EIA authority may also choose EIA authority may also choose
the form of such a the form of such a
consultation. consultation.
Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
affected public affected public
Croatia: Croatia:
public and public concerned public and public concerned
Czech Republic: Czech Republic:
right to participate is given to right to participate is given to
anyone anyone
Denmark: Denmark
The public is consulted as
early as possible in order to
determine the scope of an EIA
Germany: Hungary:
Registered organisations the public concerned
working in the field of nature
protection and citizens’ groups;
AND others experts, if
necessary
Hungary: Malta:
the public concerned General public
Malta: Malta:
General public notices in media; public invited
to express opinions

179
 Malta: Netherlands:
notices in the media; public the authorities choose the form
invited to express opinions of participation, for example
participation by a small group
or for all the stakeholders
(public, NGO's, private parties
etc.) or none
Netherlands: Poland:
the authorities choose the form Parties to the procedure
of participation, for example (including NGOs if granted
participation by a small group rights of a Party)
or for all the stakeholders
(public, NGO's, private parties
etc.) or none, if Natura2000 is
involved in the permitting, a
participation option/form is
obligated otherwise voluntary
Poland: Slovakia:
Parties to the procedure If public submits important
(including NGOs if granted comments to preliminary
rights of a Party) environmental study, the
competent authority invites
members of the public to the
consultation on the scoping
proposal
Slovakia: Spain
If public submits important
comments to preliminary
environmental study, the
competent authority invites
members of the public to the
consultation on the scoping
proposal
Spain: United Kingdom:
Environmental organizations There is nothing to restrict the
and interested public public being engaged in
scoping the EIA by the
developer, However, this is a
voluntary undertaking. In the
majority (>50%) of UK practice
some level of wider 'public'
engagement, beyond statutory
organisations occurs as part of
standard EIA practice.
United Kingdom:
There is nothing to restrict the public being engaged in scoping
the EIA by the developer, However, this is a voluntary
undertaking. In the majority (>50%) of UK practice some level of
wider 'public' engagement, beyond statutory organisations
occurs as part of standard EIA practice.

2. Development Consent Procedure

Landfill Shopping Center
N Issue Answer Country Country
°
2. Compiler of the Free choice of Austria Austria
1 information for the EIA developer
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Germany Germany
Hungary Hungary
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Netherlands Netherlands
Poland Poland

180
 Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain
United Kingdom: United Kingdom:
Note: Over 1/3rd of UK Note: Over 1/3rd of UK
Environmental Statements are Environmental Statements are
produced by consultancies that produced by consultancies that
have volunatrily signed up to have volunatrily signed up to
the UK's EIA Quality Mark the UK's EIA Quality Mark
operated by IEMA. This is a operated by IEMA. This is a
voluntary accreditation system voluntary accreditation system
that checks EIA standards and that checks EIA standards and
dreives improvement in dreives improvement in
practice. See: practice. See:
www.iema.net/qmark www.iema.net/qmark
Accredited Croatia Croatia
consultants
Cyprus Cyprus
Malta Malta
Romania Romania
Other: specification Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
a team of experts with a team a team of experts with a team
leader - may be Bulgarian and leader - may be Bulgarian and
foreign natural persons, having foreign natural persons, having
educational and qualification educational and qualification
Master degree Master degree
Denmark: Denmark:
the competent authority the competent authority
2. Manuals or guidance No Bulgaria Bulgaria
2 on EIA available to
support the developer
Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Hungary
Hungary Italy
Italy Malta
Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Slovakia
Slovakia
Yes: specification Austria: Austria:
see above see above
Czech Republic: Czech Republic:
environmental law specifies environmental law specifies
required information required information

Denmark: Denmark
https://www.retsinformation.dk/
Forms/R0710.aspx?id=
125635
Germany: Germany:
See 2.1.2.1 Anney 1 to the Federal
Building Code
Ireland: Ireland:
EPA Guidelines on information EPA Guidelines on information
to be contained in an EIS to be contained in an EIS
2002; EPA Advice Notes on 2002; EPA Advice Notes on
Current Practice in the Current Practice in the
preparation of EIS preparation of EIS
2003;Guidance for Consent 2003;Guidance for Consent
Authoritries regarding Sub- Authoritries regarding Sub-
threshold Development, threshold Development,
Department of Environment Department of Environment
2003 2003

181
 Italy: Italy:
minimal contents are specified minimal contents are specified
in National law in National law
Lithuania Lithuania:
on national level, the same as
for other EIAs
Poland: Poland:
literature other than the GDOS literature other than the GDOS
guidelines does exist (there is guidelines does exist (there is
no formally binding standard, no formally binding standard,
however) however)
Romania: Romania:
MO863/2002 MO863/2002
Slovenia: Slovenia:
Based on environmental Based on environmental
dossier prepared by developer dossier prepared by developer
assisted by licensed assisted by licensed
independent EIA local independent EIA local
consultant & verified by consultant & verified by
competant EIA authority competant EIA authority
Spain: Spain:
Legal rules Generic and legal rules
United Kingdom: United Kingdom:
Government guidance exists, Government guidance exists,
see references in answer see references in answer
3.1.1.2. Other documents exist 3.1.1.2. Other documents exist
such as IEMA's EIA such as IEMA's EIA
Guidelines, Essex Guide to Guidelines, Essex Guide to
EIA, etc. EIA, etc.
2. Obligation in national No Czech Republic Czech Republic
3 legislation to consider
specified alternatives
to this type of
development
Hungary Hungary
Ireland: Ireland:
Outline of main alternatives Outline of main alternatives
only only
Lithuania United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Yes: specification Austria: Austria:
Zero alternative, alternatives Zero alternative, alternatives
studied by developer studied by developer
Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
alternatives yes - but not alternatives yes - but not
specified ones specified ones
Croatia: Croatia:
In cases when the project summary descr. of considered
improves the status of the env. projects alternatives taking into
Or decreases the existing account their env. Impacts,
negative trends in the env. expl. Of the reasons for
selecting a particular
alternative
Cyprus: Cyprus:
Law 140/2005, Annex 3 Law 140/2005, Annex 3
Denmark: Denmark
The competent authority may
impose certain alternatives to
be considered by the
developer, but the nature of
the alternatives will dependent
on the information and
preliminary studies provided by
the developer.

182
 Germany: Germany:
Federal EIA Act: The in the planning procedure
documents must contain an according to annex 1 and 2 d)
overview of the principal Federal Building Code
alternative options investigated
by the developer and details of
the main reasons for selecting
the present project with regard
to the environmental impacts
of the project
Italy: Italy
the study of alternatives is
required in the environmental
impact study
Malta: Lithuania:
this depends on the specific zero alternative and other
case merits alternatives
Netherlands: Malta
if relevant more environmental
friendly alternatives for the
landfill exits, they should be
researched
Poland: Netherlands:
Art. 66 section 1 item 5 Act if relevant more environmental
OOS friendly alternatives exits, they
alternatives habe to be should be researched
considere, but are not
specified
Romania: Poland:
MO863/2002 Art. 66 section 1 item 5 Act
OOS
Slovakia: Romania
at least 2 variants
Slovenia: Slovakia:
Article 54 (2) 5: at least 2 variants
An environmental impact
assessment shall comprise the
identification, description and
assessment of long-term,
short-term, direct or indirect
impacts of the planned activity
on humans, land, water, air,
biological diversity and
valuable natural features,
climate and landscape, and on
the human immovable property
and cultural heritage, and their
interrelationships
Spain Slovenia:
Article 54 (2) 5:
An environmental impact
assessment shall comprise the
identification, description and
assessment of long-term,
short-term, direct or indirect
impacts of the planned activity
on humans, land, water, air,
biological diversity and
valuable natural features,
climate and landscape, and on
the human immovable property
and cultural heritage, and their
interrelationships
Spain:
2. Obligation in national No Czech Republic Czech Republic
4 legislation to consider
the do-nothing
alternative
Germany Hungary

183
 Hungary Ireland
Ireland Slovenia
Slovenia United Kingdom:
No- debatable as the EIA
process will require an
assessment of significant
effects of the development,
which must be based on
something. This something is
the baseline environment
(either now or as predicted in
the future). As such whilst an
assessment of a do nothing
alternative is not explicitly
required by the Regulations it
is implicit in order to meet the
wider requirements of
assessing significance of the
proposal's effects.
United Kingdom:
No- debatable as the EIA process will require an assessment of
significant effects of the development, which must be based on
something. This something is the baseline environment (either
now or as predicted in the future). As such whilst an assessment
of a do nothing alternative is not explicitly required by the
Regulations it is implicit in order to meet the wider requirements
of assessing significance of the proposal's effects.

Yes Austria Austria

Bulgaria Bulgaria
Denmark Denmark
Italy Germany
Lithuania Italy
Malta Lithuania
Netherlands Malta
Poland Netherlands
Romania Poland
Slovakia Romania:
without EIA in case of
shopping malls with own
parking place, the project
cannot be carried out
Spain Slovakia
United Kingdom: Spain
Yes - debatable as the EIA
process will require an
assessment of significant
effects of the development,
which must be based on
something. This something is
the baseline environment
(either now or as predicted in
the future). As such whilst an
assessment of a do nothing
alternative is not explicitly
required by the Regulations it
is implicit in order to meet the
wider requirements of
assessing significance of the
proposal's effects.

184
 United Kingdom:
Yes - debatable as the EIA
process will require an
assessment of significant
effects of the development,
which must be based on
something. This something is
the baseline environment
(either now or as predicted in
the future). As such whilst an
assessment of a do nothing
alternative is not explicitly
required by the Regulations it
is implicit in order to meet the
wider requirements of
assessing significance of the
proposal's effects.
2. Information submitted Traffic (in all cases) Austria Austria
5 by the developer to
the competent
authority for the
purpose of EIA
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Poland Netherlands
Romania Poland
Romania
Spain
Traffic (depending on Netherlands United Kingdom
the site)
United Kingdom
Noise (in all cases) Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Poland Netherlands
Romania Poland
Slovakia Romania
Spain Slovakia
Spain
Noise (depending on Hungary Hungary
the site)
Netherlands United Kingdom
United Kingdom

185
Air quality (in all Austria Austria
cases)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Netherlands Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia Spain
Spain
Air quality (depending Hungary Hungary
on the site)
United Kingdom Netherlands
United Kingdom
Vibrations (in all Croatia Austria
cases)
Cyprus Croatia
Denmark Denmark
Germany Lithuania
Ireland Poland
Italy Romania
Lithuania Slovakia
Malta Spain
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Vibrations (depending Austria Bulgaria
on the site)
Bulgaria Cyprus
Netherlands Germany
United Kingdom Ireland
Italy
Malta
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Climate (in all cases) Austria Austria
Bulgaria Croatia
Croatia Czech Republic
Cyprus Denmark
Czech Republic Ireland
Denmark Lithuania
Ireland Poland
Lithuania Romania

186
 Malta Slovenia
Poland Spain
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
Climate (depending Germany Germany
on the site)
Italy Italy
Netherlands Malta
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Shading (in all cases) Denmark Denmark
Romania
Shading (depending Austria Austria
on the site)
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Malta Malta
United Kingdom
Waste management Austria Austria
(in all cases)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Denmark Denmark
Germany Ireland
Ireland Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Malta
Malta Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Spain
Spain
Waste management Hungary Germany
(depending on the
site)
Netherlands Hungary
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Regional development Austria Austria
planning (in all cases)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Denmark Denmark
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Netherlands Netherlands
Poland Poland
Romania Romania
Spain Spain

187
Regional development Ireland Germany
planning (depending
on the site)
United Kingdom Ireland
United Kingdom
Nature protection (in Austria Austria
all cases)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Germany Ireland
Ireland Lithuania
Italy Poland
Lithuania Romania
Poland Slovenia
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
Nature protection Hungary Germany
(depending on the
site)
Malta Hungary
Netherlands Italy
United Kingdom Malta
Netherlands
Spain
United Kingdom
Water management Austria Austria
(in all cases)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Germany Ireland
Ireland Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia
Spain
Water management Hungary Germany
(depending on the
site)
Malta Hungary
Netherlands Malta
United Kingdom Netherlands
Spain

188
 United Kingdom
Geotechnical Bulgaria Bulgaria
engineering (in all
cases)
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Denmark Denmark
Germany Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Romania
Romania
Spain
Geotechnical Austria Austria
engineering
(depending on the
site)
Ireland Germany
Malta Ireland
Netherlands Malta
United Kingdom Netherlands
United Kingdom
Hydrogeology (in all Austria Bulgaria
cases)
Bulgaria Croatia
Croatia Cyprus
Cyprus Denmark
Denmark Italy
Germany Lithuania
Ireland Poland
Italy Romania
Lithuania
Netherlands
Poland
Romania
Spain
Hydrogeology Malta Austria
(depending on the
site)
United Kingdom Germany
Ireland
Malta
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Landscape Bulgaria Bulgaria
engineering (in all
cases)
Croatia Croatia
Denmark Cyprus
Germany Denmark
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania

189
 Poland Poland
Romania Romania
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain
Landscape Austria Austria
engineering
(depending on the
site)
Malta Germany
Netherlands Malta
United Kingdom Netherlands
United Kingdom
Cultural heritage (in Bulgaria Bulgaria
all cases)
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Ireland Germany
Italy Ireland
Lithuania Italy
Poland Lithuania
Romania Poland
Slovenia Romania
Spain Slovenia
Spain
Cultural heritage Austria Austria
(depending on the
site)
Germany Hungary
Hungary Malta
Malta Netherlands
Netherlands United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Human health (in all Austria Austria
cases)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Hungary Hungary
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Poland Poland
Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain
Human health Germany Germany
(depending on the

190
site)
Ireland Ireland
Netherlands Netherlands
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Other (in all cases): Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
specification material asset material asset

Denmark: Denmark:
Transport, material goods, the Transport, material goods, the
public's access to the public's access to the
countryside, socioeconomic countryside, socioeconomic
assessment of the assessment of the
environmental impact environmental impact
Ireland: Ireland:
Archaeological Heritage and Archaeological Heritage and
Architectural Heritage Architectural Heritage
Slovakia: Lithuania:
Environment, odor, radiation, the guidance are very broad,
heat include radiation etc.
United Kingdom: Slovakia:
Under the EIA Regulations the Environment, odor, radiation,
following information is heat
required to be submitted if a
developer voluntarily seeks a
scoping opinion:
In relation to an application for
planning permission— .
(i)a plan sufficient to identify
the land; .
(ii)a brief description of the
nature and purpose of the
development and of its
possible effects on the
environment; and .
(iii)such other information or
representations as the person
making the request may wish
to provide or make; .

In relation to a subsequent
application— .
(i)a plan sufficient to identify
the land; .
(ii)sufficient information to
enable the relevant planning
authority to identify any
planning permission granted
for the development in respect
of which a subsequent
application has been made; .
(iii)an explanation of the
possible effects on the
environment which were not
identified at the time planning
permission was granted; and .
(iv)such other information or
representations as the person
making the request may wish
to provide or make.

Note1:

Spain:
Energy efficiency and lighting

191
 United Kingdom:
Under the EIA Regulations the
following information is
required to be submitted if a
developer voluntarily seeks a
scoping opinion:
In relation to an application for
planning permission— .
(i)a plan sufficient to identify
the land; .
(ii)a brief description of the
nature and purpose of the
development and of its
possible effects on the
environment; and .
(iii)such other information or
representations as the person
making the request may wish
to provide or make; .

In relation to a subsequent
application— .
(i)a plan sufficient to identify
the land; .
(ii)sufficient information to
enable the relevant planning
authority to identify any
planning permission granted
for the development in respect
of which a subsequent
application has been made; .
(iii)an explanation of the
possible effects on the
environment which were not
identified at the time planning
permission was granted; and .
(iv)such other information or
representations as the person
making the request may wish
to provide or make.

Note1:

Other (depending on Czech Republic: Czech Republic:

the site): specification Soil / Geology Soil / Geology

Hungary: Hungary:
Soil / Geology Soil / Geology
2. Topics that receive Austria air quality, waste management, traffic, noise, air
water protection, traffic
6 greater focus for the
particular project type
Bulgaria air quality, waste, geotechnical traffic, air quality, geotechnical
engineering, water, health, engineering, waste, landscape
nature protection
Cyprus waste management, traffic, noise and vibrations,
geotechnical engineering, geotechnical engineering,
landscape, nature protection, water management
air quality, health
Denmark none none

Germany Traffic, nature protection, Traffic, noise, integration into

hydrogeology, landscape the cityscape
engineering
Hungary not specified no specifications

Ireland Traffic/ Transport, Noise, Air Traffic/ Transport, Landscape/

Quality, Landscape, flora & Urban Design, Archaeology,
fauna, Hydgro-geology, Architectural Heritage
Hydrology, Archaeology
Italy ground and groundwater, air air quality, traffic, waste
quality management
Lithuania Depending on the screening If scoping asks then there are
advice is special focus on those topics

192
 Malta waste management, traffic, air quality, geotechnical
geotechnical engineering, engineering, noise, vibrations
landscape, nature protection,
air quality, health/impacts on
human population
Netherlands hydrology/air quality, it is traffic (routes, time, numbers
important to try to reach a and type of traffic) usually is
zero-emission terminal as the main environmental theme
much as possible. So in this type of EIA
emissions to the groundwater
and air should be avoided and
if not possible minimized, the
design of the landfill,
management of the site and
monitoring are important
aspects
Poland traffic, waste management, traffic, nature protection,
nature protection, hydrogeology, waste
hydrogeology; management
Please specify: varies, but
generally would expect to see
more on: waste managememt,
hydrogeology, air pollution,
noise, human health
Romania waste management, air quality, waste management, air quality,
geotechnical engineering, geotechnical engineering,
nature protection, water, soil, nature protection, water, soil,
human health human health
Slovakia not specified no specification

Slovenia humans, land, water, air, humans, land, water, air,

biological diversity and biological diversity and
valuable natural features, valuable natural features,
climate and landscape, and the climate and landscape, and the
human immovable property human immovable property
and cultural heritage, and their and cultural heritage, and their
interrelationships interrelationships
Spain Hydrogeology and air quality Traffic, noise, energy efficiency
and lighting
United Kingdom Depends on site location. In Depends on site location. In
general Traffic/transport, Noise general Traffic/transport, Noise
/ vibration, Ecology, water, / vibration, Ecology, water,
landscape, soil & land quality, landscape, soil & land quality,
and air appear in ~80% of UK and air appear in ~80% of UK
Environmental Statements. Environmental Statements.
This figure is based on a This figure is based on a
review of 100 ES (of different review of 100 ES (of different
development types) submitted development types) submitted
to UK consenting authorities to UK consenting authorities
during 2010. See Box 5.2 in during 2010. See Box 5.2 in
the report @ the report @
www.iema.net/eiareport www.iema.net/eiareport
2. Obligation to include Yes Austria Austria
7 information on the
environmental impact
of the construction
phase of the project
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Hungary Germany
Italy Hungary
Malta Italy
Netherlands Lithuania
Poland Malta
Romania Netherlands

193
 Slovakia Poland
Slovenia Romania
Spain Slovakia
United Kingdom Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
No Germany: Ireland
No, not mandatory acc. to the
Federal EIA Act or the EIA Act
of Land Schleswig-Holstein,
but in practice operators are
asked to include this
information
Ireland: Not
specifically. Requirement to provide a description of the likely
significant effects of the proposed development on the
environment.
2. Obligation to include Yes Austria Austria
8 information on the
environmental impact
of accidents /
incidents of the project
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Hungary Hungary
Italy Italy
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Netherlands Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Spain:
in the follow
Spain:
in the follow
No Germany Germany
Ireland Ireland
Slovakia Netherlands
Slovenia Slovakia
United Kingdom Slovenia
United Kingdom
2. Level of detail General level (rough Slovakia Netherlands
9 required in the estimations)
documents that the
developer has to
provide for the EIA
Slovakia
Medium level Germany Germany
(modeling for selected
tpoics, estiomations
for the rest)
Lithuania Lithuania
Netherlands Netherlands
Romania Poland

194
 Slovakia Romania
Slovenia Slovakia
United Kingdom Slovenia
United Kingdom
Detailed level (on all Austria Austria
topics)
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia: Cyprus
Modelling specifically required
for env. effects
Cyprus Czech Republic
Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Hungary
Hungary Ireland
Ireland Italy
Italy Malta
Malta Spain
Poland United Kingdom
Spain
United Kingdom
2. Average volume of the 50 to 200 pages Bulgaria Bulgaria
1 documents that the
0 developer has to
provide for the EIA
Denmark Denmark
Lithuania Germany
Netherlands Lithuania
Romania Netherlands
Poland
Romania
201 to 500 pages Cyprus Cyprus
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Poland
501 to 1,000 pages Czech Republic Czech Republic
Germany Hungary
Malta Malta
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
United Kingdom United Kingdom
over 1,000 pages Austria Austria
2. Responsible Federal authority: Cyprus: Cyprus:
1 competent authority / specification Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Ministry of Agriculture, Natural
resources and Environment resources and Environment
1 authorities for carrying (MANRE) (MANRE)
out the EIA
France: France:
Ministry of Environment Ministry of Environment

Malta: Malta:
Malta Environment and Malta Environment and
Planning Authority Planning Authority
Netherlands: Slovakia:
In case of fills in the area of Slovak Environmental
large rivers or coastal waters Imspectorate (part of the
the ministry of infrastructure Slovak Ministry of the
and environment is the Environment)

195
 competent authority, the
proponent (relevant authorities
or private parties) carries out
the EIA
Slovakia: Slovenia:
Slovak Environmental Ministry
Imspectorate (part of the
Slovak Ministry of the
Environment)
Slovenia:
Ministry
Regional authority: Austria: Austria:
specification Regional governments Regional governments

Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
Regional inspectorates for Regional inspectorates for
Environment and Waters Environment and Waters
(RIEW) (RIEW)
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Germany: Hungary:
Agency for Agriculture, the environmental inspectorate
Environment and Rural Areas
of Land Schleswig-Holstein
(LLUR)
Hungary: Italy
environmental inspectorate
Italy Lithuania:
Environmental agency or
regional environmental agency
Lithuania: Poland:
Environmental agency or Regional Director for
regional environmental agency Environmental Protection
Netherlands: Slovakia:
in case the decisions involved Or designated powers to the
are taken on a regional level, Regional Environmental Office
the proponent (relevant and the District Environmental
authorities or private parties) Office
carries out the EIA
Poland: Spain:
Regional Director for +2.500 m²
Environmental Protection
Romania:
Regional Environmental Agency for EIA of project covering more
than one region;
REPA (if classified unter IED)
Slovakia:
Or designated powers to the Regional Environmental Office and
the District Environmental Office
Spain
Local authority: Denmark: Denmark:
specification Municipalities, cf. Section 2, Municipalities, cf. Section 2,
subsection 1 and 4, of subsection 1 and 4, of
Ministerial Order no. 1510, Ministerial Order no. 1510,
dated 2010-12-15, concerning dated 2010-12-15, concerning
EIA. EIA.
Ireland Germany:
Building authority
Netherlands: Ireland
in case the decisions involved
are taken on a local level, the
proponent (relevant authorities
or private parties) carries out
the EIA
Poland: Netherlands:
municipal authority municipality in local spatial
plans

196
 Romania: Poland:
Regional Environmental municipal authority
Protection Agency for EIA of
project covering more than one
county;
EPA
United Kingdom: Romania:
Local planning authority - EPA
either a district authority or a
County Council
Spain:
-1.000 m² or -50 Kw
United Kingdom:
Local planning authority -
either a district authority or a
County Council
Statutory body: Croatia: Croatia:
specification Ministry Ministry

Ireland: Ireland:
Planning: ABP on appeal, or ABP on appeal
directly in the case of
development by or on behalf of
a local authority, or Strategic
Infrastructure Development.
Where a Waste Licence is
required, the EPA assess the
EIS while carrying out the
licence application
assessment. Both the ABP
assessment and EPA
assessment form the overall
EIA.
Lithuania: Lithuania:
Ministry of environment Ministry of environment
Other: specification Spain:
Delegation regional authority
1.000 to 2.500 m² or 50 Kw
2. Evaluation of the Austria Experts of the authority and if Experts of the authority and if
need be external experts need be external experts
1 quality of the review the information review the information
2 information submitted submitted and check the submitted and check the
project against the state of the project against the state of the
by the developer by art ( and according to art ( and according to
the competent traceability, completeness and traceability, completeness and
authority / authorities plausibility) in the respective plausibility) in the respective
topic, the expert team prepares topic, the expert team prepares
a (written) environmental a (written) environmental
impact expertise or a summary impact expertise or a summary
assessment . assessment .
Bulgaria The competent authority shall The competent authority shall
assess the quality of the EIA assess the quality of the EIA
report in 14 days following its report in 14 days following its
deposition, on the basis of the deposition, on the basis of the
following criteria: following criteria:
1. completeness and accuracy 1. completeness and accuracy
of the information by sections of the information by sections
of the report, in compliance of the report, in compliance
with the Terms of reference with the Terms of reference
approved by the competent approved by the competent
authority; authority;
2. consideration of the results 2. consideration of the results
of the consultations held; of the consultations held;
3. equalized description, 3. equalized description,
analysis and comparison of the analysis and comparison of the
alternatives; alternatives;
4. significance of impacts; 4. significance of impacts;
significance of significance of
unavoidable/permanent unavoidable/permanent
impacts on the environment; impacts on the environment;
5. proposed measures for 5. proposed measures for
prevention or reduction of prevention or reduction of

197
 substantial harmful impacts, substantial harmful impacts,
intended to ensure compliance intended to ensure compliance
with the environmental with the environmental
normative acts, and plan normative acts, and plan
elaborated for their elaborated for their
implementation; implementation;
6. availability of graphic 6. availability of graphic
materials – maps, schemes, materials – maps, schemes,
sketches, diagrams, etc.; sketches, diagrams, etc.;
7. the non-technical summary 7. the non-technical summary
should not contain technical should not contain technical
terms. terms.

Croatia In the course of (public) In the course of (public)

sessions of the advisory expert sessions of the advisory expert
committee; method of committee; method of
operation of the committee and operation of the committee and
the criteria for evaluating the the criteria for evaluating the
environmental impact study environmental impact study
may be elaborated in detail In may be elaborated in detail In
the decision on appointment of the decision on appointment of
the committee. the committee.
Cyprus within the Committee for EIA within the Committee for EIA
formed by various authorities formed by various authorities
(MANRE, Planning and (MANRE, Planning and
Housing Dept, Ministry of Housing Dept, Ministry of
Labour and Social Security, Labour and Social Security,
Ministry of Commerce, Ministry Ministry of Commerce, Ministry
of Works, Federation of of Works, Federation of
Environmental and Ecological Environmental and Ecological
Organisations, ETSC Organisations, ETSC
Czech Republic The information is first The information is first
reviewed by the "Reviewer" reviewed by the "Reviewer"
(who provides an opinion on (who provides an opinion on
the Environmental Impact the Environmental Impact
Statement). This is then Statement). This is then
reviewed in a public reviewed in a public
consultation process & consultation process &
Relevant Authority issues the Relevant Authority issues the
final statement. final statement.
Denmark The competent authority is The competent authority is
responsible for the quality of responsible for the quality of
the information the information
Germany Involvement of other Local development plan: the
departments of LLUR and information is checked by the
other authorities affected by authority, it becomes subject of
the project, involvement of the the weighting procedure and
public and public discussion the decision is made by the
local council or the municipal
council.
development consent: the
information is checked by the
authority.

Ireland Planning: Discretionary public Discretionary public hearing.

hearing. Written Assessment Written Assessment (report)
(report) which takes account of which takes account of
submissions by prescribed submissions by prescribed
bodies and third parties. bodies and third parties.
Additional information may be
sought from the applicant as
required.
Italy a documental screening phase a documental screening phase
is expected before the is expected before the
beginning of EIA beginning of EIA
Lithuania it is assessed during the procedure, but not mentioned in the
EIA decision

198
 Malta On a case-by-case basis as On a case-by-case basis as
the information submitted to the information submitted to
the Competent Authority is the Competent Authority is
reviewed and detailed reviewed and detailed
comments are sent to the EIA comments are sent to the EIA
Consultant for any Consultant for any
amendments/revisions; by the amendments/revisions; by the
Director of Environment Director of Environment
Protection Protection
Netherlands by the authorities itself, by the authorities itself,
sometimes by the NCEA sometimes by the NCEA
Poland both the authority and the both the authority and the
RDOS (independently) assess RDOS (independently) assess
the contents. There is no the contents. There is no
specific binding guidance specific binding guidance
anmd the assesmetn may be anmd the assesmetn may be
either very formal of in-depth, either very formal of in-depth,
on a case by case basis on a case by case basis
Romania during the meeting of the during the meeting of the
Technical Comitee Technical Comitee
based on guideline and based on guideline and
checklist provided in the checklist provided in the
legislation -MO 863/2002 legislation -MO 863/2002
In most cases the quality of In most cases the quality of
information provided by the information provided by the
developer are very good. If the developer are very good. If the
quality requirements are not quality requirements are not
met than the competent met than the competent
authority could claim to revise authority could claim to revise
those pieces of information those pieces of information
Slovakia elaborative expert review elaborative expert review
(expert appointed by ministry) (expert appointed by ministry)
Slovenia an independent environmental an independent environmental
expert from the ministrys expert from the ministrys
expert 'database' (once a year expert 'database' (once a year
the ministry publishes a public the ministry publishes a public
tender and invites candiates tender and invites candiates
for environmental exeprt to for environmental exeprt to
submit their tenders) submit their tenders)
Spain If not detailed, requires correct
Usually good, otherwise
required to remedy
United Kingdom Reviewed by planning officer Reviewed by planning officer
and relevant colleagues. There and relevant colleagues. There
are no formal (mandatory are no formal (mandatory
criteria for this). A number of criteria for this). A number of
local authorities contract local authorities contract
consultants in to review consultants in to review
Environmental Statements to Environmental Statements to
assess the quality of the assess the quality of the
information submitted. information submitted.
2. Consideration of the Development consent Austria Austria
1 result of the EIA in the comprises binding
3 development consent conditions /
obligations based on
the recommendations
from the EIA process
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Hungary Hungary
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Malta Lithuania
Netherlands Malta
Poland Netherlands
Romania Poland
Slovakia Romania

199
 Spain Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Development consent Netherlands Netherlands
comprises
recommendations
proposed in the EIA
process
Slovenia

Other: specification Bulgaria: Bulgaria:

the EIA Decision is attached to the EIA Decision is attached to
the development consent the development consent
Croatia: Croatia:
Committee issues an opinion EIA results are taken into
on the accept. of the project account in the location permit
contains in particular: expl. on for project impl.
the (non)accept. of the
project’s most accept.
alternative, descr. of the
project’s most accept.
alternative for the env. with an
expl., proposal of env.
protection measures with an
impl. plan, proposal of env.
monitoring programme with an
impl. plan.
Germany: Germany:
The EIA is an integral part of Local development plan:
the plan approval procedure. If environmental report is one
conditions, obligations and issue taken into account in the
recommendations result from decision making process and
the EIA they are integrated into becomes part of the charter.
the plan approval. There they Development consent (§ 145
are not separated from other BauGB) authority checks
sector specific obligations whether there are results that
have to be taken into the
permit as conditions or
obligations
Lithuania: Malta:
EIA recommendations are The possibility of a negative
binding, and they have to be recommendation if there are
observed in the project design. unacceptable residual impacts
The Development consent should also be considered.
approves the final project
design, which assumes that
the EIA recommendations
have been fully observed and
integrated in it
Malta: Netherlands:
The possibility of a negative if the EIA states 'necessary
recommendation if there are measures' to conform to
unacceptable residual impacts regulation or similar
should also be considered.
Netherlands: United Kingdom:
if the EIA states 'necessary Binding conditions are applied
measures' to conform to by the development consent;
regulation or similar however, they do not include
everything recommended by
the ES. Reesarch in the East
of England in 2005 indicated
that up to 50% of EIA
recommendations were not
conditioned by local planning
authorities. The reasons
behind this are multiple.

200
 United Kingdom:
Binding conditions are applied by the development consent;
however, they do not include everything recommended by the
ES. Reesarch in the East of England in 2005 indicated that up to
50% of EIA recommendations were not conditioned by local
planning authorities. The reasons behind this are multiple.

2. Documentation of the Technical report Croatia Czech Republic

1 results of the EIA produced prior to the
4 development consent
Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Hungary
Hungary Lithuania
Lithuania Netherlands
Netherlands Poland
Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain
United Kingdom United Kingdom
As part of the Austria Austria
document associated
with the final
development consent
Cyprus Cyprus
Germany Ireland
Ireland Italy
Italy Malta
Malta Netherlands
Netherlands
Other: specification Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
EIA report + EIA Decision EIA report + EIA Decision
Malta: Croatia:
Environmental Planning Committee issues an opinion
Statement on the accept. of the project
contains in particular: expl. on
the (non)accept. of the
project’s most accept.
alternative, descr. of the
project’s most accept.
alternative for the env. with an
expl., proposal of env.
protection measures with an
impl. plan, proposal of env.
monitoring programme with an
impl. plan.
Netherlands: Germany:
depends for example on the Environmental report (§ 2 Abs.
decision(s) involved and 4 BauGB) becomes part of the
phasing in the decision documents of the charter
making, usually tailor-made
Poland: Malta:
the EIA ends in a sperate Environmental Planning
administrative decsion Statement
(decsion on environmetnal
conditions of the development)
which is binding for all
subsequent administrative
decsions issued

201
 Poland:
a decision on the
environmental conditions;
the EIA ends in a sperate
administrative decsion
(decsion on environmetnal
conditions of the development)
which is binding for all
subsequent administrative
decsions issued
2. Character of the Environmental permit Austria Austria
1 development consent
5 for the respective
project type
Czech Republic Denmark
Germany Italy
Hungary Malta
Ireland Poland
Italy
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Slovakia
Slovenia
Planning permission Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Denmark
Denmark Germany
Hungary Hungary
Ireland Ireland
Malta Malta
Netherlands Netherlands
Poland Poland
Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Other: specification Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
Construction permit Construction permit
Croatia: Croatia:
See the General note in the See the General note in the
beginning of the Questionnaire beginning of the Questionnaire
Poland: Germany:
multistage procedure, Development consent (building
including, apatr from the licence)
environmetnal decsion,
planning/location permit,
construction and exploitation
permit. The general
interpretation is that the
developmetn cosent is made
up of all the permits including
the construction pemit.
Slovakia: Poland:
Building Permit construction permit;
multistage procedure,
including, apatr from the
environmetnal decsion,
planning/location permit,
construction and exploitation
permit. The general
interpretation is that the
developmetn cosent is made

202
 up of all the permits including
the construction pemit.

Spain: Slovakia:
One hand, mandatory, binding, Building Permit
independent of the
authorization procedure
Slovenia:
Both building permit &
environmental permit are
needed if EIA undertaken; If
project meets thresholds
Spain:
Let's continue with the
processing of authorization
2. Development consent No Germany: If “appeal”
1 provides for appeals means “to submit objections against the project to the authority”,
it is not the case. People/parties can directly file suit or take
6 action against the project bearer.
Yes Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
France France
Germany: Germany
if “appeal” means “file suit” or
“take action against s.o.
Hungary Hungary
Ireland: Ireland
Except in the case of Strategic
Infrastructure Development or
Local Authority Development
Italy Italy
Malta Malta
Netherlands Netherlands
Poland Poland
Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain United Kingdom
United Kingdom
2. An appeal can be Everybody Bulgaria Bulgaria
1 lodged by
7
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark: Denmark:
(provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal
interest in the matter). interest in the matter).
Hungary Hungary
Ireland: Ireland:
in case of planning provided theay have made a
submission to the planning
authority in the first instance
Italy Italy
Malta Malta

203
 Netherlands Netherlands
Romania Romania
Slovenia Slovenia
Spain Spain
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Neighbours Austria Austria
Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany
Poland Poland
Municipalities Austria Austria
Denmark: Denmark:
(provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal
interest in the matter). interest in the matter).
Germany Germany
Poland Poland
Citizen's groups Austria Denmark:
(provided it has spatial issues
as a purpose, is governed by
bye-laws and has more than
100 members).
Denmark: Germany
(provided it has spatial issues
as a purpose, is governed by
bye-laws and has more than
100 members).
Germany Poland
Poland Slovakia
Slovakia
Environmental Austria Austria
organisations
Denmark: Denmark:
(provided it has spatial issues (provided it has spatial issues
as a purpose, is governed by as a purpose, is governed by
bye-laws and has more than bye-laws and has more than
100 members). 100 members).
Germany Germany
Poland Poland
Slovakia Slovakia
NGOs Denmark: Denmark:
(provided it has spatial issues (provided it has spatial issues
as a purpose, is governed by as a purpose, is governed by
bye-laws and has more than bye-laws and has more than
100 members). 100 members).
Germany Poland
Poland Slovakia
Slovakia
Statutory bodies / Denmark: Denmark:
agencies (provided they have a legal (provided they have a legal
interest in the matter). interest in the matter).
Poland Poland
Other: specification Austria: Austria:
Project applicant; parties Project applicant; parties
stipulated by the applicable stipulated by the applicable
administrative provisions for administrative provisions for
example land owners; example land owners;
ombudsman of the ombudsman of the
environment, water environment, water
management planning body; management planning body;
Note: Environmental Note: Environmental
organisations (including also organisations (including also
environmental NGOs), which environmental NGOs), which

204
 have been recognised by the have been recognised by the
Federal Minister of Federal Minister of
Environment in agreement with Environment in agreement with
the Federal Minister for the Federal Minister for
Economic Affairs Economic Affairs

Denmark: Denmark:
Minister of the Environment, Minister of the Environment,
National Park Fund National Park Fund
Germany: Lithuania:
Generally: those who are it is a part of the construction
affected by the project law, not environmental law and
administrative law
Ireland: Slovakia:
In the case of a Waste Licence recently amended in legislation
(issued by EPA) only those
who made a submission during
the licence application
assessment stage can make
an objection to a decision.
Slovakia:
recently amended in legislation

3. Public Participation
Landfill Shopping Center
N Issue Answer Country Country
°
3. Information of public Mandatory by the Bulgaria Bulgaria
1 about the project and developer
the EIA
Cyprus Cyprus
Ireland Ireland
Italy Italy
Malta Lithuania
Romania Malta
Romania
Mandatory by the EIA- Austria Austria
authority
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany
Hungary Lithuania
Lithuania Malta
Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia Spain
Spain United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Other: specification Austria: Austria:
In many cases voluntary by the In many cases voluntary by the
developer developer

205
 France: France:
optional optional
Ireland: Hungary:
With regard to developments Inspectorate
requiring a Waste Licence, all
information pertaining to the
licence application and the EIS
are available on the EPA
website
Romania: United Kingdom:
Mandatory by the develper As indicated previously the
under close coordination of majority of UK EIA now involve
competent authority for EIA public engagement activities
prior to submission of the
Environmental Statement and
application for consent. This is
not mandatory, but has been
found to be of such value that
developers have taken it up
voluntarily and it is now seen
as standard EIA practice. The
scale of such activity will vary
per project.
United Kingdom:
As indicated previously the majority of UK EIA now involve
public engagement activities prior to submission of the
Environmental Statement and application for consent. This is not
mandatory, but has been found to be of such value that
developers have taken it up voluntarily and it is now seen as
standard EIA practice. The scale of such activity will vary per
project.

3. Provision of the Public advertisement Austria Austria

2 mandatory information
on the project and the
EIA
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Germany Hungary
Hungary Ireland
Ireland Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Malta
Malta Netherlands
Netherlands Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia Spain
Spain United Kingdom
United Kingdom
On the EIA-authority's Austria Austria
website
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark

206
 Ireland: Germany
in the case of EPA
Italy Hungary
Lithuania Italy
Malta Lithuania
Poland Malta
Romania Poland
Slovakia Romania
Slovenia Slovakia
United Kingdom Slovenia
United Kingdom
During public hearings Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark Denmark
Germany Germany
Hungary Hungary
Ireland Ireland
Lithuania Lithuania
Malta Malta
Poland: Poland
if held - decision at the
discretion of authority
Romania Romania
Slovakia Slovakia
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Other: specification Austria: Austria:
Austrian EIA database (open Austrian EIA database (open
to public). Crucial information to public). Crucial information
included in this database is included in this database is
also accessible via Internet. also accessible via Internet.
Czech Republic: Czech Republic:
EIA/SEA information system EIA/SEA information system
Ireland: Ireland:
Site notice Site notice
Spain: Spain:
In the official bulletin of the In the official bulletin of the
regional authority in the web of regional authority in the web of
substantive body and the substantive body and the
municipal authority municipal authority
3. Extent of public Austria The environmental impact The environmental impact
statement of the developer is statement of the developer is
3 participation in the available for public inspection available for public inspection
entire EIA process for for at least 6 weeks; for certain for at least 6 weeks; optional
projects the environmental public hearing; the
the respective project impact expertise by the EIA development consent
type authority is available for public documents are available for
inspection for at least 4 weeks; public inspection for at least 8
optional public hearing; the weeks (right to appeal see
development consent above).
documents are available for
public inspection for at least 8
weeks (right to appeal see
above).
Bulgaria high high

Croatia For all type of projects: the For all type of projects: the
public is involved in scoping public is involved in scoping
and EIA review (through the and EIA review (through the
public debate/ debates). public debate/ debates).
JASPERS is not aware of a JASPERS is not aware of a
specific public particcipation for specific public particcipation for

207
 this project type this project type
Cyprus scoping and review (public scoping and review (public
debate) debate)
Czech Republic The public has the possibility The public has the possibility
to review the first "notification to review the first "notification
of conception". Furthermore a of conception". Furthermore a
public hearing is to be public hearing is to be
scheduled to review the scheduled to review the
"environmental impact "environmental impact
statement" statement"
Denmark The public may participate in The public may participate in
the scoping process. the scoping process.
Germany Interested neighbours, citizens’ Comments, statements and
groups, NGOs, … participate objections are taken into
in the procedure account during the weighting
procedure
Hungary Possibility for review of the Possiblity to comment on
documentation preliminary assessment as well
as final.
Ireland PLANNING: (a) Third party (a) Third party right to make
right to make submissions at submissions at planning
planning permission stage permission stage (Local
(Local Authority) or directly to Authority) (b) third party right of
ABP in the case of local appeal to ABP against decision
authority development or of local planning authority
Strategic Infrastructure provided they have made a
Development (b) third party submission to the planning
right of appeal to ABP against authority in the first instance.
decision of local planning Third parties can also apply for
authority provided they have leave to appeal directly to ABP
made a submission to the in exceptional circumstances.
planning authority in the first
instance. Third parties can
also apply for leave to appeal
directly to ABP in exceptional
circumstances. WASTE
LICENCE: The public has
access to the licence
application documentation
(including the EIS), in
hardcopy format and electronic
format on the EPA website.
The licensing process allows
for written submissions by
anyone. Everyone who makes
a submission is notified of the
EPA's proposed decision on
the application. Subsequently,
anyone may make an
objection, to a proposed
decision by the EPA on an
application, within 28 days of
notification of the proposed
decision. Submissions are
available for public inspection
on the EPA's website and are
con
Italy the public can provide comments within 60 days from teh
beginning of the procedure
Malta at stages: notification, at stages: notification,
screening, scoping, review, screening, scoping, review,
including public hearing, EPS including public hearing, EPS
issuance; issuance;
Public participation is carried Public participation is carried
out during some of the major out during some of the major
steps in the EIA process: (1) steps in the EIA process: (1)
during scoping and the drafting during scoping and the drafting
of the Terms of Reference for of the Terms of Reference for
the EIA; (2) following the EIA; (2) following
finalisation of the finalisation of the
Environmental Statement Environmental Statement
which is issued for public which is issued for public
consultation; and (3) during the consultation; and (3) during the
EIA-related public hearing. EIA-related public hearing.

208
Netherlands In the Netherlands there are In the Netherlands there are
few EIA's for landfill. The few EIA's for shopping centers.
extent seems limited. Mostly these centers are
Depending on the controversity combined in EIA's for large
of the project the participation urban developments The
can be wider extent seems limited.
Depending on the procedure
for example the controversity
of the project the participation
can be wider
Poland Every person has the right to Every person has the right to
take part in EIA procedure and take part in EIA procedure and
the right to submit comments the right to submit comments
and suggestions in the course and suggestions in the course
of a procedure; The of a procedure; The
administration authorities administration authorities
competent to issue decision on competent to issue decision on
the environmental conditions the environmental conditions
require that the possibility of require that the possibility of
public participation should be public participation should be
ensured prior to the issue and ensured prior to the issue and
modification of decision; the modification of decision; the
administration authority administration authority
competent to issue such competent to issue such
decisions shall provide the decisions shall provide the
public without an undue delay public without an undue delay
with information concerning: with information concerning:
the possibilities of becoming the possibilities of becoming
acquainted with the necessary acquainted with the necessary
documentation of the case and documentation of the case and
the place where it is available the place where it is available
for review. The administration for review. The administration
authority in the justification of authority in the justification of
the decision, irrespective of the the decision, irrespective of the
requirements under the requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Administrative Procedure
Code, shall provide information Code, shall provide information
on public participation in the on public participation in the
procedure and the manner in procedure and the manner in
which the comments and which the comments and
suggestions submitted in suggestions submitted in
relation to public participation relation to public participation
have been considered and the have been considered and the
extent to which they have been extent to which they have been
used. used.
formal scope of public invlov mostly relatively little publ
Romania throughout all the EIA throughout all the EIA
procedural stages: notiification, procedural stages: notiification,
screening, scoping, reviewing, screening, scoping, reviewing,
including pupblic dabate, EIA including pupblic dabate, EIA
decision issuance; decision issuance;
Anyone interested can read Anyone interested can read
the documentations and can the documentations and can
provide written objections to provide written objections to
competent authorities competent authorities
Slovakia If public submits important If public submits important
comments to preliminary comments to preliminary
environmental study, the environmental study, the
competent authority invites competent authority invites
members of the public to the members of the public to the
consultation at later stages. consultation at later stages.
Slovenia Every person shall have right Time-line: public has 30 days
of access to environmental of the public announcement
information the right of access and an
Time line - public has 30 days opportunity of gininvg opininos
of the public announcement and comments (Article 58)
the right of access and an
opportunity of ginonvg opinions
and comments (Article 58)
Spain Such projects, often have high Such projects often have no
opposition answer

209
 United Kingdom In the majority of cases for In the majority of cases for
such development public such development public
engagement would occur engagement would occur
during the EIA process, prior to during the EIA process, prior to
submission to understand the submission to understand the
views of NGO's local groups, views of NGO's local groups,
etc. This may involve etc. This may involve
information provision, public information provision, public
scoping, workshops, public scoping, workshops, public
exhibtions, neighbourhood exhibtions, neighbourhood
meetings / Q&A's, direct meetings / Q&A's, direct
meetings with specific groups. meetings with specific groups.
All such activity is voluntary All such activity is voluntary
and will vary between different and will vary between different
projects, but a degree of this projects, but a degree of this
action is standard practice action is standard practice
across UK EIA practice. across UK EIA practice.

Formal consultation with the Formal consultation with the

public occurs at submission of public occurs at submission of
application of consent. This application of consent. This
consultation is both on consultation is both on
application and ES findings. application and ES findings.
The responses from the public The responses from the public
can lead to further assessment can lead to further assessment
being required before the being required before the
consent is determined. The consent is determined. The
public are able to attend local public are able to attend local
authority consent procedures authority consent procedures
and make reresentations and make reresentations
directly to the elected decision- directly to the elected decision-
makers. makers.

4. Monitoring
Landfill Shopping Center
N Issue Answer Country Country
°
4. Recommendation of No Denmark Denmark
1 monitoring of
environmental impacts
by EIA
Netherlands
Yes Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Cyprus
Czech Republic Czech Republic
Hungary Germany
Ireland Hungary
Italy Ireland
Lithuania Italy
Malta Malta
Netherlands Poland
Poland Romania
Romania Slovakia
Slovakia Slovenia
Slovenia Spain
Spain
Other: specification Austria: Slovakia:
e.g. as measures proposed in Specified by person carrying
the environmental impact out the programme
expertise or the summary
assessment of the authorities´

210
 expert team, and subsequently
as conditions in the
development consent

Germany: United Kingdom:

Answer to 3.1.4.1 to 3.1.4.3: Depends on the impacts
There is no extra chapter of identified. In general
conditions, obligations, monitoring is limited as it is
recommendations deriving difficult to require monitoring
from the EIA in the final via the conditions that can be
decision. Whether a condition, imposed on UK planning
obligation or recommendation permissions. However,
is based on the EIA, an monitoring of landfill gas levels
objection against the project or and signs of leachate pollution
the expertise of an authority / leakage would be expected
affected by the project makes for landfill projects. Also
no difference. A specifically recommending
recommendation for a permit dust / litter monitoring
obligation may result in an (operation) and archaeological
obligation in the permit and watching brief during
become part of the inspection construction would be
later on. This is not regulated expected.
by law.
Note:
In the UK Environmental
Management Plans are
becoming common practice to
carry EIA recommendations
from an Environmental
Statement through the consent
and into construction (and in
some cases operation). Where
such a document is included in
an environmental statement
there tends to be better
coverage of monitoring.

However, a shopping centre

would not require fomral
environmental monitoring
under wider legislation so in
many cases monitoring would
not be untertaken
Slovakia:
Specified by person carrying out the programme

United Kingdom:
Depends on the impacts identified. In general monitoring is
limited as it is difficult to require monitoring via the conditions
that can be imposed on UK planning permissions. However,
monitoring of landfill gas levels and signs of leachate pollution /
leakage would be expected for landfill projects. Also specifically
recommending dust / litter monitoring (operation) and
archaeological watching brief during construction would be
expected.

Note:
In the UK Environmental Management Plans are becoming
common practice to carry EIA recommendations from an
Environmental Statement through the consent and into
construction (and in some cases operation). Where such a
document is included in an environmental statement there tends
to be better coverage of monitoring.
4. Development consent No Czech Republic Czech Republic
2 comprises conditions /
recommendations on
monitoring based on
EIA
Denmark Denmark
Hungary Hungary

211
 Lithuania Lithuania
Slovakia Netherlands
United Kingdom Slovakia
United Kingdom
Yes Austria Austria
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Cyprus Germany
Germany: Ireland
see answer 3.1.4.1
Ireland Italy
Italy Malta
Malta Poland
Netherlands Romania
Poland Slovenia
Romania Spain
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
4. Type of monitoring Traffic Italy Austria
3 programs (as
recommended by the
EIA) provided for by
the development
consent
Malta Germany
Poland Ireland
Spain Italy
Malta
Poland
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
Noise Ireland Austria
Italy Germany
Malta Italy
Poland Malta
Slovenia Romania
Spain Slovenia
Spain
Air quality Bulgaria Austria
Ireland Bulgaria
Italy Germany
Lithuania Italy
Malta Malta
Poland Romania
Romania Slovenia
Slovenia Spain
Spain
Vibrations Malta Germany
Spain Malta
Spain
Waste management Austria Bulgaria

212
 Bulgaria Germany
Ireland Italy
Poland Romania
Romania Spain
Spain
Nature protection Ireland Germany
Spain
Water Austria Bulgaria
Bulgaria Germany
Ireland Italy
Italy Romania
Netherlands Slovenia
Poland Spain
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
Other: specification Croatia: Germany:
measuring meteorological Depending on the case and
parameters, landfill gas the items that were most
emissions, leachate and important in the EIA
precipitation discharges from
the landfill surface, the
hazardous substance pollution
parameters of groundwater, if
located in the landfill impact
area; control of landfill body
stability.
Germany: Malta:
see answer to 3.1.4.1 This is carried out on a case-
by-case basis, depending on
the significant impacts
identified in the Environmental
Statement.
Malta: Poland:
This is carried out on a case- depending on local
by-case basis, depending on environmental conditions
the significant impacts
identified in the Environmental
Statement.
Netherlands: Slovakia:
ground water, nature values Dependant on impacts
Slovakia: Slovenia:
Dependant on impacts state of environment,
monitoring with purpose of
reducing risk to environment,
monitoring natural phenomena
Slovenia:
state of environment, monitoring with purpose of reducing risk

213
 United Kingdom:
Depends on the specific project and its predicted environmental
effects. However, monitoring can prove difficult to condition due
to restrictions placed on rules concerning the phrasing of
conditions, which must:

Conditions should be clear and specific

• Compliance must be possible
• Inclusion of a requirement to report on the completion of
mitigation works or on
monitoring can encourage self-policing by project proponents
• Any conditions concerning monitoring should be clear on what
is to be monitored,
how it is to be achieved, who is responsible for carrying it out
and how the results
will be used to effect necessary action
• Planning authorities should consider how they will monitor and
enforce
such conditions and also how the results of monitoring and
mitigation will be
communicated to third parties

Further guidance on the tests for planning conditions can be

found in DoE circular
11/95 and in the Scottish Government’s Circular 4/1998 and
addendum, and on
planning obligations in ODPM ci
4. Check of compliance During final inspection Austria Austria
4 with the monitoring after completion of
conditions construction
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Germany
Germany Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Malta
Malta Poland
Poland Romania
Romania
During environmental Bulgaria Bulgaria
inspections
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Germany
Germany Italy
Ireland Malta
Italy Poland
Malta Romania
Poland Slovenia
Romania Spain
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
By periodical reporting Austria Austria
by the developer
Croatia Croatia
Germany Germany
Ireland Ireland
Italy Malta
Malta Slovenia
Netherlands Spain

214
 Poland
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
No checks on consent Denmark Denmark
conditions are carried
out by authorities
Slovakia Netherlands
Slovakia
Other: specification Czech Republic Czech Republic
Denmark: Denmark:
Compliance with the Compliance with the
monitoring conditions are monitoring conditions are
subject to the general subject to the general
regulatory supervision. regulatory supervision.
Hungary: Germany:
controls and test runs Depending on the case and
the items that were most
important in the EIA
Ireland: Slovakia:
for planning conditions, Specified by person carrying
complaints to local authority out the programme
Slovakia: United Kingdom:
Specified by person carrying Some conditions relate to
out the programme environmental monitoring that
relates to checks that will be
undertaken by statutory
bodies, this form of monitoring
will occur regularly and be
complied with. Other
development control /
management by local
authorities is designed to
check that conditions are
delivered; however, this
process is not effectively
delivered in all cases. As such,
conditions may not be
delivered or delivered in a less
effective manner than
imposed.
United Kingdom:
Some conditions relate to environmental monitoring that relates
to checks that will be undertaken by statutory bodies, this form
of monitoring will occur regularly and be complied with. Other
development control / management by local authorities is
designed to check that conditions are delivered; however, this
process is not effectively delivered in all cases. As such,
conditions may not be delivered or delivered in a less effective
manner than imposed.

4. Check of compliance During final inspection Austria Austria

5 with all other after completion of
conditions construction
Bulgaria Bulgaria
Croatia Croatia
Cyprus Germany
Germany Italy
Italy Lithuania
Lithuania Malta
Malta Poland
Poland Romania
Romania United Kingdom

215
 United Kingdom
During environmental Bulgaria Bulgaria
inspections
Croatia Croatia
Denmark Denmark
Germany Italy
Ireland Malta
Italy Poland
Lithuania Romania
Malta Slovenia
Netherlands Spain
Poland
Romania
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
By periodical reporting Croatia Croatia
by the developer
Germany Germany
Ireland Malta
Italy Slovenia
Malta Spain
Poland United Kingdom
Slovenia
Spain
No checks on consent Slovakia Netherlands
conditions are carried
out by authorities
Slovakia
Other: specification Bulgaria: Bulgaria:
1) The competent authorities 1) The competent authorities
shall exercise control over shall exercise control over
implementation of the implementation of the
conditions set forth in the conditions set forth in the
decision on EIA: decision on EIA:
in the process of approval and in the process of approval and
coordination of investment coordination of investment
projects; projects;
in the process of construction; in the process of construction;
in the process of issue of in the process of issue of
permit for use of the permit for use of the
construction; construction;
in the process of operation of in the process of operation of
the facilities. the facilities.
2) The control shall include 2) The control shall include
verification, by documents and verification, by documents and
by on-site visits, of the results by on-site visits, of the results
from implementation of the from implementation of the
plan for measures for plan for measures for
prevention, reduction or prevention, reduction or
liquidation of substantial liquidation of substantial
harmful impacts on the harmful impacts on the
environment, and assessment environment, and assessment
of their efficiency. of their efficiency.
3) Where the decision on EIA 3) Where the decision on EIA
has been issued by the MEW, has been issued by the MEW,
the control over the control over
implementation of the implementation of the
conditions may be assigned to conditions may be assigned to
the respective RIEW, basin the respective RIEW, basin
directorate or directorate of directorate or directorate of
national park. national park.

216
 Czech Republic: Czech Republic:
not spcified not spcified
Ireland: Germany:
for planning conditions, case during inspections
by case checks by local
authority department
Slovakia: Ireland:
Specified by person carrying case by case checks by local
out the programme authority department
United Kingdom: Slovakia:
Some conditions relate to Specified by person carrying
environmental monitoring that out the programme
relates to checks that will be
undertaken by statutory
bodies, this form of monitoring
will occur regularly and be
complied with. Other
development control /
management by local
authorities is designed to
check that conditions are
delivered; however, this
process is not effectively
delivered in all cases. As such,
conditions may not be
delivered or delivered in a less
effective manner than
imposed.
United Kingdom:
Some conditions relate to
environmental monitoring that
relates to checks that will be
undertaken by statutory
bodies, this form of monitoring
will occur regularly and be
complied with. Other
development control /
management by local
authorities is designed to
check that conditions are
delivered; however, this
process is not effectively
delivered in all cases. As such,
conditions may not be
delivered or delivered in a less
effective manner than
imposed.
4. Consequences, if the Austria usually subsequent usually subsequent
improvement, penal provisions improvement, penal provisions
6 project does not in the EIA Act set down fines in the EIA Act set down fines
comply with EIA for non-compliance for non-compliance
related conditions /
obligations of the
development consent
Bulgaria not known not known

Cyprus imprisonment not exceeding imprisonment not exceeding

six months or a fine not six months or a fine not
exceeding fifteen thousand exceeding fifteen thousand
pounds or with both penalties; pounds or with both penalties;
in addition to any penalty in addition to any penalty
imposed, the court has the imposed, the court has the
power to order that the works power to order that the works
be demolished pr removed or be demolished pr removed or
configured properly as to configured properly as to
comply with any conditions comply with any conditions
from the environmental from the environmental
approval, and fix the time approval, and fix the time
within which the offender must within which the offender must
comply comply
Czech Republic not specified not specified

217
 Denmark The legal consequence is that The legal consequence is that
the project is non-compliant the project is non-compliant
and the developer will be and the developer will be
refrained from carrying out the refrained from carrying out the
project. project.
Germany Subsequent orders acc. to Discussion of offences with the
Article 32 par. 4 Product investor, subsequent orders, if
Recycling and Waste necessary fines
Management Act
Hungary fines, sanctions, revoking fines, sanctions & possible to
permit revoke permit
Ireland PLANNING: The Planning The Planning Authority has
Authority has statutory powers statutory powers in respect of
in respect of a breach of a a breach of a planning
planning condition and other condition and other
enforcement powers. WASTE enforcement powers
LICENCE: EPA have
enforcement powers relating to
conditions of Waste Licence.
Italy the developer is subjected to the developer is subjected to
various fines various fines
Malta a guarantee is presented by a guarantee is presented by
the applicant and penalties are the applicant and penalties are
applied in case of any breach applied in case of any breach
of any condition imposed by of any condition imposed by
the DC; enforcement action the DC; enforcement action
may be carried out may be carried out
Netherlands court cases court cases

Poland suspension of the works suspension of the works

carried out in a way that carried out in a way that
significantly deviated from the significantly deviated from the
terms and conditions specified terms and conditions specified
in the permit for construction or in the permit for construction or
in the rules - Art. 50 section 1 in the rules - Art. 50 section 1
of the Construction law; of the Construction law;
formally all conditions are formally all conditions are
binding - so a breach results in binding - so a breach results in
breaking the law; there is a breaking the law; there is a
possibility of modifications and possibility of modifications and
derrogations, subject to derrogations, subject to
screening /assessment. screening /assessment.
Romania The developer which is not The developer which is not
compling with the compling with the
environmental permit may be environmental permit may be
penalized fined with a fine penalized fined with a fine
betwen 5,000 euro and 10,000 betwen 5,000 euro and 10,000
euro. Also the permit may be euro. Also the permit may be
suspendet after a prior notice suspendet after a prior notice
by the competent authority. by the competent authority.
Slovakia fines fines

Slovenia inspector establishes inspector establishes

regulations have been regulations have been
breached, he can temporarily breached, he can temporarily
or permanently prohibit the or permanently prohibit the
operation of a plant/installation, operation of a plant/installation,
performance of activity,etc.; performance of activity,etc.;
propose withdrawal of propose withdrawal of
environmental protection environmental protection
permit; can propose measures; permit; can propose measures;
request repetition of request repetition of
operational monitoring - operational monitoring -
possibility of a fine if violation possibility of a fine if violation
of permit of permit
Spain Punishment and correction or Punishment and correction or
closure closure
4. Information of the No, the public is not Bulgaria Austria
7 public about the informed about the
results of monitoring results of monitoring
Cyprus Bulgaria
Denmark Cyprus
Germany Denmark

218
 Hungary Germany
Lithuania Malta
Malta Netherlands
Slovakia Slovakia
Slovenia Slovenia
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Yes: specification Austria: Ireland:
For certain projects, a post- Planning files are open to the
project analysis has to be public
carried out (at the latest five
years after notification of
completion). The Austrian EIA
database (open to public)
includes the results of the post-
project analysis.
Ireland: Italy:
PLANNING: Planning files are on the authority website
open to the public
WASTE LICENCE:
Enforcement files are open to
the public at regional EPA
offices.
Italy: Poland:
on the authority website It may be released under
access to information on the
environment. The competent
authority shall inform the public
by putting on a publicly
accessible list of information
such as the follow-up analysis
- Art. 21 section 2, item 17 17
Act OOS;
information is publicly
available, however rarely
publicly advertised (i.e. only
informed members of the
public would obtain access)
Netherlands: Romania:
passive if a request is made The public access to the result
usually the information is of monitoring is guaranteed.
provided Every person interesend can
receive those results on
request. Also mountly reports
regardin environemntal
condistions published by
competent authority consist of
those information among
others.
Poland: Spain:
It may be released under The records are public
access to information on the
environment. The competent
authority shall inform the public
by putting on a publicly
accessible list of information
such as the follow-up analysis
- Art. 21 section 2, item 17 17
Act OOS;
information is publicly
available, however rarely
publicly advertised (i.e. only
informed members of the
public would obtain access)
Romania:
The public access to the result of monitoring is guaranteed.
Every person interesend can receive those results on request.
Also mountly reports regardin environemntal condistions
published by competent authority consist of those information
among others.

219
Spain:
The records are public

220
12.5 Appendix 5: Links to Guidance

Austria:
http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/DP085.pdf
http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_SUP_EMAS/uvp-
leitfaeden/EKZ_Leitfaden.pdf
http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf-leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf
http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_SUP_EMAS/uvp-
leitfaeden/EFP_LF.pdf
http://www.lebensministerium.at/umwelt/betriebl_umweltschutz_uvp/uvp/materialien/lei
tfaeden.html,http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_SUP_E
MAS/uvp-leitfaeden/EFP_LF.pdf, http://www.salzburg.gv.at/pdf-leitfaden-uvp-2.pdf

Cyprus:
http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agriculture.nsf/index_en/index_en?OpenDocument

Denmark:
https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=125636
https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=125637
https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=125638

Germany:
www.bmu.de/umweltvertraeglichkeitspruefung/doc/6379.php
www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf
www.fgsv-verlag.de, www.schleswig-
holstein.de/UmweltLandwirtschaft/DE/ImmissionKlima/03_Luftreinhaltung/02_Genehmig
ungsverfahren/3_Eckpunkte/03_3_PDF/

Ireland:
http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/Environment/Miscellaneous/FileDownLoad,1804,e
n.pdf

Lithuania:
http://www.am.lt/VI/files/0.519685001249378224.pdf

Netherlands:
http://www.infomil.nl/onderwerpen/ruimte/mer/mer-scan/

Poland:
www.gdos.gov.pl

221
Romania:
http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislations/view/624,
http://www.anpm.ro/upload/58674_2010_DESULFURARE.pdf
http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislations/view/624,
http://www.anpm.ro/upload/58673_2010_DESEURI.pdf
http://apmar.anpm.ro/Mediu/reglementari-16
www.mmediu.ro
http://www.anpm.ro/upload/58671_2010_AUTOSTRAZI_si_DRUMURI.pdf
http://www.epcmediu.ro/legislatie/hotarare-nr-1213-din-6-septembrie-2006
http://apmar.anpm.ro/legislations/view/624

Spain:
http://www.magrama.es/es/calidad-y-evaluacion-ambiental/temas/evaluacion-
ambiental/guias-directrices/
http://www.cmati.xunta.es/portal/cidadan/lang/gl/pid/2567

United Kingdom:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/
publications/planningandbuilding/circularenvironmentalimpact
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100410180038/http://communities.gov.uk/
publications/planningandbuilding/environmentalimpactassessment
http://infrastructure.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Advice-note-7-
EIA-screening-and-scoping.pdf
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/1999/10/pan58-root/pan58-pdf
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-Environment/planning/National-Planning-
Policy/themes/enviro-assessment/eia/Screening
http://dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol11/section2/hd4708.pdf

222
12.6 Term of References

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR IMPEL PROJECT

No Name of project
2012/09 The implementation of the Environmental Impact
Assessment on the basis of precise examples

1. Scope
1.1. Background The Environmental Impact Assessment or EIA Directive was adopted in
9
1985 and was first amended in 1997 . The EIA procedure ensures that the
environmental consequences of projects are identified and assessed before
authorisation is given. The public can give its opinion and all results are
taken into account in the authorisation procedure of the project. The public
is informed of the decision afterwards.
The EIA Directive outlines the project categories which should be made
subject to an EIA, the procedure that shall be followed and the content of
the assessment.
The purpose of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) is to increase
the consideration for environmental matters and management of resources
in the decision-making through a regulated process of consultation.
The "Study concerning the report on the application and effectiveness of the
EIA Directive (2009)" highlighted a number of "problematic areas" in the
application of the EIA Directive, namely:
• Screening - inter alias, the use of thresholds
• Transboundary consultations - different procedures applied in the
various Member States
• Quality control
• Monitoring
In addition the Study pointed out other means of ensuring effectiveness in
application like
• Guidance on the assessment of the impacts on human health
• Guidance on how to address the issue of "salami-slicing"
• Guidance on how to address the issue of cumulative effects of
projects
• Guidance and/or assessment tools on the integration of climate
change issues, focusing inter alia on projects for which these issues
are particularly relevant
The recommendations in this Study and the experience with the application
of EIA lead to this IMPEL project, where the following issues should be
addressed:
• How do MS deal with aspects like screening, scoping cumulation,
"salami slicing"?
• How are the results of the EIA taken into consideration? (both by
using precise examples)
Which thresholds lead to the application of EIA regime?

9
Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directives 97/11/EC and 2003/35/EC

223
1.2. Link to MAWP This project is in line with the following IMPEL strategic goals outlined in the
and IMPEL’s role Multi annual work program:
and scope
Strategic goal II: Improving methodologies
by exchange of different experiences and the documentation
Strategic goal III: Development of good practices
By learning from each other and showing results of different approaches to
EIA issues, different permitting processes and procedure through a
questionnaire and a workshop
Strategic goal V: Providing feedback to policy makers
The results will also help to improve the knowledge of the commission and
EU Institutions
1.3. Objective (s) The main objectives are to
• Compare what kind of information is required to determine if an EIA has
to be carried out
• Exchange experience which approaches are used for special EIA issues
(screening, scoping, cumulation, "salami slicing", no impacts, accident
risk, interaction between factors, traffic)
• Identify Good Practice
• Exchange of information on existing guidance material
1.4. Definition The IMPEL project will compare the screening and permitting procedure of
projects with EIA. As a first step the project will analyse the present
situation in the MS and the current needs in permitting procedure. Therefore
a questionnaire will be send out, covering two main thematic complexes:
Complex 1: Screening
Possible topics:
• Verifying the obligation for an EIA with the help of precise examples
(e.g. for land reclamation for the purposes of conversion to another
type of land use; urban development projects, ski-lifts and cable
cars; holiday villages and hotel complexes, golf-courses; parking
areas)
• Compare thresholds for screening
• Are there regulations for cumulation or dealing with "salami slicing"
and how are they designed respectively what happens, if the limits
for EIA were not exceeded
• How is the screening phase at the beginning of an EIA designed (in
terms of complexity, extension, operating expense, level of detail)
• Reasons for exclusion of an EIA

The questionnaire will be developed with help of the IMPEL-NEPA "Better

Regulation Checklist".
Complex 2 - Comparison of the EIA procedure and the level of detail
Possible topics:
• Scoping (consideration of climate, climate protection, energy
efficiency, traffic, accident risk, no impact statements, interaction
between factors)
• Information to be provided by the developer / frame of the content
• Quality control
• Consideration of the results of the EIA
• Monitoring (are there final inspections or controlling instruments
after the realization of a project within the EIA –procedure and how
are they designed)
The project will be carried out on the basis of one or two precise examples.

224
 The examples will be defined by the core team.
After the analysis of the questionnaire and the consolidation of the results a
workshop will be held with max. 25 participants from IMPEL Member States
(max. 2 of each country). The participants exhibit EIA experience in
permitting procedure. A consultant will support and assist the group.
The project participants will meet once in 2012 to discuss the evaluation of
the questionnaire, exchange experiences and enhance the knowledge for
the most urgent needs.
A final report will be written which will cover the findings and
recommendations for improvements.
1.5. Product(s) Final IMPEL paper with findings, outcomes and recommendations for
further development of the EIA and the application in Member States

2. Structure of the project

2.1. Participants Representatives from competent authorities from IMPEL Member States
with EIA experience and involved in EIA permit procedures
IMPEL secretariat and EU-Commission are invited to participate
2.2. Project team Core team: representatives of Austria and four other Member States
(geographical diversity is desired):
- Department of environmental protection of the Provincial Government of
Salzburg, Markus Graggaber, Austria
- Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water
Management, Susanna Eberhartinger-Tafill, Austria
- Germany
- Italy
- one or two further MS (eg. from eastern or western Europe)
A representative of a consulting agency, who will
• prepare the questionnaire
• prepare the evaluation of the questionnaire
• prepare the meeting of the working group
• document the results of the presentations and the
discussions during the meeting of the working group
• incorporate participant's recommendations and draft
the final paper
2.3. Manager Department of environmental protection of Salzburg and the Austrian
Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water
Executor
Management
2.4. Reporting Draft report will be submitted and epresented at the Cluster meeting in
arrangements autumn 2012
Final report will be submitted to the IMPEL Plenary Meeting in autumn 2012
for approval
2.5 Dissemination The final report will be put on the IMPEL website. Report will also be
of results/main disseminated to the competent authorities, environmental agencies a.o. in
target groups IMPEL Member States.
The result of this project will be sent as an IMPEL information to the
competent EU institutions.

225
3. Resources required
3.1. Project costs 2012
and budget plan 1. Overhead (organisation) cost (€) : 500
2 Project meeting costs (€)
Meeting 1
No of Participants: 5
Travel: 1.000
Accommodation: 360
Catering: 200
Meeting venue: 0
Meeting 2
No of Participants: 5
Travel: 1.440
Accommodation: 360
Catering: 200
Meeting venue: 0
Workshop (Salzburg)
No of Participants: 18
Travel: 6.120
Accommodation: 2.380
Catering: 900
Meeting venue: 900
Meeting 4
No of Participants: 5
Travel: 1.440
Accommodation: 360
Catering: 200
Meeting venue: 0
3. Other costs (€):
Consultant: 19.500
Translation: 0
Dissemination: 0

TOTAL cost per year € 35.860

TOTAL project cost € 35.860
3.2. Fin. from Project meeting costs (€): 15.860
IMPEL budget Other costs (consultant) (€) 10.000
3.3. Co-financing 1. Overhead costs (€): as co-financing
by MS (and any contribution, committed by Lead Country
other ) (name of institution)
2. Project meeting costs (workshop
accommodation)
3. Other costs (€): consultant, as co-financing 10.000
contribution (Lebensministerium Vienna)
Meeting preparation and participation
3.4. Human from
MS

4. Quality review mechanisms

The quality of the final product will be reviewed by the project participants and appraised by the
Cluster "Improving permitting, inspection and enforcement". It will then be submitted to the IMPEL
General Assembly for appraisal and adoption.

226
5. Legal base
5.1. Directive/ Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directives 97/11/EC and
Regulation/Decision 2003/35/EC
5.2. Article and
description
th
5.3 Link to the 6 EAP

6. Project planning
6.1. Approval A document with input material for the project was presented at the Cluster 1
meeting in Vienna 11/12 March 2010. After that a ToR was developed and
presented and supported by Cluster "Improving permitting, inspection and
enforcement". The ToR 2010 was accepted by the IMPEL General Assembly,
had to be moved on behalf of personal circumstances.
6.2. Fin. The project is supported by IMPEL, Austria
Contributions
6.3. Start January 2012
6.4 Milestones January 2012: Project start, request for input to the first draft of the
questionnaire
January 2012: Meeting 1 of the Core Team, finalization of the questionnaire,
first preparation and design of the workshop
February 2012: dissemination of the questionnaire to participants and experts
with EIA experience and involved in EIA permit procedures
March 2012: Meeting 2 of the Core Team, analysis of the questionnaire,
preparation of the workshop
April 2012: Workshop
May 2012: preparation draft version of the final report
June 2012: adjustment of the draft report with all participants
July 2012: Meeting 3 of the Core Team, discussion of the draft version of the
final report
August 2012: submitting draft version of the final report to IMPEL Cluster 1
Autumn 2012: Final report
6.5 Product Final project report
6.6 Adoption Presentation and discussion of the final report to the IMPEL Plenary is planned
for winter 2012

227
228