§3.2.5 Conclusions of the appropriate assessment

An assessment carried out under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive must contain complete, precise and definitive findings and conclusions in the light of the best scientific knowledge in the field. It must be capable of removing all reasonable scientific doubts as to the effects of the plan or project proposed on the protected site concerned. The conclusions of the appropriate assessment must clearly relate to the integrity of the site and its conservation objectives. Where the assessment concludes that there will be adverse effects on the integrity of the site, it should clarify for which aspects, taking mitigation into account, there are residual adverse effects. This will be important if the plan or project is further considered under Article 6(4). A worked out example of a possible format for recording the results of the appropriate assessment is provided in Table 9 on the next page. Site 1: SPA Xxx Summary description: The SPA contains the largest extent of marsh in Xxxxxx region. The wide diversity of coastal habitats found on the site supports important numbers of water birds throughout the year. Potential impact Feature affected Conservation objectives Adverse effect of plan/project alone on the feature Adverse effect of plan/project in combination with other plans or projects on the feature affected Possible avoidance or mitigation of adverse effects Conclusion: adverse effects on the integrity of the site: Yes. No. Uncertain. Long term. Short term Habitat loss Species disturbance Birds of coastal habitats: ... … (species names) Maintain population and distribution of species… (details in relation to the conservation objectives). Maintain structure and functions and supporting processes on which habitats of species rely… (details in relation to the conservation objectives). Component X of the plan will reduce the area of saltmarsh available to the species. A potential loss of 110 ha has been estimated in the appropriate assessment. There is the potential for adverse effects in combination with other plans that would increase indirect pressures on the sites. Increased disturbance through a rise in recreational use, associated with other projects, would have adverse effects on the site. No Yes – long term Habitat deterioration Birds of lowland wet grasslands … … (species names) Maintain population and distribution of species… (details in relation to the conservation objectives). Maintain structure and functions and supporting processes on which habitats of species rely… (details in relation to the conservation objectives). Component Y of the plan could cause a modification in the water flow regime that could affect wet grasslands that provide suitable habitat for the species …..(details in relation to the conservation objectives) Not expected Uncertain Uncertain (component Y is not defined in detail so effects on flow regime cannot be properly assessed and quantified). … Following the completion of the appropriate assessment, its conclusions should be clearly presented in a report which: (a) describes the plan or project in sufficient detail for members of the public to understand its nature, scale and objectives; (b) describes the baseline conditions of the Natura 2000 site as well as its conservation objectives; (c) identifies the adverse effects of the plan or project on the Natura 2000 site in view of the site-specific conservation objectives; (d) explains how those effects will be avoided or sufficiently reduced through mitigation; (e) sets out a timescale and identifies the mechanisms through which the mitigation measures will be secured, implemented and monitored; (f) draws a duly justified conclusion as to the impact on the integrity of the site. The appropriate assessment report should be drafted clearly, with: (i) easy-to-follow evidence trails (e.g. leading from activities to pressures and to sensitivities and vulnerabilities of affected natural features); and (ii) an adequate level of evidence or analysis, suitable for consultation with the relevant nature conservation agencies and the public. For some of the plan’s elements or components, adverse effects on the site’s integrity may be uncertain or not possible to determine with enough confidence. Such aspects would, however, still require further consideration. Many national strategies comprise key planned investments like new reservoirs or transport corridors which may affect Natura 2000 sites, but whose exact location, design or operation details are not determined yet; such elements must be duly assessed at project level. In such cases, this fact, i.e. the remaining uncertainty, should be recorded in the results of the assessment, and such components/elements of plans must undergo appropriate assessment at project level (see also section 4.2). The conclusions of the appropriate assessment, together with any agreed mitigation measures or conditions, should also be part of the permit or any other decision taken in relation to the plan or project under consideration. Making a decision on the basis of the appropriate assessment It is for the competent authorities, in the light of the conclusions of the appropriate assessment into the implications of a plan or project for the Natura 2000 site concerned, to approve the plan or project. This can be done only after they have made certain that the plan or project will not adversely affect the integrity of the site. That is the case where no reasonable scientific doubt remains as to the absence of such effects. Where doubt remains as to the absence of adverse effects on the integrity of the site linked to the plan or project being considered, the competent authority will have to refuse authorisation (C-127/02 paragraph 57). See further details in the Article 6 Guide – section 4.7.3. A specimen report for presenting the outcomes of the appropriate assessment is presented in Box 16 at the end of section 3.2. If the competent authority determines that adverse effects will occur or cannot be excluded, then the plan or project may not proceed (unless the conditions of Article 6(4) apply – see section 3.3).

← 3.2.4 · All articles · 3.2.6 →

Source: EUR-Lex (Cellar) · retrieved 2026-09-07