COMMISSION NOTICE Assessment of plans and projects in relation to Natura 2000 sites…

COMMISSION NOTICE Assessment of plans and projects in relation to Natura 2000 sites – Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

guidance · European Union · 52021XC1028(02)

629 provisions in 962 nodes

Defined terms · All instruments · EU Member State · EU law · Internet · access to information · air quality · animal life · biodiversity · biosphere

Table

COMMISSION NOTICE

Assessment of plans and projects in relation to Natura 2000 sites – Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

1.1. Purpose and nature of the document

2. GENERAL APPROACH AND PRINCIPLES

2.1. The stages of the Article 6(3) and 6(4) procedure

2.2. Approach to decision making

3. THE ARTICLE 6(3) AND 6(4) METHODOLOGY

3.1. Stage 1: Screening

3.1.1. Step 1: Ascertain whether the plan or project is directly connected with, or necessary to, the management of a Natura 2000 site

3.1.2. Step 2: Description of the plan or project and its impact factors

Subparagraph

Table

3.1.3. Step 3: Identify which Natura 2000 sites may be affected by the plan or project

3.1.4. Step 4: Assess whether likely significant effects can be ruled out in view of the site's conservation objectives

Subparagraph

Assessing the likelihood of significant effects

Subparagraph

Table

Subparagraph

Assessing possible cumulative impacts with other plans and projects

3.1.5. Conclusions: decision based on the outcome of the screening

Subparagraph

Table

3.2. Stage 2: Appropriate assessment

Table

Subparagraph

3.2.1. Step 1: Collect information on the project and on the Natura 2000 sites concerned

3.2.2. Step 2: Assessing the implications of the plan or project in view of the site's conservation objectives, individually or in combination with other plans or projects

Table

Subparagraph

—

(a) Identifying the conservation objectives of the Natura 2000 sites affected by the plan or project

(b) Identifying and assessing the impacts of the plan or project in view of the site's conservation objectives

3.2.3. Step 3: Ascertain the effects of the plan or project on the integrity of the Natura 2000 site

3.2.4. Step 4: Mitigation measures

3.2.5. Conclusions of the appropriate assessment

3.2.6. Further considerations: consultations, quality of the appropriate assessment, access to justice

Ensuring the quality of the appropriate assessment

3.3. Stage 3: Procedure under Article 6(4)

Table

Subparagraph

3.3.1. Step 1: Examining alternative solutions

Table

Subparagraph

—

(a) Identification of alternative solutions

Subparagraph

—

Subparagraph

(b) Comparative assessment of the alternatives considered

3.3.2. Step 2: Examining imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI)

Weighing up IROPI against conservation objectives

Subparagraph

Table

3.3.3. Step 3: Identification, assessment and adoption of compensatory measures

Subparagraph

Table

(a) Main types of compensatory measures

(b) Guiding principles for setting compensatory measures and targets

Subparagraph

Table

Proportionality of the compensatory measures

Subparagraph

Table

Ecological functionality and location of the compensatory measures

(d) Evaluation and monitoring of compensatory measures under Article 6(4)

(e) Setting compensatory measures for plans

4. STRATEGIC PLANNING AND APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT OF PLANS

4.1. Strategic planning

Subparagraph

Table

Subparagraph

4.2. Appropriate assessment of plans

4.3. Sensitivity mapping

4.4. Consultation and dialogue in strategic planning

Subparagraph

5. LINKS WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES: EIA, SEA, WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

5.1. Streamlining environmental assessments

Subparagraph

5.2. Environmental impact assessment, strategic environmental assessment and the appropriate assessment

Subparagraph

Table

5.2.1. Opportunities for and benefits of streamlining EIA/SEA and appropriate assessment

Ensuring quality and completeness of the assessment:

Subparagraph

Consultation and public participation:

Subparagraph

Monitoring:

Subparagraph

Information to the public and consulted authorities:

Subparagraph

Conflict of interest:

Subparagraph

Transboundary impacts:

Subparagraph

5.2.2. Specific features of the appropriate assessment and differences with EIA/SEA procedures

Subparagraph

—

Table

5.2.3. Relationship between SEA/EIA/appropriate assessment and the strict species protection provisions of the Nature Directives

Subparagraph

—

Subparagraph

5.3. Assessments under Article 4(7) of the Water Framework Directive, coordinated or integrated with the Article 6(3) procedure under the Habitats Directive

EXAMPLES OF PRACTICES, CASE STUDIES, METHODS AND NATIONAL GUIDANCE

Introduction

Subparagraph

Table

1. SCREENING AND APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT: APPROACHES, METHODS, EXAMPLES FROM MEMBER STATES

1.1. Information and practical tools to support the screening and the appropriate assessments (AA)

Table

Subparagraph

Table

1.2. Guidance for the assessment

Table

Subparagraph

A: Background and status of the standards

Subparagraph

B: Concept of the standards

Subparagraph

C: Developing the thresholds for habitat loss

C. Thresholds for losses of habitats of animal species

Subparagraph

D: Advantages of the standards

ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OF EFFECTS ON THE NATURA 2000 SITE

(PART OF THE SCREENNG FORMAT INCLUDED IN NATIONAL GUIDELINES IN ITALY)

Table

1.3. Appropriate assessment of a national electricity programme in Ireland – assessment of cumulative effects

Assessment of cumulative effects

Subparagraph

Table

Subparagraph

Assessment of potential significant effects and proposal of mitigation measures

Subparagraph

—

Subparagraph

2. IMPERATIVE REASONS OF OVERRIDING PUBLIC INTEREST (IROPI)

2.1. Examples of various types of IROPI and their justification

Table

I. IROPI of a social or economic nature (site with non-priority target features)

Project: Proposed Upgrade to an existing Water Treatment Plant at Lough Talt, Co. Sligo (Ireland, 2019).

II. Justification of IROPI: protection of lives and property

Project: Implementation of a dirigible flood protection polder Rösa (Germany, 2014).

III. Justification of IROPI: other reasons including social and economic ones

Project: Public works for a high-speed train between Tours and Bordeaux (France, 2013).

IV. Justification of IROPI: other reasons further to an opinion from the Commission

Project: Deepening the Danube waterway between Straubing and Vilshofen; section Straubing-Deggendorf (Germany, 2019).

3. COMPENSATORY MEASURES

3.1. Examples of compensatory measures under Article 6(4)

Table

3.2. Time-related aspects of compensation measures

Table

Subparagraph

4. LINKS BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES: AA, EIA, SEA

4.1. Comparison of procedures under appropriate assessment (AA), EIA and SEA

Table

5. STRATEGIC PLANNING – ASSESSMENT OF PLANS

5.1. Example: Planning of highways in Austria

Table

5.2. Example: Strategic planning of new hydropower developments in the Danube

5.3. Example: Spatial plan for offshore wind farms and grid connections in the German North Sea EEZ

Table

Note