COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 18.01.1996 
COM(95)720 final 
94/0078 (SYN) 
Amended proposal for a 
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 
AMENDING 
DIRECTIVE 85/337/EEC ON THE ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF 
CERTAIN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROJECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT 
(presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 189 a (2) 
of the EC-Treaty) 

Explanatory memorandum 
In accordance with Article 130s, paragraph 1, of the EC Treaty, the Council consulted 
the European Parliament on the proposal for a Directive amending Directive 85/337/EEC 
on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment 
(COM(93) 575 final, 94/0078 (SYN)). At its Sitting of 11 October 1995 the European 
Parliament approved 58 amendments, 16 of which are accepted by the Commission, either 
in whole or in part1. These amendments are discussed below and included in the present 
modified proposal. 
Amendments accepted by the Commission 
Amendments of the recitals: Relevant background matters like the Fifth Action 
Programme on the Environment and Conclusions of the Dublin European Council are 
now included in the recitals as well as an indication of the Commission's intention to 
incorporate the main principles of the Espoo Convention into the Directive (amendments 
2, 5, 11 and 15). An amendment on a "high" level of protection and "similar" criteria is 
in line with the purpose of the Commission's proposal (amendment 3). As amended by 
amendment 8, recital 3 will better reflect the proposal, which will alter to some extent 
the scope of Member States' obligations. 
Amendment of articles of Directive 85/337/EEC: As amended in line with the first part 
of amendment 32 it is made clear in the directive that projects which require an assess­
ment have to be made subject to a requirement for development consent. The Commis­
sion considers, however, that the amendment would fit better with the body of the Direc­
tive if the change is made to Article 2(1) instead of Article 6, as proposed by the Par­
liament. 
In Article 3 the definition of the environmental factors covered by an assessment will be 
clarified (amendment 25). In Article 5 the minimum list of information to be gathered for 
an environmental impact assessment will be reintroduced. This will aid harmonisation 
within the Member States (amendment 28). Article 7 will be improved by inserting a 
new opening paragraph concerning the timetable for consultations in a transboundary 
context (the first part of the amendment 33). 
In Article 9 a new final paragraph will be inserted indicating that the detailed arrange­
ments for publishing a development consent decision are to be determined by Member 
States (the last part of amendment 34). 
Amendment of Annex I of Directive 85/337/EEC: The scope of Annex I will be improved 
by adding a reference to projects relating to certain activities, for example the production 
and enrichment of nuclear fuel, installations for the incineration of waste, ground water 
abstraction, and certain intensive lifestock installations (amendments 44 and 46 and 
points 9a, 9d, 9e, 9f, 9i, 9n and 9s of amendment 47). 
Amendment of Annex II of Directive 85/337/EEC: The scope of Annex II will be 
improved by inserting a reference to extraction of minerals by marine dredging, to 
Minutes of the Sitting of 11 October 1995, provisional edition, PE 194.336. 
windfarms, to permanent racing and test tracks, the storage of scrap iron and scrap 
vehicles and to cable cars (certain parts of amendments 50 and 51). 
Amendments not accepted bv the Commission 
Amendments of the recitals: The amendments not accepted to the recitals generally do 
not fit in with the proposal, are linked with other amendments which are being rejected 
or overlap with other amendments. They concern the Fifth Action Programme on the 
Environment (amendment 1), "second expert opinions" (amendment 6), carrying out a 
cost benefit analysis before carrying out a project (amendment 9), avoiding distortions of 
competition (amendment 71), the definition of the environment (amendment 12), the need 
to pay particular attention to islands (amendment 13), mechanism for determining which 
projects are to be assessed (amendment 14) and the need to harmonise community law 
(amendment 17). 
Amendment of articles of Directive 85/337/EEC: In general the proposed amendments not 
accepted to the Articles overlap with other Community proposals or legislation or do not 
fit in with the approach taken in the proposal. In the case of some amendments it is 
considered that the Directive is not an appropriate instrument for implementing the 
amendments proposed. 
Regarding Article 1 it was suggested that a requirement for an assessment of programmes 
be inserted (amendment 19, as well as amendments 4 and 7 of the recitals), but this 
should be dealt with in a separate proposal. It was also proposed to amend the definitions 
(amendments 20 and 21). These proposals are already covered by the Directive or overlap 
with other amendments. Furthermore, it is not considered appropriate to include projects 
for national defence purposes (amendment 22). The exemption of projects adopted by 
specific acts of national legislation (amendment 23) is not in line with the objective of 
avoiding duplication which objective already is indicated in the Directive. 
Concerning Article 2, it was suggested that new arrangements be inserted for applying 
the power to exempt specific projects in exceptional cases (amendment 24 and 
amendment 18 of the recitals); this is not considered necessary since this power is rarely 
used. As regards Article 4, the goal of the Commission proposal is to establish a clear 
and effective mechanism for determining which Annex II projects have to be assessed. 
In this context it is not considered that amendment 26 would improve the text of the 
proposal. 
With regard to Article 5(1), a new scoping process is foreseen with consultations between 
the developer and the authorities. It was suggested that this be amended by inserting 
public involvement in the scoping phase (amendment 27). This provision is considered 
too far reaching. The rest of the suggested amendments to this Article are not considered 
to improve the Commissions proposal i.e. information to be available to the developer 
(amendment 29), a register of environmental impact assessment consultants (amendment 
30) and civil liability (amendment 31). 
Regarding Article 6, a proposal was made concerning the details of public consultations 
(the second part of the amendment 32) and on Article 7 on transbouisdary conauNations 
a proposal was made to set out detailed procedural requirements (the inaj«rity of 
amendment 33 and amendment 18 of the recitals). However the Commission considers 
that such details are best worked out by Member States themselves. 
Regarding Article 9, the Commission proposed that the development decision sliould be 
notified to an affected Member State in a transboundary case. This should not be deleted 
as suggested in the first part of the amendment 34. Amendment 34 also suggested that 
environmental compensation would be dealt with here, but the Directive is not considered 
to be an appropriate instrument for dealing with this matter. Furthermore it was suggested 
that post-consent monitoring be included, (amendments 36, 37 and amendment 16 of the 
recitals), but this would overlap with other Commission proposals such as the draft Direc­
tive on Integrated Pollution Control. Regarding setting up an ad hoc committee to assist 
the Commission when reviewing the effectiveness of the Directive (amendment 38), the 
Commission already has regular contacts with Member States to discuss the Directive. 
Requirements on environmental impact assessment are also proposed in respect of 
projects outside of the EU which receive financing from the EU (amendments 39 and 84). 
This kind of assessment requirement is more appropriate to the relevant Community 
funding instrument. 
Amendment of commencement provision. There are two suggestions regarding com­
mencement provisions (amendments 40 and 41). However, the provisions of the Directive 
as adopted in 1985 should apply to all applications received before the date on which 
Member States have to comply with the provisions of the proposal. 
Amendment of Annex I of Directive 85/337/EEC: Certain amendments have not been 
accepted because the definitions therein are too imprecise to be useful (amendments 42, 
43, 45 and points 9b, 9c, 9g, 9h, 9j, 9k, 91, 9m, 9o, 9p, 9q, 9r and 9t to 9w of amend­
ment 47). 
Amendment of Annex II of Directive 85/337/EEC: It was suggested that new types of 
projects be introduced to Annex II. However a large number of projects will not usually 
have significant environmental effects or are already adequately dealt with in the 
Directive (this applies to amendments 49 and the rest of the amendments 50 and 51 men­
tioned above, 52, 53, 54 and 65). 
Amendment of the New Annex Ha of Directive 85/337/EEC: To the new Annex Ha two 
amendments have been proposed. However the "rational use of energy" proposal can be 
dealt with under the existing "use of natural resources" heading (amendment 55). In the 
other amendment the aim was to impose a requirement on the contents of land use plans, 
which are not covered by the Directive (amendment 56). 
Amendment of Annex III of Directive 85/337/EEC: Two proposals have been made to 
amend Annex III concerning the information collected under Article 5. It is considered 
unnecessary to spell out in the Directive the definition of "alternatives" (amendment 57). 
It is not considered appropriate to refer to "insurance cover" in Annex III (amendment 
67). 
In accordance with Article 189 A paragraph 2 of the EC Treaty, the Commission 
modifies as follows the text of its proposal concerning environmental impact assessment 
in order to include the accepted amendments into its proposal. 
AMENDED PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE AMENDING 
DIRECTIVE 85/337/EEC ON THE ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF 
CERTAIN PUBUC AND PRIVATE PROJECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT 
COM(93) 575 final, SYN 94/0078 
(Submitted by the Commission pursuant to Article 189a (2) of the EC Treaty on***) 
ORIGINAL TEXT AMENDED TEXT 
Recital 1 
Whereas the main purpose of the envi­
ronmental assessment procedure under 
Council Directive 85/337/EEC4 is to 
provide the competent authorities with 
relevant information to enable them to 
make a decision on a specific project in 
full knowledge of the facts regarding the 
project's probable impact on the environ­
ment; whereas the assessment procedure 
is therefore a fundamental instrument of 
environmental policy as defined in 
Article 130r of the Treaty; Whereas the main purpose of the envi­
ronmental assessment procedure under 
Council Directive 85/337/EEC4 is to 
provide the competent authorities with 
relevant information to enable them to 
make a decision on a specific project in 
full knowledge of the facts regarding the 
project's probable impact on the environ­
ment; whereas the assessment procedure 
is therefore a fundamental instrument of 
environmental policy as defined in 
Article 130r of the Treaty and of the 
Fifth Community programme of policy 
and action in relation to the environment 
and sustainable development: 
Recital 2 
Whereas a sufficient degree of environ­
mental protection must be ensured at 
Community level by laying down a 
general assessment framework and cri­
teria for defining those projects which 
must be submitted for an environmental 
assessment; Whereas a high degree of environmental 
protection must be ensured at Commun­
ity level by laying down a general 
assessment framework and similar cri­
teria for defining those projects which 
must be submitted for an environmental 
assessment; 
Recital 2b (new) 
Whereas the conclusions of the Dublin 
European Council stipulate that the pur­
pose of action by the Community and its 
Member States must be to guarantee 
their citizens the right to a clean and 
healthy environment: 
Recital 3 
Whereas the report on the implementa­
tion of Directive 85/337/EEC, as adopted 
by the Commission on 2 April 1993, 
shows that there are problems in apply­
ing the Directive; whereas certain provi­
sions of the Directive should therefore be 
clarified so that the assessment 
procedure may produce greater benefits, 
but without altering the actual scope of 
the Member States' obligations under the 
Directive: Whereas the report on the implementa­
tion of Directive 85/337/EEC, as adopted 
by the Commission on 2 April 1993, 
shows that there are problems in apply­
ing the Directive; whereas certain provi­
sions of the Directive should therefore be 
clarified so that the assessment 
procedure may produce greater benefits, 
Recital 4 
Whereas it would, nevertheless, appear. 
necessary to introduce provisions 
designed to improve the rules on the 
assessment procedure; Whereas experience acquired in environ­
mental impact assessment makes it 
necessary to introduce provisions 
designed to improve the rules on the 
assessment procedure; 
p/v»p/impact/KIA/<lirectiv/amen-en 
/em 
Recital 7 
Whereas some of these measures bring 
the provisions of the Directive into line 
with the Convention on environmental 
impact assessment in a transboundary 
context (Espoo Convention), which the 
Community signed at the same time as 
the Member States on 25 February 1991, Whereas it is necessary to incorporate in 
this Directive the main principles of the 
Convention on environmental impact 
assessment in a transboundary context 
(Espoo Convention), which the Com­
munity signed at the same time as the 
Member States on 25 February 1991, 
Article 1 (la) (new) 
Article 2 (1) is replaced by the follow­
ing: 
Member States shall adopt all measures 
necessary to ensure that projects likely to 
have significant effects on the environ­
ment by virtue inter alia of their nature, 
size or location are made subject to a 
requirement for development consent and 
an assessment with regard to their 
effects. 
These projects are defined m Article 4.' 
Article 1 (lb) (new) 
Article 3 is replaced by the following: 
'Article 3 
The environmental impact assessment 
will identify, describe and assess in an 
appropriate manner, in the light of each 
individual case and in accordance with 
Articles 4 to 11. the direct and indirect 
effects of a project on the following 
factors: 
human beings (including their 
health and safety and quality of 
life), fauna and flora; 
soil, water, air, climate, and land­
scape; 
material assets and the cultural 
heritage (including historical 
monuments and buildings and 
other buildings); 
z interaction between the factors 
mentioned in the first, second 
and third indents.' 
Article 1 (4) 
4. Article 5 (2) is deleted. Deleted. 
Article 1 (8) 
2. The Member States concerned 2. The Member States concerned 
shall «nter into consultations, setting a shall enter into consultations, and shall 
reasonable timetable for: set a reasonable time limit for the length 
of the consultation period for: 
Article 1 (10), final paragraph of Article 9 (new) 
The detailed arrangements for such infor­
mation shall be determined by the Mem­
ber States ' 
ANNEX (1) 
3.(a) Installations for the reprocessing 3.(a) 
of irradiated nuclear fuel; 
(b) Installations designed solely for 
the permanent storage or final 
disposal of radioactive waste 
storage installations for radioac­
tive waste or irradiated fuel.' 
-bai-Installations for the reprocessing 
of irradiated nuclear fuel; 
(b) Installations designed solely for 
the production or enrichment of 
nuclear fuels, the processing of 
irradiated nuclear fuels or other 
radioactive waste, the permanent 
or temporary storage and/or the 
disposal of radioactive waste or 
irradiated nuclear fuel: 
The dismantling of nuclear power 
stations.' 
ANNEX (3a) (new) 
Point 9 in Annex I is replaced by the 
following:: 
'9. Waste disposal installations for 
the incineration, chemical treat­
ment or : landfill of toxic and 
dangerous wastes, and installa­
tions for the incineration of 
industrial and domestic waste 
with a capacity of more than 300 
tonnes per day.' 
ANNEX (3b) (new) 
The following points are added to Annex 
L 
10. Ground-water capture schemes 
where the annual volume of 
water captured is equivalent to or 
exceeds 10 million cubic metres. 
11. Works for the transfer of water 
resources between river basins. 
12. Waste water treatment plants 
with a capacity exceeding 
300 000 population equivalents1 
including the management and 
treatment of the sludge. 
13. Installations for the production of 
hydrocarbons at sea. 
14. Dams and other installations 
designed for the holding back or 
permanent storage of water with 
a capacity of more than 100 Hm3. 
15. Installations for the intensive 
rearing of poultry or pigs with 
more than: 
40,000 places for poultry; 
2,000 places for the pro­
duction of pigs (over 30 
kg), or 
750 places for sows. 
For the purpose of this Directive, one population equivalent is an organic biodegradable load 
having a five day biochemical oxygen demand of 60g of oxygen per day. 
ANNEX (5a) (new) 
Other projects The following new pqwfe jfe aj<fed 
under points 2 and 3 in Annex H: 
2. Extractive Industry 
Extraction of minerals by marine 
dredging. 
3. Energy Industry 
Large-scale installations for the 
harnessing of wind power for energy 
production (wind farmsY 
ANNEX (7) 
11. Other projects 
(a) Permanent racing and test tracks for 
cars and motor cycles. 
(e) Storage of scrap iron. (a) Permanent racing and test tracks for 
motorised vehicles. 
(e) Storage of scrap iron and scrap 
vehicles. 
(j) Cable cars 
10 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(95) 720 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 14 
Catalogue number : CE-CO-95-751-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-98415-5 
Office for Official Publications of ilic European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
AA