COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 189 c (b) of the EC-Treaty Common position of the Council on the 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
Date: 1996-07-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: environmental impact, environmental protection, industrial project, private sector, project evaluation, public sector

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

*
*
☆

^ ☆

***

☆
*
*

Bmssels, 01.07.1996 
SEC(96)1224 final

94/0078 (SYN)

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 189 c (b) of the EC-Treaty

Common position of the Council on the

proposal for a Council Directive amending 
Directive 85/337/TEEC on the assessment of the effects 
of certain public and private projects on the environment

N'i

Δ

Π7 1996

received

*0

to

to

1.  Procedure

The proposal (COM (93) 575 final, 94/0078 SYN of 16 March 1994) was sent to the 
Council on 21 April 1994.

The Economic and Social Committee adopted its opinion on 14 September 1994 (OJ 
C393, 31.12.1994, p.l).

The Committee of the Regions adopted its opinion on 16 November 1994 (OJ C210, 
14.8.1995, p.78).

The European Parliament delivered its opinion on a first reading on 11 October 1995 
(OJ C287, 30.10.1995, p. 83).

The Commission presented an amended proposal (COM (95) 720 final) and sent it to 
the Council on 18 January 1996 (OJ C 81, 19.03.1996, p. 14).

At its 1939th meeting on 25th June 1996, the Council adopted a common position on 
the Directive.

2.  Aim of the Directive

The Proposal aims to improve the environmental assessment procedure set out in Directive 
85/337/EEC and to clarify and extend the lists of projects to which the Directive applies.

3.  Commission position on the Council’s common position

3.1  General remarks

The Commission accepted (in whole or in part) 16 of the 58 amendments to the 
Proposal requested by the Parliament; 11 of these 16 amendments have been fully or 
partially incorporated into the common position.

3.2  Specific remarks

(A) Parliamentary amendments accepted by the Commission and incorporated into the

common position :

-  the amendments to recital 1 (amendment 2), recital 3 (amendment 8), and recital 4 
(which has become part of recital 3) (amendment 11);

-  the substitution of a new Article 2(1) requiring the projects covered by Directive 
85/337/EEC to be subject to a requirement for development consent and an 
environmental assessment (amendment 32);

-  the substitution of a new Article 3 setting out the general requirements of an 
environmental assessment (amendment 25 - incorporated in part);

-  the reinstatement in Article 5 of the minimum list of information to be provided bv 
the developer (amendment 28);

-  the addition of the following types of project to Annex I ol' Directive 85/.337/I d X ' - 
projects relating to nuclear pouer stations and fuels and to radio active waste

(amendment 44 - incorporated in part); the incineration of non-ha2ardous waste 
(amendment 46); ground water capture schemes; works for the transfer of water 
between river basins; waste water treatment plans; extraction of hydrocarbons; dams 
and other installations for the holding back of water; and intensive livestock rearing 
installations (amendment 47 - in some cases thresholds used to define these projects 
have been added or amended);

- the addition of the following types of project to Annex Π of Directive 85/337/EEC - 
extraction of minerals by marine drôiging; wind farms (amendment 50); certain 
racing and test tracks; the storage of scrap vehicles; cable cars (amendment 51).

(B) 

Parliamentary amendments accepted bv the Commission but not incorporated into the
common position :

- the amendments to the second and seventh recital (amendments 3 and 15) and the 
addition of a new recital referring to the Dublin summit (amendment 5) - the second 
recital and the new recital referring to the Dublin summit were not considered 
necessary and the seventh recital was rewritten on the basis that the revisions to the 
transboundary provisions in Directive 85/337/EEC are desirable but not necessary in 
a legal sense;

- the revision of the opening paragraph of new Article 7(2) (amendment 33) - Article 
7 was rewritten and tìiis revision was no longer requirod;

-  the addition of a final paragraph to Article 9 (amendment 34) - Article 9 was also 
rewritten so that this revision was no longer required.

(C) 

New elements introduced bv the Council :

-  some relatively minor revisions of Article 2 of Directive 85/337/EEC (vdiich, in 
particular, provide that a single procedure may be used to fulfil the requirements of 
the 1985 Directive and the proposed Directive on integrated pollution, prevention and 
control and that the power of exemption in Article 2(3) of the Directive cannot be 
used to circumvent the transboundaiy consultation requirements in Article 7);

-  a revised Article 4, vdiich provides that Member States may determine whether 
projects listed in Annex Π of the Directive have to be environmentally assessed by 
either carrying out case by case examinations or by setting thresholds or criteria and 
that ^^hen carrying out such examinations or setting such thresholds or criteria the 
relevant selection criteria in new Annex Π1 must be taken into account;

- a revised Article 5, ^^hich makes the new scoping procedure conditional on a request 
being submitted by the developer and adds a reference to alternatives to the minimum 
list of infonnation to be provided by developers in every case;

- a revised Alide 7, wliich incorporates the main principles of the Espoo Convention 
on environmental impact assessment in a transbounda'y context;

-  revised Articles 8, 10 and 11(2), containing some minor drafting changes;

-  a revised Article 9, which replaces the requirement in the I^oposal to publish the 
development consent decision with a requirement to infonn the public of the decision 
and lo make rclcvanl infoi'niatii'n on the decision available;

J

-  a new Article 2 of the Proposal requiring a further 5 year report;

-  the redrafting of points 6 and 8(b) of Annex I and the addition of the following 
types of project to that Annex ; non - ferrous crude metal installations, dual carriage 
ways, installations for the chemical treatment of non-hazardous waste, ground water 
recharge schemes, gas, oil and chemical pipelines, installations for the manufacture 
of pulp, paper and board, quarries, open-cast mining and peat extraction, overhead 
electrical power lines, and storage installations for petroleum, petrochemical and 
chemical products (in most cases thresholds have been used to define these categories 
of project);

- the redrafting of some of the project categcaies in Annex Π and the addition of the 
following projects to that Annex insofar as they are not included in Annex I : 
extraction of minerals by fluvial dredging, installations for asbestos production, 
ground water abstraction and ground water recharge schemes, works for the transfer 
of water between river basins;

-  the redrafting of new Annex HI (criteria to be taken into account when setting 
thresholds and criteria or carrying out case by case examinations under Article 4).

Commission position on new elements ; The Commission considers that the common 
position text represents an acceptable compromise. The redrafting of Article 4 of 
Directive 85/337/EEC, read in conjunction with the transfer of projects from Annex 
II to Annex I and the redrafting of new Annex ΠΙ, sets out a generally acceptable 
mechanism for determining which projects should be submitted to an environmental 
assessment. Tlie extension of Annex I is to be particularly welcomed. The scoping 
provision in Article 5(2) could be stronger and it will be necessary to study closely 
how well tilis provision operates in practice. The Commission agrees with the 
introduction of a reference to "alternatives" in the minimum list of information in 
Article 5(3). The Commission is satisfied with new Article 7 because it incorporates 
the main principles of tlie Espoo Convention and applies those principles to all of the 
projects assessed under the Directive, not just to those listed in the Convention. The 
additions to Annex Π and the relatively minor amendments to Article 2, 8, 9, 10, and 
11 are also acceptable to the Commission.

4.  Conclusion

file Commission considers that the Common Position text is an acceptable compromise which should 
improve the operation of Directive 85/337/EEC.