Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment
Date: 2012-10-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building industry, environmental impact, environmental protection, impact study, industrial project, private sector, public sector

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 26.10.2012  
COM(2012) 628 final 

2012/0297 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and 
private projects on the environment 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

{SWD(2012) 354 final} 
{SWD(2012) 355 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

General context – Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

Directive  2011/92/EU1  contains  a  legal  requirement  to  carry  out  an  environmental 
impact  assessment  (EIA)  of  public  or  private  projects  likely  to  have  significant 
effects  on  the  environment,  prior  to  their  authorisation.  There  is  consensus  that  the 
main  objective  of  the  Directive  has  been  achieved;  the  principles  of  environmental 
assessment  have  been  harmonised  throughout  the  EU  by  the  introduction  of 
minimum  requirements  concerning  the  type  of  projects  subject  to  assessment,  the 
main developer’s obligations, the content of the assessment and the participation of 
the  competent  authorities  and  the  public.  In  parallel,  as  part  of  the  development 
consent process, the EIA is a tool to assess the environmental costs and benefits of 
specific  projects  with  the  aim  of  ensuring  their  sustainability.  Hence,  the  Directive 
has  become  a  key  instrument  of  environmental  integration  and  has  also  brought 
environmental and socio-economic benefits. 

After 25 years of application, the EIA Directive has not significantly changed, while 
the policy, legal and technical context has evolved considerably. The experience with 
implementation,  as  reflected  in  the  Commission  reports  on  the  application  and 
effectiveness of the EIA Directive, including the latest one published in July 20092, 
has  identified  a  number  of  shortcomings.  In  its  mid-term  review  of  the  6th 
Environment  Action  Programme3,  the  Commission  stressed  the  need  for  improving 
the assessment of environmental impacts at national level and announced a review of 
the  EIA  Directive.  In  the  context  of  Better  Regulation,  the  Directive  has  also  been 
identified as a potential instrument for simplification4. The general objective of the 
proposal  is  to  adjust  the  provisions  of  the  codified  EIA  Directive,  so  as  to  correct 
shortcomings,  reflect  ongoing  environmental  and  socio-economic  changes  and 
challenges, and align with the principles of smart regulation. 

Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union 

As the revised EIA Directive can play a crucial role in achieving resource efficiency 
(e.g. by introducing  new  requirements  for  assessing issues such as biodiversity  and 
climate change which are related to the use of natural resources), the proposal is part 
of the initiatives aiming to implement the Roadmap to a Resource-Efficient Europe5. 
Furthermore,  the  revision  of  the  EIA  Directive  subscribes  to  the  Europe  2020 
strategy6, in particular the priority of sustainable growth. The revised Directive can 
also  contribute  significantly  to  the  duty  of  the  Union  to  take  cultural  aspects  into 
account in all its policies and actions. 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

Directive 2011/92/EU (OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p.1) codifies Directive 85/337/EEC and its three subsequent 
amendments (Directives 97/11/EC, 2003/35/EC and 2009/31/EC). 
COM(2009) 378. All reports are available on http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/eia-support.htm. 
COM(2007) 225. 
COM(2009) 15. 
COM(2011) 571. 
COM(2010) 2020. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
2. 

RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE INTERESTED PARTIES AND 
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

Consultation of interested parties 

The consultation took place in 2010, in line with the Commission’s standards. From 
June  to  September  2010,  a  wide  public  consultation  on  the  review  of  the  EIA 
Directive  was  launched,  using  a  web  questionnaire  available  in  all  EU  official 
languages.  1365  replies  were  received  (684  from  citizens,  479  from  organisations, 
companies and NGOs, 202 from public authorities and administrations). In addition, 
the  Institute  of  Environmental  Management  &  Assessment  (IEMA)7  sent  a 
contribution (1815 responses) in the form of a survey incorporating a number of the 
Commission’s  questions.  The  consultation  phase  was  concluded  with  a  Conference 
(on  18-19/11/2010,  at  Leuven,  Belgium),  which  complemented  the  wide  public 
consultation as it looked for input from specialised stakeholders. 200 representatives 
from  the  EU  and  international  institutions, public  authorities  –  at  national,  regional 
and  local  levels  –  industry,  environmental  organisations,  and  the  academic 
community  were  present  at  the  conference.  The  results  of  the  public  consultation8 
and  the  conclusions  of  the  Conference9  have  provided  useful  input  for  the 
development of the Commission’s proposal. 

Result of the impact assessment 

in 

that 

lead 

legislation 

the  current  EIA 

The  Impact  Assessment  (IA),  which  is  submitted  with  this  proposal,  identified 
shortcomings 
to  unsatisfactory 
implementation  (no  provisions  that  ensure  quality  of  information  and  quality 
standards for the EIA process and implementation gaps) and socio-economic costs in 
the implementation of the Directive. If these problems are not adequately addressed, 
the  Directive  would  become  less  effective  and  efficient  and  would  not  be  able  to 
ensure  the  integration  of  environmental  considerations  in  decision-making.  In 
addition,  the  socio-economic  costs  are  likely  to  negatively  affect  internal  market 
harmonisation. The shortcomings of the Directive can be grouped into three specific 
problem areas: (1) the screening procedure, (2) the quality and analysis of the EIA 
and  (3)  the  risks  of  inconsistencies  within  the  EIA  process  itself  and  in  relation  to 
other legislation. 

The IA assessed a number of policy options with the aim of identifying cost-effective 
measures  to  address  these  problems.  The  outcome  has  led  the  Commission  to 
propose a number of amendments, of which the main ones are as follows: 

It is proposed to clarify the screening procedure, by modifying the criteria of Annex 
III  and  specifying  the  content  and  justification  of  screening  decisions.  These 
amendments would ensure that EIAs are carried out only for projects that would have 
significant  environmental  effects,  avoiding  unnecessary  administrative  burden  for 
small-scale projects. 

7 

8 
9 

The  largest  professional  membership  body  for  the  environment  with  over  15,000  members  working 
across all industry sectors. 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/consultations/eia.htm 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/conference.htm 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
As  regards  the  quality  and  analysis  of  the  EIA,  it  is  proposed  to  introduce 
amendments  to  reinforce  the  quality  of  the  process  (i.e.  mandatory  scoping  and 
quality control of EIA information), specify the content of the EIA report (mandatory 
assessment  of  reasonable  alternatives,  justification  of  final  decisions,  mandatory 
post-EIA monitoring of significant adverse effects) and adapt the EIA to challenges 
(i.e. biodiversity, climate change, disaster risks, availability of natural resources). 

As regards the risks of inconsistencies, it is proposed to specify the time-frames for 
the  main  stages  required  by  the  Directive  (public  consultation,  screening  decision, 
final  EIA  decision)  and  introduce  a  mechanism,  a  kind  of  EIA  one-stop  shop  to 
ensure coordination or joint operation of the EIA with the environmental assessments 
required  under  other  relevant  EU 
legislation,  e.g.  Directives  2010/75/EU, 
92/43/EEC, 2001/42/EC. 

Nine  of  the  twelve  amendments  analysed  are  expected  to  provide  significant 
environmental  and  socio-economic  benefits  without  additional  administrative  costs; 
moderate  savings  are  also  expected.  Two  amendments  (assessment  of  alternatives 
and  monitoring)  are  expected  to  provide  high  environmental  and  socio-economic 
benefits  at  moderate  costs  for  developers  and  with  limited  or  negligible  costs  for 
public  authorities;  one  amendment  (adaptation  of  the  EIA  to  new  challenges)  is 
expected to provide high benefits at moderate to high costs for developers and public 
authorities.  In  the  long  term,  the  significant  environmental  and  socio-economic 
benefits  and  the  moderate  savings  associated  with  the  proposed  amendments  are 
likely to exceed the administrative costs. 

3. 

LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

Summary of the proposed action 

The proposal  will  strengthen  the provisions concerning the  quality of the EIA  with 
the aim of achieving a high level of environmental protection. Indeed, the ability to 
make valid decisions on the environmental impact of a project depends – to a large 
extent  –  on  the  quality  of  the  information  used  in  the  EIA  documentation  and  the 
quality of the EIA process. Furthermore, the proposal will enhance policy coherence 
and synergies with other EU law instruments and simplify procedures, with a view to 
reducing unnecessary administrative burdens. 

Specific  information on the amended  Articles  and  Annexes of  the EIA Directive is 
provided below. 

The changes to Articles 1(2), 1(3) and 1(4) aim to clarify the terms of the Directive, 
based  on  the  implementation  experience  and  the  Court  case-law.  The  definition  of 
‘project’  is  amended  to  make  it  clear  that  demolition  works  are  included,  in 
accordance  with  the  Court  ruling  in  case  C-50/09;  relevant  definitions  are  also 
inserted.  The  possibility  of  not  applying  the  Directive  is  limited  to  projects  with 
national defence as their sole purpose and is extended to cover civil emergencies, as 
it is already the case under Directive 2001/42/EC. 

Article  2(3)  is  amended  to  introduce  an  EIA  ‘one-stop  shop’,  allowing  the 
coordination  or  integration  of  assessment  procedures  under  the  EIA  Directive  and 
other EU legislation. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

The  modifications  to  Article  3  aim  to  ensure  consistency  with  Article  2(1),  i.e.  by 
referring  to  ‘significant’  effects,  and  adapt  the  EIA  to  environmental  issues 
(biodiversity, climate change, disaster risks, use of natural resources). 

The changes introduced in Article 4 streamline the screening procedure and enhance 
the consistency of Member States' approaches to ensure that EIAs are required only 
when it is clear that there are significant environmental impacts. As regards projects 
listed  in  Annex  II,  a  new  paragraph  is  inserted  concerning  the  obligation  of  the 
developer  to  provide  specific  information  to  the  competent  authority  (detailed  in 
Annex II.A). This Article also allows for specification of the selection criteria listed 
in Annex III via delegated acts. The content of the screening decision is specified to 
acknowledge the successful practice of adapting projects under certain preconditions 
(on  the  basis  of  a  consideration  of  the  most  relevant  impacts  and  information 
generated under other Union environmental legislation), which can avoid having to 
conduct a full assessment, as the most relevant environment impacts are satisfactorily 
addressed  by  the  adapted  project.  The  likelihood  of  significant  effects  and  the 
subsequent  need  for  an  EIA  would  take  into  account  the  account  the  nature, 
complexity,  location  and  size  of  the  proposed  project  and  would  be  based  on 
objective factors, such as the scale of the project, the use of valuable resources, the 
environmental sensitivity of the location, and the magnitude or irreversibility of the 
potential impact. Furthermore, the lessons drawn from the case-law, where the Court 
stressed  the  need  for  "sufficiently  reasoned"  (C-75/08)  screening  decisions,  which 
contain or are accompanied by all the information that makes it possible to check that 
the decision is based on adequate screening (C-87/02), are taken on board. Finally, a 
time-frame is set for adoption of the screening decision. 

Article  5  is  comprehensively  modified,  with  a  view  to  reinforcing  the  quality  of 
information  and  streamlining  the  EIA  process.  The  core  requirement  for  the 
developer  to  submit  environmental  information  is  maintained,  but  its  form  and 
content  is  streamlined  and  specified  in  Annex  IV.  The  scoping  process  becomes 
obligatory  and  the  content  of  the  opinion  delivered  by  the  competent  authority  is 
specified.  Mechanisms  are  introduced  to  guarantee  the  completeness  and  sufficient 
quality of the environmental reports. 

Article 6(6), which refers to the time-frames for public consultation, is modified with 
a  view  to  reinforcing  the  role  of  environmental  authorities  and  defining  concrete 
time-frames for the consultation phase on the environmental report. 

Article  7(5)  is  amended  in  order  to  include  the  establishment  of  time-frames  for 
consultations  among  the  issues  to  be  determined  by  Member  States  when  defining 
the  arrangements  for  the  implementation  of  projects  likely  to  have  significant 
transboundary environmental effects. 

Article  8  is  substantially  amended  and  includes  several  new  provisions.  Firstly,  a 
time-frame  is  set  for  the  conclusion  of  the  environmental  impact  assessment 
procedure.  Secondly,  the  competent  authority  is  required  to  include  in  the 
development  consent  decision  itself  some  items  substantiating  the  decision;  this 
reflects  the  case-law  (e.g.  C-50/09).  Thirdly,  mandatory  ex-post  monitoring  is 
introduced only for projects that will have significant adverse environmental effects, 
according to the consultations carried out and the information gathered (including the 
environmental  report),  with  the  purpose  of  assessing  the  implementation  and 

EN 

5 

   EN 

effectiveness  of  mitigation  and  compensation  measures.  Some  Member  States 
already  require  such  monitoring,  which  should  not  duplicate  that  which  may  be 
required  by  other  Union  legislation  (e.g.  on  industrial  emissions  or  water  quality), 
and it is appropriate therefore to establish common minimum requirements. This new 
obligation  is  cost-effective,  as  it  may  help  to  avoid  adverse  impacts  on  the 
environment and public health and costs of reparation, and is relevant for addressing 
impacts  related  to  new  challenges  such  as  climate  change  and  disaster  risks. 
Fourthly,  the  competent  authority  is  required  to  verify  that  the  information  of  the 
environmental  report  is  up  to  date,  before  deciding  to  grant  or  refuse  development 
consent. 

The main modification to Article 9 is the inclusion of a description of the monitoring 
arrangements in the information provided to the public when development consent is 
granted. 

Article  12  is  amended  in  order  to  specify  the  information  required  to  monitor  the 
implementation of the Directive. 

Two new Articles (12a and 12b) are inserted concerning the adaptation of Annexes 
II.A, III and IV to scientific and technical progress through delegated acts. 

Annex II.A, which is a new Annex, sets out the information to be submitted by the 
developer as regards projects listed in Annex II, for which screening is carried out to 
determine whether an EIA is required. This amendment is intended to harmonise the 
screening process. 

Annex  III,  which  lays  down  the  criteria  used  for  screening  Annex  II  projects,  is 
amended  to  clarify  the  existing  criteria  (e.g.  cumulative  effects  or  links  with  other 
EU  legislation)  and  to  include  additional  ones  (mainly  those  related  to  new 
environmental issues). 

Annex IV contains the items to be considered in the environmental report required by 
Article 5. The main changes are additional information requirements concerning the 
assessment of reasonable alternatives, the description of monitoring measures and the 
description  of  aspects  related  to  new  environmental  issues  (e.g.  climate  change, 
biodiversity, disaster risks, use of natural resources). 

The amended Directive contains transitional provisions, which draw on the case-law 
(e.g.  case  C-81/96).  The  EIA  should  apply  to  projects  for  which  the  request  for 
development consent was introduced before the time-limit for transposition and for 
which the environmental impact assessment has not been concluded before that date. 

Explanatory documents 

The  Commission  considers  that  explanatory  documents  are  necessary  in  order  to 
improve  the  quality  of  information  on  the  transposition  of  the  Directive  for  the 
following reasons. 

The complete and correct transposition of the Directive is essential to guarantee that 
its objectives (i.e. protecting human health and the environment and ensuring a level 
play  field)  are  achieved.  The  EIA  is  part  of  the  process  for  assessing  and  granting 
development consent to a wide range of private and public projects in the Member 

EN 

6 

   EN 

States, as either a separate or integrated part of assessment procedures. In addition, 
the implementation of the Directive is often highly decentralised, as the regional and 
local authorities are responsible for its application and, in some Member States, even 
for its transposition. Finally, the codification of the EIA Directive is likely to result 
in changes to the national measures that transposing progressively the initial directive 
and  its  three  subsequent  amendments.  In  order  to  implement  the  provisions  of  the 
revised  Directive,  which  amends  the  codified  version,  Member  States  may  have  to 
act in different policy fields and amend a wide variety of legislative acts at national, 
regional and local levels. 

The  above  factors  are  likely  to  increase  the  risks  of  incorrect  transposition  and 
implementation  of  the  Directive,  and  complicate  the  Commission’s  task  of 
monitoring  the  application  of  EU  law.  Clear  information  with  respect  to  the 
transposition of the revised EIA Directive is instrumental in ensuring the conformity 
of national legislation with its provisions. 

The  requirement  to  provide  explanatory  documents  may  create  an  additional 
administrative  burden  on  those  Member  States  which  do  not  work  on  this  basis  in 
any  case.  However,  explanatory  documents  are  necessary  to  allow  effective 
verification of complete and correct transposition, which is essential for the reasons 
mentioned  above,  and  there  are  no  less  burdensome  measures  to  allow  efficient 
verification.  Moreover,  the  explanatory  documents  can  contribute  significantly  to 
reducing  the  administrative  burden  of  compliance  monitoring  by  the  Commission; 
them,  considerable  resources  and  numerous  contacts  with  national 
without 
authorities  would  be  required  to  track  the  methods  of  transposition  in  all  Member 
States. Hence, the possible additional administrative burden of providing explanatory 
documents  is  proportionate  to  the  aim  pursued,  namely  to  ensure  effective 
transposition and fully achieve the objectives of the Directive. 

In  view  of  the  above  it  is  appropriate  to  ask  Member  States  to  accompany  the 
notification of their transposition measures with one or more documents explaining 
the relationship between the provisions of the Directive and the corresponding parts 
of national transposition instruments. 

Legal basis 

As  the  primary  objective  of  the  Directive  is  the  protection  of  the  environment,  in 
accordance with Article 191 TFEU, the proposal is based on Article 192(1) TFEU. 

Subsidiarity and proportionality principles and choice of instrument 

The  subsidiarity  principle  applies  insofar  as  the  proposal  does  not  fall  under  the 
exclusive competence of the European Union. 

legislation  sets  minimum  requirements  for 

The objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States. 
The  existing 
the  environmental 
assessment  of  projects  throughout  the  EU  and  aims  to  comply  with  international 
conventions (e.g. Espoo, Aarhus, Convention on Biological Diversity). This principle 
is  maintained  in  the  proposal  which  further  harmonises  the  principles  of 
environmental  assessment  and  addresses  inconsistencies.  All  Member  States  must 
take measures to comply with the minimum requirements; individual national actions 

EN 

7 

   EN 

could  impair  the  functioning  of  the  internal  market,  as  varying  national  regulation 
might hamper transboundary economic activities. 

EU action will better achieve the objectives of the proposal. Since the adoption of the 
Directive  in  1985,  the  EU  has  enlarged,  while  the  scope  and  seriousness  of 
environmental issues to be tackled and the number of major EU-scale infrastructure 
projects  have  also  increased  (e.g.  transboundary  projects  in  the  field  of  energy  or 
transport). Because of the transboundary nature of environmental issues (e.g. climate 
change,  disaster  risks)  and  of  some  projects,  action  at  EU  level  is  necessary  and 
brings  added  value  compared  to  individual  national  actions.  The  EU’s  action  will 
also  address  issues  that  are  important  to  the  EU  as  a  whole,  such  as  adaptation  to 
climate change and disaster prevention, and has a role to play in the achievement of 
Europe’s 2020 objectives for sustainable growth. 

The proposal therefore respects the subsidiarity principle. 

The chosen legal instrument is a directive, as the proposal aims to modify an existing 
directive. The proposal lays down general objectives and obligations, while leaving 
sufficient  flexibility  to  the  Member  States  as  regards  the  choice  of  measures  for 
compliance and their detailed implementation. The proposal therefore complies with 
the proportionality principle. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS  

The proposal has no implications for the EU budget. 

5. 

OPTIONAL ELEMENTS  

The proposal concerns a matter relevant to the European Economic Area and should 
therefore be applicable to it. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

2012/0297 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and 
private projects on the environment 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 192(1) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national Parliaments, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee10, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions11, 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

Directive 2011/92/EU has harmonised the principles for the environmental assessment 
of projects by introducing minimum requirements (with regard to the type of projects 
subject  to  assessment,  the  main  obligations  of  developers,  the  content  of  the 
assessment  and  the  participation  of  the  competent  authorities  and  the  public),  and 
contributes to a high level of protection of the environment and human health. 

The  mid-term  review  of  the  sixth  Environment  Action  Programme12  and  the  latest 
Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the application 
and  effectiveness  of  the  EIA  Directive  (Directive  85/337/EEC)13,  the  predecessor  to 
Directive  2011/92/EU,  stressed  the  need  to  improve  the  principles  of  environmental 
assessment  of  projects  and  adapting  the  Directive  to  the  policy,  legal  and  technical 
context, which has evolved considerably. 

10 
11 
12 
13 

OJ C , , p. . 
OJ C , , p. . 
COM(2007) 225. 
COM(2009) 378. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

It is necessary to amend Directive 2011/92/EU in order to strengthen the quality of the 
environmental assessment procedure, streamline the various steps of the procedure and 
enhance coherence and synergies with other Union legislation and policies, as well as 
strategies and policies developed by Member States in areas of national competence. 

Over the last decade, environmental issues, such as resource efficiency, biodiversity, 
climate change, and disaster risks, have become more important in policy making and 
should  therefore  also  constitute  critical  elements  in  assessment  and  decision-making 
processes, especially for infrastructure projects. 

In  its  Communication  entitled  ‘Roadmap  to  a  Resource  Efficient  Europe’14,  the 
Commission committed itself to including broader resource efficiency considerations 
in the context of the revision of Directive 2011/92/EU. 

The  Soil  Thematic  Strategy15  and  the  Roadmap  to  a  Resource-Efficient  Europe 
underline  the  importance  of  the  sustainable  use  of  soil  and  the  need  to  address  the 
unsustainable increase of settlement areas over time (land take). Furthermore, the final 
document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development held in Rio 
de  Janeiro  on  20-22  June  2012  recognises  the  economic  and  social  significance  of 
good land management, including soil, and the need for urgent action to reverse land 
degradation.  Public  and  private  projects  should  therefore  consider  and  limit  their 
impact on land, particularly land take, and soil, including on organic matter, erosion, 
compaction and sealing, including through appropriate land use plans and policies at 
national, regional and local levels. 

The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity ("the Convention"), to which 
the European Union is party, requires assessment, as far as possible and as appropriate, 
of the significant adverse effects of projects on biological diversity, which is defined 
in  Article  2  of  the  Convention,  with  a  view  to  avoiding  or  minimising  such  effects. 
This  prior  assessment  of  impacts  should  contribute  to  attaining  the  Union  headline 
target adopted on 201016 of halting biodiversity loss and the degradation of ecosystem 
services by 2020 and restoring them where feasible. 

The measures taken to avoid, reduce and, if possible, offset significant adverse effects 
on  the  environment  should  contribute  to  avoiding  any  deterioration  in  the  quality  of 
the  environment  and  any  net  loss  of  biodiversity,  in  accordance  with  the  Union’s 
commitments  in  the  context  of  the  Convention  and  the  objectives  and  actions  of  the 
Union Biodiversity Strategy up to 202017. 

Climate  change  will  continue  to  cause  damage  to  the  environment  and  compromise 
economic  development.  Accordingly,  the  environmental,  social  and  economic 
resilience  of  the  Union  should  be  promoted  so  as  to  deal  with  climate  change 
throughout the Union’s territory in an efficient manner. Climate change adaptation and 
mitigation  responses  need  to  be  addressed  across  many  of  the  sectors  of  Union 
legislation. 

14 
15 
16 
17 

COM(2011) 571. 
COM(2006) 231. 
European Council conclusions, March 2010. 
COM(2011) 244. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

                                                 
(10)  Following  the  Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  Council,  the  European 
Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the 
Regions  on  a  Community  approach  on  the  prevention  of  natural  and  man-made 
disasters18, in its conclusions of 30 November 2009, the Council of the EU invited the 
Commission to ensure that the implementation review and further development of EU 
initiatives  take  into  consideration  disaster  risk  prevention  and  management  concerns 
and the United Nations Hyogo Framework for Action Programme (2005-2015), which 
stresses  the  need  to  put  in  place  procedures  for  assessment  of  the  disaster  risk 
implications of major infrastructure projects. 

(11)  Protection  and  promotion  of  cultural  heritage  and  landscapes,  which  are  an  integral 
part  of  the  cultural  diversity  that  the  Union  is  committed  to  respect  and  promote  in 
accordance  with  Article  167(4)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European 
Union, can usefully build on definitions and principles developed in relevant Council 
of  Europe  Conventions,  in  particular  the  Convention  for  the  Protection  of  the 
Architectural  Heritage  of  Europe,  the  European  Landscape  Convention  and  the 
Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society. 

(12)  When applying Directive 2011/92/EU, it is necessary to ensure a competitive business 
environment, especially for small and medium enterprises, in order to generate smart, 
sustainable  and  inclusive  growth,  in  line  with  the  objectives  set  out  in  the 
Commission's  Communication  entitled  ‘Europe  2020  –  A  strategy  for  smart, 
sustainable and inclusive growth’19. 

(13)  Experience has shown that in cases of civil emergency compliance with the provisions 
of Directive 2011/92/EU may have adverse effects, and provision should therefore be 
made to authorise Member States not to apply that Directive in appropriate cases. 

(14)  The  information  which  the  developer  is  required  to  supply  in  order  to  enable  the 
competent  authority  to  determine  whether  projects  listed  in  Annex  II  of  Directive 
2011/92/EU should be subject to an environmental assessment (screening procedure), 
should be specified. 

(15)  The  selection  criteria  laid  down  in  Annex  III  of  Directive  2011/92/EU,  which  are 
taken into account by the Member States in order to determine which projects should 
be subject to assessment on the basis of their significant environmental effects, should 
be  adapted  and  clarified  in  order  to  ensure  that  an  environmental  assessment  is  only 
required for projects likely to have significant environmental effects, such as projects 
using or affecting valuable resources, projects proposed for environmentally sensitive 
locations, or projects with potentially hazardous or irreversible effects. 

(16)  When  determining  whether  significant  environmental  effects  are  likely  to  be  caused, 
the  competent  authorities  should  identify  the  most  relevant  criteria  to  be  considered 
and use the additional information that may be available following other assessments 
required by Union legislation in order to apply the screening procedure effectively. In 
this  regard,  it  is  appropriate  to  specify  the  content  of  the  screening  decision,  in 
particular where no environmental assessment is required. 

18 
19 

COM(2009) 82. 
COM(2010) 2020. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
(17)  The competent authorities should be required to determine the scope and level of detail 
of  the  environmental  information  to  be  submitted  in  the  form  of  an  environmental 
report (scoping). In order to improve the quality of the assessment and streamline the 
decision-making  process,  it  is  important  to  specify  at  Union  level  the  categories  of 
information on which the competent authorities should make that determination. 

(18)  The environmental report of a project to be provided by the developer should include 
an assessment of reasonable alternatives relevant to the proposed project, including the 
likely evolution of the existing state of the environment without implementation of the 
project  (baseline  scenario),  as  a  means  to  improve  quality  of  the  assessment  process 
and to allow integrating environmental considerations at an early stage in the project’s 
design. 

(19)  Measures  should  be  taken  to  ensure  that  the  data  and  information  included  in  the 
environmental  reports,  in  accordance  with  Annex  IV  of  Directive  2011/92/EU  are 
complete and of sufficiently high quality. With a view to avoiding duplication of the 
assessment,  Member  States  should  take  account  of  the  fact  that  environmental 
assessments may be carried out at different levels or by different instruments. 

(20)  With  a  view  to  ensuring  transparency  and  accountability,  the  competent  authority 
should be required to substantiate its decision to grant development consent in respect 
of  a  project,  indicating  that  it  has  taken  into  consideration  the  results  of  the 
consultations carried out and the relevant information gathered. 

(21) 

It is appropriate to establish common minimum requirements for the monitoring of the 
significant  adverse  effects  of  the  construction  and  operation  of  projects  to  ensure  a 
common approach in all Member States and to ensure that, after the implementation of 
mitigation  and  compensation  measures,  no  impacts  exceed  those  initially  predicted. 
Such monitoring should not duplicate or add to monitoring required pursuant to other 
Union legislation. 

(22)  Time-frames for the various steps of the environmental assessment of projects should 
be introduced, in order to stimulate more efficient decision-making and increase legal 
certainty,  also  taking  into  account  the  nature,  complexity,  location  and  size  of  the 
proposed  project.  Such  time-frames  should  under  no  circumstances  compromise  the 
high standards for the protection of the environment, particularly those resulting from 
other Union environmental legislation, and effective public participation and access to 
justice. 

(23) 

In order to avoid duplication of the assessment, reduce administrative complexity and 
increase economic efficiency, where the obligation to carry out environmental impact 
assessments  arises  simultaneously  from  this  Directive  and  other  Union  legislation, 
such  as  Directives  2001/42/EC  on  the  assessment  of  the  effects  of  certain  plans  and 
programmes on the environment20, 2009/147/EC on the conservation of wild birds21, 
2000/60/EC  establishing  a  framework  for  Community  action  in  the  field  of  water 
policy22,  2010/75/EU  on  industrial  emissions23  and  Council  Directive  92/43/EEC  on 

20 
21 
22 
23 

OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p.30. 
OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p.7. 
OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p.1. 
OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p.17. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

                                                 
the  conservation  of  natural  habitats  and  of  wild  fauna  and  flora24,  Member  States 
should  provide  for  coordinated  or  joint  procedures  fulfilling  the  requirements  of  the 
relevant Union legislation. 

(24)  The  new  provisions  should  also  apply  to  projects  for  which  the  request  for 
development  consent  is  introduced  before  the  time-limit  for  transposition  but  for 
which the environmental impact assessment has not been concluded before that date. 

(25) 

(26) 

In  accordance  with  the  Joint  Political  Declaration  of  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  of  28  September  2011  on  explanatory  documents,  Member  States  have 
undertaken  to  accompany,  in  justified  cases,  the  notification  of  their  transposition 
measures  with  one  or  more  documents  explaining  the  relationship  between  the 
components  of  a  directive  and  the  corresponding  parts  of  national  transposition 
instruments. With regard to this Directive, the legislator considers the transmission of 
such documents to be justified. 

In  order  to  adjust  the  selection  criteria  and  the  information  to  be  provided  in  the 
environmental report to the latest developments in technology and relevant practices, 
the  power  to  adopt  acts,  in  accordance  with  Article  290  of  the  Treaty  on  the 
Functioning of the European Union, should be delegated to the Commission in respect 
of Annexes II.A, III and IV of Directive 2011/92/EU. It is of particular importance that 
the  Commission  carry  out  appropriate  consultations  during  its  preparatory  work, 
including at expert level. 

(27)  The  Commission,  when  preparing  and  drawing  up  delegated  acts,  should  ensure  the 
simultaneous,  timely  and  appropriate  transmission  of  relevant  documents  to  the 
European Parliament and Council. 

through 

(28)  Since the objective of this Directive, namely to ensure a high level of protection of the 
environment  and  of  human  health, 
the  establishment  of  minimum 
requirements  for  the  environmental  assessment  of  projects,  cannot  be  sufficiently 
achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scope, seriousness 
and  transboundary  nature  of  the  environmental  issues  to  be  addressed,  be  better 
achieved  at  Union  level,  the  Union  may  adopt  measures,  in  accordance  with  the 
principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union. In 
accordance  with  the  principle  of  proportionality,  as  set  out  in  that  Article,  this 
Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective. 

(29)  Directive 2011/92/EU should therefore be amended accordingly, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: 

Article 1 

Directive 2011/92/EU is amended as follows: 

(1) 

Article 1 is amended as follows: 

24 

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p.7. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

                                                 
(a) 

in point (a) of paragraph 2, the first indent is replaced by the following: 

"—  the  execution  of  construction  or  demolition  works,  or  of  other  installations  or 
schemes," 

(b) 

in paragraph 2, the following definition is added: 

"(g)  "environmental  impact  assessment"  shall  mean  the  process  of  preparing  an 
environmental  report,  carrying  out  consultations  (including  with  the  public 
concerned  and  the  environmental  authorities),  the  assessment  by  the  competent 
authority,  taking  into  account  the  environmental  report  and  the  results  of  the 
consultations  in  the  development  consent  procedure  as  well  as  the  provision  of 
information on the decision in accordance with Articles 5 to 10." 

(c)  paragraphs 3 and 4 are replaced by the following: 

"3.  Member  States  may  decide,  on  a  case-by-case  basis  and  if  so  provided  under 
national  law,  not  to  apply  this  Directive  to  projects  having  as  their  sole  purpose 
national  defence  or  the  response  to  civil  emergencies,  if  they  deem  that  such 
application would have an adverse effect on those purposes." 

4.  This  Directive  shall  not  apply  to  projects  the  details  of  which  are  adopted  by  a 
specific  act  of  national  legislation,  provided  that  the  objectives  of  this  Directive, 
including that of supplying information, are achieved through the legislative process. 
Every two years from the date specified in Article 2(1) of Directive XXX [OPOCE 
please  introduce  the  n°  of  this  Directive],  Member  States  shall  inform  the 
Commission of any application which they have made of this provision." 

(2) 

In Article 2, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 

"3.  Projects  for  which  the  obligation  to  carry  out  assessments  of  the  effects  on  the 
environment  arises  simultaneously  from  this  Directive  and  other  Union  legislation 
shall be subject to coordinated or joint procedures fulfilling the requirements of the 
relevant Union legislation. 

Under  the  coordinated  procedure,  the  competent  authority  shall  coordinate  the 
various  individual  assessments  required  by  the  Union  legislation  concerned  and 
issued  by  several  authorities,  without  prejudice  to  any  provisions  to  the  contrary 
contained in other relevant Union legislation. 

Under  the  joint  procedure,  the  competent  authority  shall  issue  one  environmental 
impact  assessment,  integrating  the  assessments  of  one  or  more  authorities,  without 
prejudice  to  any  provisions  to  the  contrary  contained  in  other  relevant  Union 
legislation. 

Member States shall appoint one authority, which shall be responsible for facilitating 
the development consent procedure for each project." 

(3) 

Article 3 is replaced by the following: 

EN 

"Article 3 

14 

   EN 

The  environmental  impact  assessment  shall  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  significant  effects  of  a  project  on  the 
following factors: 

(a)  population,  human  health,  and  biodiversity,  with  particular  attention  to 
species  and  habitats  protected  under  Council  Directive  92/43/EEC(*)  and 
Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(**); 

(b) land, soil, water, air and climate change; 

(c) material assets, cultural heritage and the landscape; 

(d) the interaction between the factors referred to in points (a), (b) and (c); 

(e) exposure, vulnerability and resilience of the factors referred to in points (a), 
(b) and (c), to natural and man-made disaster risks." 

_________________ 

(*) 

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p.7. 

(**)  OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p.7." 

(4) 

Article 4 is amended as follows: 

(a)  paragraphs 3 and 4 are replaced by the following: 

"3.  For  projects  listed  in  Annex  II,  the  developer  shall  provide  information  on  the 
characteristics  of  the  project,  its  potential  impact  on  the  environment  and  the 
measures envisaged in order to avoid and reduce significant effects. The detailed list 
of information to be provided is specified in Annex II.A." 

4. When a case-by-case examination is carried out or thresholds or criteria are set for 
the  purpose  of  paragraph  2,  the  competent  authority  shall  take  account  of  selection 
criteria  related  to  the  characteristics  and  location  of  the  project  and  its  potential 
impact  on  the  environment.  The  detailed  list  of  selection  criteria  to  be  used  is 
specified in Annex III." 

(b)  The following paragraphs 5 and 6 are added: 

"5. The competent authority shall make its decision pursuant to paragraph 2, on the 
basis  of  the  information  provided  by  the  developer  and  taking  into  account,  where 
relevant, the results of studies, preliminary verifications or assessments of the effects 
on  the  environment  arising  from  other  Union  legislation.  The  decision  pursuant  to 
paragraph 2 shall: 

(a) state how the criteria in Annex III have been taken into account; 

(b) include the reasons for requiring or not requiring an environmental impact 
assessment pursuant to Articles 5 to 10; 

EN 

15 

   EN 

(c)  include  a  description  of  the  measures  envisaged  to  avoid,  prevent  and 
reduce any significant effects on the environment, where it is decided that no 
environmental impact assessment needs to be carried out pursuant to Articles 5 
to 10; 

(d) be made available to the public. 

6.  The  competent  authority  shall  make  its  decision  pursuant  to  paragraph  2  within 
three  months  from  the  request  for  development  consent  and  provided  that  the 
developer  has  submitted  all  the  requisite  information.  Depending  on  the  nature, 
complexity, location and size of the proposed project, the  competent authority may 
extend that deadline by a further 3 months; in that case, the competent authority shall 
inform the developer of the reasons justifying the extension and of the date when its 
determination is expected. 

Where  the  project  is  made  subject  to  an  environmental  impact  assessment  in 
accordance with Articles 5 to 10, the decision pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Article 
shall include the information set out in Article 5(2)." 

(5) 

In Article 5, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 are replaced by the following: 

"1.  Where  an  environmental  impact  assessment  must  be  carried  out  in  accordance 
with  Articles  5  to  10,  the  developer  shall  prepare  an  environmental  report.  The 
environmental report shall be based on the determination pursuant to paragraph 2 of 
this Article and include the information that may reasonably be required for making 
informed decisions on the environmental impacts of the proposed project, taking into 
account current knowledge and methods of assessment, the characteristics, technical 
capacity  and  location  of  the  project,  the  characteristics  of  the  potential  impact, 
alternatives to the proposed project and the extent to which certain matters (including 
the  evaluation  of  alternatives)  are  more  appropriately  assessed  at  different  levels 
including the planning level, or on the basis of other assessment requirements. The 
detailed list of information to be provided in the environmental report is specified in 
Annex IV. 

2.  The  competent  authority,  after  having  consulted  the  authorities  referred  to  in 
Article  6(1)  and  the  developer,  shall  determine  the  scope  and  level  of  detail  of  the 
information  to  be  included  by  the  developer  in  the  environmental  report,  in 
accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article. In particular, it shall determine: 

(a) the decisions and opinions to be obtained; 

(b) the authorities and the public likely to be concerned; 

(c) the individual stages of the procedure and their duration; 

(d)  reasonable  alternatives  relevant  to  the  proposed  project  and  its  specific 
characteristics; 

(e) the environmental features referred to in Article 3 likely to be significantly 
affected; 

EN 

16 

   EN 

(f) the information to be submitted relevant to the specific characteristics of a 
particular project or type of project; 

(g)  the  information  and  knowledge  available  and  obtained  at  other  levels  of 
decision-making  or  through  other  Union  legislation,  and  the  methods  of 
assessment to be used. 

The  competent  authority  may  also  seek  assistance  from  accredited  and  technically 
competent experts referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article. Subsequent requests to 
the developer for additional information may only be made if these are justified by 
new circumstances and duly explained by the competent authority. 

3. To guarantee the completeness and sufficient quality of the environmental reports 
referred to in Article 5(1): 

(a) the developer shall ensure that the environmental report is prepared by accredited 
and technically competent experts or 

(b) the competent authority shall ensure that the environmental report is verified by 
accredited and technically competent experts and/or committees of national experts. 

Where accredited and technically competent experts assisted the competent authority 
to prepare the determination referred to in Article 5(2), the same experts shall not be 
used by the developer for the preparation of the environmental report. 

The  detailed  arrangements  for  the  use  and  selection  of  accredited  and  technically 
competent  experts  (for  example  qualifications  required,  assignment  of  evaluation, 
licensing, and disqualification), shall be determined by the Member States." 

(6) 

Article 6 is amended as follows: 

(a)  paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: 

"6.  Reasonable  time-frames  for  the  different  phases  shall  be  provided,  allowing 
sufficient time: 

(a) for informing the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) and the public and  

(b)  for  the  authorities  referred  to  in  Article  6(1)  and  the  public  concerned  to 
prepare  and  participate  effectively  in  the  environmental  decision-making 
subject to the provisions of this Article." 

(b) 

the following paragraph 7 is added: 

"7. The time-frames for consulting the public concerned on the environmental report 
referred to in Article 5(1) shall not be shorter than 30 days or longer than 60 days. In 
exceptional  cases,  where  the  nature,  complexity,  location  or  size  of  the  proposed 
project so require, the competent authority may extend this time-frame by a further 
30  days;  in  that  case,  the  competent  authority  shall  inform  the  developer  of  the 
reasons justifying the extension." 

(7) 

In Article 7, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: 

EN 

17 

   EN 

"5.  The  detailed  arrangements  for  implementing  paragraphs  1  to  4  of  this  Article, 
including the establishment of time-frames for consultations, shall be determined by 
the  Member  States  concerned,  on  the  basis  of  the  arrangements  and  time-frames 
referred to in Article 6(5) and (6), and shall be such as to enable the public concerned 
in  the  territory  of  the  affected  Member  State  to  participate  effectively  in  the 
environmental  decision-making  procedures  referred  to  in  Article  2(2)  for  the 
project." 

(8) 

Article 8 is replaced by the following: 

"Article 8 

1. The results of consultations and the information gathered pursuant to Articles 5, 6 
and 7 shall be taken into consideration in the development consent procedure. To this 
end,  the  decision  to  grant  development  consent  shall  contain  the  following 
information: 

(a)  the  environmental  assessment  of  the  competent  authority  referred  to  in 
Article 3 and the environmental conditions attached to the decision, including a 
description  of  the  main  measures  to  avoid,  reduce  and,  if  possible,  offset 
significant adverse effects; 

(b)  the  main  reasons  for  choosing  the  project  as  adopted,  in  the  light  of  the 
other alternatives considered, including the likely evolution of the existing state 
of the environment without implementation of the project (baseline scenario); 

(c) a summary of the comments received pursuant to Articles 6 and 7; 

(d)  a  statement  summarising  how  environmental  considerations  have  been 
integrated  into  the  development  consent  and  how  the  results  of  the 
consultations and the information gathered pursuant to Articles 5, 6 and 7 have 
been incorporated or otherwise addressed. 

For  projects  likely  to  have  significant  adverse  transboundary  effects,  the 
competent  authority  shall  provide  information  for  not  having  taken  into 
account  comments  received  by  the  affected  Member  State  during  the 
consultations carried out pursuant to Article 7. 

2.  If  the  consultations  and  the  information  gathered  pursuant  to  Articles  5,  6  and  7 
conclude  that  a  project  will  have  significant  adverse  environmental  effects,  the 
competent authority, as early as possible and in close cooperation with the authorities 
referred  to  in  Article  6(1)  and  the  developer,  shall  consider  whether  the 
environmental  report  referred  to  in  Article  5(1)  should  be  revised  and  the  project 
modified to avoid or reduce these adverse effects and whether additional mitigation 
or compensation measures are needed. 

If the competent authority decides to grant development consent, it shall ensure that 
the  development  consent  includes  measures  to  monitor  the  significant  adverse 
environmental  effects,  in  order  to  assess  the  implementation  and  the  expected 
effectiveness  of  mitigation  and  compensation  measures,  and  to  identify  any 
unforeseeable adverse effects. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

The type of parameters to be monitored and the duration of the monitoring shall be 
proportionate  to  the  nature,  location  and  size  of  the  proposed  project  and  the 
significance of its environmental effects. 

Existing  monitoring  arrangements  resulting  from  other  Union  legislation  may  be 
used if appropriate. 

3. When all necessary information gathered pursuant to Articles 5, 6 and 7 has been 
provided to the competent authority, including, where relevant, specific assessments 
required under other Union legislation, and the consultations referred to in Articles 6 
and 7 have been completed, the competent authority shall conclude its environmental 
impact assessment of the project within three months. 

Depending on the nature, complexity, location and size of the proposed project, the 
competent authority may extend that deadline by a further 3 months; in that case, the 
competent authority shall inform the developer of the reasons justifying the extension 
and of the date when its decision is expected. 

4. Before a decision to grant or refuse development consent is taken, the competent 
authority shall verify whether the information in the environmental report referred to 
in  Article  5(1)  is  up  to  date,  in  particular  concerning  the  measures  envisaged  to 
prevent, reduce and, where possible, offset any significant adverse effects." 

(9) 

Article 9 is amended as follows: 

(a)  paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

"1.  When  a  decision  to  grant  or  refuse  development  consent  has  been  taken,  the 
competent authority or authorities shall inform the public and the authorities referred 
to  in  Article  6(1)  thereof,  in  accordance  with  the  appropriate  procedures,  and  shall 
make available to the public the following information: 

(a) the content of the decision and any conditions attached thereto; 

(b)  having  examined  the  environmental  report  and  the  concerns  and  opinions 
expressed  by  the  public  concerned,  the  main  reasons  and  considerations  on 
which  the  decision  is  based,  including  information  about  the  public 
participation process; 

(c) a description of the main measures to avoid, reduce and, if possible, offset 
the significant adverse effects; 

(d) a description, where appropriate, of the monitoring measures referred to in 
Article 8(2)." 

(b) 

the following paragraph 3 is added: 

"3. Member States may also decide to make available to the public the information 
referred to in paragraph 1, when the competent authority concludes its environmental 
impact assessment of the project." 

(10) 

In Article 12, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

EN 

19 

   EN 

"2. In particular, every six years from the date specified in Article 2(1) of Directive 
XXX [OPOCE please introduce the n° of this Directive] Member States shall inform 
the Commission of: 

(a) the number of projects referred to in Annexes I and II made subject to an 
assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10; 

(b) the breakdown of assessments according to the project categories set out in 
Annexes I and II; 

(c) the breakdown of assessments undertaken by type of developer; 

(d)  the  number  of  projects  referred  to  in  Annex  II  made  subject  to  a 
determination in accordance with Article 4(2); 

(e) the average duration of the environmental impact assessment process; 

(f) the average cost of the environmental impact assessments." 

(11) 

The following Articles 12a and12b are inserted: 

"Article 12a 

The  Commission  shall  be  empowered  to  adopt  delegated  acts,  in  accordance  with 
Article 12b, concerning the selection criteria listed in Annex III and the information 
referred to in Annexes II.A and IV, in order to adapt them to scientific and technical 
progress. 

Article 12b 

1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the 
condition laid down in this Article. 

2.  The  delegation  of  power  referred  to  in  Article  12a  shall  be  conferred  on  the 
Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the [OPOCE please introduce 
date of the entry into force of this Directive]. 

3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 12a may be revoked at any time by 
the European Parliament or by the Council. A revocation decision shall put an end to 
the  delegation  of  the  power  specified  in  that  decision.  It  shall  take  effect  the  day 
following  the  publication  of  the  decision  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European 
Union or at a date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated 
acts already in force. 

4. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously 
to the European Parliament and to the Council. 

5.  A  delegated  act  adopted  pursuant  to  Article  12a  shall  enter  into  force  only  if  no 
objection  has  been  expressed  either  by  the  European  Parliament  or  by  the  Council 
within  a  period  of  two  months  of  the  notification  of  that  act  to  the  European 
Parliament  and  the  Council  or  if,  before  the  expiry  of  that  period,  the  European 
Parliament  and  the  Council  have  both  informed  the  Commission  that  they  will  not 

EN 

20 

   EN 

object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European 
Parliament or the Council." 

(12) 

The Annexes to Directive 2011/92/EU are amended as provided in the Annex to this 
Directive. 

Article 2 

1. 

Member  States  shall  bring  into  force  the  laws,  regulations  and  administrative 
provisions  necessary  to  comply  with  this  Directive  by  [DATE]  at  the  latest.  They 
shall  forthwith  communicate  to  the  Commission  the  text  of  those  provisions  and  a 
document explaining the relationship between them and this Directive. 

When  Member  States  adopt  those  provisions,  they  shall  contain  a  reference  to  this 
Directive  or  be  accompanied  by  such  a  reference  on  the  occasion  of  their  official 
publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made. 

2. 

Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions 
of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. 

Article 3 

Projects  for  which  the  request  for  development  consent  was  introduced  before  the  date 
referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 2(1) and for which the environmental impact 
assessment has not been concluded before that date shall be subject to the obligations referred 
to in Articles 3 to 11 of Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by this Directive. 

This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in 
the Official Journal of the European Union. 

Article 4 

Article 5 

This Directive is addressed to the Member States. 

Done at Brussels,  

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

21 

   EN 

(1) 

The following Annex II.A is inserted: 

ANNEX  

"ANNEX II.A – INFORMATION REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 4(3) 

1. A description of the project, including in particular: 

(a) a description of the physical characteristics of the whole project, including, where 
relevant, its subsurface, during the construction and operational phases; 

(b)  a  description  of  the  location  of  the  project,  with  particular  regard  to  the 
environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected. 

2. A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected 
by the proposed project. 

3.  A  description  of  the  likely  significant  effects  of  the  proposed  project  on  the 
environment resulting from: 

(a) the expected residues and emissions and the production of waste; 

(b)  the  use  of  natural  resources,  in  particular  soil,  land,  water,  and  biodiversity, 
including hydromorphological changes. 

4.  A  description  of  the  measures  envisaged  to  avoid,  prevent  or  reduce  any 
significant adverse effects on the environment." 

(2) 

Annexes III and IV are replaced by the following: 

"ANNEX III – SELECTION CRITERIA REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 4(4)  

1. CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECTS 

The characteristics of projects must be considered with particular regard to: 

(a) the size of the project, including, where relevant, its subsurface; 

(b) cumulation with other projects and activities; 

(c)  the  use  of  natural  resources,  in  particular  land,  soil,  water,  and  biodiversity, 
including hydromorphological changes; 

(d) the production of waste; 

(e) pollution and nuisances; 

(f)  the  natural  and  man-made  disaster  risks  and  risk  of  accidents,  with  particular 
regard  to  hydromorphological  changes,  substances,  or  technologies  or  living 
organisms used, to specific surface and subsurface conditions or alternative use, and 
to the probability of accidents or disasters and the vulnerability of the project to these 
risks; 

EN 

22 

   EN 

(g) impacts of the project on climate change (in terms of greenhouse gas emissions 
including from land use, land-use change and forestry), contribution of the project to 
an improved resilience, and the impacts of climate change on the project (e.g. if the 
project is coherent with a changing climate); 

(h)  impacts  of  the  project  on  the  environment,  in  particular  on  land  (increase  of 
settlement  areas  over  time  –  land  take),  soil  (organic  matter,  erosion,  compaction, 
sealing),  water  (quantity  and  quality),  air  and  biodiversity  (population  quality  and 
quantity and ecosystem degradation and fragmentation); 

(i) the risks to human health (e.g. due to water contamination or air pollution); 

(j) impact of the project on cultural heritage and landscape. 

2. LOCATION OF PROJECTS 

The environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected by projects 
must be considered, with particular regard to: 

(a) the existing and planned land use, including land take and fragmentation; 

(b) the relative abundance, availability, quality and regenerative capacity  of natural 
resources (including soil, land, water, and biodiversity) in the area; 

(c) the absorption capacity of the natural environment, paying particular attention to 
the following areas: 

(i) wetlands, riparian areas, river mouths; 

(ii) coastal zones; 

(iii) mountain and forest areas; 

(iv)  nature  reserves  and  parks,  permanent  pastures,  agriculture  areas  with  a  high 
nature value; 

(v) areas classified or protected under Member States' legislation; Natura 2000 areas 
designated by Member States pursuant to Directive 2009/147/EEC of the European 
Parliament  or  of  the  Council  and  Council  Directive  92/43/EEC;  areas  protected  by 
international conventions; 

(vi) areas in which there has already been a failure to meet the environmental quality 
standards, laid down in Union legislation and relevant to the project, or is likely to be 
such a failure; 

(vii) densely populated areas; 

(viii) landscapes and sites of historical, cultural or archaeological significance. 

3. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACT 

The potential significant effects of projects must be considered in relation to criteria 
set out under 1 and 2 above, with particular regard to: 

EN 

23 

   EN 

(a) the magnitude and spatial extent of the impact (geographical area and size of the 
population likely to be affected); 

(b) the nature of the impact; 

(c) the transboundary nature of the impact; 

(d) the intensity and complexity of the impact; 

(e) the probability of the impact; 

(f) the duration, frequency and reversibility of the impact; 

(g) the speed of onset of the impact; 

(h)  the  cumulation  of  impacts  with  the  impacts  of  other  projects  (in  particular 
existing and/or approved) by the same or different developers; 

(i) the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected; 

(k) the information and findings on environmental effects obtained from assessments 
required under other EU legislation. 

(l) the possibility of reducing impacts effectively. 

ANNEX IV – INFORMATION REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5(1) 

1. Description of the project, including in particular: 

(a) a description of the physical characteristics of the whole project, including, where 
relevant,  its  subsurface,  and  the  water  use  and  land-use  requirements  during  the 
construction and operational phases; 

(b) a description of the main characteristics of the production processes, for instance, 
nature and quantity of the materials, energy and natural resources (including water, 
land, soil and biodiversity) used; 

(c) an estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions (water, air, 
soil and subsoil pollution, noise, vibration, light, heat, radiation, etc.) resulting from 
the operation of the proposed project. 

2. A description, of the technical, locational or other aspects (e.g. in terms of project 
design,  technical  capacity,  size  and  scale)  of  the  alternatives  considered,  including 
the identification of the least environmentally impacting one, and an indication of the 
main reasons for the choice made, taking into account the environmental effects. 

3. A description of the relevant aspects of the existing state of the environment and 
the  likely  evolution  thereof  without  implementation  of  the  project  (baseline 
scenario).  This  description  should  cover  any  existing  environmental  problems 
relevant  to  the  project,  including,  in  particular,  those  relating  to  any  areas  of  a 
particular environmental importance and the use of natural resources. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

4. A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected 
by  the  proposed  project,  including,  in  particular,  population,  human  health,  fauna, 
flora,  biodiversity  and  the  ecosystem  services  it  provides,  land  (land  take),  soil 
(organic  matter,  erosion,  compaction,  sealing),  water  (quantity  and  quality),  air, 
climatic factors, climate change (greenhouse gas emissions, including from land use, 
land use change and forestry, mitigation potential, impacts relevant to adaptation, if 
the project takes into account risks associated with climate change), material assets, 
cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological ones, landscape; such a 
description should include the inter-relationship between the above factors, as well as 
the  exposure,  vulnerability  and  resilience  of  the  above  factors  to  natural  and  man-
made disaster risks. 

5.  A  description  of  the  likely  significant  effects  of  the  proposed  project  on  the 
environment resulting from, inter alia: 

(a) the existence of the project; 

(b)  the  use  of  natural  resources,  in  particular  land,  soil,  water,  biodiversity  and  the 
ecosystem  services  it  provides,  considering  as  far  possible  the  availability  of  these 
resources also in the light of changing climatic conditions; 

(c) the emission of pollutants, noise, vibration, light, heat and radiation, the creation 
of nuisances, and the elimination of waste; 

(d)  the  risks  to  human  health,  cultural  heritage  or  the  environment  (e.g.  due  to 
accidents or disasters); 

(e) the cumulation of effects with other projects and activities; 

(f)  the  greenhouse  gas  emissions,  including  from  land  use,  land  use  change  and 
forestry; 

(g) the technologies and the substances used; 

(h) hydromorphological changes. 

The  description  of  the  likely  significant  effects  should  cover  the  direct  effects  and 
any indirect, secondary, cumulative, transboundary, short-, medium- and long-term, 
permanent  and  temporary,  positive  and  negative  effects  of  the  project.  This 
description  should  take  into  account  the  environmental  protection  objectives 
established at EU or Member State level which are relevant to the project. 

6.  The  description  of  the  forecasting  methods  used  to  assess  the  effects  on  the 
environment  referred  to  in  point  5,  as  well  as  an  account  of  the  main  uncertainties 
involved  and  their  influence  on  the  effect  estimates  and  selection  of  the  preferred 
alternative. 

7. A description of the measures envisaged to prevent,  reduce and, where  possible, 
offset any significant adverse effects on the environment referred to in point 5 and, 
where  appropriate,  of  any  proposed  monitoring  arrangements,  including  the 
preparation of a post-project analysis of the adverse effects on the environment. This 

EN 

25 

   EN 

description should explain the extent to which significant adverse effects are reduced 
or offset and should cover both the construction and operational phases. 

8. An assessment of the natural and man-made disaster risks and risk of accidents to 
which  the  project  could  be  vulnerable  and,  where  appropriate,  a  description  of  the 
measures  envisaged  to  prevent  such  risks,  as  well  as  measures  regarding 
preparedness  for  and  response  to  emergencies  (e.g.  measures  required  under 
Directive 96/82/EC as amended). 

9. A non-technical summary of the information provided under the above headings. 

10.  An  indication  of  any  difficulties  (technical  deficiencies  or  lack  of  knowhow) 
encountered  by  the  developer  in  compiling  the  required  information  and  of  the 
sources used for the descriptions and assessments made, as well as an account of the 
main uncertainties involved and their influence on the effect estimates and selection 
of the preferred alternative." 

EN 

26 

   EN