Presentation Transcript

1. EIA and SEA in Central and Eastern Europe. Case studies Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment Dushanbe, Tajikistan 17- 18 October, 2013 Dipl. Eng. Nina Stoyanova, International Expert wecoop-project.org
2. System of environmentassessment SEA – for plans and programmes - operates at a strategic level and stresses process rather than detailed technical analysis. EIA – for public and private projects- serves to describe and assess all possible impacts - positive or negative - that a proposed project may have on the environment, combining natural, social and economic aspects. Differences SEA is intended to integrate the environment into strategic decision-making, as distinct from EIA, which is directed at projects. SEA can be seen as an extension of EIA /which was established first/ into the strategic arena towards it being used in the early stages of formulation of plans and programmes.
3. Plans and programmes SEA
4. The philosophy of SEA A systematic process for evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed plan or programme initiatives. The process begins early in the development of the policy and investigates alternative means of achieving these objectives. SEA needs to be a systematic process involving different institutions in a common reporting framework. Widespread involvement of stakeholders, policy makers and the wider public is crucial for successful SEA. Successful SEA depends on high quality and rigorous application of assessment methodologies, whether qualitative, quantitative or both. Successful SEA is an active, participatory and educational process for all parties, in that stakeholders are able to influence the decision-maker, and the decision-maker is able to raise awareness of the strategic dimensions of the policy, plan or programme.
5. The philosophy of EIA The purpose of EIA is to perform the assessment of environmental effects of those projects which are likely to have significant effects on the environment and to ensure that decision makers consider the ensuing environmental impacts. To be properly informed before a decision for project development is taken. Impact assessment is designed as a preventive measure It should give environmental considerations equal weight with technical and location aspects, including “zero”alternative. Environmental considerations should be introduced early on in the design process. Broad and public participation should ensure wide acceptance of projects implemented.
6. Main differences between SEA and EIA
7. Integration of Project Life Cycle with the EIA mechanism
8. Scheme for Integrating the Policy Processes into SEA
9. Transition from “old” system to the new EU approach – Bulgarian experience Before transition Competent authority – only one at national level; Scope of the activities subject to EIA – new and existing; Assessment of the historical pollutions as a part of the EIA; Public participation in the process – limited to public hearing only; Decision taking – one and the same form of the decision for new or existing activities; After the EU membership Clear division between plans, programmes, investment proposals and existing installations subject to SEA, EIA and IPPC; Public participation at each step of the procedures; Possibility to challenge in front of the court the final document/decision.
10. SEA in Bulgaria
11. Republic of Bulgaria 1946 – People's Republic of Bulgaria 1989 – The Transition 1990 – Republic of Bulgaria 1 January 2007 – Bulgaria joins EU SEA in Bulgarian legislation - 1991 – Environmental Protection Act containing specialized chapter for EIA - Environmental Protection Act – 2002 and 2005 full transposition of EIA Directive and SEA Directive - Ordinance on the conditions and procedures for the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programs – 2004 and 2006
12. Main features of Bulgarian SEA The integration of the environmental considerations in the sectoral planning and programming has been enforced since 1 July 2004 Most EA procedures are carried out in the sector of spatial planning – urban development plans; land use plans; management plans for protected areas EA procedures carried out for sectoral programs – in the sectors: energy, transport, tourism, waste managament EA for Operational programs – part of the ex-ante assessment Public involvement - not separate - a part of the whole process of consultations during the planning
13. Bulgarian SEA procedure Screening and scoping of the environmental assessment Elaborating the EA study/report Conducting a consultation with the public and concerned authorities Taking into account the results of the consultation in the EA study/report Defining the measures of monitoring and control of the plan/program implementation Issuing a statement on EA - an obligatory document before adoption of the plan/program. Contains: motives, conditions, measures to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects on the environment, measures for monitoring Monitoring and control of the plan/program - ImplementationBefore adoption – reference on the compliance of the final plan/program with the EA statement - During implementation – regular monitoring report
14. Practical SEA case at National level SEA procedure for National Waste Management Programme 2009-2013 /NWMP/
15. Practical SEA case at National level The proponent of the programme is the Ministry of Environment and Water and in the same time it is the competent environmental authority for issuing the statement on SEA. NWMP is a subject to obligatory SEA. Preparation of the scoping for the environmental assessment. Conducting consultations in writing with the public and authorities concerned. Elaborating the SEA study/report takinginto account the results of the held consultations at the scoping phase. Separate report for the assessment of the impacts on Natura 2000 protected sites. Defining the measures of monitoring and control of the programme implementation. Conducting consultations in writing with the public and authorities concerned on the SEA study. No public hearing/debate. Issuing a statement on SEAwith measures for monitoring and control taking into account the results of the consultations. Monitoring and control – annual monitoring reports for each year of the NWMP implementation.
16. EIA in Croatia
17. Republic of Croatia 1943–1991 Croatia was a single-party Socialist federal unit of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia 1991 – Croat independence 1 July 2013 – Croatia joins EU EIA in Croatian legislation - April 1997 - The Decree on EIA was passed - 2007 - Environmental Protection Act – first EIA Act transposing the EIA Directive - 2009 - Regulation on environmental impact assessment
18. Main features of Croatian EIA The EIA, its evaluation and acceptability are assessed by the Advisory expert committee for the environmental impact assessment procedure on the basis of the Environment Impact Study (EIS). Members of the committee can only be persons listed in the List of persons eligible to be appointed members and deputy members of committes in procedures of strategic assessment, environmental impact assessment of projects and establishment of integrated environmental requirements. The committee performs its work in sessions. It proposes to the competent authority that the public hearing on the study should be carried out. After the conducted public hearing, the committee delivers its opinion on project acceptability and submits it to the competent body for issuance of a decision which is the mandatory content of future permits for project implementation. The public participate in the EIA procedure via the public debate. The public shall be appropriately, timely and efficiently informed of their right to participate in the EIA procedure in the early phase of the decision-making procedure.
19. Croatian EIA procedure Developer submits study along with application to the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Physical Planning /MEPPP/ Proposals for commission members - MEPPP appoints the commission Members and developer notified of commission appointment First session of the commission; Decision on thoroughness and merit of expert-conducted study; Public hearing; Commission work, in sessions Local authority coordinates activities on public inspection Notification of public inspection in public media; Beginning of public inspection Public inspection (within a 2-3 week period) Commission receives documentation from the public inspection; Commission passes decision proposing approval of the project, or denies approval MEPPP/County receives commission’s decision and all relevant documentation MEPPP/County issues its consent
20. Practical EIA case at National level EIA procedure for Golf Course Brkač, City of Motovun, Istria County, Croatia
21. Practical EIA case at National level Description of the project - Two golf courses with 18 holes, 498 beds in 67 buildings, Golf house, commercial buildings, waste-water treatment facilities, Conference center with a 250 persons capacity, Wellness center, restaurants, Parking lots, Tennis courts, Infrastructure for connection to the existing infrastructure, Local gas distribution network with embedded tanks, 21 artificial lakes,2 water accumulations with 150,000 m3 capacity each, 4 meters deep. Total occupied territory – 236 hectares. Location of the project - The river Mirna flows below the hill on which Motovun town is situated. There is the famous Motovunforest. The area is uniguebecause of its wild life, moist soil and its richness with prized black and white truffles (Tuber magnatum), which grow successfully there. Brkač, where golf courses are intended, is between 1 and 2 km away from the proposed Natura 2000 network Motovun forest site. Also, the town of Motovun is a protected historic urban site. Therefore, any developments should take into account the impact on the visual identity and harmony of this cultural heritage spot.
22. Practical EIA case at National level Interested public involved - Notice of the public hearing for the study of the environmental impact of golf courses was released in major local newspapers, at the official website of Istria County and that of MEPPP. Public hearing period was for 30 days. Around 40 people participated at the public presentation among them members of the Municipal Council, representatives of investors company, EIS authors, environmental NGOs, citizens. Written opinions against the project were submited. Estimated environmental impact of the project. - The study says that 21% of the project surface is planned for construction on the high-value agricultural land, 4.5% on the valuable agricultural land and 31.5% on less valuable agricultural land. Thus, 25.5% of the land is a highly valuable and valuable agricultural soil, part of which is still used. In total 57% of the area used will be converted from food production purposes to real-estate development purposes. - The area is characterized by geomorphological and geological features that enable the rapid flow of extracted surface precipitation. In such an environment rainwater quickly drains towards the lowest point in the relief and takes away the potential contamination from the working area to the river stream. Impact to the fauna of amphibians and reptiles Significant impact on the natural values and ecological network areas Impact on endangered and rare species of fauna
23. Practical EIA case at National level Illegalities/shortcomings of the procedure or HOW NOT TO WORK - The EIS does not specify the impacts on the forests and lost of forest ecosystems; - Water consumption for irrigation was assessed too abstractly without reasonable alternative scenarios; - Time-frame for the EIA procedure set in EPA was breached by prolongation; - In the last session of the Committee the chair was replaced by a representative of the Ministry of Tourism who has not previously participated in the work of the Committee; - State Institute for Nature Protection and Croatian Herpetological Society complained that the EIS was produced based on data which were not, as the legislation mandates, "recent, reliable and available“; - A lot of the questions raised by the committee members were left unanswered or insufficiently elaborated; - The investor ignored the demands of the committee to submit an updated EIS;
24. Practical EIA case at National level Decision of the environmental authority - MEPPP, the competent authority, issued a permit in 2009 allowing the project in question to proceed if certain mitigation measures were implemented. - Without conducting a new EIA procedure or parts of it the Ministry issued a new permit in 011 after the 2009 permit was successfully appealed in the Administrative Court by NGO. Current status of the case The case is now being reviewed by the Administrative Court based on the lawsuit raised by NGO against the second permit issued by the Ministry. First, 2009 permit, was revoked because it did not sufficiently elaborate why it dismissed the comments raised by State Institute for Nature Protection, including a request for Nature Impact Assessment (Art. 36 of NPA), and by the Committee members. Shortcomings in the procedure, and breaches of deadlines were assessed as irrelevant for the outcome. Until October 2011 construction of the Golf Course Brkac did not start. Also, according to the available information, request for construction permit was not submitted to the authorities.
25. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Dipl. Eng. Nina Stoyanova, International Environmental Consultant, Bulgaria Tel: + 359 899 914 155 E-mail: ecostim@gmail.com