18 Amendments of Peter JAHR related to 2012/0297(COD)
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) 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. In many cases administrative procedures became too complicated and extended, causing delays and creating additional risks for the protection of the environment. In this respect, simplification and harmonization of the proceedings shall be one of the aims of the Directive. The suitability of creating a one-stop shop is to be taken into account with a view to allow coordinated assessment or joint procedures when several EIA's are required, for instance in cases of cross-border projects, as well as to define more specific criteria mandatory assessments.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) In the case of projects which may have a cross-border impact on the environment, the Member States involved should set up a joint one-stop shop where they should be represented on the basis of parity, which should be responsible for all procedural steps. For the final project approval, the consent of all Member States concerned must be obtained.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) The revised Directive 2011/92/EU should also ensure that environmental protection is improved, resource efficiency increased and sustainable growth supported in Europe. To this end, it is necessary to simplify and harmonise the prescribed procedures.
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) 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. As the Commission has not determined guidelines for the application of the Directive on conservation of Historical and Cultural Heritage, the Commission shall propose a list of criteria and indications with a view to a better implementation of the Directive.
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(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. In this respect, the Directive shall take into account the provisions of the Espoo Convention, which, in cases of cross- border projects, oblige the participating States to notify and consult each other. In such cross-border projects, the Commission shall, where and when appropriate and possible, play a more pro- active and facilitating role.
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – introductory part
2011/92/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – points f a and f b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – points f a and f b (new)
(b) in paragraph 2, the following definition iss are added:
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
2011/92/EU
Article 1- paragraph 2 - point f a (new)
Article 1- paragraph 2 - point f a (new)
'joint procedures': under the Joint Procedure the competent authority shall issue one environmental impact assessment, integrating the assessments of one or more authorities without prejudice to other provisions of other relevant EU legislation.
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
2011/92/EU
Article 1- paragraph 2 - point f b (new)
Article 1- paragraph 2 - point f b (new)
'simplification' means the reduction of forms, the creation of joint procedures and coordination tools in order to integrate the assessments made by the concerned authorities. Simplification also means to establish shared criteria, shorten deadlines for submitting reports and to strengthen objective and scientific evaluations.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
2011/92/EU
Article 3 – point c
Article 3 – point c
(c) material assets, cultural heritage and the landscape in accordance with Article 3 TUE;
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
2011/92/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 6
Article 4 – paragraph 6
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 furtherup to 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.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
‘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, and the 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 requirementswhich have been assessed by the developer. The detailed list of information to be provided in the environmental report is specified in Annex IV.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
(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, if the operator so requests. In particular, it shall determine:
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) reasonablthe requisite alternatives relevant to the proposed project and its specific characteristicswhich have been assessed by the developer;
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
2011/92/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point f
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
2011/92/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 7
Article 6 – paragraph 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 furtherup to 30 days; in that case, the competent authority shall inform the developer of the reasons justifying the extension.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
2011/92/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Depending on the nature, complexity, location and size of the proposed project, the competent authority may extend that deadline by a furtherup to 3 months; in that case, the competent authority shall inform the developer of the reasons justifying the extension and of the date when its decistermination is expected.
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)2011/92/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)2011/92/EU
Article 11 – paragraphs 5 a and b (new)