Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland: Guidance for Planning Authorities

1. Page 31

   Cite this pagePDF p. 31 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 31 n on their 3. cumulative – undertaken on the s 4. tatement with conclusions 3.2.2. Description of Plan or Project n or project, including its nature, size and and 3.2.3. Natura 2000 Sites amination of what Natura 2000 sites might be affected. These lans ite boundary information for Natura 2000 sites is available from the NPWS website, either he approach to screening is likely to differ somewhat for plans and projects, depending . Any Natura 2000 sites within or adjacent to the plan or project area 2. Identification of relevant Natura 2000 sites, and compilation of informatio qualifying interests and conservation objectives Assessment of likely effects – direct, indirect and basis of available information as a desk study or field survey or primary research a necessary Screening s The first element is a description of the pla location, and possible or likely effects, and draft policies, objectives, land use zonings associated strategies in the case of plans. See, for example, EPA (2002, 2003). The second element is an ex sites should be identified and listed, bearing in mind the potential for a plan or project, whether it is within or outside a Natura 2000 site, to have direct, indirect or cumulative effects, and taking a precautionary approach so that a site is included if doubt exists. P or projects that are outside the boundaries of a site may still have effects on that site. S as interactive mapping or downloadable data20. The data are also held by local authorities. T on scale and on the likely effects, but the following should be included: 1 19 Water Services Investment and Rural Water: Protection of Natural Heritage and National Monuments Programmes 20 http://www.npws.ie/en/MapsData/

2. Page 32

   Cite this pagePDF p. 32 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 32 2. Any Natura 2000 sites within the likely zone of impact of the plan or project. A distance of 15km is currently recommended in the case of plans, and derives from UK guidance (Scott Wilson et al., 2006). For projects, the distance could be much less than 15km, and in some cases less thatn 100m, but this must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis with reference to the nature, size and location of the project, and the sensitivities of the ecological receptors, and the potential for in combination effects 3. Natura 2000 sites that are more than 15km from the plan or project area depending on the likely impacts of the plan or project, and the sensitivities of the ecological receptors, bearing in mind the precautionary principle. In the case of sites with water dependent habitats or species, and a plan or project that could affect water quality or quantity, for example, it may be necessary to consider the full extent of the upstream and/or downstream catchment. Site synopses, which are summary descriptions of the key conservation interests of sites, and SAC datasheets with lists of qualifying interests for these sites are available from the NPWS website: www.npws.ie. Other information and data, such as Natura 2000 standard data forms and conservation objectives, can be requested from NPWS via the Data Request facility at http://www.npws.ie/en/media/Media,6687,en.doc. Listings of the Special Conservation Interests are currently in preparation for SPAs and will be available shortly. Other information available from the NPWS website that may be of relevance includes Species Action Plans, Conservation Management Plans (for a limited number of sites only), Freshwater Pearl Mussel sub-basin management plans, and species reports. 3.2.4. Assessment of Likely Effects The task of establishing whether the plan or project is likely to have an effect on a Natura 2000 site or sites is based on a preliminary impact assessment using available information and data, including that outlined above, and other available environmental information (e.g. water quality data), supplemented as necessary by local site information and ecological surveys. This is followed by a determination of whether there is a risk that the

3. Page 33

   Cite this pagePDF p. 33 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities effects identified could be significant. This need not be a lengthy exercise. A precautionary approach is fundamental and, in cases of uncertainty, it should be assumed the effects could be significant. Examples of significance indicators from Commission guidance (EC, 2002) are listed in Figure 4; this document also summarises four case study examples of assessment of significance outcomes for projects. As a guide, any element of a plan or project that has the potential to affect the conservation objectives of a Natura 2000 site, including its structure and function, should be considered significant (EC, 2006). Species population density Timescale for replacement Water resource Relative change Water quality Relative change in key indicative chemicals and other elements Fragmentation Duration or permanence, level in relation to original extent Disturbance Duration or permanence, distance from site Impact type Significance indicator Loss of habitat area Percentage of loss Figure 4: Examples of significance indicators (from EC (2002), Box 4) Some examples of effects that are likely to be significant are:  Any impact on an Annex I habitat  Causing reduction in the area of the habitat or Natura 2000 site  Causing direct or indirect damage to the physical quality of the environment (e.g. water quality and supply, soil compaction) in the Natura 2000 site  Causing serious or ongoing disturbance to species or habitats for which the Natura 2000 site is selected (e.g. increased noise, illumination and human activity)  Causing direct or indirect damage to the size, characteristics or reproductive ability of populations on the Natura 2000 site  Interfering with mitigation measures put in place for other plans or projects As the underlying intention of the in-combination provision is to take account of cumulative effects, and as these effects often only occur over time, plans or projects that are Section 3 - The AA Process 33

4. Page 34

   Cite this pagePDF p. 34 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 34 completed, approved but uncompleted, or proposed (but not yet approved) should be considered in this context (EC, 2002). All likely sources of effects arising from the plan or project under consideration should be considered together with other sources of effects in the existing environment and any other effects likely to arise from proposed or permitted plans or projects. These include ex situ as well as in situ plans or projects. The screening report should clearly state what in combination plans and projects have been considered in making the determination in relation to in combination effects. Simply stating that “there are no cumulative impacts” is insufficient. 3.2.5. Screening Conclusion and Statement The findings and conclusions of the screening process should be documented, with the necessary supporting evidence and objective criteria. This is of particular importance in cases where the AA process ends at the screening stage because the conclusion is that no significant effects are likely. Screening can result in the following possible conclusions or outcomes: 1. AA is not required Screening, followed by consultation and agreement with the NPWS, establishes that the plan or project is directly connected with or necessary to the nature conservation management of the site. 2. No potential for significant effects/AA is not required Screening establishes that there is no potential for significant effects and the project or plan can proceed as proposed. However, no changes may be made after this as this will invalidate the findings of screening. Documentation of the AA screening process, including conclusions reached and how decisions were made, must be kept on file. 3. Significant effects are certain, likely or uncertain The plan or project must either proceed to Stage 2 (AA), or be rejected. Rejection of

5. Page 35

   Cite this pagePDF p. 35 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 35 a plan or project that is too potentially damaging and/or inappropriate ends the process and negates any need to proceed to Stage 2 (AA). Another possible option is to recommence the screening process with a modified plan or project that removes or avoids elements that posed obvious risks. This highlights the iterative process of screening a plan or project when new alternatives that may not have any impact are being considered. However, repeated or complicated screening exercises are not recommended as they point to the risk of significant effects and the need for Stage 2 (AA). The safeguards set out in Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive are triggered not by certainty but by the possibility of significant effects. Thus, in line with the precautionary principle, it is unacceptable to fail to undertake an appropriate assessment on the basis that it is not certain that there are significant effects.

6. Page 36

   Cite this pagePDF p. 36 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities 3.3. Stage 2 – Appropriate Assessment (AA) Stage 1 Screening for AA Stage 2 AA Stage 3 Alternative Solutions Stage 4 IROPI 3.3.1. Introduction It is the competent authority’s responsibility to complete and record the AA. The overall assessment process includes the gathering and consideration of data and information relating to the plan or project and the site, the key elements of which should be contained in the NIS, data and information from other sources, and opinions from stakeholders such as nature conservation authorities and relevant NGOs. In the case of a plan, both the NIS and the AA will normally be undertaken by the planmaking authority or consultants acting on its behalf. In the case of a project, as with the EIA process, the AA will usually involve the submission of information by the project proponent (the NIS) for consideration by the planning authority and, in some cases, is likely to involve requests for further information to be provided by the proponent. The competent authority may use the NIS and other information collected for the AA as the basis for consultations with internal and external experts, statutory bodies, and other stakeholders. It may also need to seek specialist advice to ensure that the AA is as comprehensive, objective and robust as necessary to provide a valid basis for the AA. At Stage 2, the impact of a project or plan alone and in combination with other projects or plans on the integrity of the Natura 2000 site is considered with respect to the conservation objectives of the site and to its structure and function. Section 3 - The AA Process 36

7. Page 37

   Cite this pagePDF p. 37 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 37 3.3.2. Information Required Adequate information must be available to complete the AA. The purpose of the NIS is to provide this information to the competent authority. Where the NIS is inadequate, further investigations, including surveys and/or research, may be necessary and, in this regard, further information may need to be sought from the proponent of the plan or project. The first step in this assessment is to identify the conservation objectives of the Natura 2000 site and to identify those aspects of the plan or project (alone and in combination with other plans or projects) that will affect those objectives. 3.3.3. Impact Prediction Prediction of impacts should be addressed in the NIS, but the competent authority, in considering the information submitted needs to carry out the AA within a structured and systematic framework that is evidence-based. Conclusions should be objective and scientifically grounded. This requires that the types of impact be identified , e.g. direct and indirect effects; short- and long-term effects; construction, operational and decommissioning effects; noise, light pollution and disturbance; hydrological effects; pollution, including diffuse pollution; habitat degradation and loss; and isolated, seasonal interactive and cumulative effects. Examples of impact prediction methods are outlined in Figure 5 (from EC (2002)). In addition, GIS is important in assessing and considering in combination plans and projects and cumulative effects.

8. Page 38

   Cite this pagePDF p. 38 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Expert opinion and judgment can be derived from previous experience and consultations. Information from previous similar projects may be useful, especially if quantitative predictions were made initially and have been monitored in operation. Geographical information systems (GIS) can be used to produce models of spatial relationships, such as constraint overlays, or to map sensitive areas and locations of habitat loss or vulnerability. GIS are a combination of computerised cartography, storing map data, and a database management system, storing attributes such as land use and slope. GIS enable the variables stored to be displayed, combined, and analysed speedily. Quantitative predictive models provide mathematically derived predictions based on data and assumptions about the force and direction of impacts. Models may extrapolate predictions that are consistent with past and present data (trend analysis, scenarios, analogies which transfer information from other relevant locations) and intuitive forecasting. Normative approaches to modelling work backwards from a desired outcome to assess whether the proposed project will achieve these. Some commonly used models predict the dispersal of pollutants in air, soil erosion, sediment loading of streams, and oxygen sag in polluted rivers. Flow charts, networks and systems diagrams identify chains of impacts resulting from direct impacts; indirect impacts are termed secondary, tertiary, etc. impacts in line with how they are caused. Systems diagrams are more flexible than networks in illustrating interrelationships and process pathways. Direct measurements, for example of areas of habitat lost or affected, can identify proportionate losses from species populations, habitats and communities. Impact prediction methods for NIS and AA Figure 5: Examples of impact prediction methods (from EC (2002), Box 8) Section 3 - The AA Process 38

9. Page 39

   Cite this pagePDF p. 39 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 39 3.3.4. AA - Conservation Objectives Once the effects of the project or plan have been identified and predicted, it will be necessary to assess whether there will be adverse effects on the integrity of the site as defined by the conservation objectives and status of the site. It is important that the NIS applies the precautionary principle and the focus of the statement should be on demonstrating objectively, with supporting evidence, that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of the Natura 2000 site. Where this cannot be demonstrated, adverse effects must be assumed and the Statement must reflect that. From the information gathered and the predictions made about the changes that are likely to result from the construction, operation or decommissioning stages of a project or the implementation of a plan, it should now be possible to determine whether the integrity of a site will be affected. If at this stage information or evidence is lacking, then adverse effects must be assumed. This determination should be recorded and reported. 3.3.5. AA - Mitigation Measures These are measures aimed at minimising, cancelling out or ideally avoiding the negative impact of a plan or project before, during or after its completion or implementation. Mitigation measures may be an integral part of the specifications of a plan or project, or an add-on. They may be proposed by the plan or project proponent and/or required by the competent authorities. For example, they may cover:  The dates and the timeframe of works (e.g. not to operate during the breeding season of a particular species)  The type of tools and operation to be carried out (e.g., to use a specific dredge at a distance agreed upon from the shore in order not to affect a fragile habitat)  The precise location or scale of a structure or works  Protection of existing trees and other vegetation.

10. Page 40

    Cite this pagePDF p. 40 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
    Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 3 - The AA Process 40 If mitigation is possible that enables a risk to be avoided fully, then, subject to other necessary approvals, the project or plan may proceed. If mitigation measures are insufficient, or are not actually practicable and achievable to avoid the risk entirely, then, in the light of a negative assessment, the plan or project may not proceed. A wider search for alternative solutions may need to be considered – Stage 3. 3.3.6. AA - Conclusion Following the completion of the AA, the competent authority must produce an AA Conclusion Statement which:  Describes the plan or project in sufficient detail to make clear its size, scale and objectives.  Describes the baseline conditions, conservation objectives, and relevant ecological and environmental issues in relation to the relevant Natura 2000 sites. (Generally, the NIS and any other data or information obtained will be appended to the AA Conclusion Statement).  Identifies potential adverse impacts of the plan or project on the Natura 2000 sites.  If possible, explains how those effects will be avoided through mitigation.  Sets out a timescale and identifies the mechanisms through which the mitigation measures will be secured, implemented and monitored. If the competent authority considers that residual adverse effects remain, then the plan or project may not proceed without continuing to stage 3 of the AA process: Alternative Solutions.

Source Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (National Parks and Wildlife Service): Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland: Guidance for Planning Authorities (December 2009, revised February 2010) · Licence the publisher's termsText read from the publisher’s PDF; tables, maps and drawings do not survive as text, and page numbers are the PDF’s (its first page is 1). Check the original before relying on a passage.