EIA Guidance Scoping Final PDF

Environmental Impact
Assessment of Projects
Guidance on Scoping
(Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by 2014/52/EU)
Environment
Printed in Luxembourg
A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.
It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://ec.europa.eu).
© European Union, 2017
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Paper ISBN 978-79-74375-7 KH-04-17-940-EN-C doi:10.2779/286012

PDF ISBN 978-79-74376-4 KH-04-17-940-EN-N doi:10.2779/71339
Cover:
©iStockphoto/Si-Gal
©iStockphoto/Juffin
Disclaimer: The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and Do not necessarily
reflect the official opinion of the Commission. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s
behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. The examples
described in this document represent the views of the authors and are based on information gathered by the au-
thors. The references used to develop these illustrative examples should always be considered as the most accurate
and complete sources of information.
This document benefited from Specific Contract No 070201/2016/729522/SER/ENV.D.1 under Framework Contract
No ENV.F.1/FRA/2014/0063, implemented for the European Commission by COWI A/S and Milieu Ltd.
The main authors were: Paola Banfi, Adrien Lantieri, Jennifer McGuinn, and Alicia McNeill from Milieu Ltd.
Guidance on Scoping
(Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by 2014/52/EU)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GLOSSARY OF TERMS ........................................................................................................... 5

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................... 7
PREFACE ............................................................................................................................... 9
What is the aim of the Guidance Documents? ........................................................... 9
Who can use the Guidance Documents? .................................................................... 9
Who prepared the Guidance Documents? ................................................................. 9
How can I get a copy of the Guidance Documents?................................................ 9
EIA: concept and stages ............................................................................................... 10
GUIDANCE ON SCOPING .................................................................................................. 15
How to use this guidance document .......................................................................... 17
PART A – THE CONCEPT OF SCOPING............................................................................... 21
1 THE IMPORTANCE OF SCOPING ................................................................................. 23
2 THE SCOPING PROCESS .............................................................................................. 24
PART B – PRACTICAL GUIDANCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON SCOPING .................. 27
1 STEP 1 – INITIATION OF SCOPING ............................................................................... 29
1.1 Voluntary or mandatory Scoping approaches .............................................. 29
1.2 Scoping by the Competent Authority ............................................................. 30
1.3 Scoping by the Developer ................................................................................ 31
1.4 Step 1: In a nutshell ............................................................................................. 31
2 STEP 2 – INFORMATION NEEDED TO UNDERTAKE SCOPING ...................................... 32
2.1 Legal requirements on information needed to undertake Scoping ........... 32
2.2 Checklist on information for Scoping ............................................................... 32
3 STEP 3 – SCOPING CONSULTATIONS .......................................................................... 34
3.1 Who to consult..................................................................................................... 35
3.2 How to consult ..................................................................................................... 36
3.2.1 Essentials for effective Scoping consultation .................................... 38
3.2.2 Constraints on Scoping consultations ................................................ 38
4 STEP 4 – THE SCOPING OUTPUTS: THE SCOPING OPINION/REPORT .......................... 39
4.1 The content of the Scoping Opinion/report ................................................... 39
4.1.1 Step 4a – Identifying significant effects ............................................. 40
4.1.2 Step 4b – Identifying Alternatives and Mitigation Measures .......... 45
4.1.3 Step 4c – Collecting data.................................................................... 46
4.1.4 Step 4d – Monitoring Measures ........................................................... 48
PART C – SCOPING CHECKLIST ......................................................................................... 51
QUESTIONS ON PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................... 53
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROJECT ENVIRONMENT ........................................................ 59
ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................ 63
ANNEX I – LINKS WITH OTHER EU INSTRUMENTS ................................................................ 65
SEA Directive.................................................................................................................... 66
Birds and Habitats Directives ......................................................................................... 67
Water Framework Directive ........................................................................................... 68
Marine Strategy Framework Directive ......................................................................... 69
Ambient Air Quality Directive and Heavy Metals in the Ambient Air Directive ..... 69
Waste Framework Directive .......................................................................................... 70
Industrial Emissions Directive .......................................................................................... 70
Seveso Directive.............................................................................................................. 71
Trans-European Networks in transport, energy and telecommunication............... 72
Aarhus and Espoo Conventions ................................................................................... 72
ANNEX II – OTHER RELEVANT GUIDANCE AND TOOLS ..................................................... 75
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Key terms used in the guidance documents are explained in the Glossary below.
Term Explanation
2012 IA Study Impact Assessment Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of
the European Parliament and the Council amending Directive 2011/92/EU on
the assessment of the effects of certain public and private Projects on the
environment, SWD/2012/0355 final
Alternatives Different ways of carrying out the Project in order to meet the agreed objective.
Alternatives can take diverse forms and may range from minor adjustments to
the Project, to a complete reimagining of the Project.
Baseline scenario Description of the current status of the environment in and around the area in
which the Project will be located. It forms the foundation upon which the
assessment will rest.
Candidate Countries Countries which are seeking to become Members States of the European Union.
Competent Authority (CA) The authority which the Member States designate as responsible for performing
the duties arising from the Directive.
Cumulative effects Changes to the environment that are caused by an activity/project in

combination with other activities/projects.
Developer The applicant for a Development Consent on a private Project or the public
authority which initiates a Project.
Development Consent The decision of the Competent Authority or Authorities which entitles the
Developer to proceed with the Project.
Effect/Impact Any change in the physical, natural or cultural environment brought about by a
development Project.
EIA Directive European Union Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU on

assessment of the effects of certain public and private Projects on the
environment
EIA process (or EIA) The process of carrying out an Environmental Impact Assessment as required by
Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU on assessment of
the effects of certain public and private Projects on the environment. The EIA
process is composed of different steps: preparation of the EIA Report, publicity
and consultation and decision-making.
EIA Report The Environmental Impact Assessment Report is the document prepared by the
Developer that presents the output of the assessment. It contains information
regarding the Project, the likely significant effect of the Project, the Baseline
scenario, the proposed Alternatives, the features and Measures to mitigate
adverse significant effects as well as a Non-Technical Summary and any
additional information specified in Annex IV of the EIA Directive.
Measures to mitigate Measures envisaged to avoid, prevent or reduce any identified significant
(Mitigation Measures) adverse effects on the environment
Measures to monitor Procedures to keep under systematic review the significant adverse effects on
(Monitoring Measures) the environment resulting from the construction and operation of a Project, and
to identify unforeseen significant adverse effects, in order to be able to
undertake appropriate remedial action.
Member States (MS) Countries which are members of the European Union
Measures to compensate / Measures envisaged to offset any identified significant adverse effects on the
offset (Compensatory environment.
Measures)
Non-Technical Summary An easy-to-follow and understandable summary of the information included in

the EIA Report addressed to a non-technical audience.
Project The execution of construction works or of other installations or schemes, and/or

other interventions in the natural surroundings and landscape including those
involving the extraction of mineral resources.
Reasoned Conclusion The explanatory statement made by the Competent Authority on the significant
effects of the Project on the environment, based on the examination of the EIA
Report and, where appropriate, on the results of its own supplementary
examination.
Screening The process of determining whether a Project listed in Annex II of the EIA
Directive is likely to have significant environmental effects.
Screening Decision Decision taken by the Competent Authority on whether a Project listed in Annex
II will be made subject to the EIA procedure.
Scoping The process of identifying the content and extent of the information to be
submitted to the Competent Authority under the EIA process.
Scoping Opinion The Competent Authority’s decision on the Scoping process.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Key abbreviations used in the guidance documents are detailed in the list below.
Abbreviation Full name

AA Appropriate Assessment
Aarhus Convention Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and

Access to Justice in Environmental Matters
CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union
EIONET European Environment Information and Observation Network
EMIS Environmental Marine Information System
EMODNET European Marine Observation and Data Network
ePRTR European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register
ESPOO Convention Convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context
GBIF Global Biodiversity Information Facility
IED Industrial Emissions Directive
INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
MARS Major Accident Reporting System
MSFD Marine Strategy Framework Directive
PCI Project of common interest
REACH Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals
RBMP River Basin Management Plans
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
TEN-E Trans-European Networks for Energy
TEN-T Trans-European Networks - Transport
WFD Water Framework Directive
WISE Water Information System for Europe

PREFACE
In 2001, the European Commission published three EIA Guidance Documents concerning specific
stages in the EIA process: Screening, Scoping, and Environmental Impact Statement Review. These
documents have been updated and revised to reflect both the legislative changes brought about since
the publication of the original guidance documents and the current state of good practice.
These three updated documents concern the following three specific stages of the EIA process:
EIA Guidance Document on Screening;

EIA Guidance Document on Scoping;
EIA Guidance Document on the preparation of the EIA Report.
What is the aim of the Guidance Documents?
The aim of the Guidance Documents is to provide practical insight to those who are involved during
these stages in the EIA process, drawing upon experiences in Europe and worldwide.
The Screening and Scoping EIA guidance documents aim to improve the decisions taken on the need
for an EIA and the terms of reference on which the assessment is made. These two documents focus
on getting the EIA process started well.
The preparation of the EIA Report guidance aims to help Developers and consultants alike prepare
good quality Environmental Impact Assessment Reports and to guide competent authorities and other
interested parties as they review the Reports. It focuses on ensuring that the best possible information
is made available during decision-making.
Who can use the Guidance Documents?
The three EIA Guidance Documents are designed for use by competent authorities, Developers, and
EIA practitioners in the European Union Member States and, where applicable, by Candidate
Countries. It is hoped that they will also be of interest to academics and other organisations who
participate in EIA training and education, to practitioners from around the world, as well as to
members of the public.
Who prepared the Guidance Documents?
The original 2001 EIA Guidance Documents were prepared by Environmental Resources Management
(ERM) under a research contract with the Directorate General for Environment of the European
Commission. The revised 2017 EIA Guidance Documents have been prepared by Milieu Ltd and
COWI A/S under a service contract specific contract number 070201/2016/729522/SER/ENV.D.1. to
framework contract ENV.F.l/FRA/2014/0063 with the Directorate General for Environment of the
European Commission.
How can I get a copy of the Guidance Documents?
Copies of the Guidance Documents can be downloaded from the website of the Directorate General
Environment of the European Commission at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/eia-support.htm.
Milieu Ltd Preparation of guidance documents for the implementation of EIA Directive
COWI A/S (Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by 2014/52/EU) / 9
EIA: concept and stages
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Projects is a key instrument of European Union
environmental policy. It is currently governed by the terms of European Union Directive 2011/92/EU,
as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
Projects on the environment (EIA Directive).
Since the adoption of the first EIA Directive in 1985 (Directive 85/337/EEC), both the law and EIA
practices have evolved. The EIA Directive was amended by Directives 97/11/EC, 2003/35/EC, and
2009/31/EC. The Directive and its three amendments were codified in 2011 by Directive 2011/92/EU.
The codified Directive was subsequently amended by Directive 2014/52/EU. This guidance document
focuses on the modifications made to the EIA Directive since 2001, with a particular emphasis on the
key changes brought about by the most recent 2014 amendment to the Directive, which Member States
have to transpose into their national legal systems by 16 May 2017.
The EIA Directive requires that public and private Projects that are likely to have significant effects on
the environment be made subject to an assessment prior to Development Consent being given.
Development Consent means the decision by the Competent Authority or authorities that entitles the
Developer to proceed with the Project. Before Development Consent can be granted, an EIA is
required if a Project is likely to impact significantly upon the environment. Article 2(1) of the EIA
Directive (see box below) sets out the Directive’s overarching requirement.
Box 1: Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU (extract)

Article 2(1)
Member States shall adopt all measures necessary to ensure that, before development consent is given, projects
likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location are made
subject to a requirement for development consent and an assessment with regard to their effects on the
environment.
The guidance documents in this series cover three stages involved in EIA: Screening, Scoping, and the
Preparation of the EIA Report.
The ‘Screening stage’ ascertains whether the Project’s effects on the environment are expected to be
significant, i.e. the Project is ‘Screened’ to determine whether an EIA is necessary. Projects listed in
Annex I to the Directive are automatically subjected to an EIA because their environmental effects are
presumed to be significant. Projects listed in Annex II to the Directive require a determination to be
made about their likely significant environmental effects. The Member State’s Competent Authority
make that determination through either a (i) case-by-case examination or (ii) set thresholds or criteria.
The ‘Scoping stage’ provides the opportunity for Developers to ask competent authorities about the
extent of the information required to make an informed decision about the Project and its effects. This
step involves the assessment and the determination, or ‘scoping’, of the amount of information and
analysis that authorities will need.
The information relating to a Project’s significant effects on the environment is gathered during the
third stage: the preparation of the EIA Report.
These three stages are complemented by specific steps in the EIA process. This is defined in Article
1(2)(g) (see box below) which provides a definition of the Environmental Impact Assessment by
describing the EIA process.
Box 2: Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU (extract)
Article 1(2)(g)
For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply:
[…]
(g) ‘environmental impact assessment’ means a process consisting of:
(i) the preparation of an environmental impact assessment report by the developer, as referred to in Article 5(1)
and (2);
(ii) the carrying out of consultations as referred to in Article 6 and, where relevant, Article 7;
(iii) the examination by the competent authority of the information presented in the environmental impact
assessment report and any supplementary information provided, where necessary, by the developer in
accordance with Article 5(3), and any relevant information received through the consultations under Articles 6
and 7;
(iv) the reasoned conclusion by the competent authority on the significant effects of the project on the
environment, taking into account the results of the examination referred to in point (iii) and, where appropriate, its
own supplementary examination; and
(v) the integration of the competent authority's reasoned conclusion into any of the decisions referred to in Article
8a.
The figure below sets out an overview of the stages and steps usually taken when completing an EIA.
As mentioned above, implementation arrangements for these stages may vary slightly between
Member States, so care should be taken in this regard. The steps defined under Article 1(2)(g) are
mandatory when undertaking an EIA. By comparison, undertaking the Screening and Scoping stages
may not be required, depending on the nature of a Project or other circumstances: e.g. Screening is not
necessary for Projects listed under Annex I to the Directive, and the Directive only foresees Scoping to
be mandatory when it is requested by the Developer to the Competent Authority.
Screening The Competent Authority makes a decision about
whether EIA is required. At the end of this stage, a
(as appropriate) Screening Decision must be issued and made public.
The Directive provides that Developers may request a

Scoping Scoping Opinion from the Competent Authority which
identifies the content and the extent of the assessment
(as appropriate) and specifies the information to be included in the EIA
Report.
The Developer, or the expert(s) on his behalf, carries

out the assessment. The outputs of the assessment are
presented in the EIA Report which contains:
EIA Report information regarding the project, the Baseline
scenario, the likely significant effect of the project, the
proposed Alternatives, the features and Measures to
mitigate adverse significant effects as well as a Non-
Technical Summary and any additional information
specified in Annex IV of the EIA Directive.
The Competent Authority makes the EIA Report

available to authorities with environmental
Information and responsibilities, local and regional authorities and to
Consultation other interested organisations and the public for
review. They are given the opportunity to comment on
the project and its environmental effects.
The Competent Authority examines the EIA report

Decision Making and including the comments received during consultation
Development Consent and issues a Reasoned Conclusion on whether the
project entails significant effects on the environment.
This must be incorporated into the final Development
Consent decision.
Information on
Development Consent The public is informed about the Development Consent
decision.
During construction and operation phase of the project

the Developer must monitor the significant adverse
Monitoring
effects on the environment identified as well as
(as appropriate) measures taken to mitigate them.
GUIDANCE ON SCOPING
HOW TO USE THIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
This Guidance Document is one in a series of three Guidance Documents on EIA that has been
published by the European Commission. This Guidance Document is about Scoping The other two
guidance documents are concerned with Screening and with the preparation of the EIA Report.
This Guidance Document has been designed to be used throughout the European Union (EU) and
cannot, therefore, reflect all of the specific legal requirements and practices of EIA in the different EU
Member States. As such, any existing national, regional or local guidance on EIAs should always be
taken into consideration alongside this document. Furthermore, the Guidance Documents should
always be read in conjunction with the Directive and with national or local EIA legislation.
Interpretation of the Directive remains the prerogative of the Court of Justice of the European Union
(CJEU) solely and, therefore, case-law from the CJEU should also be considered.
The guidance is designed for use by various participants in the EIA process.
Project Developers and EIA practitioners: Project Developers are responsible for submitting
preliminary information to the competent authorities regarding the Project or a draft Scoping
Report so that they are able to prepare a Scoping Opinion, following the requirements of the
Directive as transposed to national legislation. Developers and the EIA practitioners should
undertake Scoping at an early stage, so as to ensure that the EIA Report examines all of the
relevant issues, irrespective of any legal requirement to undertake Scoping. Section B of this
guidance document presents the different steps to be undertaken during Scoping. It reviews the
requirements of Scoping in detail, and provides practical tips and good practices for carrying out
each of the steps of the Scoping process.
Competent Authorities: Competent Authorities might initiate Scoping if required by national

legislation or may be requested by the Developer to prepare a Scoping Opinion. Their role may be
to actually undertake the Scoping, to issue the Scoping Opinion or to comment and agree on a
Scoping Report prepared by the Developer. Part B explains the Directive’s requirements in this
regard and provides some practical information about how the competent authorities can best
carry out this role for each of Scoping’s steps. In some EIA regimes, independent bodies have
been set up to advise competent authorities while carrying out Scoping.
Consultees: The Directive requires competent authorities to seek advice from relevant
environmental authorities and local and regional authorities prior to giving a Scoping Opinion. In
many cases, other interested parties and the general public are also given an opportunity to
comment. Consultees will, therefore, be involved in commenting on the scope of the EIA Report.
The value of public participation in the Scoping process is increasingly being recognised by
competent authorities and by other participants in the EIA process within Member States. Early
consultation with interested parties can be very valuable in avoiding later delays where new
issues emerge from consultation meetings only after the EIA Report has been submitted. The
Directive’s requirements regarding Scoping consultation as well as good practice
recommendations are presented in Step 4 of Part B of this guidance document.
The guidance document is comprised of three main sections:
Part A –The concept of Scoping. This section introduces the concept of Scoping and the
relevant provisions of the EIA Directive that govern its execution. The different steps of the
Scoping process are also presented.
Part B – Practical guidance on Scoping. The practical guidance is more hands-on and detailed
on each of the steps of the Scoping process. It is aimed at providing an in-depth understanding of
the specific, current legislative requirements regarding the execution of Scoping. It follows a step
approach and provides information about how to carry out the required steps of Scoping, based on
good practice from around the EU.
Part C – Scoping checklists. The Scoping checklists are tools designed to help the user to
identify important issues to be addressed in the EIA Report. The first checklist presents a series of
questions regarding the Project’s characteristics, while the second checklist focuses on the
characteristics of the environment. These will aid the user to identify key impacts that may be
triggered by the Project.
PART A – THE CONCEPT OF SCOPING
1 THE IMPORTANCE OF SCOPING
Scoping is an important stage that takes place early in the EIA process. It provides an opportunity for
both Developers and the Competent Authority to determine those key environmental impacts and
issues of concern that are likely to be of the utmost importance to the Project proposal’s decision-
making and eliminates those that are less of a concern. In other words, Scoping defines the EIA
Report’s content and ensures that the environmental assessment is focused on the Project’s most
significant effects on the factors listed in Article 3 of the Directive, and that time and money are not
spent on unnecessary examinations. It also reduces the likelihood that competent authorities will need
to request additional information from Developers after the Environmental Report has been prepared
and submitted.
Articles 5(1) and 5(2) of the EIA Directive allow the Developer to request a Scoping Opinion from the
Competent Authority, and set conditions in the event that this takes place.
While it is not mandatory for the Developer to request that the Competent Authority issue an opinion
on the scope and level of detail of the information to be included in the EIA Report, this is strongly
encouraged as it may bring several benefits. These are outlined in the box below.
Box 3: The benefits of Scoping in EIA
Identifies key issues to be addressed: Scoping helps to ensure that the environmental information used for
decision-making provides a comprehensive picture of the Project’s important effects, including issues of
particular concern to the groups and individuals affected.
Saves time and money: Scoping helps focus resources on the important issues for decision-making and avoids
wasted effort on issues of little relevance. In addition, it reduces the risk of delays caused by requests for further
information after the submission of the Development Consent application and the provision of environmental
information.
Stimulates early consultation: A consultation session about the Project and its environmental impacts is carried
out during Scoping, between the Developer and the Competent Authority, as well as with environmental
authorities and local and regional authorities, other interested parties, and the public.
Sets appropriate time and space boundaries: Scoping aids in effective planning, management, and with
resourcing of the EIA Report. It can identify other legislation or regulatory controls that may be relevant to the
Project and can provide opportunities for the necessary assessment work, for different control systems, to be
undertaken in parallel, thereby avoiding the duplication of effort and costs for all concerned.
Helps to identify preliminary Alternatives and Mitigation Measures: Scoping should identify preliminary
Alternatives to the proposed Project as well as preliminary mitigating measures that ought to be considered by
the Developer.
2 THE SCOPING PROCESS
Part B of the guidance will give practical recommendations about how to carry out Scoping in EIA
effectively and efficiently. Scoping is divided into four steps, each of which is covered in detail in the
four following sections:
Step 1 – Initiation of Scoping: Scoping can either be initiated by the Developer requesting a
Scoping Opinion from the Competent Authority (voluntary Scoping) or can be mandatory,
given that some Member States have set provisions in national legislation requiring it.
Voluntary and mandatory Scoping approaches, as well as the responsibilities of the actors
involved, are presented under Section 1.
Step 2 – Information needed to undertake Scoping: section 2 dealing with this step presents
the information that the Developer must provide to the Competent Authority in order for them
to prepare a Scoping Opinion. A checklist of this information is also proposed.
Step 3 – Scoping consultation: section 3 dealing with this step presents some
recommendations on how to carry out effective consultations with environmental authorities
and local and regional authorities, other interested parties, and the general public during
Scoping.
Step 4 – The Scoping outputs: The Scoping Opinion or Report: section 4 describes the
information that should be contained within the Scoping Opinion, as a basis for the EIA
Report. Furthermore, it provides some methodological explanations of how to identify a
Project’s significant effects, Alternatives and Mitigation Measures, as well as possible data
sources and Monitoring Measures in a preliminary way during Scoping.
These steps are illustrated in the figure below.
The steps of the Scoping procedure
Initiation of Scoping Voluntary

Step 1 Mandatory
Information needed for Scoping Location

Technical capacity
Step 2 Likely impacts
Environmental , local
Scoping consultation and regional
authorities
Step 3
Other interested
parties
General public
Significant effects
Alternatives and
Step 4 Scoping outputs: Scoping Mitigation Measures
Opinion/Report Data sources
Monitoring
Scoping provides an opportunity to open up a dialogue between the Competent Authority and the
Developer about the Project and the issues it raises. In addition, it can be supplemented with
consultations with the relevant statutory and non-statutory organisations and with the general public.
Although Scoping can be considered as a discrete stage in the EIA process, one which ends with the
issuing of the terms of reference for the EIA Report, the activity of Scoping should continue
throughout, so that the scope of work can be amended in light of new issues and new information. The
scope of an EIA Report must be flexible enough to allow new issues, which may emerge either during
the process or as a result of design changes or through consultations, to be incorporated.
It is important to remember that the Directive allows competent authorities to request additional
information at a later stage in the EIA process, even where they did not request this information when
they issued a formal Scoping Opinion. It is therefore important to keep the scope of the EIA in mind
throughout the overall procedure.
PART B – PRACTICAL GUIDANCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON SCOPING
1 STEP 1 – INITIATION OF SCOPING
1.1 VOLUNTARY OR MANDATORY SCOPING APPROACHES
Scoping is not mandatory under the EIA Directive; however, Member States are required to introduce,
as a minimum, a voluntary Scoping procedure in which the competent authorities are obliged to issue
a Scoping Opinion if requested to do so by a Developer. The Scoping Opinion should identify the
content and extent of the information to be elaborated in the EIA Report. This provision is contained
in Article 5(2) (see box below).
Box 4: Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU
Article 5(2)
Where requested by the developer, the competent authority […] shall issue an opinion on the scope and level of
detail of the information to be included by the developer in the environmental impact assessment report […]
Member States may also require the competent authorities to give a Scoping opinion irrespective of whether the
developer so requests.
The specific procedures to be followed when carrying out Scoping, under the terms of EIA legislation,
vary between Member States and between different EIA regimes within Member States. It is generally
implemented in two different ways by the Member States:
A voluntary Scoping approach where the competent authorities are required to issue a Scoping
Opinion only where one has been requested by the Developer; or
A mandatory Scoping approach in which the Competent Authority is required to give an
opinion on the scope of the EIA Report, irrespective of whether the Developer requests it or not,
as provided for by the final part of Article 5(2).
In some Member States, a Developer may request a Scoping Opinion from the Competent Authority at
the same time as requesting a Screening Decision. Such an approach can speed up the EIA process by
reducing the need for a second round of consultations.
Box 5: Examples of voluntary and mandatory Scoping approaches in Member States

Scoping is mandatory in Member States that most recently joined the EU1 with the exception of Cyprus, Slovenia and
Croatia (cf. COWI (2009), Study concerning the report on the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive, Final
report).
Voluntary Scoping in Croatia

Article 86 of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) (Zakon o zaštiti okoliša) (“O.G.”, No. 80/13, 153/13 and 78/15)
grants the right to the Developer to request the instructions on the content of the EIA study (now EIA Report), from
the Competent Authority prior to its preparation. The procedure in such cases is set out in Article 28 – 30 of the EIA
Regulation. According to these provisions, the Competent Authority carries out the consultation procedure with the
relevant authorities and the public on the topic of the EIA Report’s content. Following the procedure’s completion,
the Competent Authority is required to issue an instruction (Scoping Opinion) on the content of the EIA Report. This
instruction does not prevent the Competent Authority from asking for additional things to be included in the further
stages of the EIA procedure, according to Article 30(4) of the EIA Regulation.
Voluntary Scoping in UK
The EIA regulations provide an opportunity for the Developer to request a Scoping Opinion from the Competent
Authority for those Projects that require planning permission. The Regulations require that the Competent Authority
consult with the Developer and that the statutory consultees identify those issues that should be addressed in an EIA.
1 Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania.
The Competent Authority has five weeks to produce the Scoping Opinion. Where this is not forthcoming within the
five-week period, the Developer may request a “Scoping direction” from the Secretary of State or the National
Assembly for Wales (NAW).
In practice, the Developer initiates Scoping by preparing a Scoping Report. This document is then submitted,
alongside the request for a Scoping Opinion, to the Competent Authority. Even though such requests are voluntary
on the Developer’s part, they do trigger a formal regulatory process that the Competent Authority must then act
upon.
Mandatory Scoping in Poland

In Poland, Scoping is obligatory for all screened-in Annex II Projects (Art. 63.4 and 69.2 of the Act on Providing
Information on the Environment and Environmental Protection, Public Participation in Environmental Protection and
on Environmental Impact Assessment dated 3 October 2008 (Journal of Laws of 2016, item 353)). Scoping is also
obligatory in the case of Projects that are likely to have significant transboundary effects for Annex I Projects. In the
case of Annex II Projects, the Competent Authority should specify whether the report is required and should define its
scope within the same interim decision. The most significant environmental issues should be identified for these
Projects during the Screening stage and the Scoping procedure is, in a way, an extension of the Screening stage.
Mandatory scoping in Hungary

The Hungarian Governmental Decree No. 314/2005 (the EIA Decree) establishes two procedures; the first is the
Preliminary Assessment Procedure, which covers both the Screening and Scoping stages, and the second concerns
the EIA procedure itself. The activities listed in Annex I to the EIA Decree require that the EIA procedure be carried
out in its entirety. In this case, the competent environmental inspectorate determines key environmental issues to be
assessed in the EIA Report during the Preliminary Assessment Procedure. Regarding activities listed in Annex III to the
EIA Decree, a case-by-case decision by the competent environmental inspectorate determines the need for the EIA
procedure during the Preliminary Assessment Procedure.
The general requirements of the EIA Report’s content are described in Annex 6 to the EIA Decree. In all cases, the
environmental inspectorate determines the EIA Report’s content upon receiving the Preliminary Assessment
Documentation from the Developer. The inspectorate consults the other concerned authorities (including the
municipalities), other organisations as well as the public and takes their input into consideration when arriving at a
decision about the EIA Report’s content.
Environment Agency (2002), Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), A handbook for Scoping Projects
UNECE (2010), Report on implementation of the ESPOO Convention on environmental impact assessment in a
transboundary context.
Even though Scoping is not legally required by the EU legislation, it is still good practice and
Developers should try to include a Scoping stage in their work programme for EIA, where appropriate.
Whether Scoping is carried out under a legal requirement or as an integral part of good practice in
EIA, it can either be undertaken by the Competent Authority or by the Developer.
1.2 SCOPING BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
Scoping may be undertaken by the Competent Authority or by an independent body, such as an EIA
Commission (e.g. in the Netherlands or France), or by a panel of EIA experts (e.g. in Cyprus and in
Italy) on the Competent Authority’s behalf (more information on the Cypriot, Dutch, French, and
Italian bodies and panels can be found in this series’ Guidance Document on the Preparation of the
EIA Report, under Part B, section 2.2.3). The Competent Authority will then issue a Scoping Opinion
to the Developer; this comprises the terms of reference for the EIA Report. Prior to the finalization of
the Scoping Opinion, the Competent Authority will consult the environmental authorities and local
and regional authorities and may consult with other interested parties or with the general public.
When Scoping is led by the Competent Authority the process typically involves the following steps.
Box 6: Steps in Scoping by the Competent Authority
The Developer is required to provide information to the Competent Authority about the Project and its
location.
The Competent Authority consults with environmental, local and regional authorities and possibly with other
interested organisations and the general public to identify issues of concern.
The Competent Authority issues a Scoping Opinion to the Developer.
1.3 SCOPING BY THE DEVELOPER
It may happen that the Developer decides not to request a Scoping Opinion from the Competent
Authority. In these cases, Scoping could still be carried out with or without the formal involvement of
the Competent Authority. It is good practice that the Developer prepares a draft Scoping Report and
that they circulate it amongst consultees before it is finalised and issued as the agreed upon terms of
reference for the EIA. The consultees may be limited to the environmental authorities and local and
regional authorities or may include other interested parties and the general public.
When Scoping is led by the Developer, the process usually involves the following steps.
Box 7: Steps in Scoping by the Developer

The Developer prepares a draft Scoping Report and decides whether to consult with environmental local and
regional authorities, other interested parties and/or the general public, to identify concerns and measures in
order to rectify them at a stage at which the changes can most readily be incorporated into the Project’s
design;
Otherwise, the Developer may still wish to request the Competent Authority’s involvement. The Developer
prepares a draft Scoping Report and submits it to the Competent Authority for review and/or approval;
The Competent Authority consults with other environmental, local and regional authorities and, possibly, with
non-statutory bodies or with the general public for their views on the proposed scope;
A finalised Scoping Report is agreed upon.
Regardless of whether Scoping is voluntary or mandatory, a proactive approach from the Developer,
including the involvement of consultees in the process, can aid in the delivery of a robust and timely
EIA Report. Ultimately, it can enable Projects to run more smoothly and, by ensuring that concerns
have already been identified and addressed at the Scoping stage, it may limit the objections raised at a
later stage.
1.4 STEP 1: IN A NUTSHELL
Scoping can either be required by legislation or carried out on a voluntary basis. In either
instance, the Developer may request a Scoping Opinion from the Competent Authority or prepare
a Scoping Report of their own volition.
If a Scoping Opinion has been requested, then the Competent Authority is required to consult the
environmental local and regional authorities and other authorities concerned; if the Developer has
prepared a Scoping Report of its own accord, he may decide to (a) consult the key stakeholder by
its own volition directly or (b) submits it to the Competent Authority for review and approval.
It is good practice to carry out Scoping even if it is not required by legislation: Developers should
endeavor to include a Scoping stage in their work programme for EIA, so that all of the concerns
can be identified and addressed during the Scoping stage.
2 STEP 2 – INFORMATION NEEDED TO UNDERTAKE SCOPING
2.1 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ON INFORMATION NEEDED TO UNDERTAKE SCOPING
The Developer will have to provide the Competent Authority with some information on the Project in
order to allow the Competent Authority to provide a Scoping Opinion. While this was considered to be
a good practice in the past, the 2014 amendments Article 5(2) of the EIA Directive now make it a
formal requirement in cases where Scoping is requested.

Article 5(2)
[The Scoping Opinion is prepared by the competent authority] taking into account the information provided by the
developer in particular on the specific characteristics of the project, including its location and technical capacity
and its likely impacts on the environment.
It is important that the Developer prepare a preliminary document that includes information on the
Project’s specific characteristics, including:
The location;
The technical capacity;
A brief description of the Project’s likely impacts on the environment.
This type of information is the same as the information that needs to be provided before screening can
take place (see this series’ Guidance Document on Screening), although more details are likely to be
needed for Scoping, especially concerning the preliminary identification of the Project’s likely impacts
on the environment. The Developer may need to carry out preliminary data collection and field work
at this stage, in order to help determine what the significant impacts of the Project are likely to be. As
much information reasonably available at the time should always be provided. The aim is not to
undertake the full EIA Report, but rather to obtain sufficient information to allow for a reasonable plan
to be drawn up for the preparation of the EIA Report. The details of the information that can be
requested will be set out in Member State legislation and national guidance documents.
2.2 CHECKLIST ON INFORMATION FOR SCOPING
More details on the types of information that may be useful for Scoping are given in the box below. It
is important to bear in mind that this information can only be requested if the Developer can
reasonably be expected to have it at that stage of the Project’s development. Where gaps and
uncertainties do exist, these should be identified and taken into account.
Box 9: Checklist on information for Scoping

Contact Details of the Developer
Name of the company.
Main postal address, telephone, fax and e-mail details for the company.
Name of the main contact person and direct postal address, telephone, fax, and e-mail details.
Characteristics of the Project

Brief description of the proposed Project.
Reasons for proposing the Project.
A plan showing the boundary of the development, including any land required temporarily during
construction.
The physical form of the development (layout, buildings, other structures, construction materials, etc.).
Description of the main processes including size, capacity, throughput, input, and output.
Any new access arrangements or changes to existing road layout.
A work programme for construction, operation, and commissioning phases, and restoration and after-use
where appropriate.
Construction methods.
Resources used in construction and operation (materials, waster, energy, etc.).
The relationship with other existing/planned Projects.
Information about the Alternatives that are being considered.
Information about mitigating measures which are being considered.
Other activities which may be required as a consequence of the Project (e.g. new roads, extraction of
aggregate, provision of new water supply, generation or transmission of power, increased housing and
sewage disposal).
Details of any other permits required for the Project.
Location of the Project

Maps and photographs showing the location of the Project relative to surrounding physical, natural, and
man-made features e.g. a water catchment area with any relevant national border.
Existing land-uses on and adjacent to the site and any future planned land uses or for marine projects,
existing or future projects on and adjacent to the site.
Zoning or land-use policies.
Protected areas2 or features.
Sensitive areas.
Details of any alternative locations that have been considered.
Characteristics of the Potential Impact

A brief description of the Project’s likely impacts considering the following factors: impacts on people,
human health, fauna and flora, soils, land use, material assets, water quality and hydrology, air quality,
climate, noise and vibration, the landscape and visual environment, historic and cultural heritage
resources, and the interactions between them.
Nature of the impacts (i.e. direct, indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long-term,
permanent and temporary, positive and negative).
Extent of the impact (geographical area, size of the affected population/habitat/species).
Magnitude and complexity of the impact.
Probability of the impact.
Duration, frequency, and reversibility of the impact.
Mitigation incorporated into the Project design to reduce, avoid or offset significant adverse impacts.
Trans-frontier nature of the impact.
The Developer will have to prepare a preliminary document containing some information on the
Project’s characteristics, in order to allow the Competent Authority to provide a Scoping Opinion;
namely, details about:
The location;
The technical capacity;
A brief description of the likely impacts of the Project on the environment.
The types of information that may be useful for Scoping are given in the checklist above.
2
For marine protected areas, it could be useful to specify if they are protected under EU legislation, by Regional Sea Conventions or by
national designation.
3 STEP 3 – SCOPING CONSULTATIONS
In cases where Scoping is required by national legislation, or where the Developer has requested a
Scoping Opinion, the Directive further establishes specific consultation requirements.

Article 5(2)
[…] the competent authorities shall consult the authorities referred to in Article 6(1) before it gives its opinion.
Article 6(1)
Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the authorities likely to be concerned by the
project by reason of their specific environmental responsibilities or local and regional competences are given an
opportunity to express their opinion […] To that end, Member States shall designate the authorities to be consulted,
either in general terms or on a case-by-case basis. The information gathered pursuant to Article 5 shall be
forwarded to those authorities. Detailed arrangements for consultation shall be laid down by the Member States.
Strong communication channels between the Developer and the Competent Authority should be
established when carrying out Scoping. However, when the EIA Report’s scope has been determined
by the Competent Authority or the Developer alone, then the resulting content of the assessment may
miss some elements that are critical to the assessment. The involvement of a wide range of
stakeholders and perspectives can be very important when preparing the Scoping Opinion.
The Directive sets minimum requirements for consultation, requiring that environmental authorities as
well as local and regional authorities are given an opportunity to comment on the EIA Report’s scope.
In some Member States, EIA legislation extends consultation on Scoping to all interested parties,
including the general public; while this is not required by law in others, it remains a good practice.
Box 11: Examples of public participation practices in Scoping in different Member States
In Hungary, depending on the project Scoping can be mandatory or voluntary. According to the Hungarian
legislation in force (Governmental Decree No. 314/2005. (XII.25.)), for Annex II projects the Competent Authority
determines whether the particular project should be made subject to an EIA procedure on a case-by-case basis
(according to Article 4 (2) point a) to the EIA Directive). When the Competent Authority comes to the conclusion
that an EIA is needed, it determines the scope and level of details that are to be included in the EIA Report, as well.
This procedure is called Preliminary Assessment Procedure (előzetes vizsgálat) and considered to be a mandatory
Screening and Scoping procedure. The Preliminary Assessment Procedure is completed by issuing the Screening
Decision and Scoping Opinion of the Competent Authority.
Whereas for Annex I projects the Competent Authority gives a Scoping Opinion, in case the Developer so requests.
This procedure is called Preliminary Consultation (előzetes konzultáció) and considered to be a voluntary Scoping
procedure. The Preliminary Consultation is completed by issuing the Scoping Opinion of the Competent Authority.
For both the mandatory (Preliminary Assessment Procedure) and voluntary (Preliminary Consultation) Scoping
procedures, the public is provided with possibilities for making comments and objections together with all the
concerned special co-authorities (consulted and given the opportunity to express their opinion) and the licencing
authority (entitled to ask for additional information from the Developer during the EIA procedure).
Wider Scoping consultation activities, although not a requirement, have been standard EIA practice in the UK for a
number of years. Practitioners shared their experience and agree that consultation and engagement can provide
substantial benefits to a Project, from the enhanced buy-in within stakeholder groups and the local community, to
access to high quality local environmental information that would otherwise not have been available to the
assessment. Where engagement is given a greater focus, there are opportunities to get local community members
involved to an even greater degree, including providing input into design and access details, as well as by helping
to develop Mitigation Measures that are more likely to be trusted and effectively implemented, given that they have
community buy-in.
Scoping meetings are held with stakeholders, including NGOs and the Local Councils for Annex I Projects in Malta.
The information made available to the public includes a Project Description Statement, site plan, photographs, and
other relevant material. The duration of this public consultation phase is 21 days.
Justice & Environment (2012), The EIA in Selected Member States, Report and Case Studies
IEMA (2001), The state of environmental impact assessment practice in the UK, Special Report
COWI (2009), Study concerning the report on the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive, Final report
In all forms of Scoping, consultation with environmental authorities, local and regional authorities,
other interested parties, and the public form important parts of the process. Consultations during
Scoping will help to ensure that all of the impacts, issues, concerns, Alternatives, and Mitigation
Measures, which interested parties believe should be considered in the EIA, have been addressed.
The early involvement of stakeholders during Scoping has benefits for the Developer in terms of good
public relations and in obtaining information about the local area. Moreover, by addressing concerns at
the outset, there is less likelihood of the Project being delayed, at the decision-making stage for
example, because important information has been overlooked.
3.1 WHO TO CONSULT
As seen above, the Directive requests that environmental authorities and local and regional authorities
be afforded the opportunity to comment on the scope of the EIA Report. In addition, it is good practice
for other interested parties and the public to also be involved in the Scoping consultation.
On the basis of national legislation, the Developer will have to identify those stakeholders who have
an interest in the Project proposal under consideration and who will, therefore, be consulted in
addition to the environmental authorities and local and regional authorities referred to in Article 6(1).
The Developer will need to identify:
Who would potentially be affected;

Who would accept/promote the Project;
Who would be opposed to the Project;
Who has been involved previously;
Who is influential in the community.
Depending upon the responses, a wide range of organisations and individuals may be identified as
stakeholders.
There are three main groups of organisations and individuals who may be appropriate to consult
during Scoping. These are:
environmental and local authorities (required by the Directive);

other interested parties;
the public and the public concerned.
The types of organisations to be included in these three groups are listed below. However, it is not a
comprehensive list and the Developer and practitioners should always consider what types of local or
national organisations it might be appropriate to consult for a particular EIA. It can be useful for those
regularly involved in EIA to keep a list of consultees for reference.
Box 12: Checklist of consultees for Scoping

1. Environmental and other concerned authorities
regional and local authorities.
authorities responsible for pollution control including water, waste, soil, noise and air pollution.
authorities responsible for protection of nature, cultural heritage and the landscape.
health and safety authorities.
land use control, spatial planning and zoning authorities.
authorities in neighbouring countries where transboundary impacts may be an issue.
2. Other interested parties
local, national, and international environmental and social interest groups.
sectoral government departments responsible for agriculture, energy, forestry, fisheries, etc. whose interests may
be affected.
international and trans-frontier agencies whose interests may be affected e.g. cross-border river basin
commissions.
local employers’ and business associations such as Chambers of Commerce, trade associations, etc.
employees’ organisations, such as trades unions.
groups representing users of the environment, e.g. farmers, fishermen, walkers, anglers, tourists, local wildlife
groups.
research institutes, universities and other centres of expertise.
3. The public and the public concerned

landowners and residents.
general members of the local and wider public.
elected representatives and community figures such as religious leaders or teachers.
local community groups, resident’s groups, etc.;
3.2 HOW TO CONSULT
Meeting with key stakeholders early in the Scoping process is a useful way to identify key issues,
opportunities, and constraints, as well as the information that is both available and required. It should
also help to identify other stakeholders that should be contacted throughout the process.
The level of consultation should be proportional to the potential significance of the Project’s impacts.
Those undertaking consultations should identify stakeholders, and the most effective means of
stimulating responses from them, and should draw up a communication plan.
Environmental, local and regional authorities are generally provided with the draft Scoping Opinion
and invited to make comments. Alternatively, meetings and workshops could be organised between
the competent authorities, the Developer, and the environmental, local and regional authorities.
It is good practice to make information about the Scoping process, and a preliminary draft of the
Scoping Opinion, available to the public. This may be facilitated by a range of means, for example:
Box 13: How to publicise the Scoping process

initial announcements about the Scoping process in local or national newspapers.
posting notices announcing the Scoping process at the site, in the neighbouring area, and at the offices of local
authorities.
preparing a leaflet or brochure about the Project, providing some details about what is being proposed with a
plan or map, describing the EIA process, and the purpose of Scoping, and inviting comments.
publication of articles in newspapers, on radio or on television.
publication on internet of all of the above whenever possible.
Once the information is made available, consultation with other interested parties and the general
public could be carried out at different degrees of engagement and dialogue: simply inviting them to
express their comments on the draft Scoping Opinion, or seeking their involvement through the
organization of face-to-face meetings, as outlined in the box below.
Box 14: Different degrees of engagement and dialogue during Scoping consultations
Submitting comments the Competent Authorities or the Developer publish a draft Scoping Opinion for
review and comment before completing the process.
the competent authorities or the Developer distribute letters or questionnaires to
potentially interested organisations, and to nearby residents, requesting information
and comments on the proposals (this is often a good starting point for Scoping if the
number of interested people and organisations is large).
Face to face meetings public meeting or an exhibition (it may be helpful to invite an independent person
to chair public meetings; an exhibition may be preferable to a public meeting as
people who are nervous about standing up and speaking at a public meeting may
feel more comfortable speaking to someone on a one-to-one basis at an exhibition.
Meetings can also be dominated by a few vocal attendees and might not allow
the full range of issues or even the most important issues to be expressed).
Telephone or video discussions or meetings with key organisations, groups or
individuals.
establishing an expert or community based Scoping Group who will continue to
oversee the EIA Report throughout the process (this can be useful for Projects where
the issues are complex or where the Project is at an early stage in the planning
process and the significance of issues is unclear).
a Scoping Workshop at which participants work together through a structured
programme to identify matters to be addressed by the EIA process (this can be
particularly helpful if the issues are complex and there are several groups interested
in the proposals; an independent facilitator can also be useful in ensuring
workshops are successful).
A range of different approaches can be used in most EIAs to suit the different types of organisations
and individuals involved and the degree of interest in the Project. However, an effective consultation
process in Scoping will typically follow the steps presented in the following box. These steps will
have to be discussed with the competent authority at the initiative of the developer.
Box 15: Typical good practice in Scoping consultations

Set up a list of organisations and individuals who are interested in the Project and update this as the Project
develops.
Contact each consultee to request their help in Scoping.
Send them information about the Project in the form of a well-produced leaflet or brochure. Give contact
details for information and comment(s).
Make the leaflet widely available in local centres (libraries, town halls, post offices); possibly provide a copy
to every household and business in the area.
Collate and analyse all responses and take them into account in planning the EIA Reports.
Write back to each respondent, thanking them for their help and explaining how their comments have
been addressed.
If appropriate arrange to telephone or meet them in person to discuss the issues they raise.
If there is considerable local interest, consider holding a public exhibition (in a hall or a mobile caravan) or
a community meeting at which the Project will be presented and staff will be on hand to answer questions.
If there are several groups with a common interest, consider setting up a special forum for them to meet
you at regular intervals.
If the EIA process is lengthy, issue a regular newsletter to keep consultees up to date with what is
happening.
Always record the views expressed in consultations in the EIA Report.
All of the participants involved in Scoping should be invited to comment on the Project’s design, on
its potential environmental impacts and their mitigation, and about any Alternatives that they consider
should be investigated. The general public is also an invaluable source of local knowledge and asking
them about any information they have about the local area, and on any special locale-specific issues,
can be very useful.
3.2.1 Essentials for effective Scoping consultation
Whichever method of consultation is employed, it is important to:
provide enough information about the Project for consultees to understand what is being proposed
and to identify potential issues;
make clear to participants that the Scoping process is about hearing and understanding their
views, not about selling the Project;
provide sufficient time for consultees to respond to requests for views and information;
reassure consultees that any views that they express at the Scoping stage will not preclude them
from making further comments and, possibly, objecting at a later stage in the EIA process;
ensure that the views expressed are taken into account, and are seen to be taken into account, in
the planning and preparing of the EIA Report and that an explanation is provided if
recommendations are not followed.
Although this is not required by the Directive, one effective way of ensuring that participants
understand how their views have been addressed is to summarise the results of the Scoping process in
the EIA Report.
3.2.2 Constraints on Scoping consultations
For some particularly sensitive and confidential Projects, or those for which wide consultation may
result in the loss of a competitive advantage, it may be necessary to restrict the range of consultations
to the Competent Authority and the statutory environmental consultees exclusively. This will not be
permissible in EIA regimes for which prior notification and Scoping are mandatory stages in the EIA
process and would not be considered to be a good practice more generally. However, where it is an
option, non-statutory organisations and other interested parties, including the public at large, should be
invited to comment as early as possible in the assessment’s later stages.
The Directive sets minimum requirements for consultation, requesting that environmental
authorities and local and regional authorities are given an opportunity to comment on the scope of
the EIA Report.
In some Member States, EIA legislation extends consultation to all interested parties including
the general public, while in others this is not required by law, but it remains a good practice.
Consultations during Scoping will help to ensure that all of the impacts, issues, concerns,
Alternatives, and Mitigation Measures that interested parties believe should be considered in the
EIA are addressed.
The Developer and practitioners should always consider what types of local or national
organisations it might be appropriate to consult with for a particular Project.
To effectively involve other interested parties and the general public, the information about the
Scoping process and a preliminary draft of the Scoping Opinion should be made publicly
available. Secondly, they should be given the opportunity to submit their comments.
Alternatively, face-to-face meetings could be organised to seek their feedback.
4 STEP 4 – THE SCOPING OUTPUTS: THE SCOPING OPINION/REPORT
4.1 THE CONTENT OF THE SCOPING OPINION/REPORT
In cases for which Scoping is required by national legislation, or where the Developer has requested a
Scoping Opinion, the Directive further establishes that the EIA Report must follow the Scoping
Opinion’s indications. While this has shown itself to be a good practice in the past, it is now formally
required by Article 5(1) of the Directive.

Article 5(1)
[…] when an opinion is issued, the environmental impact assessment report shall be based on that opinion […]
The purpose of Scoping is to identify those matters that should be covered in the EIA Report that is
prepared by the Developer and submitted to a Competent Authority and, in particular, to identify the
matters which are most important, so that these can be addressed in greater detail. Scoping should
ensure that all of the relevant issues are identified and addressed in an appropriate manner in the EIA
Report and, at the same time, that unnecessary issues are disregarded.
By investigating its most important aspects, the Scoping Opinion or Report can help, as a matter of
good practice, to define the EIA Report’s Terms of Reference and the level of detail of the information
necessary for the assessment; in so doing, it also gives an indication of the time needed to prepare the
EIA Report and its possible length.
Given that there are no formal requirements regarding the content of the Scoping Opinion or Report in
the Directive, the format and detail of these documents will vary. However, in principle, a Scoping
Opinion or Report should identify the content and extent of the information to be provided to the
Competent Authority by the Developer. An example of the content of a Scoping Opinion is presented
in the box below.
Box 17: Content of a Scoping Opinion: an example

Introduction: background and purpose of the Scoping Opinion.
Description of the site.
Description of the proposed development Project:
objectives and needs of the Project;
physical characteristics of the Project (nature, size, hazard, etc.).
The identification of main significant effects:
Description of the Scoping methodology.
Identification of the effects on the receiving environment (for each relevant environmental receptor: e.g.
air quality, natural heritage, water, etc.):
Introduction.
currently known Baseline.
key effects identified.
possible Alternatives.
assessment methodology for in depth significance assessment to be used in the EIA Report.
possible mitigation and compensation measures.
possible Monitoring Measures.
Conclusions:
Summary.
Provisional Terms of References for the EIA Report.
When preparing a Scoping Opinion, competent authorities should consider the Directive’s
requirements regarding the information to be provided by the Developer in the EIA Report, as set out
by Article 5(1) and Annex IV of the Directive.
Scoping is primarily focused on identifying the most significant effects, to be assessed in-depth at a
later stage, and on determining the scope and level of detail of information to be provided in the EIA
Report; however, it may also address other additional matters. The following box presents all of the
aspects that should be considered when carrying out Scoping/preparing the Scoping Opinion/Report.
Box 18: Aspects to be considered during Scoping

the baseline studies required to understand the existing environment’s status;
any special requirements for baseline studies regarding their geographical extent or timing, e.g. because of
seasonal changes in fauna and flora;
the types of Alternatives that ought to be considered;
the level of detail of investigations required;
the methods to be used to predict the magnitude of environmental effects;
the criteria against which the significance of effects should be evaluated;
the types of Mitigation Measures to be considered;
organisations to be consulted when assessing environmental impacts
the membership and management of the experts or team of experts that will prepare the EIA Report;
the workplan and resourcing for the assessment of environmental impacts.
for projects that require both EIA and AA, the possibility of streamlining the Scoping procedures should be
considered as a good practice (see the Annex to this Guidance Document on Links with Other EU Instruments).
In most cases, the structure of the Scoping Opinion or Report should be similar to that of the EIA
Report, but its contents will be much less detailed. In addition, a Scoping Opinion or Report can also
be used in the subsequent review of an EIA Report, in order to check that the issues, considered to be
significant at the outset of the EIA process, have been addressed.
The following sections provide some recommendations to the Competent Authority and to the
Developer on how to consider some of the aspects mentioned above when preparing the Scoping
Opinion or Report.
In particular, some methodological tools are provided to help the Competent Authority and the
Developer answer some preliminary questions at the Scoping stage, which will then be systematically
answered during the preparation of the EIA Report (see this series’ Guidance Document on the
Preparation of the EIA Report). The preliminary questions are:
What effects could the Project have on the environment?

Which of these effects are likely to be significant and therefore need particular attention in the
EIA Report?
Which Alternatives and Mitigation Measures ought to be considered in developing the proposals
for the Project?
What data sources are available to assess the environmental effects?
Which Monitoring Measures should be considered?
4.1.1 Step 4a – Identifying significant effects
Assistance from the checklists
Environmental effects can be characterised as interactions between some of the Project’s features and
some of the surrounding environment’s features. The Checklist in Part C of this guidance is designed
to help to identify such interactions.
Part 1 of the Checklist - ‘Questions on Project characteristics’ - provides a list of possible Project
characteristics that could give rise to environmental effects. The user is prompted to first consider
whether the Project is expected to involve any of the activities or features listed in the checklist and,
second, to answer using one of three responses provided in Column 2:
Yes - if the activity is likely to occur;

No - if the activity is not expected to occur;
? - if it is uncertain whether the activity will occur or not.
If the answer to any question is ‘Yes’, then the user considers which characteristics of the surrounding
environment could be affected by that activity.
The second part of the Checklist - ‘Characteristics of the Project environment’ - is designed to help the
user to think through this stage. The results can be entered in Column 3 of the first checklist, creating a
list of all of the Project’s potential effects.
The environmental information provided by the Developer to the competent authorities must address
all of the effects mentioned in this checklist. However, resources are usually limited and it is,
therefore, important that the assessment of environmental information focus on those issues that are
important for decision-making regarding the Project, and are not burdened with irrelevant detail about
less significant issues.
Identifying what is important at the Scoping stage can, however, be difficult as it requires decisions to
be made about what is likely to be significant before any detailed assessment on the environmental
effects of a Project has been undertaken.
The concept of ‘significant effects’
While a Project’s significant effects on the environment have likely already been considered at the
Screening stage of EIA (see this series’ Guidance Document on Screening), it is during Scoping that
the Competent Authority or the Developer has to provide more insight into which impacts are really
important, need to be included, and assessed further in the EIA Report.
The assessment of significant effects (or impacts) is an essential concept of the EIA Directive. It limits
the consideration of the effects or impacts a Project may have on the environment to those which are
significant or important enough to merit the costs of assessment, review, and decision-making. While
the concept of significant effects is referred to several times in the EIA Directive (see box below), no
clear definition is provided and significance has to be assessed in light of the Project’s specific
circumstances.

Article 2(1)
(1) Member States shall adopt all measures necessary to ensure that, before development consent is given,
projects likely to have significant effects on the environment, by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location
are made subject to a requirement for development consent and an assessment with regard to their effects on
the environment.
Article 3(1)
(1) The environmental impact assessment shall identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner, in the light
of each individual case, the direct and indirect significant effects of a project on a range of factors.
Article 5(1)
(1) The developer shall include in the EIA Report at least:
(a) a description of the likely significant effects of the project on the environment.
Annex IV(5) expands further by listing the types of sources/factors that may cause likely significant effects.
While the concept of ‘significant effects’ remains largely undefined, certain common characteristics
are associated therewith, as shown in the box below.
Box 20: The concept of ‘significant effects’

The assessment of significance relies on informed experts’ judgements about what is important, desirable or
acceptable with regards to changes triggered by the Project in question. These judgements are relative and must
always be understood in their context:
They are value-dependent: while judgements are, in most cases, informed by scientific data (e.g. regarding the
type of impact being examined), they are subjective to some degree as they are the opinion of one
practitioner or by a team of practitioners. Experts’ judgements vary, depending on the perspective (legal or
institutional recognition, political or public recognition), deemed to be important professionally.
They are context-dependent: judgements are made within the socio-cultural, economic, and political contexts
of a Project. A thorough understanding of contextual factors (e.g., local ecological, social, and cultural
conditions, judgements in related decision-making areas), likely to influence judgements’ significance, is
essential when identifying a Project’s impact on the environment.
At present, there is no international consensus among practitioners on a single or common approach

for assessing the significance of impacts. This makes sense considering that the concept of
significance differs across the varying political, social, and cultural contexts that Projects face.
Nevertheless, the determination of impacts’ significance can vary considerably, depending on the
approach and methods selected for the assessment. The choice of appropriate procedures and methods
for each judgement varies depending on the Project’s characteristics. Several methods, be they
quantitative or qualitative, can be used to identify, predict, and to evaluate the significance of an
impact.
As a good practice, all assessment methods should define clear thresholds or criteria for determining
whether an impact is significant, based on the characteristics of an impact, in a clear and unambiguous
manner that can be understood by anyone reading the EIA Report.
Methodology: thresholds of significance
Significant impacts can be determined using thresholds to understand the degree of change in the
receiving environment. A threshold can be defined as a quantitative or qualitative standard against
which the significance of a given environmental effect may be determined. Thresholds are generally
derived from scientific knowledge and are frequently included in regulatory standards.
Thresholds can help to determine the significance of environmental effects, but are not necessarily
certain. While it is easy to quantify how they perform against a legislative or scientific standard, some
effects (such as changes in traffic volumes or noise levels), for others, such as wildlife habitats, it is
difficult to quantify this and qualitative descriptions must be relied upon. In any case, thresholds
should be based on legal requirements or scientific standards that indicate a point at which a given
environmental effect becomes significant.
If no legislation or scientific standards are available, the EIA practitioners can then evaluate impact
significance in a more subjective way by using the multi-criteria analysis method.
Methodology: multi-criteria analysis
A common approach used in EIA is the application of a multi-criteria analysis. Common criteria used
to evaluate significance include the magnitude of the predicted effect and the sensitivity of the
receiving environment:
Magnitude considers the characteristics of the change (timing, scale, size, and duration of the
impact) which would probably affect the target receptor as a result of the proposed Project.
Sensitivity is understood as the sensitivity of the receiving environment to change, including its
capacity to accommodate the changes the Projects may bring about.
‘Magnitude’ and ‘sensitivity’ are both used as descriptors for a wide range of different factors; these
two criteria, their components, and practical examples thereof are all presented in the box below.
Box 21: Criteria for assessing significance

Criteria Components of criteria Description and examples
Existing regulations and There are specific receptors in the impact area which
guidance (law, programmes, have some level of protection, either by law or other
guidelines, zoning) regulations (e.g. prohibition against polluting
groundwater and Natura 2000 areas) or whose
conservation value is increased by programmes or
recommendations (e.g. landscapes designated as
nationally valuable).
The receptors mentioned in the Directive (Article 3 and

Annex IV.4) are: population and human health,
Sensitivity of the biodiversity, land, soil, water, air and climate, material
receiving assets, cultural heritage, and the landscape.
environment
The value of the receptor to Depending on the type of impact, it may be related to
the society (recreational economic values (e.g. water supply), social values (e.g.
values, natural values, number landscape or recreation) or environmental values (e.g.
of affected people) natural habitat).
Vulnerability to the changes Vulnerability to the change describes how liable the
(ability to tolerate changes, receptor is to be influenced or harmed by pollution or
number of sensitive targets) other changes to its environment. For instance, an area
that is quiet is more vulnerable to increasing noise than
an area with industrial background noise.
Intensity and direction Intensity describes the physical dimension of a

development and direction specifies whether the
impact is negative (”–”) or positive (”+”). Depending on
the type of impact, intensity can often be measured
with various physical units and compared to reference
values, such as the decibel (dB) for sound.
Magnitude of the
impact Spatial extent (geographical Spatial extent describes the geographical reach of an
area) impact area or the range within which an effect is
observable.
Duration (reversibility, timing, Duration describes the length of time during which an
periodicity, and regulatory) impact is observable and it also takes other related
issues, such as timing and periodicity, into account.
Scottish Natural Heritage, A handbook on environmental impact assessment: Guidance for Competent
Authorities, Consultees and others involved in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process in Scotland;
IMPERIA Project, available at: https://www.jyu.fi/bioenv/en/divisions/ymp/research/imperia-Project.
Describing impacts in terms of the above criteria provides a consistent and systematic basis for the
comparison and application of an expert judgement.
Answers to the questions of the checklists on the characteristics of the Project and its environment (see
Part C) will provide sufficient information to describe the sensitivity of the receiving environment and
the magnitude of the impacts of a Project. In addition, the following questions can be answered to
determine the significance of an impact:
Box 22: Questions to assess the significance of impacts
Is there a risk that environmental standards will be breached?
Will many people be affected?
Will many receptors of other types (fauna and flora, businesses, facilities) be affected?
Will valuable or scarce features or resources be affected?
Is there a risk that protected sites, areas, features will be affected?
Will it be difficult to avoid, reduce, repair or compensate for the effect?
Will there be a large change in environmental conditions?
Will new features be out-of-scale with the existing environment?
Will the effect be unusual in the area or particularly complex?
Will the effect extend over a large area?
Will there be any potential for trans-frontier impact?
Will the effect continue for a long time?
Will the effect be permanent, rather than temporary?
Will the impact be continuous rather than intermittent?
If it is intermittent, will it be frequent rather than rare?
Will the impact be irreversible?
Once the environmental sensitivity and impact magnitude have been described, the next step is to scale
and weight the two criteria by means of a matrix, in order to determine how significant the predicted
impacts will be. Two examples of matrices are presented below.
Box 23: Example of scale of sensitivity of the receiving environment

High High importance and rarity, national scale, limited potential for substitution and low capacity to
accommodate proposed form of change
Medium Medium importance and rarity, national scale and limited potential for substitution. The receiving
environment has some tolerance of the proposed change subject to design and mitigation
Low Low or medium importance and rarity, local scale. The receiving environment is tolerant of the proposed
change subject to design and mitigation
Box 24: Example of scale of magnitude of the impact

Major Loss of resource and/or quality and integrity of resource over a significant area; severe
change/damage to key characteristics, features or elements for more than 2 years
Moderate Loss of resource, but not adversely affecting the integrity over a significant area; partial loss of/damage
to key characteristics, features or elements, for more than 6 months but less than 2 years
Minor Some measurable change in attributes, quality or vulnerability; minor loss of, or alteration to, one
(maybe more) key characteristics, features or elements
These two matrices on sensitivity and magnitude can be combined to compile a simple matrix of
significance as shown in the table below.
Box 25: Assessing significance

Impact Environmental sensitivity
magnitude
High Medium Low
Major High High Moderate
Moderate High Moderate Minor
Minor Moderate Minor Negligible
The impacts are individually ranked for their significance on the basis of the sensitivity of the
environment and the magnitude of the change: a high environmental sensitivity and major magnitude
of change would result in a high significance of the impact. The construction of the matrix, for
weighting the significance of the impact, should be adapted to fit individual cases.
While magnitude is determined by empirical prediction, sensitivity involves more subjective

judgments in terms of how a certain environmental receptor is valued in the society. Some discretion
from the expert is, therefore, required in assigning different weight to the criteria.
The assessment of the Project’s future impacts might involve various uncertainties. A more risk-based
approach can be used to assess significant effects when there is uncertainty about the receiving
environment. This approach takes the likelihood that the impact will occur in the future into account,
in addition to both the magnitude and the sensitivity of the receiving environment.
Two aspects of likelihood are probability and confidence:
Box 26: Aspects of likelihood
Likelihood Example
The probability of an effect occurring, which may An accident at power plant could be catastrophic for the
range from certainty to a remote possibility. environment, but the probability of it occurring may be very
small.
Is there a high probability of the effect occurring? Typically, this issue is related to the uncertainty about the
future conditions and external influences.
The assessor’s confidence in judgments made The potential for significant buried archaeological findings to
about the sensitivity or value of the receiving be found is low; therefore, significant effects (on this receptor)
environment. are unlikely.
Typically, this issue is related to the assessment of imprecision

How confident am I regarding the value attached related to the evaluation; due to a lack of baseline
to the receptor that may be affected? information and imprecise models for example.
IEMA Quality Mark Article: ‘What are the changes of that’ – Probability and its Role in Determining Impact
Significance;
ARVI tool developed by the IMPERIA Project.
The Scoping Opinion or Report should clearly set out the methodological considerations and the
reasoning behind the preliminary experts’ judgements regarding the significance of an impact
identified, so that others can see the weight attached to different factors and can understand the
rationale of the assessment.
While the experts’ opinion is central to determining the significance of impacts, it is important that
they make the process of determining the significance of impacts more explicit, open to comments and
public input, and that they take different stakeholders’ perspectives on the value attached to a specific
environmental recipient and on what significance means while performing the multi-criteria analysis
(see the section on Scoping Consultation) into account.
4.1.2 Step 4b – Identifying Alternatives and Mitigation Measures
Alternatives are essentially different ways in which the Developer can feasibly meet the Project’s
objectives, by carrying out a different type of action, choosing an alternative location or adopting a
different technology or design for the Project for example. Alternatives may end up becoming part of
the Project’s final design, or its methods of construction or operation, in order to avoid, reduce or
remedy environmental effects.
While a full study of Alternatives has to be carried out as part of the preparation of the EIA Report
(see this series’ Guidance Document on the Preparation of the EIA Report); it is often good practice to
identify preliminary Alternatives during Scoping stage. Ideally, Alternatives should be identified as
early in the Project development process as possible, while it is still possible to alter the Project. Early
identification of Alternatives can also allow for more efficient data collection.
Alternatives and mitigation can, therefore, range from a high level to very detailed aspects of Project
design. Different types of Alternatives that can be considered are provided in the box below:
Box 27: Types of Alternatives and Mitigation Measures

Alternatives and mitigation can range from a high level to very detailed aspects of Project design:
Alternative strategies e.g. to manage demand or reduce losses rather than develop a new resource;
Alternative sites or routes for all or part of the Project;
Alternative technologies and raw materials e.g. construction of a combined cycle gas turbine power plant
rather than a coal fired power station;
Alternative layouts or designs e.g. locating noisy activities away from sensitive receptors or replacing one large
stack for gaseous emissions with two smaller ones;
Alternative environmental measures e.g. construction of an ecoduct (Ecoduct is a structural means by which
animals can safely traverse human constructions and barriers) to ensure safe passage of wildlife across a
motorway, rather than the establishment of compensatory habitat.
The box below provides a useful list to bear in mind when thinking about the different types of
Alternatives and Mitigation that a Developer should consider as early as the Scoping stage.
Box 28: Points to consider when identifying Alternatives and Mitigation Measures during Scoping
Measures to manage demand for goods or services.
Measures to conserve or reduce wastage of resources.
Different approaches to meeting demand.
Locations or routes.
Processes or technologies.
Working methods.
Site plans and layouts.
Design of structures.
Types and sources of materials.
Product specifications.
Timetable for construction, operation, and decommissioning including any phasing of the Project.
Start and finish dates.
Size of the site or facility.
Level of production.
Responsibilities for implementation.
Pollution controls.
Waste disposal arrangements including recycling, recovery, reuse, and final disposal.
Access arrangements and routes for traffic to and from the site.
Ancillary facilities.
Management methods and systems.
Environmental management responsibilities and procedures.
Employment and staff training.
Monitoring and contingency plans.
Decommissioning arrangements, site restoration, and after-use.
Do-nothing scenario or do-minimum Alternative.
4.1.3 Step 4c – Collecting data
When issuing a Scoping Opinion or Report, the Developer and the practitioners should be aware of
what data can be feasibly collected during the preparation of the EIA Report. Data should be collected
and interpreted by the relevant experts, and, if highly technical data are used, then data should be
verified for accuracy of interpretation and relevance. Where no such experts are available in-house,
external experts should be used. Experts may also be found at the local level, given that communities
may have local knowledge.
Data may be difficult to find; in some cases, proxy indicators can be used that can help to understand
the environmental situation in other ways. For example, a lack of air quality monitoring data from an
urban area could be resolved if there are data outlining trends in traffic flows/volumes over time, or
trends in emissions from stationary sources. Assumptions about the environment can be generated
from other available data and can be useful in determining the relevance of impacts. Data can also be
collected under other EU legislation – for example a monitoring programme must be established
which can be another data source under the Habitats Directive, Marine Strategy Framework Directive,
or Water Framework Directive (see the Annex to this Guidance Document on links with other EU
instruments).
Practitioners should be aware that data sources may differ from case to case, and the most high-tech or
extensive collection method may not be the best one. In some cases, desk research may be more
effective than field surveys, and Google Earth may be just as useful as satellite imagery that has been
purchased.
In many Member States, data are collected either nationally or regionally, and include not only data
from EIAs, but also from other environmental assessments and monitoring schemes. This practice is
also encouraged by other EU level guidance documents (e.g. European Commission, 2016,
Commission guidance document on streamlining environmental assessments conducted under Article
2(3) of Environmental Impact Assessment Directive – see the Annex to this Guidance Document on
Other Relevant Guidance and Tools for full references). These databases help to speed up the
preparation of environmental assessments. Frequently updated databases will also facilitate
transboundary consultations and the linkages between strategic and Project level environmental
assessments. Practitioners should always first check what institutions are already in place, and what
data are already available, before starting data collection for the Baseline scenario. In addition, Article
5(4) of the EIA Directive requires Member States to, if necessary, ensure that any authorities holding
relevant information make this information available to the Developer. This means the Developer
should be able to easily obtain relevant information from the different relevant authorities and to
obtain guidance to that effect from the Competent Authority.
Some typical sources of information used for collecting data in Scoping are listed below.
National/regional databases of previous EIAs;

Data collected under other EU legislation (especially the SEA Directive and the INSPIRE
Directive);
EU level and other international databases (see the table below);
Local level/community experts; and
Primary research carried out by competent experts.
Box 29: Examples of supra-national level environmental databases

General datasets
European Commission – Eurostat database;
European Environment Agency (including national emissions, water, land cover, etc.);
European Environment Information and Observation Network (EIONET);
Copernicus (previously Global Monitoring for Environment and Security);
Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE);
United Nations Environmental Data Explorer.
Biodiversity and climate change datasets
Biodiversity Information System for Europe (BISE);
Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF);
Natura 2000 Network Viewer;
Reporting under Habitats Directive, and Birds Directive
Common Database on Nationally Designated Areas (CDDA) managed by the European Environment Agency
Ecosystem assessments (MAES)
Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON);
EuMon (species and habitats of Community interest);
IPCC Data Distribution Centre.
Water & Marine datasets
Water Information System for Europe (WISE);
European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODNET);
Environmental Marine Information System (EMIS);
European Atlas of the Seas.
Chemicals and industrial datasets
Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH);
Major Accident Reporting System (MARS);
Community Documentation Centre on Industrial Risk (CDCIR);
European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (ePRTR).
4.1.4 Step 4d – Monitoring Measures
Monitoring Measures are to be proposed in the EIA Report and can be put in place to monitor the
development of the Project, including the environmental effects identified, ensuring the
implementation of Mitigation Measures or identifying previously unidentified adverse effects.
Monitoring Measures are obligatory for Projects for which the EIA has identified significant
environmental effects.
Monitoring Measures might be considered during Scoping, given that practitioners need to ensure that
the scope of the EIA Report is sufficiently wide to develop Monitoring Measures. Monitoring
Measures may be developed directly for the Project in question, or may arise from other requirements
– EU or national legislation governing the operation of a Project, funding requirements or other
sources. It is important – and a requirement of the Directive – that there is no duplication or
inconsistency in terms of the effort exerted in monitoring. For more information on developing
Monitoring Measures, please refer to this series’ Guidance Document on the Preparation of the EIA
Report.
Below are some practical suggestions that Developers and practitioners can take into account when
designing Monitoring Measures and which can already be considered during Scoping:
Monitoring Measures should be sufficiently detailed to allow for proper implementation – the
parameters, frequency, methods, responsibilities, and resources should be identified in advance.
Authorities issuing the Development Consent should be satisfied that monitoring results will be
evaluated by relevant authorities, naming such authority if relevant (this could be done via
random inspection). Rather than carrying out monitoring for each Project individually, measures
could be coordinated at a higher level (depending on the Projects this may take place in a variety
of different fora such as municipal plans, via an SEA, or more informally). This could involve
developing a database to reduce the time spent on extensive field surveys and to facilitate future
environmental assessments for similar Projects. Such a database would also be closely linked to
monitoring results from ongoing Projects.
To the extent that it is reasonable, Monitoring Measures should have the capacity to identify any
unforeseeable adverse effects, meaning they should take the state of the affected environment as
well as the specific impacts (e.g. emissions, resource use) generated by the Project into account.
The results of the monitoring should be made available to the competent authorities and to the
public.
In case where Scoping is required by national legislation or the Developer has requested a
Scoping Opinion, the Directive establishes that the EIA Report must follow the indications of the
Scoping Opinion.
There are no formal requirements regarding the content of the Scoping Opinion or Report in the
Directive. However, in principle, it should define the EIA Report’s Terms of Reference and the
level of detail of the information necessary for the assessment as well as giving an indication, as
well as providing an estimate of the time needed to prepare the EIA Report, and its possible
length.
Scoping is primarily focused on identifying the most important impacts to be assessed, but it may
also address other additional matters in a preliminary way; these include: the types of Alternatives
that ought to be considered; the methods used to predict the magnitude of environmental effects;
the criteria against which the significance of effects should be evaluated; and the types of
mitigation and Monitoring Measures to be considered.
PART C – SCOPING CHECKLIST
QUESTIONS ON PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
No. Questions to be considered in Yes/No/?

Which characteristics of the Is the effect likely to be
Scoping Project Environment could be significant? Why?
affected and how?
1. Will construction, operation or decommissioning of the Project involve actions that will cause physical
changes in the locality (topography, land use, changes in waterbodies, etc.)?
1.1 Permanent or temporary change in
land use, landscape, landcover or
topography including increases in
intensity of land use? Visual effects?
1.2 Clearance of existing land, vegetation

and buildings?
1.3 Creation of new land uses?
1.4 Pre-construction investigations e.g.

boreholes, soil testing?
1.5 Construction works?
1.6 Demolition works?
1.7 Temporary sites used for

construction works or the housing of
construction workers?
1.8 Above ground buildings, structures or

earthworks including linear
structures, cut and fill or
excavations?
1.9 Underground works including mining

or tunnelling?
1.10 Reclamation works?
1.11 Dredging?
1.12 Coastal structures e.g. seawalls,

piers?
1.13 Offshore structures?
1.14 Production and manufacturing

processes?
1.15 Facilities for the storage of goods or

materials?
1.16 Facilities for treatment or disposal of

solid wastes or liquid effluents?
1.17 Facilities for the long-term housing of

operational workers?
1.18 New road, rail or sea traffic during

construction or operation?
No. Questions to be considered in Yes/No/? Which characteristics of the Is the effect likely to be
affected and how?
1.19 New road, rail, air, waterborne or
other transport infrastructure
including new or altered routes and
stations, ports, airports, etc.?
1.20 Closure or diversion of existing

transport routes or infrastructure
leading to changes in traffic
movements?
1.21 New or diverted transmission lines or

pipelines?
1.22 Impoundment, damming, culverting,

realignment or other changes to the
hydrology of watercourses or
aquifers?
1.23 Stream crossings?
1.24 Abstraction or transfer of water from

ground or surface waters?
1.25 Changes in waterbodies or the land

surface affecting drainage or run-off?
1.26 Transport of personnel or materials

for construction, operation or
decommissioning?
1.27 Long term dismantling,

decommissioning or restoration
works?
1.28 Ongoing activity during

decommissioning which could have
an impact on the environment?
1.29 Influx of people to an area, either

temporarily or permanently?
1.30 Introduction of alien species?
1.31 Loss of native species or genetic

diversity?
1.32 Loss of biodiversity-rich / protected

areas?
1.33 Any other actions?
2. Will construction or operation of the Project use natural resources such as land, water, materials or energy,
especially any resources which are non-renewable or are in short supply?
2.1 Land, especially undeveloped or
agricultural land?
2.2 Water?
2.3 Minerals?
2.4 Aggregates?
affected and how?
2.5 Forests and timber?
2.6 Energy including electricity and

fuels?
2.7 Any other resources?
3. Will the Project involve use, storage, transport, handling or production of substances or materials which
could be harmful to human health or the environment or raise concerns about actual or perceived risks to
human health?
3.1 Will the Project involve the use of
substances or materials that are
hazardous or toxic to human health
or the environment (flora, fauna,
water supplies)?
3.2 Will the Project result in changes in

occurrence of disease or affect
disease vectors (e.g. insect or water
borne diseases)?
3.3 Will the Project affect the welfare of

people e.g. by changing living
conditions?
3.4 Are there especially vulnerable

groups of people who could be
affected by the Project, e.g. hospital
patients, the elderly?
3.5 Any other causes?
4. Will the Project produce solid wastes during construction or operation or decommissioning?
4.1 Spoil, overburden or mine wastes?
4.2 Municipal waste (household and/or

commercial wastes)?
4.3 Hazardous or toxic wastes (including

radioactive wastes)?
4.4 Other industrial process wastes?
4.5 Surplus product?
4.6 Sewage sludge or other sludges from

effluent treatment?
4.7 Construction or demolition wastes?
4.8 Redundant machinery or equipment?
4.9 Contaminated soils or other material?
4.10 Agricultural wastes?
4.11 Any other solid wastes?
5. Will the Project release pollutants or any hazardous, toxic or noxious substances into the air?
affected and how?
5.1 Emissions from the combustion of
fossil fuels from stationary or mobile
sources?
5.2 Emissions from production

processes?
5.3 Emissions from materials handling

including storage or transport?
5.4 Emissions from construction activities

including plant and equipment?
5.5 Dust or odours from the handling of

materials including construction
materials, sewage, and waste?
5.6 Emissions from the incineration of

waste?
5.7 Emissions from burning of waste in

open air (e.g. slash material,
construction debris)?
5.8 Emissions from any other sources?
6. Will the Project cause noise and vibration or release of light, heat energy or electromagnetic radiation?
6.1 From operation of equipment, e.g.
engines, ventilation plant, crushers?
6.2 From industrial or similar processes?
6.3 From construction or demolition?
6.4 From blasting or piling?
6.5 From construction or operational

traffic?
6.6 From lighting or cooling systems?
6.7 From sources of electromagnetic

radiation (consider effects on nearby
sensitive equipment as well as
people)?
6.8 From any other sources?
7. Will the Project lead to risks of contamination of land or water from releases of pollutants onto the ground or
into sewers, surface waters, groundwater, coastal waters or the sea?
7.1 From handling, storage, use or
spillage of hazardous or toxic
materials?
7.2 From discharge of sewage or other

effluents (whether treated or
untreated) to water or the land?
7.3 By deposition of pollutants emitted to

air, onto the land or into water?
affected and how?
7.4 From any other sources?
7.5 Is there a risk of the long-term build-

up of pollutants in the environment
from these sources?
8. Will there be any risk of accidents during construction or operation of the Project that could affect human
health or the environment?
8.1 From explosions, spillages, fires, etc.
from storage, handling, use or
production of hazardous or toxic
substances?
8.2 From events beyond the limits of

normal environmental protection e.g.
failure of pollution control systems?
8.3 From any other causes?
8.4 Could the Project be affected by

natural disasters causing
environmental damage (e.g. floods,
earthquakes, landslip, etc.)?
9. Will the Project result in social changes/impacts on the population, for example, in demography, traditional
lifestyles, employment?
9.1 Changes in population size, age,
structure, social groups etc.?
9.2 By resettlement of people or

demolition of homes or communities
or community facilities, e.g. schools,
hospitals, social facilities?
9.3 Through in-migration of new

residents or creation of new
communities?
9.4 By placing increased demands on

local facilities or services, e.g.
housing, education, health?
9.5 By creating jobs during construction

or operation or causing the loss of
jobs with effects on unemployment
and the economy?
9.6 Any other causes?
10. Are there any other factors that should be considered such as consequential development which could
lead to environmental effects or the potential for cumulative impacts with other existing or planned activities in
the locality?
10.1 Will the Project lead to pressure on
consequential development and that
could have significant impact on the
environment e.g. more housing, new
roads, new supporting industries or
utilities, etc.?
affected and how?
10.2 Will the Project lead to development
of supporting facilities, ancillary
development or development
stimulated by the Project which could
have an impact on the environment?
e.g.:
• supporting infrastructure
(roads, power supply,
waste or waste water
treatment, etc.)
• housing development
• extractive industries
• supply industries
• other?
10.3 Will the Project lead to the after-use

of the site which could, in turn, have
an impact on the environment?
10.4 Will the Project set a precedent for

later developments?
10.5 Will the Project have cumulative

effects, due to its proximity to other
existing or planned Projects with
similar effects?
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROJECT ENVIRONMENT
For each Project characteristic identified in Part 1 consider whether any of the following environmental
components could be affected.
Question - Are there features of the local environment on or around the Project location which could be
affected by the Project?
• Areas which are protected under international or EU, national or local legislation for their ecological, landscape,
cultural or other value, which could be affected by the Project?
• Other areas which are important or sensitive for reasons of their ecology e.g.
• Wetlands,
• Watercourses or other waterbodies,
• the coastal zone,
• mountains,
• forests or woodlands
• Areas used by protected, important or sensitive species of fauna or flora e.g. for breeding, nesting, foraging,
resting, overwintering, migration, which could be affected by the Project?
• Inland, coastal, marine or underground waters?
• Areas or features of high landscape or scenic value?
• Routes or facilities used by the public for access to recreation or other facilities?
• Transport routes which are susceptible to congestion or which cause environmental problems?
• Areas or features of historic or cultural importance?
Question - Is the Project in a location where it is likely to be highly visible to many people?
Question - Is the Project located in a previously undeveloped area where there will be loss of greenfield land?
Question - Are there existing land uses on or around the Project location which could be affected by the
Project? For example:
• Homes, gardens, other private property,
• Industry,
• Commerce,
• Recreation,
• public open space,
• community facilities,
• agriculture,
• forestry,
• tourism,
• mining or quarrying
Question - Are there any plans for future land uses on or around the location which could be affected by the
Project?
Question - Are there any areas on or around the location which are densely populated or built-up, which could
be affected by the Project?
Question - Are there any areas on or around the location which are occupied by sensitive land uses which
could be affected by the Project?
• hospitals,
• schools,
• places of worship,
• community facilities
Question - Are there any areas on or around the location which contain important, high quality or scarce
resources which could be affected by the Project? For example:
• groundwater resources,
• surface waters,
• forestry,
• agriculture,
• fisheries,
• tourism,
• minerals.
Question - Are there any areas on or around the location of the Project which are already subject to pollution
or environmental damage e.g. where existing legal environmental standards are exceeded, which could be
affected by the Project?
Question - Is the Project location susceptible to earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion, flooding or
extreme or adverse climatic conditions e.g. temperature inversions, fogs, severe winds, which could cause
the Project to present environmental problems?
Question - Is the Project likely to affect the physical condition of any environmental media?
• The atmospheric environment including microclimate and local and larger scale climatic conditions?
• Water – e.g. quantities, flows or levels of rivers, lakes, groundwater. Estuaries, coastal waters or the sea?
• Soils – e.g. quantities, depths, humidity, stability or erodibility of soils?
• Geological and ground conditions?
Question - Are releases from the Project likely to have effects on the quality of any environmental media?
• Air quality?
• Climate change and ozone depletion?
• Water quality – rivers, lakes, groundwater. Estuaries, coastal waters or the sea?
• Nutrient status and eutrophication of waters?
• Acidification of soils or waters?
• Soils?
• Landscape?
• Noise?
• Temperature, light or electromagnetic radiation including electrical interference?
• Productivity of natural or agricultural systems?
Question - Is the Project likely to affect the availability or scarcity of any resources either locally or globally?
• Fossil fuels?
• Water?
• Minerals and aggregates?
• Timber?
• Other non-renewable resources?
• Infrastructure capacity in the locality - water, sewerage, power generation and transmission, telecommunications,
waste disposal roads, rail?
Question - Is the Project likely to affect human or community health or welfare?
• The quality or toxicity of air, water, foodstuffs and other products consumed by humans?
• Morbidity or mortality of individuals, communities or populations by exposure to pollution?
• Occurrence or distribution of disease vectors including insects?
• Vulnerability of individuals, communities or populations to disease?
• Individuals’ sense of personal security?
• Community cohesion and identity?
• Cultural identity and associations?
• Minority rights?
• Housing conditions?
• Employment and quality of employment?
• Economic conditions?
• Social institutions?
ANNEXES
ANNEX I – LINKS WITH OTHER EU INSTRUMENTS
The EIA Directive is just one of many pieces of EU legislation in place that affect environmental and
Project planning. This poses the risk of duplication of assessments and procedures, and offers various
possibilities for synergy. Under the principle of Better Regulation, whereby EU policies and laws
should be designed and implemented so that they achieve their objectives at minimum cost3, efforts
are underway to ‘streamline’ these different assessments and procedures where possible. It is
important to bear in mind that ‘streamlining’ in this context means improving and better coordinating
environmental assessment procedures with a view to reducing unnecessary administrative burdens,
create synergies and hence speed up the environmental assessment process, whilst at the same time
ensuring a maximum level of environmental protection through comprehensive environmental
assessments.
Streamlining measures can, therefore, be found in the EIA Directive:
Joint or coordinated procedures (Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive)

Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive requires Member States to set up coordinated or joint procedures
when an assessment is required, both under the EIA Directive and the Habitats Directive (see below).
Moreover, Member States have the possibility to apply these joint or coordinated procedures to other
environmental assessments stemming from EU legislation, in particular under the Water Framework
Directive and the Industrial Emissions Directive. See below for more specific information on
interactions with these pieces of legislation. Practitioners are advised to check their national legislation
to see when and how coordination is required.
Consideration of other assessments (Article 4(4), Article 5(1) of the EIA Directive)
Article 4(4) of the EIA Directive relating to the Screening stage of the EIA process, as well as Article
5(1) of the EIA Directive on the preparation of the EIA Report, requires practitioners to take the
available results of other relevant assessments under other EU and national legislation into account.
Other relevant information held by authorities (Article 5(4) of the EIA Directive)
In order to strengthen the availability of data, Article 5(4) of the EIA Directive requires any authorities
holding relevant information to make it available to the Developers of Projects subject to EIA.
This section introduces the main pieces of EU legislation relevant for streamlining with EIA.
Practitioners should always check whether their Project falls under other EU legislation, and their
respective national transposing measures, and be aware that there are various other guidance
documents issued at EU and national level to help practitioners untangle legislative complexities.
Some of these EU guidance documents are referred to in the relevant sections under Part B of the EIA
guidance documents and are also listed below as well as in another Annex to this Guidance Document
on Other Relevant Guidance Documents.
The legislation covered in this section is by no means an exhaustive list, but the legislation with the
most significance include the following (formal names are introduced below):
SEA Directive;
Birds and Habitats Directives;
Water Framework Directive;
Marine Strategy Framework Directive;
Ambient Air Quality Directive and Heavy Metals in the Ambient Air Directive;
Waste Framework Directive;
3 European Commission Staff Working Document, Better Regulation Guidelines, SWD (2015) 111 final.
Industrial Emissions Directive;
Trans-European networks: TEN-E, TEN-T and TEN-TEC Regulations;
Aarhus and ESPOO conventions (including Directive 2003/4/EC and 2003/35/EC).
SEA DIRECTIVE
Name used Formal name

Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain
(SEA) Directive plans and programmes on the environment
Relevant EU guidance: Commission guidance document on Streamlining environmental

assessments conducted under Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive;
Commission guidance document on the implementation of
Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain
plans and programmes on the environment;
Commission guidance on Streamlining environmental assessment
procedures for energy infrastructure Projects of Common Interest
(PCIs).
The SEA Directive concerns the Strategic Environmental Assessment, which is carried out on certain
plans and programmes. In many cases, an SEA of a relevant plan or programme underpinning a
proposed Project will have been carried out prior to the EIA. Article 3(2) of the SEA Directive
requires an SEA to be undertaken if the plan or programme ‘sets the framework’ for a Project listed in
Annexes I and II to the EIA Directive.
Opportunities for synergy

The SEA and EIA are similar procedures, despite the former being carried out on plans and
programmes and the latter involving Projects. Both assessments can be summarised as follows: an
environmental report is prepared in which the likely significant effects (of plans, programmes or
Projects) on the environment and the reasonable alternatives are identified; the environmental
authorities and the public (and affected Member States) must be informed and consulted; the
Competent Authority decides, taking the results of consultations into consideration. The public is
informed of the decision afterwards. While the scope of the two assessments usually differs, very often
much of the work carried out under the SEA can be built upon for the EIA. Alternatives identified
during the SEA may be relevant for the EIA, some of the data gathered under the SEA may be used to
form the baseline of the EIA. Practitioners carrying out the EIA should consult the SEA report done
for any relevant plans or programmes with a view of avoiding the duplication of work.
The Guidance document on Streamlining environmental assessments for energy infrastructure Projects
of Common Interest (PCIs) (see the Annex to this Guidance Document on Other Relevant Guidance
and Tools) provides guidance on how to take advantage of synergies between the SEA and EIA
procedures. In addition, various guidance documents exist at national level.
Joint/coordinated procedures
Joint or coordinated procedures are not directly provided for by the provisions of the EIA and SEA
Directives, given that one relates to projects (Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive) and the other to
plans/programmes (Article 11(2) of the SEA Directive); moreover, each procedure must be carried out
on its own merits (Article 11(1) of the SEA Directive). The CJEU has indeed held that an assessment
undertaken within the framework of the EIA Directive does not dispense with the requirement to carry
out an assessment under the SEA Directive (cf. C-295/10, Valčiukienė and Others, para 55-63).
However, in some cases a plan/programme, and the subsequent project development, can be subjected
to an integrated assessment procedure: Member States are free to set up such mechanisms, as long as
all of the requirements of both Directives are fulfilled. In this perspective, the CJEU also held, in the
same decision, that a joint procedure may take place in which the requirements under both Directives
are covered by a single environmental assessment procedure (cf. C-295/10, Valčiukienė and Others,
para 55-63).
BIRDS AND HABITATS DIRECTIVES

Habitats Directive Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural
habitats and of wild fauna
Birds Directive Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30
November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds
Relevant EU guidance: Commission guidance document on Streamlining environmental assessments

conducted under Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive;
Commission guidance on Streamlining environmental assessment procedures for
energy infrastructure Projects of Common Interest (PCIs)
Commission guidance on Managing Natura 2000 sites: the provisions of Art. 6 of
Directive 92/43/EEC
Manual of European Union Habitats - EUR28.
The Habitats Directive, along with the Birds Directives (Directive 2009/147/EC), aim to contribute
towards ensuring biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
in the EU Members States. Together, these Directives set up a coherent network of sites (the Natura
2000 Network) hosting habitats and/or species that should be maintained or restored at favourable
conservation status according to the terms of the Directives. Any plan or Project likely to have a
significant effect on a site within the Natura 2000 site is subject to an Appropriate Assessment (AA) of
the implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives (Habitats Directive, Article
6(3)). The AA decision is binding and determines whether a plan or Project may proceed, subject to
specific provisions set out in Article. 6(4).

The scope of the AA and the EIA is different – the EIA should consider all significant environmental
effects, while the AA focuses on the conservation objectives and the integrity of the Natura 2000 site
in question; however, as with the SEA detailed above, some of the information collected for one
assessment can be used for the other.
The likelihood of significant impacts on a Natura 2000 sites in accordance with Article 6(3) of the
Habitats Directive may be central to Scoping under the EIA Directive. In many instances, where an
AA is required for a proposed Project under the Habitats Directive, then the determination of the likely
significant impacts in the Scoping stage will be guided as the content and extent of the information to
be provided by the EIA Report must cover the impacts to the protected area.
Joint/coordinated procedures
Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive stipulates that when Projects have to be assessed under both the EIA
and the Birds or Habitats Directives, Member States shall, where appropriate, ensure that coordinated
and/or joint procedures are provided for. This differs from instances in which Projects also have to be
assessed under other EU legislation, where Member States may provide for coordinated and/or joint
procedures. The EIA Directive makes several references to the Habitats Directive, for example, when
identifying significant impacts of a Project, particular attention must be paid to species and habitats
protected by the Birds and the Habitats Directives. The EU has issued a guidance document to assist
practitioners in the extent to which the results from an AA assessment is taken into account in an EIA
Procedure (see the Guidance document on streamlining environmental assessments conducted under
Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive, full references in the Annex to this Guidance Document on Other
Relevant Guidance and Tools).
Given that Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive calls for a joint or coordinated procedure between EIA
and the Habitats Directive, Scoping under the EIA Directive should largely benefit from the Screening
requirement under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. In practice, the information gathered under
Screening for the Habitats Directive should, as a minimum, be coordinated thereby allowing for the
transfer of knowledge/results from the Screening under the Habitats Directive to inform Scoping under
the EIA Directive.
WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

WFD Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a
framework for the Community action in the field of water policy
Relevant EU Commission guidance document on Streamlining environmental assessments

guidance: conducted under Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive
Commission guidance on Streamlining environmental assessment procedures for
energy infrastructure Projects of Common Interest (PCIs)
Common Implementation Strategy for the WFD: Guidance document no 7
Monitoring under the Water Framework Directive
Common Implementation Strategy for the WFD: Guidance document no 20
Exemptions to the Environmental Objectives
The WFD establishes a framework for the protection of inland surface waters, transitional waters,
coastal waters, and groundwater. Under this Directive, River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) are
established and updated every 6 years to coordinate and implement water status-related measures
within each river basin. RBMPs must address the objectives set out by the WFD, and must include an
analysis of the river basin’s key characteristics, a pressures assessment, review of the impact of human
activity on the status of water and measures to meet the Directive’s objective of ‘good status’ for all
waters.
Projects that may lead to failure of achieving good status of water bodies or lead to deterioration of
quality elements need to be assessed and if possible, a more environmentally friendly alternative
should be found. If no alternative can be found, then the Project can only go ahead when it can
demonstrate that first all practicable Mitigation Measures are taken to reduce the impact. Secondly, it
must also be demonstrated that the reasons for deterioration are of overriding public interest or that the
Project’s benefits otherwise outweigh failure to achieve the relevant environmental objectives (cf.
conditions set out in Article 4(7) of the WFD. The process of identifying and assessing such impacts
may be carried out jointly with the EIA procedure. However, the requirement of Article 4(7) of the
WFD goes beyond the requirements of the EIA Directive in the sense that it covers activities that may
not be listed in Annex I or II to the EIA Directive.

The WFD ensures that detailed environmental data are collected for water as part of the planning
process of the RBMP. Hence, synergies can be gained for part of an EIA through data collection and
the required assessments of effects on water bodies according to Article 4(7) of the WFD. As
discussed above, if a Project listed in Annex I or II to the EIA Directive is found to impact the status
of a water body as set out in the relevant RBMP, further assessment will be required to develop and
review alternatives and possibly justify reasons of overriding public interest in line with the
requirements of the Water Framework Directive. This may influence the scope and nature of an EIA
Report in the sense that it must incorporate an assessment of the likely impacts of the Project on the
objectives adopted for the water body in question.
Joint/coordinated procedure
Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive provides the option for joint or coordinated procedures where
Projects also have to be assessed under other EU legislation, but it is not a requirement.
MARINE STRATEGY FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

MSFD Directive 2008/56/EC establishing a framework for community action in the field of
marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)
Relevant EU Commission Final report on MSFD and licencing and permitting

guidance:
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MFSD) establishes a framework to assess and implement
good environmental status of the EU's marine waters by 2020. In doing so, the MSFD takes an
ecosystem and integrated approach whereby environmental protection and sustainable use go hand in
hand to prevent depletion of natural resources upon which marine-related economic and social
activities are based.

The MSFD ensures that an environmental baseline for the marine waters are established. On the basis
of this assessment and baseline, measures must be adopted and gradually implemented to ensure that
good environmental status is achieved within a specified number of years. Unlike the WFD, there is no
independent requirement in the MSFD to assess activities. However, the objectives and measures
adopted in Member States may influence the scope and nature of an EIA Report in the sense that it
must incorporate an assessment of the likely impacts of the Project on the objectives adopted for the
marine water body in question.
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY DIRECTIVE AND HEAVY METALS IN THE AMBIENT AIR DIRECTIVE

AQD Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008
on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe
HMAQD Directive 2004/107/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15

December 2004 relating to arsenic, cadmium, mercury, nickel and polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air
Relevant EU N/A
guidance:
The AQD establishes a framework for the active monitoring of ambient air and the removing of
pollutants. The Directive establishes different air quality objectives (limit values, target values, critical
levels and alert threshold) in relation to a wide range of pollutants (sulphur dioxide, nitrogen, dioxide,
particulate matter, lead, benzene, carbon monoxide). It requires air quality plans when limit or target
values are not complied with as well as short-term action plan when alert thresholds are exceeded. In
addition, the Directive obliges Member States to keep the public informed and sets out requirements
for the assessment of air quality (e.g., the monitoring network). In addition, the HMAQD sets limit
values for the air pollutants arsenic, cadmium, nickel and benzo(a)pyrene.
During Scoping, Competent Authorities should bear in mind that existing air quality objectives as well
as plans and programmes may assist to determine significant effects and refine the Scoping outputs by
requesting that the Developer provides assurances with regards to pollutants emitted and possible
remedial action that fit any existing air quality plans and short-term action plans.
WASTE FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

WasteFD Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November
2008 on waste and repealing certain directives
Relevant EU Application of EIA Directive to the rehabilitation of landfills.

guidance:
The WasteFD establishes a legal framework for the management and treatment of most waste types.
The Directive sets out a waste hierarchy that ranges from prevention to disposal. Waste management
under the Directive must be implemented without endangering human health and without harming the
environment (e.g. without risk to water, air, biodiversity, and without causing nuisance). It also sets
out rules for extended producer responsibility, effectively adding to the burdens of manufacturers to
manage products returned after use.

The WasteFD requires the adoption and implementation of Waste Management Plans and Waste
Prevention Programmes at the national and local levels. These plans and programmes should analyse
the current situation with regards to waste treatment, as well as identify the measures needed to carry
out waste management in the context of the WasteFD’s objectives. This includes existing and planned
waste management installations, which are likely to constitute Projects subject to the EIA Directive.
As waste installations should be provided for under Waste Management Plans, they are also subject to
the requirements of the SEA Directive (see above).
The EIA Directive may also bear relevance for any Project with regard to the waste produced not only
during the construction and operation of the Project, but also, in particular, with regard to the
decommissioning and/or rehabilitation of the site.
During Scoping, competent authorities can suggest the analysis of certain Alternatives depending on
the waste produced, Mitigation Measures in this regard, as well as the extended producer
responsibility.
INDUSTRIAL EMISSIONS DIRECTIVE

IED Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and the Council on industrial
emissions
Relevant EU Guidance under Article 13(3)(c) and (d) of the IED;

guidance: Commission Communication on the elaboration of baseline reports under Article
22(2) of the IED.
The IED is the main EU instrument regulating pollutant emissions from industrial installations.
Around 50,000 Projects undertaking the industrial activities listed in Annex I to the IED are required
to operate in accordance with a permit, which should contain conditions set in accordance with the
principles and provisions of the IED. As indicated in the Commission Guidance document on
‘Interpretation of definitions of Project categories of Annex I and II to the EIA Directive’ (see the
Annex to this Guidance Document on Other Relevant Guidance and Tools): the EIA Directive and the
Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) sometimes relate to the same type of activities. However, it is
important to be aware of the differences that exist between the objective, the scope, classification
systems, and thresholds of these two directives.

IED permits must take the whole environmental performance of the industrial plant into account,
including emissions to air, water, and land, generation of waste, use of raw materials, energy
efficiency, noise, prevention of accidents, and the restoration of the site upon closure. Such an exercise
aligns closely with the EIA Directive and ‘Member States have discretion to use the thresholds set by
Annex I to the IED in the context of the EIA Directive’ (Commission Guidance Document,
Interpretation of definitions of Project categories of Annex I and II to the EIA Directive, see the
Annex to this Guidance Document on Other Relevant Guidance and Tools).
In addition, permits issued under the IED are to be reconsidered periodically to ensure compliance.
While monitoring carried out under the IED will likely not cover all environmental aspects to be
considered, the IED does require specific monitoring, part of which can be used for the EIA. The
approach to monitoring for the IED can also be adopted and broadened to cover other aspects outlined
in EIA monitoring proposals.
SEVESO DIRECTIVE

Seveso Directive Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the
control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances
Relevant EU Commission guidance document on Streamlining environmental assessments conducted
guidance: under Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive
Guidance tools are collected on the Minerva portal at:
https://minerva.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/minerva
The Seveso Directive was adopted in response to the industrial accident releasing hazardous chemicals
in the Italian city of Seveso in 1976. The Directive has since been revised several times. The aim of
the Seveso Directive is to prevent and, in case they occur, limit major accidents involving dangerous
substances. It applies to establishments where dangerous substances may be present in quantities
above a certain threshold. Certain industrial activities covered by other EU legislation are excluded
from the Seveso Directive (e.g. nuclear establishments or the transport of dangerous substances).
The Seveso Directive takes a tiered approach to requiring safety measures at facilities based on the
volumes of dangerous substances present at facilities. Seveso sites are categorised as lower-tier Seveso
establishments or upper-tier Seveso establishments. Operators of lower-tier Seveso establishments
have to notify the competent authority, design a major-accident prevention policy (MAPP), draw up
accident reports and take into account land-use planning. In addition to these requirements, operators
of upper-tier Seveso establishment must establish a safety report, implement a safety management
system, define an internal emergency plan and provide the competent authorities with all necessary
information. Furthermore, authorities are required inter alia to produce external emergency plans for
upper tier establishments, deploy land-use planning for the siting of establishments, make relevant
information publically available, ensure that any necessary action is taken after an accident including
emergency measures, and conduct inspections.
The Seveso Directive is highly relevant to a number of assessments under the EIA Directive such as
for instance impacts related to risks of major accidents and disasters, Mitigation, and climate change
adaptation. In addition, in light of the risk presented by establishments covered by the Seveso
Directive, rules on permitting as well as regarding governance come into play, and as such the Seveso
Directive is often directly linked to other legislation listed in this Annex, such as the IED and Aarhus
convention. The Seveso Directive in this regard ensures that detailed information on installations are
collected and employed in both land-use planning as well as in contingency planning. Synergies with
EIA can be gained for a part of the EIA report containing the design of installations and the
assessment of risk hazards that relates to the chosen design. The Seveso Directive can also be of use
for the Screening, Scoping and Preparation of the EIA Report stages in relation to: quantitative
thresholds for the assessment of significance, rules of public information in relation to governance,
and finally the rules on Monitoring.
TRANS-EUROPEAN NETWORKS IN TRANSPORT, ENERGY AND TELECOMMUNICATION

TEN-T Regulation: Trans-European Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the
Transport Network Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development
of the trans-European transport network
TEN-TEC Regulation: Trans-European Regulation (EU) No 283/2014 of the European Parliament and of the
Telecommunication Network Council of 11 March 2014 on guidelines for trans-European networks in
the area of telecommunications infrastructure.
TEN-E Regulation Trans-European Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 Of The European Parliament and of The
Energy Network (PCI regulation) Council
of 17 April 2013 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure.
Connecting Europe Facility: Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 of the European Parliament and of the
financing for TENs Council of 11 December 2013 establishing the Connecting Europe
Facility.
Relevant EU guidance: Commission guidance on Streamlining environmental assessment

procedures for energy infrastructure Projects of Common Interest (PCIs).
The Trans-European Networks consists of lists of key transport, energy and telecommunications
infrastructure Projects, known as Projects of common interest (PCIs). These Projects are designed to
complete the European internal market and by interconnecting national infrastructure networks and
ensuring their interoperability, thereby fulfilling e.g. the EU’s energy policy objectives of affordable,
secure and sustainable energy.
Under the TEN-E regulation for the energy sector, PCIs can benefit from accelerated planning and
permit granting, due to streamlined environmental assessment processes.
AARHUS AND ESPOO CONVENTIONS

Aarhus Convention United National Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Access to Information,
Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters.
Espoo Convention United National Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Environmental Impact
Assessment in a Transboundary context.
Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on public access to
environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC.
Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003
providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and
programmes relating to the environment and amending with regards to public
participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC -
Statement by the Commission.
Relevant EU Guidance on the Application of the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure for
guidance: Large-scale Transboundary Projects;
Guidance document for member States' reporting under Article 9 of Directive 2003/4.
The Aarhus Convention establishes a number of rights of the public, both individuals and their
associations, with regard to the environment. These rights are commonly depicted under the three
pillars of access to environmental information, public participation in decision-making, and access to
justice in environmental affairs. Parties to the Convention are required to make the necessary
provisions so that public authorities will contribute to these rights to become effective. All EU
Member States, as well as the EU itself, are parties to the Convention. The first two pillars are also
part of EU law via Directives 2003/4/EC and 2003/35/EC, in addition a number of provisions in
different EU instruments seek to implement these rights, such as the public participation and access to
justice requirements under the EIA Directive, or the Access to Justice provisions under the IED
Directive.
The Espoo Convention lays down the general obligation of States to notify and consult each other on
all major Projects under consideration that are likely to have a significant adverse environmental
impact across boundaries. Article 7 of the EIA Directive provides the legal basis for regulating
Member States' rights and obligations in case of an EIA Procedure for a Project with transboundary
impacts. Article 7(1) provides rights for the potentially affected Member States to be informed about
e.g. a Screening procedure in another Member State. The affected Member State is to be informed at
the latest by the time at which the public is informed in the Member State in which the Project is
proposed for implementation.

The Aarhus Convention is the most comprehensive legal instrument relating to public involvement. By
establishing rules on information and participation of the public, the Aarhus Convention has led to
decisions setting precedents (e.g. on timeframes for informing the public), which can assist in the
implementation of the EIA procedure. The main text indicates that public participation should be
effective, adequate, formal, and provide for information, notification, dialogue, consideration, and
response. Furthermore, just as the EIA Directive requires ’reasonable timeframes’, so too does the
Aarhus Convention. These may have an impact on the different stages discussed in the EIA Guidance
Document series, for instance in relation to Scoping the EIA Directive establishes specific consultation
requirements (see Step 3).
ANNEX II – OTHER RELEVANT GUIDANCE AND TOOLS
A. Andrusevych, T. Alge, C. Konrad (eds), Case Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance
Committee 2004-2011, 2nd edition
https://www.eufje.org/images/DocAarhus/Aarhus%20CC%20case-law.pdf
Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Guidelines for ecological impact
assessment in the UK and Ireland, Terrestrial, Freshwater, and Coastal, January 2016
http://www.cieem.net/data/files/Publications/EcIA_Guidelines_Terrestrial_Freshwater_and_Coastal
_Jan_2016.pdf
Commission, Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites,
Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive
92/43/EEC
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/art6/natura_2000_assess
_en.pdf
Commission, Assessment of resource efficiency indicators and targets
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/resource_efficiency/pdf/report.pdf
Commission Communication on the elaboration of baseline reports under Article 22(2) of the IED
(European Commission Guidance concerning baseline reports under Article 22(2) of Directive
2010/75/EU on industrial emissions)
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2014.136.01.0003.01.ENG
Commission, DG Climate Action, Non-paper, Guidelines for Project Managers: Making vulnerable
investments climate resilient
http://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/metadata/guidances/non-paper-guidelines-for-project-
managers-making-vulnerable-investments-climate-resilient
Commission guidance document on Non-energy mineral extraction and Natura 2000
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/neei_n2000_guidance.p
df
Commission guidance document for Member States' reporting under Article 9 of Directive 2003/4
(Guidance document on reporting about the experience gained in the application of directive
2003/4/ec concerning on public access to environmental information)
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/pdf/guidance_en.pdf
Commission guidance document no 7. Monitoring under the Water Framework Directive
https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/63f7715f-0f45-4955-b7cb-
58ca305e42a8/Guidance%20No%207%20-%20Monitoring%20(WG%202.7).pdf
Commission guidance document no 20. Exemptions to the Environmental Objectives
https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/2a3ec00a-d0e6-405f-bf66-
60e212555db1/Guidance_documentN%C2%B020_Mars09.pdf
Commission guidance document on Inland waterway transport and Natura 2000, Sustainable
inland waterway development and management in the context of the EU Birds and Habitats
Directives
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/iwt_en.pdf
Commission guidance on Aquaculture and Natura 2000, Sustainable aquaculture activities in the
context of the Natura 2000 Network
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/Aqua-
N2000%20guide.pdf
Commission guidance on Managing Natura 2000 sites: the provisions of Article 6 of Directive
92/43/EEC
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/guidance_en.htm
Commission guidance document on Streamlining environmental assessments conducted under
Article 2(3) of the EIA Directive
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016XC0727(01)
Commission guidance on the application of the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure for
Large-scale Transboundary Projects
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/Transboundry%20EIA%20Guide.pdf
Commission guidance on wind energy development in accordance with the Natura 2000
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/Wind_farms.pdf
Commission guidance document on the implementation of Directive 2001/42/EC on the
assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (Title: Directive
2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of
the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment)
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32001L0042
Commission guidance on Streamlining environmental assessment procedures for energy
infrastructure Projects of Common Interest (PCIs)
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/PCI_guidance.pdf
Commission guidance under Article 13(3)(c) and (d) of the IED (Guidance document on the
practical arrangements for the exchange of information under the Industrial Emissions Directive
(2010/75/EU), including the collection of data, the drawing up of best available techniques
reference documents and their quality assurance as referred to in Article 13(3)(c) and (d) of the
Directive)
https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/21de9052-ea90-45a3-a681-
2614183a3e4a/BREF_guidance%20(final%20for%20Forum%2024%20Jun%2011).pdf
Commission guidelines for the assessment of indirect and cumulative impacts as well as impact
interactions
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/eia/eia-studies-and-reports/pdf/guidel.pdf
Commission, interpretation manual of European Union habitats - EUR28
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/habitatsdirective/docs/Int_Manual_EU28.pdf
Commission, Interpretation of definitions of Project categories of annex I and II to the EIA Directive
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/cover_2015_en.pdf
Commission JRC Institute for Environment and Sustainability, Life cycle indicators framework:
development of life cycle based macro-level monitoring indicators for resources, products and
waste for the EU-27
http://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/uploads/LCindicators-framework.pdf
Commission Services Non-Paper: Application of EIA Directive to the rehabilitation of landfills
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/eia_landfills.pdf
Commission Services Non-Paper: Interpretation line suggested by the Commission as regards the
application of Directive 85/337/EEC to associated/ancillary works
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/Note%20-%20Interpretation%20of%20Directive%2085-
337-EEC.pdf
Commission Support assessment tools, Tools developed to support the assessment of the marine
environment under the MSFD
http://mcc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dev.py?N=18&O=355&titre_page=Support
Commission Staff Working Document, Better Regulation Guidelines
http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/docs/swd_br_guidelines_en.pdf
European Environment Agency Land and Ecosystem Accounting - European Topic Centre
Terrestrial Environment, LEAC methodological guidebook
http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/data-and-maps/data/land-cover-accounts-leac-based-on-
corine-land-cover-changes-database-1990-2000/
EMEC, Environmental impact assessment (EIA) guidance for developers at the European Marine
Energy Centre
http://hydropower.inl.gov/hydrokinetic_wave/pdfs/day3/4_final_emec_procedure.pdf
European Investment Bank, Methodologies for the Assessment of Project GHG Emissions and
Emission Variations
http://www.eib.org/attachments/strategies/eib_project_carbon_footprint_methodologies_en.pdf
Global Marine Environment Protection, Initiative
http://www.g20gmep.org/about/
Global Marine Information System, Environmental Marine Information System
http://gmis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
IEMA Quality Mark Article: ‘What are the changes of that’ – Probability and its Role in Determining
Impact Significance
https://www.iema.net/assets/uploads/EIA%20Articles/aecom_article_probability_and_its_role_in_d
etermining_impact_significance.pdf
Imperia (EU LIFE+ funded project), Improving Environmental Assessment by Adopting Good
Practices and Tools of Multi-criteria Decision Analysis
https://www.jyu.fi/bioenv/en/divisions/natural-resources-and-environment/ymp/research/imperia-
project
Jalava, K., et al., (2010) Quality of Environmental Impact Assessment: Finnish EISs and the opinions
of EIA professionals, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 28:1, 15-27
https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/bitstream/handle/123456789/44376/978-951-39-5818-
3_vaitos26092014.pdf?sequence=3
Justice and Environment, Good Examples of EIA and SEA Regulation and Practice in five European
Union Countries, 2008
http://www.justiceandenvironment.org/_files/file/2009/06/eia-sea_good_examples.pdf
Lawrence D.: Significance Criteria and Determination in Sustainability-Based Environmental Impact
Assessment
https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/155701CE-docs/David_Lawrence-eng.pdf
Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment & CBD-Ramsar-CMS, Voluntary Guidelines
on biodiversity-inclusive Environmental Impact Assessment
https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/imp-bio-eia-and-sea.pdf
OSPAR, Assessment of the Environmental Impact of Offshore Wind-farms
https://www.google.be/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0a
hUKEwifhJ--
wczSAhWCMBoKHVCKBjUQFggxMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ospar.org%2Fdocuments%3Fd%3D7
114&usg=AFQjCNF4W-
1IuJiQV2g_0WPAjv3xIVxIgQ&sig2=O0rkDs7NgCjmvla7DNf2jw&bvm=bv.149093890,d.d2s
Renewables Grid Initiative, Good Practice of the Year 2016 award
http://renewables-
grid.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Files_RGI/RGI_Publications/Good_Practice_of_the_Year_Award_bro
chure_2016.pdf
RPS, Environmental impact assessment practical guidelines toolkit for marine fish farming
http://www.sarf.org.uk/Project%20Final%20Reports/SARF024%20-
%20Final%20Reports%20and%20Templates/EIA%20Guidelines%20FINAL+%20Templates.pdf
Schmidt, M., Glasson, J., Emmelin, L. and Helbron, H., Standards and Thresholds for Impact
Assessment, 2008.
Scottish Natural Heritage, A handbook on environmental impact assessment: Guidance for
Competent Authorities, Consultees and others involved in the Environmental Impact Assessment
Process in Scotland
http://www.snh.gov.uk/publications-data-and-research/publications/search-the-
catalogue/publication-detail/?id=2098
Sixth Framework Programme, Specific Targeted Research or Innovation Project Risk Assessment D
3.2 Report WP 3
http://www.sazp.sk/public/index/open_file.php?file=CEI/Hrncar/Risk_Assessment.pdf
Slootweg, Roel; Kolhoff, Arend, Generic approach to integrate biodiversity considerations in
screening and scoping for EIA
UK Environment Agency: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), A handbook for Scoping projects
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/handbook-for-scoping-projects-environmental-
impact-assessment
UK Department of Energy & Climate Change, Guidance notes on the offshore petroleum
production and pipelines (assessment of environmental effects) regulations 1999(as amended),
October 2011
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/193705/eiaguida
ncenote.pdf
UNFCCC, Highlights of the contribution of the Nairobi work programme, Assessing climate change
impacts and vulnerability, making informed adaptation decisions
http://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/application/pdf/unfccc-nwpsummary_interim.pdf
KH-04-17-940-EN-N

EIA Guidance Scoping Final PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EIA Guidance Scoping Final PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EIA Guidance Scoping Final PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Impact

(Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by 2014/52/EU)

© European Union, 2017

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Paper ISBN 978-79-74375-7 KH-04-17-940-EN-C doi:10.2779/286012

GLOSSARY OF TERMS ........................................................................................................... 5

Cumulative effects Changes to the environment that are caused by an activity/project in

EIA Directive European Union Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU on

Non-Technical Summary An easy-to-follow and understandable summary of the information included in

Project The execution of construction works or of other installations or schemes, and/or

Scoping Opinion The Competent Authority’s decision on the Scoping process.

Abbreviation Full name

Aarhus Convention Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and

CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union

EIONET European Environment Information and Observation Network

EMIS Environmental Marine Information System

EMODNET European Marine Observation and Data Network

ePRTR European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register

ESPOO Convention Convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context

GBIF Global Biodiversity Information Facility

IED Industrial Emissions Directive

INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

MARS Major Accident Reporting System

MSFD Marine Strategy Framework Directive

PCI Project of common interest

REACH Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals

RBMP River Basin Management Plans

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

TEN-E Trans-European Networks for Energy

TEN-T Trans-European Networks - Transport

WFD Water Framework Directive

WISE Water Information System for Europe

EIA Guidance Document on Screening;

What is the aim of the Guidance Documents?

Who can use the Guidance Documents?

Who prepared the Guidance Documents?

How can I get a copy of the Guidance Documents?

Box 1: Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU (extract)

The Directive provides that Developers may request a

The Developer, or the expert(s) on his behalf, carries

The Competent Authority makes the EIA Report

The Competent Authority examines the EIA report

During construction and operation phase of the project

Competent Authorities: Competent Authorities might initiate Scoping if required by national

The guidance document is comprised of three main sections:

Box 3: The benefits of Scoping in EIA

These steps are illustrated in the figure below.

Initiation of Scoping Voluntary

Information needed for Scoping Location

1.1 VOLUNTARY OR MANDATORY SCOPING APPROACHES

Box 4: Directive 2011/92/EU as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU

Box 5: Examples of voluntary and mandatory Scoping approaches in Member States

Voluntary Scoping in Croatia

Mandatory Scoping in Poland

Mandatory scoping in Hungary

1.2 SCOPING BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY

1.3 SCOPING BY THE DEVELOPER

Box 7: Steps in Scoping by the Developer