The new Industrial Emissions Directive

→ Article 6 (3):

Any plan or project likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site (cf. C-127/02; C-98/03; C-6/04), either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall undergo an appropriate assessment to determine the implications for the site (cf. C-127/02; C-209/04; C-239/04). The competent authorities can only agree to the plan or project after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned (cf. C-127/02, point 56).

Article 6 (3) and (4) define a step-wise procedure for considering plans and projects (10)

• 1. The first part of this procedure consists of an assessment stage and is governed by Article 6 (3), first sentence.
• 2. The second part of the procedure, governed by Article 6 (3), second sentence, relates to the decision of the competent national authorities.
• 3. The third part of the procedure (governed by Article 6 (4)) comes into play if, despite a negative assessment, it is proposed not to reject a plan or project but to give it further consideration.

Article 6 (3) is an expression of the precautionary principle. An assessment is necessary where there are doubts as to the existence of significant effects. This could be the case, for example, where plans or projects may not be restrictively defined (cf. C-98/03, points 39 et seq.) or where the preliminary consent already requires an assessment, such as land plan use (cf. C-179/06, point 41.). The assessment itself is a core mechanism of site protection and therefore the best scientific knowledge in the field must be used (cf. C-304/05, point 59).

Generally, the assessment must precede the project’s approval and it has to be in conformity with conservation objectives. Its aim is to provide complete, precise and definitive findings and conclusions capable of removing all reasonable scientific doubts as to the work proposed (cf. C-404/09, point 100).