Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental … · 2019-10-08 · EIS is a document that records this process - showing how environmental consideration helped the

Guidelines on the informationto be contained in

Environmental Impact Statements

GUIDELINES ON THEINFORMATION

TO BE CONTAINED INENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

STATEMENTS

Prepared On Behalf of:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

By

CAAS Environmental Services Ltd.6 Merrion Square

Dublin 2

March 2002

Environmental Protection AgencyAn Ghníomhaireacht um Chaomhnú Comhshaoil

P.O. Box 3000, Johnstown Castle Estate, Co. Wexford, Ireland.

Telephone : +353-53-60600 Fax : +353-53-60699e-mail: [email protected] Website: www.epa.ie

© Environmental Protection Agency 2002

Parts of this publication may be reproduced without further permission, provided the sourceis acknowledged.

Although every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the material contained in thispublication, complete accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Neither the Environmental ProtectionAgency nor the author(s) accept any responsibility whatsoever for loss or damage occasionedor claimed to have been occasioned, in part or in full, as a consequence of any person acting,or refraining from acting, as a result of a matter contained in this publication.

Guidelines on the informationto be contained in

Environmental Impact Statements

Published by the Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland.

04/02/1,000ISBN 1 84095 085 4

Price €13.00

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

GUIDELINES ON THE INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINED IN

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

1. PRELIMINARIES AND GENERAL METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2 Basic Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.3 Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.4 Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.5 Consultation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.6 The Structure of the Environmental Impact Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.7 Alternative EIS Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.7.1 Direct Format Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.7.2 Grouped Format Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.8 Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2 Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2.1 Pursuing Preventative Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2.2 Informing the Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2.3 Maintain Environmental Focus and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2.4 Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.3 Roles of Participants in Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.3.1 The Developer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.3.2 Designers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.3.3 Environmental Specialists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.3.4 Competent Authorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.3.5 Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.3.6 Non Governmental Organisations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.3.7 The Public. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.4 EIA Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.4.1 Impartiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.4.2 Health & Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.4.3 Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.4.4 Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.4.5 Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.4.6 Availability of Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.4.7 Appropriate Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Table of Contents

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3. GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1 EIA Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1.1 Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1.2 Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1.3 On-going Scoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3.1.4 Conditions and Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3.2 EIS Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3.2.1 Preamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.2.2 Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.2.3 Description of the Proposed Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.2.4 Description of the Existing Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.2.5 Description of the Likely Significant Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.2.6 Description of Mitigation Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3.2.7 Non-Technical Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4. GLOSSARY OF TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5. GLOSSARY OF IMPACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

iv GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

The preparation of these Advice Notes has been a collective task from the outset. The main drafts of the AdviceNotes, first published in 1995, were examined by an Advisory/Working Group who met the consulting team on anumber of occasions throughout the entire process to offer comments. We gratefully acknowledge the assistanceoffered by:

Advisory/Working Group:Iain MacleanKen Macken EPAGerry Byrne EPATadhg O’Mahony EPABrian Archer, Consultant Gable HoldingsDavid Jeffrey TCD/An TaisceJoe Wall, Kilkenny County CouncilEoghan Brangan Department of the Environment and Local GovernmentFrank Gallagher Department of the Environment and Local Government

The listings below acknowledge those who took the time and trouble to offer valuable advice, comments andconstructive criticism on the many drafts of the Guidelines.

Board Members of the EPA

Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltachtand the IslandsDepartment of Enterprise, Trade & EmploymentDepartment of Health and ChildrenDepartment of Public EnterpriseDepartment of the Environmentand Local GovernmentDepartment of the Marine and Natural ResourcesDepartment of Tourism, Sport and RecreationDúchas - The Heritage Service

Carlow County CouncilCavan County CouncilClare County CouncilClonmel Borough CouncilCork City CouncilCork County CouncilDonegal County CouncilDrogheda Borough CouncilDublin City CouncilDun Laoghaire – Rathdown County CouncilFingal County CouncilGalway City CouncilGalway County CouncilKerry County CouncilKildare County CouncilKilkenny Borough CouncilKilkenny County CouncilLaois County CouncilLeitrim County CouncilLimerick City CouncilLimerick County CouncilLongford County Council

Louth County CouncilMayo County CouncilMeath County CouncilMonaghan County CouncilNorth Tipperary County CouncilOffaly County CouncilRoscommon County CouncilSligo Borough CouncilSligo County CouncilSouth Dublin County CouncilSouth Tipperary County CouncilWaterford City CouncilWaterford County CouncilWestmeath County CouncilWexford Borough CouncilWexford County CouncilWicklow County Council

An Bord PleanálaAn ÓigeAn TaisceBadgerwatchBirdwatch IrelandBord FáilteBord na Móna – Environmental Division and FuelsDivisionCentral Fisheries BoardCIEClean Technology CentreCoastwatch EuropeCoillte TeorantaConstruction Industry FederationCork Environmental AllianceCouncil for the Protection of Irish Heritage ObjectsCRH

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Discovery ProgrammeEarthwatchEircomEirtricityEnvirocentreE-Power Ltd.ESB – Group Health, Safetyand Environment DivisionFinsa Forest Products Ltd.GCI Ltd.GEMRUGenetic ConcernGeological Survey of IrelandGlanbia FoodsGV Power Ltd.Health & Safety AuthorityIBECInstitute of Engineers of IrelandInstitute of Geologists of IrelandIrish Energy CentreIrish Georgian SocietyIrish Industry for Sustainable DevelopmentIrish Landscape InstituteIrish Peatland Conservation CouncilIrish Planning InstituteIrish Underwater Archaeological Research TeamIrish Wildlife TrustIrish Wind Energy AssociationIWAIKeep Ireland OpenKirk McClure MortonLickey Concern GroupMarine InstituteMC O’Sullivan EngineersMeehan Brian & AssociatesMining Heritage Trust of IrelandNational Roads AuthorityOPWRadiological Protection Institute of IrelandRoyal Irish AcademyRoyal Town Planning InstituteSalmon Research Agency of IrelandShannon Development CompanySherkin Island Marine StationTeagascThe Heritage CouncilTree Council of IrelandUCC – Coastal Resources CentreUCD – Department of Archaeologand Environmental Research Institute

Viridan Energy Supply Ltd.VOICE

vi GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

The 1992 Environmental Protection Agency Act(Section 72) provides for the preparation by theEnvironmental Protection Agency of guidelines onthe information to be contained in an EnvironmentalImpact Statement. The Act further provides thatthose preparing and evaluating EnvironmentalImpact Statements shall have regard to suchguidelines.

The Guidelines have been prepared following wideconsultation with the benefit of a number of years incirculation as 'Draft Guidelines'. Experience hasshown that the quality (sufficiency and relevance) ofthe information in EISs is closely related to themethods and procedures employed by theparticipants. For this reason additional guidance hasbeen provided to address the process that gives riseto the information contained in an EIS.

At all times the Agency has attempted to stress thatEIA is a practical and dynamic process ofenvironmental protection. The specialist studies andprofessional evaluations used for EIA shouldprincipally aim to anticipate and avoid impacts. Thegreatest value occurs when the site/route is beingselected and while the project is still being designed;it is first and foremost a process. Ideally the resultantEIS is a document that records this process - showinghow environmental consideration helped the projectto achieve the most sustainable and least disruptiveintegration with the local environment.

The Guidelines have been drafted with the primaryobjective of improving the quality of EnvironmentalImpact Statements in Ireland. Quality improvementswill result from better scoping and a closerintegration of EIA into both the design anddevelopment control processes.

The Guidelines will help to provide developers,competent authorities and the public at large with abasis for determining the adequacy of EnvironmentalImpact Statements, within the context of establisheddevelopment consent procedures. They will alsoprovide a focus for scoping between the partiesconcerned. A consensus should provide all partieswith the confidence to rely on concise Statementswhich are focused on the likely significant impacts.This will reduce the time, effort and expenserequired to prepare and evaluate EnvironmentalImpact Statements and should facilitate publicparticipation in the EIA process.

The Guidelines address a wide range of project typesand potential environmental issues. It must bestressed that all of these issues are unlikely to applyto every project. Each Environmental ImpactStatement is a unique result of specific site issuesinteracting with the effects of the proposeddevelopment.

From time to time the Agency intends to publishAdvice Notes on Current Practice in the preparationof Environmental Impact Statements. These containgreater detail on many of the topics covered by theGuidelines as well as information on the likely rangeof impacts from certain classes of projects.

vii

INTRODUCTION

GUIDELINES ON THE INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINEDIN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

EIA requirements derive from EuropeanCommunities Directive 85/337/EEC (as amended byDirective 97/11/EC) on the assessment of the effectsof certain public and private projects on theenvironment. The primary objective of the EIADirective is to ensure that projects which are likely tohave significant effects on the environment aresubject to an assessment of their likely impacts.

The approach adopted in the Directive is that EIA ismandatory for all Annex I projects on the basis thatthese project classes will always have significantenvironmental effects. Thresholds are specified inrespect of most project types in the Annex.

In the case of Annex II projects, Member States mustdetermine on a case-by-case basis or on the basis ofthresholds or other criteria (such as site sensitivity),or a combination of both approaches, whether or nota project should be subject to EIA.

In addition to transposing the mandatoryrequirements which apply to Annex 1 projects,Ireland choose to set thresholds for each of theproject classes in Annex II. In setting thesethresholds, account was taken of the relevantcircumstances in Ireland, including the generalnature, size and location of projects and thecondition of the receiving environment. Thethresholds were then set at levels which distinguishbetween those projects which, by virtue of theirnature, size or location, would be likely to have asignificant effect on the environment and thosewhich would not.

In addition, Irish implementing legislation1

addresses the possible need for EIA below thespecified thresholds. In summary, these require thecarrying out of EIA where the competent authorityconsiders that a development would be likely to havesignificant effects on the environment. Specificallyin the case of sub-threshold development onspecified conservation sites, the competent authorityis required formally to decide whether or not aproject would or would not be likely to havesignificant effects on the environment. Theseprovisions were introduced to address keyrequirements in relation to "nature, size andlocation" referred to in article 2 of the Directive (asamended).

In the light of the approach adopted by Ireland inrelation to Annex II projects, there should be only alimited need for EIA below the thresholds specified.

The Irish EIA system implements the EU Directivethrough the integration of its requirements into theland-use planning consent system and several otherdevelopment consent systems covering, for example,foreshore development, roads/motorwayconstruction, light rail systems and the laying of oiland gas pipelines. Requirements on developmentwhich may arise from the provisions of legislationsuch as the European Communities (NaturalHabitats) Regulations 19972, the NationalMonuments Acts 1930 to 1994 and the Wildlife Acts1976 to 2000 are also significant.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA)LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT

1 Each consent system e.g. planning, roads/motorway construction is governed by separate legislation.

2 Additionally, two international conventions in the heritage area, which make specific reference to EIA, have beenratified in Ireland (i.e. the Council of Europe 1992 European Convention on the Protection of the ArchaeologicalHeritage (revised) and the United Nations 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity).

viii GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is aprocess for anticipating the effects on theenvironment caused by a development. AnEnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) is thedocument produced as a result of that process.Where effects are identified that are unacceptable,these can then be avoided or reduced during thedesign process. The Environmental ImpactAssessment procedure commences at the projectdesign stage where it is decided whether anEnvironmental Impact Statement is required. If it isrequired, then the scope of the study is determined,after which the EIS is prepared as part of theapplication for development consent. The competentauthority examines the EIS, circulating copies tostatutory consultees while also making it available tothe public. The competent authority then makes itsdecision to refuse or grant permission or to seekadditional information, having regard to theinformation contained in the EIS among otherfactors.

1.2 BASIC METHODOLOGY

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is definedin S.I. No 349 of 89 (Art. 3 (1)) as follows:-

"A statement of the effects, if any, which proposeddevelopment, if carried out, would have on theenvironment".

It consists of a systematic analysis of the proposeddevelopment in relation to the existing environment.This is carried out at a stage in the design processwhere changes can still be made to avoid adverseimpacts (See Figure 1).

An Environmental Impact Statement providesinformation which the competent authority uses indetermining whether or not to grant consent. Thisinformation is also used by affected parties toevaluate the acceptability of the development and itsimpacts.

Clear, concise, unambiguous communication isessential for the effective operation of EIA. Asystematic approach, the observation of standarddescriptive methods and the use of replicableprediction techniques and standardised impactdescription contribute to ensuring that all significant,

likely effects are fully considered.

1.3 SCREENING

The first task is to determine whether anEnvironmental Impact Statement will need to beprepared. This is often referred to as 'screening'. TheEIA Regulations, together with other environmentalcriteria, set out the thresholds or sizes of certainclasses of projects which indicate that an EIS mustbe prepared.

It is important to note that the competent authoritycan also require an EIA where a project is below thespecified threshold. This usually arises where thereis a likelihood of significant effects on theenvironment by reference to the nature or location ofa project e.g. potential impact on a designatedconservation site or sensitive environments (see3.2.4). In such cases, and where projects are close tothe mandatory threshold, it is advisable thatdevelopers consult with the relevant competentauthority regarding the possible needs for an EIS3 .

1.4 SCOPING

The scoping process identifies the issues andemphasis that are likely to be important during EIAand eliminates those that are not. The informationcan be compiled by a formal process, whereby thecompetent authority is asked to consult with relevantagencies to draw up an opinion about the scope ofthe coverage required. More informal scoping canalso be carried out to ensure that all relevant issuesare identified and addressed to an appropriate levelof detail.

In addition to consultation (formal or informal) withthe competent authority, it is often prudent to contactauthorities to whom aspects of the proposeddevelopment may be referred for comment. Theseare often contacted to determine the level ofinformation which they may require and to confirmany designation they may have of the site. Dúchas,the Heritage Service of the Department of Arts,Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands or the relevantRegional Fisheries Board are typical of suchconsultees.

There are also Non Governmental Organisations(NGOs) that have interests in specific aspects of theenvironment likely to be affected by the

11 PRELIMINARIES AND GENERAL METHODS

1. PRELIMINARIES AND GENERAL METHODS

3 An Bord Pleanála or other competent authority (e.g. relevant Government Minister) have the power to grant anexemption from the requirements to submit an EIS, in exceptional circumstances.

development, such as the Heritage Council, AnTaisce or the Irish Wildbird Conservancy. Whererelevant aspects of the environment are likely to besignificantly affected, then the views of suchorganisations can be sought at an early stage.

Sensitive receptors such as neighbouringlandowners, local communities or other parties likelyto be affected are usually identified. In manyinstances it can be helpful to obtain their views orhear any concerns which they might express.

The importance of scoping cannot be overemphasised. It can help to avoid delays caused byrequests for additional information. It also providesan opportunity for the exchange of views at an earlystage when there is still flexibility in the design ofthe development. Ultimately it helps to increaseconfidence in the outcome of the process. The EPAadvice notes on Current Practice provides usefulpreliminary information that may be of assistance toall parties during scoping, particularly for projecttypes and topics.

1.5 CONSULTATION

From the outset it is important to distinguishbetween EIA related consultation – which gathersinformation – and the exercise of consensusbuilding, or canvassing for project support, whichoften accompanies applications for permission.Ideally these two activities should be kept separate.Consultation forms a key element of any EIA

process. Successful consultation for EIA ismethodical and focused; it typically addresses threetopics:-

Scoping to determine the issues and concerns whichneed to be evaluated and the methods to be used forthat evaluation.

Impacts and Mitigation are proposed and discussedto determine the likely acceptability of the residualeffects.

Alternatives are sometimes examined duringconsultation to ensure that the options that are ofinterest to all parties are evaluated, particularlytopics such as site/route suitability.

For EIA purposes most consultation takes place withthe competent authority, specialist agencies andthose parties that are most likely to be directlyaffected.

Public consultation is used principally where theaffected population is likely to be very large and/ordifficult to identify. To be of value such consultationmust have a sufficient time allocation and be expertlystructured to ensure clarity and consistency.

1.6 THE STRUCTURE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

To assist assessment and increase clarity, the

2 GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS

Proposed Development

Examine the Impacts on the Environment

Significant LikelyAdverse Impacts

Propose MitigationMeasures

Incorporate Revisionsinto Design

Positive, Residualor No Impacts

FinaliseDesign

Apply forDevelopment Consent

Figure 1 Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Impact Statement should besystematically organised (See Figure 2) to providesections describing:-

• the Proposed Development;

• the Existing Environment;

• the Impacts of the Proposed Development;

• the Measures to Mitigate Adverse Impacts;

• a Non-Technical Summary.

The existing environment and the impacts of thedevelopment are explained by reference to itspossible impact on a series of environmental topics:-

1.7 ALTERNATIVE EIS FORMATS

The above information may be organised in anumber of different ways. Generally two types ofEIS structure are commonly used. Both are equallyvalid.

1.7.1 DIRECT FORMAT STRUCTURE

An EIS is prepared that directly follows the sequenceof the Regulations, i.e. separate descriptions areprovided of the proposed development, existingenvironment, impacts and mitigation measures.Within each description there is a section on therelevant topics set out in the Regulations (e.g.Impacts on Human Beings, Fauna, Flora, Soil etc.).

The advantages of this approach are that it facilitatesa comprehensive understanding of the project,environment, impacts and mitigation measures; it isvery useful for competent authorities or the publicbecause all of the mitigation measures or impacts aregrouped together. The main disadvantages are that itleads to repetition, the descriptions of impactswithout mitigation measures can be viewed astheoretical and to follow a single topic (e.g. air), thereader must consult three different chapters.

Though technically desirable this format inevitablyleads to repetition. As a result good editing andcross-referencing are very important. Sub-consultants review and comment on the final editedtext.

1.7.2 GROUPED FORMAT STRUCTURE

An EIS is prepared in a format which examines eachtopic as a separate section referring to the existingenvironment, the proposed development, impactsand mitigation measures (e.g. flora and the proposeddevelopment, flora in the existing environment,impacts on flora, etc.).

The advantages of using this type of format are thatit is easy to investigate a single topic and it facilitates


• Human Beings

• Fauna and Flora

• Soil

• Water

• Air

• Climatic Factors

• The Landscape

• Material Assets, including the Architectural

and Archaeological Heritage, and the

Cultural Heritage

• The Inter-Relationship between the Above

Factors

Impacts should address direct, indirect, secondary,cumulative, short, medium and long-term,permanent, temporary, positive and negative effectsas well as impact interactions.

None of the topics outlined above (Human Beings,Fauna, Flora etc) should be omitted at the risk ofinvalidating the legality of the process, although theirlevel of detail may differ depending on the likelihoodof impacts. In some instances it may be sufficient tomention the topics while explaining the reasons foromitting ("scoping out") or providing minimal detailabout the topic. A formal scoping procedure willfurther assist in determining the level of detailrequired under various headings.

e.g. "Fauna:- Because of the inner city location of

the development and the lack of any natural

habitats (or roosting sites) no significant or likely

impacts on natural fauna are anticipated.

Accordingly this EIS contains no further

description of existing fauna, impacts on fauna,

mitigation or monitoring proposals for fauna".

Figure 2 The Structure of an Environmental Impact Statement

Environmental Impact Statement should be keptseparate (e.g. planning application report).


easy cross-reference to specialist studies. Thedisadvantages are that it is more difficult to obtain acomprehensive understanding of the existingenvironment or of the full range of impacts andmitigation measures, particularly the interaction offactors.

EISs in this format must be carefully edited in orderto avoid producing a disjointed EIS which is merelya collection of disparate reports by variousconsultants.

1.8 SIZE

It is in the interest of all parties that EISs are kept asconcise as possible. Where appropriate, certaininformation may be appended to the main EISdocument and made available separately whenrequired. The EIS, together with its appendicesshould ideally constitute a self contained documenti.e. there should not be significant reliance orreference to documentation not within the EIS. Inthis case it is important that proper cross-referencingbe provided. Topics which are not relevant to an

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTAlternatives ExistenceLocation ConstructionDesign OperationProcesses Change

Decommissioning

CharacteristicsLayout OtherDesign DevelopmentsSize and scale

EXISTING ENVIRONMENTHuman BeingsFauna and FloraSoilWaterAirClimatic FactorsThe LandscapeMaterial Assets, including theArchitectural and Archaeological Heritage,and the Cultural HeritageInteraction of the Foregoing

LIKELY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTSDo NothingPredicted

‘Worse case’Indirect Impacts

MITIGATION MEASURESAvoidanceReductionRemedy


1 2 3 4 5Im

pac

ts+

Time +

a iii

ii

ic

b

Figure 3 Impacts during the life cycle of a development

1 Construction2 Commissioning (mitigation becomes effective)3 Operation (within a stable range of impacts)4 Change

a) expansion/intensificationb) contractionc) cumulative deterioration*

5 Closurei) planned closure with decommissioningii) gradual dilapidationiii) persistent impacts

* Due to deteriorating mitigation measures or accumulative of persistent pollutants.


2.1 INTRODUCTION

Clear guidance is required to maintainEnvironmental Impact Assessment as a practicalapplication of sound technical and specialistknowledge. EIA provides environmental informationand guidance to the decision-making processes. It isa means to an end. This section gives prominence tothis practical aspect of EIA. All participants in theprocess should be oriented towards the common goalof preventing any avoidable environmentaldeterioration due to development and ensuring thatdevelopment is sustainable.

There can often be an excessive emphasis on EIA asa document to justify a project, rather than as aprocess to scrutinise and improve it. The Principlesand Roles in Practice, set out below, aim to provideguidance on how to ensure that EIA is primarily andeffectively directed towards the care for, andimprovement of, the environment during and afterdevelopment. Section 2.4 also reviews somecommon EIA issues frequently encountered inpractice.

2.2 PRINCIPLES

The basic tenets of Environmental ImpactAssessment are:-

• Pursuing Preventative Action

• Informing the Decision

• Maintaining Environmental Focus and Scope

• Public Participation

2.2.1 PURSUING PREVENTATIVE ACTION

Methods, data and evaluations need to be constantlyscrutinised to ensure that they contribute to theprevention of adverse environmental effects byanticipation and avoidance.

Anticipation of Impacts is an important techniqueduring screening, scoping and the considerations ofalternatives. It involves forming a preliminaryopinion, in the absence of complete data, about theapproximate magnitude and character of the likelyimpacts. Experience and expertise are most usefulfor such anticipation of impacts. However, the use of

the guidance material, such as the Advice Notes onCurrent Practice in the preparation of EISs, canallow a wide constituency of interests to makemeaningful contributions at the earliest stages ofEIA.

Avoidance of Impacts is principally achieved by twomeans; firstly, the consideration of alternatives(sections 2.4.3 and 3.2.2) and secondly the review ofdesigns (section 3.1.3) in light of environmentalconstraints. When successfully practised, ImpactAvoidance can often lead to an EIS which predicts‘no significant adverse effects. To avoidmisinterpretation of this statement it is veryimportant for the EIS to provide transparent,objective and replicable evidence of the evaluationand decision making processes which led to theadoption or selection of the final projectconfiguration. Such evidence should clearlyhighlight the considerations of environmental effectsthat influenced the evaluation of alternatives. It alsoshows how the design incorporates mitigationmeasures, including impact avoidance, reduction oramelioration. Such measures can help to explain howsignificant adverse effects were avoided.

2.2.2 INFORMING THE DECISION

The Environmental Impact Assessment, though partof the decision making process, takes place beforethe actual decision about consent is made. Thisenables the competent authority to reach a decisionin the full knowledge of the project’s likelysignificant impacts on the environment, if any.Information should be relevant and complete, andlegally compliant with the Regulations. It should beappropriate to the requirements of the consentprocedure. The information should be systematicallyassessed and presented.

2.2.3 MAINTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL FOCUS AND SCOPE

Effectiveness and efficiency in EIA are most easilyachieved where all parties ensure that documentationand analysis is confined to those topics and issueswhich are explicitly described in the relevantlegislation. It is important for all parties to maintaina vigilance against the use of EIA to evaluate a widerange of related, but not directly, environmentaltopics - no matter how well-intentioned or seeminglyconvenient. Matters such as landuse planning,

72 PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE

2. PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE

employment, economic, financial or healthconsiderations are of relevance but only insofar asthey are physically manifested at, or directlyadjacent to, the development site.

Evaluation and analysis is generally limited to areaswhere the indirect, secondary or cumulative impactsare either wholly or dominantly due to the project ordevelopment under consideration.

More detailed guidelines on scoping (see Section3.1.2) provide specific criteria on how to ensure thatthe EIA remains focused on issues that:-

• are environmentally based;

• are likely to occur;

• have ‘significant and adverse effects’4 .

granting of consent.

2.3 ROLES OF PARTICIPANTS IN PRACTICE

An EIS is the result of the activities of many people,each of whom need to make different and distinctivecontributions. This section provides guidance onhow each of the principal parties in EIA can mostconstructively and successfully contribute to theprocess.

2.3.1 THE DEVELOPER

Developers need to ensure that they allocate arealistic programme for an EIS to be properlyprepared because the lack of adequate time cansignificantly reduce the effectiveness of the process.The length of time involved very much depends onthe type of project being undertaken or the sensitivityof the receiving environment. For example, noise orecological baselines may require observations over amonthly or even a seasonal basis. A completeassessment of flood returns, on the other hand, maytake years. Experience suggests that a period of lessthan twelve weeks generally creates challenges forall participants, even on smaller projects, and shouldbe avoided if possible.

It is particularly important that the developer shouldunderstand and accept all mitigation measures thatare proposed in the EIS. These are enforceableundertakings that will have to be put in place andsustained when the project is implemented. Ideallysuch measures should be discussed with thoseresponsible for day-to-day operations to ensure thatthe proposed mitigation or avoidance measures arepracticable.

EIA is most effective where there is early and opencommunication between the participants in theprocess. The developer plays an important role byencouraging and facilitating the approach. It is alsothe responsibility of the developer to ensure thatrelevant design and environmental expertise isemployed.

EIA requires disclosure of information andcommitments to mitigation. These are the twounique responsibilities of the developer. Prior to thecommencement of an EIA a developer should beaware of the requirements arising from theRegulations and be prepared to fully disclose thefollowing as part of the process:-

• the range of alternative locations or routes (if


4 EC (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Amendment) Regulations 1999, Second Schedule.

Some project types (e.g. processing of minerals)

are part of a larger chain of activities that may

commence with resource extraction and end with

disposal of the product following purchase and

use. While it may be desirable to consider the

integrated and holistic effects of such activities it

may not be practical to evaluate the full chain of

effects by EIA alone. The EIA is limited to the

effects of the development project that is the

subject of the relevant application for consent.

Other effects (direct and indirect) that may be

reasonably and specifically anticipated may be

described for completeness. However, it should be

noted that such other activities may be subject to

other, separate, regulation and conditioning under

separate legislation and jurisdiction.

(See also 2.4.3)

2.2.4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Decisions are taken by competent authorities inconsultation with the public, while receiving advicefrom other authorities with specific environmentalresponsibilities. The structure, presentation and thenon-technical summary of the EIS as well as thearrangements for public access all facilitate thedissemination of the information contained in theEIS. The core objective is to ensure that society ismade as fully aware as possible of the likelyenvironmental impacts of projects prior to the


any) that were considered, together with theenvironmental factors which led to theselection of the preferred site;

• the range of design/layout alternativesconsidered for the proposed development;

• the range of alternative activities or processes(if any) by which the proposed developmentcould operate, together with theenvironmental considerations whichdetermined the selection of the proposedmanufacturing technology or site activities;

• the nature of the processes and activitieswhich will take place once the site is fullyoperational. This will include descriptions ofthe characteristics and qualities of materialswhich arrive at and leave the site, how theseare used within the operation and the fate ofall wastes and emissions which arise.

2.3.2 DESIGNERS

Professionals and specialists, who prepare the plansand other documentation to describe a development,should be aware that EIA may require slightlydifferent roles from those that are normally requiredof them for other procedures.

The sequence and timing of the design processshould be structured to allow environmental factorsto be accommodated at appropriate stages. In theearly stage of the design this may mean that sitingand layout will need to be adjusted to avoidenvironmental vulnerabilities, such as designedlandscapes, ecological, architectural orarchaeological heritage. In the main process therewill be design targets for emissions to air and waterthat will need to take account of the receivingenvironment. Landscape and noise factors mayinfluence the site layout or the configuration ofstructures, sometimes late in the design process.There may also be a requirement for modifications.For example, the final external finishes, the locationsof openings or drainage details may all need minordesign changes to further mitigate such effects asvisual impacts, noise or risk of water pollution.

Design Information will need to be made available toenvironmental specialists, agencies and consultees atan early stage. The designers need to makeappropriate allowances so that preliminary designsare available and readily understood. Designers willalso need to be available to communicate withspecialists, both to explain the project and to learn

about environmental design constraints. Finallydesigners will need to provide information on themethods, quantity and timing ofconstruction/development activities to a greater levelof detail than they might previously have beenrequired when obtaining other permissions orconsents.

2.3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS

EIA is critically dependent on the expertise,experience, independence and objectivity ofenvironmental specialists. They characterise theexisting environment and evaluate its significanceand sensitivity. In addition to description, however,EIA demands that specialists must also predict howthe receiving environment will interact with theproposed development. If they anticipate significantadverse impacts they will need to work with thedeveloper and designers to devise measures tomitigate such impacts. The specialist who prepareseach section should be identified in the report. Toparticipate adequately in EIA environmentalspecialists will, in addition to their knowledge of thetopic, need to:-

• have a knowledge of the relevantenvironmental legislation and standardswhich apply to their topic;

• be familiar with the relevant standards andcriteria for evaluation and classification ofsignificance and impacts;

• be able to interpret the specialiseddocumentation of the construction sector sothat they can understand and anticipate howtheir topic will be affected duringconstruction and operation;

• be able to work with designers and otherspecialists to arrive at practical and reliablemeasures to mitigate adverse impacts;

• be able to clearly and comprehensivelypresent their findings.

Considering the number of specialists who canbecome involved in an EIS, the importance of acompetent project leader who can synchronise eventsand liase between specialists must be recognised.

In conclusion it is the responsibility of the specialiststo understand the proposed development sufficientlyso that likely significant adverse impacts can beanticipated and mitigated where possible.


2.3.4 COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

EIA always exists within a regulatory frameworkwhere an authority grants consent5 for a project. Thecompetent authority fulfils a number of importantroles in EIA, particularly screening, scoping,evaluation and determination. The decisions aboutwhether EIA is required (Screening) and of what theEIS should address (Scoping) are two principal roles.Early and careful consideration of these topics canaffect confidence in the effectiveness of the process.These in turn can lead to significant reductions indelays and disputes.

Within the appropriate regulatory framework, thecompetent authority can positively contribute to theEIA process by the following means:-

Early involvement with willing applicants which cananticipate and avoid delays or disputes aboutscreening or scoping.

Advising on environmental factors, other potentiallyinteracting projects or drawing attention to likelylocal issues and concerns. The latter is a particularlyimportant contribution which draws on the uniqueknowledge and experience of the Authority,particularly for the anticipation of indirect andinteracting effects which might not otherwise bereadily apparent. Potential difficulties or concernsshould be highlighted at the earliest opportunity sothat they can be addressed by the EIA and designprocess.

Providing Environmental Data which may berelevant to the project as early as possible.Competent authorities can often provide valuableinformation to applicants about where to obtain otherrelevant data.

Document Review, either in whole or part (also seeSection 3.1.3). This has proven to be an extremelyeffective means of avoiding delays, disagreements ordisappointments. It is particularly valuable where thedetail of impact description and mitigation proposalsare closely scrutinised.

2.3.5 AGENCIES

Agencies that are responsible for data provision andfor the protection of environmental and culturalassets have special responsibilities to respond to theprocedural and pragmatic demands of EIA. Suchagencies are likely to be initially approached byapplicants or competent authorities who will beseeking data either about the existence or the

significance of resources. They may be approachedlater seeking evaluations of the likely acceptabilityof residual impacts or mitigation proposals.

Having regard to established procedures, precedentand the relevant regulations, agencies can positivelycontribute to the EIA process by providing:-Timely Responses to requests for data orobservations. Where complex or large-scale issuesare involved it may be preferable to arrangecommunications in stages. By this method matters ofprinciple (such as the intrinsic suitability of the site)can be raised as early as possible.

Appropriate Data should be readily available,current, accurate and as complete as possible. Earlynotification about data gaps can also be ofconsiderable assistance to applicants. Agencies canoften draw on their own depth of experience toprovide valuable information to applicants abouthow or where to find other relevant data.6

Appropriate Observations can be extremely useful,particularly at the early stages of a project. In someinstances it will be important to ensure that the viewsof local, regional or national officials are consistent .

2.3.6 NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS

Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) havespecial rights and responsibilities which can interactwith the EIA process in a number of ways. Early,open and constructive engagement has frequentlyproven to be beneficial to both the protection of theenvironment and to the quality of developmentprojects. The significance of such organisations liesin their ability to provide an informed andexperienced focus, particularly for the emergingconcerns of society. A mutually satisfactory outcomecan be achieved where applicants and NGOs engagein dialogue prior to the formal consent procedures.Ideally this takes place at a sufficiently early stagefor concerns to be incorporated into the designprocess.

While respecting NGOs’ independence, andrecognising that some have non engagementphilosophies or may have limited resourcesavailable, such organisations can usefully contributeto the EIA process by:-

Timely Participation which means availing of theearliest available opportunities to inform applicantsabout issues, concerns and criteria. Participation inscoping is of the greatest importance.

5 Some projects may require consent from a number of authorities.

6 This does not, however, detract from the requirement on the developer/EIA team to undertake up to date surveywork/monitoring which is site specific and relevant to the study area in question.


Open Engagement which means a willingness toparticipate in dialogue by sharing data, particularlyabout environmental sensitivities or vulnerabilities.It also means being explicit, as early as possible,about criteria for environmental acceptability orindeed about non negotiable principles.Constructive Engagement which involves awillingness to evaluate and respond to proposals bythe applicant – particularly at early stages. Thisengagement may also involve a willingness toparticipate in evaluations of a number of versions ofthe project as it evolves. It may also involve awillingness to engage in document review (see3.1.3).

2.3.7 THE PUBLIC

Public participation enhances the effectiveness andaccountability of the process by increasing theexplicit consensus of the decision making process.Local historians, farmers, wildlife experts etc. are aninvaluable source of local information and if possiblecan be identified and consulted. Availing ofopportunities for participation prior to consent is thekey to influencing the development.

In addition to the rights of objection or observationswhich are provided by the existing regulations andprocedures, the public can also participate in the EIAprocess by:

Making Observations or submissions in response toany preliminary invitations to participate such asscoping, evaluation of alternatives or documentreview. These opportunities may arise through publicnotifications, through public representatives or atcommunity consultation meetings/exhibitions by theapplicant. The most useful form of participation is toinform the applicant of concerns, as early as possibleso that the EIA process can include and attempt toaddress them.

Direct Participation, wherever possible, is morelikely to result in accurate and focusedcommunications between applicants and members ofthe public – though community organisations andpublic representatives can provide invaluablefacilities for organising and facilitating suchparticipation.

2.4 EIA ISSUES

On large and controversial projects the EIS has oftenbecome a focus of objection, disagreement anddebate. A review of experience indicates that thefollowing six issues lie at the core of these EIA

controversies. Each issue relates to adequacy of theoverall EIS rather than any particular section.Attention to the following issues may help tominimise the potential for EIA controversy in future:

• Impartiality

• Health and Safety

• Alternatives

• Screening

• Scoping

• Availability of Documents

2.4.1 IMPARTIALITY

The most common general complaint arises from afundamental lack of trust in the impartiality of anEIS. The question most frequently asked is:- Is adeveloper likely to endure the expense and trouble ofan EIS just to provide supporting evidence for anobjector?

To answer this question it is important to considerthe function of both the structure of EIA as well asthe regulatory obligations on the developer. Thesecall for a comprehensive description of the existingenvironment. In most instances this consists of acompilation of information such as environmentalvulnerabilities,7 which is already available in thepublic domain. These circumstances render itdifficult for an EIS to conceal the likelihood ofimpacts (see also ‘Published Data and Site Surveys’,Section 3.2.4).

Furthermore the complaint is often made that EISsoften conclude that ‘no significant adverse impactsare likely’. This overlooks the preventative nature ofEIA which causes the applicant to devise measuresto avoid, reduce or remedy significant adverseimpacts (i.e. to remove the causes of impacts beforeapplying for consent).

Where EIA is integrated with design development itbecomes easier to understand and to accept that theanticipation and avoidance of impacts is a verypositive incentive for the developer to participate inEIA. Where EIA has helped to modify the design, toavoid or minimise impacts, it is also easier tounderstand and accept that an EIS, even for a largeproject, can credibly anticipate that ‘no significantadverse impacts are likely’.

7 Such as the nutrient loading of a receiving water or an ecological designation for instance.


Notwithstanding these observations, it is importantto acknowledge that valid concerns aboutimpartiality remain because of the subjectivity abouthow some impacts are perceived. The description ofthe magnitude of impacts is the most controversialarea. Whenever possible, impacts should bedescribed by reference to an existing acknowledgedstandard or criteria for the topic. The criteria onwhich the terminology is based should be clearlydefined for each discipline. Where this is notpossible then it is recommended that impacts shouldbe described by reference to the ‘glossary ofimpacts’ in Section 3.2.5 of these guidelines.

Finally, wherever subjectivity and personaljudgement are factors in the prediction of likelyperceptions and responses, impacts should besuitably qualified8.

2.4.2 HEALTH & SAFETY

The physical environment is one of a number ofrecognised determinants of health which is often atthe forefront of community concerns. Health can beaffected by a number of direct and indirectenvironmental pathways, such as air, water or soil.Populations can be affected either by directcontamination or by induced effects on diseasevectors, food chains and exposure to risks. EIAtypically deals directly with the environmentalpathways and the extent to which these are affectedby known contaminants, irritants or change inducingfactors (e.g. nutrient enhancement or temperaturechange).

The evaluation of effects on these pathways iscarried out by reference to accepted standards(usually international) of safety in dose, exposure orrisk. These standards are in turn based upon medicaland scientific investigation of the direct effects onhealth of the individual substance, effect or risk. Thispractice of reliance upon limits, doses and thresholdsfor environmental pathways, such as air, water orsoil, provides robust and reliable health protectorsfor analysis relating to the environment.

Where anxieties about human health are understoodto be of particular concern the scope of the EISensures that observance of and reliance uponconformity with recognised national andinternational standards is adequately related to thespecific Health and Safety topic that are of localconcern.

2.4.3 ALTERNATIVES

The consideration of alternative routes, sites,alignments, layouts, processes, designs or strategies,is the single most effective means of avoidingenvironmental impacts. The acceptability andcredibility of EIA findings can be significantlyaffected by the extent to which this issue isaddressed. For linear projects, such as roads andpower lines, alternative routes may be the mostimportant and effective mitigation strategy while formajor infrastructure projects the intrinsic suitabilityof the site is the principal amelioration strategy.However, it is important, from the outset, toacknowledge the existence of difficulties andlimitations when considering alternatives. Theseinclude:-

HierarchyEIA is only concerned with projects. Many projects,especially in the area of public infrastructure, ariseon account of plans, strategies and policies whichhave previously been decided upon. It is important toacknowledge that in some instances neither theapplicant nor the competent authority can berealistically expected to examine options which havealready been previously determined by a higherauthority (such as a national plan or regionalprogramme for infrastructure or a spatial plan).

8 It is particularly important to exercise caution about combining impacts derived from different types of criteria(i.e. objective and subjective) within comparative, numerically weighted evaluation rankings, e.g. matrices.

Strategic Environmental Assessment

Strategic Environmental Assessment is a process

by which plans and programmes are evaluated by

reference to the same environmental topics as are

used in EIA and have regard to the likely

significant environmental effects, of implementing

the plan or programme. Like EIA, the assessment

examines alternatives and proposes mitigation

measures for any significant adverse effects that

are anticipated. A Council Directive on the effects

of certain plans and programmes on the

environment has recently been officially adopted

by the EC1

Non Environmental FactorsEIA is confined to the environmental effects whichinfluence the consideration of alternatives. It isimportant to acknowledge that other non-environmental factors may have equal or overriding


importance to the developer, e.g. project economics,land availability, engineering feasibility, planningconsiderations.

Site Specific IssuesThe consideration of alternatives also needs to be setwithin the parameters of the availability of land (itmay be the only suitable land available to thedeveloper) or the need for the project toaccommodate demands or opportunities which aresite specific. Such considerations should be on thebasis of alternatives within a site e.g. design, layout.

2.4.4 SCREENING

It is important to acknowledge that EIA can beexpensive, time consuming and difficult for allparties involved. Many poor-quality EISs arisewhere relatively small, poorly resourced projectshave to carry the disproportionate cost of anunnecessary EIA. Wherever legally possible otherforms of more limited appropriate evaluation (anEnvironmental Report or Appropriate Assessment)can be used instead (See 2.4.2). These can focus onlyon the topic(s) where impacts are likely to occur.These can be identified through consultation orscoping with relevant competent authorities. Section3.1.1 provides detailed guidance on criteria forscreening as well as alternative forms of appropriateassessment.

2.4.5 SCOPING

Unnecessary or over elaborate evaluations createavoidable delays and excessive costs. They can alsobe unintentionally counterproductive by reducing theaccessibility, clarity and focus of the EIS and theassociated decision making process. Unsatisfactorystudies can occur where demand for studies areoppressive or disproportionate. Scoping must befocused on issues and impacts which are:-

• Environmentally based

• Likely to occur

• Significant and adverse

Having regard to these criteria, competentauthorities, agencies, NGOs and other consulteesshould ensure that a transparent and justifiablerationale exists when specifying the scope for EIA

(see also Section 3.1.2 for detailed guidance onmethods and criteria).

2.4.6 AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS

It is imperative to minimise barriers that limit thepublic access to the EIS. Barriers can include:-

Size and cost which can create difficulties for thepublic and for competent authorities. Whereverpossible practitioners should aim to keep the lengthof the main volume of the EIS to less than 100 pages.The format and illustrations should be designed so asnot to impede reproduction.

Availability and ease of reproduction should befacilitated by the applicant and the competentauthority. The use of electronic access, loose leafmaster copies and the provision (and supply) ofadequate copies for public access can be discussed inadvance by the applicant and the authority.

Comprehension can be influenced by structure,language, editing and presentation. Simple, self-explanatory graphics are provided, together withappropriately scaled drawings, photographs andphotomontages. The requirement for a non-technicalsummary does not relieve the applicant of theresponsibility of ensuring that the EIS is easilycomprehended. Obscurity will often lead to queries,mistrust or even requests for additional information,none of which facilitate the decision making process.

2.4.7 APPROPRIATE EVALUATION

Where reasonable9 concerns exist that a single orvery limited number of environmental topics may beadversely10 affected by a development proposal thenan appropriate evaluation of the relevant11 topic(s)may be carried out (See also 3.1.1).

The evaluation should generally observe both thestructure and methods of an EIS, as set out in theseguidelines, namely by describing:-

• The aspects of the construction, existence andoperation of proposed developments that arelikely to affect the environmental sensitivity.

• The context, character, significance andsensitivity of the relevant EnvironmentalTopic(s).

9 There should be a likely and demonstrable means by which the proposed change could significantly and adverselyaffect the specific environmental sensitivity.

10 To alter or diminish the valued characteristic of the environmental topic.

11 Assessments of specific topics should be limited to relevant issues (i.e. those likely to be affected by the proposeddevelopment).


• The likely significant impacts of the proposeddevelopment on the specific EnvironmentalTopic(s).

• The measures to mitigate adverse impacts onthe specific environmental topic(s).

• A non-technical summary of the assessmentshould also be provided.

The assessment employs:-

• A systematic approach

• Standard descriptive methods

• Replicable prediction techniques

• Standardised impact description

For assessments of a single or very limited numberof topics the latter criterion assumes greaterimportance than it might in a full EIS. This isbecause the weight of the decision may fall upon theevaluation of the significance of the effects upon asingle topic.

The evaluation of the significance of the impactshould, wherever possible, use pre-existingstandardised terms for the significance of impacts.Where these do not exist the scoping of theAppropriate Assessments should include an explicitstatement of the criteria that will be used to evaluatethe significance (and acceptability) of the resultantand residual impact(s).

The formulation of such criteria should be subject toreplicable and systematic standards and should,wherever possible be based solely or predominantlyupon the four explicitly objective criteria set out inpart 3.2.5 of these guidelines namely:-

1. Magnitude and Intensity2. Integrity3. Duration4. Probability

3.1 EIA STAGES

To assist in the production of EISs that achieve theobjectives of Impact Anticipation and Avoidance itmay be helpful to consider the relevant issues as theyarise during each of the principal stages of EIA.These are discussed below.

3.1.1 SCREENING

Despite extensive and highly specific EIA legislationthere will still be circumstances where adetermination will be needed as to whether or not anEIS is mandatory. Where legislation or other officialguidance is inconclusive on the matter it may behelpful to consider the following issues:-

• Could the development significantly affectmore than one significant or sensitiveenvironmentally based resource?

• Is the project of a large size and effect anddoes it involve emerging technologies ortechniques?

• Are there significant levels of unpredictabilityabout effect arising from the methods,technologies or because of the absence ofdata on the receiving environment?

• Is there reason to believe that there may besignificant and reasonable levels of publicconcern about demonstrable effects onenvironmental resources?

If Yes is the clear and immediate answer to any ofthese questions then it is reasonable to anticipate thatthere would be a widely held expectation of stringentevaluation of such projects.

In such an evaluation, however, it is important toclearly examine whether concerns (public or expert)arise on account of:-

• a single or very specific environmentaltopic12

• a single or very restricted characteristic of thedevelopment13

• uncertainty or data limitations about a singleor restricted aspect of the development.

If any or all of these concerns exist in the absence ofclear requirements for an EIS under the Regulationsconsideration can be given to preparing a detailedevaluation solely of the single or restricted topic,issue or uncertainty as an appropriate evaluation (seeSection 2.4.7).

3.1.2 SCOPING

The prior determination of the nature and detail ofthe information to be contained in an EIS is one ofthe most important, yet challenging, stages of theprocess. This may be a formal or informal process.The difficulty arises from the need to know the likelyareas of potential impact and the appropriatemethods by which to evaluate them prior to thecommencement of detailed data collection orassessment.

MethodsDetermination by personnel having direct or relevantprior experience of the constituent factors i.e.knowledge of the project type or of the proposedreceiving environment or, ideally, both (See Rolesbelow).

Guidelines The EPA Advice Notes on CurrentPractice in the preparation of EISs containsguidance both on environmental topics and forprincipal project types. Other internationalpublications (see Advice Notes) provide summariesof the scope of EIA for various project types.

Precedent created by the EIA for similar oranalogous projects or environments are nowavailable by consulting the public files of competentauthorities and environmental information databases,e.g. ENFO14 .

Roles of ParticipantsThe scope may emerge from a number of sources butmost commonly emerges from a dialogue betweensome or all of the following:-

The Applicants’ agent who may be an EIA specialistand who may propose an initial outline of the scopeon the basis of a knowledge of the project and the

153 GUIDELINES

3. GUIDELINES

12 For instance archaeology.

13 For instance noise emissions.

14 Ireland’s public information service on environmental matters (Department of Environment and Local Government).

site.

The Competent Authority who will have a detailedknowledge of the procedural and legal requirementsas well as a more extensive knowledge of both thecontext and local issues and concerns.

Other Specialist Agencies (including NGOs) whowill have a detailed understanding of a particularaspect of the environment affected.

The Public, either individually or in groups, who arelikely to have either thematically specific or area-specific concerns.

CriteriaAll parties must be conscious of the need to keep theEIS as tightly focused as possible. This minimisesexpenses, delays and the potential for a confusingmass of data to obscure the relevant facts. To achievethis objective Scoping can be carried out byreference to the following criteria:-

• Use precedence, avoid ‘re-inventing thewheel’. Where similar projects on similarsites have previously been the subject of asatisfactory EIS then it is reasonable to usesuch reference for Scoping.

• Use ‘Likely’ and ‘Significant’ as criteria fordetermining the range of impacts andthresholds for data assembly respectively.

• Maintain Environmental Focus (see Section2.2.3).

3.1.3 ON-GOING SCOPING

Design ReviewAs mentioned previously, the prevention ofenvironmental degradation and associated impact onhuman beings, plants, animals etc. is the principalobjective of EIA. This can only take place where thedesign is informed and reviewed by environmentalcriteria emerging from an appropriate assessment ofthe specific receiving environment. Sections 2.3.2and 2.3.3 provide specific recommendations on theneed for the designers and the environmentalspecialists to maintain a regular dialogue through thedesign development to ensure that this objective isachieved. As such regular EIA project team meetingsare important.

Document ReviewExperience in practice, particularly on large andtime-critical projects, has shown that considerable

benefits accrue to all parties when the EIS issubjected to timely review by outside parties. Thismost commonly takes place with the competentauthority15 who may examine structure, overallcoverage, findings and the likely acceptability of theresidual impact levels or of the mitigation proposals.Consultation may take place on narrower issues withspecialist agencies or occasionally with concerned oreven potentially hostile third parties. The principaladvantages of a Document Review are reported toinclude:-

• the avoidance of requests for additionalinformation at a late stage in the process;

• the testing of the acceptability of residualimpacts and mitigation proposals;

• discovering interactions or conflicts that werenot evident at the earlier scoping stage.

3.1.4 CONDITIONS AND MONITORING

EIA related conditions that are imposed by thecompetent authority will form part of the ImpactAnticipation and Avoidance strategy.

Conditions are principally used to ensure thatundertakings to mitigate are secured by explicitlystating the location, quality, character, duration andtiming of the measures to be implemented. Asecondary role of EIA related conditions is to ensurethat resources e.g. bonds / insurances will beavailable and properly directed for mitigation,monitoring or remedial action, in the event that theimpacts exceed the predicted levels.

Monitoring of the effectiveness of mitigationmeasures put forward in the EIS, both by thecompetent authorities and the developer, is anintegral part of the process. Monitoring ofenvironmental media and indicators arise either fromundertakings or from conditions. In either case it isimportant for all parties to be aware of theadministrative, technical, legal and financial burdensthat can accompany inflexible or unresponsivemonitoring regimes. It is important to ensure that,where monitoring is provided for, it is clearly relatedto thresholds, which if exceeded cause a clearlydefined set of actions to be implemented.

3.2 EIS PREPARATION

The previous sections have dealt with the generalityof the content and procedures for EIA. This sectionprovides guidance on each specific section of the


15 It is important to note that some Competent Authorities - such as An Bord Pleanála - are precluded from having informalconsultations with applicants.

EIS. It draws attention to the scope and focus ofsections and to the topics that should be addressed ineach.

3.2.1 PREAMBLE

A preamble can usefully establish the backgroundand terms of reference for the EIS. Practitioners findit a useful way of explaining the structure andassumptions which underlie the EIS. The followingtopics are often included or referred to:-

• The approval process for which the EIS isprepared;

• The competent authority involved;

• Any correspondence, opinions or notice fromthe competent authority, Minister or otherauthority seeking an EIS;

• The full title of the application which the EISaccompanies, describing other documentationwhich may be relevant (e.g. drawings orplanning application reports);

• The relationships between the topics used inthe EIS and those stipulated by theRegulations (e.g. "In this report Fauna andFlora are combined as Ecology");

• The relevant category of development whichis referred to in the Regulations;

• Any scoping or pre-application consultationswhich may have taken place. This specifiesthe bodies consulted and the principalconcerns arising;

• The name and qualifications of the specialistswho prepared each section;

• Any technical difficulties or lack of datawhich were encountered (this item is arequirement of the Regulations).

3.2.2 ALTERNATIVES

The presentation and consideration of the variousalternatives investigated by the applicant is animportant requirement of the EIA process.

Thus an outline of the main alternatives examinedthroughout the design and consultation processes isdescribed. This serves to indicate the main reasonsfor choosing the development proposed, taking into

account the environmental effects. For the purposesof the Regulations, alternatives may be described atthree levels:-

• Alternative Locations

• Alternative Designs

• Alternative Processes

3.2.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

IntroductionThe description of the proposed development is oneof the two foundations upon which an EIA is made(the other is the description of the existingenvironment). A systematic approach is veryimportant to ensure that all relevant aspects of thedevelopment are accurately and fully described. Theobjective is to provide a description in sufficientdetail, which if taken together with the description ofthe existing environment, would allow anindependent reader to understand the significantimpacts likely to arise from the proposeddevelopment.

The description of the site, design, size or scale ofthe development, considers all relevant phases of theexistence of the project from its construction throughto its existence and operation (and in some cases toits restoration or decommissioning). It may alsoconsider the evaluation of alternative locations,designs and processes. It is generally desirable todescribe the proposed development in terms of thosetopics which will form the basis of the ImpactAssessment, such as the emissions of the project intosoils, water and air or the characteristics of theproject which could potentially affect the flora, faunaor landscape.

The level of detail required will vary considerablyaccording to the sensitivity of the existingenvironment and the potential of the project forsignificant effects. Also the focus of the EIS maychange following initial baseline surveys e.g.occurrence of archaeological features, protectedspecies, existence of buildings or designedlandscapes (e.g. 18th Century demesne) etc. It mustbe stressed that not all of the topics described in thefollowing section are likely to be of relevance to allprojects.

The following headings may serve as usefulreminders of the topics which can be addressed bydescriptions or illustrations as appropriate:-

173 GUIDELINES

• Alternatives Examined

• Characteristics of the Project

• The Existence of the Project

• Description of Other Developments

Each of the headings is described in the followingsections. (A detailed expansion of each topic isprovided in the Advice Notes on Current Practice,which accompany these Guidelines).

Alternatives ExaminedThe requirement to present an outline of alternativesexamined and the justification of the final proposedproject is discussed above in Section 3.2.2.

Characteristics of the ProjectThe means of describing the physical characteristicsof a development are summarized here. These topicsare frequently cross-referenced to drawings andillustrations:

• the size of the proposed development;

• the cumulation with other proposeddevelopments;

• the use of natural resources;

• the production of waste;

• pollution and nuisances;

• a description of the Risk of Accidents –having regard to substances or technologiesused.

The Existence of the ProjectLarge projects, which require Environmental ImpactAssessment, are described in a way, which takesaccount of their full "life-cycle". They have thepotential to generate different effects at differenttimes and at different places both at and beyond thedevelopment site.

The description should not overlook the otherdevelopments (often off-site) which occur as a directresult of the main project, such as a power line, asubstation, road junction upgrade. These often resultin significant impacts.

Description of ConstructionLarger developments can take a number of years tocomplete. During this period there may be

significant impacts, which are often of equal concernto that of the final project. The description caninclude, but not be limited to:-

• the Land-Use Requirement

• Proposed Works

• Significant Effects

• Environmental Protection Measures

Description of CommissioningThis section is included if the proposed developmentwill not be substantially operational in the periodimmediately following construction. Thisdescription could include:-

• Phasing;

• Testing and commissioning;

• Occupation/use;

• Establishment of mitigation measures(monitoring, planting etc.).

The Operation of the ProjectThis is one of the most important sections of an EIS.While comprehensive, accurate descriptions are vitalto ensure credibility, it must be stressed that not allof these topics will be relevant to many smallerprojects.

• Description of the Principal Processes orActivities;

• The Scope of the Project;

• The Operations described in general terms;

• Processes;

• Occasional Activities;

• Occupants;

• Description of Materials Used;

• Description of Natural Resources Used;

• Description of Effects, Residues andEmissions;

• Description of Waste Management;


• Description of SecondaryProcesses/Activities.

Changes to the ProjectVery few projects remain unaltered throughout theirexistence. Success may bring growth; technology ormarket forces may cause processes or activities toalter and all developments - like living entities - willsome day cease to function. The lifecycles of sometypes of projects are finite and predictable. Suchprojects often consider their closure anddecommissioning in detail from the outset, while formost developments a general indication of the natureof possible future changes may suffice. Descriptionsmay include:

• Description of Proposed Growth;

• Description of Decommissioning;

• Description of Other Changes.

Description of Other DevelopmentsMany project impacts can arise from aspects of thedevelopment other than from the main project. Thesecan loosely be grouped under two headings:- Off-siteand Secondary Developments. Such impacts canoften be as significant as those of the main projectbut are, occasionally, overlooked. The following areindicative of issues which may be examined:-

Off-Site DevelopmentsTransportationThe provision of new access facilities (e.g. links to motorways) or the upgrading of existing facilities (e.g. road widths and junctions) carried out by other parties can give rise to significant environmental effects.

EnergyThe provision of new power-lines or pipelines with associated sub stations or pumping stations can give rise (for instance) to impacts on landscape or ecological or archaeological heritage at a considerable distance from the project.

Secondary DevelopmentsThese include developments that arise solely as aconsequence of the existence of the principal project,usually not carried out by the developer of theprincipal project. Examples include:-

• Commercial Developments at new major roadjunctions;

• Industrial and warehousing developmentsnear new inter-modal transportation nodes;

• Recreational land-uses near new access inundeveloped areas;

• Retail development near new residentialareas.

3.2.4 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

IntroductionAn accurate description of the existing environmentis necessary to predict the likely significant impactsof a new development. This information alsoprovides a valuable reference (baseline) which canbe used for environmental monitoring of the impactsof the project, once it is in operation. It is importantthat the methodology used in undertaking baselineinvestigations is documented so that the results oflater monitoring can be referenced.

193 GUIDELINES

Published Data and Site Surveys

Data on the existing environment is a fundamental

resource for EIA. Descriptions should, in the first

instance, rely upon published reference to ensure

objectivity. Note that the absence of a designation

or known feature (e.g. ecological or

archaeological) does not mean that no such feature

exists within the site. A detailed evaluation of the

existing environment, by an independent

specialist, is likely to be necessary for all topics

that are likely to be significantly affected.

The environment is an extremely complexcombination of natural and human factors, many ofwhich are constantly changing. To ensure thatcomprehensive and accurate descriptions areprovided in a manner which is consistent from oneEIS to another, the Regulations specify the topicswhich should be used. These topics break theenvironment down into its constituent elements sothat it can be systematically described. The topics areas follows:-

This section provides general guidance on the scope,methodology and issues which an adequatedescription includes. (See the Advice Notes onCurrent Practice which accompany these Guidelinesfor more detail on description of each topic in theexisting environment.).

General MethodologyTo facilitate evaluation of the EIS, references torecognised descriptive standards are included whereappropriate.

The description of any aspect of the environmentshould provide sufficient data to facilitate theidentification and evaluation of the likely significanteffects on that topic. Systematic, accurate andcomprehensive descriptions include:

• Context

• Character

• Significance

• Sensitivity

ContextDescribe the location, extent or magnitude of theenvironmental factor, e.g.:-

• Where is the monument?

• Are the air/water quality conditionsrepresentative?

• What proportion of the habitat is managed?

CharacterIndicate the distinguishing aspects of theenvironment under consideration, e.g.:-

• Is it unpolluted air/water?

• What types of habitats are present?

• What age are the buildings?

SignificanceWhat quality, value or designation is assigned to thisaspect of the existing environment, e.g.:-

• Is it protected by legislation or designation?16

• Is it rare/scarce/common/abundant?

• Is it renewable/unique?

• Is it scenic/ordinary/derelict?

SensitivitiesWhat changes could significantly alter the characterof this aspect of the environment, e.g.:-

• Would any increase in nutrients causeeutrophication?

• Would disturbance cause the nesting birds toleave?

• Would any manmade structures detract fromthe wilderness character?

Sufficiency of DataHow can a Competent Authority or Developer beassured that the EIS contains sufficient data? Thefollowing criteria can provide useful guidelines:-

• Is the information necessary for identificationof the main effects available?

• Is the information necessary for assessmentof the main effects available?

• Is the information focused on effects whichare likely and significant?

The certainty or confidence which the informationprovides is a good basis for evaluating the quality ofdata. In practice unsatisfactory information is morelikely to result from omissions than from inaccuracy.

All information is ultimately used to make decisionsabout whether to grant or withhold consent to


• Human Beings

• Fauna and Flora

• Soil

• Water

• Air

• Climatic Factors

• The Landscape

• Material Assets, including the Architectural

and Archaeological Heritage, and the

Cultural Heritage

• The Inter-Relationship between the Above

Factors

16 See boxed text in Section 3.2.4.

develop. "Sufficiency" may therefore be regarded asenough information upon which to base a decision.

Where it is the case that incomplete information isprovided, it must be clear that this information is notmaliciously withheld and that all parties are awareof the incompleteness. The resultant decision willusually be qualified or conditional. The followingexample will illustrate how incomplete informationcan be included.

Scope of TopicsThe ten topics which are stipulated by theregulations – namely, Human Beings, Flora, Faunaetc. - are a necessary simplification of theenvironment. The full complexity of the environmentmay be described by reference to these topics. It isadvisable to state in the preamble how specific issues(e.g. Insects) are related to a topic laid down in theRegulations (e.g. Fauna). Certain topics will havemore significance for some projects than for otherse.g. there will be more comprehensive detail thanusual on geology for projects such as mining andquarrying.

The following is an indication of the range ofenvironmental topics which can be organised withinthe headings provided by the Regulations.

Human BeingsEconomic ActivitySocial PatternsLand-useEmploymentHealth & SafetySettlement Patterns

213 GUIDELINES

LANDSCAPES OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENTGeneral ContextThe 32.5ha site is located low on the northern slopes of the Suir River Valley in an area where the largeirregular fields of the uplands give way to small and medium sized rectangular fields of the valley. Theseare enclosed by mature hedgerows which contain many tall ash, oak and sycamore. Dairy farming is thedominant land use which determines the character of the area, though a number of homes –unrelated tofarming- have been built in the area in recent years, taking advantage of the panoramic views across thevalley and the proximity of urban amenities of nearby Clonmel. The roads in the area are popular forwalks on summer evenings and at weekends throughout the year.

When seen from the N24 (National Primary Route) the general area forms part of the foreground of theviews towards Slievenamon. This road is designated as a scenic route on many tourist maps and the SouthTipperary County Council Development Plan designates a number of views from the road for protection.The landscape of the general area plays an important role in literature and poetry, which is discussed ingreater detail in Section 10, Cultural Heritage.

The siteThe three fields and the farm buildings which comprise the site are typical of the area. The continuousline of mature ash and oak along the southern boundary limits views out of, or into, the site from thevalley while the tall (5.5m high on average) vigorous hedgerows elsewhere provide significant visualenclosure. The interior of the site is visible from the upper slopes of Slievenamon (above 300m).

The lime-lined drive together with the stone gate posts and the laurel enclosed area in front of the houseare locally distinctive man-made landscape elements. The steep slope towards the stream-side vegetationare important natural and visual amenities of the property.

Figure 4 Sample Description of Landscape in the Existing Environment

The site was examined and was deemed to be

grassland of a type which is very common

throughout the Midlands. It should be noted that

the examination was carried out in December

when the full range of potential flora was not

evident. A further study will be made, of the damp

areas in particular, to determine whether any

significant species are present during May-July.

The detailed design of the carpark may need to be

adjusted if anything of significance is encountered.

Figure 5 Example of an ecological report whichis qualified due to the necessity of beingcarried out at an unsuitable season of the year.

FaunaHabitatsBreeding/Feeding/Roosting AreasRoutesMammals/Birds/Fish/Insects/ReptilesPopulation Stability/ManagementCritical ResourcesProtection Status

FloraCommunitiesTerrestrial/Aquatic/MarineSeasonalitySuccessionExisting ManagementHabitat RequirementsProtection Status

SoilsMineral SoilsPeats/FensEstuarine SedimentsAgricultural CapabilityEngineering CharacteristicsGeology (including surficial bedrock deposits,faulting, weathering and chemical characteristics)Aquifers

WaterGround/Surface/Estuarine/MarinePhysicalChemicalBioticBeneficial Uses

AirAir Quality

- Pollutants- Suspended Particles

OdourNoiseVibrationRadiation

Climatic FactorsCFC'sAcid RainThermal PollutionClimate Change (macro and micro)Pollution Transport

LandscapeLandscape CharacterLandscape ContextViews & ProspectsHistorical Landscapes

Manmade Landscapes

Material Assets (including Architectural andArchaeological Heritage and Cultural Heritage)Archaeological HeritageFolklore/Tradition/HistoryArchitecture/SettlementsMonuments/FeaturesDesigned landscapeNatural Resources of Economic Value17

• Building & Structures

• Infrastructures

The Inter-Relationship between the Above Factors

The Changing EnvironmentWhen describing many aspects of the existingenvironment it is very important to be aware of theirdynamic nature. Few aspects of nature remainunchanged for long. Communities grow, age ormove, habitats have short and long term cyclicalchanges, monuments age, soils develop, even theclimate has cycles of change.

Where applicable, the description of the environmentcan draw attention to any trends or other evidence ofchange which may be evident in the existingenvironment. Such information can significantlyalter the perception of monitoring and cumulativeimpacts.

Significant EnvironmentsA number of types of geographic areas are generallyregarded as being particularly sensitive and/orsignificant. Many of these are officially designated,some may not be. The description of the existingenvironment may need to draw attention to thesignificance or sensitivity of the overall environment- even if no single factor is individually significant.Examples of such significant environments include:-

• Wetlands

• Coastal Zones

• Mountain and Forest areas

• Nature Reserves and Parks


17 Resources that are valued and that are intrinsic to specific places are called ‘material assets’. They may be of eitherhuman or natural origin and the value may arise for either economic or cultural reasons. Examples of natural resources ofeconomic value include assimilative capacity of air and water, non-renewable resources (e.g. minerals, soils, quarries andmines), renewable resources (hydraulic head, wind exposure).

• Areas classified or protected underlegislation,18 including special protection areadesignated pursuant to Directives79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC

• Areas in which environmental qualitystandards set by legislation have already beenexceeded (i.e. areas where the capacity of theenvironment to facilitate more developmenthas been exceeded.)

• Densely populated areas

• Landscapes of historical, cultural, orarchaeological significance

3.2.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE LIKELY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

IntroductionIt is a statutory requirement of EIA that the applicantpresents an assessment of the likely impacts of theproposed development.

This section presents a number of challenges,namely to ensure that the EIS concentrates on:-

• Likely effects;

• Significant effects;

• Description of impacts that are accurate andcredible.

Prediction of impacts is a more accurate descriptionof this section since the impacts, by definition, havenot yet occurred.

The statutory criteria for the presentation of thecharacteristics of potential impacts sets out thatpotential significant effects of the proposeddevelopment will be described with regard to:

• the extent of the impact (geographical areaand size of the affected population);

• the magnitude and complexity of the impact;

• the probability of the impact;

• the duration, frequency and reversibility ofthe impact.

• the transfrontier nature of the impact (ifapplicable);

The Likelihood of ImpactsIn theory, a new development can cause an infinitenumber of impacts which are possible while inpractice a very limited number of impacts areprobable.

Only probable or "likely" impacts are addressed.Probable impacts can be described as those whichare planned to take place (e.g. the projectedemissions, the proposed earthmoving etc.) and thosewhich can be reasonably foreseen to be inevitableconsequences of the normal construction andoperation19 of the development.

Provision for the prevention and control of abnormaloperations (accidents) must be regarded asreasonable and prudent. The extent to which thesecircumstances (and their impacts) are examined, isguided by an assessment of the likelihood of theiroccurrence (risk).

This decision can be supported by judgment basedon documented experience elsewhere or by asystematic risk assessment. Such assessments areusually employed only where the "worst case"impacts pose significant threats to the environmentand/or human health. It should be noted that suchrisk assessments should only be undertaken wherethere is reasonable cause for it as they can be verytime consuming, complex and expensive.

The Predicted ImpactThe description of the impacts which are expected tooccur should be as accurate and complete aspossible. The method employed should be explainedand justified with reference to the project andenvironment under consideration. Such methodsshould be judicious, accurate, complete andreplicable. They should be carried out in accordancewith established practice whenever this is applicable.

Potential ImpactIn some circumstance, it may be necessary todescribe the full extent of the proposeddevelopment’s effects and emissions before theproposed mitigation measures become fullyeffective. Examples include the temporarydisplacement of wildlife or visual impacts beforelandscape establishment.

Residual ImpactThe final or intended impact is that which occursafter the proposed mitigation measures have takeneffect as planned. Examples include regeneration ofecological habitats, commissioning of environmental

233 GUIDELINES

18 For example, sites and areas protected under the National Monuments Acts and the Planning and Development Act.

19 Operation may be taken to mean all stages of the lifecycle of a project from commissioning to closure.

management systems, establishment of treescreening.

The "Do Nothing" ImpactAll components of the environment are constantlychanging due to a combination of natural and humanprocesses.

When predicting likely impacts it is important toremember that there are two baselines available forcomparison: the existing environment and theenvironment as it would be in the future if nomanagement or development of any kind were totake place (the "do nothing" impact).

The "do nothing" scenario can be useful whenassessing impacts caused by developments whichthemselves are designed to alleviate environmentalor infrastructural problems - waste treatmentfacilities, flood relief projects, road building etc.

Objective ConcernsTopics are included if a development could causesignificant impacts on an aspect of the environmentwhich has been formally or systematicallydesignated as being of importance. They are alsoincluded if the potential exists for the development tosignificantly alter the existing character of someaspect of the environment.

Four objective criteria can be used to determinewhether an impact is of significance:-

• Magnitude & Intensity - Any developmentwhich can cause effects over a wide area, to alarge number of receptors, or effects whichare of an intensity which is significantly inexcess of those normally experienced.

• Integrity - The degree to which the characteror attributes of the baseline environmentaltopic is continued, enhanced or reduced.

• Duration - Any development which can causeimpacts for a long period of time (more thanone generation) or which will causepermanent changes to any aspect of theenvironment.

• Probability- Where the magnitude, intensity,duration or consequences of any changecannot be anticipated with a reasonable levelof certainty.

Subjective ConcernsA topic can acquire significance where society as awhole, a community or a significant number ofindividuals are concerned. This usually arises whensome aspect of a development may adversely affectthem or something which they value.

The Description of ImpactsThe description of impacts is usually subjected tocloser scrutiny than any other part of the EIS Clarityof method, language and meaning are vital toaccurately explain the full range of impacts.Adherence to a systematic method of impactdescription can be of considerable assistance in thismatter. The following notes offer guidance on theissues that descriptions of impacts address.

Language and TermsImpacts are described as clearly and as directly aspossible.

• The phrase "...impact will occur" is alwayspreferable to may, could, or might unlessthere is uncertainty about the impact;


e.g. "If this by-pass is not built then the trend of

increasing road fatalities at that junction will

continue". An example of a "do-nothing scenario".

The "Worst Case" ImpactsWhere the failure of the project, or its mitigationmeasures, could lead directly to profound,irreversible or life-threatening consequences thenthis scenario is described (examples include failureof a water impoundment structure, destruction of aunique habitat, obliteration of an historical site,contamination of a significant aquifer). It isimportant that the likelihood of such a scenariooccurring is stated and explained.

Positive ImpactsWhile the principle objective of the EIS is to identifyand mitigate significant adverse effects, it is alsoappropriate to describe the main positiveenvironmental effects of the project.

The Significance of ImpactsThe significance of an impact is the second criterionwhich is used to determine the scope of an EIS.Significance is usually understood to mean eitherthe importance of the environment that is affected(its sensitivity to change) or the importance of theoutcome of the impact (the consequences of thechange). Significance is determined by acombination of (objective) scientific and subjective(social) concerns:

253 GUIDELINES

• Avoid euphemisms (e.g. the description of theclearfelling of a mature wood as "a woodlandmanagement programme");

• Use terms consistently throughout the EIS,ideally referring to a glossary of terms (SeeSection 4).

The description, clearly and consistently identifiesfour key aspects of any impact, namely its character,magnitude, duration and consequence.

Character of Impacts

• Identify the aspect of the environmentaffected;

• Describe whether the impact is positive,neutral or negative;

• Highlight significant impacts (positive andnegative).

• Indicate whether the impact will betemporary, short, medium or long-term;

• Highlight permanent impacts.

Magnitude• Quantify the amount or intensity by which the

character/quality of any aspect of theenvironment will change (i.e. how muchpollution);

• Indicate the spatial extent of the impact (willsome, much or all of the areas be affected);

• Describe the degree of change; (i.e.imperceptible, slight, noticeable orsignificant);

• Highlight profound (i.e. complete) changes ofcharacter.

Duration• State whether the impact will be continuous,

intermittent or occasional;

• Indicate whether the impact will betemporary, short, medium or long-term;

• Highlight permanent impacts.

IMPACTS2.3 ha of freshwater marsh (marked ‘A’ on the site plan) will be filled by the new access causeway. Thiswill cause the permanent loss of almost 35% of the site’s wetland habitat, which in turn is among thebiggest wetland areas in the country. Though uncommon in Leinster, these habitats are abundantelsewhere in Ireland. Therefore the impact may be characterised as a permanent, regionally significant,impact.

The consequence of this impact will be to reduce the attractiveness of the marsh as a nesting site for thegrebes mentioned earlier (see Section 2.4). The deterioration of the qualities of this habitat will arise onaccount of two effects, the reduction in the extent of open water and the significantly greater likelihood ofdisturbance to nesting birds caused by the new path at the water’s edge.

MitigationThe affected area of freshwater marsh has been kept to a minimum by the consideration of a wide rangeof site layout options at the preliminary design stage. The residual impacts of the selected option will bemitigated by the following measures:

- All remaining freshwater marsh areas (see ‘B’ on site plan) will be sterilised from furtherdevelopment and will be made accessible for ecological study by interested persons on applicationto the Company.

- A non-return tidal valve will be installed and maintained by the Company at Loughery’s Bridge, toextend the area of freshwater marsh.

- The breeding population of grebes will be monitored. If the number of successful breeding pairsfalls over three successive years then the new path will be closed, for the duration of the breedingseason, between points ‘X’ and ‘Y’ as indicated on the site plan. The path will not be reopeneduntil an alternative, ecologically sustainable, pattern of access can be devised to the satisfaction ofthe planning authority.

Figure 6 Sample Impact Description

Consequences• Identify the receptors which will be affected,

indicating their sensitivity and significance;

• Indicate whether the impact can be avoidedmitigated or remedied;

• State whether compensation20 is available,possible or acceptable;

• Highlight irreversible impacts;

• Highlight when the consequence cannot bedetermined.

Indirect ImpactsImpacts which are caused by the interaction ofeffects, or by associated or off-site developments, areclassed as indirect impacts. Cumulative andsynergistic impacts are often indirect. Prediction ofsuch impacts can be difficult until the full extent ofdirect impacts has been established, together withtheir mitigation measures. These in turn can establishsecondary effects which are checked against thesensitivities of the existing environment describedearlier. Note in particular the capacity for mitigationmeasures to cause indirect impacts e.g. the visualimpacts of an acoustic screen wall or the sludgewaste disposal necessitated by water treatment. Theimportance of considering these types of impacts asan integral part of the EIA process is recognised therecently published paper by the EuropeanCommission21.

3.2.6 DESCRIPTION OF MITIGATION MEASURES

IntroductionThe central purpose of Environmental ImpactAssessment is to identify potentially significantadverse impacts at the pre-consent stage and topropose measures to mitigate or ameliorate suchimpacts. This section describes the range of methodswhich are available for mitigation. There are threeestablished strategies for impact mitigation -avoidance, reduction and remedy. The efficacy ofeach is directly dependent on the stage in the designprocess at which environmental considerations aretaken into account (i.e. impact avoidance can only beconsidered at the earliest stage, while remedy may bethe only option available to fully designed projects).

Mitigation by AvoidanceAvoidance is generally the fastest, cheapest and mosteffective form of impact mitigation. Environmental

effects and consideration of alternatives must betaken into account at the earliest stage in the siteselection and project design processes, e.g.realignment of transport corridor to avoid residentialproperty, avoid habitat destruction or to reduceagriculture severance etc.

Mitigation by ReductionThis is a very common strategy for dealing witheffects which cannot be avoided. It concentrates onthe emissions and effects and seeks to limit theexposure of the receptor. It is generally regarded asthe "end of pipe" approach because it does not seekto affect the source of the problems (as do avoidancestrategies above). As such this is regarded as a lesssustainable, though still effective, approach.

Reducing the EffectThis strategy seeks to intercept emissions, effectsand wastes before they enter the environment. Itmonitors and controls them so that acceptablestandards are not exceeded. Examples includewastewater treatment, filtration of air emissions andnoise attenuation measures.

Reducing Exposure to the ImpactThis strategy is used for impacts which occur over anextensive and undefined area. Such impacts mayinclude noise, visual impacts or exposure to hazard.The mitigation is effected by installing barriersbetween the location(s) of likely receptors andsource of the impact (e.g. sound barriers, tree screensor security fences).

Mitigation by RemedyThis is a strategy used for dealing with residualimpacts which cannot be prevented from entering theenvironment and causing adverse effects.

The Principle of RemedyRemedy serves to improve adverse conditions whichexist by carrying out further works which seek torestore the environment to an approximation of itsprevious condition or a new equilibrium.

Examples of Remedy• Reinstating buildings, walls or features;

• archaeological excavation of deposits orfeatures;

• recordings of buildings of architecturalinterest where they must be removed;

• Restoring water or soil quality;


20 In this context compensation refers to environmental, not fiscal measures.

21 EC XI 1999, Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impact as well as Impact Interactions.

• Increased planting of specific trees/shrubs tooffset unavoidable loss of vegetation;

• Installing double-glazing, deeper wells orhigher walls;

• Introduction of tunnels to accommodatebadger movements.

Impacts which cannot be MitigatedIt will not always be possible or practical to mitigateall impacts (e.g. felling mature trees). Where this isthe case then the residual impacts are clearlydescribed in accordance with the system of impactdescription as set out previously.

3.2.7 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

IntroductionThe Regulations include this requirement becauseone of the fundamental objectives of the EIA processis to ensure that the public are made aware of theenvironmental implications of any decisions aboutwhether to allow new developments to take place.

It is often useful to prepare a non-technical summaryas a separate and self-contained document, whichcan be widely distributed, to the public who arelikely to be affected by the development. It is helpfulif it contains the name and address of the CompetentAuthority to whom any comment should be sent,

indicating a latest date for such observations.

Structure and ContentsThe non-technical summary is laid out in a similar,but condensed, format to the main EIS, i.e.describing the project, existing environment, impactsand mitigation measures. It often includes a sitelocation and site layout plan (showing context)together with any easily interpreted graphicalrepresentation of the proposed development, such asa perspective drawing.

Language and TermsThe non-technical summary is short and easilyfollowed, but it does not omit or understate anyimpacts which may be controversial. Significantimpacts must be included.

Technical terms, abbreviation, references or jargonare omitted.

271 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Figure 7 Sample Impact Evaluation Checklist

DESCRIPTION

Human Beings

Flora

FaunaSoil

WaterAirClimateLandscape I

Landscape II

Cultural Heritage

Material Assets

ImpactNo.1

2

-3

---4

5

6

-

Character

Loss ofpublic access

Loss ofvegetation

-Erosion of

peat

---

Loss ofsolitude

Visibility ofmast & fence

Disturbanceof summit

cairn-

Magnitude

2 km ofKerry Way

3 ha(5% of site)

-Along 2kmof boundary

---

See Map A

See Map A

30% ofthe site

-

Duration

3 months ofeach summer

Permanent

-Intermittent

summer only

---

Long term

Long term

Permanent

-

Consequences

Diversion ofhill walkers

None Known

-Loss of

vegetation/Visual impact

---

Loss of hillwalker'samenity

Contrast withupland

characterLoss of data

-

Significance

Slight

Slight

-Slight

---

Significant

Significant

Significant

-

Certainty

High

High

-Low

----

High

Low

-

DESCRIPTION EVALUATION


294 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Alternatives (see sections 2.1.1, 2.3.1, 2.4.3, 3.2.2)A description of alternatives - as defined by theRegulations - alternative locations, alternativedesigns and alternative processes.

AmeliorationMeasures to diminish a negative impact.

AquiferA body of permeable rock that is capable of storingsignificant quantities of water.

ArchaeologyThe study of past societies of any period through thematerial remains left by those societies and theevidence of their environment. The material things(objects, monuments, sites, features, deposits) whicharchaeology uses to study past societies are referredto as ‘archaeological heritage’.

Baseline SurveyA description of the existing environment againstwhich future changes can be measured.

BAT – Best Available TechniquesBest Available Techniques shall mean the mosteffective and advanced stage in the development ofactivities and their methods of operation whichindicate the practical suitability of particulartechniques for providing in principle the basis foremission limit values designed to prevent and, wherethat is not practicable, generally to reduce emissionsand the impact on the environment as a whole:

- ‘techniques’ shall include both the technologyused and the way in which the installation isdesigned, built, maintained, operated anddecommissioned;

- ‘available’ techniques shall mean thosedeveloped on a scale which allowsimplementation in the relevant industrialsector, under economically and technicallyviable conditions, taking into considerationthe costs and advantages, whether or not thetechniques are used or produced inside theMember State in question, as long as they arereasonably accessible to the operator;

- ‘best’ shall mean most effective in achievinga high general level of protection of theenvironment as a whole.

BAT may be determined in each EU member statewith reference to the Bref documents.

BATNEEC - Best Available Technology NotEntailing Excessive CostsUse of BATNEEC means that a greater degree ofcontrol over emissions to land, air and water may beexercised, utilising the best currently availabletechnologies. In the identification of BATNEECemphasis is placed in pollution preventiontechniques including cleaner technologies and wasteminimisation. This was required by the EPA as partof Integrated Pollution Control Licence under theEPA ACT 1992. BATNEEC is superseded by BAT.

BioticProcesses which relate to living organisms.

BPEO - Best Practicable Environmental OptionTakes accounts of the total pollution from a process(including the risk of transfer of pollutants from onemedium to another) and the technical possibilitiesfor dealing with it.

Bref (See Article 16 of IPPC Directive 96/61/EC)These are reference documents developed under theaegis of the European Commission with input fromindustry, (MS) Regulators and NGO’s, at theEuropean IPPC Bureau in Seville. These documentsare intended to advance the development of BATthroughout the EU (see http://www.eippcb.jrc.es).

Competent Authority (see sections 2.3.4, 3.1.2)Any authority charged with examining anEnvironmental Impact Statement with a view toissuing a consent to develop.

Commissioning (see section 3.2.3)The rendering fully operational of a project orprocess.

Decommissioning (see section 3.2.3)The final closing down, and putting into a state ofsafety of a development, project or process when ithas come to the end of its useful life.

"Do nothing" Scenario (see section 3.2.5)The situation or environment which would exist if nointervention or development were carried out22 .

EcologyThe study of the relationships between living

4. GLOSSARY OF TERMS

22 It is worth noting here that this is not necessarily an option under the Local Government (Planning and Development)Act 1999, where the owner or occupier of a protected structure has a duty to protect it from endangerment and it can bean offence to allow a structure to deteriorate.

organisms and between organisms and theirenvironment (especially animal and plantcommunities), their energy flows and theirinteractions with their surroundings.

EffluentAny liquid discharged from a source into theenvironment.

Environmental Impact Assessment – EIA (seesections Legislation, 1.1)The process of examining the environmental effectsof development - from consideration ofenvironmental aspects at design stage through topreparation of an Environmental Impact Statement,evaluation of the EIS by a competent authority andthe subsequent decision as to whether thedevelopment should be permitted to proceed, alsoencompassing public response to that decision.

Environmental Impact Statement – EIS (seesections Introduction, 1.1, 1.7, 1.8)A statement of the effects, if any, which the proposeddevelopment, if carried out, would have on theenvironment.

Emission (see sections 3.2.3, 3.2.6)a) an emission into the atmosphere of a pollutant

within the meaning of the Air Pollution Act1987.

b) a discharge of polluting matter, sewageeffluent or trade effluent within the meaningof the Local Government (Water Pollution)Act 1977 to waters or sewers within themeaning of that Act.

c) disposal of waste, ord) noise.

EPA (see section EPA)The Environmental Protection Agency.

Geology (see section 3.2.4)The science of the earth, including the composition,structure and origin of its rocks.

Habitat (see section 3.2.4, 3.2.6)The area in which an organism or group oforganisms live.

HydrologyThe science concerned with the occurrence andcirculation of water in all its phases and modes, andthe relationship of these to man.

Impact (see sections 1.6, 2.2.1, 3.2.5, 3.2.6)The degree of change in an environment resulting

from a development.

Impact Anticipation (see section 3.1.4)Using knowledge of both the development and thereceiving environment to predict the likely effectsand consequences.

Impact Avoidance (see sections 2.2.1, 3.2.6)The modification of project decisions (about sitelocation or design for example) having regard topredictions about potentially adverse environmentaleffects.

Infrastructure (see section 3.2.4)The basic structure, framework or system whichsupports the operation of a development project forexample, installations such as roads and sewerswhich are necessary to support developmentprojects.

Integrated Pollution Control - IPCThis was a National licensing/enforcement regimefor specified activities. It aimed at preventing orresolving pollution problems rather than transferringthem from one medium to another. All majoremissions to land, air and water were consideredsimultaneously and not in isolation in order tominimise pollution of the environment as a whole.IPC is superseded by IPPC.

Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control –IPPC (see Directive 96/61/EC)This is an EU-wide licensing/enforcement regimefor specified activities. It aims to prevent, reduce,and as far as possible eliminate pollution by givingpriority to intervention at source and ensuringprudent management of natural resources, incompliance with the ‘polluter pays’ principle and theprinciple of pollution prevention. Emphasis is placedon energy efficiency and residuals management.

Land-useThe activities which take place within a given area ofspace.

Life Cycle (see section 3.2.3)Refers to the stages in the life of a process ordevelopment including construction, operation,existence, extraction, manufacture, storage,transport, handling, use, disposal anddecommissioning.

"Likely Effects / Impacts" (see sections 2.2.1,3.2.5)The effects that are proposed to take place - based onan understanding of the interaction of the proposed


314 GLOSSARY OF TERMS

development and the receiving environment".

Methodology (see section 3.2.4)The specific approach or techniques used to analyseimpacts or describe environments.

Mitigation (see sections 2.3.1, 3.2.6)Measures designed to avoid, reduce, remedy orcompensate for impacts.

Mitigation by Remedy (see section 3.2.6)Impact AvoidanceWhen no change is caused.

Impact ReductionWhere the significance of adverse impacts islessened.

Impact RemedyWhen an adverse effect is replaced with a moreacceptable effect.

Mitigation Measures (see sections 3.2.5, 3.2.6)The means by which decisions about a proposeddevelopment are modified to avoid, reduce orremedy the adverse environmental effects that areidentified.

Monitoring (see sections 3.1.4, 3.2.4)The repetitive and continued observation,measurement and evaluation of environmental datato follow changes over a period of time, to assess theefficiency of control measures.

NGO (see sections 1.4, 2.3.6)An acronym used to describe Non GovernmentalOrganisations.

PalaeontologyThe branch of science that deals with extinct andfossil animals and plants.

ParticulatesFine solids or liquid droplets suspended in the air.

Pollution (see sections 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5)Any release to the environment which has asubsequent adverse effect on the environment orman.

Precautionary PrincipleThe theory that the absence of complete informationshould not preclude precautionary action to mitigatethe risk of significant harm to the environment.

Processes (see sections 1.4, 2.3.6)The activities which take place within adevelopment.

Project PromoterA term sometimes used to describe persons ororganisations proposing to carry out a development.

Reasonably Foreseen (see section 3.2.5)A working assumption about the future that assumesthat a project will be developed as planned and usedwithin a receiving environment that will change inaccordance with currently evident trends. It willinclude a consideration of the likelihood andconsequences of abnormal occurrences - such asaccidents.

Receptor (see section 1.4)Any element in the environment which is subject toimpacts.

Risk Assessment (see section 3.2.5)An analytical study of the probabilities andmagnitude of harm to human health or theenvironment associated with a physical or chemicalagent, activity or occurrence.

Scoping (see sections 1.4, 2.4.5, 3.1.2)The process of identifying the significant issueswhich should be addressed by a particularEnvironmental Impact Assessment.

Screening (see sections 1.3, 2.4.4, 3.1.1)The process of assessing the requirement of a projectto be subject to Environmental Impact Assessmentbased on project type and scale and on thesignificance or environmental sensitivity of thereceiving environment.

Sensitivity (see sections 2.3.1, 2.4.7, 3.2.3, 3.2.4)The potential of a receptor to be significantlychanged.

Significance (see sections 2.4.7, 3.2.4, 3.2.5)The sensitivity of a receiving environment to changeor the consequence of change for the receivingenvironment.

Statutory EISA term sometimes used to describe an EIS preparedin accordance with the regulations.

Statutory Consultees (see section 1.1)Organisations and authorities stipulated byLegislation to be notified by a competent authority ifan application is made which might give that


organisation a cause for concern.

Sustainable DevelopmentDefined by the Brundtland Commission 1987"Development that meets the needs of the presentwithout comprising the ability of the futuregeneration to meet their own needs".

Threshold (see section legislation)The magnitude of a project which, if exceeded, willtrigger the requirement for an Environmental ImpactAssessment to be carried out.

Vector (see section 2.4.2)An organism (animal or fungus, for example) whichtransmits or acts as a carrier of parasites or disease.

Quality of ImpactsPositive ImpactA change which improves the quality of theenvironment (for example, by increasing speciesdiversity; or the improving reproductive capacity ofan ecosystem, or removing nuisances or improvingamenities).

Neutral ImpactA change which does not affect the quality of theenvironment.

Negative ImpactA change which reduces the quality of theenvironment (for example, lessening speciesdiversity or diminishing the reproductive capacity ofan ecosystem; or damaging health or property or bycausing nuisance).

Significance of ImpactsImperceptible ImpactAn impact capable of measurement but withoutnoticeable consequences.

Slight ImpactAn impact which causes noticeable changes in thecharacter of the environment without affecting itssensitivities.

Moderate ImpactAn impact that alters the character of theenvironment in a manner that is consistent withexisting and emerging trends.

Significant ImpactAn impact which, by its character, magnitude,duration or intensity alters a sensitive aspect of theenvironment.

Profound ImpactAn impact which obliterates sensitive characteristics.

Duration of ImpactsShort-term ImpactImpact lasting one to seven years.

Medium-term ImpactImpact lasting seven to fifteen years.

Long-term ImpactImpact lasting fifteen to sixty years.

Permanent ImpactImpact lasting over sixty years.

Temporary ImpactImpact lasting for one year or less.

Types of ImpactsCumulative ImpactThe addition of many small impacts to create onelarger, more significant, impact.

‘Do Nothing Impact’The environment as it would be in the future shouldno development of any kind be carried out.

Indeterminable ImpactWhen the full consequences of a change in theenvironment cannot be described.

Irreversible ImpactWhen the character, distinctiveness, diversity orreproductive capacity of an environment ispermanently lost.

Residual ImpactThe degree of environmental change that will occurafter the proposed mitigation measures have takeneffect.

Synergistic ImpactWhere the resultant impact is of greater significancethan the sum of its constituents.

`Worst case’ ImpactThe impacts arising from a development in the casewhere mitigation measures substantially fail.

335 GLOSSARY OF IMPACTS

5. GLOSSARY OF IMPACTS