PARTB

ENVIRONMENTALSTATEMENTREVIEWPACKAGE

CONTENTS

Page

I.

ADVICEFORREVIEWERS

31

1.

Introduction

31

1.1

Thereviewpackage

31

1.2

Purposeofthereview

31

1.3

Informationandexpertiseneededforreview

32

1.4

Strategyof thereview

32

1.5

Organisationofreviewtopics

33

2.

Reviewprocedure

35

2.1

Conductingareview

35

2.2

DecidingoncompliancewiththeRegulations

37

2.3

Outcomeofareview

40

II.

LISTOFREVIEWTOPICS

41

1.

Descriptionofthedevelopment,thelocalenvironmentandbaselineconditions

41

2.

Identificationandevaluationofkeyimpacts

44

3.

Alternativesandmitigationofimpacts

47

4.

Communicationofresults

49

III.

REVIEWSUMMARY

52

1.

Assessmentsymbols

52

2.

Collationsheet

53

30

I.

ADVICEFORREVIEWERS

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Thereviewpackage
This document comprises a complete package for the review of environmental

statementsandconsistsof:

I:

AdviceforReviewers(pages3140)

II:

ListofReviewTopics(pages4150)

III: ReviewSummary(pages5152).

It has been used successfully to locate strengths and weaknesses in a wide spectrum of
environmentalstatements(ESs)producedinthewakeofUKimplementationoftheECDirective
on environmental assessment. Although the review procedure may initially appear complex, the
underlyingstructureissimpleandeasytolearn.Withalittlepracticereviewersshouldbeableto
reviewESsquickly,accuratelyandreproducibly.Withsmallscaleamendmentsitmaybeadapted
foruseinothercountries.

Incertaincases(egwhereprojectsaretechnicallycomplexandcontroversial)thePackagemaybe
used with the assistance of consultants or,(duringthefirststageofatwostagereview)priorto
usingconsultantsformorespecialised,indepthreviewwork.

1.2

Purposeofthereview

This review is performed using a set of hierarchically arranged Review Topics with a view to
assessing the quality of environmental statements submitted in anticipation of, or in response to,
UK regulations mandating environmental assessment (EA) in accordance with EC Directive
85/3374.TheregulationsproducedundertheTownandCountryPlanningAct(TCPA)aretakenas

Reviewersinothercountriesshould,wherenecessary,amendthelistofReviewTopics
in Section II to take account of any differences from the EIA regulations in their
country.NotethatDOEregulationsare,inanycase,closelymodelledontheprovisions
ofECDirective85/337.

31

thestandardUKinterpretationoftheDirective5.AnEAcapableofproducingagoodqualityESis,
inthiscontext,onewhichconformstotheTCPARegulations(hereaftercalled`theRegulations')in
scope whilst conforming to current, international conceptions of best practice in procedure and
methods.

An ES will usually contain a largeamount of information about the form and consequences of a
development.Itisthepurposeofthisreviewto:

provide the reviewers with a framework within which to interpret this

information

enablereviewerstoassessthequalityandcompletenessoftheinformation
relativelyquickly

enablereviewerstomakeanoveralljudgementoftheacceptabilityofthe
ESasaplanningdocument.

1.3

Informationandexpertiseneededforreview

This review process is intended primarily to be applied by planners and other interested parties
who:

are familiar with the requirements of the regulations relating to

environmentalassessment

have at least a basic, nonspecialist knowledge and understanding of

impact assessment methodologies and current ideas on best practice in
EA.

1.4

Strategyofthereview

It is not intended that reviewers should attempt to refute the findings presented in an ES or to
supplant them with conclusions of their own. Reviewers should, rather, be alert to areas of
weakness, omission or even concealment in the Statement. These may most often occur when
5

Town and Country Planning (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations (SI

No1199).

32

certain tasks areomitted unsuitableor ad hocmethodsareusedbiasedorinaccuratesupporting

dataareintroduced,oftenwithoutreferencesortherationaleorjustificationforconclusionsisnot
given. The Review Topics areintended to direct the Reviewers' attentiontotheseareas. Inthis
way sources of potential error are located which can be the subject of further, if necessary
specialist,investigation.

1.5

Organisationofreviewtopics

AListofReviewTopicsisincludedaspartofthisReviewPackage.ItcontainsReviewTopics
arrangedhierarchicallyinthreelevels.Theseare:

Review Areas. These are the four major areas of EA activity (they are
preceded by one digit in the List of Review Topics, e.g. "4.
CommunicationofResults").

ReviewCategories.ThesearethecategoriesofEAactivitywhichmustbe
undertaken within each Review Area (they areprecededbytwodigitsin
theListofReviewTopics,e.g."4.2Presentation").

Review Subcategories. These comprise the detailed Review Sub

categories within each Review Category. (They are preceded by three
digitsintheListofReviewTopics,e.g."4.2.1Informationshouldbe....").

Theseformahierarchy(orpyramidalstructure)wherebyreviewers:

assess the quality of each Review Subcategory within a particular

category

use these assessments and any other impressions gained from the
Statement,whichtheyfeelarerelevant,toassesstheReviewCategory

33

usetheresultstoassesstheReviewAreasandtosummarisethequalityof
theStatementinabriefsynopsisofitsmainstrengthsandweaknesses.

AschematicdiagramofthishierarchyispresentedinFigure2.

AtthelowestlevelofthehierarchyaretheReviewSubcategories,representedbythreedigits.The
quality assessments of these are used to assess the next highest level, the Review Categories,
representedbytwodigits.ReviewCategoryassessmentsarethenusedtoevaluatethenexthigher
level,theReviewAreas,representedherebyonedigit.Inassessingthehigherlevels,reviewersare
expected to use personal judgements about the relative importance of the various subtopics and
additional knowledge gained from the Statement as well as their assessments of the level
immediatelybelow.

Figure2:AschematicrepresentationoftheReviewTopichierarchyinReviewArea4

AREA

4.

CATEGORIES
4.14.24.34.4

SUBCATEGORIES4.1.14.1.24.1.34.1.44.2.14.2.24.2.34.3.14.3.24.4.14.4.2

TheReviewTopicsare,sofarasispossible,arrangedsoastoreflecttheorderinwhichthetasks
shouldbeperformed.Thisisimportantbecausemanyofthelatertasksrequireinformationwhich
willonlybeavailableifearliertaskshavebeenadequatelyperformed.Comprehensivetreatmentof
mitigationmeasures,forexample,willonlybepossibleifallsignificantimpactshavebeencorrectly
identified. Reviewers should be alert to these interactions and should take them into account in
theirassessments.

34

It should be noted that, in order to promote objectivity in ES reviewing, it is recommended that

each ES should initially be separately reviewed by two different reviewers who should then
endeavourtoreconcileanydifferenceswhenfinalisingtheirjointreview.

35

2.

REVIEWPROCEDURE

2.1

Conductingareview

Select two reviewers for the ES review. In order to conduct a review, each should first
independentlyundertakethefollowingstepssequentially.

1.

ReadalloftheAdviceforReviewers carefully.

2.

Read through the List of Review Topics (Areas, Categories, Sub

categories)andfamiliariseyourselfwiththemandthedatarequired.

3.

ReadtheStatementquitequicklynotingthelayoutandthewhereaboutsof
essentialinformation6.

4.

Read the first Review Category (1.1) and its component Subcategories
(1.1.11.1.5). Remember that the Subcategories refer to actions which
must be undertaken in order that tasks described by the Category are
performedfullyandwell.Interprettheminthiscontext.

5.

Assess each of the Subcategories (1.1.11.1.5) referring closely to the

Statement.Beawarethattherequiredinformationwillnotallbelocated
inthesameplaceforanyonetopic.Itwillprobablybenecessarytomake
notes.Carefullyreadthelistofassessmentsymbols.(Thesearelistedin
Section III: Review Summary on page 51). The appropriate assessment
symbol is to be chosen based on the way the tasks relating to the Sub
categoryareperformedthroughouttheStatement.Beforedecidingonthe
symbolitmaybehelpfultoreferoncemoretothewordingoftheReview
SubCategoryandtorecallthestrategyofreviewexplainedabove.

If practicable, undertake a site visit to become morefamiliar with the location of the
proposeddevelopment.

36

6.

DecidewhichassessmentsymbolisappropriateforeachSubcategoryand
recorditontheCollationSheetprovidedinSectionIII(page51).Note
thatataskshouldbeassessedashavingbeensatisfactorilyhandledifthere
issufficientinformationprovidedintheStatementonthetopicconcerned
toallowadecisionmakertomakeaninformeddecisionwithouthavingto
seek further advice. It is the appropriateness and quality, and not the
volume, of information provided which is the relevant consideration. It
could be justifiable to supply morelimited informationforsmallprojects
having few and less complex impacts than for much largerprojectswith
multiplemajorimpacts.Wheredataonaparticulartopicisnotexplicitly
providedbutis,nevertheless,implicitinthetreatmentofothertopics,the
reviewer may decide that it should be assessed as adequate. Such
instancesshouldberecordedinthesynopsis(seebelow).

7.

Use the assessments of Subcategories 1.1.11.1.5, and any other

information gained from theStatementwhichyouconsideredrelevant,to
assesstheReviewCategory1.1.NotethattheassessmentoftheCategory
should not be derived by a simple averaging of the assessments of the
component Subcategories. Your evaluation of both the relative
importance of these subcategories and any information in the Statement
notcoveredbythem,shouldalsobetakenintoaccount.

8.

ProceedtothenextReviewCategory(1.2)andevaluateitinthesameway
asReviewCategory1.1.ContinueuntilallcategoriesintheReviewArea
havealsobeenassessedinthesamemanner.

9.

YourevaluationsoftheReviewCategoriescannowbeusedtoassessthe
ReviewAreainthesamewayinwhichtheythemselveswerederivedfrom
theReviewSubcategoryassessments(see7above).Thus,forexample,
theassessmentofReviewArea1istobebasedupontheassessmentsof
Categories1.11.5.

37

10.

WhenallReviewAreashavebeenassessedtheStatementasawholecan
be assigned an assessment symbol. This overall judgement should,
however, be supplemented with a brief synopsis of the Statement's
strengthsandweaknessesandaconsiderationofwhether,forexample,it
meetsminimumrequirements(seebelow).

11.

Then the two reviewers should meet to comparetheirreviewfindingsas

recordedontheirCollationSheets.Wheredifferencesintheirassessments
occur(atSubcategory,Category,etclevels),reviewersshouldjointlyre
examine them with a view to reconciling their findings on a common
CollationSheet.

2.2

DecidingoncompliancewiththeRegulations

TheminimuminformationwhichanESshouldcontain,inanyparticularcase,isspecifiedintheEC
Directive.This`specifiedinformation'isinterpretedintheRegulations,Schedule3(2)(ae).These
arereproducedinfullbelow.

(a)

A description of the development proposed, comprising information about the site

andthedesignandsizeorscaleofthedevelopment.

(b)

Thedatanecessarytoidentifyandassessthemaineffectswhichthatdevelopmentis
likelytohaveontheenvironment.

(c)

Adescriptionofthelikelysignificanteffects,directandindirect,ontheenvironment
ofthedevelopment,explainedbyreferencetoitspossibleimpacton:

humanbeings
flora
fauna
soil

38

water
air
climate
thelandscape
theinteractionbetweenanyoftheforegoing
materialassets
theculturalheritage

(d)

Wheresignificantadverseeffectsareidentifiedwithrespecttoanyoftheforegoing,a
description of the measures envisaged in order to avoid, reduce or remedy those
effects.

(e)

Asummaryinnontechnicallanguageoftheinformationspecifiedabove.

It is clearly an important consideration in deciding the suitability of the Statement as a planning

documentthattheseminimumdatashouldbeprovided.Transpositionoftheirexactrequirements
intoReviewTopics,however,isproblematic,particularlyasitcouldbearguedthattheexactnature
of the information requiredvariesfromcasetocase.Inthiscontextparagraph(b)isparticularly
difficulttointerpret.

However,ithasbeenassumedthatinthelargemajorityofcases"thedatanecessarytoidentifyand
assess"impactsinparagraph(b)aboveinadditiontothatrequiredbyotherparagraphswillbe:

sizeanddesignfeaturesofthedevelopment

quantityofrawmaterialsneeded,adescriptionoftheproductionprocesses
andthetransportationarrangementsformaterialsandproducts

thenumbersofworkersand/orvisitorsexpected

thequantitiesofwastesexpectedtobeproduced

adescriptionoftheenvironment

adescriptionofthedatausedtopredictimpactmagnitude.

otherdataneededtoidentifyandassessimpacts.

39

The Regulations' minimum requirements wouldthenbroadlycorrespondtothefollowingReview

Subcategories(seeSectionII:ListofReviewTopics):
(a)

1.1.2,1.2.1

(b)

1.1.4,1.1.5,1.2.1,1.2.2,1.2.4,1.3.2,1.4.1,1.4.2,1.5.1,1.5.32.4.1

(c)

2.1.1,2.1.2,2.5.1,2.5.2

(d)

3.2.1,3.3.1

(e)

4.4.1,4.4.2

If it is agreed by the two reviewers that all of these Subcategories are assessed, at least
`Satisfactory',ie(A,BorC)or`Notapplicable'(NA),theStatementinquestionislikelytocomply
with the minimum requirements. However, reviewers should exercise judgement and check, for
themselves,thecontentoftheparticularStatementbeingreviewedagainsttheactualRegulationsto
verifythis.

AnESmaynormallybeexpectedtocontaininformationadditionaltothisspecifiedminimum.The
standardofanESanticipatedbytheECDirectiveisspecifiedinArticle5(i)andAnnexIIIofthat
documentandtheadditionalinformationmentionedthere.ThisisparaphrasedintheRegulations
Schedule 3(3). The Regulations advise that this additionalinformation may alsobeincluded`by
way of explanation or amplification' so that the Statement contains environmental information
whichplanningauthoritiesconsider...

"sufficientfortheproperconsiderationoftheapplication".

TheStatementwouldthenbeinbroadcompliancewiththespiritoftheDirective.Theestimation
oftheextenttowhichthishasbeenachievedisoneoftheprincipalobjectsofthisreviewprocess,
and should thereforecoincidewiththefinaljudgementofthereview.Thus,broadcomplianceis
taken to mean that the Statement has met the minimum requirements of the Regulations as
interpreted above and furthermore that each Review Area has been assessed as, at least,
"satisfactory",i.e.A,BorCineachReviewArea.

40

2.3

Outcomeofareview

Having assessed the Review Areas, assigned anassessmentsymboltotheStatementasawhole,

andcheckedcompliancewithrelevantRegulations,itremainstosummarisethejointjudgementof
ESqualityinoneortwoparagraphs.Thissummaryshouldlistthemainstrengthsandweaknesses
of the Statement, especially those omissions which should be rectified before impacts can be
satisfactorily assessed or evaluated. It should also record whether the Statement complies with
minimum requirements and whether it complies morebroadly with both the Regulations and the
ECDirectiveasdefinedabove.

41

II.

LISTOFREVIEWTOPICS

Thisisalistofhierarchicallyarrangedtopicsforreviewingthequalityofenvironmentalstatements
submittedinresponsetoUKregulationsimplementingECDirective85/337.

Therearefourareasforreview.

(1)

Description of the development, the local environment and the baseline

conditions.

(2)

Identificationandevaluationofkeyimpacts.

(3)

Alternativesandmitigationofimpacts.

(4)

Communicationofresults.

Ineachoftheseareasthereareseveralcategoriesofactivitywhichmustbecompletediftheareais
tobedealtwithinasatisfactorymanner.Similarly,eachcategorycontainsseveralsubcategories.
Below is a list of these topics arranged in a hierarchy. ReviewAreasaredesignatedbyasingle
digit, e.g. 1. within these are Review Categories, designated by two digits, e.g. 1.1 and within
eachReviewCategoryareReviewSubcategories,designatedbythreedigits,e.g.1.1.1.

1.

DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDEVELOPMENT,THELOCALENVIRONMENTAND
THEBASELINECONDITIONS

1.1

Description of the development: The purpose(s) of the development should be

describedasshouldthephysicalcharacteristics,scaleanddesign.Quantitiesof
materials needed during construction and operation should be included and,
whereappropriate,adescriptionoftheproductionprocesses.

1.1.1

Thepurpose(s)andobjectivesofthedevelopmentshouldbeexplained.

42

1.1.2

Thedesignandsizeofthedevelopmentshouldbedescribed.Diagrams,
plansormapswillusuallybenecessaryforthispurpose.

1.1.3

Thereshouldbesomeindicationofthephysicalpresenceandappearance
ofthecompleteddevelopmentwithinthereceivingenvironment.

1.1.4

Whereappropriate,thenatureoftheproductionprocessesintendedtobe
employed in the completed development should be described and the
expectedrateofproduction.

1.1.5

The nature and quantities of raw materials needed during both the
constructionandoperationalphasesshouldbedescribed.

1.2

Site description: The on site land requirements of the developments should be

describedandthedurationofeachlanduse.

1.2.1

Thelandareatakenupbythedevelopmentsiteshouldbedefinedandits
locationclearlyshownonamap.

1.2.2

The uses to which this land will be put should be described and the
differentlanduseareasdemarcated.

1.2.3

The estimated duration of the construction phase, operational phase and,

whereappropriate,decommissioningphaseshouldbegiven.

1.2.4

The numbers of workers and/or visitors entering the development site

duringbothconstructionandoperationshouldbeestimated.Theiraccess
tothesiteandlikelymeansoftransportshouldbegiven.

43

1.2.5

Themeansoftransportingrawmaterialsandproductstoandfromthesite
andtheapproximatequantitiesinvolved,shouldbedescribed.

1.3

Wastes:Thetypesandquantitiesofwasteswhichmightbeproducedshouldbe
estimated,andtheproposeddisposalroutestotheenvironmentdescribed.

[NB:

Wastesincludeallresidualprocessmaterials,effluentsandemissions.Wasteenergy,
wasteheat,noiseetc,shouldalsobeconsidered.]

1.3.1

The types and quantities of waste matter, energy and other residual
materials, and the rate at which these will be produced, should be
estimated.

1.3.2

Thewaysinwhichitisproposedtohandleand/ortreatthesewastesand
residualsshouldbeindicated,togetherwiththeroutesbywhichtheywill
eventuallybedisposedoftotheenvironment.

1.3.3

The methods by which the quantities of residuals and wastes were

obtained should be indicated. If there is uncertainty this should be
acknowledgedandrangesofconfidencelimitsgivenwherepossible.

1.4

Environmentdescription:Theareaandlocationoftheenvironmentlikelytobe
affectedbythedevelopmentproposalsshouldbedescribed.

1.4.1

The environment expected to be affected by the development should be

indicatedwiththeaidofasuitablemapofthearea.

1.4.2

Theaffectedenvironmentshouldbedefinedbroadlyenoughtoincludeany
potentially significant effects occurring away from the immediate
constructionsite.Thesemaybecausedby,forexample,thedispersionof
pollutants,infrastructuralrequirementsoftheproject,traffic,etc.

44

1.5

Baselineconditions:Adescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentasitiscurrently,
andasitcouldbeexpectedtodevelopiftheprojectwerenottoproceed,should
bepresented.

1.5.1

The important components of the affected environments should be

identified and described. The methods and investigationsundertakenfor
thispurposeshouldbedisclosedandshouldbeappropriatetothesizeand
complexityoftheassessmenttask.Uncertaintyshouldbeindicated.

1.5.2

Existing data sources should have been searched and, where relevant,
utilised. Theseshouldincludelocalauthorityrecordsandstudiescarried
out by, or on behalf of, conservation agencies and/or special interest
groups.

1.5.3

Local land use plans and policies should be consulted and other data
collected as necessary to assist in the determination of the "baseline"
conditions,i.e.theprobablefuturestateoftheenvironment,intheabsence
oftheproject,takingintoaccountnaturalfluctuationsandhumanactivities
(oftencalledthe"donothing"scenario).

2.

IDENTIFICATIONANDEVALUATIONOFKEYIMPACTS

2.1

Definitionofimpacts:Potentialimpactsofthedevelopmentontheenvironment
should be investigated and described. Impacts should be broadly defined to
cover all potential effects on the environment and should be determined as the
predicteddeviationfromthebaselinestate.

45

2.1.1

A description should be given of the direct effects and any indirect,

secondary, cumulative, short, medium and longterm, permanent and
temporary,positiveandnegativeeffectsoftheproject.

2.1.2

The above types of effect should be investigated and described with

particularregardtoidentifyingeffectsonoraffectinghumanbeings,flora
and fauna, soil, water, air, climate, landscape, material assets, cultural
heritage (including architectural and archaeological heritage) and the
interactionsbetweenthese.

2.1.3

Consideration should not be limited to events which will occur under

design operating conditions. Where appropriate, impacts which might
arisefromnonstandardoperatingconditions,duetoaccidents,shouldalso
bedescribed.

2.1.4

The impacts should be determined as the deviation from baseline

conditions,i.e.thedifferencebetweentheconditionswhichwouldobtainif
the development werenot to proceed and those predicted to prevail as a
consequenceofit.

2.2

Identification of impacts: Methods should be used which are capable of

identifyingallsignificantimpacts.

2.2.1

Impacts should be identified using a systematic methodology such as

project specific checklists, matrices, panels of experts, consultations, etc.
Supplementary methods (eg causeeffect or network analyses) may be
neededtoidentifysecondaryimpacts.

2.2.2

Abriefdescriptionoftheimpactidentificationmethodsshouldbegivenas
shouldtherationaleforusingthem.

46

2.3

Scoping:Notallimpactsshouldbestudiedinequaldepth.Keyimpactsshould
be identified, taking into account the views of interested parties, and the main
investigationcentredonthese.

2.3.1

There should be a genuine attempt to contact the general public and

special interest groups clubs, societies, etc. to appraise them of the
projectanditsimplications.

2.3.2

Arrangements should be made to collect the opinions and concerns of

relevant public agencies, special interest groups, and the general public.
Public meetings, seminars, discussions groups, etc. may be arranged to
facilitatethis.

2.3.3

Key impacts should be identified and selected for more intense

investigation. Impact areas not selected for thorough study should
nevertheless be identified and the reasons they require less detailed
investigationshouldbegiven.

2.4

Prediction of impact magnitude: The likely impacts of the development on the

environmentshouldbedescribedinexacttermswhereverpossible.

2.4.1

The data used to estimate the magnitude of the main impacts should be
sufficient forthetaskandshouldbeclearlydescribedortheirsourcesbe
clearly identified.Anygapsintherequireddatashouldbeindicatedand
themeansusedtodealwiththemintheassessmentshouldbeexplained.

2.4.2

Themethodsusedtopredictimpactmagnitudeshouldbedescribedandbe
appropriatetothesizeandimportanceof theprojectedimpact.

2.4.3

Wherepossible,predictionsofimpactsshouldbeexpressedinmeasurable
quantitieswithrangesand/orconfidencelimitsasappropriate.Qualitative

47

descriptions,wheretheseareused,shouldbeasfullydefinedaspossible
(e.g.`insignificantmeansnotperceptiblefrommorethan100mdistance').

2.5

Assessment ofimpactsignificance:Theexpectedsignificancethattheprojected
impacts will have for society should be estimated. The sources of quality
standards, together with the rationale, assumptions andvaluejudgementsused
inassessingsignificance,shouldbefullydescribed.

2.5.1

The significance to the affected community and to society in general

should be described and clearly distinguished from impact magnitude.
Where mitigating measures are proposed, the significance of any impact
remainingaftermitigation,shouldalsobedescribed.

2.5.2

The significance of an impact should be assessed, taking into account

appropriate national and international quality standards where available.
Account should also be taken of the magnitude, location and duration of
theimpactinconjunctionwithnationalandlocalsocietalvalues.

2.5.3

The choice of standards, assumptions and value systems used to assess

significance should be justified and any contrary opinions should be
summarised.

3.

ALTERNATIVESANDMITIGATION

3.1

Alternatives: Feasible alternatives to the proposed project should have been

considered. These should be outlined in the Statement, the environmental
implications of each presented, and the reasons for their rejection briefly
discussed, particularly where the preferred project is likely to have significant,
adverseenvironmentalimpacts.

48

3.1.1

Alternativesitesshouldhavebeenconsideredwherethesearepracticable
and available to the developer. The main environmental advantages and
disadvantages of these should be discussed and the reasons for the final
choicegiven.

3.1.2

Where available, alternative processes, designs and operating conditions

shouldhavebeenconsideredatanearlystageofprojectplanningandthe
environmental implications of these investigated and reported where the
proposed project is likely to have significantly adverse environmental
impacts.

3.1.3

Ifunexpectedlysevereadverseimpactsareidentifiedduringthecourseof
theinvestigation,whicharedifficulttomitigate,alternativesrejectedinthe
earlierplanningphasesshouldbereappraised.

3.2

Scope and effectiveness of mitigation measures: Allsignificantadverseimpacts

shouldbeconsideredformitigation.Evidenceshouldbepresentedtoshowthat
proposedmitigationmeasureswillbeeffectivewhenimplemented.

3.2.1

Themitigationofallsignificantadverseimpactsshouldbeconsideredand,
where practicable, specific mitigation measures should be put forward.
Any residualorunmitigatedimpactsshouldbeindicatedandjustification
offeredastowhytheseimpactsshouldnotbemitigated.

3.2.2

Mitigationmethodsconsideredshouldincludemodificationoftheproject,
compensationandtheprovisionofalternativefacilitiesaswellaspollution
control.

3.2.3

It should be cleartowhatextentthemitigationmethodswillbeeffective
when implemented. Where the effectiveness is uncertain or depends on

49

assumptions about operating procedures, climatic conditions, etc., data

shouldbeintroducedtojustifytheacceptanceoftheseassumptions.

3.3

Commitmenttomitigation:Developersshouldbecommittedto,andcapableof,
carrying out the mitigation measures and should present plans of how they
proposetodoso.

3.3.1

Thereshouldbeaclearrecordofthecommitmentofthedevelopertothe
mitigation measures presented in the Statement. Details of how the
mitigationmeasureswillbeimplementedandfunctionoverthetimespan
forwhichtheyarenecessaryshouldalsobegiven.

3.3.2

Monitoring arrangements should beproposedtochecktheenvironmental

impacts resulting from the implementation of the project and their
conformitywiththepredictionswithintheStatement.Provisionshouldbe
made to adjust mitigating measures where unexpected adverse impacts
occur. Thescaleofthesemonitoringarrangementsshouldcorrespondto
thelikelyscaleandsignificanceofdeviationsfromexpectedimpacts.

4.

COMMUNICATIONOFRESULTS

4.1

Layout: The layout of the Statement should enable the reader to find and
assimilate data easily and quickly. External data sources should be
acknowledged.

4.1.1

Thereshouldbeanintroductionbrieflydescribingtheproject,theaimsof
theenvironmentalassessmentandhowthoseaimsaretobeachieved.

4.1.2

Information should be logically arranged in sections or chapters and the

whereaboutsofimportantdatashouldbesignalledinatableofcontentsor
index.

50

4.1.3

Unless the chapters themselves are very short, there should be chapter
summariesoutliningthemainfindingsofeachphaseoftheinvestigation.

4.1.4

When data, conclusions or quality standards from external sources are

introduced,theoriginalsourceshouldbeacknowledgedatthatpointinthe
text. A full reference should also be included either with the
acknowledgement,atthebottomofthepage,orinalistofreferences.

4.2

Presentation: Care should be taken in the presentation of information tomake

surethatitisaccessibletothenonspecialist.

4.2.1

Information should be presented so as to be comprehensible to the non

specialist. Tables, graphs and other devices should be used as
appropriate. Unnecessarily technical or obscure language should be
avoided.

4.2.2

Technicalterms,acronymsandinitialsshouldbedefined,eitherwhenfirst
introduced into the text or in a glossary. Important data should be
presentedanddiscussedinthemaintext.

4.2.3

TheStatementshouldbepresentedasanintegratedwhole.Summariesof
datapresentedinseparatelyboundappendicesshouldbeintroducedinthe
mainbodyofthetext.

4.3

Emphasis: Information should be presented without bias and receive the

emphasisappropriatetoitsimportanceinthecontextoftheES.

4.3.1

Prominence and emphasis should be given to potentially severe adverse

impacts as well as to potentially substantial favourable environmental

51

impacts. The Statementshouldavoidaccordingspacedisproportionately

toimpactswhichhavebeenwellinvestigatedorarebeneficial.

4.3.2

The Statement should be unbiased it should not lobby foranyparticular

point of view. Adverseimpactsshouldnotbedisguisedbyeuphemisms
orplatitudes.

4.4

Nontechnical summary: There should be a clearly written nontechnical

summaryofthemainfindingsofthestudyandhowtheywerereached.

4.4.1

There should be a nontechnical summary of the main findings and

conclusions of the study. Technical terms, lists of data and detailed
explanationsofscientificreasoningshouldbeavoided.

4.4.2

ThesummaryshouldcoverallmainissuesdiscussedintheStatementand
contain at least a brief description oftheprojectandtheenvironment,an
account of the main mitigation measures to be undertaken by the
developer, and a description of any significant residual impacts. A brief
explanation of the methods by which these data were obtained, and an
indication of the confidence whichcanbeplacedinthem,shouldalsobe
included.

52

III.

REVIEWSUMMARY

1.

ASSESSMENT SYMBOLS: Use the following symbols when completing the

CollationSheetbelow.
Symbol

2.

Explanation

Generallywellperformed,noimportanttasksleftincomplete.

Generallysatisfactoryandcomplete,onlyminoromissionsandinadequacies.

Canbeconsideredjustsatisfactorydespiteomissionsand/orinadequacies.

Partsarewellattemptedbutmust,asawhole,beconsideredjustunsatisfactory
becauseofomissionsand/orinadequacies.

Notsatisfactory,significantomissionsorinadequacies.

Veryunsatisfactory,importanttask(s)poorlydoneornotattempted.

NA

Notapplicable.TheReviewTopicisnotapplicableorirrelevantinthecontext
ofthisStatement.

COLLATIONSHEET
OverallAssessment .........
1

...........

...........

...........

...........

1.1
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
1.1.5

.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........

2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4

.........
.........
.........
.........
.........

3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3

.........
.........
.........
.........

4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4

.........
.........
.........
.........
.........

1.2
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5

.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........

2.2 .........
2.2.1 .........
2.2.2 .........

3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3

.........
.........
.........
.........

4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3

.........
.........
.........
.........

1.3
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.3.3

.........
.........
.........
.........

2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3

.........
.........
.........
.........

3.3 .........
3.3.1 .........
3.3.2 .........

1.4 .........
1.4.1 .........
1.4.2 .........

2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3

.........
.........
.........
.........

1.5 .........
1.5.1 .........
1.5.2 .........

2.5 .........
2.5.1 .........
2.5.2 .........

4.3 .........
4.3.1 .........
4.3.2 .........

4.4 .........
4.4.1 .........
4.4.2 .........

53

1.5.3 .........

2.5.3 .........

54

MinimumRequirements
Wereminimum requirements met,takingintoaccountwhetherornotthefollowingReviewSub
categorieswereallperformedsatisfactorily,i.e.assessedA,B,orC?
(a)

1.1.2,1.2.1

(b)

1.1.4,1.1.5,1.2.1,1.2.2,1.2.4,1.3.2,1.4.1,1.4.2,1.5.1,1.5.3,2.4.1

(c)

2.1.1,2.1.2,2.5.1,2.5.2

(d)

3.2.1,3.3.1

(e)

4.4.1,4.4.2

YES

NO

BroadCompliance
Wereminimumrequirementsmet,andReviewAreas1,2,3and4allperformedsatisfactorily,i.e.
assessedA,BorC?
YES

NO

OverallQuality
Assignanassessmentsymbol(A,B,C,D,EorF)totheStatementasawholeandsummarise,in
oneortwoparagraphs,thekeyfactorswhichhavedeterminedyouroverallassessment.

55