to deliver the Government’s vision for an 'ecologically coherent network of MPAs across the UK and to ensure the health of the wider UK marine environment’. These sites are intended to protect habitats and species not necessarily covered by existing mechanisms and complement the existing MPA network of SACs and SPAs. Once designated, the protection and maintenance of MCZs will be enforced by the MMO.
3.3.3.6 Habitats Regulations Assessment 61.
Under the Habitats and Species Regulations (2010) the Secretary of State must consider whether a plan or project has the potential to have an adverse effect on the integrity and features of a Natura 2000 site (See section 3.2.3.3 for information on the EU directive which dictates the designation Natura 2000 sites). This process is known as Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). Under Regulation 61 of the Habitats and Species Regulations, Appropriate Assessment is required for a plan or project, which either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, is likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site and is not directly connected with or necessary for the management of the site.
62. HRA generally follows a four stage process (Defra 2010):
Stage 1: Screening is the process used to identify the likely project and cumulative impacts on a Natura 2000 site, and establish the need for an Appropriate Assessment.
Stage 2: Appropriate Assessment considers the impact on the integrity of the Natura 2000 site and determines whether adverse effects may be excluded, and what mitigation measures may be applied.
Stage 3: Assessment of alternative solutions examines alternative ways of achieving the objectives of the project that would avoid adverse impacts on the integrity of the Natura 2000 site.
Stage 4: Assessment where no alternative solutions exist and adverse impacts remain, where an assessment is made as to whether or not the development is necessary for imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI) and, if so, of the compensatory measures needed to maintain the overall coherence of the Natura 2000 network.
63. Where priority habitats or species are present, the imperative reasons need to be “…reasons relating to human health, public safety or beneficial consequences of primary importance to the environment, or other reasons which in the opinion of the European Commission are imperative reasons of overriding public interest”, whereas for non-priority habitats and species, imperative reasons of a social or
Preliminary Environmental Information May 2014
East Anglia THREE Offshore Windfarm
Chapter 3 Policy and Legislative Context Page 14
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29