Transportudvalget 2023-24
TRU Alm.del Bilag 325
Offentligt
Svar fra ECPRD
Indhold
UK ......................................................................................................................... 2
Canada ................................................................................................................ 11
Finland ................................................................................................................ 23
Holland................................................................................................................ 27
Norge .................................................................................................................. 31
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0002.png
UK
To:
From:
Research section:
Tel:
Email:
Ref:
Date:
ECPRD Rasmus Baastrup
Alan Walker
SES
020 7219 1882
[email protected]
850497
16 July 2024
Better citizen involvement and efficient
approval processes in Large-Scale Renewable
Energy and Infrastructure Projects
Summary
Large scale renewable energy infrastructure projects are classified as nationally
significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs). Onshore wind turbines are not classified as
NSIPs however: since March 2016 they require planning permission from the Local
Planning Authority (LPA). The
Planning Act 2008 is the main legislation applying to such
structures and this
includes requirements that community groups are consulted in the
planning stages.
1.1 Nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs)
Most proposed development projects in England require planning consent from the
local planning authority (LPA, usually the district council), but there is a different
regime for projects that are considered to be nationally significant.
Major infrastructure projects relating to energy, transport, water, and waste are
classed as ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’ (NSIPs). They are
projects of
certain types and over a certain size, which are considered by the government to be
sufficiently large and nationally important that permission to build them needs to be
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0003.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
given at a national level, by the responsible government minister (the Secretary of
State) as set out by
the Planning Act 2008.
The
Commons Library briefing on planning
for NSIPs
sets out the policy background.
Part 3 of the Planning Act 2008 sets out the threshold above which projects are
considered NSIPs. For example, an offshore wind farm with a generating capacity of at
least 100 megawatts (MW), or an onshore solar farm with a capacity of at least 50 MW
would be classed as an NSIP.
Local planning authorities decide planning applications
for projects below the relevant NSIP threshold.
Planning systems in different parts of the UK
England
The developer of an NSIP must apply to the
Planning Inspectorate,
an executive agency
of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), for a
permission called a
Development Consent Order (DCO).
The
National Infrastructure
Planning Unit,
part of the Planning Inspectorate, handles the applications and a
planning inspector or a panel of inspectors will
carry out an examination of the project
and prepare a report. This will include a recommendation on whether the project
should be given development consent. The final decision on whether to grant
development consent to an NSIP rests with the relevant Secretary of State.
For example, the Secretary of State for Transport for transport projects or Secretary of
State for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) for energy projects.
A DCO
can also include powers that remove the need to obtain additional, non-
planning, consents
that would otherwise be required for development. The consents
are listed in
Schedule 2 of the Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties and
Miscellaneous Prescribed Provisions) Regulations 2015
(as amended) (the IPMPP
Regulations 2015). The government is keen that maximum use is made of these
provisions but
Government pre-application guidance
suggests that this is not always
the case in practice.
The NSIP process allows for a DCO to authorise the compulsory purchase of land (that
is, the purchase of land without the consent of the landowner).
Wales
The system mainly applies in England, and to a smaller extent is Wales. There are
fewer projects that fall into the NSIP category in Wales, and the levels for some of
these are set at higher values. For example, while, in England, generating stations with
a capacity over 50 MW are classed as NSIPs, the threshold for Wales is 350 MW.
Scotland
The matter is devolved in Scotland which does not use a NSIP system. All planning
applications in Scotland must be made to an LPA, and the Scottish process differs from
2
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0004.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
that in England and Wales with differing rights of appeal and application process,
depending on
development’s
type, size and importance.
1
Public consultation prior to decision-making
Before a developer can submit an application for a DCO, they must carry out extensive
consultation (including with the local community) as part of a
pre-application process.
Sections 42 to 44 and section 47 of the Planning Act 2008
set out who a developer
must consult; this includes local authorities, those with an interest in the land (such as
landowners) and local communities. Section 47 states that the applicant must prepare
a ‘statement of community consultation’ setting out how they intend to consult the
local community on the proposed project.
2
Once this statement has been prepared,
the applicant must make the statement available for inspection by the public in a way
that is reasonably convenient for people living in the vicinity of the land.
Government
guidance
advises developers to consider “how they can engage communities in a way
that supports them to understand the necessary issues […] and how they will show
how they have responded to their issues of
concern”.
3
Members of the public can
register as ‘interested parties’
to participate in the
examination process.
4
To register as an interested party, members of the public must
make a ‘relevant representation’ within a certain period (at least 28 days). A relevant
representation is a summary of a person’s views on an application. For further
information about how members of the public can register as an interested party, see
the Planning Inspectorate’s
advice note 8.2: How to register to participate in an
examination.
The Planning Inspectorate has published
further advice
to inform applicants,
consultees, the public and others about a range of process matters in relation to the
Planning Act 2008. This explains that Interested parties are invited to preliminary
hearings and have a right to be heard during the examination process. A planning
inspector is required to hold a preliminary meeting for interested parties.
Challenging a development consent order
There is no automatic right of appeal against decisions on DCOs made by the Secretary
of State. Under
section 118 of the Planning Act 2008,
however, decisions can be
challenged in court by judicial review. Decisions to refuse an application for
1
2
3
4
Morton Fraser MacRoberts LLP,
Scottish and English planning regimes,
25 June 2014
Planning Act 2008,
s47
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government,
Planning Act 2008: Pre-application stage for
Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects,
April 2024, para 22
Planning Inspectorate,
Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects - Advice Note 8.2: how to register to
participate in an Examination,
December 2012
3
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0005.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
development consent and decisions to revoke, or make to, changes a DCO can also be
challenged in court under judicial review.
5
An application for judicial review must be made within six weeks of a decision being
made.
6
The focus of judicial review is on whether the decision was made in a proper
and lawful manner; it is not concerned with the merits of the proposed project itself.
Any claim for judicial review requires permission from the court. If the court allows a
claim for judicial review and finds that procedural mistakes were made, it can quash a
development consent decision. The Secretary of State would then have to remake
their decision, correcting any mistakes identified by the court. In remaking their
decision, they might reach the same decision again, for different or expanded reasons,
or reach a different decision.
1.2 National Planning Policy Framework
The
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
(updated December 2023) sets out the
government’s
planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.
It does not contain specific policies for NSIPs but provides a framework within which
locally prepared plans can provide for sufficient housing and other development in a
sustainable manner. Local planning authorities primarily administer the planning
system, working with local communities.
7
Preparing and maintaining up-to-date plans
is seen as a priority in meeting this objective. Planning law requires that applications
for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan
unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF must be taken into
account in preparing the development plan and is a material consideration in planning
decisions. Planning policies and decisions must also reflect relevant international
obligations and statutory requirements.
In 2020, the
National Infrastructure Strategy
established a government ambition to
accelerate and improve the decision-making process for major infrastructure projects,
including those considered under
The Planning Act.
This ambition was reinforced in
2022 within the
British Energy Security Strategy
that committed to establishing a
process allowing some Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) to be
capable of receiving a decision within 12 months.
Following an operational review of the
Planning Act
2008 process beginning in 2021,
the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) published an
Action Plan
setting out proposed reforms that would be implemented to ensure the
Planning Act 2008 process can support the
country’s
future infrastructure needs. The
5
6
7
Planning Inspectorate,
Application process: Frequently asked questions,
undated [accessed 18 May 2024], FAQ
61; Section 118 of the Planning Act 2008
Part 54 of the Civil Procedure Rules;
Landmark Chambers,
Challenging development consent orders in the High
Court (PDF),
July 2018
National Association of Local Councils
4
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0006.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
Planning Inspectorate
published
guidance on the new pre-application service
(May
2024, updated June 2024) for NSIPs.
Updated government guidance has been published which provides the framework for
the new pre-application process on the
government’s 2024 National Infrastructure
Planning Guidance Portal.
National Policy Statements
Applications for DCOs are decided in accordance with
National Policy Statements
(NPSs), which set out the national policy in relation to the different categories of NSIPs.
There are 12 separate NPs and they cover energy, transport, water, wastewater and
waste sectors. They give reasons for the policy set out in the NPS, including an
explanation of how it takes into account government policy relating to the mitigation
of, and adaptation to, climate change.
There are six
Energy NPSs,
which provide planning guidance for developers of
nationally significant energy infrastructure projects. These are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Overarching NPS for energy (EN-1)
NPS for natural gas electricity generating infrastructure (EN-2)
NPS for renewable energy infrastructure (EN-3)
NPS for natural gas supply infrastructure and gas and oil pipelines (EN-4)
NPS for electricity networks infrastructure (EN-5)
NPS for nuclear power generation (EN-6)
NPSs EN-1 to EN-5 were designated on 17 January 2024 and were produced by the
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ).
NPS EN-6 was designated on 19 July 2011 and had effect for listed nuclear projects
capable of being deployed by the end of 2025. This was produced by the former
Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), now DESNZ. A new NPS is being
prepared by DESNZ.
NPSs undergo a process of public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny, before
being officially designated by the government (set out in
part 2 of the Planning Act
2008,
as amended by the
Localism Act 2011).
A
consultation on revisions to
NPSs ran from 30 March 2023 to 23 June 2023. In
response to some 157 responses NPSs were amended: for example, DESNZ made a
significant number of amendments
to the Energy NPS..
5
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0007.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
1.3 Onshore wind planning
The Library briefing
planning for onshore wind
sets out the policy framework and
explains that all onshore wind turbines, except for small-scale domestic turbines,
require planning permission from the local planning authority (LPA) in England.
Until March 2016, onshore wind farms with a generating capacity over 50MW were
treated as NSIPs. The
Energy Act 2016
and the
Infrastructure Planning (Onshore Wind
Generating Stations) Order 2016
removed onshore wind farms with a generating
capacity over 50MW from the NSIP regime. Since March 2016, all onshore wind farms
(regardless of their size) require planning permission from the LPA.
In September 2023, the government
updated national planning policy
to provide that
LPAs should approve planning applications for an onshore wind farm if it is an area
identified as suitable in the local development plan (local plan or a neighbourhood
plan) or a supplementary planning document, and if the planning impacts identified by
the affected local community have been appropriately addressed and the proposal has
community support .The Local Plan will have been prepared by the LPA and guides
planning decisions. It sets out opportunities for development and which types of
development will be permitted or restricted in certain areas.
8
The Welsh Government has identified
pre-assessed areas for wind farms
where there
is a presumption in favour of granting consent.
The Scottish Government updated its planning policy in February 2023
to express
support for new and repowered wind farms.
In Northern Ireland, LPAs should approve wind turbines that will
“not
result in an
unacceptable adverse impact”.
9
Onshore wind developments are restricted in designated areas, such as National Parks
and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, across the UK.
In England, developers are required to carry out a pre-application consultation with
the local community if the project consists of more than two turbines or the hub
height of any turbine exceeds 15 metres. Developers must publicise applications for
any proposed development that meet either of these conditions in a way that will
bring it to the attention of the majority of people who live in the vicinity of the
proposed location. They must allow the local community to comment on the proposed
development. When
finalising their application, developers must “have regard to any
responses to the
consultation”
they received. When submitting their application, they
8
9
Planning Aid England,
What is a Local Plan?,
Department of the Environment,
Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS)
(PDF),
September 2015
6
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0008.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
have to explain how they consulted the local community, what comments they
received and how they took account of these.
10
Before making a decision on applications for any onshore wind development, an LPA is
also required to publicise the application and consult local residents to allow them to
express their views on the proposed development. An LPA must take these views into
account when making its decision.
11
An LPA should grant planning permission to a proposed onshore wind development
only if it has
‘community support’.
Whether a proposed development has community
support is for the LPA to decide in the first instance (the Planning Inspectorate on
appeal, or the courts if there is a dispute).
12
1.4 Pylons and upgrades to the national grid
In April 2024 the Commons Library published a report on
Pylons and Upgrades to the
National Grid,
prior to a
debate in May 2024.
The subject of this report was the
ongoing upgrade to the single, connected electricity system that covers England,
Scotland and Wales
–
known as the GB electricity grid.
The
UK Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment)
target to be net zero in
greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 will require significant increases in low carbon
electricity generating infrastructure.
13
The UK has ambitious targets relating to the
development of offshore wind, solar energy and nuclear power in order to fully
decarbonise the electricity grid. This, along with policies to drive electrification of
transport and heat, is expected to lead to a doubling of electricity demand by 2050.
National Grid ESO, the electricity system operator for Great Britain, carried out a
review of the grid requirements needed to deliver the increase in offshore wind and
other low carbon generation. It recommended a single, integrated network connecting
new offshore wind farms and associated offshore and onshore transmission networks.
The report stated that part of the need for new infrastructure was the long lead times
developers of all low-carbon energy infrastructure have reported for connection to the
GB electrification or distribution networks in 2023/24. The Electricity Networks
Commissioner’s
report
(August 2023) set out how to halve connection times of new
projects to around seven years.
14
10
11
12
13
14
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015
The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, sections 15 & 33
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government,
National Planning Policy Framework,
last updated
December 2023, footnote 58
The Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment) Order 2019
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero,
Accelerating electricity transmission network deployment:
Electricity Networks
Commissioner’s
recommendations,
4 August 2023
7
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0009.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
In response, the government published its
Transmission Acceleration Action Plan
in
November 2023. In a
statement
detailing this plan, the then Secretary of State stated
that the government would
‘introduce
a community benefits package for communities
who host transmission infrastructure, alongside a national communications campaign
to improve public understanding of electricity infrastructure and its benefits’.
The government also proposed that electricity operators might introduce ‘community
benefits’
to local communities that host electricity transmission infrastructure, such as
community funds or compensatory payments to local residents. Following these
proposals, it published a response on
Community Benefits for Electricity Transmission
Network Infrastructure
(November 2023). A preference was reported for a
combination of electricity bill discounts and benefits, and for such a scheme to be
mandatory. wider community
1.5 Clean energy in the Labour 2024 general election
manifesto
On 5 July 2024, the UK elected a new Labour Government. The Labour party’s
manifesto set out its plans to
make Britain a clean energy superpower.
It stated that
Labour would
•
•
•
•
Work with the private sector to double onshore wind, triple solar power, and
quadruple offshore wind by 2030.
Implement plans for the nuclear sector in relation to the goal of clean energy
by 2023.
Introduce a new Energy Independence Act.
Create a new publicly-owned
company, Great British Energy to “drive forward
investment in clean, home-grown energy
production”,
and
“install
thousands of
clean power projects, including onshore wind, solar and hydropower projects,
by partnering with energy companies, local authorities and co-operatives.
Communities will be invited to come forward with projects, and work with local
leaders and devolved governments to “ensure local people benefit directly”.
15
On 17 July 2024, a new Planning and Infrastructure Bill was announced in the
King’s
Speech
to reform the planning process and improve the system at a local level by
modernising planning committees and increasing local planning authority capacity.
15
Labour,
Making Britain a clean energy superpower
8
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0010.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
The bill will also aim to reduced timescales for deciding applications for LPA and NSIP
decisions to ensure demand for new infrastructure is met and climate targets
achieved.
16
1.6 Case Studies of community engagement
Geological disposal facility working groups (GDF)
In October 2006, the UK Government accepted the recommendations of the
Committee on Radioactive Waste Managements (CoRWM)
that the UK's higher activity
radioactive waste (HAW) should be managed in the long term through
geological
disposal
in a geological disposal facility (GDF). There is currently no such facility in the
UK, however, a process to find a suitable site has been ongoing since 2006.
Nuclear Waste Services,
a division of the government’s
Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority,
states in its guidance on
Communities and GDF
(updated February 2020)
that the process is consent-based and that a facility will be built on a suitable site with
a willing community.
Radioactive Waste Management
(RWM), part of
Nuclear Waste
Services
since 2022 whose mission is to deliver a GDF, ran parallel public consultations
on how suitable sites would be evaluated in England and Wales, from 19 December
2018 to 31 March 2019 and from 16 January 2019 to 14 April 2019 respectively. The
response
from the two consultations noted that there were 90 responses from a
variety of stakeholders including academics, local authorities, non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) and members of the public. The consultations helped inform the
final documents:
Site Evaluation: How we will evaluate sites in England
(PDF, 2022) and
Site Evaluation: How we will evaluate sites in Wales (PDF, 2020).
Nuclear Waste Services provide guidance on
Communities and GDF
(updated February
2020) advising on how they would work with communities across England, for example
through
Working Groups
to engage with local people. A Working Group would consist
of (at least) the interested party; Nuclear Waste Services; an independent chair, and
independent facilitator.
17
As of January 2024, NWR is engaged with four communities across England.
18
Mid
Copeland, South Copeland (both in Cumbria), Theddlethorpe in Lincolnshire and South
Holderness in East Riding, Yorkshire. The
2023 CoRWM progress report
sets out that
these are still in very early stages of development and there is a need to clarify
expectations and levels of support.
16
17
18
Prime
Minister’s
Office,
The
King’s
Speech 2024
(PDF), 17 July 2024
Nuclear Waste Services,
Community Guidance: How we will work with communities in England
(PDF)
Nuclear Waste Services,
NWS welcomes formation of South Holderness GDF Working Group,
25 January 2024;
CoWRM,
CoRWM Report: Progress Towards the Delivery of an Operational GDF
(PDF), August 2023
9
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0011.png
Commons Library Request Response, 16 July 2024
The Great Grid Upgrade
National Grid plc, who own and operate much of the electricity transmission network
in in England and Wales, is undertaking a major upgrade of the system, called the
Great Grid Upgrade.
This consists of 17 major infrastructure projects with the aim of
improving the existing network in order to boost energy security and the affordability
of clean energy.
National Grid's website
displays all current projects so that local residents or
communities are able to check if there is a project happening in their local area. Local
stakeholders are invited to attend public consultations to give their feedback on the
project. National Grid state they will engage with local communities in a number of
ways including through supporting local projects under a
Community Grant
Programme
and holding consultation exercises using a variety of different methods of
communication as well as working with relevant authorities locally.
Public consultations are run on each of the separate local projects that make up the
overall grid upgrade, such as the
Norwich to Tibury project.
All
statutory consultation
documents and maps
have been made available for viewing to inform those who
choose to be involved, including Preliminary Environmental Information Reports
(PEIRs) and a
guide to interacting with consultation plans.
Another example is
Eastern Green Links 3 and 4.
This project ran a non-statutory
consultation between 23 April 2024 and 15 July 2024 to explain the proposals and
ensure all stakeholders had the opportunity to share their views on previous and
planned work.
19
The second, statutory stage of consultation is planned for 2025 ahead
of the submission of the application to the Secretary of State for Energy Security and
Net Zero.
The Planning Inspectorate will review and examine the application and encourage
submission of views from statutory stakeholders (such as Local Authorities, Natural
England and the Environment Agency), communities and other interested parties,
before making a recommendation to the Secretary of State. The consultation materials
have been made available to stakeholders through a
document library
and a separate
page for landowners
is available.
19
National Grid,
Eastern Green Link 3 (EGL3) and Eastern Green Link 4 (EGL4),
accessed 23 July 2024
10
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0012.png
Canada
ECPRD #5838 Better Citizen involvement and efficient approval processes in Large-Scale
Renewable Energy and Infrastructure Projects
Response of the Library of Parliament
–
Canada
15 August 2024
1. How do authorities involve citizens and other stakeholders in the preparatory work before
political decisions on major infrastructure projects are made?
At the federal level, impact assessments of large-scale projects whose effects fall within federal
jurisdiction are governed by the
Impact Assessment Act
and are conducted by the
Impact Assessment
Agency of Canada
(the Agency), a Review Panel, or an Integrated Review Panel with a lifecycle regulator.
All projects subject to an impact assessment must develop a Public Participation Plan during the
planning phase of the project.
1
A Public Participation Plan must also be developed for “regional
assessments that assess the effects of existing or future activities in a region and strategic assessments
that consider federal policies, plans or programs that are relevant to conducting impact assessments
(section 92 and 95 of the Act, respectively).”
2
Purpose of Public Consultation in an Impact Assessment
The goal of public participation in the impact assessment process is to ensure open and informed
meaningful engagement by the public throughout the assessment process of approving large-scale
projects.
3
Public participation plans must include the objectives of the project and key areas of concern
set out in the planning phase, a list of participants who have indicated they wish to be included in the
public consultation phases of the impact assessment, the method in which participants would like to
engage, and a table to determine each phase of the assessment and corresponding opportunities for
public consultation.
4
The
Agency’s
Framework: Public Participation,
sets out the overarching principles that guide public
consultation and achieve meaningful participation. These principles state that:
Page 11
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0013.png
1
2
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Impact Assessment Process Overview - Phase 1: Planning.
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Framework: Public Participation under the Impact Assessment Act.
3
Ibid.
4
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Overview of Public Participation Plan.
•
•
It starts early and continues throughout each step of the process, including timely notification of
proposed engagement.
It is supported with funding made available through the
Agency’s
Participant Funding Program,
which will be enhanced to improve public and Indigenous participation in impact assessments.
It is transparent and information is available and accessible to the public on the proposed
Impact Assessment Registry of Canada (the Registry), unless subject to valid exceptions set out
in the Act, such as financial information that is consistently treated in a confidential manner.
It is designed to increase the knowledge of participants and government and foster
relationships. Citizens and communities are able to contribute to the science and evidence base
for decision-making.
It is designed to prioritize the participation of those who are most affected by the proposed
project, while also ensuring that interested members of the public have an opportunity to share
their views.
Methods are flexible, innovative and consider the assessment context and legislated timelines. It
includes a variety of engagement techniques that are appropriate to the circumstances and are
accessible to diverse groups, including women, men, gender-diverse people and
underrepresented Canadians.
It influences decision-making and participants see that their input was considered.
It continually adapts and improves. Each assessment will contribute to a greater understanding
of participation practices.
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
Input from the public during the assessment process will become part of the public record and will be
included in the Impact Assessment Report. The Minister for Climate Change and the Environment will
consider this information when making their final decision on the project.
6
Assessment Process Timelines
When a large-scale project is submitted to the Agency for consideration, it is posted to the
Canadian
Impact Assessment Registry
(the Registry) which triggers a 180-day time limit for the planning phase.
7
Page 12
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0014.png
5
Impact Assessment Agency of
Canada. “2.
Principles.”
Framework: Public Participation Under the Impact
Assessment Act.
6
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Why, how and when to participate in impact assessment.
7
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Impact Assessment Process Overview - Phase 1: Planning.
Before the end of the 180-day period, the Agency posts a Notice of Commencement on the Registry,
which starts phase 2
–
Impact Statement. The proponent prepares an Impact Statement within three
years of the posting of the Notice of Commencement.
8
When the Agency has determined the Impact Statement has satisfied all requirements, a Notice of
Determination will be posted on the Registry which starts phase 3
–
Impact Assessment. A time limit of
300 days is given to conduct the impact assessment (600 days if it is conducted by a review board).
9
The public participates in these first three phases of the impact assessment process as described in the
public participation plan. The Agency or the review board will set activity-specific timelines. Information
about the process will be posted to the Impact Assessment Registry and be accessible to the public.
10
Post-Impact Assessment
Following the completion of the impact assessment (phase 3), a decision will be made by the Minister
within 30 days. For decisions that are deferred to the Governor General or are the result of a review
panel or an integrated review panel with a lifecycle generator, the decision must be issued within 90
days.
11
Proponents who wish to counter a decision may submit an appeal to federal court.
12
The public will also play a role in the final phase of the process, participating in follow up and monitoring
committees (including Environmental Monitoring Committees), and may report on non-compliance
through voluntary reporting mechanisms.
13
Exemptions to Public Consultation
At the federal level, there are no exemptions to the requirement of public participation in the impact
assessment process, whether the assessment is carried out by the Agency, a review panel, or as part of a
regional or strategic assessment. However, provincial laws governing the assessment process may have
different requirements for public consultation.
Provincial Example
–
Alberta
In Alberta, the
Alberta Environment and Protected Areas (AEPA)
department directs the environmental
assessment process for most industrial projects, however environmental assessments of energy projects
such as upstream oil and gas, oilsands and coal projects are the responsibility of the
Alberta Energy
Regulator (AER).
14
8
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Impact Assessment Process Overview - Phase 2: Impact Statement.
Page 13
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0015.png
9
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Impact Assessment Process Overview - Phase 3: Impact Assessment.
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Framework: Public Participation under the Impact Assessment Act.
11
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Impact Assessment Process Overview - Phase 4: Decision Making.
12
Impact Assessment Act,
S.C. 2019, c. 28, s. 1, ss. 138.
13
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Impact Assessment Process Overview - Phase 5: Post Decision.
14
Alberta Government.
Alberta's Environmental Assessment Process,
December 2015.
10
Environmental assessments are overseen by an Environmental Assessment Director (the Director), who
is appointed by Ministerial Order in accordance with the
Environmental Protection and Enhancement
Act.
The processes that involve decisions about public interest and subsequent regulatory approval are the
purview of regulatory bodies such as the
Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCBA),
the
Alberta
Utilities Commission (AUC),
and the AER.
Environmental Assessment Process
According to the Alberta Government,
“Alberta’s
environmental assessment process has three basic
goals:
Gather information
–
the process ensures that enough information is provided by the
proponent to inform the public and government agencies about the proponent’s
understanding of the consequences of their project;
Public involvement
–
the process provides an opportunity for people who may be
affected by a proposed activity to express any concerns and provide advice to
proponents and government agencies; and
Support sustainable development
–
the information provided during the process allows
early consideration of the project’s place in the overall plan for Alberta’s environment
and economy.”
15
When an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report is deemed necessary by the Director, members
of the public who are affected by a proposed project may participate during the
Preparation of Proposed
Terms of Reference
phase. During this phase, the public provides comments on a project’s proposed
Terms of Reference, a document that determines the scope of the environmental assessment process.
16
An initial draft prepared by the proponent is published in local newspapers and the public is given a
minimum of 30 days to submit their comments. The Director determines whether the comments will be
included in the final Terms of Reference.
Comments submitted by the public become part of an Environmental Assessment Register and
documents are stored online on the Government of
Alberta’s
Current projects
list.
17
Following the acceptance and review of the Terms of Reference, an EIA report is produced and
submitted for review, marking the end of the information requirements stage of regulatory approval.
Page 14
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0016.png
15
16
Ibid
Ibid
17
Alberta, Environment and Protected Areas.
Environmental Assessment Program - Guide to Providing Comments
on Proposed Terms of Reference.
The application is then sent to the appropriate regulatory body to determine if the project is within the
public interest.
18
Regulatory Bodies and Public Consultation
Once a project application has moved on for regulatory review, members of the public may submit a
statement of concern or participate in any hearings held by a Regulatory Board to determine if a project
is in the public interest.
19
Depending on the nature of the project, the regulatory review will be
conducted by the NRCBA, the AUC, or the AER.
20
Natural Resources Conservation Board of Alberta (NRCBA)
According to the NRCBA, the review process should be
“open,
public, and
impartial”
and there is an
expectation that project proponents engage the public during the process of gaining regulatory
approval.
21
The NRCBA website states that “the Board values public participation in its review process. Albertans
who are directly affected by a proposed development are encouraged to participate in the process,
including the public hearing if one is
held.”
22
The NRCBA will post notifications in local papers of a public
hearing and deadlines for registration to participate (at least 30 days).
23
The NRCBA will also solicit
statements of concern from members of the public directly affected by the project.
24
Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC)
Members of the public who “may be directly and adversely affected by utility development have the
opportunity to have their concerns heard, considered
and understood.”
25
Those who can demonstrate
that they occupy or maintain an interest in land affected by a proposed development may qualify to be
appointed a “local intervener” to either submit concerns through the AUC’s
eFiling system
or by
participating directly in AUC hearings.
Alberta Energy Regulator (AER)
18
19
Alberta Government.
Alberta's Environmental Assessment Process,
December 2015.
Alberta, Environment and Protected Areas.
Environmental Assessment Program - Frequently Asked Questions.
20
Ibid.
21
Alberta, Natural Resources Conservation Board.
The Board Review Process Under the NRCBA, Section 3: Early
Public Involvement and Consultation,
Process Guide, 2018.
22
Alberta, Natural Resources Conservation Board.
Public Participation.
23
Alberta, Natural Resources Conservation Board.
The Board Review Process Under the NRCBA, Section 8(1) Notice
of hearing,
Process Guide, 2018.
Page 15
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0017.png
24
25
Alberta, Natural Resources Conservation Board.
AOPA Application Process - Statement of Concern.
Alberta Utilities Commission.
Have your say about a utility project.
Albertans are encouraged by the AER to become involved in the regulatory process and public
participation is made possible in a number of formal and informal ways.
26
The AER will occasionally hold
public forums and community meetings, which can be found on the AER
Events
page. Participation in
public hearings is also possible, although this is limited to those directly and negatively affected by a
project.
27
Hearing participation is decided by hearing commissioners.
28
Members of the public who can demonstrate that they are directly and adversely affected by a
company’s project may also submit a Statement of Concern (SOC).
29
An SOC will be evaluated and
registered, and the AER may request a written response from the company to address the concern,
consider the concern as part of the review process, or occasionally the concern may trigger a hearing to
address it.
Synergy Alberta
Public participation in Alberta is also made possible by participating in a “Synergy Group” vis-à-vis
the
non-profit organization,
Synergy Alberta.
These groups are made up of community stakeholders and
provide a forum for the discussion of resource development and to foster the relationship between
industry and community stakeholders. These groups do not participate in decision making or regulatory
approval.
30
Post-Assessment Processes
For decisions rendered by AEPA or by a regulatory board, an appeals process is available to those
“directly affected” by an AEPA decision or “directly and negatively affected” by a regulatory decision
31
.
Appealing an AEPA decision is done through the Environmental Appeals Board, AER appeals are handled
by the Regulatory Appeal Coordinator at AER, and NRCBA and AUC appeals may be directed to the
Alberta Court of Appeal
32
.
Exemptions to Public Consultation
26
27
Alberta Energy Regulator.
“Participate
in a hearing.”
Have your say.
Alberta Energy Regulator.
“How
do I become a participant in a hearing?”
Having Your Say at an AER Hearing
–
EnerFAQs.
28
Alberta Energy Regulator.
Hearings.
29
Alberta Energy Regulator.
Statement of Concern.
30
Synergy Alberta,
Building, Navigating, and Maintaining Your Synergy Group,
October 2014.
31
Alberta, Environmental Appeals Board.
Appeal Online.;
and Alberta Energy Regulator.
Request for Regulatory
Appeal.
32
Alberta, Environmental Appeals Board.
Appeal Online.;
Alberta Energy Regulator.
Regulatory Appeal Process.;
Alberta, Natural Resources Conservation Board.
The Board Review Process Under the NRCBA, Section 10.2 Appeals,
Process Guide, 2018.; and Alberta Utilities Commission.
“May
an AUC decision be appealed?”
Hearings - Frequently
Asked Questions..
Page 16
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0018.png
For activities that require environmental assessment, there are no explicit exemptions from public
consultation. Decisions made by a director must take into consideration any concerns expressed by the
public.
33
However, inclusion of the results of public consultation in the EIA Report is left to the discretion
of the Director.
34
2. Provide examples from your legislation aimed at promoting local support and the swift approval of
projects. For instance, through the special arrangement of authority competencies, consultation
processes, limited appeal opportunities, etc.
Federal
–
Impact Assessment Act
The approval process of large-scale projects that are carried out on federal lands or outside of Canada is
governed by the
Impact Assessment Act.
Along with environmental considerations, assessments
conducted in accordance with the Act also consider social, health, and economic factors as part of the
assessment process.
35
Another important purpose of the Act is “to promote nation-to-nation,
Inuit-
Crown, and government-to-government
partnerships with Indigenous peoples[.]”
36
Designated projects that fall within federal jurisdiction and are described by the Physical Activities
Regulations must submit a project description to the Impact Assessment Agency (the Agency) in order
for a determination to be made as to whether an impact assessment is required.
37
In addition to
determining timelines and the phases of the assessment process, the Act states that an impact
assessment must include meaningful public engagement.
38
The Act’s
Physical Activities Regulations
describe the designated projects whose effects fall within
federal jurisdiction and who must submit a project description to the Agency in order to determine
whether an impact assessment is required.
39
The
Information and Designation of Time Limits Regulations
allow for the suspension of time limits by
the Agency under certain circumstances as well as outlining the information that must be included in the
project description delivered to the Agency. The Regulations also state that the Agency must provide the
proponent with the documents necessary for information gathering, including those relating to the
public participation plan (i.e., the
public participation plan template).
40
33
34
Alberta, Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act,
RSA 2000, c. E-12, Division 1, s.43(3).
Ibid,
Division 2, s.49(l).
35
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (Impact Assessment Agency of Canada).
“Purposes
of the Impact
Assessment Act.”
Overview of the Impact Assessment Act.
Training document, 2019.
36
Ibid.
37
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Frequently asked questions - Regulations.
38
Impact Assessment Act,
S.C. 2019, c. 28, s. 1, ss. 6.
39
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Frequently asked questions - Regulations.
40
Ibid.
Page 17
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0019.png
Reference re Impact Assessment Act, 2023 SCC 23
On 13 October 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada delivered a decision which found that the Impact
Assessment Act was in part unconstitutional.
41
The decision found that the federal government had
acted outside of federal jurisdiction in constructing the Act, such that it had infringed on the
constitutional rights of the Provinces and Territories. On May 2, 2024, Bill C-69, An Act to implement
certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024 was introduced in the House of
Commons and included amendments to the Impact Assessment Act that ensured the designation of
projects for impact assessment review, along with decision-making provisions with respect to those
projects, were to be carried out only in areas of federal jurisdiction.
42
The bill received Royal Assent on
20 June 2024.
43
The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada issued a policy directive for the impact assessment process
while the Act underwent amendments
–
Statement on the Interim Administration of the Impact
Assessment Act Pending Legislative Amendments.
The guidelines for the public participation
components of impact assessment were not changed because of the amendments introduced in bill C-
69.
Additional Legislation
According to the Act, in the case of activities that are regulated under the
Canadian Energy Regulator
Act
or the
Nuclear Safety and Control Act,
the Minister must refer the assessment to a review panel to
be led by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) or the Canada Energy Regulator (CER). In
these cases the procedure for impact assessment set out by the Impact Assessment Act is to be
followed, and both related Acts legislate the participation of the public in any public hearings that may
be held.
44
Provincial Example - Alberta
In Alberta, the environmental assessment process is governed under Part 2, Division 1 of the
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act.
Environmental assessments conducted by the Alberta
Energy Regulator are carried out in accordance with the Act.
45
According to the Act, the purpose of the environmental assessment process is fourfold:
(a) to support the goals of environmental protection and sustainable development,
41
42
Reference re Impact Assessment Act,
2023 SCC 23.
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
The amended Impact Assessment Act.
Fact sheet.
43
Bill C-69 - An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on April 16, 2024,
44
th
Parliament, 1
st
Session, (Royal Assent version, 20 June 2024).
44
Nuclear Safety and Control Act,
S.C. 1997, c. 9, s. 40(5); and
Canadian Energy Regulator Act,
S.C. 2019, c. 28, s.
10, ss.74.
45
Alberta Energy Regulator.
Environmental Assessments.
Page 18
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0020.png
(b) to integrate environmental protection and economic decisions at the earliest stages of
planning an activity,
(c) to predict the environmental, social, economic and cultural consequences of a proposed
activity and to assess plans to mitigate any adverse impacts resulting from the proposed activity,
and
(d) to provide for the involvement of the public, proponents, the Government and Government
agencies in the review of proposed activities.
46
Ministerial and Directorial Powers in the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act
Under some provisions of the Alberta
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act,
the Minister or
Director may decide the extent to which the public is involved in the assessment process.
For example, according to Part 1, s. 4(1)(b) of the Act the minister may “specify the functions that the
committees and experts are to perform, including, without limitation, the seeking of input from the
public, and the manner in which and time period within which those functions are to be
performed.”
47
Conversely, according to the
Approvals and Registrations Procedure Regulation,
although the
submission of an application or registration to the Environmental Assessment Director (the Director)
must include a description of public consultation, the Director may also waive this requirement if it is
not considered relevant to the application or they deem it appropriate to waive.
48
Statement of Concern
According to the Act, members of the public who are
“directly affected by a
proposed activity that is the
subject of a decision of the Director” may submit a written statement of concern within 30 days of
notice of the decision (or longer if specified by the Director).
49
The Director must consider all statements
of concern submitted during this period and must not render their decision until the period has
expired.
50
3. Effective Citizen Engagement: Provide an example of 'good practices' involving citizen engagement
in recent major infrastructure and renewable energy projects.
Laurentia Project: Port of Quebec Deep-Water Wharf - Beauport Sector
46
47
Alberta,
Environmental Assessment and Enhancement Act,
RSA 2000 c. E-12, div. 1, s. 40.
Alberta,
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act,
RSA 2000 c.E-12, p. 1, s. 4(1).
48
Alberta,
Approvals and Registrations Procedure Regulation,
Alta Reg 113/1993, s. 3(1)(q); and Alberta,
Approvals
and Registrations Procedure Regulation,
Alta Reg 113/1993, s. 3(2).
49
Alberta,
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act,
RSA 2000, c. E-12, div. 1, s. 44(6).
50
Alberta,
Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act
RSA 2000, c. E-12, div.1, s. 46.
Page 19
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0021.png
The Laurentia Project was an infrastructure project proposed by the Quebec Port Authority that sought
to extend an existing wharf in order to operate a deep-water terminal that would store cargo
containers. Aside from water management, the scope of the project also included the construction of
rail lines, a road overpass, and reconfiguration of the land the Port was located on.
51
The Impact Assessment Agency conducted an exhaustive and rigorous environmental assessment which
included extensive consultation with the public.
52
The principles for public participation established by
the Agency in
Framework: Public Participation
(the Framework) were followed throughout this process.
Public Consultation Plan
In accordance with the Framework principle that calls for early and ongoing public consultation, the
Agency released its
Public Consultation Plan
shortly after the project was registered. The Agency’s
development of the plan included a public e-consultation to allow for comments from the public. The
plan’s proposed activities for public consultation included further public e-consultation
on the
environmental impact statement, open houses, and public sessions led by a facilitator with subject
expertise. The plan also provided information about the documentation to be posted on the public
Registry, which conforms to the Framework principle that calls for transparent and accessible public
information to be made available on the Registry.
53
Participant Funding Program
Another principle in the Framework calls for improving public participation through funding made
available through the
Agency’s
Participant Funding Program.
The Laurentia Project ensured that federal
funding was made available to eligible individuals and groups, who could participate by reviewing and
providing comments on various aspects of the assessment.
54
News releases and public notices were
used to communicate deadlines to the public.
55
In total, $148,417.50 was awarded to community
organizations to participate in the environmental assessment.
56
51
52
Impact Assessment Agency.
Laurentia Project: Port of Quebec Deep-Water Wharf - Beauport Sector.
Impact Assessment Agency.
The Government of Canada releases its final decision on the Laurentia Project: Port
of Quebec Deep-Water Wharf - Beauport Sector.
News release, 29 June 2021.
53
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (Impact Assessment Agency.
Public Consultation Plan.
13 October
2015.
54
Impact Assessment Agency.
“Who
is eligible?”
Participant Funding Program; and Impact Assessment Agency.
Federal Funding Available - Port of Quebec Deep-Water Multipurpose Wharf Project - Beauport 2020.
News
Release, 16 September 2015.
55
Impact Assessment Agency.
Federal Funding Available.
Public notice, 16 September 2015; Impact Assessment
Agency.
Federal Funding Available.
News release, 16 September 2015; Impact Assessment Agency.
Deadline Extended to Apply for Federal Funding.
Public notice, 16 November 2015; and Impact Assessment Agency.
Deadline Extended to Apply for Federal Funding.
News release, 16 November 2015.
56
Impact Assessment Agency.
“Table
6: Funds allocated to Participant Funding Program organizations.”
Laurentia
Project: Port of Québec Deep-Water Wharf
–
Beauport Sector.
Environmental Assessment Report, June 2021.
Page 20
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0022.png
Meetings with Citizen Groups
According to the Framework principles, public participation should prioritize those who are most
affected by a proposed project while also allowing for input from the general public. Prior to public
information sessions and open house sessions, the Agency held meetings with citizen groups who were
more directly affected by the project.
57
Additionally, the project proponent created two standing
committees that brought together key community stakeholder groups to address the project and
provide a platform for discussion.
58
Information Methods
–
Print, In Person and Online
Under the Framework principles, engagement methods are meant to be “flexible, innovative and
consider the assessment context and legislated
timelines.”
59
The Agency held in person and virtual
(Zoom) public information sessions in various formats, in addition to publishing print resources
60
.
Final Decision
An Environmental Assessment Report for the Laurentia Project was prepared by the Agency in 2021,
which included a summarization of the main concerns raised by the public in consultation (for example,
air quality, noise pollution, and wildlife conservation).
61
Taking the comments of the public and First
Nations into consideration along with advice provided by government experts, the Agency concluded
that the project was
“likely
to cause direct and cumulative significant adverse environmental
effects.”
62
Ultimately, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change referred the project to the Governor in
57
Impact Assessment Agency.
“3.2.1
Public Consultation Conducted by the Agency.”
Laurentia Project: Port of
Québec Deep-Water Wharf
–
Beauport Sector.
Environmental Assessment Report, June 2021.
58
Port Québec.
“4.1.2.1
Standing committees.”
Summary of the Environmental Impact Statement.
September
2016.
59
Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.
Framework: Public Participation under the Impact Assessment Act.
60
Impact Assessment Agency.
Port of Quebec Deep-Water Multipurpose Wharf Project - Beauport 2020 -
Information Session.
Public notice, 29 October 2015; Impact Assessment Agency.
Public Notice - Revised Port of
Quebec Deep-Water Multipurpose Wharf Project - Beauport 2020 - Public Comment Period and Information
Sessions.
26 January 2017; Impact Assessment Agency.
Virtual Information Sessions - Zoom links and Instructions;
Impact Assessment Agency.
Letter from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to Interested Parties re:
Open House and Public Sessions.
4 January 2017; Impact Assessment Agency.
Information Sheet - Environmental
Assessment Process for the Laurentia Project.
November 2020; Impact Assessment Agency.
Laurentia Project:
Deep-water wharf in the Port of Québec - Beauport Sector - Consultation on the Draft Environmental Assessment
Report.
PowerPoint presentation, 2020; and Impact Assessment Agency.
Information Session Presentation: Federal
Environmental Assessment Process.
Québec Regional Office, November 2015.
61
Impact Assessment Agency.
“3.2.1
Public Consultation Conducted by the Agency.”
Laurentia Project: Port of
Québec Deep-Water Wharf
–
Beauport Sector.
Environmental Assessment Report, June 2021.
62
Impact Assessment Agency.
“9.
Agency Conclusions and Recommendations.”
Laurentia Project: Port of Québec
Deep-Water Wharf
–
Beauport Sector.
Environmental Assessment Report, June 2021.
Page 21
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0023.png
Council who
“determined
the potential significant direct and cumulative adverse environmental effects
of the Laurentia Project are not justified in the circumstances.”
63
63
Impact Assessment Agency.
The Government of Canada releases its final decision on the Laurentia Project: Port
of Quebec Deep-Water Wharf - Beauport Sector.
News release, 29 June 2021.
Page 22
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0024.png
Memorandum
10 July 2024
Research Service
Senior Legal Specialist Mira Matikkala
TAH20240417
Finland
ECPRD 5838 Better citizen involvement and efficient approval processes
in Large-Scale Renewable Energy and Infrastructure Projects
1) Public Participation Prior to Decision-Making:
How do authorities involve citizens and other stakeholders in the preparatory work before
political decisions on major infrastructure projects are made?
Like in Denmark, in Finland the environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure is at the centre
of involving the public and other stakeholders. The EIA aims at reducing or preventing the negative
environmental impact of projects. Examples of projects include highways, landfill sites and power
plants,
i.e.
all large-scale projects.
In the EIA procedure, the impact of the project is assessed at the preparation stage before any
decisions are made and when the forthcoming solutions can still be influenced. The EIA procedure
is a project planning tool, and its results must be considered when granting permits for projects.
The developer of the project is responsible for conducting the necessary environmental
investigations and producing the Scoping Document and Environmental Impact Assessment Report.
Developers can be individual companies or public actors, such as municipalities or government
agencies. The procedure is supervised and controlled by the Centres for Economic Development,
Transport and the Environment, who act as competent authorities. The competent authority for
nuclear energy projects is the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment.
The public and the authorities affected by the project can participate in the EIA procedure. The
nature of the procedure is participatory and open.
The
Act on the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure (252/2017)
defines the projects
whose environmental impact must always be assessed. The procedure may be applied to smaller
projects and projects not mentioned, if the projects are considered to have significant
environmental impacts.
Information on all projects is available online on the website of Finland’s environmental
administration and the local Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment,
and are often publicised further in newspapers, social media, etc. The information includes
instructions for giving written feedback, attending a public hearing, or other forms of participating.
The EIA procedure is not an authorisation procedure, and the EIA cannot be appealed against.
The procedure in a nutshell:
23
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0025.png
−
The developer draws up an EIA programme, i.e. a plan on how the environmental impact
assessment is to be carried out. The programme describes the project, its options, and the
impacts to be investigated. It also explains how information sharing and participation are
organised.
The contact authority shall inform the public about the existence of the EIA programme on
its website and in a newspaper. The information shows how to view the programme and
how to comment on it. There is at least 30 days to respond. The EIA programme is usually
presented at a public event.
The contact authority shall give its opinion on the EIA programme to the project manager
one month after the end of the consultation. The opinion takes a view on the scope and
precision of the programme. It also contains a summary of the comments made by others.
The opinion shall be published on the authority’s website.
The party responsible for the project examines the environmental impacts and organises
the related participation based on the EIA programme and the opinion of the contact
authority and prepares an EIA report.
The contact authority shall ensure that the
lis pendens
of the EIA report is communicated.
The EIA report is usually presented at a public event. The commenting period for the report
is 30–60 days.
The contact authority verifies the adequacy and quality of the EIA report and then draws up
a reasoned conclusion on the significant environmental impacts of the project. It shall be
submitted to the project manager within 2 months of the end of the consultation and shall
also be communicated. The party responsible for the project attaches an EIA report and a
reasoned conclusion to the project permit applications.
The permit authority takes the EIA report and the reasoned conclusion into account in the
permit. The public will also be able to participate in the authorisation procedure.
−
−
−
−
−
−
Environmental permits are applied from
Regional State Administrative Agencies.
The public can
read the documents related to the application in the Regional State Administrative
Agency’s
Permit
information service, where they will be displayed for at least 30 days after the publication of the
notice. The parties (persons whose interests or rights may be affected) may file an objection to a
pending application. Persons other than the parties concerned have the right to express their
opinion on the application.
2) Framework and Legislation:
Provide examples from your legislation aimed at promoting local support and the swift approval
of projects. For instance, through the special arrangement of authority competencies,
consultation processes, limited appeal opportunities, etc.
The smooth progress of the projects will be facilitated by clear processes and responsible parties
and the availability of as much information and participatory impacts as possible to the public at an
early stage to avoid surprises at a later stage.
The objective of the Act on the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure “is to further the
assessment and consistent consideration of environmental impacts in planning and decision-
making and, at the same time, to improve access to information and opportunities to participate
for
everyone”
(section 1). The EIA process, authorities, and consultation processes are regulated in
the Act.
While the EIA procedure is open to everyone to participate, it cannot be appealed against, since it
is not an authorisation procedure. At the permit stage the right to appeal is limited to those whose
interests or rights may be affected.
24
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0026.png
The
Land Use and Building Act
(132/1999, the English translation is not up to date but link to the
Swedish version) lays down provisions on the planning of areas and the construction and use of
areas. Its objective “is to ensure that the use of land and water areas and building activities on
them create preconditions for a favourable living environment and promote ecologically,
economically, socially and culturally sustainable development. The Act also aims to ensure that
everyone has the right to participate in the preparation process, and that planning is high quality
and interactive, that expertise is comprehensive and that there is open provision of information on
matters being processed.” (section 1)
Renewable Energy Directive (RED) III has led to the following legislative amendments to the Nature
Conservation Act (9/2023) (amendments came into force on 1 July 2024,
in Swedish):
−
−
The preparation of renewable energy projects will be streamlined by stipulating that the
environmental impact assessment of a renewable energy project and the Natura
assessment (for nature reserves) should always be carried out jointly (section 35).
In addition, the concept of
overriding public interest
in the national implementation of the
EU Nature Conservation Directives was clarified so that renewable energy projects are
always covered by it (section 39).
A clarifying provision was added concerning specimens of a protected species that die
unintentionally in connection with the construction or operation of a renewable energy
production plant to be constructed with appropriate permits. For example, if birds die
accidentally from wind turbine blades, there is no deliberate killing (section 70).
−
Act on Authorisation Procedures for Renewable Energy Installations and Certain Other
Administrative Procedures (1145/2020, not available in English,
link to the Swedish version)
came
into force on 30 June 2021. The aim of the Act is to expedite the procedures and to improve,
among other things, the advice related to them.
The Ministry of the Environment has launched a project to prepare amendments to this Act in
accordance with the requirements of RED III. This means, for example, that renewable energy
projects implemented in areas defined as
an area for the rapid development of renewable energy
have shorter permit-granting deadlines than projects in other areas. Moreover, projects in the
areas of rapid development are exempted from the EIA procedure under certain conditions. In
addition, the role of the contact point authority will become increasingly important in streamlining
the authorisation procedures for renewable energy installations.
3) Effective Citizen Engagement:
Provide an example of 'good practices' involving citizen engagement in recent major
infrastructure and renewable energy projects.
An EIA of the wind and solar power park project of Myrsky Energia Oy (limited liability company) in
Luumäki, Suurikangas, is currently under way. A maximum of 15 wind turbines and 76 hectares of
solar power plants are planned. Luumäki is situated in South-eastern Finland.
Information on the project is published at least on the websites of Finland’s
environmental
administration,
the company
Myrsky Energia Oy,
and the municipality of Luumäki (links are to
Finnish pages). The local Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment
(contact authority) has shared the notification in traditional and social media.
The EIA programme has been publicised between 6 March and 5 April in 2023. The contact
authority provided its statement on the programme on 5 May 2023.
At the present stage, the EIA report with its 15 attachments is publicised between 22 May and 22
25
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
July 2024. The material is available to everyone online and provided to be read on paper in the
municipality’s premises.
A public presentation and consultation event was held locally and online on 18 June. The memo of
the event has been published online. There were 28 people present at the meeting and 8
participants online (via Teams). Further opinions are requested until 22 July. Within two months of
that the contact authority will provide its final statement.
26
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0028.png
Holland
1) Public Participation Prior to Decision-Making:
How do authorities involve citizens and other stakeholders in the preparatory work before political
decisions on major infrastructure projects are made?
Since January 1, 2024, the procedures for spatial projects have been radically adjusted. From that
date, the
Environmental and Planning Act
(in
Dutch: Omgevingswet)
came into effect in the
Netherlands.
This Act describes when consultation/participation is mandatory. The Environmental and Planning Act
itself does not define participation, but only determines when participation is mandatory or can be
made mandatory.
Article 10.24 and Appendix V of the Environmental and Planning Decree (a further elaboration of the
provisions of the Environmental and Planning Act) indicate which projects require a so-called
environmental impact assessment (in
Dutch: Milieueffectrapportage, MER).
The projects you
mentioned are part of this. The uniform public preparation procedure of
section 3.4 (Articles 3.10-
3.13 of the General Administrative Law Act)
(in
Dutch: Algemene Wet Bestuursrecht, AWB)
is
prescribed for such plans or decisions. This means that anyone can submit views on the draft
decision. The Environment and Planning Act regulates that an view can also relate to the
environmental impact report.
In this extensive procedure (uniform public preparation procedure, section 3.4 General
Administrative Law Act), the competent authority decides within six months after an application. If
necessary, it can be extended by six weeks if necessary. During the extensive procedure, the
administrative body makes a draft decision on which
views
[sorry,
the explanation is only available in
Dutch]
are open. After the decision has been made, an
appeal to the court
[only
in Dutch]
is still
possible.
Article 7.4 of the Environmental and Planning Regulation
[sorry,
again only available in Dutch]
states
that the applicant for an environmental permit must indicate in the application:
•
whether the applicant actively participated his plans with involved citizens, companies, civil
societies and governing bodies
•
if so: how the applicant participated and what the results of the participation are
This application requirement does not include any obligation for the applicant to participate.
Participation by the initiator in the preparation of an environmental permit is voluntary. The answer
to the first question above may therefore also be 'no'. The competent authority may not refuse to
process an application (leave it aside) or refuse to grant the permit because there has been no
participation. The intention of Article 7.4 is only to encourage the initiator to think about
participation. If he participates, the competent authority must know what the results are. The duty
does not entail more than that.
The project decision procedure under the Environmental and Planning Act is broadly as follows. The
competent authority must carry out an exploration into possible existing or future tasks in the
physical environment for all projects for which it adopts a project decision, prior to making the draft
project decision available for inspection. The competent authority must publicly notify the intention
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0029.png
to do so. That notification must also indicate whether or not a preference decision [in
Dutch:
voorkeursbeslissing]
will be taken prior to the project decision. In the preference decision, the board
expresses its preference for the way in which it wants to solve the task in the physical environment.
This concerns a political-administrative position statement that is not legally binding and against
which no appeal is possible in court. However, anyone can put forward their views regarding a
preference decision. The preference decision must ultimately be elaborated in one or more project
decisions, which are legally binding and against which legal protection is available before the
administrative court. Making a preference decision is an intermediate step in the funneling from an
abstract task for the physical environment to a concrete project decision. This extra intermediate step
is especially of added value in complex, controversial and administratively sensitive projects, where
broad exploration and participation is desirable. Making a preference decision is therefore usually not
mandatory for the competent authority. No later than the start of the exploration, the competent
authority must indicate how citizens, companies and social organizations will be involved in the
exploration. This obligation is further elaborated on this point in the Environmental Decree compared
to the Route Act. The competent authority must in any case discuss: - who will be involved;
–
about
which they are involved;
–
when they are involved;
–
what the role of the competent authority is in
involving these parties; and
–
where additional information is available. The Environmental Decree
also sets further requirements with regard to the manner in which notification of participation
opportunities takes place. This notification must be made in such a way that the relevant public is
best reached.
Not everyone is happy with the shift from traditional advocacy to more participation under the
Environmental and Planning Act. The
Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy
[Dutch
abbreviation WRR]
wrote in
a report from october 2023:
“The Dutch Environment and Planning Act, which came into effect in 2024, also prescribes
participation, although without attaching many conditions to it. From the perspective of personal
control, more participation is benefcial to those who have the time and the skills to operate
effectively in this kind of procedure. To them, this probably means having more control over their
living environment. But the opposite is true for people who do not have the time and skills. For them,
the shift from a representative to a participatory democracy may lead to less control. They would
probably beneft more from
a ‘traditional’ representation offered by competent representatives who
can counter the more vocal and organised interests. This means that policymakers who believe they
can reduce discontent through ‘more participation’ may well be fooling themselves, because
for
some citizens this may actually mean having less personal control. That is why, besides providing
participatory routes, it is crucial that our representative democracy continues to function properly
and to the full extent.”
2) Framework and Legislation:
Provide examples from your legislation aimed at promoting local support and the swift approval of
projects. For instance, through the special arrangement of authority competencies, consultation
processes, limited appeal opportunities, etc.
Representatives of the government agencies involved say that it has been decided to set up an
independent project organization for the national infrastructure project of a new tunnel under
National highway A2 in the city of Maastricht. All government agencies involved signed a contract in
which they established the framework within which the project would be further developed. With
this, the administration and politics committed themselves. The further implementation of the
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0030.png
project and participation and communication was in the hands of the project office. See also the reply
on your third question.
Platform Participatie
is an initiative of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. Via this
website stakeholders can give their views on projects in which the Ministry of Infrastructure and
Water Management is involved. This includes topics as roads, railways, the environment, water and
aviation. On the website internet consultations for legislation and regulations that the Ministry of
Infrastructure and Water Management is developing can be found.
In 2019, the
Dutch National Ombudsman
conducted research into the participation of citizens in
major infrastructure projects. Below are the recommendations from
his report
[again,
only in Dutch]:
1. As a board, provide clarity about the frameworks
•
•
•
determine in a timely manner which choices have already been made and to what extent
citizens can influence exercise
establish the framework
respect the frameworks once established
2. Ensure an open attitude and behavior of civil servants
•
•
•
trust that participating citizens also have relevant knowledge and experience
be prepared to look for jointly supported solutions
show understanding and a listening ear
3. Make sufficient time and money available
•
•
•
•
provide the flexibility to be able to commit additional time and money if necessary, if
necessary
that more space should be provided for participation
ensure that delays in the project are not detrimental
participation opportunities
4. Evaluate and apply lessons learned
•
•
•
•
make evaluation a standard part of a government infrastructure project
ask both civil servants and citizens for feedback
facilitate that civil servants use the scholar in subsequent government infrastructure projects
put lessons into practice
3) Effective Citizen Engagement:
Provide an example of 'good practices' involving citizen engagement in recent major infrastructure
and renewable energy projects.
Representatives of the government agencies involved say that in the infrastructure government
projects
Room for the River
and realization of a
new tunnel in National highway A2
near the city of
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0031.png
Maastricht, it was decided to invest time and money in participation at the earliest possible stage.
This ultimately yielded significant results for both projects. This resulted in fewer complaints and
fewer procedures. The procedures that were conducted were generally won, because the
government had sufficiently involved stakeholders in the decision-making process. Furthermore,
there was less stagnation during implementation. And the most beautiful thing; the residents are
satisfied and even more proud of the result than the project organization. The social benefits of the
project are great, according to the representatives.
(Source:
‘Een
goed begin is het halve
werk’,
the National Ombudsman, 2019)
In addition to the legal instruments, other figures are emerging in practice in The Netherlands. In the
National Climate Agreement,
governments and initiators are urged to adopt a 'participatory
approach', in which 'process participation' and 'financial participation' are key concepts in the
construction of solar and wind energy parks.
These concepts are elaborated in the so-called
Participation Range
[Participatiewaaier;
unfortunately
only available in Dutch].
The Participation Range shows that process participation involves
'substantive involvement of stakeholders' prior to decision-making. Financial participation means that
citizens can invest in or otherwise benefit from wind and solar parks. There are different forms of
financial participation. For example, local residents can become co-owners or shareholders, or enjoy
(in)direct benefits through a local residents' scheme or environmental fund.
In the Participation Range is noted that it’s important to take into account when choosing
participation option(s) the dealing with people with a small budget. Not everyone has the
opportunity to invest money. That's why it's always important to start by making an inventory of the
wishes of local residents about it project, according to the Participation Range.
Finally, some information you might have found yourself, but is nevertheless perhaps useful for you:
A Just and Effective Wind Energy Transition: Six Insights from Denmark and the Netherlands
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0032.png
Norge
Stortingets utredningsseksjon
Dato: 19.08.2024
ECPRD request no: 5838
Utreder: Hanne Camilla Zimmer
Oppdragsgiver: Danmark
Oppdragsnummer: 2024237
Better citizen involvement and efficient approval processes in
Large-Scale Renewable Energy and Infrastructure Projects
Oppdraget er opprinnelig et ECPRD-oppdrag, senere sendt som bilateral forespørsel, og forenklet
til følgende spørsmål:
1)
Involverer myndighederne altid borgere og andre interessenter i forarbejdet, før der
træffes politiske beslutninger om større infrastrukturprojekter?
2)
Kan I give eksempler fra jeres lovgivning, der sigter mod at fremme lokal opbakning og
hurtig godkendelse af projekter? For eksempel gennem særlige ordninger for begrænsede
klagemuligheder, myndigheders kompetencer, høringsprocesser osv.
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0033.png
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0034.png
1 Involvering av borgere før politiske beslutninger om større
infrastrukturprosjekter
Det er ikke presisert om spørsmålet gjelder infrastrukturprosjekter generelt, eller spesifikt
infrastrukturprosjekter knyttet til fornybar energi (særlig utbygging av kraftnett). Vi behandler først
noen generelle prinsipper for involvering av borgere i større infrastrukturprosjekter, og deretter
spesifikt store utbygginger av kraftnett.
Statlig forvaltning er underlagt
utredningsinstruksen,
som gir retningslinjer for utredning, høring
og forberedelse av statlige tiltak. Det fremgår av innledningen i instruksen at formålet er «å
legge
et godt grunnlag for beslutninger om statlige tiltak, for eksempel reformer, regelendringer og
investeringer».
I tillegg til generelle regler om hvilke forhold som skal vurderes og hvor omfattende
en utredning skal være, inneholder instruksen i § 3-3 regler om høring. Det fremgår her at
«Offentlige utredninger, forslag til lov og forskrift og forslag til tiltak med vesentlige
virkninger skal normalt legges ut på høring. Høringene skal være åpne for innspill fra alle.
Høringsfristen skal tilpasses omfanget av tiltaket og hvor viktig det er. Høringsfristen skal
normalt være tre måneder, og ikke mindre enn seks uker.»
Større infrastrukturprosjekter kan være «tiltak med vesentlige virkninger». Et eksempel på høring
og involvering av interessenter på en tidlig fase av prosjekter, er Samferdselsdepartementets
høring i forbindelse med utarbeidelsen av Nasjonal transportplan, en stortingsmelding om
regjeringens transportpolitikk som beskriver målsetninger, virkemidler og prinsipper på
transportfeltet. Ved utarbeidelsen av
gjeldende plan (Meld. St. 14 (2023
–
2024), for perioden
2025
–
2036),
ble
underlagsmateriale, utredninger og innspill fra transportvirksomhetene selv
lagt ut på høring,
og departementet mottok over
250 høringssvar fra offentlige og private
virksomheter, kommuner, organisasjoner og privatpersoner.
I tillegg får berørte lokale
myndigheter (som kommuner og Sametinget) særskilt mulighet til å medvirke i prosessen.
Nasjonal transportplan eller stortingsbehandlingen av den fører ikke i seg selv til noen
investeringsbeslutning.
Ved det videre arbeidet med prosjektet følger store statlige investeringsprosjekter
statens
prosjektmodell,
som blant annet forutsetter konseptvalgutredning og ekstern kvalitetssikring. En
konseptvalgutredning er et beslutningsgrunnlag for å velge hvilket konsept som eventuelt skal
videreføres i forprosjektfasen. Det er ikke uvanlig at konseptvalgutredninger sendes på høring, se
for eksempel
høring av konseptvalgutredning (KVU) for transportløsninger i Nord-Norge.
Høringsrunder, spørreundersøkelser eller annen involvering av berørte interesser kan også inngå i
konseptvalgutredningens behovsanalyse.
1
Infrastrukturprosjekter forutsetter normalt også arealinngrep. Dette reguleres i
plan- og
bygningsloven,
som har omfattende regler om høring og medvirkning. Lovens regler om
arealplaner forutsetter høy grad av medvirkning for og involvering av publikum. Utbygginger skal
generelt være i samsvar med vedtatte planer, og plan- og bygningsloven forutsetter at den som
Se
Finansdepartementets veileder Utarbeidelse av KVU/KL dokumenter,
s. 4: «Kartlegging
av interessenter og
aktørers preferanser og opplevde behov er også nyttig ved utarbeidelse av behovsanalyser. Dette kan gjøres gjennom
gruppeprosesser, spørreundersøkelser, dybdeintervjuer eller sammenstilling av allerede tilgjengelig informasjon
fra formaliserte høringsrunder og lignende.»
1
2
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0035.png
fremmer planforslag, legger til rette for medvirkning, jf.
§ 5-1.
Videre forutsetter ulike
bestemmelser i loven at ulike typer planforslag legges ut til offentlig ettersyn og sendes på høring.
Når et planforslag skal sendes på høring, «skal
forslaget sendes til alle statlige, regionale og
kommunale myndigheter og andre offentlige organer, private organisasjoner og institusjoner,
som blir berørt av forslaget, til uttalelse innen en fastsatt frist»,
jf.
§ 5-2.
For mange typer planer
skal det før oppstart med planen utarbeides et planprogram som skal gjøre rede for formålet med
planarbeidet, planprosessen med frister og deltaker, opplegget for medvirkning og behovet for
utredninger. Forslaget til planprogram skal også sendes på høring, jf.
§ 4-1(2).
Utbygging av kraftnett er i stor grad unntatt fra plan- og bygningslovens regler, jf.
§ 1-3(2).
Kraftnett må derimot ha konsesjon etter energiloven, som i seg selv legger opp til en omfattende
utrednings- og medvirkningsprosess. En
oversikt over konsesjonsprosessen for ulike typer
nettanlegg
finnes på
Norges vassdrags- og energiverk
(NVEs) hjemmesider. I de aller fleste
tilfeller forutsettes offentlig høring på minst ett stadium av prosessen. I de største prosjektene
(Saksgang C) kan det være opptil tre høringer: Først sender departementet utkastet til
konseptvalgutredning på høring,
2
deretter skal meldingen etter forskrift om
konsekvensutredninger på høring, og til slutt skal selve konsesjonssøknaden høres. Se NVEs
oversikt over ulike trinn i prosessen i prosjekter som følger Saksgang C
for nærmere detaljer.
2 Eksempler fra norsk lovgivning på tiltak som skal fremme lokal støtte og
hurtig godkjennelse av prosjekter
Utbygging av ny kraft og energiinfrastruktur er regulert i ulike lover i Norge, avhengig av typen
prosjekt. Generelt kreves konsesjon for energi- og energiinfrastrukturprosjekter. En oversikt over
hvilke regler som regulerer ulike typer prosjekter gis i tabellen under:
2
Se «Konseptvalgutredning
og ekstern kvalitetssikring av store kraftledningssaker»,
s. 3.
3
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0036.png
Kilde:
NOU 2023: 3 Mer av alt
–
raskere
—
Energikommisjonens rapport, kapittel 10
(tabell 10.1).
og
Vedlegg 1 om konsesjonsinstituttet
Se lenker til de aktuelle lovene her:
Vannressursloven
Vassdragsreguleringsloven
Energiloven
Havenergiloven
Atomenergiloven
De ulike lovene gir saksbehandlingsregler som skal sikre at lokalsamfunn og andre berørte
gruppers interesser hensyntas. Grovt sett kan disse reglene deles i to grupper:
1. Regler om høring og utredning
2. Regler som særlig fremmer lokal støtte
4
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0037.png
Hensynet til
hurtig
godkjennelse og oppstart kan i noen tilfeller stå i motsetning til hensynet til
lokal støtte og involvering av berørte grupper. Vi behandler regler som skal fremme hurtig
godkjenning/oppstart i et eget avsnitt avslutningsvis.
2.1
Utredning, høring og involvering av berørte grupper
Prosessen frem mot konsesjon for de ulike prosjekttypene er nærmere beskrevet i
Vedlegg 1 om
konsesjonsinstituttet
til Energikommisjonens rapport.
Her fremgår det at tiltak som krever konsesjon etter energiloven, vannressursloven eller
vassdragsreguleringsloven har krav til konsekvensutredning etter plan- og bygningsloven (se
plan-
og bygningsloven kapittel 14
og
forskrift om konsekvensutredninger,
som blant annet bygger på
direktiv 2014/25/EU). Saksbehandlingen for store vannkraftverk, som viser krav til høring og
utredning på ulike stadier av prosessen, er fremstilt som følger i vedlegget:
I forbindelse med høringer av forslag til KU-program (konsekvensutredningsprogram) og
konsesjonssøknad arrangeres det også folkemøter. En mer detaljert fremstilling av prosessen
finnes på
NVEs hjemmesider.
Det er også gitt en egen veileder om
Konsesjonshandsaming i
vasskraftsaker.
Også større vindkraftverk har krav til forutgående melding, se forskrift om konsekvensutredninger
§ 6 jf. Vedlegg I punkt 28. Saksbehandlingen kan være mindre omfattende for mindre anlegg, og
for eksempel solkraftanlegg har i dag ikke krav til melding, selv om det må søkes konsesjon.
Ved utbygginger i tradisjonelt samiske områder gjelder en egen konsultasjonsplikt med
Sametinget, se
sameloven kapittel 4,
veilederen for konsesjonsbehandling kapittel 2, samt
informasjon fra regjeringen.
Myndigheten til å vedta arealplaner og gi byggetillatelser etter plan- og bygningsloven ligger hos
kommunene, men konsesjonspliktig kraftproduksjon trenger som hovedregel ikke reguleringsplan
eller byggetillatelse, se
plan- og bygningsloven
§ 12-1 annet ledd og § 20-6. Anleggene kan
likevel ikke bygges i strid med gjeldende arealplaner. Hvis tiltaket strider mot vedtatte planer, må
det enten gis dispensasjon eller planendring. Dette er i utgangspunktet er kommunens ansvar,
men plan- og bygningsloven inneholder en
særbestemmelse om statlig arealplan
i slik tilfeller,
som innebærer at staten kan fastsette de nødvendige planendringene for å sikre at tiltaket kan
5
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0038.png
realiseres i samsvar med konsesjonen. Ved behov for planendring har plan- og bygningsloven
som nevnt omfattende krav til
høring og medvirkning,
uavhengig av om prosessen gjennomføres
av kommunen eller staten. Departementet kan imidlertid velge å i stedet vedta at konsesjonen
skal gjelde som plan, se § 6-4 tredje ledd.
Ved utbygging av vindkraft til havs gjelder
havenergiloven.
Før et område åpnes for vindkraft,
gjelder det også etter denne loven et krav om melding med forslag til utredningsprogram, som
deretter sendes på høring (§ 4-1), konsekvensutredning og høring av denne (§ 2-2) og
konsesjonssøknad og detaljplan (§ 3-3). I forbindelse med de områdene som har vært åpnet til
nå, har det vært omfattende offentlige høringsrunder, ikke bare om miljømessige konsekvenser
og liknende, men også om prekvalifiseringskriterier, støttemodell og auksjonsmodellen for
tildeling av områder, se
energidepartementets tidslinje.
2.2
Regler som særlig fremmer lokal støtte
Et særtrekk ved norsk energilovgivning er kravet om at større vannfall skal være i norsk, offentlig
eie, se
vannfallrettighetsloven
§§ 5
–
7.
88% av norsk vannkraft er offentlig eid, hvorav 42% er i
kommunalt eie,
og mange kommuner får derfor utbytte fra vannkraftselskap. Videre har
kommuner som berøres av en vannkraftutbygging krav på konsesjonskraft og konsesjonsavgifter.
I tillegg har vertskommuner for vannkraftverk inntekter fra naturressursskatt og kommunal
eiendomsskatt på kraftverk. Mange norske kommuner har derfor store inntekter fra vannkraft. Se
Kommunenes sentralforbunds oversikt over norske kommuners inntekter fra kraftsektoren
og
energidepartementets side om beskatning av vannkraft på
energifakta
for mer detaljer.
Det gjelder ikke tilsvarende eierskapsbegrensninger for vindkraft, og det kommunale eierskapet i
denne sektoren er mindre fremtredende. Kommunene får heller ikke konsesjonskraft eller
konsesjonsavgifter fra vindkraftverk. De kan derimot skrive ut eiendomsskatt, men
verdsettelsesreglene er annerledes enn for vannkraft. Det er innført en produksjonsavgift for
vindkraft som betales til statskassen, men er forutsatt tilbakeført til kommunene gjennom
utbetaling fra NVE. Se
energifakta
for mer detaljer.
Utbygging av vindkraft på land har vært politisk omstridt i Norge, og har ofte møtt betydelig lokal
motstand. I vindkraftmeldingen
Meld. St. 28 (2019-2020)
varslet den daværende regjeringen en
rekke endringer i reguleringen av vindkraft, blant annet sterkere involvering av kommunene ved
etablering av nye vindkraftverk og ny frister i søknadsbehandlingen.
En viktig oppfølgning av vindkraftmeldingen var en
lovendring
om kommunale planer for
vindkraftverk, vedtatt i 2023. De viktigste endringene var innføring av et krav om at konsesjon
etter energiloven ikke kan gis for vindkraftverk før tiltaket er planavklart etter plan- og
bygningsloven (se plan- og bygningsloven § 2-2), og departementet kan for vindkraftanlegg heller
ikke bestemme at konsesjonen skal ha virkning som plan, se § 6-4 tredje ledd. I forarbeidene til
lovendringen beskrives formålet som følger, se
Prop. 111 L (2022
–
2023) punkt 2.2.:
Det overordnede formålet med forslagene til lovendringer som foreslås i denne
proposisjonen, er å styrke kommunenes rolle i prosesser knyttet til utbygging av vindkraft
på land, jf. Innst. 101 S (2020–2021). Det er lagt til grunn at økt involvering av
kommuner og lokalsamfunn er nødvendig for å gi økt legitimitet til prosessene, bedre
forankring av vindkraft lokalt og bedre tilpassede løsninger. Endringene antas å redusere
konfliktnivået, og dermed gi grunnlag for en videre utbygging av vindkraft, blant annet for
å styrke kraftbalansen og nå de nasjonale klimamålene.
6
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0039.png
Endringene innebærer at kommunens syn tillegges svært stor vekt, og at det bare helt unntaksvis
vil være aktuelt å gjennomføre planlegging av vindkraft som en statlig plan.
3
Energikommisjonen drøfter også mulige tiltak for å øke aksepten for ny kraftutbygging, se
NOU
2023:3 punkt 10.4.5.
2.3
Regler og tiltak som skal fremme hurtig saksbehandling
Behovet for effektiv konsesjonsbehandling drøftes i energikommisjonens utredning (NOU 2023:3)
kapittel 10.8.2.
Kommisjonen peker på følgende faktorer i norsk regelverk og praksis som viktige
for en effektiv konsesjonsbehandling:
Konsesjonsbehandlingen i Norge er i stor grad samordnet, dvs. at der det kreves konsesjon
etter ulike lovverk, koordinerer NVE arbeidet i meldings- og søknadsfasen. Dette bidrar i
utgangspunktet til forenkling og effektivisering.
NVE og departementet har utarbeidet veiledere for søkere og høringsparter for alle sakstyper.
Det er utarbeidet standardiserte søknadsmaler som gjør det enklere å søke, og digitale
løsninger for høringer.
Mer effektiv saksbehandling der det er gitt tydelige politiske prioriteringer.
For vindkraft foreslår vindkraftmeldingen nye frister i behandlingen av vindkraftsaker.
Konsesjonsbehandlingen kan likevel ta lang tid, og energikommisjonen foreslår en rekke tiltak for
raskere saksbehandling, se
kapittel 1.6.
Det er i utgangspunktet mulig for alle med «rettslig
klageinteresse»
å påklage en tildelt konsesjon
eller planvedtak etter plan- og bygningsloven som er nødvendig for tildeling av konsesjon. Dette
kan være andre som rettslig eller faktisk berøres av vedtaket, eller frivillige organisasjoner mv.
der konsesjoner griper inn i de interessene organisasjonen skal ivareta. Det er likevel noen
praktisk viktige begrensninger i klageretten:
-
-
Det er ikke klagerett på de største vannkraftsakene, der konsesjon gis av Kongen i
statsråd;
Det er ikke klagerett på statlig arealplan etter plan- og bygningsloven § 6-4, jf. fjerde ledd.
Energikommisjonen anbefaler at behandlingen av klager på NVEs konsesjonsvedtak forenkles,
særlig der klagen ikke inneholder nye, relevante opplysninger, se
NOU 2023: 3 avsnitt 1.6.
Det er også mulig å utfordre vedtak om tildelte konsesjoner for domstolene. Som hovedregel vil
imidlertid verken klage eller søksmål hindre konsesjonæren i å påbegynne utbyggingen. Hvis det
er nødvendig å ekspropriere grunn eller rettigheter for utbyggingen, noe som ofte er tilfellet, og
skjønnssaken (dvs. saken om vederlag til den ekspropriasjonen er rettet mot) ikke er rettskraftig
avgjort, kan det søkes om førtidig tiltredelse til det eksproprierte området etter
oreigningslova §
25,
slik at utbyggingen kan begynne.
At en utbygging kan begynne før tvist om ekspropriasjonen eller konsesjonsvedtaket er
rettskraftig avgjort, bidrar til at prosjekter kommer i gang, men kan volde store problemer dersom
domstolene i ettertid skulle sette vedtakene til side. Dette ble særlig tydelig i den såkalte Fosen-
saken, som gjaldt en vindpark i et samisk reinbeiteområde i Trøndelag. Saken kom opp for
3
Se
Prop. 111 L (2022
–
2023) punkt 4.6.2.
7
 TRU, Alm.del - 2023-24 - Bilag 325: HECPRD-svar til parlamentarisk arbejdsgruppe om effektive høringsprocesser
2901719_0040.png
Høyesterett etter at vindparken var bygget og satt i drift, men Høyesterett (sak
HR-2021-1975-S)
fant at utbyggingen var i strid med samisk rett til kulturutøvelse i henhold til FNs konvensjon om
sivile og politiske rettigheter, artikkel 27. Etter Høyesteretts dom oppstod vanskelige spørsmål om
hvilke konsekvenser dommen hadde og hvordan den skulle følges opp. Regjeringen kom til
enighet om en minnelig løsning med de to berørte reinbeitedistriktene henholdsvis i
desember
2023
og
mars 2024,
dvs. nærmere tre år etter at dommen falt. Avtalene innebærer blant annet
at reineierne får økonomisk kompensasjon. Se ellers
Store norske leksikons oppsummering av
saken.
Vi nevner for ordens skyld at EUs fornybardirektiv av 2018, samt endringene vedtatt i 2023,
foreløpig ikke gjelder i Norge. Direktivene er merket som EØS-relevante fra EU-kommisjonens
side, men er politisk omstridte i Norge, og er ennå ikke innlemmet i EØS-avtalen. Det er derfor pr.
i dag ikke avgjort om, og i så fall når og hvordan, fristene for konsesjonsprosesser i disse
direktivene vil bli tatt inn i norsk rett.
8