Search En menu en ClientConnect
Search
Results
Top 5 search results See all results Advanced search
Top searches
Most visited pages
    Reference: SG/A/2011/01
    Received Date: 29 March 2011
    Subject: South Poland CHP, Bielsko-Biala, Poland
    Complainant: CEE Bankwatch Network
    Allegations: Refusal to release environmental information
    Type: A - Access to Information
    Outcome*: No Grounds
    Suggestions for improvement: no
    Admissibility*
    Assessment*
    Investigation*
    Dispute Resolution*
    Consultation*
    Closed*
    29/03/2011
    6/04/2011
    20/09/2011

    * Admissibility date reflects the date the case was officially registered. All other dates pertain to the date in which a stage was completed.

    Case Description

    The project concerns the construction and commissioning of a state-of-the-art high-efficiency hard coal-fired cogeneration (CHP) unit and associated infrastructure. The capacity of the plant is 50 MWe and 106 MWt. It will replace an inefficient hard coal-fired CHP unit of higher capacity (which will be dismantled) and will be located within the boundaries of the existing Bielsko-Biala power plant, in Southern Poland.

    The complaint concerns the refusal of access to information, in particular on the carbon intensity of the energy produced in the new unit and on the exact dates of the phasing-out of existing units. The Complaint followed a request for information by the Complainant on 21 December 2010, confirmed on 08 February 2011, after refusal by the EIB services to release documents relating to the carbon energy of the project (while providing legal documents as the the local authorities’ building, environmental permissions and the EIA of the project. The complaint, essentially, concerns the fact that the complainant had not received an answer from the EIB regarding his confirmatory application of 8 February 2011 by April 2011. On 14 April 2011 the EIB replied to the confirmatory application of the complainant, apologising for the delay of their response due to administrative constraints.

    The assessment of the EIB Complaints Mechanism (EIB-CM) brought out that the complainant had on 26 January 2011 been provided with most of the information requested and that the EIB, in the reply of 14 April 2011 to the confirmatory request, covered the remainder of the requested information and moreover provided a variety of project relevant documents that had not been specifically requested, in accordance with the EIB’s disclosure of documents policy.

    Thus, although the EIB services were late in replying to the confirmatory application due to internal and administrative constraints, ultimately the totality of the information requested was disclosed. Moreover the EIB services held a meeting with representatives and co-complainants of the complainants’ NGO, CEE Bankwatch Network, on 17 March 2011 in order to discuss their general concerns regarding the Bank’s financing of coal/lignite power stations. The EIB-CM notes, in particular, that the EIB’s reply of 14 April 2011 complies with the general principles of the EIB Transparency Policy, with Regulation 1049/2001 as well as with the provisions of Regulation 1367/2006 and of the Aarhus Convention when handling request for environmental information. Therefore the EIB-CM concludes that not only was there no maladministration committed by the EIB in casu, indeed, the procedures in place – confirmatory request and lodging of a complaint – have proven effective in addressing the requester/complainant concerns