* 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 complaint concerns the negative impacts on the environment of the “Divača-Koper second rail track” project. The project consists of the construction of 27 km of single-track railway line on a new alignment to increase rail capacity between the port of Koper and the rail junction in Divača in Slovenia.
In March 2021, the EIB Group Complaints Mechanism (EIB-CM) issued an initial assessment report establishing the following allegations: allegation (1) regarding the project’s negative impacts on the environment and non-compliance with EU environmental law (Strategic Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact Assessment, Habitats and Water Framework Directives, and issues with transboundary consultations), and allegation (2) regarding the fact that the scope of the 2TDK Divača-Koper project as approved by the EIB (a single-track railway line with service tunnels) differs from the actual scope of the 2TIR Divača-Koper investment programme (a double-track railway line).
Conclusions and Outcome
After reviewing the available information, the EIB-CM found some areas of non-compliance with the EIB’s own procedures and standards in relation to allegation nr. 1 (regarding cumulative impact assessment of the project with other planned developments, meaningful stakeholder consultation process, description/assessment of project alternatives, use by the Bank of the environmental and social risk screening checklist, and engagement of an environmental specialist during the Bank’s appraisal), while allegation nr. 2 was found ungrounded. Consequently, the EIB-CM issued two recommendations and three suggestions for improvement to the Bank.
The EIB-CM recommended the Bank to request the promoter to (i) update the environmental management plan (EMP), (ii) report to the EIB on the EMP’s implementation and effectiveness and (iii) effectively communicate with relevant stakeholders on the implementation of the EMP and any new project’s developments during the project’s implementation. In order to ensure effective communication, the promoter should prepare a stakeholder engagement plan, monitor and report on it to the EIB on a regular basis. Moreover, the EIB-CM recommended to involve environmental specialist(s) for further advice (including regarding the inclusion of relevant environmental clauses in the finance contract for signature in the future) and for project monitoring.
The EIB-CM suggested that the Bank (i) request the promoter to submit an assessment of the cumulative impacts of the project, taking into account planned developments and activities in its area of influence including the third track, (ii) amend the Bank’s procedures in order to effectively appraise environmentally risky projects, especially what concerns the involvement of environmental specialist(s) in the appraisal and monitoring of operations conducted within Natura 2000 network/protected area of national importance, and (iii) at the time of re-reappraisal of the project, as well as again before the signature of the finance contract, engage with the promoter and assess the status of the Strategic Environmental Assessment for the third track, the likelihood for this plan to concretise and by when.
EIB Final Response
As provided by the EIB Group Complaints Mechanism procedures, and as was the case for this complaint, the EIB Management Committee decided to not implement some of the EIB-CM’s recommendations and suggestions for improvement issued in its Conclusions Report (available below). The EIB issued a separate Final Response to the complaint (available below). The complainant was provided with both the EIB-CM’s Conclusions Report and the EIB’s Final Response.