Infringement of the Habitats Directive in Galicia as a result of the authorities’ failure to protect priority habitats and critical species

Subject: Infringement of the Habitats Directive in Galicia as a result of the authorities’ failure to protect priority habitats and critical species

The environmental impact statement (EIS) on Greenfiber’s macro-cellulose industrial project exhibits significant shortcomings in relation to the Habitats Directive. The situation of three endangered plant species (Santolina melidensis, Armeria merinoi and Leucanthemum gallaecicum) and their priority habitats (6220* and 4020*) is of particular concern.

The presence of these species, which have been classified as endangered species since 2007, requires their area to be protected through an extension of the Natura 2000 network. Despite the Commission’s warnings to the Spanish Government about shortcomings in the representation of habitats at national level, the Galician Government did not extend protection to this area. As such, the species were not included in the updated annexes to the Directive, an omission dating back to when they were first classified as endangered.

The EIS does not properly assess the project’s impact on these species and their habitats, and the proposed compensatory measures lack scientific validation.

Does the Commission consider that the resolution approving the EIS is compatible with the obligation to ensure effective protection of biodiversity and application of the Directive, especially as regards the coherence and integrity of the Natura 2000 network?

Submitted: 15.3.2025

Joint answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission (22 May 2025)

The project in question has been subject to an assessment (1) under the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (EIAD) (2) and the Habitats Directive (3) that covers the effects on the site Serra do Careón (4) and the habitats it hosts.

The competent authorities have also assessed the impact of the project on the endangered plant species and natural habitat types of community interest (5), as well as the compensatory measures proposed by the developer prior to the project’s approval. The EIAD provides for a process of participation where the public concerned was able to express their views on the project.

Pursuant to Spanish law, the environmental impact statement issued by the competent authorities does not constitute a development consent for the project, which is subject to the obtention of all the relevant permits required under EU environmental law. There are no indications of a possible infringement of EU law at this point in the procedure.

The EIAD also provides for specific review procedures that allow the public concerned to challenge before national courts the substantive or procedural legality of decisions, acts or omissions subject to the EIAD provisions on public participation.

The Commission does not have the power to suspend projects carried out in Member States. It focuses its enforcement action on structural and systemic cases rather than on individual cases of alleged non- compliance (6).

Based on the information available, the Altri large-scale project does not seem to receive funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) (7) at this stage.

Consequently, the Commission is not in a position to provide an assessment of the concrete project’s alignment with the RRF requirements, including the ‘Do No Significant Harm’ principle.

2 2https://www.eldiario.es/galicia/altri-xunta-gobierno-ignora-manifestaciones-historicas-tierra-mar-amenaza-ambiental_1_12134178.html.

3 3https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2024-001598-ASW_EN.html.

1 ∙ ⸱ https://www.xunta.gal/dog/Publicados/2025/20250314/AnuncioG0760-070325-0001_es.html.

2 ∙ ⸱ Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private

projects on the environment. OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1-21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1-18. 3 ∙ ⸱ Article 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50. 4 ∙ ⸱ Natura 2000 site code: ES1110014. 5 ∙ ⸱

Priority habitats 6220* and 4020*, mentioned in Written Question E-114/2025. 6 ∙ ⸱ As set out in the communication of 19 January 2017 (EU law: Better results through better application — C/2016/8600, OJ C 18, 19.1.2017, p. 10-20) and in the communication of 13 October 2022 COM(2022) 518 final — Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers. 7 ∙ ⸱ https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility_en.