Significant infrastructure projects (SIP): habitats regulations assessment guidance

A Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) is a tool to evaluate whether a plan or project could significantly affect a protected European site. 

Further information regarding Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) is also available on GOV.UK.

The Welsh Ministers are the competent authority for the purposes of HRA in relation to applications where they are the decision maker. We are required to carry out an Appropriate Assessment (AA) where a plan or project is likely to have a significant effect on a European site or a European Marine site.

European sites

• Sites of Community Importance (SCIs)
• Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)
• candidate Special Areas of Conservation (cSACs) and possible SACs (pSACs)
• Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and potential SPAs (pSPAs)
• Ramsar sites

Outcome of HRA

Where an AA is carried out and results in a negative assessment, consent can only be granted if there are no alternative solutions, there are Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest (IROPI) for the development, and compensatory measures have been secured.

Early engagement with Natural Resources Wales (NRW)

For applications where a plan or project is likely to have a significant effect on a European site early consultation with NRW should be undertaken. 

Applicants should identify and discuss issues with consultees, like NRW, with the aim of resolving issues prior to making an application.

Applicants should engage with NRW early on to agree the baseline information, methodology, and evidence. Evidence plans, jointly agreed between NRW and the applicant, are useful in establishing a work programme for the pre-application stage.

Evidence of the outcome of this consultation with NRW should be submitted as it will be key to the decision making process.

Information required from applicants

If an application, alone or with another plan or project, is likely to affect a European site, the applicant must provide the competent authority with such information as may reasonably be required for the purposes of the AA. 

This information normally takes the form of a:

• No Significant Effects Report (NSER), or
• Likely Significant Effect Report (LSER). 

The NSER or LSER should provide the reasoning and evidence behind its conclusions. This is likely to be supported by the information presented in the ES for applications which are EIA development. The applicant’s NSER or LSER must show how the information gathered has been applied to the HRA and the tests applicable to the Habitats Directive.

The HRA should include screening for Likely Significant Effects. If there are none identified for all the European sites considered, then the report is likely to take the form of a No Significant Effects Report (NSER) and HRA stages 2-4 will not be required.The HRA screening stage does not consider avoidance or reduction measures.

The HRA Stage 1 screening information to be presented in the NSER or LSER should include:

• a detailed description of the development, processes, timings, and method of work proposed as part of the plan or project;
• details of the methodology used to determine which European sites should be included within the assessment, plus definition of and justification for the scope of the assessment;
• a plan and description of the European site(s) potentially affected, including a description of all qualifying features (a copy of the site data sheet is useful to include);
• an appraisal of the potential effects resulting from the construction and operation of the project (e.g. noise) and the likely significant effect on the European site(s) and qualifying features (e.g. disturbance to bird species);
• an outline and interpretation of the baseline data collected to inform the findings;
• an appraisal of the effects of any other plans or projects which, in combination with the proposed development, might be likely to have a significant effect on the European site(s). The scope of that appraisal should be well-defined and agreed with the local authorities and NRW;
• an evaluation of the potential for the project to require other consents requiring consideration of likely significant effects by different competent authorities;
• a statement which identifies (with reasons) whether significant effects on European sites in other European Economic Area States are considered to be likely; and
• evidence of agreement between the applicant and NRW on the scope, methodologies, interpretation, and conclusions of the screening assessment (such as copies of correspondence, Evidence Plans, or Statements of Common Ground).

HRA screening outcome

The applicant will need to reach a conclusion from baseline information and consultation responses, whether the project, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, will have likely significant effects on the European site and qualifying features.

If the conclusion is yes, it requires an AA by the competent authority and proceeds to HRA Stage 2. 

If it concludes no this must be explained in a No Significant Effects Report (NSER) supported by sufficient information and providing convincing reasons. No further assessment is required.

If Stage 1 identifies likely significant effects for any of the European sites considered, an assessment of the implications of the project on the site’s conservation objectives will be required. This will take the form of a Likely Significant Effect Report (LSER) and should include sufficient information for the AA, including:

• evidence about the project’s effects on the integrity of protected sites;
• a description of any mitigation measures proposed which avoid or reduce each effect, and any remaining residual effects;
• a schedule indicating the timing of mitigation measures in relation to the progress of the development;
• cross references to the relevant proposed requirements or conditions and any other mechanisms proposed to secure mitigation measures, and identification of any factors that might affect the certainty of their implementation;
• a statement as to which (if any) residual effects constitute an adverse effect on the integrity of European sites, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, and therefore need to be included within the AA; and
• evidence to demonstrate that the applicant has fully consulted and had regard to comments received by NRW during pre-application consultation.

The report should clearly identify and justify which European sites and qualifying features are included for AA and which European sites and qualifying features have been screened out of further assessment.

Unless the LSER concludes that that the project will not adversely affect the integrity of any European site, alone or in combination with other plans or projects, the applicant’s assessment will need to move to HRA Stages 3 and 4 of the process.

If Stage 2 concludes that the project will adversely affect the integrity of the site, or is inconclusive; consideration of alternatives, compensatory measures and whether the project is justified by imperative reasons of overriding public interest (‘IROPI’) will be required. 

An assessment of alternative solutions should be undertaken, and details of how these have been identified and considered should be provided in the LSER. 

If no alternative solutions can be demonstrated to minimise the project’s impact on the integrity of the European site, the project may still be carried out if the competent authority is satisfied that the scheme must be carried out for IROPI.

Where priority natural habitats or species will be affected, the IROPI justification should be provided in the LSER and must relate to either:

• human health, public safety or beneficial consequences of primary importance to the environment; or
• have due regard to any opinion from the European Commission, any other imperative reasons of overriding public interest.

The recommendation report and decision will address the likely significant effects of the project on any European site and qualifying features and whether it will have an adverse effect on the integrity of the European site. Where necessary, the report will assess the case for no alternatives, IROPI and compensatory measures. The Welsh Ministers, or PEDW where they are the determining body, will consider all the examination evidence prior to making a determination on the application.

• the Habitats Directive,
• the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), and
• the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.