Strasbourg, 3 September 2009                                                                      T-PVS/Files (2009) 4

[files04e_2009.doc]

CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF EUROPEAN WILDLIFE

AND NATURAL HABITATS

Standing Committee

29^th meeting

Bern, 23-26 November 2009

__________

File open

Windfarms in Balchik and Kaliakra

– Via Pontica (Bulgaria)

Report by the NGO

Document prepared by:

the Bulgarian Society for the Protection of Birds / BirdLife Bulgaria),

the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds / BirdLife UK)

Summary

This document provides information on implementation of Recommendation No. 130 (2007) on the windfarms planned near Balchik and Kaliakra, and other wind farm developments on the Via Pontica route, Bulgaria, up to early August 2009.

It appears that the Bulgarian authorities are still not implementing most aspects of the Recommendation. The case continues to be at a very critical stage.  In addition to the wind farm projects, Balchik and Kaliakra proposed Emerald Network/Natura 2000 sites are being damaged by a large number of other developments, including tourist complexes, golf courses and infrastructure, which are also being planned and consented without proper regard to the nature value of the sites. 

At the end of November 2008 the European Commission sent the Bulgarian Government a first warning letter (Letter of Formal Notice) because of the lack of adequate protection of Kaliakra IBA – both the approved SPA (Special Protection Area) and the area of the IBA that is excluded from Natura 2000. Thus the EC opened a second infringement procedure against Bulgaria related to Kaliakra.  The first was opened in June 2008 when the Commission sent Bulgaria a first warning letter because of insufficient designation of 6 IBAs as SPAs, including Kaliakra.

Without international intervention Balchik and Kaliakra, Emerald Network/Natura 2000 sites of exceptional value for globally threatened birds and other animals, plants and habitats listed in the Annexes of the Habitats Directive and Appendices of the Bern Convention, could be irreparably damaged. This would be in contravention of Articles 2, 3, 4 and 6(b) of the Convention, as well, as Recommendations No. 93 (2002) and No. 108 (2003) of the Standing Committee.

We thus urge the Bern Convention to take further action, as appropriate, to assist Bulgaria to avoid irreversible damage to Europe’s nature heritage.

Most urgently, the NGOs request that the Bureau:

·          Ask the Bulgarian Government to provide a progress report on implementation of the recommendation, together with a clear action plan of activities for implementing the recommendation, to the 2009 Standing Committee meeting.

·          Urges the EC, immediately, to progress the general SPA designation infringement against Bulgaria as well as the particular infringement case on lack of adequate protection of Kaliakra.

RecoMmendation 130 (2007) – state of implementation

On 30 November 2006 the Bern Convention on European Wildlife and Natural Habitats ‘opened a file’ on wind farm development on the Via Pontica bird migration route along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. On 29 November 2007 the Bern Convention adopted recommendation 130 (2007) following the on-spot appraisal carried out in 2007, and consideration of updated information on the case.

In the following sections of the report, we first describe the progress on implementation of each aspect of the recommendation and then outline key developments in relation to the wind farm developments at Kaliakra and Balchik.

1. Review relevant decisions, at the local, regional and national level, concerning wind energy plants and ensure that new plants are not built in the region unless Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prove they do not have a substantial negative effect on the biological diversity protected under the Convention - EIA reports should be more precise and scientifically sound than those already presented and should formulate independent peer reviewed conclusions;

Review of decisions

To date (August 2009) none of the relevant decisions mentioned above have been reviewed. 

Although the Ministry of Environment and Water (MoEW) has taken action to stop construction of one project.  The Windfarm project of Universum Energy Ltd (32 turbines) was sold to another company – EVN LTD and started to be constructed in November 2008. At the beginning of 2009 construction was stopped by MoEW pending completion of a new EIA. Further information about this is provided below (see pages 14-16).

New projects

In addition to the information about the number of wind turbines approved in Dobrudzha region (in total 789) provided to the Bern Convention by NGOs in October 2008, we have now obtained new information from the internet site of RIEW Varna[1] about further windfarms consented by RIEW Varna in 2007 and 2008 as well as in 2009, as follows:

2007 – 6 wind turbines approved without EIA as single/small wind turbines projects (RIEW Varna did not provide us with information about these last year).

2008 – 284 wind turbines approved without EIA as single/small wind turbines projects.  In addition there are 2 wind turbines for which the RIEW Varna decided that EIA is needed in late November 2008. (There is no information available so far about the progress of the EIA procedure.) 

2009 – 5 wind turbines approved without EIA as single wind turbines projects by RIEW Varna; for a further 180 wind turbines (14 separate projects) and 1 project for an unknown number of wind turbines  EIA procedures have started according to information on the RIEW website (the decisions of RIEW Varna on the need for EIA for these projects); recently (June/July 2009) announcements for investment projects for a total of 36 turbines in the area close to Kaliakra IBA were published on the internet site of RIEW Varna.

As a result, a total of 1302 wind turbines are expected to be erected in NE Bulgaria. Given the vast scale of this development it is essential that cumulative effects are rigorously considered.  However, the current piece meal approach of consenting vast numbers of individual turbines without EIA means that there is no assessment of cumulative effects. 

Of the 284 new wind turbines consented without EIA in 2008:

·          10 are situated in Kaliakra IBA, in the territory which is proposed, but not designated as SPA;

·          one wind turbine is consented close to Balchik IBA/SPA;

·          7 wind turbines are consented close to Belite skali IBA/SPA (the IBA situated between Balchik and Kaliakra IBAs); and

·          23 wind turbines are consented in close vicinity (less than 3 km from the boundary) of Shabla lake Complex IBA/SPA (north of Kaliakra IBA).

Of the 5 new wind turbines consented without EIA in 2009, 1 is situated in Kaliakra IBA.

Problems with access to information about projects

We are experiencing major problems accessing information about what RIEW decisions are being made. These problems are related to:

·            lack of comprehensive records;

·            lack of enough clear information abut the location of the projects

·            lack of sufficient publicity about projects and publicity on time;

·            very short periods for public consultations and opinions on projects.

One of the biggest difficulties is to find out about the project location. In many cases only the settlement area is published in the announcement or RIEW decision without an exact location. In other cases the published information includes numbers of the land plot where the project is situated, but the information of the location of the actual areas/boundaries of the land plots is not public and easy to access, and also the land plot numbers are changed very often. Thus while the information is in principle made publicly available, in fact it is completely unclear for the public and therefore extremely difficult to participate in the planning processes for individual projects.

2. Fully reconsider the development of approved windfarms projects in the Balchik and Kaliakra region situated within or nearby sites designated as important bird areas and special areas of conservation;

Other than the decision to stop construction of the EVN project (see above) the MoEW/RIEW did not reconsider any of the approved windfarms projects in or near the Balchik and Kaliakra IBAs. Further, since the recommendation was adopted in December 2007 (including the new information provided above) there have been 61 new wind turbines approved in the vicinity of Kaliakra IBA, 17 within Kaliakra IBA (the last one on 6 June 2009), 12 near Belite skali IBA (situated between Balchik and Kaliakra IBAs), and 39 near Shabla Lake Complex IBA (situated north of Kaliakra IBA). In total 129 new turbines have been approved in or near IBAs.  Ie since the information we provided to Bern in October 2008 that 77 turbines had been consented in/near IBAs we have now become aware of an additional 52 turbines consented in/near these sites.

In addition to the approvals described above, EIA procedures have been initiated for windfarms in the vicinity of IBAs in Dobrudzha as follows:

·            24 turbines (1 single project) in the vicinity of Kaliakra IBA (between Kaliakra IBA and Shabla Lake Complex IBA, but the exact location can not be identified);

·            1 turbine in vicinity of Shabla Lake Complex IBA;

·            87 turbines (1 single project) in vicinity of Batova IBA (its western border);

·            Windfarm (unknown number of turbines) within and in vicinity of Hursovska reka IBA;

On 2^nd December 2008 an order No 855/21.11.2008 of the Minister of Environment was officially published in the State Gazette. This order bans new constructions in Kaliakra Complex SCI.  It refers only to projects initiated after this date and only to the territory of the SCI. The SCI overlaps partially with Kaliakra SPA, but is smaller, including only the coastal cliffs and the steppe habitats – see the Figure below. During a visit to the area in July 2009 no new development was observed in the SCI. Although there is a renewed EIA procedure for construction of a 13-turbine windfarm in this area next to the INOS1 Ltd project.  The developer of this project is Bulgarian Windfarms Ltd (see details on pages 16-17). The EIA procedure was initiated in 2004 and stopped in 2006 because of the complaints form local people, NGOs and scientific institutions. The EIA procedure has now restarted.  From this it is clear that from the institutional perspective the ban does not stop any of the projects initiated before the ban even if the EIA procedure for the project was not finalized or had been halted at the date of the ban.

3. Investigate the possibility of relocating the windfarm projects already under construction as well as the single turbines (whose building is possible without EIA) in order to restore the integrity of sites to be considered as Natura 2000 sites, IBAs, or under other protection status;

According to our information the Bulgarian authorities have not taken any actions to implement this point.

4. Select alternative locations for future and not yet operating turbines based on appropriate data (including long-term monitoring of biodiversity) and assessments (e.g. using multicriteria-analysis); key bird areas, potential SPAs, IBAs, intensive bird migration corridors and sites regularly used by large flocks of roosting species such as storks and wintering geese must be avoided from windfarm development;

According to our information the Bulgarian authorities have not taken any actions to implement this point.

In one particular case, the developer of the biggest windfarm project within Kaliakra IBA (the 53 turbine project of Geopower Ltd – now AGE – located in the part of the IBA excluded from the proposed SPA), which was approved by RIEW Varna in March 2007[2], has now obtained finance for the project from the EBRD and IFC – both institutions approved the funding in September 2008. To support the finance application further environmental assessment was carried out (including on bird impacts) and published for consultation[3].   Although this further analysis strengthened the EIA carried out before the consents for the project were granted in Bulgaria, there were still significant gaps and weaknesses in the assessment of potential impacts on birds eg a lack of consideration of impacts on red-breasted geese and roosting storks.  As a result of these deficiencies we do not believe that the conclusion of the assessment – that the project will not have significant effects on birds – is valid and as a result we urged the developer and the Banks to undertake further assessment to address the gaps in the current analysis before taking a decision on whether to finance the project.  Hence, we were extremely disappointed that the Banks approved the finance and we are currently considering making formal complaints to the IFC and EBRD complaints mechanisms. In December 2008 the Banks, the investor and the Government of Bulgaria, represented by the Prime minister, Minister of Environment and Water and the Minister of Energy signed a contract for financing the project. At the beginning of August 2009 the windfarm is already constructed, but not operational.

5. Assess the impact of the current operating turbines;

The Bulgarian authorities have taken no action to implement this point. No access is permitted to the newly operating wind farm of INOS 1 in the steppe area of Kaliakra IBA/SPA. So far none of the reports that the investor should provide to RIEW Varna has been provided to the public. During meetings with representatives of MoEW, BSPB discussed the possibility of access to the monitoring data, and were told that the radar data can not be used by the authority. So we have serious doubts about whether the responsible authority (MoEW) is receiving accurate and understandable information about the monitoring of this windfarm.

During the meeting organized by the investor of Kaliakra Windfarm (INOS1), together with Kavarna municipality on 19 June 2009 (see section 9 below for more details) the first monitoring results were announced and the radar system to help avoid any damage of the environment was demonstrated. In our view the staff operating the system are not well trained and we doubt if they could avoid collisions of a single large bird. The results presented were that only three killed birds were recorded - two Corn Buntings and one White Pelican. However, because the monitoring programme is not public, and the monitoring process is not transparent we have serious doubts about the results presented.

There is no information about any impact monitoring being carried out at any of the other windfarms in Dobrudzha. In addition, while the monitoring of individual projects is important to test the impacts of individual projects and the efficacy of mitigation measures, there is also a need for broader monitoring to provide information about the potential cumulative effects of all the developments together. However, there is no evidence that the Bulgarian authorities are organizing any such monitoring.

Comments on the Government report of spring 2009 (T-PVS/Files (2009) 5)

We would query the results of the monitoring of the 35 turbine "Kaliakra" windfarm (investor INOS 1) presented on page 3 of the governmental report.  These contradict the results of 3-years of surveys of migration in the area carried out by BSPB[4].  The BSPB surveys showed that more than 40% of the migrants fly below 500 meters. Our observations last autumn (2008) ie during the same period as the INOS monitoring data, clearly showed that some of the white storks passed the site at the height of the wind turbines (about 100-150 m). Further the Government report presents information about the majority of the migrants passing 5-6 km inland from the windfarm. This would mean that the birds passed above the town of Kavarna. From our experience during the surveys in 2004, 2005 and 2006 we can confirm that it is not possible to detect migratory birds passing above Kavarna town from the area of the windfarm (the distance is too big) by the standard observation surveys (at observation points).

6. Conduct an Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of Bulgaria’s wind energy programme, taking into account possible conflicts of wind energy production within the most intensive bird movements areas, in particular along the Black Sea coast;

The Ministry of Economic and Energy (MoEE) is the competent authority to implement this point. The MoEE recently announced that it is now developing a new Strategy on renewables 2010 – 2020, and according to our information the Ministry has agreed to prepare an SEA for this new Strategy, which is likely to be ready by the end of 2009.

At the end of May 2009 the MoEE started an EBRD funded project “Ecological and socio-economic assessment of the Bulgarian National Plan for Wind Energy Development”. The aim of the project is to assist the Bulgarian authorities in assessing the potential for the wind energy sector, as well as to investigate the negative impacts of the renewable energy (wind) on the local landscape, the people and the biodiversity. The specific goals of the project are related to identification of the baseline for the assessment of windfarm investment projects, elaboration of criteria applicable to the ecological permissions, elaboration of criteria for evaluation of the impact assessments, identification of the basic technical obstacles, as well as the benefits arising by the windfarm development projects. The duration of the project is 9 months, which includes 3 months of studies, also evaluation and public studies. The international project team contacted BSPB at end of May 2009 to discuss possible ways for consultations and collaboration during the project implementation. In June 2009 BSPB provided to them a list with available information as well as a list of issues that are important to be addressed in the assessment, including the need for assessment of cumulative effects. Since then BSPB has not heard from the project team.

7. Establish a strict moratorium on further turbines and windfarm projects in the coastal areas of Bulgaria until EIA and SEA reports mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 6 are completed;

The Bulgarian authorities have taken no action to implement this point, other than the extremely limited order applying to new projects in the Kaliakra Complex SCI.  And, as is clear from the information provided in section 1 above, many new projects have been initiated or approved in the last year.

Comments on the Government report since spring 2009:

On page 3 of the Government report, it is stated that procedures for designation of three SPAs where there will be clear restrictions for windfarm development – Kaliakra, Shabla Lake Complex, and Durankulak Lake – have been started. This is really good and welcome step.

On 28 August 2009 the designation order for Kaliakra SPA was issued in the State Gazette. According to the order only 2/3 of Kaliakra IBA is designated as SPA, therefore the area of the AES-Geopower Ltd wind farm project remains outside the Natura 2000 site. The order restricts entirely construction of new windfarms within the SPA, defining ‘new’ as projects for which there is no EIA procedure finalized before 28 August 2009. This means that the windfarm of INOS 1 Ltd (35 wind turbines), the windfarm of Yomy Engineering Ltd (now Geopower) (7 turbines), as well as the Vertikal Petkov windfarm Ltd (1 wind turbines) are not subject to this restriction. The designation order may restrict and prevent the construction of the windfarm of Bulgarian Windfarms Ltd (13 wind turbines) and possibly the Universum Ltd windfarm (which now belongs to EVN Ltd) (32 turbines), but this is still not entirely clear (see information about the individual cases below).

By the end of August 2009 the designation orders for Shabla Lake Complex and Durankulak Lake have not been issued, nor is there  confirmation that the planned designation orders will include a  restriction on windfarm development.

In addition, of the Natura 2000 sites with windfarm restrictions mentioned in the Governmental report, only Atanasovsko Llake SPA, Pomoriysko Lake SPA and Ropotamo Complex SPA are along the Black Sea Coast. Further, there are IBAs along the Via Pontica migration route close to Black Sea that were designated as SPAs (Natura 2000 sites) in 2008 without restrictions on windfarm development – Chairya, Suha Reka and Hursovska Reka in Dobrudzha, Provadiisko-Royaksko Plato, Strandzha.

In addition there are 7 IBAs that need such protection but are still not designated as Natura 2000 sites and it is not clear if there will be restrictions on windfarm development – Belite Skali, Batova, Galata, Kamchia Complex, Kamchiiska Mountain, Emine, Bakarlaka. All of these sites are situated along the Black Sea Coast.

8. Respect the need to focus on the avoidance of the impacts coming from outside having negative effects on areas of recognised conservation importance;

The Bulgarian authorities have taken no actions to implement this point.

9. Take into account the following guidance to improve EIAs for future and not yet operating turbines, including in accordance with “Regulation about the conditions and the order for accomplishment of assessment for compatibility of plans, projects, programmes and investment intentions with the subject and the aims of the conservation of protected zones”:

Ø  further research and monitor birds, bats, other fauna, vegetations and key landscape-ecological structures and processes influencing biodiversity; to this end long-term monitoring of flora and fauna, review and validation of all data is required, included those from NGOs, institutes and independent scientists;

Ø  apply collision modelling of cumulative effects of several wind farms or turbines along intensive flyways, followed by the assessment of the suitability of localities using multicriteria-analysis methods;

Ø  develop compulsory procedures to peer review the completeness and quality of biodiversity chapters of EIAs and their conclusions before continuing the administrative and legal processes;

The MoEW has developed an internal document addressed to its RIEWs– guidance for assessing windfarm projects, including standard criteria and practices from other countries. The guidance was consulted with BSPB and most of the BSPB recommendations were accepted by the authority. The document provides generally good guidance for screening of on-shore windfarms and evaluation of the quality of EIA reports, Appropriate assessment and even SEA. At this stage we do not have any information about whether the Government plans to make such guidance available to the public (including investors). It was sent to all regional inspectorates in January 2009. However, unfortunately before this time almost all the windfarms around the country have been consented by RIEWs without EIA as small projects or on the basis of poor EIAs, usually without preliminary studies. So while the guidance will be useful for future projects, it comes much too late to influence the hundreds of consents already granted – many of which were granted in 2008.

On 19 June 2009 the investor of Kaliakra Windfarm (INOS1), together with Kavarna municipality organized a meeting concerning windfarm development in Bulgaria with participation of the Ministry of Economy and Energetic (MoEE), as well as representatives of the European Commission. The local authority and the investor tried to downplay the significant impact and the high risk for birds from the windfarms. The European Commission representative without commenting on individual cases, reminded the meeting that the Commission does not favor the dividing of projects in to pieces in order to avoid EIA, and also that while it is for Members States to decide if they will allow windfarm development in their Natura 2000 sites or not, it is important always to ensure that Natura 2000 objectives will be achieved.  Ie if wind farms are to be permitted inside Natura 2000 sites then the requirements of the EU nature Directives, including on Appropriate Assessment must be fulfilled for each project. All the parties agreed to establish a Working Group including the wind farm developers, authorities and NGOs to develop an agreement for assessing and developing new wind farms to avoid conflicts with Natura 2000. Although to date there is no more information about the timetable and next steps for this. 

10. Develop guidelines for appropriate planning of the construction of windfarms and/or individual turbines, taking account of the following issues in order to integrate biodiversity conservation concerns:

Ø  initiate a broad debate on the precautionary principle regarding development projects in relation to sites with outstanding biodiversity values;

Ø  take measures for the removal of turbines in case of unacceptable bird collisions where no alternatives exist; this require the drafting of a set of mitigating and compensatory measures when biodiversity losses occur;

The Bulgarian authorities have taken no actions to implement this point. According to our information MoEW plan to open a call for proposals related to mapping of habitats in Natura 2000, including guidance for planning of windfarms considering impacts on birds. This could be a first step in implementation of this recommendation, but by August 2009 such a call had not yet been issued.

KALIAKRA CASE

The Kaliakra wind farm projects

To date (August 2009) 223 turbines of different Bulgarian private companies have been approved or are under the procedure of approval within the boundaries of Kaliakra IBA, 45 of these are operational and 79 are under construction. The last new wind turbine was approved without EIA on 5 June 2009. It is situated in Kaliakra IBA, in the area proposed for inclusion, but excluded from the Kaliakra SPA ie the area currently the subject of the EC inadequate SPA designation infringement procedure.

A summary of the recent developments of the windfarm projects in Kaliakra IBA is given below.

·         Geopower Energy (7 turbine project in the region of Sveti Nikola)

o   No new information.

·         Geopower Energy (AGE) (53 turbine project North of village of Balgarevo)

o   The company has all necessary documents to start construction, including finance from EBRD and IFC.

o   Construction was started in January 2009 – roads, temporary buildings were constructed.

o   Monitoring of wintering geese at the windfarm area was carried out by the investor in winter 2008/2009. The report was published on the investor’s website[5]. The monitoring report confirms that the area of the windfarm is used by geese (including the Red-breasted Goose) as a feeding area. However, there are some weaknesses in the methodology of the study which make the results incomplete and also some of the conclusions are not complete or clear:

§  All the observation points used during the field studies are outside the AES Geopower Windfarm area (which is very big) - none are situated in the windfarm area. Only six out of 10 observation points are situated close to the windfarm area, and according to the data presented these six points were visited for much less time than the other points. The remaining 4 observation points are situated closer to Shabla and Durankulak Lake and were visited much more often. Thus the results reflect the frequency of the observation visits and underestimate the value of the area of AES windfarm to geese. During the International Mid-winter count of waterfowl[6] (regularly done in Mid-January every year) in 2009 we observed geese feeding at  places within the AES-Geopower windfarm area, as well as flying over, however geese are not shown as feeding/flying over these places in the monitoring report.

§  Another weak point of the report is that analysis and discussion of the flight directions of the geese is only presented for the observation points north of the AES Geo windfarm area and not for the observation points neighbouring the windfarm, thus we believe that this analysis is not complete. Our statement is confirmed by our observations during the Mid-winter Count (Mid January 2009) – where we recorded that numerous flocks of geese overnight in the sea south of Kaliakra SPA and fly to the North and North-west exactly above the AES Geo windfarm area. We record these movements every year, but such movements are not presented in the investor’s report.

§  A further weak point of the report analysis is that the avoidance index used for the modelling might be not suitable for these species.  Instead we believe that a specific avoidance index should be calculated for the project site based on information recorded from field observations. The report does not comment on the displacement effect (a very important impact for geese) of the existing neighbouring windfarms, which is extremely relevant information for the AES windfarm project. There are at least three observation points situated in places with existing windfarms in the area.

§  Finally, the last but not least, weakness – the mortality risk is calculated as relatively high but with a comment that it is lower than the mortality risk from the hunting pressure. We do not agree that these two impacts should be compared, because they will not replace each other, but instead will affect the geese in combination, which means that in fact that the mortality risk will increase significantly, including for the globally endangered Red-breasted goose. All these weaknesses must be avoided in future monitoring.

Our conclusion is that the report gives a good indication of the value of the area for geese and confirms to certain extent our previous studies, but unfortunately it is incomplete and has some significant weaknesses that lead to an overall underestimation of the value of the area for the geese.

o   In August 2009 all the wind turbines are erected and ready to operate.

·         Universum Energy Ltd. (32 turbines between Kavarna town and Balgarevo village located on steppe habitats)

o   The windfarm was sold to a new company – EVN (represented by its daughter company Naturkraft EOOD). The new owner of the windfarm started construction of the windfarm in November 2008. The order of the Minister of Environment to ban construction activities in Kaliakra pSCI did not stop construction of this park, because it was approved before the issuing of the order.

o   In January 2009 damage was caused to the steppic habitats – new roads constructed, as well as preparation of places for erection of the wind turbines – see photos below.

o   In the beginning of February 2009 the RIEW temporarily stopped the construction of the windfarm, not allowing the pilons to be erected. During the site visit in July 2009 the fundaments of the turbines were ready and the roads connecting them, but no other constriction work to erect the turbines.

o   On 8 May 2009 EVN and Naturkraft EOOD meet BSPB to discuss their windfarm in Kaliakra IBA/SPA and to ask BSPB to be involved in their monitoring. BSPB explained its position that Kaliakra SPA/IBA is absolutely inappropriate for the construction of wind farms. Because of this and also because there are open European Procedures against the construction of wind farms (and other developments) in Kaliakra SPA/IBA BSPB declined Naturkraft’s offer. BSPB already has a positive cooperation with EVN about insolating of dangerous electric poles for raptors. However this does not change the position of BSPB related to the EVN wind farm in Kaliakra. BSPB proposed certain actions to be taken by EVN, e.g. looking for new alternatives for the windfarm (in compliance with point 4 of the Recommendation 130 (2007) of the Bern Convention), initiation of a new EIA, provision of detailed monitoring plans/ management programme which BSPB is ready to consider without prejudice, etc. BSPB asked EVN to provide a formal response to BSPB about its intentions about the construction, but by August 2009 EVN has not responded.

o   During a meeting on 10 July 2009 with the Head of the Natura 2000 department of MoEW, he confirmed that EVN has been banned from erecting wind turbines (although we have not seen any documentation on this), although the fundaments are ready. He provided information that MoEW requested a new EIA procedure to be undertaken for the EVN windfarm, because the investor wanted to build higher and more powerful wind turbines than those assessed in the previous EIA report. According to our information by August 2009 EVN Ltd has not submitted a request for a new EIA procedure to RIEW Varna. It is still not clear if the developer wants to proceed with the windfarm project with lower parameters for the wind turbines, for which they already have all the permissions, or whether the developer will proceed with a new EIA procedure for a windfarm with bigger parameters.

o   On 28 August 2009 a designation order for Kaliakra SPA was published in the State Gazette, which forbids the building of windfarms for which the EIA Procedure is not completed. Thus means that if EVN Ltd still wants to change the parameters of its investment project it might be not allowed to continue with the construction of the windfarm.

·         INOS-1 Ltd (35 turbines between Balgarevo village and the buffer zone of Cape Kaliakra nature reserve)

o   The windfarm is operational all the time (even during the night). During the international Mid-winter count of waterfowl (January 2009), our observers detected that the wind turbines continue to work even when geese fly close to them, ie they are not stopped as is required as a terms of the RIEW consent decision. The observers also recorded large scale disturbance (panic reaction and attempts to avoid the turbines) of Red-breasted geese, flying from the sea to the land.

o   So far no data from the impact monitoring has been made publicly available, and as described above, even the responsible authority is having serious difficulties in checking and understanding the data provided. As described above first results of the monitoring were announced publically on 19 June 2009, showing that there is no impact (two Corn Buntings and one White Pelican were killed), but there is no transparency about the monitoring programme and its results, or any independent control mechanism.

·         “Vertical-Petkov” – (1 turbine out of 3 is constructed)

o   Operational.  BSPB are carrying out impact monitoring of birds in the area financed by the investor.  Monitoring does not show a significant impact on birds so far[7].

·         Bulgarian Windfarms Ltd (13 turbines between Balgarevo village and the wind farm of INOS 1 Ltd. The windfarm is situated both in the SPA and the SCI – ie the area under the ban for new construction, although formally the project was initiated n 2004, before the issue of this ban)

o   On 27 August 2004 RIEW Varna took decision (№73-ПР) that the investment project of Bulgarian Windfarms Ltd. for construction of a 20-turbines windfarm should be a subject of EIA. On 31 May 2006 the investor withdrew its project application rather than risking a negative vote on its EIA due to the public pressure and the withdrawal of the initial statement by the Institute of Zoology (which was based on a study made for the Balchik project and thus not deemed relevant to this case). The EIA procedure was stopped but in January 2008 the EIA procedure was restarted

o   In spring 2009 an Appropriate assessment under article 6 of the Habitat Directive was published on the internet site of the RIEW Varna. The assessment was of very poor quality and it was a subject of objections by NGOs in May 2009. After May 2009 there is no new information about the progress of the new procedure.

o   On 2^nd of September 2009 the Expert Council will take place in Varna and take a decision on EIA report (whether or not it is acceptable). As noted above, on 28 August 2009 a designation order for Kaliakra SPA was published in the State Gazette, which forbids building of windfarms for which the EIA Procedure is not completed, as it is the case here. At this stage we do not know what the outcome of the Expert Council will be, but once we have information about the outcome we will advise the Bern Secretariat.

Balchik CASE

Investor “Tessa Energy” Ltd. (12 turbines approved by RIEW at Balchik IBA)

No new information about this project. 

Further as we reported in October 2008, in July 2008 we obtained new information about another project of “Tessa Energy” Ltd. – 4 wind turbines park situated in the settlement area of Balchik, approved by RIEW Varna, most probably without EIA (decision No.335/8.8.2007). This information was not provided to us officially by RIEW in their access to information response in June 2008. However, recently we received confirmation from RIEW that such a decision has really been issued, but we could not obtain details about the content of the decision and its exact location. Thus at present we cannot confirm if the project is situated in Balchik IBA. Although we have subsequently made further attempts to get detailed information to date this has not been successful, hence we would suggest that the Bern Convention asks for official information from the government about this particular case to clarify the issue (particularly whether or not the project is located in Balchik IBA).

As mentioned above since our October 2008 report we have found out that in 2008 one wind turbine was consented without EIA in close vicinity to Balchik IBA.  The investor is a private individual: Mrs Stoyanova.