appeal to the TAR Legambiente 02462/2009 Cementirossi
N. 00360/2011 REG.PROV.COLL.
N. 02462/2009 REG.RIC.
ITALIAN REPUBLIC
IN THE NAME OF THE ITALIAN PEOPLE
The Regional Administrative Court of Veneto
(Section Three)
gives the following
JUDGEMENT
on the use of general register number 2462 of 2009, as supplemented by additional grounds, proposed by:
Legambiente Onlus Association National Association of Valpolicella 2000, the Association Committee Fumane Futura, Fulvio Scamperle Franco Scamperle, Anna Chiara Scamperle, Scarlett Scamperle, Joseph Conchi, Tiziano Faccioli, Roberto Marchesini, represented and defended by the lawyer. Maurizio Sartori Antonio Sartori, with an address at the office of second in Venice-Mestre, Calle del Sale, 33;
Legambiente Onlus Association National Association of Valpolicella 2000, the Association Committee Fumane Futura, Fulvio Scamperle Franco Scamperle, Anna Chiara Scamperle, Scarlett Scamperle, Joseph Conchi, Tiziano Faccioli, Roberto Marchesini, represented and defended by the lawyer. Maurizio Sartori Antonio Sartori, with an address at the office of second in Venice-Mestre, Calle del Sale, 33;
against
Province of Verona, in the person of the President pro tempore, represented and defended by the lawyer. Luigi Carponi Schitt, Marta Dal Bosco, with an address at Luigi Schitt fours in Venice-Mestre, via Filiasi, 57;
Fumane City, in the person of the mayor pro tempore, not on the merits,
Marano di Valpolicella, in person the mayor pro tempore, not in court;
Fumane City, in the person of the mayor pro tempore, not on the merits,
Marano di Valpolicella, in person the mayor pro tempore, not in court;
against
Cement Industry John Rossi SpA, in its legal representative pro tempore, represented by defense lawyer. Annamaria Tassetto, Franco Zambelli, with an address from Franco Zambelli in Venice-Mestre, Via Cavallotti, 22;
to cancel
Resolution No. 153 of 08/06/2009 of the Provincial Government, concerning the assessment of the environmental plan for the project di ammodernamento della cementeria di Fumane presentato dalla ditta Industria Cementi Giovanni Rossi S.p.A. di Piacenza, ai sensi dell'art. 4 c. 3 della L.R. 26/3/1999 n. 10 e s.m.;
della delibera n. 159 del 20/8/2009 della Giunta Provinciale, avente ad oggetto il giudizio di compatibilità ambientale sul progetto di riduzione del consumo di materie prime naturali nel processo produttivo mediante utilizzo di rifiuti non pericolosi presso lo stabilimento ubicato in Comune di Fumane dalla ditta Industria Cementi Giovanni Rossi S.p.A. ai sensi dell'art. 26 d:lgs. 3/4/2006 n. 152;
della determinazione dirigenziale n. 4787 dell'1/9/2009 Province of Verona empowering the Cement Industry Company John Rossi for the project and operate the plant with waste recovery requirements;
Minute No 222 of 05/15/2009 of the Provincial EIA
Minute No 206 of 28/11/2008 of the Provincial EIA
Minute No 227 of 26/06/2009 of the Provincial Integrated VIA;
of the minutes of Conference Services of 27/5/2009.
As additional grounds for determining n. 1482/2010 of 19.3.2010 concerning the Integrated Environmental Authorisation.
In view of the action, the additional grounds and its annexes;
In view of appearance in court of the province of Verona and John Cement Industry Rossi SpA;
view of the briefs;
Taking all of the acts of the case;
Rapporteur during the public days of November 11, 2010 Dr. Elvio Antonelli and heard the parties to the defenders for the appellant Antonio Sartori, G. Biondaro on hands and knees Schitt delegation of the Province of Verona and F. Zambelli Cement Industry for the defendant, John Rossi spa;
held and considered the facts and law as follows.
FACT
preliminary matter, the applicants in that right in the heart of Valpolicella, specifically in the City of Fumane Industry Cement Rossi SPA has launched two parallel operations times, one, an alleged modernization of a cement plant already operating in the area and the other aimed at reducing the consumption of natural raw materials in cement production process by implementing the use of non-hazardous waste in place of the said commodities.
More precisely, on 05/06/2008 Industry cements the company filed an initial application and the annexes of the final project and the environmental impact assessment (SIA) to "reduce consumption of natural raw materials in the process production through the use of non-hazardous waste " at the plant in the town of Fumane order to obtain the Environmental Impact Assessment.
With a second request dated 22.7.2008 called for the trial of the same environmental referred to the previous question, since this project on the management of waste, were also granted approval of the project under art. 208 of Legislative Decree 152/06 (approved only for new disposal facilities and waste collection) and LR No 3 of 2000 (rules on waste management).
VIA Commission Report No 190 of 26.6.2008 entrusted the investigation Working Group composed of the rapporteurs arch. Frapporti, arch. Mazzon and Eng. Residori.
Minutes With No 198 dated 18.9.2008, the Commission held the request of provincial EIA documentation.
On 23.1.2009 the company Cement Industry John Rossi, being in possession of a safe environment obtained by Decree 24. Veneto Region, 4.9.2007, has submitted to the province a third application for release of the Integrated Environmental (AIA) final, pursuant to Legislative Decree No. 59/05.
On 04/02/2009 the Province informed the initiation of the AIA procedure, indicating that the process of Integrated Environmental Permit would be integrated into the EIA procedure.
On February 9, 2009 Provincial Committee met the integrated VIA (acting as conference services) for the approval of the preliminary investigation AIA.
During the proceedings on the AIA held its first conference service on 16.4.2009.
On 05.27.2009 was held the final in Services Conference proceedings on AIA.
On 26.6.2009 the Provincial Commission for EIA, Integrated pursuant to art. 23 LR 10/99 with the representative of the City of Fumane, gave a favorable opinion approving the project subject to provisions contained in the report and opinion of the proposed investigation of 26/06/2009.
On 20.8.2009 the provincial government has decided to formulate "favorable opinion of the environmental project to reduce consumption of natural raw materials in the production process through the use of non-hazardous waste with the requirements di cui al verbale n. 206 del 28 novembre 2008 della C0mmissione di VIA.
Con determina 4787/09 in data 1.9.2009, il dirigente del settore Ambiente della provincia di Verona, prendendo atto del parere favorevole della delibera di Giunta Provinciale n. 159 con prescrizioni e del parere n. 227 del 26.6.2009 approva ai sensi dell’art. 23 della L.R. n. 10/99 il progetto presentato e rilascia l’Autorizzazione Integrata Ambientale per quanto attiene la relazione dell’impianto di recupero rifiuti.
Parallelamente e contestualmente alla procedura per l’utilizzo dei rifiuti, l’Industria Cementi ha attivato una seconda procedure to obtain an EIA for the modernization of the same cement.
On 13.5.2008 the Cement Industry in the Province of Verona filed an application with the attached draft.
The substance of modernization concerns the replacement of furnaces and mills Lepol reduction of raw materials with a new kiln with cyclonic preheater tower (cyclones) integrated with the grinding mill in a single line.
The aspects of modernization are also highlighted in the reports of the ARPA in June 13, 2008 which, while expressing support for environmental improvements resulting from new technology highlights the landscape impact of erectile artifacts.
By resolution of the City Council No 20 of 26 June 2008, the municipality of Marano di Valpolicella, involved in the EIA procedure adopted in conjunction with the City of Fumane the document "Application for an environmental impact assessment of the modernization project of cements Fumane, D. Decree 152/2006 and subsequent amendments Observations of common Fumane and Marano di Valpolicella.
By resolution of the City Council No 32, July 2, 2008 the City of Fumane Body as a deputy to issue the permit to build on the final draft, approved the Annex 5 to the same resolution.
The document approved by the municipalities of Marano and Fumane was acquired in the course of investigating the EIA as an observer of the municipalities involved, representing a document aspects of the landscape of the area affected by the cement plant.
On 3/9/2009 John Rossi, the company informed the Cement Industry will conduct a review of the design originally submitted, the design review with the cement industry has sought ways to mitigate The eye-catching landscape impact of the new project, also in deference to the comments received from the Municipalities concerned.
With Decision No. 35 of 20.9.2009 of the City Fumane took note of a feasibility study presented by Rossi cements containing six alternative proposals as possible solutions for the road suffers from traffic to and from the cement plant.
On 15.5.2009 a report of No 222 VIA the Provincial Commission, while considering the negative results of the investigation of the Working Group investigation, gave a favorable opinion for the compatibility requirements with landscape, requiring the acquisition the favorable opinion of the Superintendent, in charge of proposing the construction of structural works allegedly approved by the City Council with Resolution No. Fumane 35 of 20.9.2008, in addition to the acquisition of the Integrated Environmental too.
In support of the appeal shall be deducted the following reasons:
As for the procedure on the modernization of the system:
1) ultra vires illogic and inherent contradictions of the order, violation of Article. 6, letter. e) L. 241/90, violation LR No 10/99, in particular art. 1 and 2.
detects that the authority of decision deviated from the results of the investigation without adequately justify its decision deviates from it.
2) lack of motivation, no violation of LR 10/99, in particular Article. 1.
is found that the only motivation rinvendibile in the contested measures are in negative terms by the working group attached to the minutes and no 222, 15.5.2009 provincial EIA Commission, at its When you enter into the deliberations of the provincial government No 153/09.
It observes that Article. LR No 1 10/99 indicate the objectives and therefore the ratio of the EIA guidelines.
3) abuse of power on an incorrect and / or misrepresentation of the conditions, lack of investigation and reasoning.
is noted that the project has reviewed the conditions even worse than the original one.
4) lack of jurisdiction.
Viene rilevato che anche dello scavo delle 95.00 tonnellate di roccia doveva essere investita la Regione, non essendo competente la Provincia a svolgere sullo stesso alcuna valutazione d’impatto ambientale.
5)Eccesso di potere per falsa rappresentazione ovvero erronea rappresentazione dei presupposti, difetto e/o illogicità di istruttoria e di motivazione.
Viene rilevato che la delibera comunale n. 35/2008 non è stata considerata idonea a superare le criticità rilevate in punto di viabilità con ciò concretando una palese contraddizione tra risultanze istruttorie e quanto poi deliberato.
also be noted that the Commission has placed as a condition of the infrastructure work that is supposed points included in the municipal decision No 35/2008, which, however, does not contain any of this.
6) Violation of the law, Art. 26, paragraph 4, L. 152/2006 Lack of motivation.
is considered illegitimate in the deliberation that, for what emerges in its report No 222, 15.5.2009 provincial EIA Commission, both in the resolution of the provincial government No 153/2009, the acquisition Authorisation Integrata Ambientale sia stata prevista come condizione di efficacia della VIA.
La stessa rappresenterebbe al contrario un presupposto per l’emanazione della valutazione di impatto ambientale.
7)Violazione di legge, in particolare dell’art. 24 comma 5, D.Lvo 152/2006, difetto di motivazione.
I provvedimenti impugnati si limitano a citare le osservazioni pervenute dalle associazioni ricorrenti, senza prendere in alcun modo posizione sulle medesime.
8)Violazione di Legge, in particolare art. 25 Legislative Decree 152/2006.
The contested measure is the result of an EIA procedure as incomplete without the input needed shareholder of the Superintendent.
The draft procedures on the use of waste:
9) too much power to misrepresentation of the conditions and lack of motivation.
The cement industry has provided the administration of the data is not truthful about the amount of waste already authorized, without allowing the administration itself in a position to make an assessment done and on real data.
10) too much power, misrepresentation of conditions, lack of investigation, however, and unintelligibility of the illogical reasoning.
The Cement Industry has provided information that led to the Administration misled an inquiry on the impact of heavy traffic on the narrow access roads to the cement, which bisects the town plus Fumane.
11) too much power, incorrect representation of the conditions and lack of inquiry.
is highlighted the lack of investigation in which the administration has incurred in omitting the production of medical findings and statistics since 2000, the period for co-incineration in cement.
12) Excess of power, lack of motivation and / or are illogical reasons.
is highlighted the fallacy of the assumptions on which the Administration is committed separately considering the two projects, on the contrary, they interpenetrate necessarily.
13) violation of Art. 208, paragraph 7, of Legislative Decree n. 152/06.
is noted that on the authorization of the treatment of waste in the ordinary scheme should proceed to review the compatibility of landscaping, with the intervention of the Superintendent, in relation to the specific constraint for the protection of Valpolicella, in DM 23 May 1957, applied under Law 29 June 1939, No 1497, at least participating in the conference services referred to in paragraph 3 of that Article. 208.
14) Excess of power, lack of motivation and however contradictory reasoning.
detects that the Council resolution was limited to only those of environmental compatibility for the first instance of the EIA and this because if it were also attributable to the procedure laid down in the second instance of the project authorization , issued under Article. 208 of Legislative Decree 152/06, there is no reason why the same resolution are missing the many requirements of No report 277, 26.6.2009.
Likewise, the management determines n. 4787/09, approve the project, not to mention and recall the requirements of referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the proposal for an opinion in the investigation and then implemented by the Commission under the Integrated VIA Minutes # 277, 26.6.2009.
15) Lack of power, abnormal measure.
27/05/2009 The minutes of the Conference of services there can be no reference to a case of AIA finalized the financial year interim period necessary for the conduct of a functional test, such as it is management in the determination of 1.9.2009.
16) Violation of the Regional Law 3 del 2000 art. 22, comma 2, lett. d), assenza piano di sicurezza.
Il progetto non contiene un piano di sicurezza che disponga le procedure da adottarsi in caso di incidente grave che si estenda al perimetro esterno dello stabilimento.
Con i motivi aggiunti viene rilevato che da ultimo, la Provincia di Verona, Settore ambiente – servizio tutela e valorizzazione ambientale, con determinazione n. 1482/2010 del 19 marzo 2010 ha rilasciato l’Autorizzazione Integrata Ambientale.
Quest’ultimo provvedimento viene ritenuto illegittimo per i seguenti reasons:
1) too much power to misrepresentation of the conditions and lack of motivation.
No reason it is proposed the 9 of the original application.
2) Too much power, fault and / or illogical reasons, however, contradictory and illogical inconsistencies of the results of the investigation and the reasons of the measures so far contested.
No reason it is proposed the 12 of the original application.
3)Difetto di competenza, eccesso di potere, difetto di motivazione.
Viene riproposto il motivo n. 13 del ricorso originario.
Si sono costituiti in giudizio la provincia di Verona e l’Industria Cementi Giovanni Rossi S.p.A. le quali hanno eccepito l’inammissibilità del ricorso (e dei motivi aggiunti) e ne hanno constatato nel merito la fondatezza.
DIRITTO
In via preliminare vanno esaminate le eccezioni di inammissibilità sollevate dalla Provincia di Verona e dalla società defendant.
Exceptions are to be disregarded.
regard to the exception raised in respect of the National Association Legambiente no doubt that such association in light of its statutory tasks and Article 13 of Law No 8 July 1986 349 (article that expressly includes the association Legambiente among those standing to challenge the measures that affect the environment) and the subsequent Act No 15 May 1997 127 (article 17 paragraph 46) should be considered to challenge the acts in question pending the obvious impact that the same actions on the environment and landscape.
also be considered to bring the local associations' 2000 Valpolicella "and" Committee Fumane Futura "expected their undoubted roots in the Valpolicella area, and their statutory purpose (in the statutes suggests that the two associations are responsible to primarily protect and enhance the environment). Aloof then the fact that these associations have participated in the process issue in this case and therefore also for this additional factual profile must be considered their legal standing.
on standing of local associations (which pursue environmental protection) to challenge administrative acts that affect the environment in which they are located, the administrative case law is well established (compare among all the State Council, the fifth section, April 23, 2007 No 1830).
must also regarded as empowered individuals and the individual, because all applicants have demonstrated in acts of living near the cement plant in question for which must be regarded in this case the requirement of so-called "vicinitas" involved in the requirement that the Court considers it necessary for the purposes of standing to challenge acts that involve the interests of landscape and environmental value.
It also rejected the further objection of inadmissibility raised by the company cements Rossi as in this case, the evidence, shall not be deducted complaint.
the merits of the appeal is based.
Indeed the modernization project, the municipality of Marano di Valpolicella and Fumane have shown, when participation in the procedure, the value of rural landscape and wine of the Valpolicella, the historical value of the local shrine Santa Maria Valverde, the archeological research aimed at the nearby Temple of Minerva Scaliger castle and the very relevant and critical elements of the landscape (which would be recovered from all sites of observation) caused by the new tower of the cyclone furnace.
In particular it is inter alia stated that "an industrial element as the tower in the project configuration, it is irremediably alter the landscape and with it the popular meaning of that place" and that "If this place lost this connotation, it would be distorted, making, with this, an action that breaks a centuries-old history that oozes from the rocks of the hill and by the archaeological discoveries still to be seen" and that "the work, unique in its Typically, no similar examples in the entire province of Verona, it is not in accordance with the architectural characteristics of human interventions made in the Valpolicella. In fact, it does not achieve the hoped-for merger with the nature of the work of man. "
Well even though there's criticism of the highlighted then the two communities, so apodictic, express a favorable opinion, although subject to the achievement of very significant corrections to the draft (displacement of the building near the hill Scarin, turning to the southwest of the plan steps and creating a relief of 20-25 m.).
very considerable elementi di criticità emergono anche dall'istruttoria del gruppo di lavoro di tre membri nominato nell'ambito della Commissione di Valutazione di Impatto Ambientale;istruttoria poi allegata al verbale della Commissione del 15 maggio 2009.
Tale gruppo di lavoro, che ha valutato il progetto alla luce delle modifiche richieste dai due Comuni, dopo aver chiarito che sul progetto andava comunque acquisita l'autorizzazione della Soprintendenza per i Beni Architettonici e Paesaggistici, ha rilevato che "la principale fonte di pressione è rappresentata dalla nuova torre di cicloni di altezza pari a 103 m e delle infrastrutture ad essa correlate che, nonostante le migliorie nel nuovo progetto, risulterebbero highly impactful in terms of landscape "and that" the partial improvement in elevation of the tower to cyclones, as proposed in the new project as a mitigation measure is inadequate in relation to further impacts on the geomorphology and landscape matrix for the need for the excavation of 95,000 cubic meters. of rocks (to be introduced in part to the production process with obvious benefits, partly reused to build a relief that it reduces the visibility of the church of S. Maria Valverde) and subtraction of a wooded area which is not bound to see opportunities to work compensation.
In relation to the issue of viability, it is considered che uno sviluppo del cementificio inciderebbe sull’esistente problema di attraversamento dei mezzi commerciali pesanti dell’abitato di Fumane che avviene lungo Viale Verona ossia lungo un tratto di strada della SP 33 “del Pastello”. Tale aumento comporterebbe un peggioramento della situazione attuale, anche in materia di sicurezza, che già crea problemi ai residenti con un punto particolarmente critico individuabile nell’intersezione fra SP 33 “del Pastello” e SP 33b “della Crocietta”.Non si ravvisano opportune misure mitigativo/compensatorie nella documentazione del progetto proposto”.
Ebbene pur a fronte di una tale istruttoria highlighting so many critical profiles in terms of landscape, the Provincial Committee of the EIA (but without the presence of two of the three members of the select group), in the absence of any justification on the reasons for which it was believed, however, to overcome these profiles of critical issues from that group, expressed his opinion in favor of the project, but merely to require only the completion of some road works as they were identified by resolution of the City Council Fumane.
In the opinion of the Board in this case the evidence has made an apparent incongruity between the results of the investigation and Final determination and a definite lack of motivation on the reasons imposed, despite the negative results of the investigation, to perform this project.
These contradictory and motivation you need to recognize these shortcomings with regard to the next and final act of the Provincial No 153 of 6 August 2009 with this resolution since we are limited to make his own, uncritically, the Commission's findings.
carried The arguments allow you to not only allow the appeal in part on the project of modernization but also in the section on to appeals of the decision giving authorization to the use of non-hazardous waste (GP Resolution No. 159 of 08.20.2009), and this because the modernization project as directed introduction of improved technologies in the production cycle itself as a prerequisite of new process for the utilization of waste.
On the other hand, it is the same defense of the company cements Rossi to concede (in memory) that "the investment of funds by the respondent is to introducing the best technology available today has occurred and with clear positive effects on prevention and environmental protection "and that" contrary to the conservation del compendio nello Stato attuale contribuisce ad un peggioramento del sito circostante".
Per le ragioni su esposte deve ritenersi, ovviamente,a sua volta illegittima per invalidità derivata (e comunque caducata) anche la conseguente ed esecutiva determina dirigenziale n. 4787 del 4.9.2009 nonché la successiva determinazione della Giunta Provinciale di Verona n. 1482/10 del 19 marzo 2010 (impugnata con i motivi aggiunti) avente ad oggetto "autorizzazione integrata ambientale”. Anche tale autorizzazione è stata adottata sul presupposto della legittimità dei progetti di ammodernamento e di riduzione del consumo di materie prime naturali e pertanto deve ritenersi anch’essa affected by disability derived ..
Under the arguments carried the appeal and related additional grounds must therefore accept and be willing to effect the cancellation of all acts with the same legal challenge.
The absorbent nature of the complaints examined can not consider the other pleas.
There are good reasons to bear its own costs.
PQM
The Regional Administrative Court the Veneto (Section Three), finally pronouncing on the application, as proposed in the epigraph, hosts the main action is added, and the reasons for the effect cancels the contested measures.
offset expenses.
Order that the above is carried out by the administrative authority.
Decided in Venice in chambers on 11 November 2010 with the intervention of the judiciary:
Giuseppe Di Nunzio, President
Elvio Antonelli, Consigliere, Estensore
Marco Morgantini, Primo Referendario
DEPOSITATA IN SEGRETERIA
Il 01/03/2011
IL SEGRETARIO
(Art. 89, co. 3, cod. proc. amm.)
http://www.giustizia-amministrativa.it/WEBY2K/DettaglioRicorso.asp?val=200902462
http://www.giustizia-amministrativa.it/DocumentiGA / Palermo / Section% 201/2008/200802436/Provvedimenti/200900011_03.XML
http://www.giustizia-amministrativa.it/DocumentiGA / Palermo / Section% 201/2008/200802436/Provvedimenti/200900011_03.XML
and use TAR Legambiente 02462/2009 Cementirossi, Cutino, Portobello, Judge, Cementirossi, Fumane, VIA SEA Action TAR Legambiente Italcementi N. 02436/2008, Messina, Decree No 693 of July 18 2008, ARPA
0 comments:
Post a Comment