Report 2011 - EFTA Court

Articles 7(1) and 7(2) of the Directive can only be understood as
referring to such roads outside of agglomerations.
23 iceland contends that as the only roads which have more than
six million vehicle passages are to be found within the Greater
Reykjavík Area (“GRA”) agglomeration, which has more than
100 000 but fewer than 250 000 inhabitants, the time limits for
the submission of a strategic noise map and an action plan for
the agglomeration are 30 June 2012 and 18 July 2013 as laid
down in Articles 7(2) and 8(2) respectively of the Directive. in its
Rejoinder, iceland submits that when Article 7(1) of the Directive
is read together with Annex vi, points 1.5, 1.6, 2.5 and 2.6, it is
clear that all environmental noise within agglomerations must be
mapped at the same time.
24 Due to the fact that certain roads in the GRA agglomeration meet
two different requirements of Articles 7 and 8 of the Directive,
iceland submits that these roads should be a part of the noise
mapping exercise and action plan set out for the agglomeration
size to which they belong and therefore the time limits in Articles
7(2) and 8(2) of the Directive are applicable.
25 The European Commission entirely supports the views taken by ESA.
VI FINDINGS OF THE COURT
26 The parties dispute the correct interpretation of Articles 7, 8,
and 10 of the Directive. in particular, the parties disagree as
to whether Article 7(1) and Article 8(1) of the Directive require
strategic noise maps and action plans to be drawn up for major
roads which have more than six million vehicle passages a year
which are situated within an agglomeration with fewer than
250 000 inhabitants, i.e. by 30 June 2007 and 18 July 2008
respectively, or whether it is sufficient to produce the strategic
noise maps and action plans for these roads together with the
strategic noise maps and action plans for the agglomeration itself
by 30 June 2012 and 18 July 2013 respectively.
27 According to Article 7(1) of the Directive, EEA States are required
to ensure that strategic noise maps must have been drawn up
Case E-8/11 EFTA Surveillance xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Authority v iceland
Summary Judgment
CAse Case
e-xx/x
e-8/11
477