Report 2011 - EFTA Court

Court notes that it is apparent from Article 7(2) of the Directive
that strategic noise maps must be made every 5 years. Thus,
whereas Article 7(1) aims only at the most important sources
of environmental noise which are to be assessed by 2007, as of
2012, strategic noise maps for all major sources of environmental
noise, including those referred to in Article 7(1), need to be
produced every 5 years.
32 it follows from the above that that Article 7(1) and Article 8(1)
apply to major roads which have more than 6 million vehicle
passages a year irrespective of whether or not they are situated
within an agglomeration with more than 100 000 but fewer than
250 000 inhabitants.
33 Article 10(2) of the Directive obliges EEA States to ensure that
the information from strategic noise maps and summaries of the
action plans as referred to in Annex vi to the Directive are sent
to the European Commission or to ESA within six months of the
dates laid down in Articles 7 and 8 of the Directive respectively.
34 The question of whether an EEA State has failed to fulfil its
obligations must be determined by reference to the situation
in that State as it stood at the end of the period laid down in
the reasoned opinion (see, e.g., Case E-5/11 EFTA Surveillance
Authority v The Kingdom of Norway, judgment of 20 September
2011, not yet reported, paragraph 28). it is undisputed that by
the expiry of the time-limit given in the reasoned opinion, there
were six major roads which had more than six million vehicle
passages a year within the territory of iceland and that the
icelandic authorities had neither made strategic noise maps nor
drawn up action plans for these roads.
35 it follows from the above that iceland failed to produce the
required strategic noise maps and action plans in accordance
with the time-limits contained in Articles 7(1) and 8(1) of the
Directive. iceland failed to send the information concerning the
strategic noise maps and summaries of the action plans as
referred to in Annex vi to the Directive to ESA in accordance with
Article 10(2) of the Directive.
Case E-8/11 EFTA Surveillance xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Authority v iceland
Summary Judgment
CAse Case
e-xx/x
e-8/11
479