A Fairy Tale for a Modern Airport

What happens when an airport is situated inside a capital city, the closest houses are 200 meters away, the number of residents exposed to excessive noise levels is 235 000, and aircraft fly over people's heads every day? According to the Bulgarian authorities and international financial institutions the rational answer is to expand such an airport.

Once upon a time…

The Bulgarian authorities have considered reconstruction and expansion of Sofia airport a priority since 1996, claiming that an expanded airport will help Sofia become a modern city and important transport centre in the Balkans. Apparently the Bulgarian government places this priority above people's health, safety, the right to a peaceful night's sleep, and nature protection. Ever since the final Environmental Impact Assessment was completed in 2000 and approved with 20 conditions added by the Bulgarian Ministry of Environment and Waters, local NGOs and those municipalities nearest to the airport have questioned the quality of this EIA report. The Bulgarian authorities refuse to designate the NGOs an interested party in the dispute and the municipalities have been given promises that were never fulfilled. The project was such an important priority that the European Investment Bank approved a loan of EUR 60 million in September 1997 before a concrete plan was even drawn up. The project was so urgent that there was no time for developing the alternatives required by both European and Bulgarian legislation. But the money kept coming. In June 1998, EUR 40 million came from the Kuwait Fund for Arab Economic Development. Then Phare granted EUR 7.6 million for technical assistance in project planning, design and supervision, and for management of the airport. Still, no concrete project existed. The grant covered only the design of a new passenger terminal and a new runway. The total project cost was estimated at EUR 184 million. The development of the project continued at low speed until a new financial supplement from the EU was secured. In April 2000 the ISPA program approved a grant of EUR 50 million for the project. At that time the plans were still in the design process and a final EIA had not been completed. The EIA reports showed that the meeting of the environmental standards is not included in the project development, which assumed an underestimated project price.

One step forward, two steps backward

In fact, an EIA for the operations of Sofia Airport as a whole was never done. The existing two EIA reports assess the new runway and the new terminal separately. Thus it is impossible to show the cumulative and real impact of the project on human health and the environment. The Bulgarian environmental NGO Za Zemiata (For the Earth) has addressed letters to the responsible European institutions - EIB and European Commission - expressing our concerns that the EIA reports do not fulfil the EU acquis and the Bulgarian legislation on EIA. Mr. Peter Carter stated, on the behalf of the EIB, that the Bank strictly monitors the development of the project to meet EU environmental standards, and he politely advised Za Zemiata to continue their efforts to ensure that their concerns were taken into account by the Bulgarian authorities. At the same time, Mr. Michel Barnier, on the behalf of the European Commission, stated that all public concerns were incorporated in the development consent procedure. Following the advice of Mr. Carter Za Zemiata asked the airport administration to submit to them all the documents that they had already sent to the European institutions. What they received was a 10-page non-technical summary of the EIA report for the new terminal and a 10-page non-technical summary for the new runway. The European institutions made their decisions based on these sub-standard documents, and still claim that the project meets all European standards and has no negative effect on the public and the environment. As an amendment to the EIA report, a separate study was conducted of the health risks and possible noise abatement measures for people living in a specially determined Public Safety Zone around the airport. It notes that the experts cannot assess the real health risk because there is no EIA on the airport as a whole. According to the report, the assessment of the health risk is based on indirect criteria. The experts state that "the determination of this Public Safety Zone can be possible only if an EIA report for all airport facilities exists, because this is the only way to assess the cumulative effect of all real and potential factors on public health." Meanwhile, the Bulgarian authorities claim that public participation is a major part of project development and implementation. The Ministry of Environment and Water, in its ruling on the EIA, requires public participation in each stage of project implementation. In practice, we have seen exactly the opposite - NGOs are excluded from the project activities and local people are guaranteed no access to documents.

Spending, or wasting, European money?

So far, the modernisation of the existing terminal has already been completed. According to independent experts the current runway fully satisfies passenger demand. The economic benefits of an expanded Sofia Airport as the centre of the Balkan peninsula is further called into question by the opening in Athens, Greece, of a new and modern airport serving 10 million passengers a year. Bearing this in mind, and considering the fact that the existing airport already poses numerous unresolved problems such as its proximity to homes, noise pollution for thousands of people, night flights and aircraft flying over the city (both prohibited) and public safety, how reasonable is it to expand such a facility? These and many other issues remain unsolved. The saga of the airport seems, unsurprisingly, to be a never-ending story.

For more information:
www.zazemiata.org
www.bankwatch.org
Or contact Keti Medarova:
keti@bankwatch.org