D4 Highway, - Ivanka North

FINAL OPINION (No: 318/2010-3.4/ml) issued by the Slovak Ministry of Environment under Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on the assessment of impacts on the environment and on amendments to certain acts, as amended.

I. BASIC INFORMATION ON CLAIMANT

1. Name Národná diaľničná spoločnosť, a.s.

2. ID No. 35 919 001

3. Registered Office Mlynské 45, 821 09

II. BASIC INFORMATION ON THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY

1. Name D4 Highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North.

2. Purpose of the project The purpose of the proposed activity is to ensure road linking of existing highway routes D1 and D2 in the southern, eastern and northern part of the City of Bratislava and international interconnection of and with transport links to and the .

3. User Motor public.

4. Location (cadastral area) Region: Bratislava District: Bratislava II, Bratislava V , Senec Municipality: Bratislava, , Cadastral area: Bratislava – district of Jarovce, , Podunajské Biskupice and , Most pri Bratislave, Ivanka pri Dunaji - Farná, Ivanka pri Dunaji,

5. Dates of Commencement and Completion of the Construction and Operation of the Proposed Works Date of Commencement of Works: 2014 Date of Completion of Works: 2018 Date of Operation: 2018 Estimated year of closure: unkonwn

6. Brief description of technical and technological solutions

Baseline situation and objectives is currently (baseline situation) unbearable. This is because of the morning and evening rush hour, as Bratislava is a destination city for motorists. Therefore, the aim of the proposed activity is a road link of existing D1 and D2 highways in the southern, eastern and northern part of Bratislava, while the affected area is also in terms of transport relations and linkages within the region of the "Great Bratislava" very complicated due to the rapid development of the subregion and constantly changing activities and functions in this extremely attractive area where the fixing of transport requirements and links to existing road system is very crucial.

Options Ministry of Environment within the scope of the assessment of the proposed activity for the Assessment Report of 19 April 2008 has identified for further assessment of the impacts of construction "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North", in addition to the zero option, the following options: 0 to 12 km - red option assessed in the plan considering the possibility of routing under the . 12 to 20 km - purple option with modifications, which will represent a compromise taking into account comments from authorities, organizations and communities in the affected region. Prepare maps in the scale of 1: 5000 20 km until the connection to the D1 highway - red option assessed in the plan.

Based on the scope of the assessment and the decision of the claimant in the Assessment Report, the submitted and assessed following options:  Zero Option  "C" red - modification of options "A" and "B" listed in the plan  "E" green - alternative proposal (viaduct) of crossing over the Danube along the route of the tunnel option recommended in the Feasibility and effectiveness study of D4 highway and in the annex to the Assessment Report  D“ blue - a tunnel under the Danube.

When processing the Assessment Report, technical documents were supplemented by a technical study "D4 highway, Ivanka - north interchange, option", drawn up by Geoconsult, s.r.o. in April 2010. The technical study was dealing with alternative conduct of the vertical alignment of D4 when crossing D1 at Ivanka north interchange due to unfavourable hydrogeological conditions in this section (in option "C" led under D1 with a recess under the ground, it is necessary to build a sealed bath due to high groundwater level and other flood protection measures). Option for conduct of D4 is based on modification of the D4 vertical routing over D1, while the modification of the vertical levelling of the highway touches option C at km 21.250 - cad. area (22.800 643) in the section of Jarovce - Ivanka north and options 2a resp.7a and 2b, resp.7b at 0.0 to 0.575 km of Ivanka north - Záhorská Bystrica. Adapting the vertical levelling of option "C" in the section of D4 was, given the baseline option "C" and "E", referred as option "C1". This option addresses the problem section of D4 at the Ivanka north interchange, while significantly eliminating the adverse effects of option "C".

Changing the route of R7 Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná throughout the processing of the Opinion

2

After completing the Assessment Report, Ministry of Transport Bratislava on 22 July 2010 under No. 03167/2010-M file no. 30652 determines the continuation of preparation and construction of in the section of Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná, option A red. This regulation replaces the letter of the Minister of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications Ľubomír Vážny no. 01113/2009/SCDPK/M-35967 of 8 September 2009 intending the further preparation of option C green. From a technical point of view affecting the proposed D4 highway options, this decision will be affected only marginally (the feeder and interchange in the green option of R7 and feeder interchange with the road I/63 are to be cancelled and D4 elevated junction is to be replaced by the road I/63.

A brief technical and technological description of the construction  "C" red - modification of options "A" and "B" listed in the plan  "E" green - alternative proposal (viaduct) of crossing over the Danube along the route of the tunnel option recommended in the Feasibility and effectiveness study of D4 highway  "D" tunnel: The proposed route of D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north is connected to the end of the D4 highway section nat. border SK/A - D4 and D2 Jarovce interchange. Then it passes through the cadastral are of Jarovce and Rusovce, crosses the railway line no. 132 Bratislava Petržalka - Rusovce and road I/2, it passes on the bridge over the Danube and continues through cad. area of Podunajské Biskupice in north-easterly direction. Bypassing the urban area of the village of from the west in the area between the village and Slovnaft, it crosses the road I/63 and the railway track no.131 Bratislava - Komárno, then the west bypass of the village of Most pri Bratislave, crossing the road II/572 and the Little Danube. Along the Šúrsky channel to the north and it continues in the area between and the village of Zálesie and Ivanka pri Dunaji to the intersection with the road I/61. The last section from the intersection with road I/61 continues after crossing the railway line no. 130 Bratislava - to the D1 highway, where is the end of the section in the proposed intersection of D4/D1 Ivanka north. After completing the Assessment Report, Ministry of Transport Bratislava on 22 July 2010 under No. 03167/2010-M file no. 30652 determines the continuation of preparation and construction of R7 expressway in the section of Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná, option A red. This regulation replaces the letter of the Minister of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications Ľubomír Vážny no. 01113/2009/SCDPK/M-35967 of 8 September 2009 intending the further preparation of option C green. This decision in terms of the effect shall affect the proposed options of D4 highway just minimally (the feeder and interchange in the green option of R7 and feeder interchange with the road I/63 are to be cancelled and D4 elevated junction is to be replaced by the road I/63, for further details see the Study of R7 Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná be consulted on the NDS, a.s. respectively the Assessment Report R7 Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná - on the internet of Enviroportal) and to be replaced by Rovinka elevated junction.

Option "C" - red Horizontal design The section begins at "Jarovce" EI where the D4 highway joins D2. The route continues north of the city district Bratislava - Jarovce, it crosses the railway track Bratislava - Rusovce through the bridge, road I/2 and right bank of the Danube, passes the southern edge of Jarovské arm and planned rowing course, vertically to the bridge over the Danube and its left-hand barrier. On the right bank of the Danube it passes by the nature reserve (NR) Danube islands and the NATURA 2000 protected area (Ostrovné lúčky). On the left bank of the Danube it passes the viaduct through NR Gajc (but at its narrowest point) and protected landscape area (PLA) Danube 3 floodplains, which are part of NATURA 2000 protected sites (Biskupické Luhy). Negative impacts of D4 passage through this territory will be eliminated by the D4 routed on viaduct up to 5.545 km. On the left bank of the Danube D4 passes south of the gravel mining site Ketelec where the elevated junction will be placed with the planned urban collecting road from Prístavná street, led west from Slovnaft, a.s. There is designed a large double-sided parking area "Rovinka" at 9.250 km of D4. The highway route at 10.884 km of D4 crosses the road I/63 as elevated junction. At 11.750 km of D4 the proposed"Rovinka" EI with the I/63. D4 highway continues through railway track Bratislava - Dunajská Streda north of Most pri Bratislave, which in the future should cross the new, prospective expressway of Bratislava - Vlčkovce (in terms of NDS objectives) and road II/572 as elevated junction. Linking the two roads with D4 will be made through the collector strips in one elevated interchange of Most pri Bratislave. D4 route continues before landing-takeoff runway RWY 13-31 of Bratislava Airport and crosses the Little Danube with a bridge. In this section D4 is led in the recess so as to respect the protection zones of extended airport runway 13-31. D4 highway then passes the bridge over future water are of Zelená Voda (the western edge of the mining area). Currently, D4 would not intervene in the mining area of approx 70 m and if over the next two to three years the mining was carried out in its intended scope, then D4 highway would cross the newly created lake in the length of about 140 m (over the bridge). Then the D4 route goes east from the former agricultural farm in the area of Prucká sihoť (away from airport). At the intersection with the planned runway 13L-31R the D4 highway is conducted in the recess of about 6.8 to 7.2 m below ground level, so that (in the construction of runway 13L-31R) the completion of a highway through the "Zálesie " tunnel is possible. D4 route continues in a low embankment on the right bank, along Šúrsky channel, while respecting its protection zones, crosses the road I/61 as elevated junction, prospective communication between local part of Tanieriky and Šakoň, then it crosses the railway track Bratislava - Galanta as elevated junciton and ends at the connection to the D1 highway in the "Ivanka - north" EI. Total length of Option "C" is 22,800.63 km. Vertical design After bridging the railway track Bratislava (Petržalka) - Rusovce - Hungary and road I/2, the route logically bridges Jarovské arm and the Danube, in the range of which the height of the route is determined by both-sided barrage (consider leaving a minimum free height of 2.50 m above the right-sided barrage, 4.20 m above the left-sided barrage and required shipping space on the main river). Long routing of D4 behind bridging the Danube above the existing ground level is to allow animal migration across the new highway. High amount of bridges is designed to mitigate the adverse effect of dividing the road in fauna that occurs within the protected site. At the intersection of D4 highway with the prospective expressway and road II/572 ("Most pri Bratislave" EI) the D4 highway is conducted at ground level. The need to respect the protection zones of the landing and take-off space has affected the height design of D4, particularly at runway VPD 13L-31R, where the D4 highway is conducted in the groove. In the future, the D4 highway in the section crossing the runway will be covered in the form of the tunnel within the construction of runway 13L-31R. According to the representatives of Bratislava Airport a.s. the runway VPD 04-22 is not projected for expansion in the future, this runway is to be used out (as it passes the populated territory of Ivanka pri Dunaji). It is recommended to request an exception from protection zones of RWY 04-22. The D4 route is in the area of the intersection with runway 04-22 of the above reasons, vertically conducted in the low embankment above the current ground level (it counts with an exemption

4 from PZ of VPD 04-22). Under the regulation of the Ministry of Transport of 10 June 2009 the construction of "road I/61 Bratislava - Senec" will be led in its current vertical conduct and D4 it will be led by a bridge over the road I/61. End of the section based on the request of the claimant NDS, a.s. was technically resolved so that the originally proposed D4 highway routing in this option underneath D1 was vertically reviewed and designed over D1 regarding the problems with high water table in the original proposal (difficult objects - sealed bathtub).

Option "E" - green Horizontal design The beginning of the section from "Jarovce" EI to 1.0 km is designed the same way as in Option "C", the route of the D4 highway is crossed by the railway track of Bratislava - Rusovce via elevated junction (bridge), from "Rusovce" EI it continues in a straight line over Jarovské arm and the main flow of the Danube River on a bridge 2.722 km long. From 4.851 km the route passes north of the planned gravel mining site Ketelec where the elevated junction will be placed with the planned urban collecting road from Prístavná street, led west from Slovnaft, a.s. There is designed a large double-sided parking area "Rovinka" east from Lieskové at 8.700 km of D4. The route continues under option C to "Ivanka - North"EI from the road I/63 bridging at 10.245 km of D4. Total length of Option "E" is 22,168.94 km. The route of option "E" passing the territory of the Danube does not interfere with NR Danube islands and protected area of European importance Natura 2000 on the right bank of the Danube, does not interfere with NR Gajc and NR Kopáčsky ostrov on the left bank of the Danube, in the narrowest point with minimum intervention in the protected area of Danube floodplains and the protected area of European importance NATURA 2000. Negative impacts of the D4 highway passing this territory will be eliminated by conducting the D4 highway on viaduct until 5.110 km, with a bridge for animals at 5.225 km, which will enable wildlife migration via elevated road above D4 and ensure interconnection of biking trails and routes for pedestrians on both banks of the Danube with the peninsula of Jarovské arm and thus its greater use for the sports and recreation. Compared to option "C", the bridge on the D4 highway over the Danube is placed further from the existing houseboats in Jarovecké arm. Vertical design Vertical conduct is similar to Option "C", where the vertical design of the route in the section of the Danube bridging is determined by both-sided barrages and desired shipping space on the main flow of the Danube. Width arrangement According to valid STN 73 6101 it is sufficient for the projection period in this section of D4 to apply width arrangement - a four-lane where the recommended range of traffic volumes in the territory not for building-up is from 18,000 to 60,000 vehicles/24 h. According to the assessment of individual traffic sections, D4 highway capacity will meet the traffic demands of the projection period in the four-lane width arrangement.

Option "D" - blue Horizontal design The horizontal design is in concordance option "E" - green. Vertical design Vertical conduct is based on location of the beginning and end of the bored sections outside the inundation (flood) area of the river with the need for a minimum overburden of the tunnel at site of the tunnel boring start. Vertical conduct of both tunnel tubes is defined by longitudinal gradient in the amount of 1.86% in the descent from the west portal and gradient in the amount of 2.90% in the ascent towards the east portal. The height arch in the middle of the tunnel has a

5 radius of 30,000 m. The obstacle for the tunnel is the Danube River, respectively its inundation area. The current river bottom is at minimum lift elevation of about 101.30 m above the seal level based on the measurements. In addition to the river bed itself, the tunnel crosses other related water areas, arms and water sports pool. Location of tunnel portals and also portals for tunnel boring is limited by inundation dykes and parallel conducted of seepage channels and protected areas. Location of portals for tunnel boring is outside the inundation area of the river. SVP, OZ Danube Basin requires to secure the tunnel so that in the event of possible flooding it shall not represent privileged water way in to inundation areas. The tunnel route is designed by two separate routes of highway strips, one for each tunnel tube. Horizontally, the route is due to the nature of crossed obstacle conducted straight forwardly. The spacing of the axes of the tunnel tubes is 24 m. D4 highway tunnel is in the category 2T 8 (four- lane). Other sections are handled outside the tunnel the same way as option "C", respectively option "E" in the category D 33.5/120.

The tunnel formed by two tubes, south and north, will be operated in one-way basic mode. Both tunnel tubes are divided into sections built by tunnel boring and the bored sections built in open construction pit at both portals, which will subsequently be buried. Tunnel section North tunnel tube South tunnel tube Definitive portal of the tunnel km 2.400 km 2.400 west Excavated tunnel at the west 180 m (km 2.400-2.580) 180 m (km 2.400- portal 2.580) Temporary portal for tunnel km 2.580 km 2.580 west boring Bored tunnel 2,140 m (km 2.580-4.720) 2,140 m (km 2.580- 4.720) Temporary portal for tunnel km 4.720 km 4.720 east boring Excavated tunnel at the east 230 m (km 4.720-4.950) 230 m (km 4.720- portal 4.950) Definitive portal of the tunnel km 4.950 km 4.950 east TOTAL 2,550 m 2,550 m

Entrance and exit tunnel ramps are designed in a progressive cut into the original terrain, and due to high groundwater levels need to be designed in the sealing bath. The lengths of the sections are shown in the following table: Entrance and exit west tunnel ramp - sealing bath 523 m (km 1.877-2.400) Entrance and exit east tunnel ramp - sealing bath 250 m (km 4.950-5.200) TOTAL 773 m

Vertical solution also affects the D4 highway elevated junction with the rail track Bratislava (Petržalka) - Rusovce - Hungary and with the road I/2, where D4 is guided underneath them. "Rusovce" EI branches are in a notch and sealing baths. From 7.195 67 km of D4 the route continues in the same vertical conduct as Option C red. Width layout Width parameters in option "D" of the D4 highway tunnel are designed in category 2T 8 (four- lane), other sections before and behind the tunnel are considered in category D 33.5 with four- lane road, i.e. with the broader central dividing strip in order to allow easy future extension to 6- lane toward the highway axis. 6

Construction technology and technological equipment of the Danube tunnel Excavated tunnel at the Jarovecký (west) portal Excavated tunnel will be built in a construction pit, which be reinforced with cut pile walls forming a seal against entering groundwater. Pile walls will be anchored by prestressed cable anchors. Construction of excavated tunnel tubes will be reinforced with concrete, designed with sheathed water insulation and sealing of construction joints in order to protect transport area against entering groundwater. Model cross section is designed so as it corresponds to the shape of the excavated tunnel vault in the roof moulding. Road width layout in excavated tunnel will include turning and joining lanes to the intersection with the road I/2. After excavating tunnel tubes and front portal wall, the pit will be filled with the material extracted from the tunnel to the original ground level. Excavated tunnel on the Podunajské Biskupice (east) portal Excavated tunnel will be built in a construction pit, which will be reinforced with anchored walls of cut piles forming a seal against entering groundwater. Construction of excavated tunnel tubes will be reinforced with concrete, designed with sheathed water insulation and sealing of construction joints in order to protect transport area against entering groundwater. Model cross section is designed so as it corresponds to the shape of the excavated tunnel vault in the roof moulding. After excavating tunnel tubes and front portal wall, the pit will be filled with the material extracted from the tunnel to the original ground level. Construction technology of excavated tunnel tubes For the construction of excavated tunnels in the rock environment, consisting of soil below the water table, it is the ideal solution the technology of full-profile tunnel boring machines (Tunnel Boring Machine, abbreviated TBM) of circular profile with a shield with active bracing of the front. Active front bracing can be done by compressed air, suspension or dis-joined earth material with different additives. The full-profile TBM principle with a shield with active front bracing is as follows:  The earth in the front shield is disconnected by cutting (the milling) head shield, which rotates in a sealed chamber containing a medium under pressure.  The disconnected earth is made of working chamber extracted through the pipeline or screw conveyor.  TBM working space is protected by a steel shield cover around the perimeter.  There is a lining under the shield, typically of reinforced concrete segments - tubings.  TBM is moving forward with the help of hydraulic presses dismantling against the last compiled lining ring. The current state of TBM technology with shield with active front bracing allows to consider the two basic technologies:  Slurry shield where the front overpressure is ensured by suspension.  Earth pressure balance shield - EPB, where the front overpressure is ensured by a mix of disconnected earth and additives in a controlled extraction through the screw conveyor. Both technologies are intended for the construction of tunnels in soils below the water table, while ensuring the front of excavation and thus space in the tunnel during construction against slumping earth and water inside the tunnel and allowing formation of watertight lining of reinforced concrete segments. Slurry shields are used mainly in non-cohesive earth. Slurry suspension serves as a bracing medium at the face and also a transport medium for mined earth thus having a decisive impact on the shield function. Operation of the slurry shield requires intensive separation technology, which needs additional area within the construction site on the surface. The excavated earth mixed with a suspension is transported from the combustion chamber by pipeline to a separation device, which is gradually separating fractions of earth from the suspension and the latter is renewed and supplemented. Subsequently, the suspension is conveyed into the combustion 7 chamber through supply pipeline. Using compressed air is limited to cases of maintenance or removal of obstacles in front of the shield. When using slurry shield in fine-grained materials the cutting head of the shield becomes clogged by sticky, highly plastic fine-grained earth what is a substantially retarding factor. This risk increases especially for medium and high plastic clays of solid and firm consistency. Earth pressure balance shields (EPB) represent an advantageous alternative technological solution to the slurry shield. EPB shields technology has seen considerable progress, corresponding to the extension of the scope of applicability (while adding various additives) and in non-cohesive earth. The basic principle of the technology is to use an uncoupled soil as liner media inside the working chamber. Usually, the cohesive earth is solid to soft rolled through the holes in the cutting head into the working chamber. Pressure of plasticized earth mash in the chamber provides front balance is maintained by shifting the shield and rotating the screw conveyor. The excavated earth is transported by a conveyor from the pressure chamber to the interior of the tunnel with atmospheric pressure. Rotation of the chamber full of excavated earth requires a considerable torque and also results in increased wear of disconnecting instruments. A significant advantage of EPB shields in comparison with the slurry ones is the uselessness of separation device. Choosing the type of shield is a critical decision for the project of construction of tunnels in the rock environment. The selection decision is generally based on an assessment of the suitability of rock conditions, logistical requirements, but also the experience of the contractor. Ensuring the required stability of the felling during the excavation along with the elimination of adverse impacts is a critical requirement. Only in situations where the both can provide stability of the front in its entire extent of the expected rock conditions, other factors should be taken into account such as site conditions, restrictions on the disposal of excavated material and so on. Considering conditions of tunnel boring in the section it can be considered a more economic EPB shield. A more detailed analysis of the options will be subject to subsequent stages of project preparation. Construction of the tunnel and cross profile Bored tunnel cross-section is circular, based on the proposed technology of the construction, boring using full-profile TBM tunnel boring machines with shield. The final projected light cross-section of the structure of bored tunnels is formed by a circle with a radius of 5.35 m on the face of lining. The design of the bored tunnels is closely linked with the technology of their construction. In tunnel boring in soils by means of full-profile TBMs with shield, the lining generally consists of reinforced concrete segments (tubings) that are installed immediately behind the TBMs under the protection of shield and ensuring the stability of the felling in the section behind the shield. The number of segments usually varies from 5 to 8, and these may be the same or there is usually a piece of the closing. Width of the segment (generally 1.5 to 2.0 m) correlates with their mass, transport and handling. Horizontal and vertical arcs of the route are secured by inserting special conical segments. Due to geological and hydrogeological conditions under which the tunnels are to be bored, a single-layer lining is designed formed by reinforced concrete segments. The longitudinal joints must be replaced, all joints must be in waterproof design, which corresponds to joint details and emphasis on precision of precast segments manufacturing. The basic advantages of using a single-layer lining versus bilayer one are as follows:  Lower costs compared to a bilayer lining.  Instant static efficiency of single-layer lining in the entire stress.  Easy detection of leakages and easier repairs of the single-layer lining.  Clear identification of burden compared to the lack of clarity of the actual share of the load on the inner lining in the case of bilayer lining. Given the height of overburden and groundwater level, respectively the water level in the 8

Danube, the lining is designed with segments of 500 mm thick. Protection of the interior of the tunnels against groundwater will be secured by watertight joints of reinforced concrete segments with gaskets and bolts inside. Along with the space for shield casing, which will be subsequently filled by injecting, and construction and assembly tolerances to be the average of the felling and TBM diameter is 12.0 m. The internal layout of cross-section in the area defined by lining segments includes the following structures and equipment:  The bottom of the tunnel is formed by filling concrete, which houses drainage pipelines covered with a protective layer of drainage gappy concrete  Space above the drainage pipeline is filled with backfill material.  There is the roadway with concrete pavement above the reverse backfill.  Cable and fire water main are to be run on both sides of the road in protectors.  Beside and above the passing cross-section, there is a space for tunnel equipment (traffic signs, fans, lamps etc.). Safety construction work in tunnel Security structural modifications are made of several factors under articles of STN 73 7507, the purpose of which is directly related to ensuring operational safety in the tunnel. Emergency bays will be designed according to STN 73 7507, which prescribes length of 40 m and a width of 3.5m. The upper limit of the gauge is at a height of 4.2 m. It is expected to build the bay of vertical shaft located outside the river bed in advance of the tunnel tube boring by the shield. Bored tunnel tubes are interconnected by transverse links forming a protected escape routes with the distance of max. 300 m. Cross interconnections are built using conventional technology of tunnel boring to improve soil environment. Other security arrangements are the emergency niches used to accommodate emergency call equipment and niches for the location of the fire water hydrant. They will be placed directly on the surface of the lining equipped with local treatment. The distance of equipment is 150 m. This proposal will require an exemption from the applicable regulations. Technological centres Technological centres will be constructed on both tunnel portals used for placement of installations related to the tunnel equipment, in particular its power supply. There will be placed high and low voltage substations, transformers and backup power sources. The centres can be built as underground structures, properly incorporated into the excavated sections and tunnel portals. Technological equipment Tunnel equipment is to ensure operational and safety functions. In designing technological equipment it will be important that the operator decides whether to run both pipes in the mutual mode in case of closure of one of the tubes, for example, during regular maintenance. Technological equipment mainly includes the following items:  Tunnel ventilation - given the length of the tunnel less than 3,000 m it is expected the longitudinal ventilation using jet fans placed under the ceiling of the tunnel in pairs.  Tunnel lighting - will include in addition to operating lighting of the tunnel tube also evacuation lighting of escape routes and indicative lighting of curbs.  Energy supply - if it is not possible to provide power supply for equipment working at the time of fire from two independent sources, it will be necessary to provide alternative sources, such as diesel generators or UPS.  Communication equipment - for the communication of tunnel users and dispatching, the tunnel will be equipped by SOS boxes, radio communication in the tunnel and loud speakers.  Video surveillance - besides the direct supervision of the tunnel throughout its length, the tunnel is also equipped with automatic detection of incidents. 9

 Traffic signs and signals - will include variable traffic signs in front of the tunnel and inside the tunnel as well as lights.  Electrical fire alarm - a line detector in the tunnel and point detectors in areas related to the tunnel.  Measuring devices - to provide measurement of quantities mainly related to ventilation control (volume, CO values, velocity ...).  Central controlling system Given the potential for the development of Bratislava and its surroundings, as well as the position of the highway ring on the outer edge of the city, it was recommended: - from "Rusovce" EI to "Ivanka - West" EI to build the D4 highway in category D 33.5/120 (100), with four-lane width arrangement in the 1st stage, i.e., with the broader central line so as to allow the prospective expansion of the six-lane highway towards the axis (it is questionable to leave a margin for 6-lane already from "Jarovce" EI, i.e. from the D2 highway). - in the section between "Ivanka - West" EI, "Ivanka - North" EI, where it is necessary to build collector strips because of the small distance between these interchanges, it is proposed to build the D4 highway in category D 26.5/120 (100), i.e. in the four-lane width arrangement. - to purchase lands for broader use (future six-lane) already in the first stage and critical civil structures (bridges, bathtubs, ...) to be implemented for the final layout, that would significantly save costs in the financial outlook for the widening the D4 highway to 6- lane. Better economic indicators (IRR, returns, ...) can be achieved in the construction of D4 in the section of four-lane width arrangement, on the other hand, if it was necessary to additionally expand D4 to six-lane, it would mean higher additional costs (construction costs and the cost of the land e.g. in 30 years they will certainly not be lower than they are now) and for certain construction projects, for example on a bridge over the Danube, or in sealing bathtubs unless it is counted in advance, then the extension will not be able to be technically feasible.

Overview of basic highway indicators of the proposed options Overview of basic indicators of D4 highway in the section of Jarovce - Ivanka north for options C, D and E according to documents of the Feasibility and effectiveness study are shown in the following table: Option Indicator m.u. "C" red "D" blue "E" green Total length of route km 22,800 63 22,660 69 22,168 94 Bridges on D4 km 6.110 4.464 6.139 Cubic capacity of embankments m3 3,559,232 2,880,510 3,149,955 1,266,434 (out of which 580,000 for the Cubic capacity of excavations m3 549,215 tunnel) 561,044 Road relocations 1st class km 0.786 0.438 0.438 2nd class km 0.618 0.708 0.708 Field, purposeful, bypasses etc. km 22.382 23.124 23.124 Elevated interchanges pc 6 6 6 Bridges on D4 m 6,110 4,464 6,139 Bridges over D4 m 830 972 830 Bridges on roads outside D4 m 865 43 879

10

Tunnels m 0 2,550 0 Sealed bathtubs m 1,330 2,102 1,330 Noise barriers m 7,600 4,000 9,250 Parking areas pc 1 1 1 Fencing m 32,600 31,728 30,872 IRR % 5.7 3.8 5.9 Costs construction part excl. VAT € 624,529,483 827,215,260 646,615,144 Total costs excl. VAT € 843,561,884 1,149,170,345 887,804,782 Note .: prices in 2009 of the Feasibility and effectiveness study

Given the total balance of earth works with a significant lack of embankment earth we assume that the whole excavation will be used for embankments, while depositing the excavation probably will not be necessary and will be directly imposed in the highway route in the embankment.

Brief description of related structures Interchanges Option C (red)  Jarovce interchange is built as a form intersection of highways D2 and D4. The proposed continuation of D4 raises the need to complete the right bridge on D4 over D2, what will need to slightly reshape the branches linked to the new right part of the D4 highway.  Rusovce interchange - intersection of D4 with road I/2 (2.859 km of D4). The interchange is designed as an elevated deltoid-shaped interchange. Connecting road I/2 is in the form of two circular interchanges. The proposed four-lane width arrangement of road I/2 passes south of the intersection smoothly into the existing width arrangement (approx. Cat. 9.5/60), as the traffic load in this profile will be significantly lower from the load above the intersection.  Ketelec interchange- (elevated interchange according the the Report - R7 green option)- it is designed south of Ketelec at the point where currently gravel mining is carried out, while mined areas are continuously covered with various materials (mostly redundant earth for the wide surroundings). The recultivation of the land to its original height and quality will be part of the planned mining. Interchange is designed in the shape of a clover leaf (for option A of R7). Given that option A of R7 will not be implemented under the valid decision of Ministry of Transport, the interchange must be adjusted only to the crossing of D4 with planned urban road led from Prístavná street west from Slovnaft, a.s. (extension of Bajkalská street).  Ketelec interchange - (elevated interchange according to the latest guidelines of MTPT SR-R7 red option) is designed as a full four-leaf clover, with the adaptation of its shape to very skewed crossing of D4 and R7. Since this is a crossing of two 4-lane directionally divided roads, collectors are designed in case of interweaving. The interchange will ensure linking of D4 highway  Rovinka interchange - intersection of D4 with road I/63 at 10.884 km of D4 is designed between Rovinka and the district of Podunajské Biskupice, rhomboid with one large roundabout on the road I/63 which is placed at the current ground level  Most pri Bratislave interchange - D4 crossing the forward-looking expressway and intersection with road II/572 at 14.597 and 15.632 km. Interchange with the forward- looking expressway (R) is designed in the shape of a tubular junction, with road II/572 as the deltoid-shaped intersection. Both of these intersections are linked to D4 highway through the collector strips. Small roundabouts are designed on the road II/572.  Zálesie outlook intersection - interchange located at 18.797 km of D4 as an elevated deltoid-shaped junction. All traffic directions can be ensured in the interchange. The 11

mutual distance between "Zálesie" EI and "Ivanka - West" EI is only about 1.32 km, while the minimum allowable distance is 2.5 km according to STN 73 6101. It would require an exemption from the STN 73 6101, art. 9.3. Interchange is not part of the technical design of the D4 highway.  Ivanka - West interchange - D4 intersection with the road I/61 at 21.774 km is designed as an incomplete clover leaf intersection. D4 Highway is led by the bridge over road I/61, the link is through the collector strips, which will be connected to the nearest "Ivanka - North" interchange.  Ivanka - North interchange - D4 intersection with D1 at 22.800 km is designed as a clover leaf intersection. D4 Highway was originally led through sub-road underneath the D1 highway. While processing the Assessment Report, the claimant reassessed the routing and put the D4 over D1. Interconnection with D1 is designed through the collector strips on D4 to D1 collector strips to be extended to six-lane. Option E (green)  Jarovce interchange is built as a form intersection of highways D2 and D4. The proposed continuation of D4 raises the need to complete the right bridge on D4 over D2, what will need to slightly reshape the branches linked to the new right part of the D4 highway.  Rusovce interchange - D4 with the road I/2 is designed as an elevated deltoid-shaped interchange. Connecting road I/2 is in the form of two circular interchanges. The proposed four-lane width arrangement of road I/2 passes south of the intersection smoothly into the existing width arrangement (approx. cat. C 9.5/60), as the traffic load in this profile will be significantly lower from the load above the intersection. The interchange branches are kept in embankments.  Ketelec interchange, - crossing is designed in the area of Ketelec. Interchange is designed in the shape of a clover leaf (for option A of R7). Given that option A of R7 will not be implemented under the valid decision of Ministry of Transport, the interchange must be adjusted only to the crossing of D4 with planned urban road led from Prístavná street west from Slovnaft, a.s. (extension of Bajkalská street).  Ketelec interchange - (elevated interchange according to the latest guidelines of MTPT SR-R7 red option) is designed as a full four-leaf clover, with the adaptation of its shape to very skewed crossing of D4 and R7. Since this is a crossing of two 4-lane directionally divided roads, collectors are designed in case of interweaving. The interchange will ensure linking of D4 highway  Rovinka interchange - intersection of D4 with road I/63 at 10.884 km of D4 is designed between Rovinka and the district of Podunajské Biskupice, rhomboid with one large roundabout on the road I/63 which is placed at the current ground level  Most pri Bratislave interchange - D4 crossing the forward-looking expressway and intersection with road II/572 at 14.597 and 15.632 km. Interchange with the forward- looking expressway (R) is designed in the shape of a tubular junction, with road II/572 as the deltoid-shaped intersection. Both of these intersections are linked to D4 highway through the collector strips. Small roundabouts are designed on the road II/572.  Zálesie outlook intersection - interchange located at 18.797 km of D4 as an elevated deltoid-shaped junction. All traffic directions can be ensured in the interchange. The mutual distance between "Zálesie" EI and "Ivanka - West" EI is only about 1.32 km, while the minimum allowable distance is 2.5 km according to STN 73 6101. It would require an exemption from the STN 73 6101, art. 9.3. Interchange is not part of the technical design of the D4 highway.  Ivanka - West interchange - D4 intersection with the road I/61 at 21.774 km is designed as an incomplete clover leaf intersection. D4 Highway is led by the bridge over road I/61, the link is through the collector strips, which will be connected to the nearest "Ivanka - North" interchange. 12

 Ivanka - North interchange - D4 intersection with D1 at 22.800 km is designed as a clover leaf intersection. D4 Highway was originally led through sub-road underneath the D1 highway, while processing the Assessment Report, the claimant reassessed the routing and put the D4 over D1. Interconnection with D1 is designed through the collector strips on D4 to D1 collector strips to be extended to six-lane. Option "D" (blue) In addition Rusovce interchange all other interchanges in option "D" are identical to Option "C". Technical design of Rusovce interchange in option "D" is as follows:  Rusovce interchange - D4 with the road I/2 is designed as an elevated deltoid-shaped interchange. Connecting road I/2 is in the form of two circular interchanges. The proposed four-lane width arrangement of road I/2 passes south of the intersection smoothly into the existing width arrangement (approx. cat. C 9.5/60), as the traffic load in this profile will be significantly lower from the load above the intersection. The greater part of the crossroad branches is in the trench, where considering ground water levels it will be required sealing tubs.

Alternative solution of the D4 and D1 highway junction of Ivanka North NDS, a.s., the claimant, regarding unfavourable hydrogeological conditions in that section of highway (the need to build a sealed bathtub due to high ground water level and other anti-flood measures), developed in the course of the Assessment Report processing an optional technical design for routing D4 in the affected region (Ivanka north interchange). The optional design of D4 routing is based on modifying vertical conduct of the D4 highway over the D1 highway - option C1, while the necessary adjustment to the level line also affects the following section of D4 Ivanka north - Záhorská Bystrica. The option was prepared in the technical study "D4 highway, Ivanka north interchange with the D1 highway, optional solution", drawn up by Geoconsult, s.r.o. in April 2010. Modification of option "C" of D4 routing in the section has been marked as option "C1", while the vertical routing modification of the highway touches option "C" at 21.250 km - cad. area (22.800 643) in the section of Jarovce - Ivanka north and options 2a resp.7a and 2b, resp.7b at 0.0 to 0.575 km of Ivanka north - Záhorská Bystrica. The technical design for levelling vertical arrangement is conditional upon crossing traffic routes, railway track and headroom cross sections. In accordance with STN 73 6101 art. 6.14.6 on the length of the linear slope between the height arcs in opposite direction, the change in levelling at the beginning of the section shifted by 65 m while complying with exception from the protection zone of RWY 04-22. D4 crosses the road I/61 at 21.774 km, which belongs to the selected road network for large-size transport with minimal gabariti of 5.20 + 0.15 m. Subsequent crossing with overlook road between local part of Tanieriky and Šakoň at 22.184 km with the underpass cross section of min. 4.80 + 0.15 m. Highway passes over the railway of Bratislava - Galanta at 22.370 km with a height of cross section of 7.50 m. The last crossing within the area is crossing the D1 highway at 22.800 km with minimum underpass height of 5.20 + 0.15 m. In proposing changes to the vertical levelling, it was respected widening of the road I/61 to four- lane and complementing D1 with parallel roads on both sides. In the above conditions, a change in vertical levelling was proposed that meets STN 73 6101 for the design category of highway D 33.5/120. At 21.840 to 22.350 km the vertical levelling is reduced by an average of 2 m. In the next section, the vertical levelling is led by bridge over the D1 highway, thereby it excludes building of sealing bathtub below the water table. Construction and installing pillars will have a minimal effect on the groundwater regime. Road drainage Sewerage of highway is designed prospectively for 6-lane road. The designed rainwater sewers will be built across the whole highway section, traced in its middle dividing strip.

13

In addressing the issue of highway drainage, rainwater drainage was designed. Rainwater drained from the highway must be pre-treated in oil separators with the purification degree of 0.1 mg/l NEL at the outlet that will be placed in the (off) road embankment. Adjacent watercourses, respectively infiltration into the ground are designed as recipients. For Šúrsky channel, it will need to adjust the amount of water discharged which is limited. Therefore the discharged rainwater will be retained in the retention tanks (RT), and further discharged through the flow control valve with the amount determined by the administrator of the flow. Due to the low groundwater level the tanks will be constructed of the concrete pieces. The rainwater is to be pumped from the tanks through pumping stations into adjacent watercourses. Option C (red)  Highway section from the Jarovce interchange until 0.800 km to the seepage devices  Highway section from 0.800 to 2.200 km (bridge) through discharge pipeline into the Jarovské arm  Highway section bridge - 6.000 km through discharge pipeline into the Danube  Highway section from 6.000 to 14.100 km into seepage devices  Highway section from 14.100 to 19.100 km through discharge pipeline into the Little Danube  Highway section from 19.100 to 22.800 km through discharge pipeline into the Šúrsky channel  Drainage of right and left parking area through ORL to seepage devices is individually designed. Option E (green)  Highway section from the Jarovce interchange until 0.800 km to the seepage devices  Highway section from 0.800 to 4.150 km (bridge) through discharge pipeline into the Jarovské arm  Highway section from 4.150 to 7.300 km through discharge pipeline into the Danube  Highway section from 7.300 to 14.100 km into seepage devices  Highway section from 14.100 to 19.100 km through discharge pipeline into the Little Danube  Highway section from 19.100 to 22.800 km through discharge pipeline into the Šúrsky channel  Drainage of right and left parking area through ORL to seepage devices is individually designed. Option "D (blue)  Highway section from the Jarovce interchange until 1.700 km to the seepage devices  Highway section from 1.700 to 2.500 km (bridge) through discharge pipeline into the Jarovské arm  Highway section from 4.700 to 7.750 km through discharge pipeline into the Danube  Highway section from 7.750 to 14.100 km into seepage devices  Highway section from 14.100 to 19.100 km through RT and discharge pipeline into the Little Danube  Highway section from 19.100 to 22.800 km through discharge pipeline into the Šúrsky channel  Drainage of right and left parking area through ORL to seepage devices is individually designed. Other sewage: In the "Ivanka - West" interchange, it will produce crossing D1 with the existing rainwater discharge pipe from the pumping station PS 2 during construction. It is a pipeline that drains rainwater from the area of the Senecká highway interchange, lying on the road I/61, about 1,600 m west of the "Ivanka - West" intersection. DN 400 pipeline of PE pipes, passing across the 14 interchange, will be treated off the road linking the existing outlet object to Šúrsky channel. Estimated length of the relocation of the pipeline is 400 m. Relocation of the discharge pipeline has been the subject to design in the construction of extension of the road I/61 Bratislava - Senec.

Bridges Bridges are designed for a load class A except for bridges on field and forest paths, which are designed for a load class B. The support structure of the bridge on the highway is designed in most cases from bar fabrications up to 42 m fields span. For aesthetic purposes, the support structure of the bridge over the highway is designed as a monolithic prestressed. Crossing D4 with the Danube Bratislava, the capital city of Slovakia, stretches along both banks of the Danube, the European river, and on the left bank of the Morava river, on which two districts of Devin and Devinska Nova Ves are spread, as their suburbs. Bratislava including its suburbs is situated immediately on both banks of the Danube on a stretch of about 18 km and its associated parts are currently linked with 5 road bridges and one railway bridge, which is part of the highway bridge in the port area. All bridges have been constructed no to influence water flow, besides local dams due to bridge pillars placed right in the flow. Construction of Gabčíkovo Water Dam with levels in Čunovo and Gabčíkovo, and construction of Hrušov reservoir in Slovakia practically solved the protection of areas on both banks of the Danube, on the right bank to embankment of road ramp to the old bridge at 1 868.140 km and on the left bank within the reservoir the left-side embankment to the harbour pool, respectively a closing object (a new one) on the Little Danube was adjusted. Dams of Hrušov - Dunakiliti reservoir have been designed and built to the design flow in Q100 with an elevation of 1.5 m (requirement of the Danube Commission in developing Common contractual plan). In 2008 it launched local bank flood protection of Bratislava (currently already built), which provides for the protection of historic centre and other selected sections of the passage of big water, that is most often in the late spring and summer months, or as a result of ice regimes on the Danube. Cruise on the Danube is of European importance. It is still up to date also planned waterway along the Morava River in the framework of linking the Danube - Oder - Elbe. Water course administrator SVP, OZ Danube river basin requires at bridging the Danube of about 1,860 km and the inundation area to respect the following: - height of lower bridge at the fairway must respected the min. navigational height. The flow administrator provides the designer with basic information about the position of the fairway, navigable waterway and navigational height. The data form the starting basis for the design parameters of the bridge. - position of the designed pillars in the area behind the dikes must respect the protection zone 10 m from the foot of the slope of a protection dike until the pillar structure, respectively 10 m from the seepage canal bank line and the actual flow. Pillars must not be located in the body of the dam or in the profile of the seepage canal. - pillars in the inundation area and in the actual flow profile of the Danube must have the appropriate hydraulic shape. Not to situate the pillars to the foot of the river bed. No obstacle can be in the navigable waterway in the width of 120 m. - the positioning of the pillars of the proposed bridges will require an assessment of their installation and reinforcement. In the next project phase it is necessary to assess the impact of dams on the course of backwater levels in the building of the bridge - for the optimal design of the bridge it would be appropriate to repair Biskupické arm partly with option E. The length of the adjustment is proposed to 150 m. The original riverbed is necessary to be filled up, the length of about 100 m. Based on these requirements the bridging has been designed as follows: Option C addresses the bridging of the Danube through a bridge with the length of

15

722+370+665+1,002=2,759 m (obj.203). The bridge consists of four expansion units. DC1 (Jarovce viaduct) and DC4 (Biskupice viaduct) are monolithicaly prestressed beam bridges built with technology of eject partly on support scaffolding and expansion unit DC3 that bridges the Danube River using double pylone suspended semi-harp system (see text and illustration annex). Range of the main field is 361 m. Option E addresses the bridging of the Danube via a bridge with the length of 852+825+633=2,310 m. The bridge consists of three expansion units. DC2 support structure is designed as a steel girder bridge reinforced in the longest two fields (L = 210 m - rowing course and L = 315 - Danube) through Langer system arcs in the symmetrical level (see text and illustration annex). The transversal arrangement of bridges is identical to the solutions set out in the option C. There is also a cycleway and pedestrian path on these bridges allowing access to the recreation area in the area between dams. Such methods bridging the river Danube only suggest possible solutions of the bridge across the Danube from a variety of possible solutions. Access for pedestrians and cyclists to the bridge over the Danube from the existing bike trails and paths is designed with a pair of ramps in three places. Crossing D4 with the Little Danube At 16.80 km of D4 a bridge over the Little Danube is designed. The Little Danube was once one of the arms of the Danube. At present, both banks are adapted to the trapezoidal profile. The watercourse serves as the recipient for waste water drainage (WWTP Vrakuňa, Slovnaft and others). The flow starts with abstraction, not flood flows. Level flow regime is subordinated to the procedures of closing object at the inlet. In place of a stream crossing and bridging the max. operational level was set up at Q = 60 m3.s-1. The infiltration of water from the Little Danube in the surrounding terrain is very small by these observations, the Little Danube bed is quite sealed against water ingress by chemical and other waste materials. For this reason it is not recommended to intervene in the flow profile. The current position of the course does not meet certain security requirements of air traffic of the Bratislava Airport. Part of technological equipment is placed on the existing bridge over the river. Flow relocation is necessary for the planned shift of runway 13-31 by 400 m. The length of the proposed relocation of the Little Danube is about 3,265 m, and the length of the abandoned bed is about 2,100 m. The relocation of the Little Danube is not part of the construction of the D4 highway, it is the intention of the Bratislava Airport. In terms of water managers it would be ideal to firstly resolve the flow shift in terms of airport plans and respect for the highway route and only then propose the final position of the bridge. The technical design of the bridge and its location is in accordance with those requirements. Crossing D4 with the railway track route crosses the following railway lines:  track no. 132 Bratislava - Rusovce in cad. area of Jarovce,  track no. 131 Bratislava - Dunajská Streda in cad. area of Podunajské Biskupice,  track no. 130 Bratislava - Galanta in cad. area of Farná, At various intersections it should be taken into account the following specifications, which were discussed with RRO (Railway Regulatory Office):  track no. 132 Bratislava - Rusovce in cad. area of Jarovce, The highway passes the single-track electrified railway. In bridging the railway it needs to take into account the expected double-track railway tracks. The bridge must be built up with anti-touch barrier. Height of cross-section shall be 7,500 mm.  track no. 131 Bratislava - Dunajská Streda in cad. area of Podunajské Biskupice, The highway passes over the single-track non-electrified railway. In bridging the railway it needs to take into account the overlook railway electrification. The ledge arrangement of the bridge must be enable building a anti-touch barrier in case of electrification of the track. Height of cross-section shall be 7,500 mm. 16

 track no. 132 Bratislava - Galanta in cad. area of Farná, The highway passes over the double-track electrified railway. The bridge must be built up with anti-touch barrier. Height of cross-section shall be 7,500 mm. Horizontal and vertical conduct of bridges is closely associated with the proposed highway, resp. road passing the bridge. Bridge type, its length and range of fields is further dependent on the nature of bridging barriers, terrain and geological conditions. The basic division of bridges and their names in the study are based on the relationship placing the main road or junction branch led on the bridge. The main road in this part of the study in different options are options of R7. Overview of bridges in terms of the location of the main road is as follows: D4 – Option C a) Bridges on D4 with length of < 50 m 53.0 m b) Bridges on D4 with length of 50 - 100 m 654.0 m c) Bridges on D4 with length of < 100 m 5,403.0 m d) Bridges over D4 with length of < 50 m 0.0 m e) Bridges over D4 with length of > 50 m 830.0 m f) Bridges on roads outside D4 865.0 m D4 – Option E a) Bridges on D4 with length of < 50 m 53.0 m b) Bridges on D4 with length of 50 - 100 m 716.0 m c) Bridges on D4 with length of < 100 m 5,370.0 m d) Bridges over D4 with length of < 50 m 0.0 m e) Bridges over D4 with length of > 50 m 830.0 m f) Bridges on roads outside D4 879.0 m D4 – Option E a) Bridges on D4 with length of < 50 m 85.0 m b) Bridges on D4 with length of 50 - 100 m 564.0 m c) Bridges on D4 with length of < 100 m 3815.0 m d) Bridges over D4 with length of < 50 m 0.0 m e) Bridges over D4 with length of > 50 m 972.0 m f) Bridges on roads outside D4 43.0 m

Water management measures According to Decree no. 211/2005 Coll. of the MoE, the important water management watercourses are the Danube under Bratislava at 1,708.2 to 1,850.2 rkm and above Bratislava at 1,872.7 to 1,880.2 rkm, the Little Danube and Šúrsky channel throughout the entire section. Within Gabčíkovo Water Dam, there is a seepage canal of Janíkov dvor - Jarovce - Rusovce - Čunovo. The water facilities are respected within the technical design of the D4 highway. Šúrsky channel - according to the administrator´s data SVP, OZ Danube Basin, Management of internal waters of Šamorín was built to drain all the watercourses flowing down from the Little Carpathians. But the mouthed streams were not protected against alluviation, so the channel became sludgy over time. Mouth of Vajnorský waste then required the deepening of the channel. The flow is now regularly maintained, there is a sporadic tree stand on the banks, river bed is overgrown with aquatic plants. D4 highway route is situated near the channel by digging groove (sealing bathtub). The flow administrator requires for ensuring the maintenance and protection of the channel to keep min. 10 m, and in exceptional cases 5 m wide operating strip from the foot of the dam until D4 highway. Noise control measures The Feasibility and effectiveness study of the proposed D4 highway the following noise control measures are proposed (PHS - noise barriers): PHS proposed under the Feasibility study: Option Designed noise barriers Height (m) Length (m) 17

PHS on D4 at 0.000 - 2.000 km on the right 3.0 2,000.0 PHS on D4 at 2.900- 4.600 km on the C right 2.0 1,700.0 7,600.0 PHS on D4 at 2.900- 4.600 km on the left 2.0 1,700.0 PHS on D4 at 19.300- 21.500 km on the right 4.0 2,200.0 PHS on D4 at 0.000 - 1.800 km on the right 3.0 1,800.0 PHS on D4 at 2.500- 4.600 km on the right 2.0 2,100.0 E PHS on D4 at 2.500- 4.600 km on the left 2.0 2,100.0 10,000.0 PHS on D4 at 7.500- 8.550 km on the right 4.0 1,800.0 PHS on D4 at 19.300- 21.500 km on the right 4.0 2,200.0 PHS on D4 at 0.000 - 1.800 km on the 4,000.0 right 3.0 1,800.0 D PHS on D4 at 19.300 -21.500 km on the right 4.0 2,200.0

Preparation of the area Preparation of the area suggests to remove all vegetation from the area of permanent land use and surfacing for the establishment of construction yards. Handling strips in the current flat area are not designed, particularly with regard to minimization of agricultural land use, interference in the territory which is the subject of conservation. The landscaping will consist of humus removal, storage of redundant humus to inter-deck and its subsequent treatment to re-use for the road humification. For larger bridge structures it is considered the establishment of construction yards (material dumps), all within the area of permanent land use. In case of the agreement with the users (e.g. with agricultural organizations, municipalities, etc.) it will be also possible to use other suitable surfaces.

Landscaping and alternative planting Landscaping on the road and interchange branches will be multifunctional in order to protect slopes of terrestrial body against erosion, reduce the negative impact of transport on the nature and environment (to capture emissions and partly noise) and integrate the road in the landscape. Road embankment slopes and areas of the interchange branches will be covered with concentrated bush planting and group plantings of various species of trees to create a continuous green compact mass with the varied colour and heigh structure. Central dividing strip areas will be covered with grass and its central part will be planted with a continuous line of green bush. At the same time, a suitable bushy planting to lead animals under the bridge will be designed in places of animal migration along the fencing. Detailed selection of tree species will be performed in the next stage of project documentation, taking into account local climatic and soil conditions, the original native species and overall landscape. Hillside and other area humification and grassing is included in the cost of the lower structure of the relevant road. The landscaping range in different options of D4 highway is shown in the following table: Option C E D Landscaping (m2) 589,497 623,365 499,740 Alternative planting (€) 342,250.00 332,752.00 323,302

Fencing 18

D4 highway will be fenced in its entire section. All fencing will be made of plastic-coated wire mesh, with support steel elements. At the airport fencing it is considered a wooden fence of lath (proximity of radio navigation equipment makes the use of metal fencing impossible). - Option C length of about 38,900.00 m - Option E length of about 38,100.00 m - Option E length of about 31,728.00 m Access roads to the construction site, construction yards and dumps Detours to build the highway it will be necessary to build the following detours of existing roads:  Detour on the road I/2 at "Rusovce" EI - During the construction of "Rusovce" elevated interchange it will be necessary to build a temporary detour on the road I/2. Width arrangement of the detour is designed in category C 7.5/50, length of the detour will be approximately 430 m.  Detour on the road I/63 at "Rovinka" EI - During the construction of "Rovinka" EI, including adjacent finishing of the road I/63, it will be necessary to build a temporary detour, parallel to the existing road. Free width of the detour will be 7.00 m, which corresponds to the width of the lanes of 3.00 m, with guide strips width of 0.50 m. The detour will be about 560 m long.  Detour on the road Podunajské Biskupice - at 12.811 km of D4 - The detour is necessary due to the elevated crossing of D4 highway. Width arrangement of the detour is designed in category C 7.5/50, length of the detour will be approximately 375 m.  "Most pri Bratislave" detour - During construction of relocations of road II/572 and II/06359, it will be needed to build detours. Width arrangement of the detour is designed in category C 7.5/50, total length of the detour will be approximately 700 m.

Access roads to the construction site - within the construction of the D4 highway it will be necessary to provide access of construction machinery to the construction site, especially to large objects of construction sites, such as bridges, intersections, etc.. In principle, it is expected that public roads will be used as main access routes to get the direct access to the construction site, while prospective suppliers of works will keep on moving along the route, along the surfaces of the permanent land use of the structure. The site will be divided in some parts by means of difficult or costly surmountable obstacles. Some tertiary roads belonging to different entities can be used as access routes to the construction site. The condition of these roads typically requires treatment (repairs of the road cover, construction of a new road, extending the road, etc.). There is an indicative plan for the development of temporary tertiary roads for the construction of the D4 highway:  access road to the bridge over the Danube on the right bank - access from the road I/2 at "Rusovce" interchange, running on tertiary road of the Danube basin towards right-sided dike, afterwards on the new road parallel to the dike and then along the route of the existing road on the right bank of Jarovské arm, the length of treatment about 1,000 m  access road to the west portal over the Danube on the left river bank for option E and C access from the road I/63 via any of the tertiary roads around Slovnaft, then along the route of the existing field road or forest road to the left-hand seepage channel of the water dam, length of treatment about 3,900 m  access road to the west portal, access from the road I/63 via any of the tertiary roads to the mining area of Ketelec, then along the route of the existing field roads to the highway route, the length of treatment about 2,100 m  access road to the construction site of the Little Danube relocation - access from the road II/572 to construction site on the right side of the current flow, length of treatment about 19

600 m  access road to the construction site to the south and north of the D4 highway - access from the road I/61 in opposite to METRO, a.s., then along with the field road to the highway, length of about 1,600 m The envisaged access road treatments are indicative, further processing of the documentation will provide further analyses of the issue and it will especially be negotiated with the relevant authorities and organizations. Construction yards in the area are considered at "Rusovce" interchange, Rovinka parking area, "Most pri Bratislave", "Ivanka - West" and Ivanka - North" interchanges with the area of 29,265.8 m2. Only temporary humus dumps are considered during the construction. These will be addressed in the vicinity of construction yards.

Parking areas There is a large two-sided parking area of ""Rovinka"designed for the section of the highway - a site for large parking area was designed on both sides of the D4 highway on undeveloped territory in the section between Ketelec interchange and D4 highway crossing with the road I/63.  Location of parking area for option C - D4 stationing 9.0 to 9.5.  Location of parking area for option E - D4 stationing 8.5 to 9.0.  Location of parking area for option D - D4 stationing 8.5 to 9.0. The proposed parking area capacity on one side is the following:  Total area 53,130 m2

 paved areas and roads for cars 3,370 m2

 paved areas and roads for trucks 12,840 m2

 pavements 2,330 m2

 greenery 21,040 m2

 area for hospitality establishments 6,980 m2

 area for fuel station 6,570 m2

 number of stationing - for cars 60 - for trucks 60 - for busses 10

Induced investments In connection with the placement of the D4 highway, it will need to get adjusted the following utilities and roads

Option Type of relocation Length C red E green D blue Road relocations km 7.415 6.713 6.955 Water main relocations km 1.410 1.410 1.410 Sewage relocations km 0.400 0.400 0.400 Melioration relocations km 16.950 17.250 16.450

20

Gas pipeline relocations km 1.800 1.800 1.800 Oil pipeline relocations km 0.100 0.100 0.100 Pipeline relocations km 0.200 0.200 0.200 HV line relocations km 8.300 11.300 11.300 LV line relocations km 14.855 14.445 14.050

D4 collision with upcoming lines and equipment Option C  HV 1 x 400 kV line of Podunajské Biskupice - Gabčíkovo at 10.880 km - part of the project "2 x 400 kV Gabčíkovo - Veľký Ďur", according to the planning and technical study by Elektrovod, a.s., December 1999 - parallel with the southernmost existing 2 x 400 kV line - collision of D4 with the planned lines, must be dealt with mutual coordination within the entire junction node of "Rovinka" uopn providing a complete map data Option E  HV 1 x 400 kV line of Podunajské Biskupice - Gabčíkovo at 10.880 km - part of the project "2 x 400 kV Gabčíkovo - Veľký Ďur", according to the planning and technical study by Elektrovod, a.s., December 1999 - parallel with the southernmost existing 2 x 400 kV line - collision of D4 with the planned lines, must be dealt with mutual coordination within the entire junction node of "Rovinka" uopn providing a complete map data  HV 1 x 400 kV line of Podunajské Biskupice - Petržalka III at 8.300 km - parallel with existing 1 x 110 kV line at "Rovinka" parking area - collision of D4 with the planned lines, must be dealt with mutual coordination within the entire junction node of "Rovinka" uopn providing a complete map data Option D  HV 1 x 400 kV line of Podunajské Biskupice - Gabčíkovo at 10.880 km - Part of the project "2 x 400 kV Gabčíkovo - Veľký Ďur", according to the planning and technical study by Elektrovod, a.s., December 1999 - parallel with the southernmost existing 2 x 400 kV line - collision of D4 with the planned lines, must be dealt with mutual coordination within the entire junction node of "Rovinka" uopn providing a complete map data  HV 1 x 400 kV line of Podunajské Biskupice - Petržalka III at 8.300 km - parallel with existing 1 x 110 kV line at "Rovinka" parking area - collision of D4 with the planned lines, must be dealt with mutual coordination within the entire junction node of "Rovinka" uopn providing a complete map data

LV line relocations The documentation considers the following range of telephone and remote lines with the fact that their extent and type will be specified in subsequent stages of PD. Option C E D Local telecommunication distribution (m) 655 345 250 Remote telecommunication networks and lines 13,400 (m) 13,800 13,700 Future area for Ivanka - West interchange 400 400 400

Further conditions for the construction of the proposed options

21

In terms of designed options the following adaptations of the Bratislava road system should be considered (related investments that are within the competence of Bratislava city):  to adapt the existing Svornosti st. by extending to the four-lane road, including adjustments to strategic interchanges with Slovnaftská and Popradská street to elevated junctions,  build a new four-lane "radial road", which will interconnect Bajkalská st. from the intersection on D1 Prievoz and D4 through the Ketelec intersection (defined in the LUD). Note: - assessment required by Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on impact assessment for this section.

The above adjustments are defined and protected in the form of binding regulations in updated and currently valid zoning plan of Bratislava of 2007, respectively its amendments 01 of 2008.

Summary of Estimated Costs for the construction of the D4 highway Jarovce - Ivanka north by the Feasibility study is presented in the following table (prices in 2010): Construction Construction Optio Total costs excl. Total costs costs excl. VAT costs incl. VAT n VAT (€) incl. VAT (€) (€) (€) C 624,529,483 843,561,884 743,190,084 987,535,462 D 827,215,260 1,149,170,345 992,658,312 1,379,004,414 E 646,615,144 887,804,782 769,472,021 1,036,788,794

Construction phasing The construction of the entire D4 highway is proposed by NDS, a.s. to be implemented in the following stages, in sections:  Section I Jarovce – Ivanka North, resp. Rača interchange*  Section II Ivanka North, resp. Rača interchange* – Záhorská Bystrica,  Section III Záhorská Bystrica – Devínska Nová Ves (extension to 4-lane), under construction.  Section IV Devínska Nová Ves - nat. border SK/A (* According to the Feasibility study, a recommendation to extended section I to the Rača interchange of Section II.) The assessed section of Jarovce - Ivanka north, respectively Rača crossroad is recommended under the study to be built as first, because after it is put into operation, the greatest positive impacts on other roads in the southern and south-eastern part of Bratislava are expected, as follows: - partial traffic relief of the D1 highway inside the city (especially in Ružinov, Prievoz, on a busy bridge over the Danube, in Petržalka), - diversion of transit traffic to the D4 highway ring, - partial diversion of traffic between outskirts on the outer edge of the City of Bratislava, - a favourable impact on the 3rd class road network is expected (decreased congestion), for example between Podunajské Biskupice and municipalities of Most pri Bratislave - Zálesie - Ivanka pri Dunaji, which currently replace the missing outer ring road of the city, - if the construction of a part of the section Ivanka North - Rača crossroad (Section II) began in Section I, this would have a positive impact not only on Rybničná street - through a reduction of traffic load (currently assumes the function of the missing outer ring of the town), but also on internal part of Vajnory, where there would be a significant reduction in congestion of a new urbanization (Čierna voda), as car traffic would have

22

already been caught up on the D4 highway. It should also be noted that the section Ivanka north - Rača interchange was not subject to the assessment of this section, but to the next one. Therefore, this section can be built after completing the assessment of the second section of D4.

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE 1. Development of the Assessment Report Assessment Report of "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North" (the "Assessment Report") was drawn up by GEOCONSULT, s.r.o. in April 2010, the research team leader was Mgr. Ivan Jakubis.

Processing the Assessment Report was preceded by an evaluation of the plan "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North" under the Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on the impact assessment on the environment, as amended (the "Act"). Slovak Ministry of Environment (the "MoE"), after studying the submitted plan and taking into account comments received in cooperation with departmental body, approval authority and after consultation with the claimant, determined and issued the scope of the assessment to the activity under Section 30 of the Act on 19 April 2010 under No. 5487/08 - 3.4/ml.

2. Distribution and publication of the Assessment Report The claimant has submitted the Assessment Report pursuant to Section 31 of the Act to the MoE in June, 2010. MoE after checking the particulars under Section 33 paragraph 1 of Act has forwarded the Assessment Report to the authority by a letter no. 318/2010-3.4/ml. on 28 June 2010 to all stakeholders and the interested public with a notice that a written opinion on the Assessment Report pursuant to Section 35 paragraph 1 of the Act shall be delivered to the address - Ministry of Environment, EIA Department, Nam. Ľ. Štúra 1, 812 35 Bratislava, within 30 days of its receipt. The Assessment Report was published pursuant to Section 34 of the Act in a standard way at the appropriate municipalities and on the website of Ministry of Environment www.enviroportal.sk.

During the processing of the Final opinion the following has happened:

 On 05 October 2010, the first negotiation on draft final opinion on the proposed activity "D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north" was held in the conference room of MoE. . The subject of the discussion was requirements of BROZ and nature protection organizations and bodies, mainly that the option of tunnel crossing the Danube (option "D") and the range of compensatory measures (range of compensatory measures will be specified after the annual survey of biota) has not been sufficiently verified.  NDS, a.s., arranged a working meeting on 18 November 2010 at the Ministry of Environment, where the second discussion on the BROZ´s opinion was held. (Again it was discussed the requirement for compensatory planting of 300 ha of forests and grassing of 200 ha of arable land, etc.).  By letter no. 318/2010-3.4/ml of 23 December 2010 MoE sent a draft final opinion on the activity and the invitation to 12 January 2011 to discuss the final opinion. Nature conservation organizations again demanded to equally evaluate the tunnel option D under the Danube.  Due to the demands of BROZ association which required the equal review of tunnel option with surface options already been considered in the Assessment Report. Review and completion of the report was provided by NDS, a.s., in April, 2011. Supplements to the Assessment Report on the "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North" (the report - supplement) was carried out by GEOCONSULT s.r.o., Bratislava. The research team leader was RNDr. Ivan

23

Jakubis. The claimant submitted the "Report-supplemet" to the MoE by letter ref. no. 1406730101/2011 dated 14 April 2011. MoE after checking the particulars sent the Report-supplement by letter no. 318/2010/-3.4/ml of 19 April 2011 to all stakeholders and the interested public, with the notice that the written opinion on the report-supplement shall be delivered to the address - Ministry of Environment, EIA Department, Nám. Ľ. Štúra 1, 812 35 Bratislava. The report-supplement was published in the affected municipalities in accordance with Section 34 of the Act in the standard manner on the website of the Ministry of Environment www.enviroportal.sk.

3. Discussing the Assessment Report with the public Joint public hearing on the Assessment Report, held on 15 July 2010, in the Mirror Hall of the Presidential Palace, Bratislava.

Present: according to the attendance list Agenda of the public hearing: 1. Introduction + welcoming the participants of the public hearing - Ing. Stanislav Tokoš 2. Recap of the steps taken in the environmental impact assessment process in the role of the affected municipality + claimant - Ing. S. Tokoš 3. Presentation of the Assessment Report by the claimant- Ing. Daniela Okuliarová, Ing. Alena Kušnierová, 2. Presentation of the Assessment Report by the processor – Geoconsult, Bratislava – RNDr. Ivan Jakubis, Ing. Juraj Fürst 3. Discussion 4. Conclusion ad 1. Introduction: Ing. Stanislav Tokoš (from RE-OÚP of the municipality) welcomed the participants of the public hearing on the Assessment Report and introduced representatives:  the claimant - NDS, a.s. – Ing. Daniela Okuliarová and Ing. Alena Kušnierová  the processor of the Assessment Report - GEOCONSULT, s.r.o. - RNDr. Jakubis, Ing. Fürst, and processor of a part of the report RNDr. Peter Krempaský  representatives of Bratislava districts: he apologized the absence of Mr. Antoš the mayor of Rusovce and VZ, and Ing. Elena Borková from Podunajské Biskupice. He noted the absence of invited representatives of the local governments of Bratislava and the surrounding municipalities.  of the municipality - HMB: Mgr. Ondrej Ferenci then he stated that the course of the public hearing will be kept in written minutes and accompanied by a recording on CD, and the present and the citizens have the opportunity to comment on this report to 1 August 2010 and their comments can be addressed to the Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Regional Development, Dobrovičova 12, 812 66 Bratislava. ► He presented the purpose of the construction, while stressing the absence of efficient system of public transport. D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka north in this section is designed in two options:  C - red - modification of options "A" and "B" listed in the plan - the total length of 22.800 63 km.  E - green - alternative proposal (elevated road) for crossing over the Danube along the route of the tunnel option - total length of 22.168 94 km. ► The place of implementation is the area from Jarovce to Ivanka north interchange. Presented solution of the D4 highway at any of these options is assessed to be appropriate and necessary; for the connection of R7 we support to the solution in accordance with LUD Bratislava.

24 ad 2. Recap of the steps taken in the assessment process from the position of the City of Bratislava as the affected municipality and the claimant - Ing.S.Tokoš a/ The plan was delivered on 6 March 2008 (the public informed of the plan on 11 to 31 March 2008) with the date for the opinion until 27 March 2008 - the opinion was drawn up on 11 April 2008 and signed by the mayor on 12 May 2008. b/ The negotiation on the scope of the assessment (SA) : was held on 14 April 2008 at MoE (presented for HMB Ing. Tokoš and Mgr. Kožárová). Ing. Luciak summarized the comments of the opinions sent of affected bodies and organizations, including NGOs. This was followed by a rich discussion, of which ideas were incorporated into the text of SA. d/ Scope of the assessment of 21 April 2008 (delivered with the minutes of discussions on the SA + attendance list - on 5 May 2008) e/ Informing the public on the Scope of the assessment - a notice was published on 12 May 2008 - with the possibility to comment until 22 May 2010. f/ He stated that on 8 March 2010 at 10 am a working meeting to the assessment report processing! was held under the auspices of the NDS in the office of Geoconsult, Miletičova 21. All the participants were informed e.g. on the fact that NDS ordered the "Feasibility and effectiveness study" with the solution of option C (about the route of original null circuit), with the solution of tunnel and viaduct option. Ing. Fürst informed about the transport - he said the projection period 2015 - 2020 to 2030 was considered but also in 2040 in the context of developing areas which will affect it. He spoke about the connection to the existing road network, the connection point of (to D2) Jarovce EI, the other EIs, the road I/63 (ul. Svornosti), Rovinka EI through feeder road: R7 Ba - D. Lužná, and others transport and technical contexts of the construction of D4. g/ Assessment Report was delivered to the municipality with a letter of MoE on 30 June 2010. Notice to the public on the Assessment Report was published on 06 July 2010 with the possibility of consultation, studying and commenting from 02 July 2010 to 01 august 2010. The notice shall also include information on the public hearing to be held on 15 July 2010 at 4.30 pm in the Mirror Hall of the Presidential Palace. g/ Invitations to the public hearing were distributed on 06 July 2010. In addition, the invitations were sent also by NDS (delivered to HMB on 12 July 2010). ad 3. Presentation of the Assessment Report by the claimant - NDS, a.s. - Ing. Daniela Okuliarová, Ing. Alena Kušnierová:

Ing. D. Okuliarová introduced briefly the genesis of preparing the Assessment Report - the plan and scope of the assessment is followed by the report, but there was a lot of technical requirements that had to be technically resolved in the "Feasibility and effectiveness study" for all sections of the D4 highway. Then she passed the floor to Mr. I. Jakubis from Geoconsult, Bratislava. ad 4. Presentation of the Assessment Report by the processor - GEOCONSULT BA - RNDr. Ivan Jakubis:  He briefly informed on the technical design of highway and on changes from the Plan under the Feasibility and effectiveness study - in relation to the environmental assessment. He stated that the technical solution of the Feasibility and effectiveness study was elaborated by Dopravoprojekt a.s. in 2009, it also addresses option C (red - viaduct), D (blue - tunnel) and E (green - viaduct). The Feasibility and effectiveness study was designed to minimize interference with the habitats along the Danube, to respect the Danube branches, rowing course on the Danube, shipping gabarit, gravel mining activities at Ketelec, respectively PWMA Rye Island. D4 extends into the PA system of international and national importance. They discussed routing underneath the Danube, the question of extending the D4 to six-lane 25

road from Jarovce interchange to Ivanka north interchange; the requirements of cyclists were respected too, connection of R7 (option A, option C); a need for technical solution of Ivanka north interchange to a full four-leaf, to check noise exposure in the area, flood protection, resolve routing around the Bratislava Airport, connection of Zálesie (complete downhill/exit to D4).  He also informed that in the section of Jarovce over the Danube, options C, D, E were examined, that it is thought to build a four-lane being upgradeable to 6-lane (to inside the highway to avoid ALU). Option C - green is repsected for R7; negotiations of highway routing around the Bratislava Airport showed that there is no need to bore the tunnel (Zálesie, Ivanka pri Dunaji); the route has been moved in the direction towards option C (red), for the collision with planned VPD13L-31R the D4 is to be buried under the ground. It was negotiated also with the Bratislava Airport.  As for Zálesie feeder (he was asked by the municipality Zálesie within commenting on the plan) - he stated that there is not enough traffic volume to connection, and there is no suitable Ist class road, respectively IInd class road, but a reserve for this feeder is to be considered for the future.  The tunnel under the Danube - the effort of the shortest tunnel, tunnel axis located in the distance of about 24 m, the tunnel has a 4-lane, the other out of the tunnel, however, is 6-lane (i.e. necking); tunnel length ÷ 2,550 m (digged and bored part). The Danube, inundation, the bottom level of about 101.30 m above sea level are obstacles - this raised the requirements for vertical tunnel routing. Technical Study = tunnel option being the less favourable. When considering the following positives have been taken into account: the smallest tree felling, the smallest intervention in PA, no crossing of sports and recreational area; but there are also drawbacks: it is difficult (excavated in sealing tubs), cycling trails, necking to four-lane: 6- lane, reservations are also from the Danube basin (not to get overflown, the barrier effect of groundwater flow), tunnel drainage, efficiency issues are problematic ... and therefore this option (D - tunnel) is not recommended in the overall assessment.  Then he stated features of options C and E: It is also shown in brochures you received at the arrival to the meeting, both options are different from about 2.0 km to 11.0 km. Option green - E = new option, option C = as an intersection of original options A, B presented in the Plan. The problem is crossing D1 and D4. NDS ordered the "Technical study" of this intersection. The Feasibility and effectiveness study shows that the D4 highway is guided underneath the D1 but within TS, which was developed in parallel with the Assessment Report on the environmental impacts, the D4 highway routing was re-designed over D1 (confirmed by a note by Ing. A.Kušnierová of NDS a.s.).  Furthermore, he presented (even with pictures) options C and E: crossing over the Danube - bridging question: - option C – red = bridge over the Danube with the length of 2,759 m (722+370+665+1002). - option E – green = bridge over the Danube with the length of 2,310 m (852+825+633). GEOCONSULT BA – Ing. Juraj Fürst: He commented on impacts on the existing road network, intersections, presenting figures on load, and talked about what is D4 about. He said that option C - red and option E - green are identical a part of the route. He informed about the Jarovce interchange, about crossing D4 with the Rusovce road, and the other junctions on the route that are included in the Assessment Report. Within the Zálesie interchange he said that the connection to D4 is requested in the conclusions of the development plans of the municipality. The traffic load - until 2040 it is foreseen a significant traffic volume on the roads in Bratislava; the busiest section of D4 is between Rovinka EI and Ketelec EI (from 50,000 to 55,000 vehicles/day), and therefore it is considered to six-lanes (i.e. category 33.5 m). In the first stage, it is designed as a four-lane, central dividing strip is broader, if the intensities are exceeded (and STN) then this central dividing strip would be narrowed and the road would be widened to a 6-lane. In the context of links within the he said that it is recommended for 26 implementation as I. stage: section from Jarovce interchange to Ivanka north, respectively to Rača EI. GEOCONSULT BA - RNDr. Ivan Jakubis (addition to the interpretation): To assess the options, the special "studies" were used e.g. for bridging, RNDr. Krempaský processed a study of the effects on protected areas, the noise study is also prepared (critical sections in the cadastral area of Jarovce and Vajnory = noise barriers), emission/dispersion study (emission limits not to be exceeded); noise impacts on biota - the problem was to assess in particular the impact on animals (lack of methodology). In terms of multi-criteria evaluation he mentioned all partial criteria used in this process - as the result indicated that more favourable is option E with Ivanka north EI according to option C1 - i.e. D4 over D1. ad 5. Discussion - Ing. Tokoš - thanks for interpretation on the Assessment Report and opens the discussion. Question - RNDr. Anna Zemanová (deputy of BSK) - asks if a representative of BSK is present BSK and whether BSAK was invited to the discussion? She stated that on 20 July from 9:00 pm the Terms of Reference for LUD Bratislava region is to be discussed at BSK and asked the representatives of the claimant and HMB to participate in the negotiations in order to solve things (e.g. the routing and environmental impacts around Vajnory etc.). Answer: Ing.S.Tokoš (HMB): Yes, we sent the invitation on time to BSK (is it under No. 14). Answer: Ing. Okuliarová (NDS,a.s.): On 23 June 2010 we negotiated with BSK (also in a wider context) and we are also active in commenting on the "Terms of Reference". In terms of Triblavina crossroad - it is addressed in the plan of D1 extension to six-lane + collectors, and is also included in the LUD HTU. Question –Ing. Elena Borková (district of P.Biskupice) – quoting: "The City district will apply its opinion in writing, now I state only essential facts that will be included in the opinion." The city district in an area limited by Lieskovec and Ketelec, i.e. in the area between the two routes of D4 (between E - green and C - red) procures an urban study in order to achieve changes in Master plan. A water surface is to be formed in the area, after the previous deep gravel mining, and the water surface should be base for a new function of the contact zone. The city district is considering the development of intensively used relaxation zone for the citizens of the City District in conjunction with a high proportion of green, it envisages the formation of bio- centre and related bio-corridors. Order for processing TS was made available to NDS in May 2009, also two quality committees were held to the study in progress, so we think that the idea of the transformation of the zone could be projected, or at least mentioned, in the present Assessment Report. Neither of options for D4 routing in terms of function will substantially affect the proposal of future land use, however, it changes its perception as an area in front of the D4 highway, i.e. linked to the urbanized area of the city district, respectively an area behind the highway, which already affects its availability as the " option E green" cancels the Jegenešská access road. The city district prefers "option C - red" of D4 tracing for the following reasons:  The D4 route is in the territory of the district of PB in accordance with the Master Plan of Bratislava; preparation of this D4 routing option is considered to be faster and more efficient because its implementation is not subject to complex achievement of amendments to the Master plan of the city;  Due to preparation of the urbanization plan of the area defined by sites of Lieskovec and Ketelec;  Even given the fact, as stated by Ing. Fürst, to future extreme congestion of D4 in the section between Ketelec and Rovinka interchanges, to place the impacts of traffic - noise, emissions, as far away from the urbanized area of the city district 27

At the same time, we propose to incorporate in technical measures: More passages for migrating animals in the area between Ketelec and Rovinka interchanges, with respect to the proposed amendment of the use and proposed extensive green areas; Noise barrier, proposed to protect the village of Lieskovec in option E to be designed in option C, in order to protect forthcoming recreational functions; We have to repeatedly express our disapproval to routing of R7 and its outlet into the Svornosti street (the road I/63), despite the fact that the Assessment Report states the completion of I stage of investment preparation of R7. The issue of R7 routing is considered still open and we will continue to promote the solution according to present Master plan, since the routing of the said road shall not affect significantly any of stakeholders than the City District of Bratislava - Podunajské Biskupice. Brief resume of CD arguments:  assessing the impact of routing of traffic construction of R7 (EIA) was carried out only to the border of the territory of Bratislava and the impacts of the outlet of the road on (residential) areas of the city were not considered or taken into account, especially on the territory of the city district - Podunajské Biskupice  conflict of the route with the Master plan  routing of R7 expressway with its outlet into the Svornosti street through the connecting system and junction nodes destroys the only free development area located in the city district, intended for buildings. The affected area has an utmost importance for Podunajské Biskupice in terms of strategy, since the objective is to make it equivalent entering space to the area from the south, with the character of not only the city, but regional importance. the said proposal of R7 routing did not solve in any way the difficult traffic situation on the road in the Svornosti street, which is unsatisfactory even today in terms of capacity. Unbearable traffic volume in the Svornosti street (I/63), insufficient width parameters of the road, constantly increasing transit, impermeability of junctions, improper construction and technical condition of the road without sidewalks, cause traffic jams and increased accident rates, not only during rush hours, but also during the day. Answer: Ing.S.Tokoš (HMB): Processing the TS after gravel mining in Lieskovec - Ketelec is being paid attention by HMB, this TS should be the basis for amendments to city LUD (ZaD). Opinion of CD on R7 is essentially in accordance with the opinion of HMB. City insists on solution along the lines of a valid Master plan. Other solutions are considered temporary, not solving the final distribution of traffic on the road network in the city. In this context, he pointed out the recent talks of representatives of NDS with representatives of HMB - on the subject of protection zones around the highways in Bratislava area. In this context, he stated, that working meetings will continue and will seek the consensus of both parties. Answer: Ing. Okuliarová + Ing. Kušnierová (NDS): in relation to the Jegenešská road they indicated that all roads interrupted by the construction of highway will be after the completion of the highway restored. Question – Ing. Daniela Pyszková (resident): She asked questions about the development plans and whether it should not be declared the building enclosure for the whole D4 route? She also asked about the tunnel option - a portal on Petržalka side - what is new? Answer: RNDr. I. Jakubis (Geoconsult): According to the longitudinal profile of the highway in tunnel option D the highway in the direction from Jarovce goes below the ground before crossing the railway of Bratislava-Rusovce. Answer: Ing.S.Tokoš (HMB): As for the building enclosure, I would say that in the context of what has been said here I do not consider it good - it's beyond the scope of the legislation. Negotiations between HMB and NDS which I previously mentioned will be addressing the issues. Question – Ľudoví Bolha (resident) – he asked about the R7 outlet - what is the situation in Svornosti street? 28

Answer: Ing. Kušnierová - the plan addressed option A, B, after comments of municipalities and HMB it included green option - therefore the Assessment Report only deals with option A and a new option - C green. The final opinion of MoE SR is that both options are evaluated as equivalent. With this lack of preference of options, Ministry of Transport designated NDS by letter to prepare option green - C for the next stages of PD. Answer: Ing.S.Tokoš – confirmed words of Ing. Kušnierová. Answer: Ing. Okuliarová - said that negotiations took place between NDS and BSK regarding the R7 route changes in the Master plan, where HTU accepts changes in R7 route in green option and NDS under Act No.50/1976 Coll. on Territorial Planning and Building Code (Building Act) pursuant to Section 19 will contribute financially to the ZaD LUD HTU of Bratislava region for the R7 route. Answer: Ing.S.Tokoš - said the solution of the issue must be brought, that the binding parts of LUD HTU are binding even for Master Plan of Bratislava, but it it is expected that HMB will require a solution by red option - with the possible connection of extended Bajkalská Street to Ketelec EI. Answer: Ing. Okuliarová - said that without building the road behind Slovnaft - extension of Bajkalská and increase in capacity of Bajkalska EI, Ketelec EI on D4 will not fulfil its function of redistribution of traffic from the south, as one of two inputs to Bratislava. Question - Ing. Kamenický (resident in Marianka) - he asked for traffic analysis - methodology, dispersion study - methodology. Answer: RNDr. I. Jakubis (Geoconsult) - he quoted the exact name of the methodology according to the Assessment Report (this is a US methodology). Answer: Ing. Fürst (Geoconsult) - it is based on Alfa 04 study (we take into account the data for HMB as well as HTU , and HTU Bratislava). Answer: Ing. D.Okuliarová - we included the figures for the Austrian side of the territory that have been coordinated with the Austrian side. ad 6. Conclusion - Ing. Tokoš thanked the participants for their active participation in the public discussion and reminded the public option to comment on the Report by 01 august 2010.

Public hearing on the Assessment Report held on 20 July 2010 at 3 pm in Information Centre in Ivanka pri Dunaji. Mdm mayor confirmed that the Assessment Report, as well as the invitation to negotiation were accessible to citizens in the municipality in an usual way by a notice on the notice board of the Municipal Office from 6 July 2010 up to date. Notice of the public hearing was announced on local radio. NDS deputy Ing. Okuliarová explained to the present the process for the preparation of highways under current legislation and briefed about the whole upcoming section of D4. Agenda of today's meeting: a.) Information on technical design of highway and environmental assessment of the Assessment Report, the report's author RNDr. Jakubic and Ing. Fürst b.)Discussion ad a.) Information on technical design of highway and environmental assessment of the Assessment Report, RNDr. Jakubis , Geoconsult s.r.o Informed on technical solution, the environmental impacts assessment and the conclusions from a comparison of the assessed options. Ing. Fürst –informed on transport assessment of options. ad b.) Discussion 1.) Question: Mr. Glasa

29

-what is the design of crossing the airport and highway? Is the highway an obstacle for groundwater flow? Answer: RNDr. Jakubis Crossing of highway with the airport was consulted and agreed upon as part of the Feasibility and effectiveness study, where the position of highway was fixed in the final position which has been taken into consideration in the Assessment Report on the environmental impacts, Surely the highway would be a barrier for groundwater flow, but measures will be taken - drainage channels are to be built under the highway, as the highway will be stored in a sealing tub of 6 to 7 m below the ground (+ height of the highway), drainage channels will be placed so that the highway not be a barrier to groundwater flow. It will also be necessary in the next stage of PD to do a hydrogeological survey. Question: - when the highway is to be built? Answer: Ing. Okuliarová - this section in 2014 – 2016, the whole road of D4 by 2018. Question: - Will the junction of D1/D4 Ivanka north on the bridge be a six-lane? Answer: Ing. Okuliarová – yes, it will be a 6-lane and given the proximity of the intersection D4/I/61 Ivanka west it will be solved by collectors as in Einstein street in Petržalka. It will be just a large interchange. Question: - Is the highway to Záhorská Bystrica a 4-lane in the tunnel? Answer: RNDr. Jakubis – Yes, the highway in the tunnel is 4-lane. 2.) Question: Mr. Schreiner Is there an access to the M.R.Štefánik´s memorial? Answer: RNDr. Jakubis – All roads interrupted by the highway will be operated after the highway completion. In this case, there will be a bridge over the highway. Question: Why the collectors designed on the highway are not for the continuation of the highway in the direction to Most pri Bratislave? In the event of an accident it could be possible to move the traffic to collectors. If there is no connection of Ivanka, respectively Zálesie to D4by a junction, or collectors, Ivanka will not get rid off transit from other municipalities passing through. Answer: RNDr. Jakubis- In this area the position of highway is defined by the end of landing / take-off runway VPD 04-22 of the airport from one side and very close proximity of Šúrsky channel on the other side. The highway will be about 35 m wide in crown- a reserve for future six-lane and with respect to the protected area of Šúrsky channel, environmentalists will not let us in. Ing. Kušnierová Ľ. : If collectors are built, the coverage of highway and collectors would increase from about 35 m by 2 x 10 m - distance of a collector from the highway on each side (distance of both roads 10 m is required by MoT) + 2x about 10 m to collector itself on both sides of the highway (collector is a one-way two-lane road with category of C9.5/80). So overall coverage for the highway and collectors would be about 75 m. Dr. Jánošík : transit is not so big and the highway would be addressed mainly through transit traffic. 3.) Question:

30

Mr. Halás –what is the stage of preparation of D1 Bratislava – Trnava? Answer: - the documentation for zoning decision, Master plans - amendments are being processed. 4.) Question: Mr. Glasa – how can be the highway included in the Master Plan? Answer: Ing. Okuliarová - the city must take the highway position over to the MP - by amendments. Ing. Fürst - Zálesie interchange and feeder are in the MP of Zálesie in two options, as the problem is expected for the assets and legal settlement of one of options, which is led through the church land. 5.) Question: Ing. Letenay - Zálesie interchange was designed to be implement as a half road - connection and disconnection of the highway. Why it is not a part of the structure now but is to be built later? Answer: - Ing. Fürst – While processing the Feasibility and effectiveness study, based on discussions with airport, the highway route was shifted from the original position so as to respect the requirements of the airport for the prospective runway VPD 13L-31R. Also when shifting the highway, Zálesie interchange can be implemented, but only when traffic intensities for Zálesie feeder are justified. Question: - Is it possible to provide a link of M.R. Štefánik´s memorial of the highway, or at least the collector? Answer: - Ing. Fürst – Ivanka´s requirements for connecting the M.R. Štefánik´s memorial to the highway were presented in earlier negotiations, but due to the STN it is not acceptable. Only I class or II. class road can be connected to the highway, it is not the case of the road leading to the memorial (special road). The collector is not designed for the section. 6.) Question: Mr. Schreiner What is the purpose of such a huge crossroad, when Ivanka can not connect to the D4 highway? Answer: Ing. Fürst – To build a highway junction (6-lane + collector) with a 4-lane road I/61 and another intersection of two highways at a distance of about 1 km (D4, 6-lane + collectors with D1, 6- lane + collectors) can not be resolved otherwise, if we want to enable interconnections of intersecting roads in this short length. Ivanka although has not connection to D4, but has two connections to the road I/61. Question: Why are you not looking for a way to preserve space for the intersection on D4 in order to exclude the transit of other municipalities that want to connect to I/61 from Ivanka? Or why Zálesie intersection is not built as the same time as the highway? The solution without this option will not help Ivanka. Answer: Ing. Fürst – If a space for the next junction to D4 in Ivanka is found, it is not possible to connect it to the I. or II. Class road, as there is no one close to the territory along the highway and connection to the of the highway to the local, respectively special road is not allowed by STN. Building Zálesie interchange is possible if it is proved its traffic validity and there is no problem with property and legal settlement of church land under the feeder.

31

7.) Question: Ms. Mayor If Zálesie interchange is not built together with D4 highway, the unbearable traffic volume of road by vehicles from other municipalities passing through Ivanka is not going to be helpful for Ivanka. Due to impossibility of another connection to the road I/61, and even to the future D4, the vehicles will keep on running through Ivanka and it can be assumed that even in increased number due to the construction boom that is currently taking place in these municipalities. Answer - Therefore, the circuit around Bratislava is under preparation so that those municipalities which now pass through Ivanka will connect to it. Question: Several municipalities have jointly commissioned a study for the corridor connecting D4, which would suit everyone, but what we offer them today does nothing to help with easing the unbearable traffic load in the village. Answer – This year is the year of the national traffic census, if increase in traffic is shown to the extent to prove the justification for the construction of Zálesie interchange and settlement of property relations of feeder over church land will be really possible, we can consider Zálesie interchange within the construction of the highway. 8.) Question: p.Blubla – what is the design of bio-corridor of Šúrsky channel ? Will it be diluted by noise barrier? Answer : RNDr. Jakubis – Šúrsky channel will be bridged and the noise barrier will be built along the dike.

Municipality´s opinion : It agrees with the content of minutes. It supplements the minutes by the following: Municipality Ivanka pri Dunaji insists on its requirement that the feeder of Zálesie was part of the highway construction and its eventual implementation was not postponed by 2020. The traffic in our municipality and its neighbourhood continues to get worse due to ongoing new and new construction in the surrounding municipalities / mainly in Zálesie, Malinovo, Most pri Bratislave, Bernolákovo, Chorvátsky Grob, Dunajská Lužná, etc. /. Our citizens, but also citizens of neighbouring communities have repeatedly manifested dissatisfaction of not addressing the situation by the competent authorities. And our duty is to seek redress, although all of us know that yesterday was too late. Therefore, the municipality clearly highlights the need for construction of junction on D4, while the most appropriate position is considered its location between Ivanka pri Dunaji and Zálesie. As for the feeder at this intersection, the route should be designed to reduce the complex property rights settlement of lands to a minimum. If necessary, the municipality is willing to help in property rights settlement of these lands.

Public hearing on the Assessment Report held on 21 July 2010 at 3 pm in Cutlural Centre in Most pri Bratislave. The mayor confirmed that the Assessment Report, as well as the invitation to negotiation were accessible to citizens in the municipality in an usual way as follows: on the report from 30 June 2010 and on today´s public hearing by a notice on the notice board of the Municipal Office from 08 July 2010 up to date. Notice of the public hearing was announced on local radio.

NDS deputy Ing. Okuliarová explained to the present the process for the preparation of highways under current legislation and briefed about the whole upcoming section of D4. Agenda of the meeting:

32

A.) Information on technical design of highway and environmental assessment of the Assessment Report, the report's author RNDr. Jakubic and Ing. Fürst B:) Discussion ad a)Information on technical design of highway and environmental assessment of the Assessment Report RNDr. Jakubis , Geoconsult, s.r.o,Informed on technical solution, the environmental impacts assessment and the conclusions from a comparison of the assessed options. Ing. Fürst –informed on transport assessment of options. ad b) Discussion 1.) Question: Mr. Slamka – Is build a noise barrier a technical barrier? Answer: RNDr. Jakubis – construction of noise barriers is necessary to comply with the prescribed hygiene limits, their height will be 3 m. Ing. Okuliarová – according to the act on the impact assessment, we are obliged to carry out monitoring of the individual components of the environment (noise, air pollutants, groundwater and surface water ...) one year before construction, during construction and one year after putting the highway into operation. In the event of e.g. non-compliance with hygienic limits because of noise, further measures are to be proposed. 2.) Question: Mr. Hlavatý – Connecting north of Rye Island is not negotiable and when building the D4 highway it will be even worse, as it will increase traffic in the municipality at least by 50%. Do you think it can be withstood by II. class road, which passes through the municipality and this one will be connected to the highway intersection? It is already overloaded and it is hard to safely cross the road. Would not it be appropriate to build a bypass of the village? Is there a bridge over the Little Danube and Zelená voda? Answer: RNDr. Jakubis - Zelená voda is mined, limits for mining area are established and it will be bridged by the actual mining in the year of the highway construction. Then, the highway will be given the proximity of the planned airport runway under the surface in the sealing bath. In the case of construction of a new runway the highway will be covered. Ing. Fürst - the through road via II. class road is the responsibility of self-governments, in this case the Bratislava region (BSK), as the road is its property. NDS can not interfere with their competences. Within work on the transport part of the impact assessment report on the environment, we have made a transport model to find out what will happen on the adjacent road network. The model showed that in terms of the south-eastern section, the passage through the village after building the D4 highway will be unbearable. It needs to be dealt now and the first steps could be:  by updating, incorporate bypass of the village into the master plan in such a position that all vehicles from Malinovo, Štvrtok na Ostrove, Tomášov, etc., could connect to it and do not pass directly through the village.  to urge HTU to incorporate the bypass of Most pri Bratislave in the Master plan of Bratislava region. 3.) Question: Mr. Červeňák - Why should not we push for a change in the Master Plan and MP HTU? As you do this now, keep on pushing. What is it in perspective? Answer: Ing. Kušnierová – within the compentences of the institutions and organizations it is not possible in terms of NDS to 'push', respectively "force" HTU to deal with investments falling within their 33 competence - whether or not included in MP HTU. The competences of NDS include highways, expressways and some first-class roads. The road passing through the municipality is II. class road and II. and III. class roads fall within the competence of HTU. The prospective expressway connected to the D4 highway at the intersection of Most pri Bratislave with the continuation to Sereď means that sometimes in the future, according to traffic calculations it is assumed that it will be necessary to build such road. However, it is likely that in the rapid construction of new houses in different municipalities around the area it passes, it could not pass through this built-up area via capacitive road as expressway. Currently, it is only a limitation - conservation of the area for the possibility of building expressway. This is prepared at the level of technical study, i.e. in the scale of 1:10 000, without measuring the area. If you mean the calculation of traffic in perspective, it is means to expect increase in traffic by mathematical methods in different years to the future - usually it's in 5-year cycles and thus to determine the expected traffic in a given year in the future - in perspective. Ing. Okuliarová – it will draw up an Assignment for MP BSK and can be added with comments by 31 August 2010. It would be very good to send written comments - a requirement to build a bypass of the municipality, with regard to the upcoming construction of the D4 highway and the possibility of traffic collapse in the village after the highway is put into service when failing to solve bypass of Most pri Bratislave. 4.) Question: Ms. Kunková – impact of emissions is not significant, but noise from the airport at night is significant and main road through the village is so overwhelmed with traffic that it is impossible to get connected from the side streets to the main road where cars speed up to 120 km/h. Should not Zelená voda be left for recreation? Can the construction of highway cause the devastation of water resources? I would like to ask if you could help us to build the bypass for the municipality. Answer: We expect that after the completion of highway and needed landscaping around Zelená voda, it will can serve for recreation. Due to the passage of the highway through a very rare territory for nature conservation (flora and fauna), it will during highway construction put a maximum emphasis on mitigation of intervention in groundwater of Rye Island. There will be no devastation of water resources. Ing. Okuliarová – bypass request should be sent to the BSK and it is also possible to send any comments directly to the Ministry of Environment (?) for every citizen and for the community This year is nationwide census of traffic and it is possible that it demonstrates the enormous increase in traffic on the road II/572, which passes through your community and in your requirements to HTU it will encourage the preparation of the bypass of the village. RNDr. Jakubis – MP HTU is 10 years old, for those 10 years nothing has been done, that is why it's so difficult. Right now we are preparing amendments to the Master plan, where your requirements could get involved. Observations can be sent to the HTU by the end of August. 5.) Question: Ms. Šataníková – why do not you deal with the bypass of the village, why do you it when not dealing with the bypass? How does the bypass fit in there, when you said that the expressway does not fit there? Why did you do it so badly? Answer : In the preparation and design of highways we do not deal with bypasses of municipalities because they are not the responsibility of NDS, but of higher territorial units. Bypass passes behind the municipality - in this case, behind Most pri Bratislave. There must be the space for its construction. Expressway mentioned above will pass between Most pri Bratislave and Malinovo, between Štvrtok na Ostrove and Tomášov etc. up to Sereď.

We tried to solve it to its best, but bypass needs to be addressed at HTU.

34

6.) Question: Mr. Drozda, former Mayor He used to participate in negotiations on the zero road circuit. Even then the mayors submitted proposal to change the position of the zero circle behind the municipalities - away from Bratislava. As can be seen, no one accepted their proposals, because today D4 highway is in the same position as the zero circuit. He asks on behalf of the community not only consider Zálesie interchange, but to be built simultaneously with D4 and bypass of the village, to which it is connected. Without building bypass of Most pri Bratislave, the road through the village will not sustain the transit traffic from other municipalities (Tomášov, Malinovo, Štvrtok na Ostrove, etc.) that will want to get to the D4 highway. Answer : Ing. Okuliarová – In 2005 it developed a technical study for D4 routing in such a position beginning in Jarovce, respectively in on nat. border of A/SK continuing the same as today presented D4 route, but in the area of Most pri Bratislave interchange, the route was deviated in two options - one connected to D1 in Bernolákovo and the other in Čataj. Following instructions of Ministry of Transport we have been tasked to examine a further option III, which was in the route of the former zero circuit. Option III was recommended for further preparation of the D4 highway. Therefore, today we present the D4 highway in the route of the former zero circuit. Zálesie has Zálesie intersection and also feeder in the MP of the municipality. 7.) Question: Mr. Rendek – Why comments of communities were disregarded and the circuit was not shifted behind them? Why is it like we did not want to now and we have to push someone to build bypass of the village? Answer : This question could be asked the Municipality of Bratislava. NDS did not participate in the negotiations on the zero circuit shift. 8.) Question: Mr. Hlavatý It is useless to think about the proposed circuit behind the villages - the route is longer and thus more expensive, so it's about money. Would it be possible to include 2 km long bypass of Most pri Bratislave into the highway? It is included in MP of the village, but it has no money for that. It is also included in MP HTU, but comments of the village have not been taken into account. Answer : Ing. Okuliarová – It is not possible to involve bypass of any municipality into highway costs. The money is bound to the highway, highway intersections, feeders and induced investments, such as relocations of utilities, roads, interrupted by the highway etc. If the bypass is included in MP and this is also in MP HTU it is required by the municipality to ask in writing for its stabilizing in MP HTU also with the request for its implementation in the time frame of the highway implementation so that after putting D4 into operation there is no collapse in the village on the road II/572, as the highway interchange in Most pri Bratislave is connected to this road passing through the centre of the village.

Opinion of the village: agrees with the content.

Public joint negotiation of the presentation and consultation of tunnel option of D4, section Jarovce - Ivanka north - a complement to the Assessment Report, held on 09 May 2011 at 4 pm in the Presidential Palace, Bratislava.

35

Present: according to the attendance list Agenda of the presentation and consultation: 1. Introducing + welcoming the participants in the public hearing on behalf of HMB and on behalf of the claimant (NDS, a.s. Bratislava) - Ing. Stanislav Tokoš 2. Recap of the steps taken in the assessment process in the role of the affected municipality + claimant - Ing. S. Tokoš 3. Presentation of D4 tunnel option under the Danube – GEOCONSULT – RNDr. Ivan Jakubis 4. Discussion 5. Conclusion Ad 1. Introduction: Presenter: Ing. S. Tokoš (Municipal RMP) repr. the affected municipality welcomed the participants in the public consultation and presentation and introduced al. Mgr.Blažena Kožárová and repr. of the claimant Ing. Daniela Okuliarová, Ing. Alena Kušnierová and Ing. Ľubica Kušnierová. He also presented RNDr. Ivan Jakubis as processor of EIA documentation for this D4 highway section. Ing. Tokoš confirmed to keep minutes from the meeting accompanied by a recording on CD delivered by 15 May 2011 to the address of the Ministry of Environment, Department of Environmental Assessment, Bratislava.

Ad 2/ Ing. Tokoš introduced recapitulation of previous steps. By letter no. 318/2010/-3.4/ml of 19 April 2011, Ministry of Environment sent us the complement to the Assessment Report of option "D" of D4 highway, section in Jarovce - Ivanka north. Based on comments on the initial Assessment Report within opinions received, in particular NGO´s opinion, it presented the requirement to finalize option "D" - tunnel, which was sent to the selected subjects of assessment (material in paper form and on the Internet (http://eia.enviroportal.sk/detail/dialnica-d4-usek-jarovce-ivanka-sever). The opinion shall be delivered within 10 days of receipt of the document. Ing. Tokoš said that the opinion of HMB is mostly composed - in terms of transport planning, technical infrastructure and urbanism, he expressed the view that in the coming days it is to be finalized - possibly as soon as on 10 May 2011). Then he said that opinion of HMB to this structure is already known from previous discussions - and taking into account the significant contribution of highway to solve traffic problems associated with transit traffic (currently aggravating roads in the city) in terms of transport planning we support the selection and finalization of the option of which the preparation and subsequent implementation will be more efficient and faster. In terms of time and urgency of tackling traffic problems the most favourable solution is full compliance with MP. In case of necessity of the approval process of amendments to MP it can be accelerated by minimizing its induced amendments. In terms of technical infrastructure systems the supplemented opinion highlights the possible negative impacts, particularly on groundwater - an area of PWMA Rye Island, but also large drinking water source of Rusovce - OLM.

Ad 3. Presentation of D4 tunnel option under the Danube – GEOCONSULT – RNDr. Ivan Jakubis  At first he stated that the claimant asked to complement the Assessment report of 2010 with option "D" - tunnel, and make its comparison with all the other option in the complement to the Assessment Report. He said that the introductory chapters to complement the report are formulated in intentions of the report of April 2010, the following sections describe in particular the new option "D" - the tunnel under the Danube.  The complement includes the noise study and dispersion study, evaluated impacts on protected areas (PAs), there's a hydrogeological study (HG-study addresses the impact on groundwater collectors - he added that the thickness of the gravel in this place is from 20-30 36

m). He said that the new Minister of Transport J. Figel changed his mind on the R7 routing - according to the red option, which has an impact on the environmental assessment. He said they will consider the requirement of CD Podunajské Biskupice for the Ketelec intersection with a view to the processed zoning specification of Lieskovec - Ketelec designating the zone of recreation and relaxation.  He noted that the philosophy of the D4 highway is aimed at linking D2 and in corridor of so- called zero circuit it connects to the Austrian S8 expressway in the north and S6 in the south (from Jarovce). He said that these are four sections, in 2009 the Feasibility and effectiveness study of the D4 highway was processed. In the section from Jarovce to Ivanka north interchange there are three options considered - two of them (C and E - surface) were presented at the public hearing on 15 July 2010 at the Mirror Hall of the Presidential Palace. Option D is new - he stated: o he described the beginning - course of the route - end of the route. From "Jarovce" EI to 1.0 km it is designed the same way as in Option "C", the route of the D4 highway is crossed (in elevated junction (sub-road) by the railway track of Bratislava - Rusovce and the road I/2, from "Rusovce" EI it continues in a straight line via "Danube" tunnel in the length of 2.550 km below Jarovské arm and underneath the Danube River connecting the Ketelec interchange. From Ketelec EI connection to the D1 highway, the option is identical to the option "C" red. Total length of Option "D" is 22,660.69 km. o He said the option D is a complicated solution; in the section from Jarovce interchange to crossing the railway track Ba - Rusovce bored with the sealing tub, at 2.4 km it is designed a permanent portal and this will be excavated from the top to the depth of 2,580 km. From 2,580 km tunnel is excavated - on the other side, it is designed the same (mirror). This was presented based on the image to page 12 of the completed Assessment Report. Then he said the tunnel is double-tubular, in each tube there is a two-lane road and the diameter of the excavation for a tunnel is 12 m. o He commented on complicated hydrogeological conditions (HG) with the occurrence of watered layers. Sealing tubs will be in the watered area. After negotiations with SVP, respectively Danube basin it is required to design the tunnel to prevent water passing through the tunnel outside the inundation during floods. o Then he presented the cross profile - section of the tunnel and stated that there is a watered horizon in the sub-soil, but also the pressure water. o Finally, he evaluated the option D is problem option of multiple perspectives and criteria. ► Environmental impacts divided into several categories: o Impacts on the population - based on processed studies - noise and dispersion study, he indicated that in terms of noise load a noise barrier is designed in Jarovce. Dispersion of emissions in the tunnel - via longitudinal ventilation (without exhaust) and emissions will be pulled out of the portal by fans. The situation is taken into account, and requires no special measures. o Impacts on rock environment- he said that in the next stage of preparation it is necessary to develop a detailed IGHG-survey. o Impacts on groundwater - he presented in the picture water flow directions on the left and right side of the Danube (on the right bank the predominant downstream from the NE to SW, on the left bank it's about dominance from W to E). He said that it was necessary to process three-dimensional HG-model, but the tunnel will significantly affect the groundwater flow. The quality of groundwater - he said the impact on ROL water sources is evident (there are high permeability coefficients, somewhere water literally flows like in the channels, the need to use bentonite or other chemical sealants = i.e. the riskiness of the threat to the quality of drinking water - moreover, we are in PWMA Rye Island.

37 o Impacts on biota - D4 route in this section passes through the PLA D. luhy, Natura 2000, but national PA (presented using the map annex no. 2: Protected areas, of the complement to the Assessment Report). o Impacts of migration - are minimal. In the eastern portal there will temporary limitation of migration of fauna, the impact on birds is minimal. o Impacts during operation - the part is designed in an open bath - i.e. noise, lighting problems - glare. It is recommended to shift the portal by 300 m to the east in order to reduce these negative impacts. o Impacts on TSES - the route goes through the NRBC Biskupické floodplains. The complement to the report correctly identifies these impacts also with proposing actions. ► Recommendations from the scope of the assessment - solution of pedestrians and cyclists trails is not possible in the tunnel option (it is just for viaduct options in this section of D4). ► Overall assessment (presented in table on p. 84) - there are evaluated options C, D, E. In terms of the construction costs it is for different options roughly as follows: option C ÷ 624 million €, option D ÷ 827 million €, option E ÷ 646 million € (data from table on p. 85). He noted that in tunnel option it is necessary to consider other costs - additional associated with technology and tunnel safety. ► Comparisons on the basis of criteria are processed in details- technical-economic, landscape- environmental, urban, and health. Summary options are evaluated on p. 92 of Supplement to the report. The table shows the efficiency values by IRR (with the sequence of options: 1. – option E; 2. – option C; 3. – option D). He presented the table of the page 86 - Efficiency - return of IRR in % (with the same sequence of options: (1. – option E; 2. – option C; 3. – option D). Then he presented evaluations under the above criteria, at the conclusion, he stated that the most efficient options is option E - viaduct. ► Benefits of option D - the most favourable in terms of impacts on PAs. Shortcomings of option D - there is more: high costs + difficulty of tunnel with geotechnical risks + inefficient investments + negative impacts on groundwater + outlook limits (tunnel will be only four-lane, but the D4 highway to be the view of six-lane) + impossibility of linking for pedestrians and cyclists. Addition to the presentation - Ing. Daniela Okuliarová (NDS, a.s.) - noted that simultaneously with the acquisition of the tunnel option a 1-year monitoring of biota has been procured and all findings will be the basis for the design of compensatory measures.

Ad 4. Discussion - Ing.Tokoš - opened the discussion and asked the discussants to introduce themselves on each entry into the discussion, as the sound track and a written minutes are kept from the meeting. Question 1 - Mgr. Mária Šavelová (Bratislava Regional Environment Office) - asking about security issues when accidents; effects and risks on the operation - i.e. escape routes, vents, fire etc. ? response - Dr. Jakubis - the operation of the tunnel solves the accidents, a fire water mains will be placed in the tunnel and the situation will be monitored. The tunnels will be interconnected by corridors (to escape e.g. in case of fire) Question 2 - Andrej Kovarik (BROZ) - Asked more questions: 1. - compensatory measures - he asked at this stage to specify measures for all options, the annual monitoring of biota was not required, compensatory measures plan could be done on the basis of the data collected; 2. - he stated that in case of priority habitats, respectively interventions in Natura 2000 sites the financial costs are always dominant over environmental factors; 3. - the Final opinion of options assessment indicates that zero option is less favourable - he says that yes in terms of traffic it is so, but in terms of impact on biota it is not. response of Ing. Okuliarová - transport criteria were already in TS of 2005 but also in the feasibility study, i.e. that your claim does not stand up, because the outlook is to 2040, and the

38 increase in traffic can not otherwise be handled. It is proposed a new safer route for the capital city, which relieves the city road network. The annual monitoring of biota - it was the requirement of BROZ and according to their today's statement is not needed. Environmentalists still submit new statements and new requirements, which costs quite a lot of money. response - RNDr. Jakubis - we've already dealt with it, but the tunnel requires tunnel boring machinery, construction pit and this is the building site (he presented it using images from Austria). opposite response – Mgr. Šavelová : to RNDr. Jakubis - You want to say that the tunnel option will cause larger land use (i.e. incl. PAs)? response - RNDr. Jakubis - such a construction site equipment should be done on both banks of the Danube (image). response – Ing. Ľ.Kušnierová – the issue of impact on Natura 2000 sites are also relevant here, she stressed. Question 3 – Andrej Kovarik (BROZ) – stated that some things are not clear in the compensatory measures, and they must be supplemented after a one-year monitoring; zero option does not destroy habitats but it does for viaducts. response – RNDr. Jakubis – Viaduct option E does not destroy habitats. response – Mgr. Šavelová – opposes Mr. Kovarik because option D will also be devastating; and presented her findings from Austria and Italy. Question 4 – Ján Snopko (TAROSI, s.r.o. – tunnel expert) – objected to certain claims of the presentation - said the tunnel should be put lower in the Neogene (of course with longer tunnel); he asks why the tunnel has just a single-shell and not two-shell (lining). About the pictures from Austria he said that the tunnel boring machine is big, but construction yard does not necessarily need to be situated next to the building, respectively on both banks, and also he argues about the negative impact on groundwater. response – RNDr. Jakubis – the construction of the tunnel must comply with certain trim and must respect transverse crossing of roads. opposite response – Snopko : RNDr. Jakubis – again he pointed out the need to go to the Neogene. response – Ing. A.Kušnierová - ... but the possibility of cross road interconnections must be respected. response - Ing. Okuliarová – tunnel boring machinery does not care about boring 2 or 3 km of the tunnel, but it must also respect the financial capacity of the state. Question 5 – František Mastný (Mayor of Most p. Bratislave) – made comments on D4 as such. He stated that Most p. Bratislave will suffer, he asked whether in the previous period this municipality has given a written opinion on the D4, adding that R7 expressway needs to be dealt. response – Ing. Tokoš – He said he does not want to develop the debate on the so-called zero circuit or that it is not good to question the previously defined corridor. In his opinion, the impacts of D4 on Most p. Bratislave can be eliminated for example by appropriate noise control measures.

5. Conclusion - Ing. Tokoš - thanked for active participation in the negotiations and noted the possibility of public participation in another public hearing on the D4 highway - from Ivanka north interchange to Záhorská Bystrica to be held on 10 May 2011 at 4.30 pm in the Mirror Hall of the Presidential Palace.

Annexes:  attendance list of the public discussion  audio recording and presentation of the processor of complement to the Assessment Report on CD

39

4. Opinions, comments and expert opinions submitted to the Assessment Report and to the report - supplement

Opinions to the Assessment Report:

Ministry of Transport, the Department for road traffic and roads, (letter of 2 July 2010, no. 06912/2010/SCDPK-27853) It agrees with the conclusions of the processor of the Assessment Report. According to part V. Comparison of options for the proposed activity and the proposal for optimal option, more favourable option, based on the value analysis in terms of selected criteria, is option E green. Based on the above and based on the comparison of alternative solution for Ivanka north interchange (D1 and D4) it is recommended to implement the route of D4 in Jarovce - Ivanka north in option E (green) in combination with Option C1 of Ivanka north interchange. Ministry of Transport, Ján Figel-1st Deputy Prime Minister of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications, (letter dated 22 July 2010, no. 03167/2010-M/z.30652/2010/SCDPK- 27853) 'Mr Director General the construction of R7 Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná under Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on the assessment of environmental impacts, as amended, completed the assessment process by issuing a final opinion of the Ministry of Environment no. 5461/07-7.3/m. l dated 9 May 2009. In assessing the proposed activity there were two options compared and assessed for R7 in the section Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná. Based on the reassessment and the revaluation of all positions, induced investments, compensatory measures and consideration of a comprehensive solution for connection of R7 to the road system of Bratislava city I stipulate option A red for the continuation of preparation and construction of R7 in the section Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná. This regulation replaces the letter of the Minister of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications Ľubomír Vážny no. 01113/2009/SCDPK/M-35967 of 8 September 2009 intending the further preparation of option C green. Ministry of Transport, the Department for road traffic and roads, (letter of 31 August 2010, no. 03167/2010/SCDPK/z.-35779) Mr Director General, following the assessment of the state of preparation and construction of highways, expressways and first class roads in Slovakia, taking into account the possibilities of EU funding and the state budget, and according to the conclusions of the working sessions held at the Ministry of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications and the Ministry of Finance, hereby I request you to ensure the development of the following documentation: a) Technical study on the road between the junction of R7 with the planned D4 highway,, Ketelec to "Prievoz" interchange on the D4 highway in the route of extension of R7 Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná, including links to the Prístovný most. b) Technical study of highway between D3 highway Žilina - Brodno until D1 highway Dubná Skala and road with the use of the existing road network - the I class road I/18. Tenders for processors of the technical studies to be published by 30 September 2010. Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Regional Development, Section of Geology and Natural Resources, Department of Geological rights and contractual relationships (letter dated 22 July 2010, no. 41520/2010) Department of Geological rights and contractual relations ho no objections to the submitted material in terms of the overall concept. The content and structure of the report corresponds to the Annex11 of the Act. Submitted comments and recommendations are related to the content processing of chapters dealing with geological issues: 1. Chapter C.II.2. (Geology) refers to the geological map, which is not listed in the annexes. It is necessary to supplement the general geological map to the annexes, or insert an image of 40

general geology in the text of the chapter. The chapter is concluded with a general text regarding anthropogenic sediments. Their real existence in the route of the planned highway can be fairly accurately identified based on existing works. We recommend the planned highway options to be confronted with the Registry of landfills on the National Geological Institute in Bratislava, as well as with results of the geological project "Systematic identification of environmental burdens in Slovakia", which was implemented from 2006 to 2008. The results of this project are compiled into an information system on environmental burdens from throughout Slovakia and available to the public at www.enviroportal.sk. 2. Chapter "Engineering geological conditions" (p. 61) and "Hydro-geological conditions" (p. 62) is lacking a source of the data used. Since we expect them to have been taken over from existing reports to the engineering geological and hydrogeological maps, it would be appropriate to cite the authors' names and year of maps. 3. Chapter "Mineral Resources" (p.61) does not provide a complete list of non-reserved minerals (gravel), which are located close to the highway route. At the same time they are given wrong names. 4. Chapter "Pollution of the rock environment" (p. 63) is inadequately briefly treated. Given that pollution of the ground is back with groundwater contamination, we recommend reference to the "Groundwater" chapter (p. 69 - last paragraph), which provides information about groundwater contamination. We recommend this part to be marked with a special name "Groundwater pollution", and given the insufficient current data from monitoring of groundwater carried out by SHMI, it is necessary to appropriately expand the content of the text. 5. For Chapter C.II.15 (Characteristics of existing sources of environmental pollution and their impact on the environment) and chapter "Waste and waste dumps" (p. 113), we propose to reduce an introductory text of the information on landfills that are not in the area of the planned highway, resp. in the vicinity (e.g. landfills in Zohor, Stupava, Budmerice). The chapter should contain real data on landfills and environmental burdens on the route of the highway (source of information is available atwww.enviroportal.sk). 6. Harmonize start date and completion date. The report repeatedly states implementation in 2012 to 2015, but for example in the opinion of NDS, a.s. of 09 April 2010 states the expected date of initiation of the D4 highway is 2014. 7. During the preparation of selected option, we require to carry out an engineering geological and hydrogeological survey in the route of highway, as described in chapter C.IV.5. (Other measures). 8. The maps 2A and 2B state incorrectly in the legend "NS, CHLU mining" for gravel deposit in Ketelec. In fact, the name of the deposit is "Podunajské Biskupice III" because it is "unlisted minerals" deposit, which according to § 7 of the Act no. 44/1988 Coll. on the Protection and Use of Mineral Resources (Mining Act), as amended, it is part of the land, can not be determined by PDA (protected deposit area). Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Regional Development, Water section, (letter of 2 August 2010, no. 3940/2010) According to Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on water, it urges: - to comply with Section 31 of the Water Act, as the route intervenes into the 2nd degree water source zone of Rusovce, - to comply with conditions of the flow administrator of SVP, - to maximally reduce the formation of the negative impacts of construction on surface water and groundwater, - bridges to be designed not to exacerbate drainage of flood flows, - to take effective measures to protect groundwater from oil products. Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Regional Development, Section of nature and landscape protection (letter dated 10 August 2010, no. 8326/2010-2.1.2) 41

Evaluation of the Assessment report in terms of nature conservation: The submitted assessment report contains information on nature and landscape protection in accordance with Annex. 2 of the impact assessment act. The Assessment Report incorporates the specific requirements referred to in the plan, but the professional level of processing individual requirements varies. Requirement no.16 was to assess specifically and in details the impact of activity on the territories included in the European system of protected areas and on priority habitats or priority species habitats. Impacts are evaluated separately in Annex 5. This annex has two different titles. The first title refers to impacts on the "area of nature and landscape protection" (i.e. the impacts on the national protected areas), but these are missing in the Annex. The study is quite chaotic, unnecessarily providing activities with a potential negative impact on the conservation objectives. The graphic designs of areas and maps of the areas concerned of coherent European network of protected areas are taken from the web site of the SNC. Such evaluation under unreadable graphic materials can not be the result of the Assessment Reports or real comparison of the impacts. The tunnel option under the Danube has been assessed only in the Feasibility and effectiveness study of D4 highway, and in the Assessment Report it was not compared with other options. For this reason, some of the options recommended are missing in methodological evaluation and it seems to be just purposefully chosen with an emphasis on economic demands of the implementation. The Assessment Report in accordance with the requirement no. 17 identifies the measures to protect the surrounding area against noise and light and the Danube bridge, so that it does not prevent from migration and genetic information exchange in protected areas and does not cause fragmentation of the territory. The specific requirement no. 18 was to process and add compensatory measures to ensure reducing the impact on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species and TSES. Description of crossing points of migrating animals and draft technical solution is missing in the report,as well as the requirement no. 21, describing the impact of the D4 highway on hunting deer in the affected area. Building and operation of highway elevated road and bridge in the area of the Danube - floodplain landscape, is (as pointed in the Report) negative intervention in protected areas, their fragmentation, the occupation of habitats, killing and disturbance of animals, destruction of trees and plants and change in the landscape features. For this reason, we consider tunnel option after assessing its impact on the hydrological regime of surface and groundwater as the most favourable. In the event the route of D4 is led across the Danube through the elevated roads and bridge we prefer after a realistic assessment to implement option "E"- green along with proposed measures to mitigate the adverse effects of construction and operation of highway and with compensatory measures for the protection of nature and landscape on pages 161 to 164, 168 to 169 in the submitted Assessment Report. Measures to protect the rock environment and relief from adverse effects of construction and operation of highway: • Potential activation of geodynamic processes (suffosion and instability) during construction,especially in installing structures of the D4 highway, will be compensated in a timely engineering geological and hydrogeological survey and detailed design of sanitation and stabilization measures in the next stage of PD, including monitoring, with emphasis on challenging bridges and excavated notch at 17.5 to 18.8 km. • Protection of rock environment from pollution during construction and operation is necessary to be ensured by discipline in construction, appropriate documentation to deal with accidents and operational documentation. • Actions against erosion of slopes of embankments need to be secured against wind and water erosion by suitable landscaping. • Necessary remedial measures for the installation of the highway need to be designed in

42

accordance with the recommendations of engineering and geological survey. • During operation it is necessary to ensure the continuation of monitoring in selected localities. Measures to protect the surface and groundwater from adverse effects of construction and operation of highway: • Through the entire route of D4, a road drainage using oil separators is designed, the road drainage will be divided, the water will be drained from road to road sewer and run through cleaning equipment into the recipient, respectively by infiltrating into the rock environment. The proposed method of water treatment must conform to water protection in PWMA Rye Island that the proposed options of the highway pass through; For WS Rusovce and in the highway section in PWMA Rye Island we need to carry out an assessment of highway impacts on groundwater; • The optimal design of sewage water drainage by infiltration requires to carry out hydrogeological survey at the site of the proposed infiltration objects. • In the section of the notch (sealing bath) at 17.5 to 18.8 km with respect to the anticipated impact on the groundwater regime and flow, it is necessary to provide a hydrogeological survey, including mathematical modelling, while we estimate the need to build drainage "windows" underneath the tub. • Protection of surface and groundwater from pollution during construction and operation is necessary to be ensured by discipline in construction, appropriate documentation to deal with accidents and operational documentation. • During construction and operation, it is necessary to ensure the implementation of monitoring of surface and ground water, including waste water from building yards and effluents from road drains and sewers in parking areas. Measures to protect the soil from adverse effects of construction and operation of highway: Summary and handling with topsoil and subsoil will be part of the next step in the PD in accordance with the decision of the competent authority for ALU protection. Handling with leaf litter and removing stumps and roots will be part of the next step in the PD in accordance with the decision of the competent authority for FLU protection. Protection of soil from pollution during construction and operation is necessary to be ensured by discipline in construction, appropriate documentation to deal with accidents and operational documentation. Reverse reclamation of temporary ALU and FLU, demolishing roads and so on needs to be addressed in terms of the decision of the competent authority and reclamation project in the next stage of PD. Temporary deposition of materials (e.g. soil from excavation) requires to use low-quality non- agricultural areas, for example areas after gravel mining and so on. Measures for the protection of nature (flora, fauna, habitats, protected areas and TSES) against adverse effects of construction and operation of highway: C- red option Extension of the proposed bridge over the Danube until about 6.0 km. By shifting the highway embankment outside forests and protected areas, the land use of these areas will be reduced. It also extends the space under the bridge, which allows migration and exchange of genetic information to a wider range of living organisms and their communities as a highway fencing on the embankment. Building a passage for animals at 10.35 km. Passage (subway) is located at the intersection of the old Danube embankment, being a cultural technical monument. It is proposed to build a multifunctional bridge, one of whose tasks will be to mitigate the barrier effect of a linear structure. The bridge needs to be supplemented by corridor with vegetation cover. Addition of both-sided noise and light (multifunctional) barriers according to the design in terms

43 of noise study at 2.9 to 7.5 km on the right and 2.9 to 5.8 km on the left. The barriers are designed in a section passing through protected areas on the Danube in order to reduce the area of space affected by the noise and light pollution, as well as reducing the risk of collision of birds with cars. E - green option • Extension of the bridge over the Danube until about 5.5 km. • By shifting the highway embankment outside forests and protected areas, the land use of these areas will be reduced. It also extends the space under the bridge, which allows migration and exchange of genetic information to a wider range of living organisms and their communities as a highway fencing on the embankment. • Building a passage for animals at 9.7 km. • Passage (subway) is located at the intersection of the old Danube embankment, being a cultural technical monument. It is proposed to build a multifunctional bridge, one of whose tasks will be to mitigate the barrier effect of a linear structure. The bridge needs to be supplemented by corridor with vegetation cover. • Addition of both-sided noise and light (multifunctional) barriers according to the design in terms of noise study. • The barriers are designed in a section passing through protected areas on the Danube in order to reduce the area of space affected by the noise and light pollution, as well as reducing the risk of collision of birds with cars. Common measures for both options • Enhance the functionality of connection of the Little Danube bio-corridor at the intersection with the highway for • terrestrial organisms (game species, but also protected animals); • In this regard, it is proposed e.g. extension of a bridge on the Little Danube in extending water flow cross section in this area. • Building a passage for animals at 14.2 km. • Passage (subway) is designed at the point where the highway is led above the surrounding terrain and where are relatively extensive areas suitable for animals on both sides of the highway. Its role will be to mitigate the barrier effect of a linear structure. The bridge needs to be supplemented by corridor with vegetation cover. • Crossing the highway with significant landscape feature at 19.1 km to be implemented at elevated level (bridge). This is a linear depression of the old Danube arm with tree species vegetation which acts as a TSES interactive element at the local level. Elevated crossing is to ensure connectivity of the line element and also the possibility of animal migration. • Necessary tree felling in the route of the highway and also all work associated with the construction of the highway at 3.0 to 6.0 km (option C), respectively 2.5 to 5.5 km (option E) to be implemented in the non-breeding season (August - February) and during the shortest construction period. • The quantity of animals killed during the construction of the highway can be reduced by an appropriate timetable of work. The greatest losses would occur if the interventions to the most valuable habitats are carried out at the time of breeding and letting out young animals. Shortening the construction period to ensure a reduction of time for which animals are exposed to stress factors related to construction of the highway. It will be based on the current state of nesting species (information provided by the Slovak State Nature Conservation), particularly vulnerable steps should be taken if the nest of the white-tailed eagle, the black kite or black stork are occupied near the structure. • Implementation of substantial emergency transfers of protected species of organisms from the highway route before the real start of construction. For this purpose it is necessary within the framework of the preparatory work just before the planned start of construction to ensure the current exploration of the area and identify the sites and species whose transfer is

44

possible and effective; Access roads to the construction site and construction yards to be situated outside protected areas and TSES elements (as proposed in the map attached). The aim of this measure is not to burden sensitive areas with noise and emissions respectively direct occupation of spaces for these activities. • All temporary areas without vegetation during highway construction in protected areas to be put after its completion to its original state using appropriate landscaping. The measure particularly important in view of preventing the spread of non-native or invasive plant species into the natural environment. When landscaping water areas along the highway to use mainly habitat-native plants, and in no case invasive species. • For bridges to use as low and clearly visible structure as possible. The aim is to reduce collisions of birds in PWMA with the bridges (e.g. cables) under the poor visibility. Measures to protect the landscape image and scenery from adverse effects of construction and operation of highway: • When passing the landscape-based valuable territory, especially in the section of the Danube and the Danube floodplains, it requires superstandard architectural integration of the bridge into the scenery using suitable solution of the bridge while meeting requirements of conservation measures, landscaping to be designed with the largest portion of greenery. • In other sections the route passes through mostly agricultural land around the settlements, the integration of the highway needs the design of appropriate landscaping of higher embankments, intersection branches and parking areas, respecting revitalization programs of the affected municipalities. • The barrier effect of highway is designed by bridges of sufficient brightness and span, the recommended measures to extend bridges, respectively add bridges (passages for migration) referred to in the preceding part to be respected to minimize the effect of splitting. Compensatory measures The measures are proposed as compensation for damage to the property and compensation for losses caused by the activity being assessed. Generally, the compensation of the D4 highway impacts on the environment can be solved by using landscaping, which shall perform the function of erosion protection of slopes in terrestrial body and reducing the negative impacts of transport on the natural and living environment (capturing emissions and partly noise). On road terrestrial slopes, in areas of the interchange branches, as well as road relocation slopes near highway, a concentrated bush planting and group planting of various species of trees will be designed to create a continuous green compact mass with the varied colour and heigh structure. The impact of D4 on nature is reflected mainly by dividing the area with a fenced road, with the possibility of crossing only at sites of designed bridges, changing species composition of plants in the immediate vicinity of the road. The road will affect the migration routes of animals, create a barrier for the surrounding fauna, which will also be affected by the production of noise and air pollutants. By optimizing spatial routings, by bridging, as well as proper fencing along the road, the negative impact on flora and fauna will be considerably mitigated. the range of negative effects will be mitigated by a significant increase in the scale of landscaping on roads at the point of distortion. In the protected area of Danube floodplains and NR Gajc, it is necessary to minimize the scope of the intervention, while before the construction in this area, it is to carry out a detailed survey of biotic component and propose any limits for the movement of machinery, or carry out an emergency transfer of rare plant and animal species to another location. To compensate the negative impacts of the proposed activity on the protected areas it is recommended to carry out some of the following measures: • Expansion of forest area in the vicinity of the planned highway on the left bank of the Danube in the area of Biskupické floodplain forests. Forest habitats destroyed and mutilated during construction and operation of the highway are to be reforested in areas intended for this purpose in the Master plan of Bratislava and in the documentation for nature

45

conservation (TSES project). When reforesting, to use only native tree species. • Creating meadows by grassing arable land in PWMA Danube floodplains or areas within 1 km of its border. The measure aims to create substitute food and nesting habitats for the selected species. • Creating (restoring) wetlands by watering (water system recovery) depressions of the former Danube arms. The measure aims to create substitute food and nesting habitats for the selected species. In the right-bank Danube inundation it is recommended to implement the measures in the depressions backfilled by construction waste (NR Starý háj, surrounding of Ovsištské arm). Following the disposal of this waste the water areas have been restored which would partly replace the localities affected by the construction. In the left-bank part of the PWMA Danube floodplains it is recommended to implement rehabilitation of former arms in Biskupické floodplains. • Completion of the complex system of gates and barriers disabling illegal entry to protected areas affected by the activities performed. The aim is to reduce the excessive disturbance of sensitive species.

The above compensatory measures need to be implemented at the latest together with the commencement of field works within the proposed activity and finish them before completion (the operation) of the proposed activity. Among other compensations we can mention: • Compensation for destroyed habitats to be clarified after processing documentation for their inventory and social assessment under the relevant legislation in the next stage of PD. • Destroyed tree and bushy green growing out of the forest will be replaced by new planting. The scope needs to be clarified in the next stage of PD. • Compensation for material damage of land use, necessary demolition and compensation for loss of agricultural production on temporarily used agricultural and forest lands. Ministry of Defence, Section of property and infrastructure (opinion of 12 July 2010, No. SEMaI-131-407/2010) Ministry of Defence has no comments on the Assessment Report from the perspective of assessing of expected impacts on the environment. Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Water Management, , Austria (letter dated 04 August 2010) They became aware of the Assessment Report and do not require participation in the further proceedings of impact assessments. Bratislava self-governing region, BSK Office, Department of Transport, (letter dated 15 July 2010, no. 11030/10-PK) In terms of the interests of the Department of Transport BSK both options of the route in the section D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north are suitable. The "Text and image annexes" chapter provides prospective traffic intensities on the D4 highway in each section when considering connection of R7 et Rovinka interchange (green option). It is a pity, that in terms of optimizing the assessment of options of connection of R7 the increase in traffic intensity on the D4 highway is not specified in calculations in the section between Ketelec and Rovinka interchanges. In the green option of the R7 route this section is to be mostly used by vehicles from (to) highway feeder of Bajkalska road. In this case, the function level in the section can be higher than that stated in the table on page 22. Such an assessment could help to rethink the position of the route R7. The Capital City of the Slovak Republic Bratislava, (letter No. MAGS OUP-48203/10-274475, OUP-977/10 dated 06 August 2010) It states about the route assessment in relation to MP of Bratislava of 2007 that in the opinion on the plan they made the comments on routing R7, which were not reflected in the Assessment Report.

46

Routing slightly differs from the MP in both options. Location of Rusovce EI in option E is a significant intervention, as the interchange is placed in the position of the future road I/2. Rovinka parking area has no support in MP. In terms of urban concept they argue that neither of the options submitted deals with the connection of R7 in the position of Ketelec interchange so that the connection is effective - extension of Bajkalska street to R7 and they disagree with the solution of R7 connection to the Svornosti street and insist on solution under MP of the city. Both options pass on the right side of the territories reserved for the development of sports and recreational areas. It insists on the position of Ketelec interchange and highway routing under MP of the city. It disagrees with the solution of Rovinka interchange and requests respecting location under MP of the city. Most pri Bratislave interchange to be designed so that it can be connected to prospectively planned expressway. In terms of transport - recommended option E - green with option "C1". In terms of selected environmental components - warning of Act. 54/2002 Coll. on consents to the destruction of habitats, further warning of intervention in Ramsar sites. They support all measures to protect nature. Noise- justify the details of the proposed noise control measures (length of walls). City District of Bratislava - Podunajské Biskupice (letter of 28 July 2010, no. SÚ/1522/6152/ 10/Bo.) City district supports option "C" red of the D4 highway routing for the following reasons: The D4 route is in the territory of the district of Podunajské Biskupice in accordance with the Master Plan of Bratislava; preparation of this D4 routing option is considered to be faster and more efficient because its implementation is not subject to complex achievement of amendments to the Master plan of the city; City district in an area determined by Lieskovec and Ketelec, i.e. in the area between the two routes of D4 (the "Green E" and "C Red") procures urban study, which verifies the new functional use and which should be the basis for the acquisition of amendments to the Master plan. A water surface is to be formed in the area, after the previous deep gravel mining, and the water surface should be base for a new function of the contact zone. City district is interested in the development of protective, eco-stabilizing, landscape-forming features with emphasise on functions available for the benefit of the citizens of the city district, for a short rest and the related physical activities and additionally also for related small business activities. It is considering, for example a golf course, with cycle park in relation to existing and future cycling routes, with hippo-park for horse breeding and animals, for development of agro tourism. City district is interested in developing intensively used relaxation zone, in conjunction with a high proportion of green, including bio-centre and bio-corridors. Order for processing TS was to be made by the claimant NDS, a.s. and available in May 2009, also two quality committees were held to the study in progress, so we think that the idea of the transformation of the zone could be projected, or at least mentioned, in the present Assessment Report. Despite the fact that none of the options of D4 routing will substantially affect draft future land use, however, it negatively changes its perception as a territory in front of the D4 highway, that means related to the urbanized area of the city district and easily accessible, respectively an area behind the highway that has significantly affected availability, as "option E green" cancels Jegenešská access road (depending on the graphic part of the documentation - without compensation) and reduces its attractiveness. It notes that to the south of the Slovnaft, the D4 routing option "E green" comes to collision with safety zones of Slovnaft of I. and II. degree and with land reserve for the HV routes. Another of serious reasons for preference of "option C red" is declared future extreme D4 highway traffic in the section of Ketelec - Rovinka. City district deems negative impacts of highway: noise, emissions and so on to be relegated to the farthest position from the urbanized

47

area of the district. Usefulness of option "E" declared by processors allows expansion of gravel mining in Ketelec, it is not significant for the city district, as the it has no interest to expand gravel mining in its territory, but prefers deep mining in the currently operated deposits. City district at the same time requires to incorporate in technical measures of option "C red" the following: More passages for migrating animals (ecoducts) in the area between Ketelec and Rovinka interchanges, with respect to the proposed amendment of the use and proposed extensive green areas, bio-centre and bio-corridors; Noise barrier, proposed to protect the village of Lieskovec in option E to be designed in option C, in order to protect forthcoming recreational functions; City district supports any proposal to eliminate the negative effects of the proposed activity on nature protection, such as fencing along the section that prevents ingress of game to the road, the increased number of opaque glare and noise barriers, a larger number of ecoducts for the game. Draws attention to minor technical error in a text of the report, the name of the settlement Lieskové is not correct and should be changed to Lieskovec. As the new solution of D4 in both options considers the route of the R7 expressway (and its involvement in D4) only in the position of option C, according to the plan "R7 - Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná" i.e. with connection to "Rovinka" EI, the city district deems necessary to restate fundamental disagreement with the routing of R7, despite the fact that the Assessment Report shows that the 1st phase of investment preparation of R7 has been completed. The issue of R7 routing is considered still open and we will continue to promote the solution according to present Master plan, since the routing of the said road shall not affect significantly any of stakeholders than the City District of Bratislava - Podunajské Biskupice. Reasons for disagreement of the city district: • assessing the impact of routing of traffic construction of R7 was carried out only to the border of the territory of Bratislava and the impacts of the outlet of the road on (residential) areas of the city were not considered or taken into account, especially on the territory of the city district - Podunajské Biskupice • conflict of the route with the Master plan • Routing of R7 with its outlet into the Svornosti street through the system of connection and conditioning the junctions nodes destroys the only free development area located in the urban area, intended for buildings for civic amenities of urban and above-urban character and mixed area of trade and services, manufacturing and non-manufacturing. The affected area has an utmost importance for Podunajské Biskupice in terms of strategy, since the objective is to make it equivalent entering space to the area from the south, with the character of not only the city, but regional importance. • the said proposal of R7 routing did not solve in any way the difficult traffic situation on the road in the Svornosti street, which is unsatisfactory even today in terms of capacity. Svornosti street (nat. road I/63) as a two-lane road is at present loaded by about 26,500 vehicles/24 hours in one way. Its unbearable traffic volume, insufficient width parameters of the road, constantly increasing transit, impermeability of junctions, improper construction and technical condition of the road without sidewalks, cause traffic jams and increased accident rates, not only during rush hours, but also during the day. Traffic incidents are simultaneously transmitted to the interconnected transport road system of Bratislava city districts - Ružinov and Bratislava - Vrakuňa. Expecting start of operating the R7 expressway and the D4 highway at the same time, which would provide a partial distribution of traffic from R7 in the same time frame, is considered unreal in terms of the current difficult financial and economic situation. Transport of R7 can enter the city only after building the lack of capacity road infrastructure in its territory, i.e. D4 highway and possibly extended Bajkalska street. Building new D4 and

48

extended Bajkalska street will create a new traffic entrance to the city from south-east of Slovakia, thus greatly relieves the existing road system of the city adjoining the national road I/63. For these reasons, the city district deemed necessary to set realistic priorities in addressing transport measures and in accordance with them to focus efforts and financial resources to their implementation. City District of Bratislava - Podunajské Biskupice (letter of 28 July 2010, no. SÚ/1522/6152/ 10/Bo.) Sent the following supplement to the opinion: Based on consultations with the plan procurers of D4 highway, the city district completes its opinion as follows: City district at the same time requires to incorporate in technical measures of option "C red" the following: For relief of Svornosti street, diverting at least a portion of the heavy traffic from Slovnaft and to Slovnaft in the southern gate, but also addressing transport connection of upcoming change in land use of Lieskovec - Ketelec, requires to provide the traffic connection from D4 and to D4 (and also from R7 and to R7), for example by two junction bidirectional branches. City District of Bratislava - Vajnory (letter of 28 March 2011, no. OS-UP-87/2134/2011-JŠ) Letter addressed to Ministry of Transport, with a requirement that the processing of tender documents for the selection of processor for the project documentation for planning of the D4 highway, the section "Ivanka - north interchange, Rača interchange" was attached to the first section (Jarovce - Ivanka north.) City District of Bratislava - Vajnory (letter of 06 August 2010, no. 5366-7/1081/2010/st) Given the confusing and misleading information published by the deputy of BSK Ms. I. Zemanová, I consider it necessary to inform you of the opinion of the Bratislava-Vajnory. The deputy at the press conference on 29 July 2010 falsely stated that the petition in 2008 was not interested by anyone of BSK and it has never been studied or registered. The petition was duly registered on 27 October 2008 at BSK and former bathrobe district governor Mr. Bajan responded to the petition on 25 November 2008 in professional and broad opinion (attached). City district wants to repeat its opinion on the D4 routing, city district AGREES only with this option mentioned in the report of impacts on the environment: • Ivanka - North interchange - D4 intersection with D1 at 22.800 km, D4 is designed as a clover leaf intersection. D4 Highway is led through sub-road underneath the D1 highway. Interconnection with D1 is designed through the collector strips on D4 to D1 collector strips to be extended to six-lane. Alternative solution of the D4 and D1 highway junction of Ivanka North D4 highway crossing the D1 highway according to the Feasibility and effectiveness study is designed under the existing D1 embankment body with partially embedded D4 highway below the ground level due to observance of standard head clearance - Option C. In this way, it is necessary to build D4 in the sealed bathtub in the length of about 600 m because of the high water table. This opinion was also presented by Mr. Jánošík from NDS on Monday, 02 August 2010 on Slovak Radio and published in an article on on-line news and we identify with it. The city district, strictly DISAGREES with further option of the D4 routing over D1 mentioned in the report as an alternative. It is this paragraph from the report on the impacts, which we disagree with: NDS, a.s., the claimant, regarding unfavourable hydrogeological conditions in that section of highway (the need to build a sealed bathtub due to high ground water level and other anti-flood measures), developed in the course of the Assessment Report processing an optional technical design for routing D4 in the affected region (Ivanka north interchange). Option of the D4 routing consists in modifying vertical conduct of D4 over D1 - option C1,

49 while necessary adjustment ... ' . Thus we disagree with the vertical conduct of D4 highway over D1 and then on pylons. We recall also our disagreement with the tunnel portal in Rača, due to the destruction of our unique Small Carpathian vineyards and thus we insist, and we have many times stated, on the location of the tunnel portal directly to the valley between Sv. Jur and Vajnory degraded by very high voltage. We consider this the best solution for the protection of nature in our region, of course, with the implementation of appropriate and necessary conservation measures.

Annex: Letter of Bratislava Region on petition of citizens, dated 25 November 2008 Dear citizens, You have appealed to me with petition received on 27 October 2008 in the matter of implementation of legislative changes that would allow finding new D4 highway routing in the section of Ivanka pri Dunaji interchange - Stupava interchange and you ask for the section to be removed from the binding part of Master plan to guiding part. After investigating the petition and real fact-finding I´d like to announce: Master plan of a higher territorial unit (the "MP HTU") of Bratislava region, in 1998 was procured by the Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic and approved by the Government, and its binding part was proclaimed by regulation of the Government. The binding regulations undertake a prospective corridor for D4 highway around Bratislava from the intersection D2xD4 in Bratislava - Jarovce and then direction of a new bridge over the Danube, Rovinka, Most pri Bratislave, Ivanka pri Dunaji, east of the city district Vajnory along Šúrsky channel, tunnel underneath the Carpathians, Marianka connected to road I/2, from road I/2 to proceed with proposal for construction towards the D2 highway south of Stupava and the road II/505 and continue in perspective to Bratislava - Devinska Nova Ves in parallel with the railway line to the national border with Austria to build a new bridge over the Morava River and border crossing. Zero circle of Bratislava was at the request of the Ministry of Transport, Posts and Telecommunications marked as D4 highway. In 2005, the technical study of the highway route was processed from Jarovce to the intersection on the D1 highway and after consultation of the three selected options (at zero circuit route, the route to Pezinok, the route behind Senec) option of D4 highway routing evaluated as the most favourable option - the route of zero circle of Bratislava. The above route is included in the Concept of development of highways and expressways in Slovakia, what was required in addressing the Central European Transport Corridor (CETC). This concept is the basis for the Slovak Spatial Development Concept, that must be in compliance with regional master plan. After the transfer of competences; in the section of spatial planning activities of Bratislava region; procured in 2005 "Amendments 1/2005 MP HTU of Bratislava region", where the zero circuit of Bratislava in existing corridor was directionally partially regulated by detailed work "Traffic-urban study of Bratislava zero circle" and directionally coordinated with the route approved in the Capital city master plan of Bratislava, 2007. The amendments by Resolution no. 3/2008, which enacted the generally binding regulation no. 20/2008 amending and supplementing VZN Bratislava Region no. 18/2007 declaring a binding part of the higher territorial unit of the Bratislava region. New changes in MP HTU of Bratislava region can be made only in accordance with Act No.50/1976 Coll. on Urban Planning Building Code (Building Act) as amended. The desired change - the deletion of the reserved projected corridor for the D4 highway at Ivanka pri Dunaji interchange and Stupava interchange, the binding master plan of the region would result in conflict with the Concept of development of highways and expressways in Slovakia with the Slovak Spatial Development, approved by the Government. The self-government as a planning authority under § 30 of the Building Act, manages change in the master plan or complement to the regional master plan, if necessary to comply with the Slovak Spatial Development Concept or its amendments. When discussing amendments to the

50 territorial planning documentation it shall proceed appropriately according to § 22 to § 25 of the Building Act. This means that a report on the changes in territorial planning documentation, together with an assessment of all opinions and comments shall be submitted to the approval authority (regional council). Only on the basis of the submitted proposal it is not possible for the council of Bratislava region to decide on reassigning the reserved corridor of D4 highway from the binding part of the MP HTU to the guiding part because it would not be in line with the above provisions of the Building Act, concerning the approval of amendments to land-use planning documentation . However, I agree with you that it is necessary to immediately address the unsatisfactory traffic situation in our region, and therefore I support the steps leading to the solution, that is, the further preparation of the D4 highway in the approved corridor, from conceptual point of view, I will support efforts to verify the next new route that could help to address the traffic situation of the region. At the same time I inform you that next year we will begin to procure the "General Transport Development Plan of Bratislava region" and the new "Master Plan of the Bratislava region" that will react also to your proposal and legitimately look for a new solution of concept of area organization in relation to territorial-technical, economic and social prerequisite. City District of Bratislava – Ružinov, (letter of 27 July 2010, no.CS/ŽP2010/11073/LRI) In terms of the Master Plan : Assessment report compares the impacts of the proposed options "C" - red and "E1" -green with the zero option which is existing transport link of Jarovce and Ivanka on the D1 highway. Although the proposed D4 highway crosses the territory of Bratislava.-Ružinov. But the implementation of four of seven proposed highway junctions significantly affects traffic flows on D1 and on four Ružinov radial roads, i.e. extension of Bajkalska, Gagarinova, Vrakunská and Hanska road. D1 will be relieved, which is already congested in Port bridge. Construction of D4 will make pressure to build extensions of Bajkalska road, which will relieve Slovnaftská road crossing prospective area of Pálenisko. CD Bratislava-Ružinov supports the construction of the D4 highway and prefers option "E" green enabling shorter route of extension of Bajkalska street. In terms of nature and landscape protection: In accordance with Act no. 543 2002 Coll. on Nature and landscape conservation, as amended, the claimant shall ask for permission for felling of existing trees and under the relevant decision to carry out an adequate substitute planting on his own land. In terms of static traffic: In terms of transport U and RR section has no comments. Based on the above CD Bratislava - Ružinov agrees with the submitted Assessment Report. City District of Bratislava – Rusovce (letter no. MÚ/R – 118-2/2011 of 7 February 2011) No comments to the submitted Assessment Report. Regional Environmental Office in Bratislava, Nature and landscape protection department (letter of 30/07/2010, No. 1256/2010) At the beginning of the assessed section 0.0 - 8.0 some interventions in the natural reserve of Gajc, a nature reserve Danube islands are expected, which consist of valuable habitats of floodplain forest and steppe habitats. The area is also part of the PLA Danube floodplains, the system of areas of European importance Natura 2000 and sites protected by the Ramsar Convention. Interventions also affect TSES elements of regional and provincial character. Based on the scope of the assessment some new options have been designed by a verification study:  „C“ - viaducts - red  „D“ - tunnel under the Danube - blue  „E“ - viaducts - green 51

The tunnel option D was finally omitted in the Assessment Report and the following options remained in the assessment: C - red - viaduct, modification of option A and B from the planned E - green - in the route of the tunnel option but with viaducts In terms of water protection, National water management authority recommends, within the measures of groundwater and surface water protection from the adverse effects, to carry out an impact assessment of highway on groundwater specifically to assess solutions of rainwater drainage into infiltration area in terms of the long-term impact on the groundwater quality in the protected water management area of Rye Island. Rainwater sewer downstream is proposed in the infiltration in option "C" at 6.00 to 14.100 km, in option E at 7.300 to 14.100 km. Both of these sections are in PWMA Rye Island. Because of the missing impact assessment, they can not recommend any of the options. In terms of nature and landscape protection we recommend option "E" - green, which means a smaller areal intervention in the special protection areas under the Act on nature and landscape protection on the left bank of the Danube downstream, where the areas with higher 4th grade of special protection - NR Gajc and NR Kopáč. In collaboration with SNC, RC Bratislava and PLA Danube floodplains it is necessary to provide the current survey of affected areas of conservation, ensure replanting and transfer of selected species of protected spiecies and build replacement habitats. We also recommend to calculate the approximate social value of destroyed habitats and determine appropriate financial compensation. Regional Office for Road Transport and roads, Bratislava (letter no. A/2010/01749 of 06 August 2010) No comments to the submitted Assessment Report. District Office for Road Transport and Roads in Bratislava (letter of 27 July 2010, No. 2010/06206/JTA) No additional comments to the submitted Assessment Report. District Office for Road Transport and Roads in Senec (letter of 27 July 2010, No. 2010/1148) It sent the following statement: - after studying the documentation it a g r e e s with the option "C" - red, - this option counts less interventions in the natural area, it is the most economical - option "C" is beneficial because it strongly connects traffic from the roads I/61, I/62, I/63, II/572, II/510, II/503 to D4 and reduces road traffic through Bratislava, - it asks to carry out a traffic study for the elevated and level interchanges in the next step of the project documentation, for all Ist and IInd class roads where D4 is crossing them in line with STN. - asks to submit opinions of the SSC Bratislava, BSK, as owners of roads, RA CDPK, RCB a.s. District Environmental Office in Senec (letter of 2 August 2010, No. ŽP/EIA/1666/10-Vi) Section of state water management - has no comments under observance of Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on Water. Section of nature and landscape protection - recommended option "E" - green in combination with option "C1". Section of state administration of air protection - has no comments on the Assessment Report. Section of Waste management - notes the requirement of waste disposal in accordance with applicable regulations. Conclusion It recommends option "E" - green in combination with option "C1". District Environmental Office in Senec, ( letter of 30 July 2010, no. ZPO/2010/00108- 12/ANJ/BA II III IV) Sent the following opinion: Waste management authority In terms of waste management it has no objections to the submitted Assessment Report. Air protection authority

52

The proposed structure is not a point source of air pollution, during the execution of the construction it will act as an air pollution source. Air pollution in relation to the affected population can be expected especially in populated urban area of Jarovce and Podunajské Biskupice. It has the following comment: a negative impact on air quality during construction to be eliminated by measures to reduce dust, appropriate organization of work and optimization of access roads to the construction site. Cross-cutting environmental activities unit District Environmental Office in Bratislava agrees with the solution of red option without comments. Water Management Authority Relocations of existing utilities and melioration facilities are necessary during construction. The entire section of D4 will have sewerage with oil separators with outlet concentration of NEL up to 0.1 mg/l with pumping stations. Rainwater discharge is designed according to the site into the infiltration of Jarovecké arm, the Danube and the Little Danube. In the area of Rusovce interchange, Rovinka parking area, Most pri Bratislave interchange, Ivanka west and Ivanka north, there is proposed location of construction yards. In terms of impact on groundwater, surface water and existing water structures, it is recommended option "E", option C1 in crossing the D1 highway. Installing bridges over streams to be designed to prevent pillars interfering in the protection zone of dikes and the riverbed foot. Develop a hydrogeological report, assessing the impact of pre- treated rainwater draining from the highway to groundwater and streams. Construction site equipment and temporary landfills to be located away from floodplains and protected water management areas. During construction and operation of the highway it requires a plan of preventive measures for preventing uncontrollable leakage of hazardous substances into the environment and for the procedure in case of their leakage and approved by the relevant state water management authority. In terms of state water management authority, the competent authority of the state water management for structures and activities in inundation area of the Danube is the Department of SWM of Regional Environmental Office in Bratislava. Nature and landscape protection authority For the benefit of nature and landscape protection, the highway section, which overcomes the Danube River and its inundation area is crucial. The overlap of several categories of protected areas (of national and European importance, whose natural values are analysed in the "report") in this space, tells about its extraordinary importance. Under the specific requirements set out in the Scope of the assessment, impacts of a proposed activity on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species and TSES have been evaluated and impacts of activities on Natura 2000 sites, i.e. the areas included in the European system of protected areas and on priority habitats or priority species habitats have been processed in a separate study in details. They were also designed technical measures and completed compensatory measures that should ensure a mitigation of the impact on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species and the development of TSES. During the preparatory works, the actual construction and during operation these will mainly be the following impacts: direct damage and destruction of habitats, tree felling, animal killing, creating barriers in migration corridors, fragmentation of habitats, noise and light load on animals, air pollution. In option "C" the habitat of European importance LS1.1 Willow-poplar lowland floodplain forests (91EO willow-poplar and alder floodplain forests) will be directly destroyed in the approximate range of 26,430 m2; in option "E" the above habitat of European importance will be directly destroyed in the range of about 20,010 m2, while in option "E" the habitat in question is located just outside the Biskupické floodplains and in option "C" approximately 2/3 of the size of the destroyed

53 habitat is situated in Biskupické floodplains. In option "C" there is significant affection of species habitats of European importance for which the Biskupické floodplains is declared - this concerns in particular the habitats of species the great capricorn beetle (Cerambyx cerdo) and the stag beetle (Lucanus cervus). During operation, the wildlife will be disturbed by noise and light from surrounding highway. Based on the results referred to in dispersion study the annual limit value for the protection of vegetation (30u.gm-3NOx) is not to be exceeded. The proposed highway route provides the following protected areas: option "C" red with a total length of 22.80063 km - Ramsar site of Danube floodplains, SPA Danube floodplains, SCI Biskupické Floodplains, PLA Danube floodplains (second degree of protection), PWMA Danube floodplains, SCI Biskupické Floodplains, PLA Danube floodplains (second degree of protection). According to RTSES of Bratislava (SEA 1994) and Update of Bratislava RTSES elements (SEA 2005) both options are crossing national bio-centre of Bratislava floodplains and Provincial bio- corridor Danube. The final comparison of options in terms of their technical and transport solution, environmental impacts and economic routing was in the Feasibility and effectiveness study recommended optimal option "E" green (viaduct in the route of the tunnel option). Among measures to eliminate and offset the impacts of the D4 highway on the environment, the "report" recommends, in particular: Implement the proposed technical measures for the conservation of nature:  option "C": extension of a bridge over the Danube after about 6.0 km, construction of passage for animals at 10.35 km, adding two-sided lighting and noise barriers as proposed by noise study at 2.9 to 7.5 km on the right and 2.9 to 5.8 km on the left,  option "E": extension of a bridge after about 5.5 km, construction of transition for the game at 8.7 km, adding both-sided noise and light barriers as proposed by noise study,  both options: build a passage for animals at 14.2 km, necessary tree felling to be carried out in the non-breeding season, to implement justified rescue transfers before the start of the construction, access roads to the construction site and construction yards to be situated within, if possible, outside protected areas and TSES elements, near bridges to use a minimum and clearly visible structure to limit the collision of birds in PWA. Compensatory measures: to make planting that will work as erosion protection of slopes and mitigating the negative impacts of transport (capturing emissions and partly noise) - by optimizing spatial routing, bridges, as well as proper fencing along the road the negative impact on flora and fauna (migratory routes, noise, air pollutants) will be significantly mitigated. The proposed compensatory measures of negative impacts on protected areas: expansion of forests in the vicinity of the planned highway (use only native species of trees), creating meadows by grassing arable land in the PLA Danube floodplains or within 1 km from its border with the aim of creating alternative foraging and nesting habitats, creating (restoring) wetlands by watering depressions of former Danube arms, completion of a comprehensive system of gates and barriers preventing illegal entry to protected areas affected by executed activity - measures need to be performed at the latest together with the commencement of fieldwork. In the protected area of Danube floodplains and NR Gajc, it is necessary to minimize the scope of the intervention, while before the construction in this area, it is to carry out a detailed survey of biotic component and propose any limits for the movement of machinery, or carry out an emergency transfer of rare plant and animal species to another location. Compensation for destroyed habitats to be specified after processing documentation of their inventory and social valuation, also range of replacement tree planting for destroyed wood to be specified in the next stage of PD. An important condition is the requirement to draw up a project to monitor the various components 54 of the environment and propose policies for environmental surveillance. The monitoring should be still carried out during operation, taking actions if considered elements of the environment are burdened more than expected. District Environmental Office agrees with the draft of SNC and its justification, according to which: the Danube in this area has created floodplain type of landscape, the importance of which in terms of nature and landscape protection confirms the concentration of several categories of protected areas of both national and European importance. Building and operation of highway elevated road in this area means, as stated in the "report", negative intervention in protected areas, their fragmentation, use of habitats, killing and disturbance of animal species and plants, changing the landscape feature. For this reason, the SNC considers the most favourable tunnel option (after assessing its impact on the hydrological regime of surface and ground water), evaluation of which, however, based on the results of the Feasibility and effectiveness study of the D4 highway was not involved in the report. In the event the route of D4 is led across the Danube through the elevated road, DEPO together with SNC prefers to implement option "E"- green along with proposed measures to mitigate the adverse effects of construction and operation of highway and with compensatory measures for the protection of nature on pages 159 to 161, 164 to 168 in the submitted Assessment Report. According to § 28. 5, 6 and 8 of Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, if based on the outcome of the impact assessment pursuant to a special regulation (Act No. 24/2006 Coll. on EIA) it is necessary to carry out necessary measures to offset the adverse effects of the plan or project on the integrity of European network of protected areas, the claimant shall request for approval of Ministry of Environment on the method and conditions of their implementation; compensatory measures must be comparably aimed at adversely affected natural habitats of European importance and species of European importance and ensure functions comparable with features of the territory affected by the plan or project so as to ensure protection of the overall coherence of the EU system of protected areas; the Ministry informs the European Union about the compensatory measures. Final summary: District Environmental Office in Bratislava requests to take into account and fully respect comments and recommendations of nature protection, air and water protection authority when drawing up the final opinion based on the assessment of the proposed activity. Cross-cutting environmental activities unit agreed in terms of prevention of major industrial accidents with red option without comments, State Water Management Authority in terms of impact on groundwater, surface water and existing water structures recommends option "E", for crossing the D1 highway it is option "C1" and nature and landscape protection body prefers option E - green together with measures to eliminate the adverse effects of construction and operation of highways and compensatory measures for nature conservation, listed on p. 159- 161, p. 164-168 in the present assessment report for the proposed activity. Senec District Office, Department of Civil Protection and Crisis Management (letter of 20 July 2010, No. CO-2010/188-74) No comments in terms of the interests of the civil protection. District Directorate of Fire and Rescue Service, Pezinok (letter no. ORHZ - 1282/2010 of 04 August 2010) No comments. Regional Mining Office in Bratislava, (letter of 14 July 2010, No. 801-1908/2010) No comments on the present assessment report as the institution concerned and remains on the opinion of the local authority, under no. 265-707/2008 dated 19 March 2008. Regional Public Health Authority in Bratislava (letter of 23 July 2010, No. HŽP/11242/2010) In terms of health protection, i t a g r e e s with the Assessment Report. It requires to include in the Final Statement, respectively for zoning proceeding of the construction the following:  Resolve sound insulation of Jarovce against noise from traffic on D1 and D4, including their 55

crossing.  Demonstrate effective solution to noise protection of recreational area of Jarovské arm.  Ensure protection of Vajnory against noise from D4, at least in the construction of section Ivanka -Záhorská Bystrica. It points out that during the approval procedures of individual stages it will be required to demonstrate the effectiveness of noise protection by noise measurement results. The proposed activity is not an unacceptable deterioration in the living conditions in your area based on the implementation of the proposed acoustic measures. At the same time, it comes to improvement around the current roads (I/63 and passages through the municipalities). Construction will be further assessed in the context of land-use proceedings of public health authority by constitutional Act. no. 355/2007 Coll. and implementing regulations. Slovak Railways, Bratislava DG, Department of expertise, (letter dated 15 July 2010, under No. 14012/2010/0420) The plan interferes with the railroad protection zone and circuit of three railway lines: Devinska Nova Ves - Štúrovo state border, Bratislava Nové Mesto - Dunajska Streda and Rusovce state border - Rusovce railway km 116.645. The plan will affect properties in the report of Slovak railways. No comments to the submitted Assessment Report. Slovak Air Traffic Office, Bratislava Airport, Bratislava (letter no. 6213/313-1841-P/2010 of 12 July 2010) During the hearing on the plan the Air traffic office disagreed with Option C, since it is contrary to the protection zones of the airport (it has a beacon at 21.4 km). It requires to submit project documentation. Slovak Water Management Enterprise (letter dated 02 August 2010, No. 8630/220-Mru/2010) 1. In bridging the Danube at about 1,860 km and its inundation area: • height of lower bridge at the fairway must respected the min. navigational height. The flow administrator provides the designer with basic information about the position of the fairway, navigable waterway and navigational height. The data form the starting basis for the design parameters of the bridge. • Position of the pillars of the bridge over the Danube in the area of the protective dikes (the left and right bank of the Danube) must respect their protection zones, i.e. at least 10 m from the foot of upstream and air slope of the protective dike, respectively at least 10 m from the bank line of seepage canal. Pillars must not be located in the body of the dam or in the profile of the seepage canal. • Pillars in the inundation area, the flow profile of Danube arms and in the actual flow profile of the Danube, must have the appropriate hydraulic shape. In subsequent stages of project documentation we require to solve turning the pillars of a bridge mathematically, respectively by physical model, due to flood discharges in the Danube and assess the impact of the pillars on the impoundment of water levels in the Danube. Width of navigation gabarit must be min. 120 m (i.e. the distance between pillars in the Danube riverbed) and the height of navigation gabarit min. 10 m from the max. navigation levels. • For the optimal design of the bridge it would be appropriate partly in option E to partly adjust the route of existing Biskupické arm. The length of the adjustment is proposed to 150 m. The original riverbed is necessary to be filled up in the length of about 100 m. • Minimize installing pillars of a bridge on the route through Jarovecké arm. 2. Crossing D4 with the Little Danube: Crossing the Little Danube through "D4" is requested in the next stage of "PD" to keep the existing profile of the Little Danube riverbed. 3. Šúrsky channel: It requires for ensuring the maintenance and protection of the channel to keep min. 10 m wide operating strip from the foot of the dam until D4 highway. 4. Observe the regime of the protected water management area of Rye Island pursuant to § 31 of 56

Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on Water. Slovak State Nature Conservation (letter dated 30 July 2010, No. ŠOP SR/2048/2010) Sent the following opinion: It agrees with the attached expert opinion of territorially competent organizational unit of SNC RCOP in Bratislava, PLA Danube floodplains, no. RCOP BA 298/2010. To meet specific requirements of the scope of assessment related to nature and landscape protection is complemented by the evaluation: 1. Specific and detailed evaluation of the impact of activities on the territories included in the European system of protected areas and on priority habitats or priority species habitats. Impacts are evaluated separately in Annex 5. This has two different titles, the first title refers to impacts on the "areas of nature and landscape protection" (i.e. the impacts on the national protected areas), but these are missing. The study is quite chaotic, it present unnecessarily activities with a potential negative impact on the conservation objectives and maps (some illegible) of the areas concerned of the European network of protected areas transferred from the website of the SNC. The result of the study is not to compare the impacts and recommendation of one of the options. 2. In the routing highway in the manner set out in the plan, to propose measures to ensure that the surrounding area is protected against noise and light and bridging the Danube and protected areas will not prevent migration and exchange of genetic information and will not lead to a fragmentation of the territory. Fulfilled 3. Process and add compensatory measures to ensure reducing the impact on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species and TSES, describe the crossing points of migrating animals and suggest a way of technical solutions. It is deemed to be fulfilled despite of the missing description of the game passages. 4. Describe the impact of the D4 highway on hunting deer in the affected area. Not fulfilled. Slovak State Nature Conservation, the Regional Nature Conservation Centre in Bratislava, PLA Danube floodplains, (letter dated 19 July 2010, No. RCOP BA 298/2010) Both assessed options of crossing the Danube (the most difficult section in terms of nature conservation) are designed by a bridge. Assessment of the area of nature conservation For the benefit of nature and landscape protection, the highway section, which overcomes the Danube River and its inundation area is crucial. The overlap of several categories of protected areas (of national and European importance) in this space, tells about its extraordinary importance. The proposed highway route provides the following protected areas: C - red option - Ramsar site of Danube floodplains, PWA Danube floodplains, Biskupické Floodplains PLA Danube floodplains (2nd degree of protection), NR Gajc (4th degree of protection). E - green option - Ramsar site of Danube floodplains, PWA Danube floodplains, Biskupické Floodplains PLA Danube floodplains (2nd degree of protection). According to RTSES of Bratislava (SEA 1994) and Update of Bratislava RTSES elements (SEA 2005) both options are crossing national bio-centre of Bratislava floodplains and Provincial bio- corridor Danube. PLA Danube floodplains They are characterized by hardwood floodplain forests and particularly the specific communities of the dry forest steppe habitats of the Danube -(Asparago-Crataegetum). This diversity of natural conditions is reflected in numerous representation of plant and animal species, of which many are rare and endangered. PLA Danube floodplains is in the second degree of protection under the Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection. NR Gajc The purpose of declaring NR is to ensure protection of the habitat of steppe vegetation immediately bordering with floodplain forest. There is the fourth degree of protection under the

57

Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection. ÚEV Biskupické luhy The area included in the system for the protection of habitats of European importance Thermophilous Pannonian oak forests (91 HO), the Carpathian and Pannonian oak-hornbeam forests (91G0), riparian oak-ash-elm tree forests around lowland rivers (91F0) and species of European importance: great capricorn beetle (Cerambyx cerdo), Stag (Lucamts cervits) Dioszeghyana schmidtii, bullhead (Cottus gobio), Danube ruffe (Gynmocephalus balloon), Kessler's gudgeon (Gobio kessieri), European fire-bellied toad (Bombina bombina) and the European beaver (Castor fiber). PLA Danube floodplains Danube floodplains are one of the three most important areas for a nesting of species such as white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), little egret (Egretta garzetta), black kite (Milvus migrans), little bittern (Ixobrychus minutus), Mediterranean Gull (Larus melanocephalus), common tern (Sterna hirundo), kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) and one of the five for nesting spieces of the garganey (Anas qaerquedula), redshank (Tringa totamis), red-crested pochard (Netta rufina) and gadwall (Anas strepera). There is more than 1% of the European population regularly wintering or migrating in the area such as the smew (Mergus albellus), tufted duck (Aythya fidigula), common pochard (Aythya ferina) and common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula). The site regularly holds during migration over 20,000 and during wintering more than 70,000 specimens of several species of aquatic birds. Furthermore, there is more than 1% of the national population of the species nesting in the territory such as tawny pipit (Anthus campestris), black stork (Ciconia nigra), Western marsh harrier (Circus aeruginosus) and sand martin (Riparia riparia). Ramsar site of Danube floodplains The reason for including the Danube floodplains among internationally important wetlands was the existence of a system of river branches and dead branches on Slovak-Hungarian section of the Danube, which is one of the largest inland delta in Central Europe and is representative and rare example of natural and close-natural wetland type in the Pannonian region. Section of Jarovce - Danube and the Danube - Ivanka north are passing through agricultural landscape, with the first degree of protection under the Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection. Evaluation of the Assessment report in terms of nature conservation: The submitted assessment report contains information on nature and landscape protection in accordance with Annex. 2 of the impact assessment act. Assessment of compliance with the specific requirements of the assessment scope The Assessment Report identifies specific requirements referred to in the Plan i.e. there were: - new options of the highway route (tunnel option under the Danube, verified only in the Feasibility and effectiveness study of D4 highway, not evaluated in the Assessment Report) - evaluated impacts on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species and TSES. - the impacts of activity on Natura 2000 sites processed in details in a separate study, - measures mitigating the negative effects of the activity and compensatory measures. Draft solution and justification The Danube in this area has created floodplain type of landscape, the importance of which in terms of nature and landscape protection confirms the concentration of several categories of protected areas of both national and European importance. Building and operation of highway elevated road and bridge in this area means, as stated in the "report", negative intervention in protected areas, their fragmentation, use of habitats, killing and disturbance of animal species and plants, changing the landscape feature. For this reason, it is considered the most favourable tunnel option (after assessing its impact on the hydrological regime of surface and ground water), evaluation of which, however, based on the results of the Feasibility and effectiveness study of the D4 highway was not involved in the report. In the event the route of D4 is led across the

58

Danube through the elevated road and bridge, it prefers to implement option "E"- green along with proposed measures to mitigate the adverse effects of construction and operation of highway and with compensatory measures for the protection of nature on pages 162 to 164, 168 to 168 in the submitted Assessment Report. Bratislava Regional Protection Association (letter of 27 July 2010) In the opinion on the planned construction of the D4 highway Jarovce - Ivanka north we requested by the letter dated 28 March 2008 in the Assessment Report to supplement the option of highway route crossing the Danube by a tunnel and that is for several reasons. The planned construction of highway section D4 Jarovce - Ivanka-north crosses the protected area of the Danube floodplains and is an extremely negative impact and destructive interference in existing protected areas that are part of a coherent European network of protected areas Natura 2000 - sites of Community Importance Ostrovné Lúčky and Biskupické floodplains, Protected bird area of the Danube floodplains. We also requested to assess and consider other factors: • evaluate the impact of activity (during construction and operation) on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species, TSES and pay attention to the spatial synthesis of the impacts of activities in the area and comparison of activity options and proposal for optimal option, including comparison with the option if the activity is not implemented (inter alia,. the appropriateness of the carrying cables of the main bridge displayed in visualization in a protected bird area), • specific and detailed evaluation of the impact of activities on the territories included in the European system of protected areas, • in option of the highway route through protected areas in the manner set out in the plan we request (in the context of measures to mitigate adverse impacts) to implement the full section with flood fortifications on the right bank of the Danube (about 3 km) to the edge of the floodplain forest on the left bank of the Danube (about 6 km) on piles and in both directions with opaque noise barriers and without illumination of the road. Ensure enough corridors to pass the highway by animals outside the section. We propose to built the noise barrier on the south of the highway in the section of about 6-8 km where the route runs close to forests and protected areas, • We propose to process and add compensatory measures to ensure reducing the impact on the gene pool, biodiversity, protected areas and species and TSES. After analysing the Assessment Report and its annexes we state the following: 1. The option of crossing the Danube via tunnel - option "D" was not sufficiently proven in the Assessment report The range of the assessment of the proposed activity implies a requirement to assess the option at 0-12 km - red option assessed in the plan with considering the possibility of routing under the Danube. Tunnel option of crossing the Danube and the adjacent floodplains was evaluated only in the Feasibility and effectiveness study for the section of D4 Bratislava - Jarovce - Ivanka north - Stupava south - state border SK/A. The Feasibility study, however, is mainly technical economic feasibility assessment of individual options, in any case it can not be considered the evaluation of environmental suitability of individual options. And since the subject of the EIA process is the evaluation of the environmental impacts, we consider this review of tunnel option poor and demand to compare options of the proposed activity on an equal basis in all spheres of impacts - such as economic and technical as well as environmental (all components of the environment). According to § 28 par. 1 of Act 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, the aim of Natura 2000 is to maintain the favourable conservation status of habitats of European importance and the favourable conservation status of species of European importance. The activity that may affect either alone or in combination with other activities the territories belonging to the European system of protected areas will be issued by the state administration

59 body a decision on the authorization of such activity only when such activity based on the result of the assessments under a separate regulation would not affect the favourable conservation status of that territory in terms of protection (par. 2). If there are no alternative solutions within negatively impact assessment, the activity can take place only in the public interest. If the territories belonging to the European system of protected areas involve priority habitats or priority species habitats, the activity may be permitted only if it relates to threat of human health, public order, security of the Slovak Republic, has a significant impact on improving the environment or if under the opinion of European Commission it is related to other urgent reasons of public interest (par. 3). Tunnel option "D" is an alternative, not affecting the protected areas and Natura 2000 sites, and this route is conducted outside the territory designated for sport and recreation (Jarovské arm). This is specified also in the Feasibility and efficiency study for D4 Bratislava Jarovce - Ivanka North - Stupava South - nat. border SK/A, on the page 20. Since there is an alternative option to options "E" and "C", not affecting the protected areas and Natura 2000 sites and this option was not equally reviewed, we believe that the assessment of environmental impacts in this case is not in accordance with Act 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, and Council Directive. 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. We request a comprehensive assessment of tunnel option (option "D"), the same as options "E" and "C" and completion of assessment for tunnel option. General comments on the Assessment Report for options "C" and "E": Annual comprehensive monitoring of biota inventory has not been carried out in the area. • Annual comprehensive monitoring of biota inventory - fauna, flora, habitats, has not been carried out in the area. The relevant chapters of the assessment report has been prepared based on literature data, the authors knowledge of the relevant chapters and field survey for a short period of the year. It is surprising that at such a significant investment the annual comprehensive monitoring and inventory of protected species of plants, animals, species and habitats covered by the protection of national protected areas and species and habitats covered by the protection area of Natura 2000 network has not been carried out. - The methods used do not allow to capture all significant plant and animal species that occur in a given area and can be existentially threatened by the construction of the highway. - Based on incomplete input data it is impossible to make qualified and relevant impact assessment on biota and protected species Compensatory measures are inadequate  According to the European Council Directive 92/43/EEC (Article 6, par. 4): "If, despite the negative assessment of the implications for the site and the absence of alternative solutions, the plan or project must be implemented for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including social and economic reasons, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure the overall coherence of Natura 2000. The Commission shall be informed of the compensatory measures adopted.  The proposed compensatory measures are confined to the corridor itself and technical body of the highway (noise barriers, the height of pylons, etc.). These measures are right but not sufficient!  Besides these measures, the assessment report does not provide practically no other action to improve the status of protected areas and natural elements beyond the current master plan.  Such a huge impact on the locality as the construction of D4 will cause direct occupation of protected areas, fragmentation and indirect destruction of the conditions of occurrence and successful existence of protected species even at a considerable distance from the highway - by the destruction of feeding sites, resting places, meeting points and 60

wintering grounds, noise, light pollution (to some extent even by applying technical measures of various protective walls), flight barrier etc. There will be significant damage to the ecological functions of the territory as Jarovské arm. Biskupické arm, creek on the left bank of the Danube, affected vegetation of floodplain forests and the Danube itself.  It is therefore necessary to supplement the compensatory measures by concrete measures to improve the ecological functions of adjacent protected areas of the Danube floodplains - recovery and achievement of favourable status of natural habitats, improvement in water regime, flowing and revitalization of river branches, etc. General, less practical and insufficiently developed compensatory measures:  insufficiently specified location and characteristics of the proposed ecoducts. Due to the barrier impact of the proposed activity on the supra-regional bio-corridor it is needed to design effective compensatory measures which could significantly alleviate the barrier effect of the D4 highway. This goal can only be met by precise selection of highway section for implementation of eco-ducts and by appropriate technical solution according to the models from abroad (i.e. sufficient width of ecoducts, noise abatement, feeders and so on.). These measures are not in the Assessment Report elaborated using sufficient extent.  In part IV. Measures designed to prevent, eliminate, minimize and offset the impacts of the proposed activity on the environment and health, p. 168, it is recommended for compensation of the negative impacts of the proposed activity on the protected areas to implement more of the following measures: - Expansion of forest area in the vicinity of the planned highway on the left bank of the Danube in the area Biskupické floodplain forests. - Forest habitats destroyed and mutilated during construction and operation of the highway are to be reforested in areas intended for this purpose in the Master plan of Bratislava and in the documentation for nature conservation (TSES project). When reforesting, to use only native tree species. - Creating meadows by grassing arable land in PWMA Danube floodplains or areas within 1 km of its border. The measure aims to create substitute food and nesting habitats for the selected species. - Creating (restoring) wetlands by watering (water system recovery) depressions of the former Danube arms. The measure aims to create substitute food and nesting habitats for the selected species. In the right-bank Danube inundation it is recommended to implement the measures in the depressions backfilled by construction waste (NR Starý háj, surrounding of Ovsištské arm). Following the disposal of this waste the water areas have been restored which would partly replace the localities affected by the construction. In the left-bank part of the PWMA Danube floodplains it is recommended to implement rehabilitation of former arms in Biskupické floodplains. This part suggests in terms of nature conservation very important measures. In this form, the proposed measures are too general, non-specific and non-binding and therefore there is a reason to believe that they will never be implemented in practice. We want to keep and work out in detail all the points to specific dimensions and localizations. We require to state specific measurable outcomes of the proposed measures, e.g. create min. 50 ha of permanent grasslands in specific locations and cadastral areas, to plant min. 250 ha of forest and to restore habitats of European importance 91F0 Riparian oak-elm-ash forests around lowland rivers and 91E0 * Alluvial willow-poplar and alder forests. Within the rehabilitation of former arms in Biskupické floodplains, we require to resolve and implement revitalization of Biskupické arm which will be directly affected by the construction of option E. With the revitalization of Biskupické arm we require to solve the direct connection of the arm to the Danube by the construction of a structure over the left-hand flood protection embankment. Along with the revitalization of Biskupické arm and its recovery by water directly from the 61

Danube, it is necessary to consider the possibility of revitalization and connection of other fragments of the Danube arms in , Dunajská Lužná etc.. We recall that according to § 28, par. 3, 4 of Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, "the entrepreneur" and legal entity are obliged at their own cost to design and implement measures leading to a return of damaged or destroyed habitats of European importance or species habitats of European importance and perform them before undertaking the activity which will damage or destroy them. Comment on routing of option "E" (green): The recommended option E is at 5 - 7 k m closer to the edge of forests and boundaries of protected area. In terms of nature conservation, it is desirable that the highway route passes as far from the border of forests and protected area as possible, i.e. passing forward, and Ketelec EI would be shifted more to the south. Summary We conclude that the environmental impact assessment of the D4 highway Bratislava Jarovce -Ivanka north is deemed insufficient. In particular, we require equal and comprehensive environmental assessment of the tunnel option (option "D"). Designed and assessed options represent a significant barrier element in the territory of a coherent network of protected areas NATURA 2000 and do not comply with Directive 92/43/EEC, as in the evaluation process, there is also an alternative that does not negatively interfere with elements of the NATURA 2000. We would like to highlight in particular the contrary to European legislation. By breaching or bypassing the Directive, the Slovak Republic takes on the risk of sanctions, which may in the future greatly complicate the construction of highway and greatly disrupt time and financial plan for implementation. We also request to complement and develop compensatory measures and their implementation before the implementation itself of the highway, in compliance with Act 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, as well as with the Council Directive no. 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Hunting Association the Danube, JUDr. Jozef Gaisbacher, (letter of 16 July 2010) HA Danube, whose members are engaged in hunting law enforcement on hunting lands, part of which will be used by D4 highway, recommends to follow option E-green during the construction of the road. Slovnaft a.s., Member of MOL, (letter of 4 August 2010,no. 62310/2010/1281) Sent the following opinion: Two options have been submitted for routing of D4, option "C" - red and option "E" - green. Option "C" red area is in the area of city district routed south of Ketelec (in accordance with city MP) and option "E" green is routed north of Lieskovec. After consideration of the above plan, SLOVNAFT a.s. prefers and supports the "red C" option of D4 routing for the following reasons: • "C" option is not in collision with the protection zone around Slovnaft (PZ), routing of D4 under green option "E" extends into the PZ, even in the I. and II. PZ, that is a risk of safety, • routing under "E" option is in collision with the upcoming development projects of Slovnaft a.s., the route extends into land reserve of VN route (Energy Corridor), • Route D4 according to the "C" option is in accordance with the Master Plan of Bratislava. Within the draft of the land use of Lieskovec - Ketelec it is recommended to solve traffic connection from D4 and to D4 and also from R7 and to R7 by means of e.g. two junction bidirectional branches. Holcim, a.s., producer of concrete and aggregates, Rohožník (letter of 9 August 2010) As a business entity in the mining and processing of gravel in the territory, used locally as building material for the construction of D4 respectively R7, but primarily as the owner of the lands of about 44 ha in the affected area and in relation to future land use prepared in cooperation with the city district and other owners and businesses in the area the "Urban study of Podunajské Biskupice -

62

Lieskovec - Ketelec", knowing well conditions in the area, we see more favourable option "C" (red) for the construction of D4 highway. It also agrees with the requirement of Podunajské Biskupice - we see the need within the construction of D4 and R7 to relieve the Svornosti street by diverting at least a portion of the heavy traffic behind Slovnaft to the southern gate and also the rest of the traffic from this territory and by solving the traffic connection of the road in response to the upcoming road D4 and R7. Klára Hornišová, Lipského 11, 841 01 Bratislava Ms Hornišová in her opinion strongly disagrees with the way of the development of society and bases her opinion on the development of public transport compared to passenger cars and houses outside the city and also requires measures that penalize possession and use of cars and promote public transport. Then it would not be necessary to build highways and airports. Then she notes that the assessment report does not address the requirements to eliminate excessive traffic and insists that her observations are justified. Then she notes that the assessment report is flawed, incomplete and the evaluation of biota is quite inadequate and does not sufficiently deals with the questions of burdens of protected areas by lighting, noise, chemical pollution and possible accidents. Ing. Róbert Porubčan, Puškinova 19, 900 28 Ivanka pri Dunaji (letter of 29 July 2010) Assessment report sent on 28 June 2010 does not reflect my earlier comments and on the contrary, it pushes the proposed solution of highway in contact with Ivanka pri Dunaji to the position with significantly worse impacts on the population of Ivanka pri Dunaji. The submitted immission study takes no account of the concurrence of emissions from other local sources, it is only a theoretical essay without relation to a specific situation. In particular, the immission study around Ivanka pri Dunaji does not deal with influence of the airport. Although the text clearly describes the plan to build a parallel runway VPD 13L -3 IR closer to the territory of Ivanka, the immission study ignores old or newly projected runway in terms of production of gaseous emissions and noise. The solution that you sent me with a covering letter dated 28 June 2010, responding to my comments making wrong version even worse, which directly foresees exemptions from the protection zones of VPD 04-22. After the above exemptions the highway will be in contact with Ivanka routed so that it does not go below the ground level, but rather on the embankment, which will significantly increase and support the effect of emissions, in particular noise, on the habitability of Ivanka pri Dunaji. Your approach is a blatant example of how to enforce the worst solution for the population concerned by successive amendments, while the majority of the population does not have the time or skills to study dozens of pages of projects in which these substantial amendments are incorporated only in a few sentences. It is striking that the immission study is being signed by someone who intentionally does not count with the superposition and interference by substantial existing source of emissions and noise as the airport is (page 5, par. 2 emission study). Calculation of noise contours of permissible level of LAeq is transferred to a line source so as not precluding any interference with the existing noise from airfields and hangars. No existing frequency spectra of noise, no mention of the current contours, no dynamic sources of noise, no vectors, nothing of the important parameters is not involved in your study. Really every one of affected experts believes that even in the future he will not be punished for his intentional "contribution" to the environment? Obviously, after construction of the highway the possible breach of hygiene standards will not give rise to the change of the route, but in this case that excess is obvious already now, in design phase. Calculation of emissions and noise according to your studies would be correct only if you cancel the airport. The reason why the increase of the dynamic noise source is not taken into account can also be that your noise experts cannot compile an acceptable dynamic model, but personally I think it is only a intentional calculation with previously desired result. I strongly protest against this practice and ask for a study that evaluates the impact of the highway in the real environment.

63

At the same time I also request under previous drafts that highway along the length of contact with Ivanka pri Dunaji was routed not on the embankment, but in the tunnel body, where it is possible to reliably solve the problems of noise around. If you identify problems with tunnel in close proximity of Šúrsky channel, change the route. Taking into account the projected elementary expertise of designers it seems to me that they must have realised at first proposal that the tunnel with profile below the ground level of Šúrsky channel will be technically problematic. Majority of the population of Ivanka was initially satisfied with the fact that the highway will be in contact with the community, led by the tunnel body. But now there is a change of which you became familiar based on distribution list by seven individuals (two from Ivanka pri Dunaji) The noise study annexed to the present assessment report is the original noise study, which considered tunnels in the protection zone of runways. Page 5 directly indicates "at 21.140 to 21.150 km the route is led in the tunnel." This figure does not correspond with your report from the end of June 2010. The noise study concerns a completely different arrangement (tunnels) than you actually describe in the report (embankments). Such misleading can be consider directly the procedure involving the signs of fraud. In addition it is also clear that no one is willing to take personal responsibility if after construction of the highway it is demonstrated already obvious fact that the noise and emission study does not reflect the real conditions. I also propose that the calculations of noise contours of permissible level introduce real measured values from the measurements of runway VPD 13-31 at the appropriate distance, which will later be for the runway 13L - 3IR from the highway. Also, it seems to me that if the result of the noise study analyzing actual parameters will indicate exceeding the permissible noise exposure, it is necessary to review the routing from the beginning. Construction of the highway should not be the result of enforcement power approaches, but the result of a technical dialogue, which obviously in this case is absent, as even after the hundreds of pages of text your experts did not note and report in several places (including the cover letter) the name of Ivanka pri Dunaji with a long "a". Mgr. Ivana Číkova, Pri zrube 17, 831 07 Bratislava, (letter of 29 July 2010) Ms. Číková in her opinion on the assessment report expressed as follows (verbatim): In introduction, she explains what according to Act 24/2006 Coll. means the public. Then she states: Having noted the relevant documents, I came to the following view: I. Under § 34 par. 2 of Act no. 24/2006 Coll. the affected municipalities in cooperation with the claimant are to ensure public hearing on the proposed activity. Probably not all the affected municipalities provided such public hearing II. The procedure in evaluation of environmental impacts in case of D4 Jarovce - Ivanka is considered as shredding of the plan and shredding of the impact assessment III. CEPIT and the planned construction at the airport in Vajnory are developer´s projects focused on profit for the groups that are associated with them. Development is only better- sounding term for trafficking of real estate. Both of these plans are in direct conflict with the definition of territorial development, as set out in the Building Act. The same applies also to D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north and Ivanka north - Stupava - see for example text in the assessment report - purpose of D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north. This part of the assessment report - the purpose of D4 contains arguments which I consider to be false and this part also includes very inappropriate phrases in view of the fact that D4 highway / impacts induced / would in the case of its implementation directly threaten and damage the health of people in the affected territory, it would further destroy, damage and threaten habitats of the territories belonging, inter alia, in the Natura 2000 network as well as drinking water sources and in direct causal link with D4 it would kill animals, including protected species. IV. The planned D4 routing of the section D4 Jarovce - Ivanka and also Ivanka - Stupava is inappropriate and in case of its implementation drivers using the highway would be forced to ride unnecessary kilometers, because they would be forced to pass through the artificially extended

64

D4 highway route. Due to the expected volume of traffic on D4 it should probably be daily wasted thousands to tens of thousands kilometers and the associated noise and emissions. V. The planned D4 routing of the section D4 Jarovce - Ivanka and also Ivanka - Stupava is inappropriate and in case of its implementation drivers using the highway would be forced to ride unnecessary kilometers, because they would be forced to pass through the artificially extended D4 highway route. Due to the expected volume of traffic on D4 it should probably be daily wasted thousands to tens of thousands kilometres and the associated noise and emissions. Besides, given the fact that D4 is planned in the area which is not appropriate to build and operate the highway. The above states / in particular paragraph III./ that D4 Jarovce-Ivanka north and Ivanka north - Stupava in the case of its implementation would not address the unfavourable traffic situation in Bratislava, but would increase traffic flow in the affected area. Unfavourable traffic situation especially during rush hour in Bratislava is mainly caused by improper urbanization of Bratislava and the poor condition of public transport. VI. The area affected by D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north and its negative impacts involves particularly special protected areas: NR Gajc NATURA 2000 SKUEV 0295 Biskupické floodplains NATURA 2000 PWMA Danube floodplains Ramsar site of Danube floodplains PLA Danube floodplains, important bio-corridors, PWMA Rye Island. Both options of D4 highway Jarovce - Ivanka pass through Natura 2000 Biskupické floodplains. This area of NATURA 2000 involves the priority habitats such as: Pannonian and Carpathian oak - hornbeam forests /91GO/ -thermophilic Pannonian oak forests / 91HO / In addition to these priority habitats there are priority habitats of willow-poplar lowland woods / 91EO / in the affected area. D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north, in the event of its implementation, would have a significant negative impact on NATURA 2000 site with priority habitats and the highway does not meet one of the reasons listed exhaustively in accordance with § 38 par. 4, second sentence of Act no. 24/2006 Coll. so it can be authorized. According to Art. 103 of the EC Treaty preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, including the protection of habitats and of wild fauna and flora are an essential objective of general interest pursued by the European Community. Public interest, the supreme public interest in this case is the protection of natural areas, where there are priority habitats, protection of water resources and human health. D4 highway can be conducted by another route so that this highway and negative impacts of the construction and operation do not threaten, destroy and damage the specially protected natural areas, water resources and residential areas. VII. Negative impacts caused by D4 Jarovce -Ivanka North /by both options/ which act in the affected area are mainly (the writer listed all the negative impacts of road traffic and the impact on human health of the air) ozone, high temperatures, carbon monoxide, etc. , The route of D4 Jarovce - Ivanka and Ivanka -Stupava is, moreover, contrary to: - Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds - Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of habitats, wildlife of fauna and flora. Several of the above mentioned negative impacts were not considered in the assessment report and some of the negative impacts mentioned in the assessment report are underestimated. Such a procedure for impact assessment could result in circumvention of § 38 par. 4, second sentence of Act no. 24/2006 Coll. VIII. Furthermore, the writer disputes the legality of the following documents:  D4 route so-called a zero circuit of Bratislava - crossing with D2 Jarovce - crossing with D1 Ivanka pri Dunaji - crossing with the road II/502 - crossing with road I/2 - crossing with D2 Stupava south - state border SR/Austria/ hereinafter Jarovce - Ivanka - Stupava  Government Resolution no. 1084/2007  Operational Programme Transport 2007-2013- version that was approved by Government 65

Resolution no. 1007 of 6 December 2006,  Program of preparation and construction of highways and expressways for 2007-2010,  to which the Government Resolution no. 1084/2007 dated 19 December 2007 was adopted  Government Resolution no. 1007/2006 approving the Operational Programme Transport 2007- 2013 IX. Given that D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north, in the event of its implementation, had a significant negative impact on the specially protected natural areas of NATURA 2000 where there are priority habitats, threatened and damaged water resources and given the fact that the route of the highway was not approved in accordance with the relevant legislation, I propose that the Ministry of Environment or entity exercising jurisdiction and obligations of this ministry, in its final opinion on the highway D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north not to recommend the implementation of the D4 highway Jarovce - Ivanka north. Otherwise, it would be possible to consider action of the administrative authority as assisting in evading § 38 par. 4, second sentence of Act no. 24/2006 Coll. and subject to certain assumptions it could lead to fulfilment of the fact of obstruction to the role by public official under Criminal law. Municipal Commission of SZOPK, Bratislava (letter of 31 July 2010) It states the following - the option of crossing the Danube via tunnel was not sufficiently proven in the Assessment report, while the tunnel option means an alternative. According to § 28 par. 1 of Act 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, the aim of Natura 2000 is to maintain the favourable conservation status of habitats of European importance and the favourable conservation status of species of European importance. The activity that may affect either alone or in combination with other activities the territories belonging to the European system of protected areas will be issued by the state administration body a decision on the authorization of such activity only when such activity based on the result of the assessments under a separate regulation would not affect the favourable conservation status of that territory in terms of protection (par. 2). If there are no alternative solutions within negatively impact assessment, the activity can take place only in the public interest. It requires a comprehensive assessment of the tunnel option. It further states that the annual comprehensive monitoring and inventory of biota was not carried out in the area and compensatory measures are general, little specific and insufficiently developed. Finally, it states that compensatory measures are also important from the perspective of the European Union, which could, in the absence of such data in the future make the allocation of funds more difficult.

Opinions and minutes of the discussions during the preparation of expert opinion and Final opinion on the Assessment Report:

Letter of the Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Regional Development, dated 02 August 2010, no. 318/2010-3.4/ml., addressed to NDS, a.s. to complement the Assessment Report. By letter dated 27 July 2010 the Bratislava Regional Protection Association, Bratislava sent to the Ministry of Agriculture, Environment and Regional Development of the Slovak Republic, Department of evaluation and assessment of environmental impacts, an opinion on the proposed activity of D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka north under Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on the Environmental impact assessment and on amendments to certain laws. The letter identified a number of reservations about the contents of the assessment report. We ask you to complement the Assessment Report as required by the letter writer, or for an opinion on the objections of the writer. Answer of NDS a.s. to the opinion of BROZ, dated 09 September 2010 under no. 66

30101/33978/2010 After studying the comments of BROZ we are sending you the following opinion: After the development of highway construction plan, the requirement of BROZ to complement an option of the highway route with a tunnel under the Danube was accepted. Given the request, but also others in related D4 sections (new option of Senec - Pezinok - Lozorno, tunnel under the Morava and others), NDS was to ensure before drawing up the assessment report the technical file that will enable responsible assessment of options provided for in the Scope of assessment issued by the Ministry of Environment. For this purpose, the Feasibility and effectiveness study of the entire highway route D4 Jarovce - Ivanka - Záh. Bystrica - Devinska Nova Ves - state border SR/A has been developed. This documentation has been developed as a basis for the assessment report of the environmental impacts for all sections of the D4 highway. The conclusions of this study related to technical solution (technical and economic demands of individual options) and the results and recommendations for efficiency and implementation of individual buildings are incorporated in assessment reports of individual sections of the D4 highway. The Scope of the assessment imposed on the claimant to prove the possibility of technical solution of tunnel option under the Danube. This requirement has been satisfied in the Feasibility and effectiveness study. Following the submission of the action plan of D4 Jarovce - Ivanka, MoE by letter no. 5487/08- 3.4/ml of 19 April 2008 ordered pursuant to § 30 of Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on the environmental impact assessment and on amendments to certain laws, the scope of the proposed activity as follows: For further more detailed assessment of the impact of the proposed activity" ""D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North" it is indicated besides the zero option (situation that would arise if the proposed activity is not carried out) also the following options: 0 to 12 km - red option assessed in the plan considering the possibility of routing under the Danube. 12 to 20 km - purple option with modifications, which will represent a compromise taking into account comments from authorities, organizations and communities in the affected region. Prepare maps in the scale of 1: 5000 20 km until the connection to the D1 highway - red option assessed in the plan. For the problematic section of 0-12 km which passes through protected areas, not only of national but also European importance, an alternative proposal of the D4 routing via tunnel under the Danube was elaborated in the Feasibility and effectiveness study as option "D", which can be considered an alternative solution eliminating the negative impact of the highway on the favourable conservation status of habitats and species of European importance of surface options (bridging of protected areas). We agree with the statement that the tunnel option is an alternative that does not interfere respectively minimally hits the protected areas, but its technical and economic evaluation of a proven negative impacts on other components of the environment, including health are so fundamental to unequivocally excluding this alternative, which was sufficiently assessed in the Feasibility and effectiveness study. The requirement for considering the possibility of highway routing under the Danube was met by the claimant by preparing the Feasibility and efficiency study, including a comparison with surface options and therefore it was not necessary to further consider tunnel option in the assessment report. Scope of Assessment requirement was also met in the assessment report, where in Chapter II.8 Part A essentially a "review" of the possibility of highway routing via tunnel under the Danube is processed with reference to the relevant initial documentation (The Feasibility study). Therefore, we did not state any information in the assessment report that has been processed in the

67

Feasibility and effectiveness study with the fact that this documentation is available at the claimant, at the Ministry of Environment and anyone at any time can study this documentation as supplementary material for the Assessment report. To complement the data that might not have been clearly highlighted in the Assessment Report, it should be noted that in terms of implementation of the investment it is crucial to make the economic evaluation of the proposed options (see the Feasibility study - Economic evaluation), where one of the key indicators is the degree of profitability (internal rate of return in percent IRR), the value of which for the tunnel option "D" was 3.8%. If that value is compared with a reference rate according to "Guidelines to cost-benefit analysis" that is at least 5%, it is clear that, at a given interest rate environment, the proposed investment (tunnel option) is unprofitable. Thus, the tunnel under the Danube could be built only when achieving a minimum efficiency of investment, which is expected after 2040. Therefore, the proposed activity in the tunnel option was excluded by the investor and in terms of environmental impact he considered economically effective options (surface viaduct options "C" and "E"), which is also in line with the Scope of the evaluation. In view of the current state of traffic volume on the existing road network and the expected traffic forecast in the area it is necessary to envisage the construction and commissioning of the D4 highway as soon as possible. The current analysis of traffic volume clearly demonstrates the need to address the alarming traffic conditions by excluding purely transit traffic of the road network in the capital city of Slovakia, relief of Bratislava road system and a redistribution of traffic entering the city. Estimated traffic forecast reflecting the strong development potential of the entire catchment area of Bratislava directly linked to the suburban districts and surrounding villages demonstrated the need to build the D4 highway, because within the projection period due to the enormous capacity excess of basic road system in the area will cause formation of long-term traffic congestions and subsequent collapse of transport. Additional comments may be put as follows:  The annual comprehensive monitoring and inventory of biota will be carried out, with which we totally agree, but this requirement was not involved in the Scope of the assessment and, hopefully, will be still up to date after the final determination of the highway route.  Final opinion on the proposed activity may oblige the investor in the next preparation of the construction to implement the annual monitoring of biota and "Inventory and social assessment of habitats of European and national importance" is according to TP-03/2006 MDPT SR part of the next stage of project documentation - documentation for zoning permit (DZP) to be established for the final option of the highway.  Location of the designed ecoducts is clearly specified in measures, their detailed solution will be processed under the measurement of the area in the next stage of the project documentation (DZP).  Compensatory measures can be optimized and complement to the requirements of the final opinion on the basis of substantiated opinions to be evaluated in the opinion. We proposed in collaboration with experts the measures in the Assessment Report that we consider sufficient within the highway. Other measures proposed by you are beyond the scope of the investor at this stage of preparing the construction when it is not clear which option will be recommended (afforestation of 250 hectares, grassing of 50 ha, restoration of Biskupické arm etc.). These measures can not be solved without the participation of the relevant authorities, organizations and municipalities because they interfere considerably in their master plans outside the highway area and into the lands owned by various entities that are not affected by the construction of highway. Due to our explanation that all comments made in the opinion of BROZ can be addressed in the next stage of project documentation, when the final option of the highway is to be known, we

68 consider the completion of the report at this stage of the technical documentation unjustified and unnecessary. In conclusion, it is possible to discuss whether the proposed activity is contrary to EU legislation, since the construction of the D4 highway in the section Jarovce - Ivanka north as soon as possible is in the public interest of the Slovak Republic as it will have an immediate and significant impact on improving the environment in the greater area of Bratislava immediately after commissioning. In terms of potential traffic collapse in Bratislava and it neighborhood it is an urgent need to resolve the situation. Construction of the tunnel option would to be eligible after 2040, which is in terms of human health risk significantly riskier than the fastest possible construction of surface options. They relate mainly to the possibility of flooding, which today is very topical issue. These arguments can be considered reasonable at the level of European legislation. Minutes of the working meeting dated 05 October 2010 Working meeting held by NDS, a.s, based on the comments of Protection Association BROZ on the tunnel option of D4 highway Jarovce - Ivanka north. The aim of the meeting was to agree the next steps of works - an explanation of the observations of BROZ, finalization of opinion, issuance of the final opinion (FO). Ing. Okuliarová, NDS, welcomed those present, explained the progress of work on the Plan, where within the Scope of the assessment (SA) it was requested in addition to the assessed option in the plan to make assessment of new, technically unsolved options. NDS provided the "Feasibility and effectiveness study of the D4 highway" where the original and new routes across the D4 highway section D4 have been studied. One of the new options included also considering the possibility of keeping the highway route under the Danube. Key comments of BROZ related to this option and the compensatory measures. RNDr. Kušík, BROZ, explained they have two main objections: 1. They require equal assessment of the tunnel under the Danube from an environmental point of view with other assessed options. 2. The proposed compensatory measures are deemed insufficient, unspecified - virtually. RNDR. Jakubis, Geoconsult - report processor : To point 1. Assessment report is prepared by scoping the assessment, which was intended to examine the possibility of the highway crossing under the Danube. This was proven in the Feasibility and effectiveness study, which was the technical basis for the report. The tunnel option was assessed: in terms of hydrogeology : - the need to develop technically demanding measures to avoid endangering the groundwater flow, - expanding groundwater level and thus threatening the municipalities by flood - flooding the tunnel would require building a gate for closing the tunnel in case of floods, etc. in terms of economy : - it is a costly structure, where according to rate of return (IRR = 3.8%) the tunnel would be profitable in 2040. Given this economic criterion the tunnel option was recommended to be implemented in the Feasibility Study. The assessment report considered options by the scope of the assessment as well as the conclusions of the Feasibility study. To point 2. The proposed measures will be set out for the final option. The annual monitoring before construction, during construction and the first year after the highway is put into operation (Act No.24/2006 Coll.) will be carried out. There will also be proposed compensatory measures. These and all other comments will be transferred to the final opinion requirements (e.g. monitoring bird area around the Jarovecké lake, closer specification of compensatory measures, 69 etc.) Ing. Polák, NDS : Ensuring annual monitoring of biota and bird area can be addressed in subsequent stages of project documentation. After one year of monitoring the motion of compensation measures may be specified according to the results of monitoring. After further discussion the present agreed on the following conclusions: 1. Observations of BROZ - on the equivalent environmental assessment of tunnel option with other options: the tunnel option is the most environmentally friendly - this also recognized in the Feasibility and effectiveness study. Its expected implementation, given the economic indicators, is minimal respectively the earliest time frame for implementation is in 2040. 2. The scope and specification of compensatory measures can be addressed in subsequent stages of project documentation. 3. Prior to the final decision, even before convening the relevant authorities and organizations to draft Final opinion, the claimant shall convene one more working meeting with the participation of Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport, BROZ, Municipality, Geoconsult, processor of opinion and NDS, a.s.

Minutes of the meeting held at the Ministry of Environment on 18 November 2010 on the opinion of BROZ, Bratislava In November 2010 BROZ sent an opinion proposing compensatory measures for intervention in the habitats. NDS, a.s., convened meeting on the proposal in order to agree fair compensation. The meeting was attended by representatives of the Ministry of Transport, Construction and RD SR, MoE, NDS, a.s., BROZ, City Hall of Bratislava, experts. Requirements of BROZ concerned - measures to improve the water regime (releasing the flow of Biskupice arm, releasing the flow and recovery of Starohájske arm, connection of Jarovecké arm system to Rusovecké arm and more) - planting new forests and new permanent grassland, - annual monitoring of the efficiency of measures. Minimum annual monitoring will be carried out with regard to the proposed compensatory measures and the output will be use to specify the target species and selected parameters of the compensatory measures (flow, water depth, the quality requirements of each species ...).

After the discussion of all stakeholders it was arrived to the following conclusions: Národná diaľničná spoločnosť, a.s. - shall ensure annual monitoring of biota in territories affected by the highway, - shall ensure the preparation of expert reports on legal options to address the required compensation. - following the expert opinion of the affected area by D4 highway route, NDS s.s shall proceed according to the Act no. 543/2002, § 28, par. 5-9. The working meeting held at the Ministry of Environment on 12 January 2011 on the draft final opinion emphasizing opinion of BROZ, Bratislava. During discussing the final opinion, BROZ again demanded to equally evaluate the tunnel option D under the Danube.

xxx Assessment Report – complement xxx

Opinions on the Assessment Report-complement, drawn up in April 2011

MTCRD SR, Section of road transport, roads and investment projects, Department of roads (letter dated 03 May 2011 under no. 01839/2011-SCDPKaIP /z.22090)

70

Processor of the complement to the assessment report developed a comprehensive assessment of the expected impacts of option D - tunnel on the environment and their assessment in terms of significance, and introduced measures to prevent, eliminate, minimize and offset the impacts of the proposed activity on the environment and health. Evaluation of option D was involved in the complement to the report, carried out by the method of value analysis. It has no substantive comments on submitted complement to the assessment report of option "D" tunnel". It agrees with the conclusions of the processor of the present complement to the assessment report. Based on the conclusions set out in chapter V. Comparison of options of the proposed activity and the proposal for optimal option, after comparing the options C, D and E in terms of technical and economic criteria, landscape-environmental, health and urban, it was recommended as the optimal option "E" in combination with option "C1" for further preparation. Supplemented option "D" - the tunnel is in terms of affecting the habitats of European importance and impacts on protected areas more favourable than the surface options, but has significantly less favourable expected impacts on the rock environment, surface and groundwater in the section of crossing the Danube via tunnel as well as significant impact on flood protection of the area. Based on a comprehensive assessment of the expected impacts in terms of their significance, as well as taking into account the financial and technical demands and the urgent need to continue the development and construction of the D4 highway, it does not recommend implementation of the tunnel option "D" of D4 highway in the section Jarovce - Ivanka north. Ministry of Environment, Department of state administration (letter dated 10 May 2011 under no. 5609 / 2011-2, 2228991/2011) After studying the submitted complement to the assessment report, we believe that the option D (tunnel) with the proposed mitigation measures is in terms of nature and landscape conservation the best option with the least negative impacts on nature conservation interests. The actual complement to the assessment report repeatedly states that the impacts of surface options (option "C" and "E") on protected areas and NATURA 2000 sites compared with subsurface option D are significantly less favourable. In this regard, we would like to draw attention to the need for compliance with § 38 par. 4 of the Act, and we believe that the proposed option "D" represents a solution with less adverse impacts on the integrity of the territory of the system of protected areas in therms of the objectives of protection. This opinion does not replace statements, permits, approvals and other decisions according to Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, and under other laws of general application. Ministry of Environment, Section of Geology and Natural Resources, Department of State geological report (letter dated 04 May 2011 under no. 27751/2011) 1. It recommends to accept the results referred to in hydrogeological assessment (GEOSPEKTRUM, s.r.o. Bratislava), which clearly indicates that subsurface option of highway routing is unfavourable due to direct intervention in the groundwater collector. The proposed building will call the changes that will affect its hydrological and hydraulic parameters. 2. According to the notice of the State Geological Institute of Dionýz Štúr as an authorized organization of the Ministry, according to the attached annex in scale 1: 50000 there are in the affected area of the structural design recorded unlisted minerals of " Podunajské Biskupice II, gravels and sands" (ANČETA, s.r.o. Bratislava). Ministry of Agriculture and RD SR (letter dated 03 May 2011 under no. 2339 / 3011-430) In terms of requirements for agricultural land use and forest land use it can be concluded that all three options are designed for the same land use, about 14 ha of agricultural land and about 43 ha of forest land. Following studying of the submitted plan documentation we do not recommend implementation of the tunnel option. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development considers that:

71

1. Risks of tunnel option in relation to g drinking water ground sources are incalculably greater than possible negative impacts of the proposed activity on birds, land use respectively impacts on other biota in the affected area. 2. The economic aspect and the speed of implementation of zero circuit of Bratislava, which includes the assessed plan is also one of the limiting elements of decision-making, which should be respected in the assessment process, 3 Even large structures, and not only in Slovakia, had in addition to long-lasting impacts on the landscape, by forming a new landscape landmark, almost always a positive impact on the environment (soil, water), and in particular due to the gradual return of the original habitats, respectively the emergence of new, in many cases unique habitats; this positive side is not generally, and also in this case, considered. The local Ministry recommends to implement the bridge E green option with the fact that lands temporarily excluded from agricultural land and forest land will be technically and biologically reclaimed and restored in performing their current functions after implementation of the proposed activities. This requirement is essential and we require to include it in terms of the final opinion. Ministry of Defence, Section of property and infrastructure (letter of 11 May 2011, No. SEMaI-34-171/2011) Ministry of Defence has no comments on the Assessment Report from the perspective of assessing expected impacts on the environment. It also asks to present the next stage of the project documentation. RÚVZ Bratislava, capital city (letter dated 06 May 2011 under no. HŽP/09226/2011) Sent t h e following o p i n i o n : In terms of health protection, I a g r e e with the assessment report pursuant to Act no. 24/2006 Coll. for activity of "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka north, complement of option D". Option "D" is considered useful for the protection of recreational area in the Danube inundation against noise, but risky in terms of protection of drinking water sources. Therefore, its implementation can not be accepted. Construction will be further assessed in the option in the context of land-use proceedings of public health authority by constitutional Act. no. 355/2007 Coll. and implementing regulations. At this stage, the detailed noise study shall demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed noise barriers. Bratislava self-government (letter dated 02 May 2011 under no. 6369/2011) Department of Regional Plan and Regional science in terms of land-use activities in relation to the Master plan of HTU Bratislava region notes a discrepancy of the proposed tunnel option with binding regulative of the HTU master plan in paragraph 5.16, proposing in the binding part routing of the D4 highway by bridging over the Danube. The Department of Transport does not agree with the linking of the Danube banks by tunnel option in terms of transport for the following reasons: - within the tunnel option, there are only 2 x 2 lanes without the possibility of future extension; - tunnel link will not enable routing cycling and walking between the two banks of the Danube and in recreational areas. Based on the above, Bratislava Region disagrees with the proposed tunnel option of D4 in section of Jarovce-Ivanka north. City district of Bratislava-Rusovce (letter dated 5 May 2010 no. MÚ/R-925-2/2011) CD Bratislava - Rusovce issues on the submitted option "D" this binding opinion: it disagrees with the submitted option "D", since its implementation could lead to possible contamination of groundwater and threat to Rusovce water source. We also recommend to implement option "E", as it is more preferred in terms of health impacts on the population, groundwater, water resources, land, impacts on the existing infrastructure and efficiency. The capital city of Slovakia, Bratislava (letter dated 10 May 2011 under no. MAGS OUP- 44186/11-264-406 OUP-366/11, K EIA no.34-10)

72

Sent the following opinion: 1 / In terms of urban planning: Assessment in relation to the LUD of capital city of SR Bratislava, 2007, as subsequently amended (the LUD): • Draft LUD plans to build zero circuit around the city. • Complement the Assessment report on the proposed activity is submitted for D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north in option D blue - tunnel and comparison of all the proposed options and evaluation of the optimal design for additional preparation. • According to guidelines of the first Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Transport, Construction and Regional Development Jan Figel it was intended to prepare R7 expressway in the section of Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná in option A red and not green, as stated in the Assessment report. The information concerning this change are set out in the present report complement. • In terms of urban planning we clearly prefer in dealing with the D4 highway and R7 expressway R7 the option, which is in line with the proposed zero circuit in the LUD of capital city of Bratislava, 2007. The tunnel option is not in accordance with LUD in terms of routing, as well as in technical design. In addressing the Danube bridging by highway and architecture of the structure itself of elevated roads it is recommended to make choices by the architectural competition. In terms of transport planning: It states the following to the submitted complement to the Assessment report: • the investment plan for highway construction in the section D4 Jarovce - Ivanka north (as a transport link of existing highway routes D1 and D2), the options "A" - purple and "B" - red were proposed for the development of plan by Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on environmental impact assessment • after commenting on documentation and pursuant to specific requirements in the scope of assessment, the D4 highway was technically redesigned in the Feasibility and effectiveness study (09/2009, Dopravoprojekt, a.s.) and subsequently there were identified for further consideration two new options "C" - red (modification of the original options "A "and" B ") and" E "- green, with alternative solution of Ivanka north interchange (D4 highway conducted under resp. over the D1 highway); we expressed our opinion to the Assessment report in 2010 • currently, the Assessment report is supplemented by complement of the solution for D4 highway in option "D" (tunnel option) and a comparison of all proposed options, including the optimal design; according to the conclusions from a comparison of the assessed options of D4 highway the recommended is option "E" - green with option "C1" at Ivanka - north interchange (D4 run over D1) • the complement already incorporates new information in connection with the planned R7 expressway (in relation to its intersection with D4), i.e. it is defined the new position connecting to "Ketelec" EI (option "A" according to plan "R7 - Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná"). Opinion: • In relation to LUD of Bratislava, 2007, as amended, design of D4 highway in option D is not consistent with the prospective solution of zero circuit, which does not consider the tunnel option of routing under the Danube. • Position and shape of "Rusovce" EI resulting from the tunnel option can not be considered definitive, since the draft does not respect the valid LUD and new transport hub is placed in a position in which LUD addresses the linking superior road network (road 1/2) with a network of prospective service roads in Petržalka -south. Conclusion - taking into account the significant contribution of highway to solution of traffic problems associated with transit traffic (currently burdening the city road) in terms

73

of transport planning with a proposed option D4 highway routing it agrees. We support the selecting and processing of this option, the preparation and subsequent implementation of which will be more efficient and faster. However, it is necessary to note investor about the fact that the solution to the highway route and its intersections that is different from the approach in the current land-use planning documentation, it is subject to the approval of the amendments. In terms of technical infrastructure systems - D4 highway tunnel option extends into PWMA Rye Island by its eastern part, in the western part from which Rusovce water resources are being supplied (municipality) and Rusovce - Ostrovné Lúčky - wetlands. The tunnel tubes and underground sealing walls at the portals will have a lasting impact on groundwater flow with the potential ability to threats to its quality. From this perspective, we assess option "D" as negative. 2 / In terms of selected components of the environment and specific factors greenery, landscaping: Air - Dispersion study (attached to the plan) confirmed compliance with the applicable emission limits for pollutants under the decree as well as for the least favourable dispersion and operating conditions. Water: • The proposed structure will imply the changes that will affect the hydrogeological and hydraulic conditions of watered collector, flow directions and velocity, or changes in groundwater quality. To carry out this construction it is required according to § 27 par. 1 b) of Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on Water, the consent of the State Water Authority (SWA). • The envisaged construction will be implemented in the PWMA Rye Island, where it is to observe the provisions of § 31, par. 2 of Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on Water: o (2) In the protected water management area it can plan and carry out an activity only if all-round protection of surface water and groundwater and protection of conditions of their formation, occurrence, natural water accumulation and renewal of stocks is guaranteed. • We note on the compliance with provisions of § 20, par. 8 f) of the Act no. 7/2010 Coll. on flood protection: o (8) It may be authorized transport buildings, facilities and installations that do not disturb surface water outlet, ice movement and that can not decrease the water quality in the inundation area. • To protect groundwater the option "D" is considered inappropriate, since it significantly affects the groundwater regime and in principle it can reduce its quality and the quality of water resources on important water management area of Rye Island. Soils: • For subsequent withdrawal of agricultural land (AL) under § 17 of Act no. 220/2004 Coll. on the protection and use of agricultural land, as amended, it shall require a decision on the withdrawal of agricultural land from the authority of AL protection. • The documentation provides abbreviations such as agricultural land fund (ALF) and forestland fund (FLF). According to current legislation these should be replaced by terms of agricultural land (AL) and forest land (FL). • Given the threat of soil pollution in winter maintenance of the road it should prefer materials for its maintenance, which represent the minimal risk of soil contamination and considering CFTVO Rye island that is passed by the proposed highway section. Waste - at this stage the comparability of options and in particular of option "D" with the tunnel solution is missing in terms of amount of waste produced during construction, since this number can not be specified at present. Nature and landscape protection, TSES, greenery: • The present option compared with option "C" (red) and "E" (green) is in interventions in protected areas more favourable, but its implementation has a significant impact on PWMA Rye Island, which is a reservoir of drinking water.

74

• When you select any option, it is necessary to fully implement all the measures mentioned in the assessment report before, during and after construction in order to ensure maximum protection of protected areas and their habitats and to minimize interference and impacts on them. • In terms of interventions in the green areas we consider all evaluated options, including tunnel option, in principle equivalent. • This opinion does not replace the binding opinion of Bratislava City on the investment activity, which will be issued under the laws of general application following the expert opinion on documentation for zoning permit. Milan Vtáčnik, Mayor Regional Office for Road Transport and Roads in Bratislava (letter of 27 April 2011, No. A/2011/01970/STE) No comments on the completed Assessment Report in terms of the interests pursued. Regional Environmental Office (letter dated 30 May 2011, no. ZPO/1162/2011 -svl) The original plan of the activity was dealing with highway section of Jarovce interchange to D2 - Ivanka-north interchange to Dl. There were two options proposed - option "A" red and option 'B' purple. They differed in the solution of the section from Rovinka intersection to Ivanka north interchange. In 2011, a complement to the Assessment report - option "D" - tunnel was submitted, developed probably due to the requirements of the "green public". After seeing the design of the technical solution it is obvious that tunnel boring represents on both sides of the Danube greater areal intervention in community of floodplain forests, than installing viaducts in option "E". For this reason, tunnel option is not optimal for nature and landscape conservation. In terms of water management, tunnel option would represent a significant intervention into the riverbed and strong impacts on groundwater flow, so therefore it can not be optimal. On this basis we maintain the position of 30 July 2010, when the Regional Environmental Office in Bratislava recommended the option "E" - green as optimal on the viaducts and that is again recommended. Regional Land Office, Bratislava (letter no. 611/110/2011 dated 12 May 2011) It recommends option E green. Option D is not recommended because of greater negative impacts on agricultural land in relation to the ground supply of drinking water and on other biota as a whole. District Office for Road Transport and Roads in Senec (letter of 27 May 2010, No. S/2011/00734) No comments on the completed Assessment Report in terms of the interests pursued. District Environmental Office in Bratislava (letter of 5 May 2011, no. ZPO/2011/03126- 8/ANJ/BA II III IV) Waste management authority In terms of waste management it has no objections to the submitted complement to the Assessment Report. Air protection authority The source of air pollution will be in option D mainly construction machinery in construction yards, transport of materials on the access roads within the structure operation and in the site itself. The proposed structure is not a point source of air pollution, during the execution of the construction it will act as an air pollution source. The Department of Air protection has the following comment on the papers: a negative impact on air quality during construction to be eliminated by measures to reduce dust, appropriate organization of work and optimization of access roads to the construction site. Cross-cutting environmental activities unit In terms of preventing major industrial accidents agrees without any comments. Water Management Authority

75

In terms of State water management: Water resources and the need for maintenance and fire water main in the tunnel is not considered in the submitted documentation. D4 will have highway sewerage with oil separators and pumping stations. Rainwater will be after pre-treatment in oil separators discharged into watercourses or into infiltration. In terms of state water management we have submitted the following comments on the report: During construction of sealed pits and tunnels of such an extent there is a significant risk of contamination of the rock environment and groundwater by suspensions of chemical injection and oil substances. Diaphragm walls and tunnels affecting up to Neogene will be a permanent barrier to groundwater flow. The tunnel is routed over the Water Management Protected Area of Rye Island and over Rusovce water resource and Rusovce-Ostrovné Lúčky-wetlands water resources, which are directly threatened by construction activities and built construction. When installing bridges and building temporary portals for tunnel boring it will have an adverse impacts on watercourses. Subway below the Danube and flood protection dykes may induce alterations in hydrogeological groundwater regime with consequences on flows. During construction the tunnel will form preferred way to water into inundations during flood conditions. Given that the construction will directly threaten the watered collector that serves as a reservoir of drinking water, and regarding the negative hydrogeological report we disagree with the assessment report on tunnel option "D" for the protection of water conditions. As the area administrator and flows administrator, SVP, OZ Bratislava has to make opinion to the assessment report. In terms of state water management authority, the competent authority of the state water management for structures and activities in inundation area of the Danube is the Department of SWM of Regional Environmental Office in Bratislava. Nature and landscape protection authority In option "D" the area is only partially affected by interference in the forests and ecologically important segments of the landscape, while it will cause also local deforestation. According to the report submitted, the protected areas are affected by option D as follows: - protected landscape area of Danube floodplains: direct engagement of the protected area, a direct effect of noise and lighting - Nature reserve Gajc: outside the protected area, the direct impact of noise and lighting - Nature reserve Kopáč Island: outside the protected area, the direct impact of noise and lighting - Nature reserve Topoľové hony: outside the protected area, the direct impact of noise and lighting - areas of Community importance of Biskupické floodplains: direct engagement of the protected area, a direct effect of noise and lighting - protected bird area of Danube floodplains: direct engagement of the protected area, a direct effect of noise and lighting (section of the notch) - PWMA Sysľovské fields: outside the protected area, the direct impact of noise and lighting - Ramsar site of Danube floodplains: direct engagement of the protected area, a direct effect of noise and lighting - NR Danube islands and UEV Ostrovné lúčky are not affected by the direct land use and are also outside the influence of noise and lighting Estimated impact on flora, fauna and their habitats, protected areas, TSES and landscape image in comparing option D with options C and E: more positive impacts of option 'D' compared to options "C" and "E":  no attack on habitats of European importance  lower use of PWMA Danube floodplains and insignificant effect on migration of birds in 76

this PWMA  lower risk of contact with animals that is likely only in sections guided on the surface  lower impact of noise and glare and the resulting shorter length of the proposed multi- functional screens  less extensive tree felling  significantly smaller occupation of protected areas (26.25 ha), surface options 30.76 ha  lower impact on the national bio-centre of Bratislava floodplains  positive impact on the landscape image, compared to viaduct options "C" and "E" more negative impacts of option 'D' compared to options "C" and "E":  grooving sections of the entrance and exit of the tunnel will form a permanent obstacle in the whole section, while in option "C" and "E" only in places of pillars, the remaining part will be unobstructed  the possibility of adverse indirect impact on flora and fauna of protected areas as a result of significant impact of option "D" on surface water and substantially greater impact on groundwater (potential threat to water quality in the establishment of a temporary portal for tunnel boring and anticipated changes in groundwater flow by building a tunnel and sealing baths with potential fluctuations in groundwater levels, affecting concerned vegetation). These facts were also reflected in the evaluation of the impact on biota when comparing options of the proposed activity option "D" was evaluated clearly as the most appropriate (taking into account the impact on animals by action of stress factors during construction and operation, impact on flora by forest land use and tree and shrub vegetation growing outside the forest, area of direct occupation of habitats of European importance, impact on protected areas and NATURA 2000 sites under the direct occupation of the different protected areas and impact on TSES by the length of the route in the national bio-centre of Bratislava floodplains). The overall assessment of the group of landscape criteria (groundwater, water resources, land use and biota) the most acceptable is option D. After studying the submitted report, the Department of nature protection, in conformity with the opinion of the professional organization of State Nature Protection, Regional Centre for Nature and Landscape Protection in Bratislava (SOP) recommends the tunnel option, while the SNC, if implemented this option, proposes to extend the tunnel on the left bank of the Danube, so that its portal is to be located outside protected areas, including forest lands (the present report in the measures for nature protection from the adverse effects of construction and operation of highway proposes an extension of the bored tunnel until about 5.3 km - shift of temporary portal for boring from 4.72 to about 5.3 km). For completeness, it should be noted the information from Chapter 17. Spatial synthesis of the impacts of the activity in the area, according to which the evaluation does not consider the emergency situations. Final summary In terms of environmental concerns within the scope of Regional Environmental Office in Bratislava in the Section of waste management and in terms of prevention of major industrial accidents, has no comments on the complement to the Assessment Report "section Jarovce - Ivanka north, supplement of option D". The nature and landscape protection authority prefers option "D" - tunnel as the most environmentally friendly, while the SNC, if implemented, proposes to extend the tunnel on the left bank of the Danube, so that its portal was located outside protected areas, including forest land. On the other hand, given that the construction will directly threaten the watered collector that serves as a reservoir of drinking water, and regarding the negative hydrogeological report we disagree with the assessment report on tunnel option "D" for the protection of water conditions. Observations of nature conservation authority and water management authority shall be respected, assessed and taken into account along with the comments of the air protection 77 authority in preparing the final opinion from the assessment of the proposed activity and in determining the conditions under which the activity is allowed and implemented. District Environmental Office in Senec (letter of 06 May 2011, No. ŽP/EIA/910/11-Vi) Sent the following opinion: Section of state water management Given that the interest area is in protected water management area of Rye island where any activity can be carried out only by ensuring all-round protection of surface and groundwater and the production, transport and other interests must comply with the above requirements in the processing concept of territorial development and land use documentation, it does not recommend option "D" - tunnel. This option is a risk from the hydrogeological point of view for the most negative impact of construction on the groundwater regime. Section of Nature and landscape protection In terms of the interests protected by the Act. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, the most optimal is option "D" - tunnel. In terms of offsetting complex impact on all components of the environment we recommend option "E" green combined with option "C1" of Ivanka - north intersection. Section of state administration of air protection All three proposed options are feasible, it recommends option "E" as the most optimal. Final summary District Environmental Office in Senec recommends to carry out the route in option "E" green combined with the option "Cl" in relation to the submitted assessment report - supplement of option "D". District Office for Road Transport and Roads in Bratislava (letter of 02 May 2011, No. B/2011/04356/JTA) No further requirements for the complement to the assessment report. Slovak State Nature Conservation (letter dated 06 May 2011, No. ŠOP SR/1622/2011) Assessment of the area of nature conservation For the benefit of nature and landscape protection, the highway section crossing the Danube River and its inundation area is crucial. Several protected areas (of national and European importance) that are found in this area, tell about its particular relevance:  Protected landscape area of Danube floodplains (2nd degree of protection)  Ramsar site of Danube floodplains  Protected bird area of Danube floodplains  Site of Community importance of Biskupické floodplains  Nature Reserve Gajc (4th degree of protection). Those protected areas are indirectly affected by the proposed option "D", but to a much lesser extent than by options assessed in the Assessment report. The exception is the NR Gajc which is not directly intervened by the route, but it is routed in the immediate vicinity. The highway crosses the National bio-centre of Bratislava floodplains and provincial bio- corridor Danube (RTSES of Bratislava, SEA 1994 and RTSES Features update of Bratislava, SEA 2005). Evaluation of the Assessment report in terms of nature conservation Presented complement to AR contains information vital to the protection of nature and landscape, impact assessment on protected areas and mitigation measures. For the selection of the optimal option, there were five sub-criteria included in biota criteria, which had to be divided into at least three separate criteria:  biota (fauna, flora, possibly habitats)  protected areas of national and European protected areas network  territorial system of ecological stability. Summarizing the logically selected criteria would change the total values and order of appropriateness of the compared options in favor of option D. 78

Draft solution and justification The Danube conditioned the considerable importance of this area in terms of nature and landscape protection with concentration of several protected areas, of not only national but also European importance. Building a highway in this area assumes a negative impact on protected areas. The present tunnel option "D" with the proposed mitigation measures is considered most appropriate with the lowest negative impacts on nature conservation interests. Slovak Railways, Bratislava DG, Department of expertise, (letter dated 05 May 2011, under No. 14224/2011/0420-4) In terms of development plans we prospectively monitor double-tracking of the railway track with the establishment of a second rail track to the left in the direction of the stationing, i.e. from the direction of Jarovce. Given the above, we ask for this option to create a spatial reserve over D4 to build a second railway bridge of prospective rail track. Furthermore, we note that the construction of the railway bridge on the running track will require the closure of railway transport, the related replacement bus service for passengers in passenger in trains and diversion of cargo trains to other routes of the railway track. The duration of the traffic closure depending on the technological process is assumed for days to weeks. The closure must be applied for at least one year prior to the schedule of the work. All associated costs will be borne by the developer, investor.

Slovak Civil Aviation Authority (letter dated 28 April 2011 under no. 4865/313-1040-P/2011) No comments on the option "D", provided that the protection zones of Bratislava Airport are to be respected. Our opinion no. 6213/31'3-1841-P/2010 dated 12 July 2010 is applied on other options. Mgr. Ing. Ivana Číková, Pri struhe 17,831 07 Bratislava Sent the following opinion: I propose that the Ministry of Environment not recommends any of the options of the D4 highway /D, E, C/ in the territory, respectively recommends the zero option. It is justified in the 13 pages of text. Slovak Water Management Enterprise, Bratislava (letter no. 9704-210/2011-Su dated 01 July 2011) 1. The tunnel option is not the most important aspect of flood protection measures. The risk of this option is damage to the flood protection dykes. 2. Since the input and output port is designed lower than the elevation of the crown of protection dikes, it would cause flooding of the area behind embankments in case of tunnel floods. During construction the status of open dams can not be accepted. 3. Building structures of tunnel option will interfere with the groundwater watered collector with a negative impact on available drinking water supplies. Regional Mining Office, Bratislava (letter no. 461-1221/2011 dated 19 May 2011) No comments.

Posted comments can be divided into the following groups: a. favourable opinions, comments of which have already been accepted in commenting on the Plan and have already been introduced in the assessment process and evaluated in the assessment report, respectively have been reminded in opinions b. favourable opinions with comments which were intended to contribute positively to the proposed solutions, are realistic and will be incorporated in measures to eliminate, compensate or minimize the impact of construction and operation of the proposed activity on the environment in the Final Opinion and subsequent stages of project preparation c. unfavourable opinions, which argued against the implementation of the activity in any of the options and are justified and unjustified, some vague or not related to the activity d. opinions of general nature.

79

The vast majority of comments made was justified, feasible and contributed to addressing measures to minimize the impacts of construction and operation of roads on the environment and are incorporated into the draft measures. It might be said that citizens (besides Ivana Číková, which is against the construction) have no fundamental objections to the construction of D4 highways in condition that it will be implemented in some of the options in any action to minimize and eliminate adverse impacts. At the same time it is needs to be stated that: BROZ demanded assessment of option "D" tunnel, what has been done in the complement to the assessment report. Residents had no fundamental objections to the construction of highway at the public hearing in condition that they will implement measures to minimize and eliminate adverse impacts. Citizens, civil initiatives and non-governmental organizations in their submissions presented a favourable opinion provided the implementation of their proposals and measures

5. Technical expertise according to § 36 of the Act Expert opinion and draft final opinion was prepared in accordance with the provisions of § 36, par. 4,6 and 7 of the National Council of the Slovak Republic Act No.24/2007 Coll. by Ing. Karol Mahr, registered in the list of persons professionally qualified to assess the environmental impacts according to § 36 of the cited Act and § 9 of the Decree of Ministry of Environment no. 52/1995 Coll., of 04 September 1997 under no. 63/96-OPV.

The proposed activity was recommend as follows:  at km 0.000 to 5.500 in the route of "E" green option  at km 5.500 to 7.500 connection to option "C" red  at km 7.500 - cad.area in the route of „C“ red option with elevated interchange of D1 a D4 in option „C1“. Conclusion of the opinion are reflected in Chapter VI. of this "Final Opinion".

IV. COMPLEX ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY, INCLUDING HEALTH

Current condition Currently, no part of "O" circuit of D4 highway is built up. The area is partly original (beginning of the section), partially altered by anthropogenic activities of varying intensity.

Expected impacts According to the Assessment report, complement to the Assessment report, expert opinion, minutes of the public discussion and the opinions received, the proposed activity will have multiple effects on the environment in the assessed area and will seek different kinds of impacts of variable severity. In existing solutions of evaluation documentation, opinions and consultations the following impacts have been identified.

1. Impacts on the population 1.1 Population affected During operation Immediately affected are residents of Most pri Bratislave, Zálesie and Ivanka pri Dunaji in positive way in all options, because the current transport through built-up areas of municipalities will be reallocated by re-routing transit traffic on capacity road, thereby significantly reducing the number of vehicles moving through that municipalities. If the D4 highway was not implemented, the adverse current situation in municipalities with increasing traffic volume would get worse.

80

Residents of Podunajské Biskupice will be indirectly positively influenced by interconnection of R7 (D4) to Bajkalská Street through the intersection of D4 Ketelec in both options. Unless the connection to Bajkalska street resp. D1 is constructed, unfavourable current status remains, which will be deteriorating with increasing traffic volumes on Svornosti street and adjacent roads. Rest of the population in the affected region will be positively influenced indirectly by improving their access to Bratislava on capacity road. During construction Negative impacts may be qualified only during construction, but these will be temporary and minimum, because future construction site, construction yards and access roads are led mostly outside the urban area of the affected municipalities. 1.2 Health risks Risks during construction The number of employees working on the construction site results from the nature and type of work - construction work as well as from design engineering (PD), work at heights, working with gas, electric equipment, construction and transport mechanisms. During construction, there is an increased movement of construction machinery in the construction site, increasing the amount of noise, dust and emissions from transport. This will not have a significant impact on the health of the population. Direct health risks arise from the construction only in connection with the actual construction activity. It is mainly about the danger of injury during transport and handling of material for construction, especially work at heights, working with electric devices etc. These risks can be eliminated only by work discipline and compliance with health and safety. The risks affecting the health of the residents are usually assessed through the impact of traffic on air quality and noise in the environment. These impacts may be demonstrated in health condition with long-term population exposure to concentrations exceeding health limits. It is believed that air pollution contributes to increase of the diseases of the respiratory system (asthma, allergies to dust and other substances) During construction, it is expected the increased production of air pollutants from traffic of heavy trucks and dust during construction of highway, these are only temporary and will be minimized by appropriate organization of construction, location of the construction yards and access roads. Increased noise pollution is only temporary, during construction of the sections with noise barriers (option "C" - 7,500 m, option "E" - 6,400 m and option D - 3,400 m) and in some access roads. The most significant impact of air pollution can be expected at the stage of construction works, when the operation of heavy car traffic is the source of air pollution due to exhaust gases and swirling particle deposition on the surface of the road and in the immediate vicinity but this effect is short-term and less significant. Health risks to the immediately affected population, however, will be present mainly during construction. These risks will be just temporary and minimized by appropriate organization of construction, location of the construction yards and access roads. Risk during operation of the proposed activity represents impact on the population affected in particular by noise. It is relevant to assess the impact of noise by criterion of the Decree no. 549/2007 Coll. of Ministry of Health, establishing details on the permissible values of noise, infrasound and vibration. Its adverse effect may occur with long-term status of exceeding allowed hygienic limit. The negative impacts of noise on the population will be eliminated by implementing noise control measures and thus it will cause a significant shift of population exposure to lower sound levels. The results of the noise study confirmed that the construction of highways in all options, in the implementation of noise control measures, will not exceed daily health limits or at night. Because of addressing "Podunajské Biskupice - Lieskovec - Ketelec" zones in an urban study -

81 recreational and resting area, it may need to add moise control measures in the section of D4 in all options from Ketelec interchange - Rovinka parking area (stationing at about 7.5 to 9.0 km after its construction). Localization of all options outside the built-up area of municipalities will directly affect only a minimum of the population by emissions. Based on the results of the exhalation study it can be concluded that the pollution by harmful substances from the D4 highway traffic by 2030 will not exceed the maximum permissible concentrations of harmful substances (CO, PM and NOx) in its area it does not exceed 2.5 to 54% of the authorized minimum values . Based on the results of exhalation study (complement to the report), the in tunnel option and even in the most unfavourable scenario, i.e. in shutdown of both tunnel tubes this will not pose a risk in terms of risk to human health in the area of the highway, (this concentration is only about 8% of limit) and therefore it is not necessary to propose any action. 1.3 Social and economic consequences and context Social and economic effects of the structure are reflected in the traffic parameters by redistributing traffic after using the new structure, but also in the initial part of the relevant road network, and this is by reaching a higher driving speed, travel speed and safety of users and by reducing the negative impacts on the affected population, as a consequence of higher quality of the new structure compared to the deteriorating status quo. The economic effects will be felt mainly for the final customers of the section of road network by decrease in the costs related to transport of goods and people, respectively to the operation of their vehicles. The social effects will be demonstrated for road users by increasing road safety fro residents near the road I/63 by reducing the negative effects on the environment. They will also be seen in a decline in travel time for passenger cars and buses. The positive effect of the investment is also increasing the efficiency of the road network in the area and partly across the whole Bratislava city and further improving serviceability as well as creating conditions for the development of a given territory and also creating jobs due to construction activities. The negative consequence is the necessity of new lands use, loading new lands by traffic and collision with the plans of another land use. 1.4 Well-being and quality of life disruption The disruption of well-being and quality of life means primarily the negative effects on the fundamental factors in the environment for residents of municipalities (quality of housing, the quality of essential elements of the environment - notably air, water and environmental hygiene, subjective factors of perception of the environment). It is understood that during direct construction work of highways, the previously established way of life and the quality of the environment will change, and these changes are mostly negative, however, are temporary. Factors influencing the well-being and quality of life can be regarded as direct and indirect effects of construction activities associated with the construction of highway and implementation of related investments e.g .:  increased intensity of freight transport with subsequent increase in noise, dust and general traffic especially in the area of construction yards and larger construction objects  disruption of the long-term perception of landscape (new technical elements in the landscape). After putting the structure into operation, however, the benefits of the activity will be immediately apparent for the inhabitants of affected municipalities by redistribution and subsequent reduction in transport intensity on the road network, which will occur as a result of the use of the new section of the highway. Reducing traffic load will improve the quality of life and well-being especially for residents near the roads leading through the urban areas by reducing noise, vibration and emissions, by increasing traffic safety and accident risk. As a result of that positive change, there will be the decrease in fuel consumption and operating costs of users of the highway section. 82

Impacts on well-being and quality of life distortion can be evaluated to the total value of the zero option as positive. When comparing the proposed options, option "D" blue has somewhat smaller negative impact, then it is "E" green and the worst is option "C" red. 1.5 Acceptability of activities for municipalities Affordability for municipalities in the hitherto preparation as follows: Bratislava City, Bratislava City Hall, taking into account the significant contribution of highway to solve traffic problems associated with transit traffic (currently aggravating roads in the city) in terms of transport planning we support the selection and finalization of the option of which the preparation and subsequent implementation will be more efficient and faster. In terms of time and urgency of tackling traffic problems the most favourable solution is full compliance with MP. In case of necessity of the approval process of amendments to MP it can be accelerated by minimizing its induced amendments. In terms of technical infrastructure systems the supplemented opinion highlights the possible negative impacts, particularly on groundwater - an area of PWMA Rye Island, but also large drinking water source of Rusovce - OLM. District of Bratislava - Jarovce, no comments District of Bratislava - Rusovce, disagreement with option D. District of Bratislava - Podunajské Biskupice, did not send its opinion on the report - complement. In an opinion on the assessment report it prefers option C red and for R7 expressway option C green. District of Bratislava - Vajnory, did not send its opinion on the report - complement. City district agrees with "Ivanka north EI" only in option routing of D4 under D1. In its opinion on the Assessment Report, city district agrees with "Ivanka north EI" only in option routing of D4 under D1. Most pri Bratislave without opinion. Ivanka pri Dunaji did not send its opinion on the report - complement.

2. Impacts on geological environment The direct and indirect impacts of the proposed activity on the rock environment and relief can be included:  intervention in the rock environment and relief with natural body of the highway and in option D by tunnel as a direct impact  possible contamination of the ground as an indirect impact Interventions in the rock environment and relief represented Option „C“ and „E“: especially by digging slit (sealing bath at 17.5 to 18.8 km) and sections of high embankments can be characterized as a permanent, irreversible and long-term impact on geological environment and relief. Impacts are identical for both options. Option "D". Impacts on rock environment and relief of option "D" are, excluding the highway crossing over the Danube, the same as for option "E". Option "D" blue has, however, significantly more unfavourable impacts on the rock environment in the section of the passing through the Danube via tunnel, than surface options "C" and "E". The anticipated impacts of option "D" on the rock environment are linked to the technical solution (tunnel under the Danube) and the geological structure of the area, while in the longitudinal profile of the tunnel there are Quaternary fluvial sediments of riverbed facia and offshore mounds facia, locally superimposed by clayey and sandy flood sediments and technological shots (flood protection treatment on both banks of the Danube). Earth mounds of offshore facies are predominantly made up of fine-grained soil and sand. They do not form consistent layers. The most significant part of sediments representing fluvial gravels of riverbed facie, base of which is expected at the level of 18-20 m in Jarovce and 20 m in Biskupice. 83

Gravels have different ratio of gravel and sandy fraction, while the sand fraction is represented in only 15-20%. Their typical feature is the occurrence of boulder zone based on, i.e. in the interface of Quaternary gravels and clay-sand surface strata of the earliest Neogene (gravel subsoil). Boulder zone represents a significant granular inhomogeneous environment with pebbles to boulders sized over 600 mm. Sedimentation in the gravel base was probably chaotic, without patterns in sedimentation, therefore the basal layer of gravel is very heterogeneous. Pre-Quaternary subsoil is represented by the earliest Neogene sediments consisting of fine grained and sandy sediments. They are mostly in subhorizontal position, having a lenticular structure with a predominance of clay with varying degree of litification (hardening) overlaid with layers of deposited sands, sometimes even saturated and prone to liquefaction. Often containing hardened, tough sandstones, claystones and siltstones which are cemented by calcareous cement. Regular positions of Neogene sediments are gradually thinning and frequently changing thickness. As a whole, it is assumed that the geological environment comprises of asymmetrical wide open "bath" filled with gravel the bottom of which is formed by the Neogene basement but is not divided by irregular height. Bottom shape is more or less subject to deep erosion and sedimentation of the original Danube riverbed combined with tectonic movements. In the Danube tunnel we can expect the following risk geotechnical conditions:  when assuming tunnel boring method TBM with bentonite shield it is necessary for construction (start) pit to use sealing tub with high demands on its static safety and tightness (down to Neogene basement),  in the high permeability of the gravel the construction pit is exposed to high hydro dynamic burden with the development of high corrosive suffosion stress on the corners of a sealed pit,  excavation of stabilization and sealing elements (piles, diaphragm walls) would be very unevenly loaded with boulder gravel-based fraction (assuming the occurrence of boulders above 600 mm),  regarding the permeability of gravel base (at least in the level of x.10-2m.s-1) high demands are posed to sealing wall tightness, in the case of inflows high demands on the security draining,  stability of the foundation of construction pit will be strongly influenced by development of stress state - a real risk of bottom elevation by lightweighting excavated soil (bottom stability against elevation).  tunnel corridors area is near the interface 6° and 7° MSK-64 intensity of earthquakes (STN 73 0036)  ground water level ranges at a depth of 1-4 m below ground level,  the Neogene strata consists of watered sands, often with a stressed level of a discharging height of up to several meters,  based on physical-chemical analysis of archival data, Neogene groundwater have local harsh effects of groundwater on the concrete (sulphate aggression), Building on the degree of knowledge of engineering geological conditions in the area around the Danube tunnel corridor the most significant risk and impact on the rock mass will be represented by:  large trenches extending into the gravel watered environment because of the need to implement large construction pits (sealing baths) both for preparing for boring machine including all the boring technology, as well as location technology for operation of the tunnel,  changes in flow and a changes in the hydrodynamic groundwater conditions in high permeable gravels around the sealed building pits, increasing the flow rate may cause suffosion in sediments and thus changes in the entire watered environment,

84

 the impact of the rock environment will be the case of recovery measures implemented before TBM tunnel boring in the case of injection of gravel sediments, which, however, especially in the basal zones of gravel fluvial sediments, will be significantly difficult due to the high permeability, using chemical injection (as an effective means to immediate reduction of permeability) it may cause rock pollution and then groundwater pollution,  impact on the geological environment includes digging of difficult construction pits due to changes in pressure field around pits and in the pit bottom, digging may cause elevation of the pit bottom,  in denudation of large area of pits in well-drained gravels it is to be significantly higher risk of gravel contamination and consequently groundwater pollution in emergency situations during construction. The risk in construction of sealed pits and tunnel boring using a TBM is a change in the thickness of the fluvial sediments due to deep erosion, and the occurrence of boulders and boulder gravels at the base of gravel, The risk of tunnel boring means also stronger thickness of positions of watered sands in the strata of Neogene sediments with the possibility of strained groundwater levels, possible groundwater aggression. Possible contamination of the ground as an indirect impact The presence of well-permeable soils indirectly determines the possible pollution of the rock environment during the highway construction and also during its operation in a collision of vehicles carrying dangerous substances, which can be characterized as a state of emergency. If they are activated, it would cause permanent, irreversible condition producing additional costs for necessary remediation. The adverse impacts arising from the construction and operation of the highway can be mentioned optimizing the highway conduct in terms of intervention in the rocks and relief and preventing progressive evolution of current geodynamic processes by appropriate technical measures.

3. Impacts on climate Construction and operation of the highway will not have observable changes in climate in the affected area. Compared to option C and E, the operation of highway in tunnel option D may induce changes in the micro-climate of portals by producing warmer air coming out of the tunnel, especially in winter, but these effects are insignificant. Other major changes in the micro- climate outside the tunnel section (due to landscaping, etc.) are more likely to affect the work itself, respectively activity related to its operation, as in options C and E.

4. Impacts on air During construction During construction it is expected to be temporary, short-term increase in air pollution from vehicles and construction machinery when carrying materials to the existing road network passing through the urban settlements, increased secondary dust due to landscaping and earthworks, loading and transporting earth. Composition of the contractor´s fleet at this stage is unknown. In addition, a decisive effect on the negative impacts of highway construction will have work organization and the chosen method of construction, which can eliminate significant adverse impacts of construction work. This effect is temporary and limited to the construction period. During operation Air quality during operation of the road will be similarly influenced by emissions and dust levels of car traffic and polluting solids in winter sanding. According to the calculations for the annual average concentrations, contribution to air pollution by the planned emissions arising from the expected traffic load for the respective limit is minimal. The assessed activity in option D (nor at tunnel portals) by amendments to the diffusion study will not, as in options C and E, significantly affect the quality of the air in the affected area.

85

Currently, the transport is provided through a network of urban roads, they will be relieved of the burden, taken over by the D4 highway. Thus it is expected to decline in the production of pollutants from car traffic primarily on urban roads, through which the whole transit passes nowadays. On the basis of the calculated emission load by harmful substances from transport by 2030, we can conclude that after putting the building into operation it will not exceed the maximum permissible concentrations of harmful substances (CO, PM and NOx) from transport in its vicinity in none of the options. In terms of the impact on air quality of the affected area as a whole and in terms of expected concentrations of CO, NOx and PM10, option E green is a little bit more favourable.

5. Impacts on water conditions Contamination of water flowing down from the road surface is caused by the contents of a number of pollutants, while waste water may have a negative impact mainly on the quality of groundwater. The intensity of impact is dependent on the concentration of pollutants, climatic and hydrogeological conditions. Surface water: Option „C“ and „E“: Impacts on surface water represent a threat to surface water quality during construction and operation of highway, which is essentially equivalent for options C and E. During the construction we can expect a threat to water quality in establishing the pillars of the bridges crossing surface streams and water areas in both options, respectively during necessary adaptation of Biskupické arm in option E. Both options are bridged over by the Danube and adjacent system of arms and channels at 3.0 to 4.8 km of option C, respectively at 2.7 to 4.6 km of option E, while the proposed bridge pillars will be directly installed in Jarovské arm. Option "D": In option "D" a threat to water quality can be expected during construction when installing a temporary portal for west boring that is to be near the seepage canal, in installing the pillars of bridges crossing streams and surface water bodies, respectively when making the necessary adaptations of Biskupické arm, including a temporary portal for east boring in its vicinity. It passes under the Danube via tunnel, in this option there is not direct influence of surface water. Indirectly, it can be assumed possible changes in the hydrogeological regime of groundwater, which may result in changes in the surface flows, particularly in affected canals and arms, not to mention the emergency situations when crossing the bored tunnel underneath the water flows (unstable tunnel topsoil). Problematic seems to be the transition of tunnel underneath the flood protection dykes and safeguard of the area against floods. According to the requirements of SVP, the tunnel needs to be ensured, so that in the event of flooding, the tunnel must not be the preferred path for the water to inundation territories, i.e. equipping the portal sections of the tunnel by lockable gates, but this will not be possible during construction. D4 highway then bridges the Little Danube and water area of gravel pit called Zelená voda at 16.8 to 17.5 km. The direct threat to the quality of surface water can be caused by leakage of pollutants directly into water from construction machinery, respectively during accidents. During operation, the quality and mode of surface water is threatened in the affected flows due to the entry site of the waste water drained from the highway to the respective recipients (Danube, Little Danube, Šúrsky channel); according to the technical solution, however, it is considered before the outlet to purify the water in ORL, or hold them in the retention basins. Impacts on surface water mean a threat to surface water quality during construction and operation of highway. Besides the tunnel section of option "D", influences on the surface water shall be equal to option "E".

86

In option "D" a threat to water quality can be expected during construction when installing a temporary portal for west boring that is to be near the seepage canal, in installing the pillars of bridges crossing streams and surface water bodies, respectively when making the necessary adaptations of Biskupické arm, including a temporary portal for east boring in its vicinity. Groundwater: Given that the whole section of the assessed options crosses the area of highly permeable rocks (gravel sand sediments) and substantial underground water reserves, a part of the affected area is also one of the major sources of drinking groundwater (PWMA Rye Island) and close to the highway there are very important groundwater sources (WR Rusovce - Mokraď - Ostrovné lúčky, WR Rusovce), it is necessary to the pay attention to protection of groundwater during construction and operation. Expected impacts are virtually identical for all options with the exception of the section crossing the highway through the territory of the Danube and its inundation. During construction there may be a threat to the quality of the groundwater especially in the earthwork, which will reach the groundwater level, in installing sealing baths and bridges that will intervene in the groundwater collector - sand-gravel layers. Groundwater contamination may occur through leakage of dangerous substances directly into an open groundwater level in the trenches and digging of foundations (piles, ground walls), respectively indirectly through leakage to sand-gravel horizons which are highly permeable and groundwater contamination may be caused by leakage of pollutants to watered horizons. During operation, based on hydrogeological and protection limits within the technical solution, a road drainage has been designed for assessed options, which in normal operation of the highway provides protection of ground water against negative influences. However, it is being considered a partial inlet of waste water from the road, respectively from the operation of the parking area into the rock environment by infiltrating, waste water will be purified in ORL according to the technical solution before the inlet, which will ensure the groundwater quality. It may threaten groundwater quality in this section as a consequence of emergency situations, ground water regime will be affected only in tunnel option D by building barriers. A hydrogeological report on the impact of the tunnel Danube on groundwater has been developed for tunnel option "D", the conclusions are as follows. The highway will be routed at least in the section of 1.878 to 5.200 km on the subsurface, will directly intervene in the groundwater watered collector in which these waters accumulate and form. In the section of 1.878 to 2.580 km (702 m) and 4.720 to 5.200 km (480 m) there is proposed implementation of sealing pits, considering their recess down to the Neogene basement. These pits will still create a permanent barrier to groundwater flow after construction. On the east portal, the completion of the sealing pit is envisaged at 5.200 km, but it is believed that the vertical alignment of the highway still be located below the static groundwater level, therefore, the sealing bath is likely to be extended by a few dozen meters. The length of the sealing bath at the western portal will therefore be 702 m, width at the outlet into the tunnel tubes will also include the turning and joining lanes for intersection with Rusovecká road. Furthermore, there will be an elevated junction, which will be constructed as well the sealing bath. The bored part of the tunnel at 2.580 to 4.720 km (2,140 m) will be in two separate tubes with a diameter of 12 m each. The spacing of the axes of the tunnel tubes is 24 m. Both tunnel tubes will also be a permanent barrier to the groundwater flow nearby. Permanently built diaphragm walls and tunnel tubes in the water horizon will create a permanent barrier to groundwater flow and cause local curving of hydroisohypses. Potential threat to groundwater quality is considered during construction, which could result in direct danger to the groundwater collector (e.g. oil substances, various suspensions etc.) and the spread of contamination to the environment. The proposed route of the tunnel passes through extremely vulnerable region, a part is protected

87 by legislation for the protection of ground water (PWMA Rye Island). Subsurface option D in length to 3.8 km is considered unfavourable because there would be direct intervention in the groundwater collector and the potential direct threat to the collector. Groundwater in its physical- chemical composition is at the level of drinking water. The threat comes out of possible direct contamination of groundwater during construction. Other negative effect will be caused by the construction of permanent barriers for groundwater flow in the form of sealing pits with a length of 702 and 480 m and tunnel tubes with a length of 2,140 m (the tunnel will also partly affect the Neogene basement). Based on the above it can be assumed that the impact on groundwater will be significantly enhanced in option "D" than options "C" and "E". Natural healing water There are no natural healing water in direct contact with the structure. There is IInd degree PZ of Čilistov in the wider area. The impact of the structure is not expected given the hydrogeological collector of the water.

6. Impacts on soil The basic negative effect on soil is occupation by the road, interchange branches and temporarily by land use, deposited materials and construction yards. The negative effect may occur in the construction phase on soils in temporary land use. Permanent and temporary land use areas were calculated in the technical study based on the expected land shape of the proposed options and are listed in the following table. Permanent use of ALU Temporary use of ALU Option and FLU in total (m2) and FLU in total (m2) "C" red 1,430,942 317,135 "E" green 1,422,346 439,529 "D" blue 1,424,577 433,688 The forest land use (FLU) will occur in  option "C" between 4.8 and 5.8 km (cca 4.01 ha), at 16.0 km (about 0.21 ha), 19.1 (about 0.01 ha), 19.3 (about 0.04 ha) and at Ivanka - West interchange (about 3.09 ha). In total in option "C" the FLU is 7.36 ha  in option "E" between 4.6 and 5.4 km (cca 2.9 ha), at 16.0 km (about 0.21 ha), 19.1 (about 0.01 ha), 19.3 (about 0.04 ha) and at Ivanka - West interchange (about 3.09 ha). In total in option "E" is 6.25 ha  in option "D" between 4.950-5.300 km (cca 1.62 ha), at 16.0 km (about 0.21 ha), 19.1 (about 0.01 ha), 19.3 (about 0.04 ha) and at Ivanka - West interchange (about 3.09 ha). In total in option "D" the FLU is 4.97 ha A temporary FLU will also occur in tunnel section at the site of bored tunnel at 4.720 to 4.950 km (about 1.08 hectares). Option "C" with respect to its length has largest land use of ALF and FLF. Impacts on quality of soil During construction, given the use of heavy machinery we can count with degradation, compaction of the soil profile and potential soil intoxication near the construction, handling belts and the construction yards. Given construction impacts during construction of the road, it can be expected a change in the quality of soil in the immediate vicinity of the highway and in areas reclaimed after temporary land use. The changes in quality are reflected depending on the restoration and reclamation. Another change in the quality of soil is a possible contamination of soil during construction and operation of the road. During construction, the most vulnerable sites to accumulation of works are around the larger structures, construction yards, parking areas of machinery and equipment. Soil contamination during operation of the road depends on several factors:  the mere production of substances contaminating the soil (exhaust gases, winter maintenance equipment); 88

 distance from the kerbside,  buffering capacity of the soil (soil resistance to anthropogenic-based acidification). Following the current researches and measurements the impact of road and highway traffic on the environment can be characterized as follows:  about 70 to 90% of the emitted amount of metals from transport are depositing close to the road at a distance of 3 to 30 m.  pollution is mainly bound to the surface layer of about 25 cm. Based on observations of the impact of exhaust gases on vegetation, it is possible to consider the zone of the possible negative effect on soil within about 30 m from the road. Possible soil contamination depends on the permeability and damping (buffering) ability of soils. The buffering capacity of the soil in assessed area is good given the physical and chemical properties, the decisive factor for possible contamination is the permeability of soil and substrate. A special case of potential soil contamination are car accidents associated with leakage of fuel or transported chemicals. This produces a local soil pollution, which will require timely clean-up work to avoid contamination to penetrate into groundwater.

7. Impacts on flora, fauna and their habitats Line structures represent a substantial risk for biodiversity conservation. It can be threatened directly (extinction of species at destroyed or degraded habitats) and indirectly (e.g. loss of food sources for certain species, their isolation and inability to overcome the distance between natural habitats). If the habitats and populations living in are fragmented into small groups and the link between them is disturbed, their long-term existence may be disrupted. Small and isolated populations are vulnerable to extinction due to inbreeding. This, however, relates to all line elements such as highways and expressways that form a hardly surmountable obstacle in the area. In recent years, a significant impact on the game is represented also by the noise that must also be defined as negative. When assessing the impact of the proposed activity, direct, indirect, secondary, cumulative, synergistic, short-term, temporary, long-term and permanent projected impacts must be taken into account and effects caused during construction and operation of the proposed activity. In general, the impacts of the proposed options on the fauna, flora and their habitats can be divided as follows:  primary (disappearance of habitat due to construction of roads),  secondary (killing of animals, fragmentation of habitats, pollution by salting materials, exhaust fumes, noise, light, changes in the hydrological regime, climate etc.),  tertiary (penetration of new, often invasive species into the environment, the construction of the highway will also bring the development of human settlements, technical infrastructure, industry, recreation etc.) In assessed section of the highway, it will in particular be the following impacts that may be seen during the preparatory work, the construction itself and then also during operation:  direct damage and destruction of habitats,  tree felling,  killing of animals,  creating a barrier in migration corridors,  fragmentation of habitats,  noise, light load of animals,  air pollution. In view of these impacts, surface options will be identical, the difference is, however, in affecting the habitats. For option C, a habitat of Community importance Ls1.1 Willow-poplar lowland floodplain forests (91E0 floodplain willow-poplar and alder forests) will be directly destroyed in the

89 following approximate range and social value in terms of MoE Decree No.24/2003 Coll. implementing the Act no.543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended: 26,430 m2 x 17.92 €/m2 x 2 = 947,252 € For option E, a habitat of Community importance Ls1.1 Willow-poplar lowland floodplain forests (91E0 floodplain willow-poplar and alder forests) will be directly destroyed in the following approximate range and social value in terms of MoE Decree No.24/2003 Coll. implementing the Act no.543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended: 20,010 m2 x 17.92 €/m2 x 2 = 717,158 € The area includes all sites with habitats of Community importance in the routes of individual options, while for option E, the said habitat is located outside the ÚEV Biskupické floodplains and for option C, about 2/3 of the size of the destroyed habitat are situated in ÚEV Biskupické floodplains and 1/3 is beyond the territory. In option C, there will be a stronger (compared to option E) impact on the habitats of species of Community importance for which the ÚEV Biskupické floodplains is declared. This is particularly related to the habitats of species such as great capricorn beetle (Cerambyx cerdo), and stag beetle (Lucanus cervus). Other habitats in the vicinity of the highway will be indirectly negatively affected by noise and air pollution. The scope of the effect can be defined from the results set out in the noise and dispersion study.

8. Impacts on the landscape - the structure and land use, landscape image The landscape scenery of the assessed area is determined by the deployment of a positive perception of landscape elements in the heavily urbanized and agricultural land. The technical and urban features, such as mass housing, industrial sites, engineering works (roads, power lines, etc.) are largely negatively perceived elements in the landscape. In this regard, we must consider the status of new technical element in landscape scenery, which would be a new highway. This will be strongly apply mainly in relief-exposed areas and protected areas of nature and landscape. The range of influencing the landscape scenery by implementing the highway depends primarily on the nature of the technical intervention in the landscape. The subsurface (tunnel) option "D" will not be seen in the protected areas of nature and landscape. It will be disruptive in the landscape scenery on Biskupice side due to the barrier effect of the entrance and exit ramp of east tunnel port. The highway in this section is in the grove, which will be a permanent barrier in the affected area. The highway routing on the bridge (options "E" and "C") is due to the migration barrier effect more favourable than recessed parts of the exit and entrance to the tunnel. The majority of the highway route consists of agricultural land near the Bratislava agglomeration, while the visual effect of a new highway line in the affected landscape will not be so observed as close to built-up parts of municipalities. The use of the narrow corridor from agricultural production to transport infrastructure will be changed in the highway corridor. However, given the strong pressure of urbanization around Bratislava, which requires another especially agricultural land use, the proposed highway is acceptable in the landscape and its negative impact will be manifested only in a short section of highway crossing through the territory of the Danube floodplains, while the tunnel option "D" will be more favourable than viaduct options "C" and "E".

9. Impacts on protected areas and their protection zones Site of Community importance of SKUEV0295 Biskupické floodplains The area is included in the system for the protection of habitats of European importance:  Thermophilic Pannonian oak forests (91H0)  Carpathian and Pannonian oak-hornbeam forests (91G0) 90

 The riparian oak-elm-ash forests around lowland rivers (91F0) and species of European importance When identifying habitats hit by the highway, based on documents processed under the amendments to the study, it can be stated as follows. As the highway passes through the SCI in option "D" mostly on subsurface via tunnel, there are not within the corridor of option "D" the territories where are the habitats of European importance of SCI Biskupické floodplains. However, these are attacked by surface options "C" and "E". In the section of bored tunnel and sealing bath of east portal, where the highway comes to the surface and also affects the SCI, in mapping habitats along the route of option "E", the corridor of which is in SCI led like in option "D", in the previous period no habitats of Community Importance SCI Biskupické floodplains have been recorded. There will just be tree felling in this section of highway and the FLU similarly to the option "E". Site of Community importance of SKUEV0295 Ostrovné lúčky The area is included in the system for the protection of habitats of European importance:  The riparian oak-elm-ash forests around lowland rivers (91F0)  The riparian willow-poplar and alder forests (91E0)  Xerophilic grass-herbal and shrub stands on calcareous soil (6210)  Natural eutrophic and mesotrophic still waters with vegetation of floating and / or submerged vascular plants of Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition type (3150) When identifying the intervention of the highway into habitats, based on documents processed under the amendments to the study, it can be stated as follows: since the highway in option "D" passes beyond the SCI, there are not affected areas within the corridor in option "D", same as in option "E" , with occurrence of habitats of Community importance SCI Ostrovné lúčky. Option "C" passes close to SCI, while there multifunctional barriers designed to eliminate indirect impacts (noise and lighting) in this section. Special protected area SKCHVU 029 Sysľovské fields Sysľovské fields are one of the three most important areas for nesting species such as the great bustard (Otis tarda) and red-footed falcon (Falco vespertinus). More than 1% of Central European populations of geese (Anser sp.) is wintering in the area. When identifying SPA hit by the highway, based on documents processed under the amendments to the study, it can be stated as follows. As the highway in option "D", like options "C" and "E", passes well away from the SPA, we do not foresee a direct impact on protected area. Indirect impacts will be eliminated by recommendation to build noise barriers to protect the population of Jarovce across the intersection of D4 and D2 (noise study 04/2010). Special protected area of SKCHVU007 Danube floodplains SPA Danube floodplains was declared in order to ensure the favourable conservation status of habitats of the bird species of European importance and habitats of migratory bird species such as the black stork, sand martin, Little Bittern, Mediterranean gull, black kite, common goldeneye, red-crested pochard, common pochard, tufted duck, garganey, gadwall, common redshank, western marsh harrier, tawny pipit, white-tailed eagle, smew, common tern, common kingfisher, little egret and ensure conditions for their survival and reproduction. Special protected areas was declared in order to ensure the favourable conservation status of habitats and conditions for the survival and reproduction of migratory water bird species forming clusters during migration or wintering. When identifying SPA hit by the highway, based on documents processed under the amendments to the study, it can be stated as follows. As the highway passes through the SPA in option "D" mostly on subsurface via tunnel, there are not within the corridor of option "D" the territories in which there is SPA on the surface. However, these are strongly attacked by surface options "C" and "E". It is assumed that SPA is partly influenced by option "D" on the eastern exit of the tunnel where the section of bored tunnel and sealing bath the highway comes out to the surface and continues into the SPA. In this section we can assume effects, as described in the present 91 study. Spatial impacts of the effects of option "D" on Natura 2000 sites, respectively on protected areas that are part of them, or which include Natura 2000 sites, are listed in the following table: Territory affected Territory affected Proposed Protected area / Direct land use by the noise up to by the noise over options degree of protection 50 dB 50 dB under the Act % of the % of the % of the 543/2002 Coll. ha total ha total ha total (total area) area area area PLA Dunajské luhy 3.89 0.03 267.13 2.17 178.52 1.45 E / 2nd degree (12,284 C ha) 4.81 0.04 363.35 2.96 248.34 2.02 1.62 0.01 99.98 0.81 39.37 0.32 D NR Dunajské 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.24 0.00 0.00 E ostrovy / 5th degree C (219.71 ha) 0.00 0.00 41.5 18.89 0.00 0.00 NR Gajc / 4th 0.00 0.00 47.03 74.98 29.32 46.75 E degree (62.72 C ha) 1.64 2.61 62.72 100.00 60.21 96.00 0.00 0 5.63 8.98 4.87 7.76 D NR Kopáčsky 0.00 0.00 46.66 56.48 24.1 29.17 E ostrov / 5th degree C (82.62 ha) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NR Topoľové hony 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 E / 5th degree C (60.06 ha) 0.00 0.00 10.48 17.45 0.00 0.00 ÚEV Biskupické 3.5 0.40 218.41 25.13 158.09 18.19 E luhy C (869.03 ha) 3.96 0.46 265.68 30.57 163.31 18.79 1.55 0.18 95.98 11.04 37.79 4.35 D ÚEV Ostrovné 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.11 0.00 0.00 E lúčky C (613.56 ha) 0.00 0.00 42.47 6.92 25.52 4.16 PWMA Dunajské 12.44 0.08 566.31 3.43 412.95 2.50 E luhy C (16,511.58 ha) 12.77 0.08 617.82 3.74 444.94 2.69 1.55 0.01 97.61 0.59 37.79 0.23 D Ramsar site 6.42 0.04 386.32 2.67 262.54 1.81 E Dunajské luhy C (14,488 ha) 7.58 0.05 496.45 3.43 345.15 2.38 1.62 0.01 99.98 0.69 39.37 0.27 D 26.25 Option E (green) Total 30.76 Option C (red) 6.34 Option D (blue) Given that part of the tunnel will be carried out in an open construction pit (excavated tunnel), which will consequently be re-filled, during construction, it will cause also a temporary use of protected areas on the left bank of the Danube. This is an area of 1.08 ha area, the permanent and temporary use of protected areas in the tunnel section will be 7.42 ha in total. Given the routing in option "D" through protected areas mainly through the tunnel, the use of protected areas is considerably smaller than for surface options "C" (30.76 hectares) and "E"

92

(26.25 hectares). For illustration, a comprehensive review of the impacts of proposed options "C", "E" and "D" on protected areas is presented in the following:

Impact on the protected landscape area of Danube floodplains  Option "D" blue (km 4.72 to 5.25) - the highway is led partially via mined tunnel, but mostly via bored tunnel (4.72 to 4.95) and the grove (4.95 to 5.25), direct use of a part of the protected area, a direct impact of noise and illumination (grove section). No impacts in the section of the mined tunnel .  Option C red (4.7-5.2 km), E green (4.5-5.3 km) - the highway in both options is mostly conducted by the bridge, direct land use of the protected area, direct impact of noise and lighting. The direct impact of noise and lighting is more significant in option "C" (route runs close to the SPA boundary - section Jarovské arm). Impact on Nature Reserve of Danube islands  Option "D" blue-highway is led through the tunnel outside protected area, outside the impact of noise and lighting.  Option C red- the highway is conducted by the bridge,out of the protected area,direct impact of noise and lighting (route runs close to the borders of NR - Jarovské arm).  Option E green - the highway is conducted by the bridge, out of the protected area, out of the impact of noise and lighting. Impact on Nature Reserve of Gajc  Option D blue - the highway is led through the tunnel, grove and in the field, out of the protected area, direct impact of noise and lighting (route runs close to the borders of NR).  Option C red (4.8-5.1 km) - the highway is conducted by the bridge,direct land use of the protected area,direct impact of noise and lighting.  Option E green - the highway is conducted by the bridge and in the field, out of the protected area, direct impact of noise and lighting (route runs close to the borders of NR). Impact on Nature Reserve of Kopáčsky island  Option "D" blue-highway is led through the tunnel, grove and in the field outside protected area, outside the impact of noise and lighting.  Option C red - the highway is conducted by the bridge and in the field, out of the protected area, out of the impact of noise and lighting.  Option E green - the highway is conducted by the bridge and in the field out of the protected area, indirect impact of noise and lighting. Impact on Nature Reserve of Topoľovské hony  Option "D" blue-highway is led through the field outside protected area, indirect impact of noise and lighting.  Option "C" red - the highway is conducted through the field out of the protected area, indirect impact of noise and lighting.  Option E green - the highway is conducted through the field, out of the protected area, out of the impact of noise and lighting. Impact on site of Community importance of Biskupické luhy  Option "D" blue (km 4.72 to 5.25) - the highway is led partially via mined tunnel, but mostly via bored tunnel (4.72 to 4.95) and the grove (4.95 to 5.25), direct use of a part of the protected area, a direct impact of noise and illumination (grove section). No impacts in the section of the mined tunnel .  Option C red (4.8-5.4 km), E green (4.6-5.3 km) - the highway in both options is mostly conducted by the bridge, direct land use of the protected area, direct impact of noise

93

and lighting. Impact on site of Community importance of Ostrovné lúčky  Option "D" blue-highway is led through the tunnel outside protected area, outside the impact of noise and lighting.  Option C red - the highway is conducted by the bridge, out of the protected area,direct impact of noise and lighting (route runs close to the borders of NR - Jarovské arm).  Option E green - the highway is conducted by the bridge, out of the protected area, out of the impact of noise and lighting. Impact on the protected bird area of Danube floodplains  Option "D" blue (km 4.72 to 5.25) - the highway is led partially via mined tunnel, but mostly via bored tunnel (4.72 to 4.95) and the grove (4.95 to 5.25), direct use of a part of the protected area, a direct impact of noise and illumination (grove section). No impacts in the section of the mined tunnel .  Option C red (3.0-5.4 km), E green (2.7-5.3 km) - the highway in both options is mostly conducted by the bridge, direct land use of the protected area, direct impact of noise and lighting.

Under phytogeographical division of Slovakia the territory belongs to the Pannonian flora (Pannonicum), region of Eupannonian xerophilous flora (Eupannonicum) and district of Danubian Lowland. It lies near the border with Austria and Hungary in a warm climate, so you can expect the occurrence of thermophilic and Pannonian species. Of the total recorded species 91 is thermophilic (31.5%), which have a Mediterranean or sub-Mediterranean area of distribution. The most occurring ones are: Ballota nigra, Berteroa incana, Bromus tectorum, B. sterilis, Carduus acanthoides, C. nutans, Chondrilla juncea, Crepis foetida, C. tectorum, Echium vulgare, Hyoscyamus niger, Melilotus albus, M. officinalis, Nepeta cataria, Onopordum acanthium, Stachys annua a Verbascum phlomoides. From Pannonian spieces only Bupleurum affine and Erysimum diffusum. The typical Pannonian species are missing here that occur in Slovakia relatively rarely and are classified as rare and endangered taxa of flora of Slovakia; ex.3: Armoracia macrocarpa, Artemisia pancicii, Cirsium brachycephalum, Colchicum arenarium, Crepis pannonica, Festuca vaginata subsp. dominii, Limonium gmelinii subsp. hungaricum, Onosma arenaria, Pulsatilla pratensis subsp. hungarica, Tripolium pannonicum and many others. Given the high degree of deformation of the original environment to the field ecosystems, there is usual presence of synanthropic species. Synanthropic species are typical companions of human activities and their occurrence is directly dependent on human activity. They are divided into ruderal - plants in the vicinity of human settlements (annual and perennial species) and segetal - plants of field crops that are adapted for periodic interference (in particular, annual species). Among ruderal species are represented: Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Artemisia vulgaris, Ballota nigra, Carduus acanthoides, Elytrigia repens, Galium aparine, Glechoma hederacea, Melilotus albus, M. officinalis, Onopodrum acanthium, Rumex patientia, Tanacetum vulgare a Urtica dioica. They spread everywhere with appropriate conditions. They spread into the fields, to fallow lands and forest communities. The species tolerating slipping are maintained on field roads: Convolvulus arvensis, Cynodon dactylon, Lolium perenne, Poa annua a Polygonum aviculare agg. Segetal species are e.g.: Anagallis arvensis, Consolida regalis, Fallopia convolvulus, Kickxia spuria, Lathyrus tuberosus, Lithospermum arvense, Lycopsis arvensis, Myosotis arvensis, Raphanus raphanistrum, Silene noctiflora, Sonchus arvensis, S. asper, Tithymalus exiguus, Veronica arvensis, Vicia tetrasperma and Viola arvensis. Expansively spread in maize fields are Panicum miliaceum, Datura stramonium, Chenopodium album agg., Ch. hybridum a Setaria verticillata. Most weeds are located on the edges of fields where intervention of agricultural machinery is minimal and even sensitive species can be kept here. 94

Windbreaks, i.e. strips of vegetation between fields, have a different character. Windbreaks of forest character are the most numerous, which are generally wider (over 10 meters). Their floristic composition is different. Either they are natural forests, for example fragment of floodplain forest, and then the tree floor is formed by Fraxinus angustifolia, Ulmus sp., Acer campestre. More often they are windbreaks dominated by acacia (Robinia pseudoacacia), whose floristic composition is rather poor and monotonous. The shrubs presented are Sambucus nigra, Crataegus monogyna, Rosa sp. and herbaceous understory is significantly synathrophic, composed mainly of species Ballota nigra, Bromus sterilis, Elytrigia repens, Galium aparine a Urtica dioica. Some windbreaks have an enormous occurence of planted ornamental trees (Celtis occidentalis, Laburnum anagyroides, Ptelea trifoliata, Rhodotypos scandens) or fruity plants (Juglans regia, Malus domestica, Morus alba, Prunus insititia). Less common are forest steppe windbreaks, which are on average narrower (up to 10 m). They consist of scattered trees (Crataegus monogyna, Pyrus pyraster, Robinia pseudoacacia a Sambucus nigra) involving herbaceous vegetation. There are often grasses Arrhenatherum elatius, Bromus inermis, Dactylis glomerata a Elytrigia repens and other herbs such as Ballota nigra, Carduus acanthoides, Falcaria vulgaris, Marrubium peregrinum, Salvia nemorosa, Tithymalus sp. and others. Species of different habitats meet on fallow fields. As a remnant of field crops, there may be synanthropic species, but at the same time also species of surrounding habitats, xerotherm or meadows are spreading around. Location of Laurovské is by nature different from other territories. In the past it was the habitat of hygrophilous vegetation, but is now largely filled up and transformed into a garbage dump. There remained a small lake in the central part where some hygrophilous species survived (Calystegia sepium, Epilobium parviflorum, Phalaroides arundinacea and Phragmites australis). There is a forest fragment around the site. The territory is also greatly represented by invasive plants. Out of 33 recorded invasive species there is 14 archaeophytes, 10 neophytes and 9 potentially (regionally) invasive species. Invasive plants are: Ailanthus altissima, Lycium barbarum, Negundo aceroides, Robinia pseudoacacia and potentially invasive Amorpha fruticosa and Lonicera tatarica, which are planted in the area, but may spread to nearby area spontaneously. For invasive and potentially invasive weeds the most numerous are: Amaranthus powellii, A. retroflexus, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Ballota nigra, Bromus sterilis, Bryonia alba, Cannabis ruderalis, Conium maculatum, Conyza canadensis, Datura stramonium, Panicum miliaceum, Solidago gigantea, Stenactis annua and Tripleurospermum perforatum. Others are still relatively rare and not invasive. There are also some venomous (for humans) species: Anagallis arvensis, Aethusa cynapium, Conium maculatum, Datura stramonium, Hyoscyamus niger, Laburnum anagyroides, Papaver rhoeas, Solanum nigrum and Thymelaea passerina. Among rare and endangered species 9 have been recorded: Chamaepitys chia subsp. trifida LR:nt, Erysimum diffusum LR:nt, Marrubium peregrinum LR:nt, Thymelaea passerina LR:nt, Kickxia spuria VU, Nigella arvensis VU, Odontites vernus VU, Bupleurum affine EN, Podospermum canum EN. Summary of results: 289 species of higher plants recorded, including 44 wood species (13 planted, 31 indigenous), 6 crops and 239 other plants. Of the total number is 91 thermophilic (31.5%), 33 invasive (11.4%) and 9 endangered (3.1%). For the status quo of species diversity, respectively its increase, it would be appropriate to take certain measures. Especially to prevent the further spread of invasive and alien species of plants. For example not plant non-native and potentially invasive species of wood plants on the slopes of elevated roads, to limit the spread of invasive herbs such as Solidago gigantea and also it would be desirable that the locust stands to be gradually restored to a natural forest type. To maintain and spread native species of thermophilic herbs the suitable habitats are forest steppe

95 wind deflectors in which it is important the unplugged tree floor, allowing sufficient supply of light for herbs and fallow lands, which, however, should be regularly mowed to prevent them from overgrowing by self-seeded trees.

Special protected area SKCHVU 029 Sysľovské fields  Options "C, D and E (km 0.0-0.1)" - the highway is conducted through the field out of the protected area, indirect impact of noise and lighting. Impact on Ramsar site of Danube floodplains  Option "D" blue (km 4.72 to 5.25) - the highway is led partially via mined tunnel, but mostly via bored tunnel (4.72 to 4.95) and the grove (4.95 to 5.25), direct use of a part of the protected area, a direct impact of noise and illumination (grove section). No impacts in the section of the mined tunnel .  Option C red (3.0-3.2 km and 4.1-5.7), E green (3.9-5.3 km) - the highway in both options is mostly conducted by the bridge, direct land use of the protected area, direct impact of noise and lighting. The direct use and impact of noise and lighting is more significant in option "C" (route runs close to the SPA boundary - section Jarovské arm).

Given the routing in option "D" through protected areas mainly through the tunnel, its impact on protected areas is considerably smaller than for surface options "C" and "E". Impact of migration can be defined as the total effect on the movement of animals in the affected area of conservation. For terrestrial, semi-terrestrial, semi-aquatic and aquatic animals, because of the technical solution of the highway in option "D" (through the affected area the route is mostly conducted via tunnel), their migration will be limited after putting the highway into operation, only in the section of the entrance and exit gate at the eastern portal of the tunnel.

In options "C" and "E" a similar highway barrier effect for the above animals will be minimum, the proposed bridges will have sufficient passage height for the movement of animals. Migration of avifauna does not assume any impact in option "D", while in options 'C' and E the impacts will be significant give the routing of the highway by viaducts. To minimize stress factors (noise, dazzling) the recommendations indicate proposed noise barriers, which may also form screens against dazzling while ensuring their multi-functionality.

Overview of multifunction screens for options is shown in the following table: Sequence Stationing in Location Length in m Height in m surface in m2 km Option C PC1 2.90 – 7.50 on the right 4,600 2 9,200 PC2 2.90 – 5.80 on the left 2,900 2 5,800 Total 7,500 15,000 Option E* PC1 2.60 – 5.50 on the right 2,900 2 5,800 PC2 2.60 – 6.10 on the left 3,500 2 7,000 Total 6,400 12,800 Option D PC1 4.9 – 7.1 on the right 2,200 2 4,400 PC2 4.9 - 6.1 on the left 1,200 2 2,400 Total 3,400 6,800 * The assessment report of 04/2010 recommended to extend the multi-functional wall to the left until 6.1 km, ie. by 600 m.

96

Comparing the options, given the highway route in the tunnel, option "D" has the shortest length of the proposed multi-functional screens. The impact on protected water management area of Rye Island and water resources The proposed tunnel option "D" is situated in PWMA Rye Island in almost the same length as options C and E in the section about 4.0 to 16.9 km, the impact of options is, in addition to the section crossing the Danube area, the same and is the risk of pollution of groundwater reserves in the area. Based on the outcomes of the hydrogeological study, the route of tunnel option "D" in sub- surface section (tunnel Danube) is led through extremely vulnerable area, and its part is also protected by legislation (PWMA Rye Island). Subsurface option of highway routing in length to 3.8 km is considered unfavourable because there would be direct intervention in the groundwater collector and the potential direct threat to the collector. Groundwater in its physical-chemical composition is at the level of drinking water. The threat comes out of possible direct contamination of groundwater during construction. Other negative effect will be caused by the construction of permanent barriers for groundwater flow in the form of sealing pits with a length of 702 and 480 m and tunnel tubes with a length of 2,140 m (the tunnel will also partly affect the Neogene basement). Potential threat to groundwater quality is considered during construction of the tunnel option D, which could result in direct danger to the groundwater collector (e.g. oil substances, various suspensions etc.) and the spread of contamination to the environment, which could threaten the water quality on Rusovce water resource. For this reason, the impact of option "D" on PWMA Rye Island and VZ Rusovce is expected greater than of options "C" and "E".

10.Impacts on the territorial system of ecological stability The impacts of the highway in tunnel option D on the national bio-centre NRBc of Bratislava floodplains will be similar as the impacts on the protected areas that are part of bio-centres, respectively they involve the bio-centre. In this option, a partial direct land use of area NRBC Bratislava floodplains is to be occurred mainly on the left bank of the Danube (east portal, including entry and exit), the major part of the option, however, is led in favour of bio-centre via tunnel. Impacts of surface options "C" and "E" will be in this respect significantly more negative than of option "D". In the section of the highway behind the tunnel until Ketelec interchange, the impact of option "D" (use of NRBc) is to be slightly larger (longer section) than in options "C" and "E". Highway barrier action for migration and exchange of genetic information of ground living organisms and their communities through bio-corridors (PBk Danube and NRBk Little Danube) in all options will be minimized by the fact that highway will cross bio-corridors at the elevated level via tunnel, resp. bridges. Significantly negative impact on avifauna will be in surface options "C" and "E" than option "D" tunnel. The engagement of local TSES elements comes at 19.1, 19.3 km and at the Ivanka - West interchange. The engagement is the same for all options. Among the identified impacts on TSES the following can be stated for the evaluated options in terms of subregional and regional aspect, while the effect of negative factors will be similar as for the protected areas in the phase of construction and operation of highway. NRBc Bratislava floodplains  Option "D" blue (km 2.4 to 2.58; 4.72 to 7.1 km) - highway in these sections is routed by excavated tunnel, grove and field, direct use of a part of the NRBc area, in section of 2.4 -2.58 km and 4.72 to 4.95 km temporary (excavated tunnel will be filled in), direct impact of noise and lighting at 4.95 to 7.1 km. The highway mostly passes through the bio-center via tunnel.  Option C red (2.9-7.2 km), E green (2.4-6.7 km) - the highway in both options is mostly 97

conducted by the bridge and through the field, direct land use of the NRBc area, direct impact of noise and lighting. PBk Danube, NRBk Little Danube  Option "D" blue - highway barrier action for migration will be minimized, however, by the fact that the highway crosses the bio-corridors via elevated roads (tunnel, bridge). The most significant effects will be felt during the construction and early operation. Migration of animals after a certain time will adapt to new conditions and bio-corridors will continue working. More favourable to the PBk Danube in terms of migration of birds is this option.  Option C red, E green - passages through the corridors can be considered in both options for the same (width of the corridors can not be precisely defined), highway barrier action for migration, however, will be mitigated by the fact that the highway crosses the corridors at elevated level. The most significant effects will be felt during the construction and early operation. Migration of animals after a certain time will adapt to new conditions and bio-corridors will continue working. For migrating birds, these options are less favourable.

11. Impacts on the urban complex and land use Construction of the D4 highway will fundamentally change land use in the affected part of the territory. The largest part of the area of proposed options today is taken up by agricultural land. The intensity of land use will be influenced by the road only temporarily during construction, during operation, no important effects on the intensity of land use are expected due to the fact that all the technical measures to eliminate adverse effects will be implemented. Impact on the urbanization of the territory Option "D" is under current LUD located outside the existing built-up area of Bratislava and affected municipalities and the construction does not require the demolition of permanent structures. Option "D" collides with the prospective areas of urbanization in the affected area that is in the cadastral area of Jarovce - areas of prospective amenities at 1.600 to 2.500 km. Prospective sports and recreation areas (ARTS Jarovské arm) will be underpasses via the tunnel in this option. In the area of Ketelec - Lieskovec an urban study of "Podunajské Biskupice-Lieskovec-Ketelec" has been developed, which reflects solution of the D4 highway in options "C" and "D". Variant E collides with Jegenešská access road at the proposed parking area, it is necessary to harmonize planned activities designed in ZS with the solution of D4, if this option will be recommended for further preparation. Following additional information, option "E" in the section of 8.0 to 8.5 km interferes with the territorial reserve of the HV route (energy corridor) of Slovnaft, a.s. If this option is recommended, it is necessary to harmonize the suggested solutions. Option "A" also extends into a protected zone I and II of Slovnaft, a.s. At 17.0 to 17.9 km (red option stationing) the highway intervenes in a prospective recreation area of Zelená voda in the cadastral area of Most pri Bratislave. Conflict of the airport interests has been solved in the Feasibility study, at 21.1 km (red option stationing) the highway route is in contact with the radio-beacon, it will need to address the security of the object (building of replacement, shifting the highway route). The impacts of the highway route on the objects of the Ministry of Defence were discussed with the authorities concerned, while the highway will be in contact with an underground unit of the Ministry of Defence at about 1.5 km. Option "D" is more favourable for prospective urbanization of the area in terms of land use for recreation and sports (ARTS Jarovské arm and P.Biskupice - Lieskovec - Ketelec). Impacts on land use 98

In terms of use of the current area all options have about the same effect.

12. Impacts on cultural and historical monuments Option C red at 10.350 km and option E green at 9.710 km crosses the protected cultural and technical monument - the original flood protection dike (implemented during the Austro- Hungarian Empire under the reign of Maria Theresa) as part of a secondary flood line (Upper Rye Island dike). The proposed option "C" does not collide with protected cultural monuments.

13. Impacts on archaeological sites Some archaeological findings may be expected in cadastral area of Jarovce and Rusovce that will require an archaeological survey.

14. Impacts on paleontological sites No important paleontological sites or geological sites have been discovered in the area.

15. Impacts on intangible cultural values The proposed options or their possible construction will not affect the intangible cultural values.

16. Other Impacts Impacts on Forests Impact of construction and operation of the proposed action on forestry will be mainly in the separation of forest vegetation by the highway route. During construction and operation the access to the forestry activities shall be ensured. Impact on water management In terms of the impact of construction and operation of the highway on water management it can be considered significant impacts such as direct impacts related to crossing existing hydro- meliorations and indirect effects related to the existence of water management important areas and protection zones of water resources in the wider area through the possible contamination of groundwater. The impact on the affected hydro-meliorations is solved in the technical design of the D4 highway, impacts on PWMAs and water resources have been described in previous sections hereof. According to Decree no. 211/2005 Coll. of the MoE, the important water management watercourses are the Danube under Bratislava at 1,708.2 to 1,850.2 rkm and above Bratislava at 1,872.7 to 1,880.2 rkm, the Little Danube and Šúrsky channel throughout the entire section. Within Gabčíkovo Water Dam, there is a seepage canal of Janíkov dvor - Jarovce - Rusovce - Čunovo. The water facilities are respected within the technical design of the D4 highway. Šúrsky channel according to the administrator´s data SVP, OZ Danube Basin, Management of internal waters of Šamorín was built to drain all the watercourses flowing down from the Little Carpathians. But the mouthed streams were not protected against alluviation, so the channel became sludgy over time. Mouth of Vajnorský waste then required the deepening of the channel. The flow is now regularly maintained, there is a sporadic tree stand on the banks, river bed is overgrown with aquatic plants. D4 highway route is situated near the channel by digging groove (sealing bathtub). The flow administrator requires for ensuring the maintenance and protection of the channel to keep min. 10 m, and in exceptional cases 5 m wide operating strip from the foot of the dam until D4 highway. Impact on flood protection of the area Option "D" tunnel underpasses flood protection dikes, i.e. the right bank at 2,650 km and the left bank at 4,510 km. In the case of the right dyke the tunnel overburden will be very small and necessary, given the proximity of the seepage canal, to be reinforced below the dyke in order to avoid its deformation. In the case of left dyke the tunnel overburden is about 10 m thick, which

99 will ensure sufficient stability of the dyke at the proposed tunnel boring technology. Flow administrator require, in addition to maintenance and safety of dikes (min. 10 m wide operating band from the foot of the dyke) and secure tunnel so that in the event of flooding, the tunnel will not form preferred way for water into inundation areas, it means to secure tunnel portals by lockable gates, which is not necessary for options "C" and "E". Based on the above it can be assumed that the impact on flood protection of the territory will be more significant in option "D" than options "C" and "E". Impacts on industrial production and technical sites The proposed road does not directly affect (possible demolition) any of the industrial, production and other technical sites. It can favourably affect some production and entrepreneurial activities within the region. D4 route extends into the mining area of gravel in Ketelec what was mentioned in the previous sections of the report. According to the data obtained, these deposits are to be mined and reclaimed at the time of highway construction, so that they will not be affected. Impact on gravel extraction in the cadastral area of Most pri Bratislave was mentioned in the previous section of the report At 3.1 km of the red option, the highway route passes nearby Bratislava water company and at 11.900 to 12.300 km (red option stationing) passes near the Slovasfalt´s packaging plant, but it is led out of their areas, the impact on listed buildings will only be during construction, however, their accessibility shall be ensured. The route of option "E" and "D" extends into a protected zone of I and II. degree of protection of Slovnaft. Impact on hunting and fishing Impact on the activities of hunters and fishermen in the affected area will be particularly important in the construction period, when the activity will be significantly restricted (establishment of a bridge directly in the waters of Jarovské arm, construction of the highway right in hunting areas). After completion of construction and during operation, mainly hunting activity will be partly reduced with respect to the occupation of hunting areas by the highway and due to excessive noise the game will probably move to quieter areas of the Danube floodplains, which will cause the changes to the frontier of the hunting grounds. Impacts on non-production activities The proposed options will not directly affect non-productive activities, indirectly, positively affecting the activities associated with the development of suburban recreation and sports area, which gradually is to be built. Impacts on services, recreation and tourism Construction of the highway in option "D" like in option "A" does not negatively affect the existing service activities in the affected area associated with the devices in high season serving for cyclists, skaters and walkers who use the adjacent area for their sports activities (option "C" will not affect the devices). Other services will be positively affected, mainly catering services during construction. The further development of services in the affected area may be subject to possible construction of production plants, which will benefit from the accessibility of the area using the new transport infrastructure after completion of the high-capacity road. The assessed highway is directly situated in the suburban area of Bratislava, while after completion of construction it will indirectly have a positive impact on the development of all activities related to the provision of services to meet the increased traffic of the area due to the convenient transport access through planned interchanges. Option "D" tunnel will not interfere in the area of projected recreation, sports and tourism area ARST Jarovské arm, in this section, the highway is led by subsurface. Parallel use of Jarovské arm and its surrounding for recreation and sports activities (houseboats) will also not be affected. The construction phase only represent a partial impact. Options "C" and "E" in terms of future

100 land use for recreation and sports (impact on ARTS) will have more significant negative impact than option "D". Option D tunnel, however, does not provide the ability to interconnect both banks of the Danube - Jarovce and Biskupice including the inter-dyke spaces for hiking, respectively cycling (linking of international Danube cycle trail). For the territory defined by Lieskovec and Ketelec CD Podunajské Biskupice prepares urban study of "Podunajské Biskupice - Lieskovec - Ketelec" area as a recreational and rest area with physical activities, golf resorts etc.. The highway route will not significantly affect the draft future land use, while in terms of land use, its perception and the availability, the more favourable solution of the highway is in southern option "C". Other impacts mentioned in the report of 04/2010 are the same for all options. Positive impacts on the bike and hiking trails during operation will be ensured by linking both banks of the Danube in both options by a bridge, which will have a path for pedestrians and cyclists allowing access to the recreational area in between the dikes. Access for pedestrians and cyclists to the bridge over the Danube from the existing bike trails and paths is designed with a pair of ramps in three places. A partial positive impact on recreation, sports and tourism in the territory concerned may be regarded as improving accessibility of the area through the proposed intersections. In Most pri Bratislave at 17.0 to 17.9 km, the highway route extends into the area of the village recreation facilities with suburban area of Zelená voda, where the mined gravel pits are used for recreational purposes associated with swimming etc. However, there are no service facilities built in this area, recreational use is still just natural swimming. At present, gravel mining has been restored in the area, therefore the use of the site will be quite limited until the end of mining. With regard to the highway route through the said area, the use of Zelená voda for recreation will be limited by negative impacts, particularly noise. Impacts on infrastructure In terms of impacts on infrastructure it is needed to include collisions with existing roads, railways and collisions with existing utilities as significant impacts of the highway construction. These are designed as induced investments. Impacts on territorial development The proposed activity will have an impact on territorial development of affected municipalities. According to the valid land use documentation of individual municipalities, the impact on their territorial development can be assessed as follows: The proposed activity will have an impact on territorial development of Bratislava, affected municipalities and higher territorial units. According to the valid land use documentation of Bratislava region, Bratislava City, Most pri Bratislave, Zálesie and Ivanka pri Dunaji, the impact on their territorial development can be assessed as follows: Option C red  acceptable for the city of Bratislava and HTU  acceptable for Most pri Bratislave  acceptable for Zálesie  acceptable for Ivanka pri Dunaji Option E green  for the city of Bratislava and HTU options "E" and "D" are not consistent with LUD, it will be necessary to make and agree on "Amendments to the LUD" for the selected option  acceptable for Most pri Bratislave  acceptable for Zálesie  acceptable for Ivanka pri Dunaji Option "D" - blue

101

 for the city of Bratislava and HTU options "E" and "D" are not consistent with LUD, it will be necessary to make and agree on "Amendments to the LUD" for the selected option  acceptable for Most pri Bratislave  acceptable for Zálesie  acceptable for Ivanka pri Dunaji Impact on the transport system and transport infrastructure The submitted proposed activity is part of the superior highway network and will fulfill the role of a zero circuit of Bratislava. The basic road system of Bratislava is a separate group of roads from a selected road network, which executes a decisive share of road transport in the city and whose quality is decisive for the operability of the whole urban transport system. ZAKOS consists of traffic circles (inner and central), traffic semicircle, radial roads and connecting section. In the future the transport circles will be formed by the following roads:  inner traffic circle - Staromestská, Štefánikova, Šancová, Legionárska, Karadžičova, Dostojevského rad, Vajanského and Rázusovo nábrežie  outer traffic circle – Bojnická, tunnel, under the Small Carpathians, D2 highway,  zero circle – proprosed D4 highway (thus also this assessed section) An analysis of the current state of car traffic shows that the largest increase in traffic and at the same time most critical situation is reflected in the central traffic circle, or in contact with it on entering radial roads. Fully and more urgently, the requirement, applied for all processed conceptual materials so far, for completing the highway sections, completion of the selected road network with the missing sections, the extension of the selected road network with additional traffic lanes and rebuilding the crucial intersections from level to partially or completely elevated junctions is being confirmed. In terms of traffic engineering assessment, it would be appropriate to consider, with a view to solve international, supra-regional and regional relations, the implementation of the following transport structures with the start of construction in the next five years:  The following radial roads Lamacska, Racianska, Senecka and Biskupicka.  D1 highway increase in capacity of Harbour bridge (to build a parallel bridge)  D1 highway Harbour Bridge - Vajnory EI to the six-lane reserved for the eight-lane  R7 expressway Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná - Harbour Bridge  D4 Highway Jarovce (D2) - Ivanka North (D1)  D4 Highway Ivanka North (D1) – Stupava - South (D2)  Extending road I/61 to the four-lane road with unlimited access  The road of regional significance - D1 highway link with road II/502 (connection to bypass of Pezinok and Sv. Jur)  D4 highway Devínska Nová Ves - nat. border SK/A Impacts on the transport system and transport infrastructure are the same in all options. The disadvantage of option D is limited possibility of increasing the capacity of the highway after 2040 by completing the third driving lane (6-lane) due to the tunnel Danube in category 2T8, i.e. two separate two-lane (not three-lane) tunnels. Newly designed extension of R7 from Ketelec interchange with D4 to Prievoz interchange with D1 is significantly beneficial for the transport and transport relations. This solution will add another SE radial road and significantly relieve traffic on the road I/63, respectively. on Svornosti street in Podunajské Biskupice.

17. Spatial synthesis of the impacts of activities in the area In terms of the previous section of the report, assessing the expected impacts in terms of their importance and the time course of action is based on the identification of inputs and outputs of

102 the proposed plan, while the basic classification lies in the significance in the modification of the current state of the environment, whether in a negative but in a positive direction and also the timing of their action. The expected impacts in terms of significance can be classified as follows:  Degree 1 - very significant impacts  Degree 2 - significant impacts  Degree 3 - less significant impacts  Degree 4 - impacts without significance The expected impacts in terms of timing can be classified as follows:  a - impacts during construction  b - impacts during operation  c - impacts during construction and operation When evaluating the different impacts in terms of their significance, the fact needs to be taken into account that the area is heavily anthropogenically modified agricultural land close to the agglomeration of Bratislava, Most pri Bratislave and Ivanka pri Dunaji. The beginning of the section where the NATURA 2000 site is located is opposite. The evaluation does not consider the emergency situations. Degrees of expected negative effects in terms of significance and the time of action are presented in the following table: Expected negative impact in terms of significance and the time of action Environmental element Option E Option D blue Option C red green Rock environment and relief 1a 4a 4a Surface water 2c 2c 2c Groundwater 1a, 2b 2c 2c Soils 1a 1a 1a Air 3a, 4b 3a, 4b 3a, 4b Biota and habitats 2a, 3b 1a, 2b 1a, 2b Protected areas, Natura 2000, TSES 2a, 3b 1a, 2b 1a, 2b Landscape Scenery 4c 3c 3c Quality of life of the population concerned 2a, 3b 2a, 3b 2a, 3b Territorial development 4c 3c 2c Infrastructura and transport 2a 2a 2a Health risks of population 2a, 4b 2a, 4b 2a, 4b

The geological environment and relief - option "D" tunnel will have a very significant impact on the geological environment especially in the section of the tunnel, including entrance and exit gates, as it will pass through highly-permeable horizons of gravel, which may result in pollution of the environment and also in terms of geotechnical risks the tunnel implementation with entrance and exit gates will be very difficult to ensure the stability of the rock environment due to its high water horizon and unfavourable engineering geological properties (quaternary and Neogene sediments) for tunnel boring. The geological environment and relief in the route of options "C" and "E" can be characterized as well feasible without significant geodynamic phenomena with favourable engineering geological properties. Impacts of the proposed activity are assessed as insignificant and only during construction. Surface water in the area is represented by the rivers of Danube, Little Danube and Šúrsky channel, Biskupické arm, waterways of channels built within the Gabčíkovo WD and gravel pit

103 lake of Zelená voda. Surface water is very vulnerable (possible direct pollution), particularly during construction. Option "D" is in the section of the Danube led through the tunnel, the proposed tunnel boring technology does not assume impact on the surface water quality and regime in the affected area during construction, however, the right bank seepage canal may be directly affected, which is in close proximity to the proposed west portal for boring. The ground water in the affected area is very vulnerable due to the high throughput of the environment. Impact of highway routing with respect to its position in PWMA Rye Island is considered significant during construction and operation, while in option "D" tunnel there is a very significant risk of influencing groundwater during construction. Soils are mainly affected by land use, so it is a very important impact especially during construction. Air pollution is affected by the overall air quality in the area. Given that the current transport is practically only redistributed and will be proportionately increasing even if the D4 was not implemented, only accumulation of air pollution in poor dispersion conditions will be changed, but in open landscape outside the local municipalities, with significantly better ventilation capability. The impact is considered insignificant during operation. During construction, there may be an accumulation of air pollution at construction yards and on access roads to the construction site at introduction of construction machinery and transport capacities in earthworks. The impact can be considered insignificant, but it will be only temporary. Biota, habitats, protected areas, Natura 2000 and TSES - in option "D" the area is only partially affected by interference in the forests and ecologically important segments of the landscape, while it will cause also local deforestation. The impact during construction is very important, when the direct forest plants disposal is to happen. During operation, the impact of option "D" will be in terms of stress factors insignificant. In options "C" and "E" the territory in terms of impacts on flora and fauna is directly affected, particularly by interference with the habitats of European importance and ecologically significant landscape segments, where there is also a considerable deforestation. The impact during construction is very important in both options, when the direct habitats disposal is to happen. During operation, the impact of both options can be regarded as significant in terms of the production of stress factors (noise, vibration). Impacts on landscape scenery of option "D" can be considered insignificant during construction and operation, given the nature of the current landscape. Option "D" led below the surface will be have in a protected area a minimal impact on the landscape scenery, but it is necessary in portal and pre-portal tunnel sections to pay sufficient attention to incorporating entrances and exits to the landscape scenery. In options 'C' and 'E' the possible effects on the landscape scenery can be regarded as insignificant during construction and operation, given the nature of the current landscape. However, the bridge over the Danube in a protected area will act in different manner, where it is necessary to ensure its architectural design incorporated in the territory of the Danube floodplains, taking into account the requirements to minimize the impacts on migration and bird overflows. The quality of life of the population concerned will be perceived differently during construction and during operation. It will be strongly influenced by the accumulation of negative factors such as noise, vibration, local increase in air pollution by air pollutants from transport, limited traffic on existing roads, and thus creation of collapses in traffic during construction. This impact is significant during construction and less important during operation for all options. The proposed activity for territorial development in terms of negative impacts can impose constraints and limits for future land use in the corridor of the highway due to its protection zone and also, in particular, by dividing the area with the line structure of the barrier action. Negative impact will be manifested in the area around Jarovské arm, with planned urbanization for

104 purposes of recreation, sports and tourism. Option "E" green affects the territory more significantly, it is less for option "C" and there is no for option "D". Infrastructure and transport during construction will be significantly affected because of the necessary relocation of networks and roads, traffic restrictions etc. The impact will be significant during construction in all options. The health risks are associated mainly with the operation, especially due to excessive noise. During construction, the noise and air pollution from traffic at the construction site will locally affect communities in the vicinity of construction yards, equipment, access roads in all options. During operation the health risks, particularly noise, will be eliminated by technical measures, the effects will be insignificant. Positive impacts during construction are expected in increasing building production, which will bring increased demand of the other production activities mainly in the production of building materials and products. During construction, the demand for services related to the construction of the structure will increase. During operation, a significant positive impact will be diverting the traffic outside the urban area of affected municipalities and relief of the zero option, which will have an overall impact on improving the accessibility of the area, improving transport links across the region and improving the existing adverse impacts particularly on the population (reduction of noise, air pollution, health risks and overall well-being and the quality of the affected population).

18. Comprehensive assessment of the expected impacts in terms of their significance and their comparison with the valid legislation Car traffic poses a direct threat to human health not only due to traffic accidents but also by producing pollutants and combustion and diesel engines, noise and vibrations caused by motor vehicles. Air pollution To determine the amount of pollutants emitted by a transport on a proposed highway, the dispersion study and its supplement for option "D" has been processed. Basic input data for the calculation of emissions were projected traffic volume and composition of traffic flow on the D4 highway, limit values for human health are not exceeded in either of the monitored periods, the highway route is conducted well away from residential areas. Noise and vibrations To assess noise ratios of the individual options of the highwaym the noise study and its supplement has been processed. The noise study reveals that the portion of transport, that will be taken over to the new high-capacity road, produces such a noise exposure that it requires to build noise barriers so as to meet the permissible noise limits from traffic set by Decree no. 549/2007 Coll., of the Ministry of Health, establishing details on the permissible values of noise, infrasound and vibration and on the requirements for the objectification of noise, infrasound and vibration in the environment, as amended by Decree no. 237/2009 Coll. amending and supplementing previous decree. Vibration study has not been processed separately, we expect that due to sufficient distance of the highway, there will be no impact on the affected population. On the other hand, the current state is to be significantly improved, as explained above.

Water pollution In accordance with Section 31 of Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on water, the area concerned is part of the protected water management area of (PWMA) Rye Island by Regulation no. 46/1978 Coll., with the principles of water protection in PWMA are embedded in the legislation. On the basis of a hydrogeological opinion the impact of the tunnel option on SPA os significantly more adverse especially during construction than options "C" and "E". Waste water limits are legally guaranteed in Government Ordinance no. 296/2005 Coll. laying

105 down quality requirements and qualitative targets for surface water and limit values for waste water and special water indicators. Based on the limits specified in the relevant legislation it is necessary to propose technical solution requirements for waste water treatment from the highway and within the meaning of the relevant legislative to propose disposal of waste water (sewage and paved areas) from the operation of the tunnel and parking areas. Habitats of Community importance Act no.543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection in Section 6 Protection of habitats defines that whoever intervenes in the habitat of Community importance or habitat of national importance, shall take appropriate alternative restoration measures resulting mainly from the documentation of nature and landscape protection; this obligation does not apply in the case of routine management of agricultural crops or forest plantations. If the restoration measures cannot be performed, the person shall pay financial compensation to the amount of social value of the affected habitat (§ 95). The financial compensation is the income of the state budget. Nature protection authority shall identify details of the restoration measures or financial compensation, the nature protection authority shall order the use of appropriate restoration measures and determine their scope and details or order to pay financial compensation to those who intervened in the habitat of Community importance or habitat of national importance without authorisation. Act no. 117/2010 Coll., amending and supplementing the nature and landscape protection act, as amended, and on amending and supplementing Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on assessment of impacts on the environment and on amendments to certain laws, as amended, which will be in force from 1 May 2010 amended the wording of Section 6 Protection of habitats. Nature protection authority provides statement to activities and competences are transferred to the district environment offices. In terms of affecting the habitats of European importance options "C" and "E" are significantly less favourable during construction and operation than the option "D". Land use During construction of the highway, ALU and FLU will be necessary, which has an area mentioned in the preceding sections of the report. After withdrawing land for non-agricultural purposes, it is necessary to follow relevant provisions of Act no. 220/2004 Coll. on the protection and use of agricultural land and use of forest land to comply with the provisions of Act no. 326/2005 Coll. on forests.

19. Operational risks and their possible impact on the area Risks associated with the implementation of the proposed activity may result from:  failure of technical and other measures,  failure of human factor,  external factors effects (natural forces, weather, etc.). The formation and effect of risks could adversely affect:  geological environment, surface and groundwater quality,  biota nature protected areas  air quality in view of the increase or excess of air pollution limits,  health and property of passengers in the event of an accident (possible collision with the crossing game)  health and fortune of residents in the wider area in the event of accident of vehicles carrying dangerous substances and their disposal.

The causes of such conditions may include:  leakage of harmful substances from construction machinery, machinery and equipment, heavy goods and passenger vehicles during construction and operation,  traffic collapse due to extreme weather,  other emergency situations.

106

The above potential risks that might threaten the quality of the individual components of the environment in that area are not significant and do not pose larger risks. Their limitations, resp. minimization will be ensured by technical and organizational measures, control of the observance of laws and regulations, etc. .. Risks of human origin are taken into account in particular solution of the management, control and monitoring. Other possible risks associated with the implementation of the proposed action, in addition to the above, are not expected. It may note that in the assessed area there are no sources of unacceptable risk to society if they strictly comply with measures for prevention, elimination, minimization and compensation of impacts on the environment and with all the operational and emergency plans.

V. OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY IMPACTS ON PROPOSED PROTECTED BIRD AREAS, SITES OF EUROPEAN IMPORTANCE OR THE EUROPEAN NETWORK OF PROTECTED AREAS (NATURA 2000) The proposed activity will have a negative impact on sites of Community importance or the European network of protected areas (Natura 2000). Impacts on protected nature and landscape areas of Natura 2000 There are locations of national and European network of protected areas in the route, or near the considered option "D". Given their mutual overlap we evaluate the impact on the NATURA 2000 sites, which also include national protected areas. These are processed in detail in the supplement to the 'Study' of impact assessment of the highway on protected areas listed in the annex to the report. Based on the processed supplement to the impact study of the highway on NATURA 2000 protected areas it can be stated that the route of option "D" passes through the affected protected area mostly below the surface via tunnel, it will not attack, unlike options "C" and "E", any habitats of European importance . Similarly, it describes the impacts on birds, which is detailed in the study of 04/2010 and its amendment of 04/2011. To compare the impacts of the assessed options on the affected birds in SPA Danube floodplains it is as follows: Negative Negative Negative Slovak name impact of the impact of the impact of the Scientific name Category (group) proposed proposed proposed activity (C) activity (E) activity (D) Western marsh Circus aeruginosus 1 1 0 H harrier Black kite Milvus migrans 3 3 1* H White-tailed eagle Haliaeetus albicilla 3 3 2* H Common redshank Tringa totanus 0 0 0 H Common tern Sterna hirundo 0 0 0 H Common Alcedo atthis 0-1 0-1 0-1 H kingfisher Tawny pipit Anthus campestris 0 0 0 H Sand martin Riparia riparia 0 0 0 H Little bittern Ixobrychus minutus 1 1 0 H Mediterranean Larus 0 0 0 H Gull melanocephalus Gadwall Anas strepera 2 1 0 H Garganey Anas querquedula 2 2 0 H Red-crested Netta rufina 2 1 0 H pochard Little egret Egretta garzetta 2 1 0 H 107

Black stork Ciconia nigra 3 3 1* H Common pochard Aythya ferina 1 1 0 n Tufted duck Aythya fuligula 1 1 0 n Common Bucephala clangula 1 1 0 n goldeneye Smew Mergus albellus 2 2 0 n water species 2 2 0 n groups Average impact 1.35 1.2 0.25

Explanation: Category H - nesting species Impact: 0 - without meaning; n - migrating and wintering species 1 - less significant impact; 2 - significant impact; 3 - very significant impact; * - The impact can be reduced by moving the east tunnel portal by about 350 m outside SPA Based on the above it can be concluded that option "D" will have an insignificant impact on affected birds in SPA Danube floodplains compared to options "C" and "E".

In such cases, under the Habitats Directive (Article 6) and § 38 par. 4 of the Act no. 24/2006 Coll. the following applies: "Should the outcome of the impact assessment show a negative impact of the proposed activity on the integrity of the territory of the system of protected areas to the objectives of protection and the absence of alternative solutions, without adverse effect or should these are not with less adverse effects, the proposed activity may be allowed only for imperative reasons of overriding public interest and subject to the imposition of compensatory measures under a special regulation. If the territory concerned hosts priority natural habitats or priority species, the proposed activity shall be allowed only from such imperative reasons of overriding public interest relating to public health, public safety or beneficial consequences of fundamental importance for the environment or in the opinion of the European Commission it is related to the other imperative reasons of overriding public interest." So then according to § 28 par. 5 and 6 of the Act on nature and landscape protection: 1) Provided that based on the outcome of the impact assessment under the special regulation 64c) it is necessary to take measures to offset the adverse effects of the plan or project on the integrity of the territory of the system of protected areas 64d), the applicant is obliged to request the approval of the Ministry to the method and conditions for their implementation. 2) Compensatory measures shall be comparable in scale aimed at adversely affected natural habitats of European importance and species of European importance and ensure comparable functionality with features of the territory affected by the plan or project so as to ensure protection of overall coherence of the EU system of protected areas. Based on the above it can be concluded that option "D" will have an minimal impact on affected birds in SPA Danube floodplains compared to options "C" and "E". During construction and operation of the highway in option "D" the following impacts will be seen: . temporary (during construction) and permanent (during operation) use of the affected parts of protected areas including the tree felling . Noise, light and emission pollution of the affected parts of protected areas. Other adverse collateral effect during construction and operation of highway in all options can be 108 the slaughter of animals in the contact protected area. However, these are only the sections of highway routed on the surface, while it is necessary to take precautions to protect the construction site and operated highway with suitable barriers that eliminate direct contact of mechanisms, respectively cars with animals. In options "C" and "E" the risk of contact of animals is more important than in option "D" (most of the affected section is led through the tunnel). Habitats of Community importance will not be affected by construction and operation of the highway in option "D", therefore there will be no fragmentation. Fragmentation of habitats is expected in options "C" and "E". Noise pollution around the highway will be particularly disturbing to wildlife. Hearing of many species is more sensitive than hearing of people. The reactions of each species present in the corridor of the highway on the mentioned stress factors are highly individual. Some species are unable to get adapted to these changes, but most of them prefer to avoid noisy areas. In general, we can say that the noise makes their mutual communication, mating and hunting difficult. In relation to wildlife no exact values of noise are set up that would not be disturbing to them, while we assume that the most significant stress impacts are in sections passing through protected area. For options "C" and "E" it is a whole section of viaducts routed in protected area, for option "D" it is only a section of the east portal of the tunnel. During construction of option "D" the increased noise pollution will be caused by machinery needed for the construction of sophisticated structures (excavated tunnels, sealing tubs), the noise of which from aggregates will cause stress on wildlife, but the impact will be temporary and will be completed after the construction of these objects. In operation of the highway we assume, mainly at the exit of the tunnel, it will cause so-called piston effect with an immediate multiple increase in the noise, however, the advantage is that the portal will be below ground and noise transmission to the environment will be partially eliminated. The largest noise pollution can be expected at the exit and entrance of cars in front of the tunnel where the highway routed in protected area on the ground, respectively slightly under the surface, which is documented in the processed model of sound propagation presented in the complement to the noise study. When compared, it is clear that the impact of noise on the affected area of conservation for options "C" and "E" will be very important than for option "D". Light pollution around the highway in a protected area will be caused both by vehicles passing through the section of the protected area, while in options "C" and "E" it is the entire length of viaducts, in option "D" only the grove section (ramp) at the east portal, respectively the lighting of portal, which is permanently in operation during the night because of a traffic safety. When compared, it is clear that the impact of glare on the affected area of conservation for options "C" and "E" will be very important than for option "D". Emissions around the highway in a protected area during normal operation are not expected in either of the options, as evidenced by a dispersion study (04/2010) and its amendment (04/2011). -3 Calculated annual limit value for the protection of vegetation (30μg.m NOx) will not be exceeded in any option of the D4 highway. One of the indirect impacts on protected areas, however, may also by a change in the water regime in the vicinity of the highway. Given that, according to the hydrogeological assessment, by construction of the tunnel and sealing tubs some changes in groundwater flow are expected in option "D", which can ultimately affect the current regime of fluctuations in groundwater levels, these changes may occur in the affected vegetation as well as in water level in adjacent arms. These impacts are not expected in options "C" and "E". The tree felling will occur during construction of the highway, whether in the route of options "C", "E" or "D", with precise specification of the range will be possible in the next stages of construction preparation. The tree felling will be concentrated, as well as activities in forest habitats, in the left bank of the Danube and the places of crossing the highway route with line and areal elements of non-forest tree and shrub vegetation in the agricultural landscape (same as

109 option "C" from Ketelec interchange). We expect that in option "D" a minor tree felling will be needed in the crossing of the Danube (route predominantly led via tunnel) than in options "C" and "E". Highway barrier effect with respect to animal migration in migration corridors will start acting during construction and will continue throughout operation. The barrier effect in the tunnel section of option "D", routed in the eastern side of the portal, will be in excavated tunnel more significant in the construction (open construction pit), after completion (tunnel spilling) it is virtually eliminated. During construction and operation of sealing tubs (entrance and exit ramp) the barrier effect of the highway will be the same. The killing of animals will be an ongoing activity during operation of the highway. Some animals are attracted by hot bitumen road (e.g. reptiles), others will be attracted by the available food (e.g. already-killed animals). Killing of particularly less mobile species will occur already during construction. Habitat fragmentation is considered one of the main causes of today's extinction. Roads and railways crash animal populations into smaller, often isolated units. Smaller populations are becoming less stable, exposed to greater predation pressure, reducing the availability of shelter and food, and may be threatened by inbreeding and genetic disorders. Consequences of fragmentation can be partly mitigated by establishing crossings through migration barriers. This, however, solves only the problem of insulation but not loss of interior habitats.After completing the grove sections of the entrance and exit of the tunnel (sealing tubs) of option "D", the highway routing on the bridge (option "E" and "C") for migration of terrestrial animals considerably more favourable, the built grove will be a permanent barrier across the section, for the bridge (option "E" and "C") only places of the pillars will be the permanent barrier, the remaining part will be passable by sufficient head clearance of the bridge structure. The opposite situation is in terms of impact on migrating birds where tunnel option "D" will not create any barrier, whereas bridges in options "C" and "E" will significantly affect bird migration corridor.

VI. CONCLUSIONS

1. Final opinion to the proposed activity

Based on the results of the assessment process carried out under the provisions of act that considered situation in the territory and carrying capacity of the natural environment, the importance of expected impacts of the proposed activity (including the cumulative effects) on the environment and human health in terms of the likelihood, scope, duration and nature, the place of performance of the proposed activity, opinions of bodies and organizations relevant to the proposed activity and affected by the proposed activity, as well as the opinion of the people living in the area of interest and other members of the public, in the present state of knowledge

it is recommended

to implement the proposed activity of "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka north" subject to meeting the conditions and implementation of the measures outlined in Part VI/3 hereof. Uncertainties identified in the evaluation process need to be addressed in subsequent stages of project documentation for activities authorized under special regulations.

2. Recommended option Based on the course of the whole assessment process on the proposed activity (technical documentation, plan, assessment report, assessment report - complement, opinions, minutes of public hearings, technical study, complement to the technical study, land use documentation,

110 preparation and possibilities of financial security, follow-up buildings ), as well as discussions during processing the expert opinion, processed complement to the assessment report (adding the option "D" blue), it is advisable to proceed as follows:

 at km 0.000 to 5.500 in the route of option "E" - green  at km 5.500 to 7.500 connection to option "C" - red  at km 7.500 - end of the section in the route of option "C" - red

In preparing the recommended option it will be needed in the next stage of technical documentation (DZP) to consider all reasonable measures to prevent, eliminate, minimize and compensate for the environmental impacts that are recommended in the final opinion, the measures resulting from the survey of biota and the outcome of the special proceedings under Act . 543/2002 Coll.

Concerning the option "C1" of Ivanka-north interchange Given the strong opposition of CD Vajnory with the D4 routing over D1 and requirements to affiliate solution of this interchange in the processing of tender documents for the selection of processor of project documentation for zoning procedure to the 1st section, it is recommended to resolve this issue in subsequent stages of project preparation.

3. Recommended conditions for the preparation, construction and operation of the proposed activity Following the assessment report, the results of the assessment process, the comments and opinions of relevant affected state authorities, affected communities, members of the public, results of the public hearings on the proposed activity, expertise and negotiations in the assessment process, the following conditions are recommended for preparation, implementation and operation of the proposed activity:

Planning Measures The proposed activity at the stage of preparation requires the amendments to Bratislava LUD, LUD HTU Bratislava Region, LUDs of Most pri Bratislave and Ivanka pri Dunaji. In principle, the corridor of the D4 highway of red option "C" is embedded in the LUD of Bratislava, Most pri Bratislave, Ivanka pri Dunaji and Bratislava region with minor variations, while its route is in the corridor of the original "zero" circuit of the city. At 18,797 km of D4 the territory should be reserved for any prospective construction of feeder "Zálesie" and "Zálesie" EI and prospective connection to the planned expressway in the cadastral area of Most pri Bratislave. It is also necessary to reserve an area for compensatory measures to protect the habitats that result from the draft Project for compensatory measures as a result of the special procedure under Act no. 543/2002 Coll.

Technical and administrative measures 1. To justify the superior public interest in accordance with § 40 of Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, and the SR Government Resolution no. 793 of 11 November 2009. 2. To conduct a survey of biota in the territory affected by the proposed activity (consult SNC SR RCOP in Bratislava, PLA Danube floodplains) and based on its results, develop Draft project for compensatory measures. The method and conditions for the implementation of compensatory measures, the applicant must request for approval from Ministry of Environment. 3. With the approval of Ministry of Environment it is eligible to carry out rescue transfers of protected species of organisms on the sites identified by the PLA Danube floodplains, SNC

111

SR RCOP in cooperation with Bratislava City Hall and Bratislava region. 4. Extension of the bridge over the Danube after about 5.5 km and a vertical alignment treatment so that the height clearance under the bridge is at least 3-4 m. By shifting the highway embankment outside forests and protected areas, the land use of these areas will be reduced. It also extends the space under the bridge, which allows migration and exchange of genetic information to a wider range of living organisms and their communities as a highway fencing on the embankment. 5. To consider the proposal of dual noise barrier in the next stage of PD, which will serve as the light barrier under the updated noise study, which are designed in the section which passes through protected areas on the Danube in order to reduce the area of space affected by the noise and light pollution, reducing the risk of collision of birds with cars. 6. In cooperation with BSK, MTCRD SR and Zálesie to ensure connectivity of Zálesie, as a separate structure after achieving traffic capacity on its merits. 7. Necessary tree felling in the route of the highway and also all work associated with the construction of the highway at 2.5 to 5.5 km (option E) to be implemented in the non- breeding season (August - February) and during the shortest period. The quantity of animals killed during the construction of the highway can be reduced by an appropriate timetable of work adn reducing time of construction. It will be based on the current state of nesting species (information provided by the Slovak State Nature Conservation), particularly vulnerable steps should be taken if the nest of the white-tailed eagle, the black kite or black stork are occupied near the structure. 8. Access roads to the construction site and construction yards to be situated outside the protected areas and TSES elements in order to avoid load on the sensitive area by noise and pollution, respectively to minimize direct land use in protected areas. If necessary building access roads, routes to be consulted with SNC SR RCOP in Bratislava and PLA Danube floodplains. 9. All temporary land use areas and areas damaged during highway construction in protected areas to be put after its completion to its original state using appropriate landscaping. When landscaping water areas along the highway to use mainly native plants, and in no case invasive species. 10. For bridges to use as low and clearly visible structure as possible. The aim is to reduce collisions of birds in PWMA with the bridges (e.g. cables) under the poor visibility. 11. To consider the R7 expressway Bratislava - Dunajská Lužná in option A red and its elongation until elevated junction of D1 Prievoz and technically resolve their connection in the next step of preparation of the action. 12. Adverse effects of noise, vibration and air pollution in the construction phase to be partly eliminated by placing the access roads to the construction site and construction yards outside the residential areas of municipalities. Given that access to the construction site will only be possible on the existing road network, which locally leads through urban areas, adverse impacts will be minimized by construction organization. 13. Projected adverse impacts of noise during operation in residential areas, to be eliminated by noise screens. To install sound insulation at Ivanka north interchange, including interchange branches and adjacent sections of D1 according to the conclusions of a detailed noise study in the next stage of PD. 14. At 17.0 to 17.9 km to assess the noise situation in the next stage of PD with regard to the use of the site Zelená voda for recreational purposes. 15. During construction and operation of the proposed activity to ensure the monitoring of the individual components of the environment by Project monitoring. 16. The potential activation of geodynamic processes (suffosion and instability) during construction, particularly in installing structures, to be registered by early engineering geological and hydrological surveys, and based on their results in the next stage of PD to

112

develop projects of remediation and stabilization measures, including monitoring with an emphasis on challenging bridge structures and excavated grove at 17.5 -18.8 km. 17. Protection of rock environment, surface and groundwater from pollution during construction and operation to be ensured by discipline in construction, appropriate documentation to deal with accidents and operational documentation. 18. The slopes and embankments tp be secured against wind and water erosion by suitable landscaping. 19. Necessary remedial measures for the installation of the highway to be designed in accordance with the results of engineering and geological survey. 20. Waste water from road sewage discharged into receiving waters, respectively by infiltrating into the rock environment must meet the requirements of water protection in PWMA Rye Island. 21. The waste water from the highway sewers in cad.area of Jarovce to be discharged into receiving waters even at the cost of pumping. 22. For the optimal design of waste water drainage from road by infiltration to carry out a hydrogeological survey at the site of the proposed infiltration objects. 23. In the section of excavated grove (sealing bath) at km 17.5 to 18.8 due to the expected impact on the groundwater regime and flow, to ensure hydrogeological survey and ensure the resulting measures. 24. During construction and operation of the proposed activity to ensure the monitoring of surface and ground water, including waste water from building yards and effluents from road drains and sewers in parking areas. 25. Summary and handling with topsoil and subsoil will be in accordance with the decision of the competent authority for ALU protection. 26. Handling with leaf litter and removing stumps and roots will be in accordance with the decision of the competent authority for FLU protection. 27. Protection of soil from pollution during construction and operation is necessary to be ensured by discipline in construction, appropriate documentation to deal with accidents and operational documentation. 28. Reverse reclamation of temporary ALU and FLU, demolishing roads and so on needs to be addressed in terms of the decision of the competent authority and reclamation project in the next stage of PD. 29. For temporary deposition of materials (eg. soil from excavation) to use low-quality non- agricultural areas. 30. Building a passage for animals at 10.35 km. Passage (subway) is located at the intersection of the old Danube embankment, being a cultural technical monument. It is proposed to build a multifunctional bridge. The bridge needs to be supplemented by landscaping. 31. At 10.35 km the route of D4 passes the protection dikes through the embankment, which is a cultural and technical monument and also local cycle trail. The possible collision is to be solved by bridge (the measure is also mentioned in nature conservation). 32. Building a passage for animals at 14.2 km. Passage (subway) is designed at the point where the highway is led above the surrounding terrain and where are relatively extensive areas suitable for animals on both sides of the highway. The bridge needs to be supplemented by landscaping. 33. To extend the bridge over the Little Danube in order to increase functionality of interconnection of the bio-corridor of the Little Danube at the intersection with the highway for terrestrial organisms (game species, but also protected animals) 34. The highway route passes mostly through agricultural land around the settlements, the integration of the highway needs the design of appropriate landscaping of higher embankments, intersection branches and parking areas. 35. Mitigating the barrier effect of the highway by bridges of sufficient brightness and range. To

113

minimize the separating effect to respect recommended measures to extend bridges, respectively adding bridges (crossings for animal). 36. When processing the next stage of PD to check the current status of the affected gravel mines in highway route in terms of meeting the conditions of the District Mining Office in Bratislava (requirements for treatment and rehabilitation of the gravel pit after completion of mining according to the plan of opening the project documentation (POPD deposit), which was provided to the companies concerned, extracting the gravel in the area of Ketelec at about 8.2 to 8.6 km and in the area of Zelená voda at 17.2 to 17.4 km, which may influence the technical design of the highway structures in these sections (founding body of the highway, bridge structures). 37. In the next stage of PD to carry out archaeological research and propose the necessary measures. 38. During construction and operation, to provide technology and services of the area for agricultural and forestry activities and the proposed bridges to be designed in sufficient headroom brightness and width. The technical proposal to conform to the relevant agricultural and forestry companies. 39. Due to changes in hunts, relocations of the field roads and bridges, the new landscaping projects to be developed. 40. In the next step of the project documentation to coordinate requirements of concerned hunting associations to the highway route through the hunting grounds. 41. Respect the requirements of Slovak Water Management Enterprise:

In bridging the Danube at about 1,860 rkm and its inundation area: 1. Height of lower bridge at the fairway must respected the min. navigational height. The flow administrator provides the designer with basic information about the position of the fairway, navigable waterway and navigational height. The data form the starting basis for the design parameters of the bridge. 2. Position of the pillars of the bridge over the Danube in the area of the protective dikes (the left and right bank of the Danube) must respect their protection zones, i.e. at least 10 m from the foot of upstream and air slope of the protective dike, respectively at least 10 m from the bank line of seepage canal. Pillars must not be located in the body of the dam or in the profile of the seepage canal. 3. Pillars in the inundation area, the flow profile of Danube arms and in the actual flow profile of the Danube, must have the appropriate hydraulic shape. In subsequent stages of project documentation we require to solve turning the pillars of a bridge mathematically, respectively by physical model, due to flood discharges in the Danube and assess the impact of the pillars on the impoundment of water levels in the Danube. Width of navigation gabarit must be min. 120 m (i.e. the distance between pillars in the Danube riverbed) and the height of navigation gabarit min. 10 m from the max. navigation levels. 4. For the optimal design of the bridge it would be appropriate partly in option E to partly adjust the route of existing Biskupické arm. The length of the adjustment is proposed to 150 m. The original riverbed is necessary to be filled up in the length of about 100 m. 5. Minimize installing pillars of a bridge in the flow on the route through Jarovecké arm.

Crossing D4 with the Little Danube Crossing the Little Danube by the highway is requested in the next stage of "PD" to keep the existing profile of the Little Danube riverbed.

Šúrsky channel 1. It requires for ensuring the maintenance and protection of the channel to keep min. 10 m wide operating strip from the foot of the dam until D4 highway.

114

2. Observe the regime of the protected water management area of Rye Island pursuant to § 31 of Act no. 364/2004 Coll. on Water.

42. After the precise measurement of the area in option "C" red at 11.9 to 12.3 km in stationing of red option with asphalt mixing packaging plant of Slovasfalt, to ensure its protection e.g. by a main wall, or shift the route so that the highway does not intervene in the complex area of packaging plant. 43. To ensure the functioning of the international Danube cycle trail for bridging the Danube, to build cycle and pedestrian interconnection of the both banks and an island between the Jarovské arm and the main stream. 44. During construction, to ensure permanent access to that territory. The technical solution needs to respect functionality of existing access road. 45. Respect recreational use of Zelená voda in cad. area of Most pri Bratislave et 17.0 to 17.9 km in stationing of option "C" red, to respect local bike trails that lead along the Sursky channel. 46. In the next stage of PD, crossing conditions of the infrastructure should be discussed with the relevant administrators. 47. D4 highway crossings with I., II., and III. class roads and with railway line to be designed with elevated roads. 48. Permanent and temporary use of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes to be addressed pursuant to Act No. 220/2004 Coll. on the protection and use of agricultural land and amending Act No. 245/2003 Coll. on integrated prevention and control of environmental pollution and on amendment of certain laws.

Mitigation measures It is necessary to conduct the Mitigation measures study for identified impacts.

Compensatory measures The measures are proposed as: 1. compensation for losses caused by the assessed activity and 2. compensation for the material loss.

1.) Compensation for losses caused by the assessed activity Given that the assessment process has demonstrated that the building will have a negative impact on the favourable conservation status of some species of birds that are protected in SPA Danube floodplains, the proposed activity can be implemented only for imperative reasons of overriding public interest and subject to the imposition of compensatory measures under Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection. Compensatory measures shall be comparable in scale aimed at adversely affected natural bird species and shall ensure comparable functionality with features of the territory affected by the activity so as to ensure protection of overall coherence of the EU system of protected areas. Compensatory measures (implement rescue transfer of rare plant and animal species to another location) should be implemented so that the replacement of damaged habitats was established prior to destruction, that means as the first object in the implementation of the highway construction. The method and conditions for the implementation of compensatory measures shall request approval by the applicant from the authority of the state administration of nature and landscape protection - Ministry of the Environment.

2). Compensation for the material loss

115

 Compensatory measures related to soils result from the relevant legislative provisions, namely from the Act No. 220/2004 Coll. on the protection and use of agricultural land and amending Act No. 245/2003 Coll. on integrated prevention and control of environmental pollution and on amendment of certain laws.  Compensatory measures related to forests result from the relevant legislative provisions, namely from the Act No. 326/2005 Coll. on forests.  Compensatory measures relating to the tree felling will be handled in accordance with Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, and in accordance with the Implementing regulation no. 24/2003 Coll., establishing social value of wood plants.  Compensation for the material losses will be dealt with under the current legislation (Decree of the Ministry of Justice no. 492/2004 establishing the general value of assets), individually in close coordination structure´investor, those concerned, representatives of the affected municipalities.

Organizational and Operational Measures The main objective of organizational and operational measures is to prevent unforeseen circumstances, especially accidents, work and operational disorders, or other damages, excessive waste and to reconcile work and technological procedures with applicable legislation and relevant technical standards. It is the development of Master plan for construction organization (POV), emergency plans, handling and processing orders, the waste management plans, organizational directives on health and safety or others. The plan includes also material and technical equipment for their implementation. During construction, the mitigation of the above negative effects on the environment to be achieved primarily through compliance with required technological discipline at various construction works and for maintenance of machines, by keeping borders of the structure, implementing temporary fencing in selected sections of the site, timely and meaningful transfer of materials and matters (without unnecessary transfer stations), transport organization minimizing crossings of affected municipalities, paved areas under parking lots of cars and construction machinery, with preventing pollution of subsoil and adjacent flows, cleaning mechanisms before the leaving the site to nearby roads, continuous maintenance of the used roads (cleaning, or spraying in order to reduce dust), and ensuring perfect diversion of rainfall and groundwater from the site. Construction of the highway due to lack of embankment soil from its own excavations will require the establishment of borrow pits. Conditions for site selection should be adequately adapted to the general requirements for the protection of all environmental elements and approved by the representatives of municipalities. Other measures In the next phase of construction preparation we recommend to develop, in addition to the proposed measures, the following documentation respectively surveys and other measures during construction and operation: Other measures in the preparatory phase of the selected option: 1. Conduct (the claimant) a detailed biotic survey to be consulted with the SNC SR RCOP in Bratislava, PLA Danube floodplains and BROZ at least within one year for the recommended option "E" green. To that end, the claimant will ensure the development and implementation of "Compensatory measures project", which will include an inventory of species habitats (feeding, nesting, etc.), which are adversely affected by the construction of highway determining their size and function in a given area and the proposal for implementing measures, that sufficiently offset the negative effects of the project on the SPA Danube floodplains. It will include a timetable for implementation of compensatory measures. Compensatory measures shall be comparable in scale aimed at adversely affected natural habitats 116

of European importance and species of European importance and ensure comparable functionality with features of the territory affected by the proposed activity so as to ensure protection of overall coherence of the EU system of protected areas. 2. MTCRD SR in cooperation with the Ministry of Environment shall inform on the compensatory measures the European Union under Art. 6 of the Habitats Directive. 3. Engineering geological survey and based on its results to clarify environmental and technical design of the structure. 4. Hydrogeological survey to determine the conditions of infiltration of waste water from road sewage and groundwater protection in PWMA, examination of the impact on the groundwater regime in the sealing tub et 17.5 to 18.8 km. 5. Archaeological survey. 6. Pedological survey. 7. Dendrological survey. 8. Anti-corrosive and geoelectric survey. 9. Design appropriate construction technology of dilatation units for the bridge across the Danube so as to minimize interference with the protected natural areas. 10. Specify the measures proposed in the protected areas, spatial solution of proposed eco-ducts and multifunction barriers in cooperation with the staff of SNC SR. 11. Specify new sources of filling material. 12. Suggest anti-emission and anti-erosion protection of the immediate vicinity of road by tree and bush planting on the slopes of the road. 13. Suggest reclamation and landscaping in places of distortion and intervention in the bio- corridors with a view of a rapid return of vegetation to its original condition using appropriate plants into the environment i.e. to use primarily geographically and traditional indigenous tree species (to exclude planting of invasive species). 14. Increased attention to be paid to land use elaborate with evaluation of the quality, balance and the use of overburden material. 15. Ensure waste disposal in accordance with the Waste Act. 16. A special attention to be paid to setting the conditions for the technical work influencing groundwater and surface water regime. 17. Deal with the conflicts of interest of the road construction with the existing infrastructure and to clarify the proposed solution caused by technical measures. 18. Propose measures to minimize the land use in protected areas in the technical solution. 19. Suggest a mix of the road, in particular embankments with maximum use of excavated soil from its own construction. 20. Develop project monitoring the individual environmental components (input data for post- project analysis) at the points provided in the Final Opinion 21. Ensure environmental monitoring of the site. 22. During construction and operation of the highway it requires a plan of preventive measures for preventing uncontrollable leakage of hazardous substances into the environment and for the procedure in case of their leakage and approved by the relevant state water management authority. 23. We recommend the highway route to be confronted with the Registry of landfills on the National Geological Institute in Bratislava, as well as with results of the geological project "Systematic identification of environmental burdens in Slovakia", which was implemented from 2006 to 2008. 24. To ensure in advance property rights settlement to the estate in the route of the proposed road under the current legislation and for the solution of compensatory measures to protect the habitats that result from the outcome of the special procedure under Act no. 543/2002 Coll. and Directive 92/43/EEC and with current Slovak legislation.

117

Other measures during construction 1. Implement measures to prevent leakage of harmful substances into the soil and bedrock. 2. In cooperation with the competent authorities to exclude construction interventions, or protect them by fencing, in significant locations (outside the permanent and temporary road use). 3. Within POV, take actions against noise, emissions and dust in nearby buildings. 4. Solve the capture and purification of waste water from building yards and the water in lowering the groundwater level from the pits before they are discharged into watercourses. 5. Carry out biological reclamation and return to its original purpose on temporary used lands after completion of the construction. 6. In terms of water quality, it is essential to follow the technological discipline, to prevent direct leakage of contaminants, mainly fuels and lubricants into surface and groundwater. 7. Take precautions to prevent secondary dust during transportation of bulk materials 8. Before construction remove only necessary plants, which are located in the road route and carry out felling in non-vegetation and non-breeding season. 9. Road topsoil and subsoil to be removed, to pass the topsoil for agricultural activities and store subsoil during construction and after completion of the construction to be used for vegetation and landscaping. 10. Forest soil to be used for reclamation of forest land of temporary occupation after completion of construction. 11. After completion of the work associated with the construction to immediately proceed to the reclamation works and revitalizing. 12. Remove and restore all areas of landfills and various commercial areas in the perimeter of the structure with its use as areas with suitable vegetation species composition. 13. Ensure monitoring of selected elements of the environment according to the approved project documentation. 14. In the case of archaeological and paleontological findings during construction to inform the relevant professional institute (Archaeological Institute in ). 15. Construction contractor cooperation with the affected municipalities in determining the routes, the arrangement of machinery traffic, the way of maintenance of roads, traffic signs and traffic control during construction. Other measures during operation 1. Perform post-project analysis of monitoring adopting the measures if the assessed components of the environment will be more burdened as expected. 2. Dispose of waste in accordance with applicable laws. 3. Ensure continued monitoring of selected elements of the environment according to the recommendations of the post-project monitoring analysis. 4. In the case of demonstrating adverse effects by monitoring to quickly solve their elimination by appropriate technical and organizational measures.

4. Justification of the Final opinion including justification for acceptance or non-acceptance of submitted written opinions on the Assessment Report

The Final opinion was drawn up in accordance with § 37 of the Act, based on the results of the assessment process using all available documents and the results of the Assessment report and relevant documentation, opinions of interested bodies, authorizing bodies and departmental body, affected municipalities, the results of the public hearing, opinions received from citizens, the Parliamentary Committee for economic policy, Minister of MTCRD SR and expert opinion. Ministry of Environment thoroughly considered all comments and opinions from all parties concerned, experts and the public. All complaints, whether submitted in writing or orally, were discusses with the claimant, processor of the assessment report and processors of expertise and 118 substantiated comments were reflected by the Ministry in the Final opinion on the draft measures.

The Final opinion was drawn up mainly based on the following documents:  Assessment report on impacts of „D4 highway, Jarovce – Ivanka north“, GEOCOSULT, s.r.o., Miletičová 21, 520 05 Bratislava, 04/2010  Assessment report - complement on impacts of „D4 highway, Jarovce – Ivanka north“, GEOCOSULT, s.r.o., Miletičová 21, 520 05 Bratislava, 04/2011  Technical Study "D4 highway, Ivanka north interchange with D1 highway - alternative solution" (GEOCOSULT s.r.o. 04/2010)  The Feasibility and efficiency study for D4 Bratislava Jarovce - Ivanka North - Stupava South - nat. border SK/A, Dopravoprojekt Bratislava, 2009  Scope of the assessment to the proposed activity "D4 highway, Jarovce - Ivanka North" issued by Ministry of the Environment  Opinions to the Assessment Report  Minutes from the public discussion on the Assessment Report  Minutes of the presentation and consultation of the assessment report - complement  Opinions to the Assessment Report - complement  Expert opinion on the Assessment Report In evaluating documents and processing Final opinion it followed the provisions of Act No.24/2006 Coll. on Assessment of impacts on the environment and on amendments to certain laws, as amended.

Preferring options in the assessment report, the assessment report-complement, opinions and public hearings is as follows:

1. Recommended option under the assessment report The following options were considered:  "C" red - modification of options "A" and "B" listed in the plan  "E" green - (viaduct) of crossing over the Danube recommended in the Feasibility and effectiveness study of D4 highway

Based on a comparison of assessed options of D4 highway, section Jarovce - Ivanka north, processors recommend under the assessment report option "E" green with the transition to option "C" red in combination with option "C1" of Ivanka - north interchange.

2. Recommended option under opinions to the assessment report The opinions on the assessment report give different views on the selection of the final option. They are listed in the following table (the table does not mention observations and conditions - see the detailed chapter III.3):

Table: Recommended option to the Assessment Report Recomended option Authority rese. the public Other "C" red "E" green Authority Ministry of Transport - for Affected Bratislava City - - No opinion municipality received CD Podunajské Biskupice for - CD Vajnory - for D4 under D1 CD Ružinov - for

119

CD Rusovce - - No comments on the options Affected MPŽPRR SR, Section of - - No comments authority geological rights of natureal on the options resources MPŽPRR SR, Section for nature - Specified and landscape protection measures for both options MoD SR - No comments on the options Bratislava Region Office for for Both options are suitable Regional Environmental Office - for in Bratislava District Office for Road for No comments Transport and Roads in on the report Bratislava District Office for Road for Transport and Roads in Senec District Environmental Office in - for Bratislava Senec District Office, for No comments Department COaKR District Mining Office in - for No comments Bratislava Regional Public Health Office - for Bratislava Slovak Railway, Bratislava for for No comments Other entities Slovak Water Management - Agrees with Enterprise, Bratislava both options with conditions SNC SR and SNC SR, RCOP in - for Agrees with Bratislava, PLA Danube meeting floodplains in Bratislava measures. Slovnaft a.s. for Holcim, Bratislava for Hunting Association Danube - for BROZ, Bratislava - It requires equivalent Public comprehensive assessment of option D tunnel. Klára Hornišová, Bratislava - Does not recommend the implementation Ing. Róbert Porubčan, Ivanka p/D - - Requires Ivanka north EI in option "C"

120

Mgr. Ing. Ivana Číkova, Vajnory - - Does not recommend the implementation

From the opinions received it can be stated:  against the construction two public representatives.  in favour of option "C" red 4 organizations (one of which the municipality concerned, one authority concerned and the two legal persons)  in favour of option "E" green 11 organizations (of which two concerned municipalities, Ministry of Transport and 8 of the bodies concerned, 1 legal entity)  no preferred option 6 organizations concerned

Citizens, civil initiatives and non-governmental organizations in their submissions presented a favourable opinion provided the implementation of their proposals. Observations of BROZ and SZOPK, Bratislava, pointing to the equivalent environmental assessment of tunnel option with the other options, ensured by NDS, a.s. in the assessment report - complement, which has considered option "D" - tunnel.

Acceptable and justified comments of citizens (Ms. Hornišová, Číková, Mr. Porubčan), have been reflected in the draft measures.

3. Recommended option under opinions to the assessment report-complement: Table: Recommended option to the report - complement Authority rese. the public Option Other concerned C E D Authority MDVRR SR for Option "D" nor recommended Affected Capital city of Bratislava - - - They agree with the authority highway and promote the most effective and fastest option CD Podunajské - - - No opinion received Biskupice CD Vajnory - - - No opinion received CD Ružinov - - - No opinion received CD Rusovce against Does not agree with option "D" MPŽPRR SR, Section of - - - No comments on the geological rights of options natural resources MPŽ SR, Department of It notes that option "D" state administration has the least negative impacts on nature conservation .. MoD SR - - - No comments on the options Bratislava Region Office for for against Agrees with options "C" and "D" and disagrees with Option D.

121

Regional Environmental for Nature conservation Office in Bratislava authority is for option "D" and the authority for water management is for option "E". Regional Office for - - - No comments to the Road Transport and submitted Assessment Roads in Bratislava Report. Regional Office for - - - No comments on the Road Transport and report Roads in Bratislava District Office for Road for It recommends option "E" Transport and Roads in in combination with Senec option "C1". District Environmental - - - No opinion received Office in Bratislava Regional Public Health against Does not agree with Office Bratislava option "D" Other Slovak Railway, - - - No comments Bratislava SNC SR and SNC SR, - - for Tunnel option"D" RCOP in Bratislava, considered the best. PLA Danube floodplains Public in Bratislava BROZ - - - No opinion received Mgr. Ing. Ivana Číkova against against against Does not recommend the implementation

From the opinions received it can be stated:  against the construction one public representative  in favour of option "C" red 1 organization,  in favour of option "E" green 5 organizations,  no preferred option 5 organizations concerned  against option "D" 3 organizations

Eligible and substantiated comments of residents were reflected in the draft measures.

4a. Recommended option under public hearings to the assessment report: Bratislava City and City districts Jarovce, Rusovce, Podunajské Biskupice and Vajnory - agree with option E green except Podunajské Biskupice. Most pri Bratislave - agrees the highway location. Ivanka pri Dunaji - prefers option "C" red. Insists on its requirement that the feeder of Zálesie was part of the highway construction and its eventual implementation was not postponed by 2020. This indicates that out of two options assessed in the report the option "E" green is acceptable to all concerned, provided that the from about 5.5 km it is to be diverted to the option "C" red.

4b. Recommended option of public hearings on the report-complement: The public hearings on the assessment report-complement revealed preference of option "E" green, which is acceptable to all concerned, provided that from about 5.5 km it will be redirected to the option "C" red. 122

5. Recommended option under the assessment report-complement Evaluating all options of the D4 highway based on value analysis shows more favourable option E green compared to option D blue and option C red. Option E green compared to option C red is more favourable in all assessed criteria, except for slightly higher construction costs, but the rate of return IRR of option E is more money saving. Costs of the proposed measures to be implemented for the option C red, are likely to increase the total costs of option C and for this reason, to mitigate and eliminate the adverse effects the option C requires more action than option E green. Option "E" green is compared to option D blue more favourable in all criteria considered in addition to effects on biota. It should also be emphasized that the anticipated significant negative impacts of the tunnel on groundwater must be reviewed by the detailed hydrological survey. 6. Recommended option under opinions to the assessment report-complement: Option E green was recommended under compliance with the proposed measures for prevention, elimination, minimization and compensation of impacts of the proposed activity on the environment and health. 7. Recommended option under public hearings to the assessment report-complement: Option E green was recommended under compliance with the proposed measures for prevention, elimination, minimization and compensation of impacts of the proposed activity on the environment and health.

Description of problem, advantages and disadvantages of options"E" green and "D" blue: Option E green 1. For the benefit of nature and landscape protection, the highway section, which overcomes the Danube River and its inundation area is the most critical section. There is an overlap of several categories of protected areas of national and European importance. The proposed highway route provides the following protected areas:  Ramsar site of Danube floodplains  Special protected area of (SPA) Danube floodplains  Site of Community importance of (SCI) Biskupické floodplains  protected landscape area PLA Danube floodplains (second level of protection under Act no. 543/2002 Coll., on nature and landscape protection.  According to the regional territorial system of ecological stability (RTSES) of Bratislava (SEA, 1994) and Updated elements (RTSES) of Bratislava (SEA, 2005) the option crosses national bio-centre Bratislava floodplains, Provincial bio-corridor Danube. Bridge over the Danube forms a barrier in the migration corridor of avifauna. Direct intervention in the Ramsar site Danube floodplains, PLA Danube floodplains and SPA Danube floodplains. Surface routing will form a barrier in the migration of fauna. Noise and light pollution of fauna. 2.) Negative impacts of the D4 highway passing through this territory will be eliminated by the D4 routing on viaduct up to 5.500 km, allowing wildlife migration underneath the D4 highway via elevated road, crossing the river Danube is vertical and straight, which simplifies the construction of the elevated road, 3) The possibility of excellent architectural work of the bridge in the open air above the water level of the Danube and water levels of Jarovské arm. 4.) An advantage is connection of cycle trails and pedestrians trails from both Danube banks with peninsulas of Jarovské arm and thus its greater use for the sports and recreation. 5). Significantly lower construction costs compared with option "D" blue 6). According to Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection, as amended, and Act no. 24/2006 Coll., Section 38 - "If the territories belonging to the European system of 123

protected areas involve priority habitats or priority species habitats, the activity may be permitted only if it relates to threat to human health, public order, security of the Slovak Republic, has a significant impact on improving the environment or if under the opinion of European Commission it is related to other urgent reasons of public interest." Therefore, in the case of surface highway routing the investor shall pursuant to § 28, par. 3 and 4 of Act 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection take measures aiming to recover damaged or destroyed priority habitats of European importance, habitats or species of Community importance, and these must be carried out before implementing the activity that will damage or destroy them. Justification of the surface option routing in overriding public interest will be the fundamental decision. The public interest issue will be resolved by the appropriate departmental authorities under Resolution no. 793 of 11 November 2009.

Following the annual monitoring of biota and its conclusions as reflected in the "Draft for compensatory measures" it will be needed to proceed in the case of surface highway routing with the compensatory measures. The opinion of BROZ has recommended to compensate for the negative impacts of the proposed activities the following measures:  Expansion of forest area in the vicinity of the planned highway on the left bank of the Danube in the area Biskupické floodplain forests. Forest habitats destroyed and mutilated during construction and operation of the highway are to be reforested in areas intended for this purpose in the Master plan of Bratislava and in the documentation for nature conservation (TSES project). When reforesting, to use only native tree species.  Creating meadows by grassing arable land in SPA Danube floodplains or areas within 1 km of its border. The measure aims to create substitute food and nesting habitats for the selected species.  Creating (restoring) wetlands by watering (water system recovery) depressions of the former Danube arms, if necessary improving the condition of existing arms (release of flow). The measure aims to create substitute food and nesting habitats for the selected species. This is required to be consulted with the administrator of the flow.  Completion of the complex system of gates and barriers disabling illegal entry to protected areas affected by the activities performed.  In collaboration with SNC, RC Bratislava and PLA Danube floodplains it is necessary to provide the current survey of affected areas of conservation, ensure replanting and transfer of selected species of protected species and build replacement habitats. The aim is to reduce the excessive disturbance of sensitive species.

Option "D" - blue 1). In terms of nature and landscape protection there is a little interference with the PLA Danube floodplains, PD Danube islands and protected areas of European importance NATURA 2000 on the right bank of the Danube, which can be minimized by extension of tunnel by about 350 m. In terms of surface intervention in protected areas it is the most sensitive solution. The tunnel will affect the groundwater flow regime and hence secondary effects on flora and fauna. Surface routing from the east portal will form a barrier in the migration of fauna. Intervention from east portal to the marginal area of the Ramsar site Danube floodplains, PLA Danube floodplains and SPA Danube floodplains. 2) Demanding structure in terms of construction and technology (tunnel under the Danube, including sealing tubs below HPV) 3) Risks of structure impact on rock mass 124

Building on the degree of knowledge of engineering geological conditions in the area around the Danube tunnel corridor the most significant risk and impact on the rock mass will be represented by:  changes in flow and in hydrodynamic ratios of groundwater in fluvial sediments in the area of built sealing pits. Increasing the flow may cause suffosion in sediments and thus changes in the entire watered area,  the impact on the rock environment of fluvial sediments will be the case of remedial measures implemented prior to TBM in the case of injection of gravel sediments which, however, especially in the basal zones of sediments will be significantly difficult due to the high permeability. When using chemical injections (as an effective means to immediately reduce permeability) it may change the chemical composition of groundwater and thus threaten water sources of drinking water.  impact on the geological environment includes excavation of construction pits due to changes in pressure field around pits and in the pit bottom. The consequence of excavation can be enhanced pit bottom,  implementation of the proposed type of TBM in Neogene soils will have a significant impact on rock mass,  tunnel corridors area is near the interface 6° and 7° MSK-64 intensity of earthquakes (STN 73 0036) Due to the proximity of seismic active zone it is recommended to assign the site a higher value of 7° MSK-64. For the design seismic acceleration regulated by STN 73 0036 it can be recommended acceleration value of ag = 0.3,  the Neogene strata consists of watered sands, often with a stressed level of a discharging height of up to several meters,  longitudinal, longer wall should be oriented vertically to the flow of the Danube, diagonally to vertically to the direction of groundwater flow. In the high permeability of the gravel the wall is exposed to high hydro dynamic burden with the development of high corrosive suffosion stress on the corners of a sealed pit. 4) Degree of return (IRR internal rate of return) is 3.8%, which is inefficient in terms of return on investment, whereas, according to "Guidelines to cost-benefit analysis" it should be at least 5%. Based on the results of the economic analysis (IRR = 3.8, NPV = -263.86 thous. EUR), this option is below the efficiency level and thus economic performance is poor, which can result in problems with project financing from all sources (EU , EIB loans or PPP). In terms of the economy, the construction of the tunnel could be considered after 2040. 5.) It is not possible to connect cycle trails and walking routes from the right bank to the left bank of the Danube and with peninsulas of Jarovské arm through objects of D4 highway. 6.) Only the four-lane D4 highway arrangement in the tunnel under the Danube (options with cities are 6-lane). 7.) In case of a catastrophic flood situation, overcoming the current state of protection lines, or in breaking the lines, it is necessary to close the tunnel by fencing.

8.) The tunnel must meet the criteria for Q1000 of annual water.

Justification of linking green option to red option Draft linking at 5.5 km is for the following reasons:  interference of option "E" green to the first and second protection zone of Slovnaft (potential of explosion)  the possibility of developing recreational and sporting activities in Podunajské Biskupice 125

without barrier effect of TS Podunajské Biskupice - Lieskovec - Ketelec zone  land reserves for HV lines

The conclusions of the assessment Based on the results of the assessment the following key areas of impacts and the need to address have been identified: - Impact on protected areas at the beginning of the section (Natura 2000) - make amendments in all stages of land use documentation of the affected municipalities, - impact on surface and groundwater, particularly in bridging the Danube - specific technical solution of bridging the Danube, including architectural design - prospective need for the construction of feeders to Zálesie - completion of extension of R7 from Ketelec interchange to Bajkalská street - increase in capacity of Svornosti street (in the competence of Bratislava) - necessity to conduct IGHP - need to prepare an area for compensatory measures for biota prior to the construction - determine the time priorities of the construction - address the availability of sports and recreational activities to be restricted at the intersection with the structure.

Summary of the comments, accepted or not accepted Posted comments can be divided into the following groups:  favourable opinions, comments of which have already been accepted in commenting on the Plan and have already been introduced in the assessment process and evaluated in the assessment report, respectively have been reminded in opinions  opinions with comments which were intended to contribute positively to the proposed solutions, are realistic and will be incorporated in measures to eliminate, compensate or minimize the impact of construction and operation of the proposed activity on the environment in the Final Opinion and subsequent stages of project preparation  unfavourable opinions, which argued against the implementation of the activity in some of the options (e.g. CD Vajnory is against the option "C1")  opinions of general nature.  unfavourable opinions, which are in principle against the construction and all the approved land use documentation and other documents,

The vast majority of comments made was justified, feasible and contributed to addressing measures to minimize the impacts of construction and operation of the future highway on the environment and were incorporated into the draft measures. It can be stated that residents have no fundamental objections to the construction of D4 highway in condition that they will implement measures to minimize and eliminate adverse impacts.

The selected route of options is a compromise between the current state, uncertainties and actual financial possibilities of the State. Implementation of the proposed activity is related objectively to irreversible impacts on the environment.

126

Upon acceptance and implementation of the proposed measures to prevent, eliminate, minimize and compensate for negative impacts of construction on the environment and consistent project analysis, it is possible to minimize the bulk of the expected and actual existing negative impacts during construction and operation and thus ensure the predominance of positive effects.

4.1 Notice for authorising authority In the subsequent authorising procedures under specific regulations initiated upon 30 April 2010 under provision § 24a), par. 1 of Act no. 24/2006 Coll. on the assessment of environmental impacts as amended by Act no. 145/2010 Coll., the status of a party to the procedure is the public, including individuals who submitted written statement under § 23 par. 4, § 30 par. 5, § 35 par. 3, which shows their interest in the result.

5. The required range of post-project analysis

The monitoring program before construction, during construction and operation

Subject of the monitoring in the highway section should be processed within DZP respectively DPP in Annex "Project of monitoring of selected elements of the environment" and under TP 6/2008 "Handbook of monitoring the impact of roads on the environment" valid from 15 August 2008 for definitive option. It should focus mainly on monitoring impacts of activity in all stages of preparation, construction and operation on selected environmental components in specified - affected locations, while the task of post-project analysis is to analyse and evaluate the impacts of the activity detected during monitoring with subsequent consequences and taking measures to eliminate the impacts which will be less favourable than foreseen in the Assessment report.

Monitoring in the area of the proposed activity must focus particularly on:  biota, with emphasis in the section in contact protected areas (PLA Danube floodplains), NATURA 2000 sites (SCI Biskupické floodplains, SPA Danube floodplains) and habitats affected by the results of a survey of biota during and after construction  noise, emissions and vibration during and after construction in selected areas in view of the position of the selected route to the built-up areas and recreational zones (subject to current status).  wastewater from road drains at outlet of oil separators primarily to infiltrations,  groundwater before, during and after construction especially in relation to PWMA Rye Island and to the extent of the recommendations of engineering geological and hydrogeological survey (construction of monitoring wells along the route).  wildlife migration routes in relation to the barrier effect of the selected option, before, during construction and their effectiveness of the proposed measures to ensure wildlife migration corridors (ecoducts) during operation,  geotechnical monitoring during and after construction

Scope and duration of monitoring and evaluation shall be determined in accordance with § 39, par. 2 of the Act on authorizing authority when it comes to the authorization of the proposed activity according to special regulations with regard to the present final opinion.

Compliance with environmental control measures of the final opinion from the assessment process shall be undertaken by the environmental supervision according to Act no. 543/2002 Coll. on nature and landscape protection.

127

Based on the immediate evaluation of the monitoring results is according to § 39, par. 3 of the Act the claimant is obliged, in case it is found that the actual impact of the proposed activity assessed under the Act is worse than anticipated in the assessment report, to be the one who carries out the activity, shall take measures to harmonize the real impact with the impact listed in the assessment report in accordance with the terms of the authorizing decision on proposed activity under special regulations.

VII. Confirmation of the data accuracy

1. Final opinion processors Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic Environmental Assessment Department Ing. Milan Luciak

in cooperation with Regional Public Health Office, of City of Bratislava, office in Bratislava

2. Confirmation of data of the authorized representatives of competent authority, stamp Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic RNDr. Gabriel Nižňanský Head of Environmental Assessment Department

3. Place and date of issuance of the Final opinion Bratislava 28 September 2011

128

Disclaimer

This is an English translation of a document that was originally produced in the . While we have exercised utmost care to make this translation accurate, it may contain typing or translation errors. Therefore, always consult the Slovak original before making decisions on the basis of this translation.

The name of this document in Slovak is Záverečné stanovisko. The file name has not been changed.

We hereby confirm that the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development shall have no responsibility for the translated content.

Project Implementation Services, spol. s r. o. Consultant under Consultancy Contract C31934